DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This office correspondence is in response to the application filed on January 30, 2026. Claims 2-3, 8, 13-15, 17, and 19-20 are amended.
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 01/30/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues the combined prior arts fail to disclose the limitation of “determining, in response to the bandwidth usage being at or above the bandwidth threshold, whether the bandwidth usage is associated with one of voice traffic or data traffic”, “determining, based on the bandwidth usage being associated with the voice traffic, a first action configured to lower voice traffic bandwidth usage”, “determining, based on the bandwidth usage being associated with data traffic, a second action configured to lower data traffic bandwidth usage”.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. The instant application is directed towards determine network traffic congestion at the backhaul. The claim limitation is a “or” limitation of determining whether the bandwidth usage is associated with one of voice or data traffic. Then determining to lower either voice or data traffic bandwidth usage with first or second action and to execute that first or second action in respect to voice or data traffic.
Roy discloses adaptive bandwidth allocation and volume monitoring of bandwidth allocation for Voice over WiFi (VoWiFi) calls over a network. The packet traffic is determined based on either real-time traffic or non real-time traffic and have a priority communication traffic with voice traffic. The non-real-time packet traffic is non-voice traffic (data traffic) as such having a lower priority communication traffic. Communication traffic with different priorities than are classified as real-time or non-real-time and depend upon the information in the headers of the packets in the packet traffic. The present disclosure allocates the minimum resources needed when some initial VoWiFi packet traffic shows up from an end user consumer device. Using a configured threshold value or percentage, determine whether to allocate up a step to a maximum as real-time traffic (the bandwidth usage of packet traffic) increases or down a step as real-time traffic. In the headers the destination address, the source address, the destination port, the source port, and/or the DSCP value in the packet headers may be used to classify real-time and non-real-time packet traffic. Additionally, a guaranteed minimum bandwidth and a guaranteed maximum bandwidth may be allocated to the real-time traffic be configured such that all IPsec control and management data packet traffic can pass through, and a maximum number of individual VoWiFi calls may be distributed among all end user devices presently connected to the terminal. Both the guaranteed minimum bandwidth and the guaranteed maximum bandwidth of the non-real-time traffic may be allocated on a per frame basis after the real-time time traffic may be allocated. Any bandwidth for non-real-time traffic after the guaranteed minimum bandwidth for the non-real-time traffic is allocated with priority for those terminals which may have a strict and/or hard QoS and/or QoE. All real-time traffic are allocated in according to the adaptive bandwidth allocation and volume monitoring of the present disclosure, and then all remaining traffic, including the non-real-time traffic, are allocated according to an adaptive bandwidth allocation with a lower priority than the real-time traffic, the non-real-time traffic may be allocated, after the real-time traffic Therefore, Roy discloses based on bandwidth usage voice or data traffic are determined to lower traffic bandwidth usage.
Aksu discloses the scheduler assess backhaul bandwidth, capacity demands associated with an IAV link and radio sites. The traffic balancer receive an available IAB link bandwidth value regarding an IAB link from the scheduling device. The available IAB link bandwidth value indicate a total bandwidth or a capacity value. The available IAB link bandwidth value include a current value and/or a prospective value. The traffic balancing device may receive a bandwidth demand value from the scheduling device. The scheduling device may determine whether the total bandwidth demand is greater than the allocated bandwidth.
The scheduler considers various factors pertaining to access capacity demands, such as number of users, the connections associated with the frequency bands, radio frequency conditions, spectral efficiency, and the like. Each scheduler may provide the traffic balancer with backhaul bandwidth and capacity demands. Based on the bandwidth and access demand assessment values, the traffic balancer may calculate and allocate the maximum access bandwidth for each site. The traffic balancer may consider various factors, such as network topology, radio site efficiency, radio site cluster efficiency, bandwidth history, day and/or time, and/or other types of context information, when calculating the maximum access bandwidth.
The scheduler may perform cross-frequency band, cross-user scheduling and load balancing based on the maximum access bandwidth allocated by the traffic balancer. The scheduler determines whether a total bandwidth demand exceeds the allotted maximum access bandwidth, and traffic of users associated with a first frequency band may be reconfigured for scheduling with traffic of users associated with a second frequency band based on service level agreement (SLA) requirements. The scheduler may suspend scheduling of traffic of lower priority users when the total bandwidth demand exceeds the allocated maximum access bandwidth.
Traffic balancer provides a traffic balancing service of the IAB backhaul sharing among co-located radio sites service. Traffic balancer calculate a maximum access bandwidth for each IAB device or co-located radio sites relating to use of the IAB backhaul links, and calculates based on an access capacity demand associated with each IAB device or co-located radio sites and an IAB link bandwidth associated with each IAB device or co-located sites. The scheduler provides a scheduling service of the IAB backhaul sharing among and calculate local scheduling for access and use of the IAB backhaul by an IAB device. Scheduler may calculate a joint schedule, involving two or more frequencies bands or cells associated with RUs at or of the IAB device or co-located sites) versus an independent scheduler for each frequency band or radio at or of the IAB device or the co-located sites. Scheduler calculate the joint schedule based on a total bandwidth demand and an allotted maximum access bandwidth provided by the traffic balancing service. The scheduler further reconfigure a first allocation of bandwidth pertaining to the IAB backhaul associated with users of a first frequency band or cell to a second allocation of bandwidth pertaining to the IAB backhaul associated with users of a second frequency band or cell based on the relative values between the total bandwidth demand and the allotted maximum access bandwidth.
When the total bandwidth demand is not greater than the allocated bandwidth, the scheduling device may determine whether to reconfigure any user. The scheduling device may increase an allotment of the maximum access bandwidth to a set of users or a user.
When the scheduling device determines that there are no users that may be reconfigured, the scheduling device may update the bandwidth demand. The scheduling device may inform the traffic balancer with an updated access capacity demand. In this way, the traffic balancer may assign any excess bandwidth to another co-located radio sites or IAB device. The scheduling device may calculate an access bandwidth demand and other parameters such as SLA requirement of a user, buffer size, user traffic priority, queueing history, and other parameters/metrics. When the total bandwidth demand is greater than the allocated maximum access bandwidth, the scheduling device may determine whether any user may be reconfigured. When there is insufficient IAB backhaul bandwidth, the scheduling device may decrease or downgrade an allotment of the maximum access bandwidth. Therefore, after carefully reviewing the prior arts discloses managing backhaul congestions in transmission of packets in the network traffic and determine bandwidth usage to meet the bandwidth threshold to execute appropriate actions to reduce the congestion, the rejection is sustained for this claim.
For at least the foregoing reasons, claims 6 and 16 recite similar features to claim 1. Claims 2-5, 7-15, and 17-20 each depend from one of the respective independent claims, and rendered obvious by the combination of the prior arts Roy and Aksu for at least the same reasons by virtue of their dependencies. Examiner respectfully sustains the rejections.
Furthermore, as it is Applicant's right to continue to claim as broadly as possible their invention, it is also the Examiner's right to continue to interpret the claim language as broadly as possible. It is the Examiner's position that the detailed functionality that allows Applicant’s invention to overcome the prior art used in the rejection, fails to differentiate in detail how these features are unique. By the rejection above, the applicant must submit amendments to the claims in order to distinguish over the prior art use in the rejection that discloses different features of Applicant's claimed invention.
Applicant has not yet submitted claims drawn to limitations, which distinguishes over the prior art or to significantly narrow definition/scope of the claims and supply arguments commensurate in scope with the claims implies the Applicant intends broad interpretation be given to the claims. It is requested that Applicant clearly and distinctly define the claimed invention.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Satyajit ROY (US Publication 2025/0167880) hereafter ROY, in view of Aksu et al. (US Publication 2025/0056373) hereafter Aksu.
As per claim 1, Roy discloses a system comprising: one or more processors; and one or more non-transitory computer-readable media storing computer-executable instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the system to perform operations comprising: determining, based on network traffic, a bandwidth usage at a backhaul of a telecommunication network (paragraphs 0022, 0039-40: threshold of real-time traffic); determining that the bandwidth usage is at or above a bandwidth threshold (paragraphs 0040, 0048-51, 0067: traffic volume allocation with guaranteed threshold value); determining, in response to the bandwidth usage being at or above the bandwidth threshold, whether the bandwidth usage is associated with one of voice traffic or data traffic (paragraphs 0016, 0018: data traffic consists of voice/data or non-data packet); determining, based on the bandwidth usage being associated with voice traffic, a first action configured to lower voice traffic bandwidth usage; determining, based on the bandwidth usage being associated with data traffic, a second action configured to lower data traffic bandwidth usage (paragraphs 0037, 0059, 0066: various type of traffic); and executing, by the system, the first action or the second action (paragraphs 0016, 0048-49, 55-56). Although, Roy discloses bandwidth allocation based on current traffic level, but he fails expressly disclose determining that the bandwidth usage is at or above a bandwidth threshold.
However, in the same field of the endeavor, Aksu discloses the claimed limitation of bandwidth allocation based on current traffic level, but he fails expressly disclose determining that the bandwidth usage is at or above a bandwidth threshold (paragraphs 0029, 0068, 0048: adjustment in bandwidth usage).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Aksus’ teaching with ROY. One would be motivated to manage priority-based network traffic to reduce congestion.
As per claim 2, ROY discloses the system wherein the bandwidth usage is associated with the voice traffic and the first action comprises: in response to a second bandwidth usage at a base station communicatively coupled with the backhaul being less than a base station bandwidth threshold, generating by the base station, second voice traffic that corresponds to the voice traffic (paragraph 0003); and transmitting the voice traffic and the second voice traffic to a device communicatively coupled with the telecommunication network (paragraphs 0016, 0048-50).
As per claim 3, ROY discloses the system wherein the bandwidth usage is associated with the data traffic and the second action comprises: determining a priority for additional data traffic associated with a user device that is in communication with a base station communicatively coupled with the backhaul (paragraphs 0003, 0016, 0022); and determining, based on the priority, at least one of: a first magnitude of maximum data rate reduction for the user device; or a second magnitude of an increase in a backoff timer of the additional data traffic associated with the user device (paragraphs 0055-57, 0061, 0066).
As per claim 4, ROY discloses the system wherein executing the first action comprises sending an instruction to a base station communicatively coupled with the backhaul to perform the first action (paragraphs 0003, 0016, 0022).
As per claim 5, ROY discloses the system wherein the system is physically coupled to the backhaul (paragraphs 0003, 0016, 0022).
Claim 6 is an Independent claim with similar limitation but different in preamble and hence are rejected based on the rejection provided in claim 1.
As per claim 7, ROY discloses the method wherein the type of network traffic comprises voice traffic (paragraphs 0016, 0018).
As per claim 8, ROY discloses the method wherein determining the action comprises: in response to a second bandwidth usage at a base station communicatively coupled with the backhaul being less than a base station bandwidth threshold, generating, by the base station, second voice traffic that corresponds to the voice traffic (paragraph 0003, 0016); and transmitting the voice traffic and the second voice traffic to a device communicatively coupled with the telecommunication network (paragraphs 0016, 0048-50).
As per claim 9, ROY discloses the method wherein determining the action comprises: determining that new voice traffic received at a first base station communicatively coupled with the backhaul is transmitted from a second base station communicatively coupled with the first base station (paragraphs 0003, 0016, 0022); and permitting, based on the new voice traffic being received from the second base station, transmission of the new voice traffic from the first base station to the backhaul (paragraphs 0055-57, 0061, 0066).
As per claim 10, ROY discloses the method wherein the action comprises: determining that new voice traffic received at a base station communicatively coupled with the backhaul is transmitted from a user device that is in communication with the base station; and restricting, based on the new voice traffic being received from the user device, transmission of the new voice traffic from the base station to the backhaul (paragraphs 0037, 0060-61).
As per claim 11, ROY discloses the method wherein the action comprises increasing a backoff timer associated with new voice traffic received at a base station communicatively coupled with the backhaul (paragraphs 0016, 0048-50).
As per claim 12, ROY discloses the method wherein the type of network traffic comprises data traffic (paragraphs 0037, 0059, 0066).
As per claim 13, ROY discloses the method further comprising determining a priority for data traffic associated with a user device that is in communication with a base station communicatively coupled with the backhaul (paragraph 0003, 0016).
As per claim 14, ROY discloses the method wherein the action comprises at least one of: determining, based on the priority, a first magnitude of maximum data rate reduction for the user device; or determining, based on the priority, a second magnitude of an increase in a backoff timer for the data traffic associated with the user device (paragraphs 0055-57, 0061, 0066).
As per claim 15, ROY discloses the method wherein the action comprises: reducing, in response to determining that a second bandwidth usage at a second backhaul communicatively coupled with the backhaul is below a second bandwidth threshold, a first initial random access channel power of a first base station communicatively coupled with the backhaul (paragraphs 0003, 0016, 0022); and increasing, in response to determining that the second bandwidth usage at the second backhaul is below the second bandwidth threshold, a second initial random access channel power of a second base station communicatively coupled with the second backhaul (paragraphs 0016, 0048-50).
Claim 16 is an Independent claim with similar limitation but different in preamble and hence are rejected based on the rejection provided in claim 1.
As per claim 17, ROY discloses the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media wherein the type of network traffic comprises voice traffic, determining the action comprises: in response to a second bandwidth usage at a base station communicatively coupled with the backhaul being less than a base station bandwidth threshold, generating by the base station, second voice traffic that corresponds to the voice traffic (paragraphs 0003, 0016, 0022); and transmitting the voice traffic and the second voice traffic to a device communicatively coupled with the telecommunication network (paragraphs 0055-57, 0061, 0066).
As per claim 18, ROY discloses the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media the type of network traffic comprises voice traffic, determining the action comprises: determining that new voice traffic received at a first base station communicatively coupled with the backhaul is transmitted from a second base station communicatively coupled with the first base station (paragraphs 0003, 0016, 0022); and permitting, based on the new voice traffic being received from the second base station, transmission of the new voice traffic from the first base station to the backhaul (paragraphs 0037, 0060-61).
As per claim 19, ROY discloses the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media wherein the type of network traffic comprises data traffic, the operations further comprising determining a priority for the data traffic associated with a user device that is in communication with a base station communicatively coupled with the backhaul (paragraphs 0016, 0048-50).
As per claim 20, ROY discloses the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media wherein the action comprises at least one of: determining, based on the priority, a magnitude of maximum data rate reduction for the user device; or determining, based on the priority, a magnitude of an increase in a backoff timer for the data traffic associated with the user device (paragraphs 0055-57, 0061, 0066).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FARZANA B HUQ whose telephone number is (571)270-3223. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday: 8:30-5:30 ET.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Emmanuel L Moise can be reached at 571-272-3865. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/FARZANA B HUQ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2455
Prosecution Insights