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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Priority
This application claims foreign priority to Chinese Application No. 202310997096.2, filed August 9, 2023.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 7 and 11 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 1 and 11 recite “has an ability to” and claim 7 recites “having a connection ability”. Examples of such claim language raise a question as to the limiting effect of the language in a claim. The claim scope is not limited by claim language that suggests or makes optional but does not require steps to be performed, or by claim language that does not limit a claim to a particular structure. Notably, limitations recited after the phrases will be considered optional to the functionality of the claimed system. It is suggested to positively and concretely define the functionality of the claimed invention.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-6, 8, 10 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Tennant et al. (US 20230413084 A1 and Tennant hereinafter).
Regarding claim 1, Tennant teaches a portable device for determining communication performance metrics of a cellular module (Figure 2), wherein the portable device has an ability to communicate with cloud and is configured to either communicate with the cloud or not communicate with the cloud under different scenarios (Paragraph 0020; utilize spare computing power and storage space on the wireless client devices to reduce the cloud operation costs of the system. Paragraphs 0037 and 0038; control server to issue a set of configuration instructions comprising a level of autonomy authorized for each client devices to perform and reporting test. Examiner asserts that since client devices are reporting test result to the control server that reduce cloud operation cost; thus the control server is in association with cloud and communicates with client devices), the portable device comprising:
a control device having an ability to monitor, record and/or process communication-related data respectively associated with a plurality of types of communication performance metrics for determining respective communication performance metrics (Paragraph 0037; control server to issue a set of configuration instructions to client devices comprising a level of autonomy authorized for each client device. Paragraph 0038; the configuration instructions define reporting and testing based on tests that are pre-selected and schedules pre-defined. The configuration instructions also determine what tests to select and perform, when to perform the tests, what test result data to store, whether and how often to report to the control server, and how to dynamically change the frequency (i.e., periodicity of testing) and granularity (i.e., level of detail captured during testing) of testing), and is configured to:
determine, based on configuration information, a type of a predetermined communication performance metric and identification information of a to-be-tested cellular module (Paragraph 0038; the configuration instructions define reporting and testing based on tests that are pre-selected and schedules pre-defined. The configuration instructions also determine what tests to select and perform, when to perform the tests, what test result data to store, whether and how often to report to the control server, and how to dynamically change the frequency (i.e., periodicity of testing) and granularity (i.e., level of detail captured during testing) of testing);
acquire, based on the type and the identification information, communication-related data of the to-be-tested cellular module for determining the predetermined communication performance metric, and determine and record the predetermined communication performance metric of the to-be-tested cellular module based on the communication-related data, or record the communication-related data for determining the predetermined communication performance metric (Paragraph 0038; the configuration instructions define reporting and testing based on tests that are pre-selected and schedules pre-defined. The configuration instructions also determine what tests to select and perform, when to perform the tests, what test result data to store, whether and how often to report to the control server, and how to dynamically change the frequency (i.e., periodicity of testing) and granularity (i.e., level of detail captured during testing) of testing. Paragraph 0053; the client device 506, 506′, 506″ can be configured to perform a voice/audio test, wherein a voice or audio sample is sent to and received from a server, analyzed for audio quality, and the client device provides an indication of voice/audio quality (e.g., a green, yellow, or red indicator). In some embodiments, if the client device 506, 506′, 506″ detects a major network or connectivity problem, the client device can automatically notify the user of the nature of the problem); and
upload, via the to-be-tested cellular module and to the cloud, the predetermined communication performance metric or the communication-related data for determining the predetermined communication performance metric, in a case where data is required and able to be uploaded to the cloud (Paragraph 0038; the configuration instructions define reporting and testing based on tests that are pre-selected and schedules pre-defined. The configuration instructions also determine what tests to select and perform, when to perform the tests, whether and how often to report to the control server); and
a storage for storing the predetermined communication performance metric or the communication-related data for determining the predetermined communication performance metric, in a case where data is not required or unable to be uploaded to the cloud and storage space of the storage is not full (Paragraph 0038; the configuration instructions define reporting and testing based on tests that are pre-selected and schedules pre-defined. The configuration instructions also determine what tests to select and perform, what test result data to store).
Regarding claim 2, Tennant teaches all of the limitations of claim 1, as described above. Further, Tennant teaches wherein the control device is further configured to acquire the configuration information from the cloud or use local configuration information set in advance (Paragraph 0020; utilize spare computing power and storage space on the wireless client devices to reduce the cloud operation costs of the system. Paragraphs 0037 and 0038; control server to issue a set of configuration instructions comprising a level of autonomy authorized for each client devices to perform and reporting test. Examiner asserts that since client devices are reporting test result to the control server that reduce cloud operation cost; thus the control server is in association with cloud and communicates with client devices).
Regarding claim 3, Tennant teaches all of the limitations of claim 1, as described above. Further, Tennant teaches wherein the configuration information further comprises an indication of whether the data is required to be uploaded to the cloud and a condition for stopping monitoring, and the control device is further configured to: upload, via the to-be-tested cellular module and to the cloud, the predetermined communication performance metric or the communication-related data for determining the predetermined communication performance metric, based on an available network connection between the to-be-tested cellular module and the cloud, in response to the condition for stopping monitoring being met and the data being required to be uploaded to the cloud; and/or store, in the storage, the predetermined communication performance metric or the communication-related data for determining the predetermined communication performance metric, in response to the condition for stopping monitoring being met, the data being not required to be uploaded to the cloud and the storage space of the storage being not full; and/or upload, via the to-be-tested cellular module and to the cloud, the predetermined communication performance metric or the communication-related data for determining the predetermined communication performance metric, based on the available network connection between the to-be-tested cellular module and the cloud, in response to the condition for stopping monitoring being met, the data being not required to be uploaded to the cloud and the storage space of the storage being full (Paragraphs 0056 and 0057; either the network or the client device themselves can configure to dynamically adjust the types and frequency and granularity of testing to increase the level of detail available if a network problem is indicated. In some cases, for example, when there is poor connectivity or throughput, these additional data can be stored locally on the client devices 506, 506′, 506″, and then reported after the network problem improves).
Regarding claim 4, Tennant teaches all of the limitations of claim 1, as described above. Further, Tennant teaches wherein the configuration information further includes a condition for stopping monitoring, and the control device is further configured to: store, in the storage, the predetermined communication performance metric or the communication-related data for determining the predetermined communication performance metric, in response to the condition for stopping monitoring being met and the storage space of the storage being not full; and/or stop working, in response to the condition for stopping monitoring being met and the storage space of the storage being full (Paragraph 0038; the configuration instructions define reporting and testing based on tests that are pre-selected and schedules pre-defined. The configuration instructions also determine what tests to select and perform, when to perform the tests, what test result data to store, whether and how often to report to the control server, and how to dynamically change the frequency (i.e., periodicity of testing) and granularity (i.e., level of detail captured during testing) of testing. Paragraphs 0056 and 0057; either the network or the client device themselves can configure to dynamically adjust the types and frequency and granularity of testing to increase the level of detail available if a network problem is indicated. In some cases, for example, when there is poor connectivity or throughput, these additional data can be stored locally on the client devices 506, 506′, 506″, and then reported after the network problem improves).
Regarding claim 5, Tennant teaches all of the limitations of claim 3, as described above. Further, Tennant teaches wherein the configuration information further comprises a threshold number of experiments, and an operation completed by the control device for recording the predetermined communication performance metric or the communication-related data for determining the predetermined communication performance metric is as one experiment (Paragraph 0041; the control server 408 can configure client devices 402, 402′, 402″ via remote instruction regarding which tests to run, how frequently such tests should be run, and thresholds for testing and reporting, and schedules and other conditions for reporting data), and wherein the control device is further configured to: update current experiment count, in response to the condition for stopping monitoring being met (Paragraphs 0038 and 0041; the client devices testing and reporting according to the received configuration, such as thresholds for testing and reporting is finished/stopped); check the current experiment count each time data is uploaded to the cloud, and in response to the current experiment count reaching the threshold number of experiments, acquire new configuration information from the cloud in a case where cloud services are available or stop working in a case where cloud services are unavailable; and/or check the current experiment count each time after the storage stores data, and in response to the current experiment count reaching the threshold number of experiments, upload, via the to-be-tested cellular module and to the cloud, the predetermined communication performance metric or the communication-related data for determining the predetermined communication performance metric based on the available network connection between the to-be-tested cellular module and the cloud, or stop working in an absence of the available network connection (Paragraphs 0038 and 0041; configuration instructions define reporting and testing based on tests that are pre-selected and schedules pre-defined. The configuration instructions also determine what tests to select and perform, when to perform the tests, what test result data to store, whether and how often to report to the control server, and how to dynamically change the frequency (i.e., periodicity of testing) and granularity (i.e., level of detail captured during testing) of testing. Paragraphs 0056 and 0057; either the network or the client device themselves can configure to dynamically adjust the types and frequency and granularity of testing to increase the level of detail available if a network problem is indicated. In some cases, for example, when there is poor connectivity or throughput, these additional data can be stored locally on the client devices 506, 506′, 506″, and then reported after the network problem improves).
Regarding claim 6, Tennant teaches all of the limitations of claim 4, as described above. Further, Tennant teaches wherein the configuration information further comprises a threshold number of experiments, and an operation completed by the control device for recording the predetermined communication performance metric or the communication-related data for determining the predetermined communication performance metric is as one experiment (Paragraph 0041; the control server 408 can configure client devices 402, 402′, 402″ via remote instruction regarding which tests to run, how frequently such tests should be run, and thresholds for testing and reporting, and schedules and other conditions for reporting data), and wherein the control device is further configured to: update current experiment count, in response to the condition for stopping monitoring being met (Paragraphs 0038 and 0041; the client devices testing and reporting according to the received configuration, such as thresholds for testing and reporting is finished/stopped); check the current experiment count each time data is uploaded to the cloud, and in response to the current experiment count reaching the threshold number of experiments, acquire new configuration information from the cloud in a case where cloud services are available or stop working in a case where cloud services are unavailable; and/or check the current experiment count each time after the storage stores data, and in response to the current experiment count reaching the threshold number of experiments, upload, via the to-be-tested cellular module and to the cloud, the predetermined communication performance metric or the communication-related data for determining the predetermined communication performance metric based on the available network connection between the to-be-tested cellular module and the cloud, or stop working in an absence of the available network connection (Paragraphs 0038 and 0041; configuration instructions define reporting and testing based on tests that are pre-selected and schedules pre-defined. The configuration instructions also determine what tests to select and perform, when to perform the tests, what test result data to store, whether and how often to report to the control server, and how to dynamically change the frequency (i.e., periodicity of testing) and granularity (i.e., level of detail captured during testing) of testing. Paragraphs 0056 and 0057; either the network or the client device themselves can configure to dynamically adjust the types and frequency and granularity of testing to increase the level of detail available if a network problem is indicated. In some cases, for example, when there is poor connectivity or throughput, these additional data can be stored locally on the client devices 506, 506′, 506″, and then reported after the network problem improves).
Regarding claim 8, Tennant teaches all of the limitations of claim 1, as described above. Further, Tennant teaches wherein the portable device further comprises a location and/or time determination module for determining a location and/or monitoring time of the to-be-tested cellular module (Paragraph 0033; result of each test can include, but are not limited to, steady state signal strength, variability in signal strength, signal-to-noise ratio, current percentage of network traffic versus network capacity, radio attachment latency, resource request latency, location of the test device, and ping response time), and wherein the control device is further configured to obtain the location and/or monitoring time and to associate the predetermined communication performance metric or the communication-related data for determining the predetermined communication performance metric with a corresponding location and/or monitoring time (Paragraph 0033; result of each test can include, but are not limited to, steady state signal strength, variability in signal strength, signal-to-noise ratio, current percentage of network traffic versus network capacity, radio attachment latency, resource request latency, location of the test device, and ping response time).
Regarding claim 10, Tennant teaches all of the limitations of claim 1, as described above. Further, Tennant teaches wherein the predetermined communication performance metric comprises a cellular module-cloud connection success rate, a cellular base station identification, or a data upload success rate, wherein the control device is configured to receive the communication-related data from the to-be-tested cellular module (Paragraph 0033; result of each test can include, but are not limited to, steady state signal strength, variability in signal strength, signal-to-noise ratio, current percentage of network traffic versus network capacity, radio attachment latency, resource request latency, location of the test device, and ping response time), the communication-related data comprising data related to communication of the to-be-tested cellular module with a cellular base station (Paragraph 0043; service 406 can be any type of service, platform, system, or device that allows access by one or more client devices 402, 402′, 402″ through one or more access points 404. For example, the service 406 can be a mobile phone service whose access points are cellular towers. The service 406 can also be online cloud computing platform accessible via any access point that provides access to the Internet. The service 406 can also be a cloud-based virtual private network (VPN) networking system with access points owned by the cloud-based VPN or the client).
Regarding claim 11, claim 11 recites similar features as claim 1, therefore is rejected for at least the same reason as discussed above regarding claim 1.
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tennant, as applied to claim 2 above, further in view of Ketonen et al. (US 20180338278 A1 and Ketonen hereinafter).
Regarding claim 7, Tennant teaches all of the limitations of claim 2, as described above. Further, Tennant teaches wherein the to-be-tested cellular module is one of a plurality of modules, and the portable device further comprises: a plurality of interfaces for installing and connecting the plurality of modules, respectively, and having a connection ability with the control device; and a selector for connecting the control device with the to-be-tested cellular module via a corresponding cellular interface of the plurality of interfaces according to a selection control signal from the control device, wherein the control device is configured to generate the selection control signal based on the identification information of the to-be-tested cellular module and determine the communication-related data for determining the predetermined communication performance metric of the to-be-tested cellular module based on the type of the predetermined communication performance metric (Paragraph 0038; the configuration instructions define reporting and testing based on tests that are pre-selected and schedules pre-defined. The configuration instructions also determine what tests to select and perform, when to perform the tests, what test result data to store, whether and how often to report to the control server, and how to dynamically change the frequency (i.e., periodicity of testing) and granularity (i.e., level of detail captured during testing) of testing).
Tennant does not explicitly teach a plurality of cellular modules. In an analogous art, Ketonen teaches a plurality of cellular modules (Paragraph 0032; a mobile device that may have multiple network connection interfaces (for example, Wi-Fi and cellular radios), one interface may be used for testing while another remains active for other device operations, enabling an otherwise unused interface to be used to monitor performance in the background as the device continues normal operation. Additionally, performance readings may be compared across multiple interfaces, channels, bands, or frequencies to increase granularity of test result data, according to a testing protocol). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Tennant and Ketonen because it may allow testing of a communication module without disruption to service (Ketonen, Paragraph 0032) and may provide a way to manage network roaming behavior and identify a device persistently so it can be tracked across access points and networks, and so that the device can reconnect to the desired network or access point as it changes location (Ketonen, Paragraph 0004).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tennant, as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Gerber et al. (US 20150131471 A1 and Gerber hereinafter).
Regarding claim 9, Tennant teaches all of the limitations of claim 1, as described above.
Tennant does not explicitly teach wherein the predetermined communication performance metric comprises an energy consumption rate, and the portable device further comprises: a digital electric meter connected with the to-be-tested cellular module as well as a battery module, and is configured to measure battery electric amount data of the battery module as the communication-related data of the to-be-tested cellular module, and provide the battery electric amount data to the control device, wherein the battery module is configured to provide power to the to-be-tested cellular module and the portable device. In an analogous art, Gerber teaches wherein the predetermined communication performance metric comprises an energy consumption rate (Paragraph 0032; importance of cellular network resources on mobile application performance and energy efficiency, the following description focuses on correlation of the radio resource layer with the higher layers (e.g., transport, application, and user) to identify application radio resource and energy bottlenecks), and the portable device further comprises: a digital electric meter connected with the to-be-tested cellular module as well as a battery module (Paragraph 0043; attaching the battery of a smartphone to a hardware power meter. After keeping the smartphone in this inactive state for 20 seconds, a user datagram protocol (UDP) packet is sent at t=23.8 s, which triggers a promotion from IDLE to DCH that takes approximately 2 seconds. From t=26.1 s, the phone remains at the high-power DCH state for about 5 seconds (the DCH tail), then switches to the low-power FACH state at t=31.5 s. Finally after the FACH tail time period, at t=44.1 s, the phone returns to the IDLE state. During the tail time, the UE still occupies the transmission channel and the WCDMA codes, therefore the radio power consumption is kept at the corresponding level of the state), and is configured to measure battery electric amount data of the battery module as the communication-related data of the to-be-tested cellular module, and provide the battery electric amount data to the control device, wherein the battery module is configured to provide power to the to-be-tested cellular module and the portable device (Paragraph 0043; battery of a smartphone trigger a promotion from IDLE to DCH).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Tennant and Gerber because given the importance of cellular network resources on mobile application performance and energy efficiency it provides analysis of interaction between applications and the radio access network (Gerber, Paragraph 0032).
Pertinent but not Cited References
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
McLean et al. (US 20240284212 A1) discloses periodic or continuous monitoring of multiple heterogeneous radio communications networks, and the processing, storage and analysis of the measurement data generated from that monitoring.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jing Gao whose telephone number is (571)270-7226. The examiner can normally be reached on 9am - 6pm M-F.
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 Alison Slater can be reached on (571) 270-0375. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Jing Gao/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2647
Prosecution Insights