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 action is in response to application filed on 04.
Claims 1-20 are pending and rejected.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 05 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because the title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
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 non-obviousness.
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.
Claims 1, 10, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shahi et al (US20220400499A1) (hereinafter "Shahi") in view of Nentwig et al (WO2010139843A1) (hereinafter "Nentwig").
Regarding claim 1, Shahi discloses a radio comprising:
a transceiver configured to communicate signal packets ([0082] Means for performing the operations of block 502 include the processors 210, 212, 214, 216, 252, 260, and the wireless transceivers 256 and 266.);
a memory configured to store a multilayer process; and ([0060] The various processors 210, 212, 214, 216, 218, may be interconnected to one or more memory elements 220, system components and resources 224, and custom circuitry 222, and a thermal management unit 232 via an interconnection/bus module 226.)
one or more hardware processors in communication with the memory and configured to:
identify transmission parameter data at a time period between successful communications of the signal packets ([0030] In some embodiments, the TX timing model may be configured to identify a TX timing based on balancing TX performance of the data transmission against a predicted RF peak. The predicted RF peak may include a time of relatively high RF interference (e.g., as compared to other times) from other transmitters (e.g., other wireless devices). … In some embodiments, the TX timing model may be configured to determine a TX timing of an uplink transmission for the wireless device that avoids a predicted RF peak (or RF valley).);
store the transmission parameter data in a buffer in the memory ([0004] In some aspects, applying a plurality of RF channel factors related to data uplink transmissions by the wireless device to a TX timing model configured to provide as an output TX timing for a data transmission to a base station may be performed in response to storing data in an uplink buffer.);
pass the transmission parameter data to the multilayer process to determine a plurality of potential operating configurations comprising at least one of a power operational setting, a frequency operational setting, a multiple-input multiple-output operational setting, or a time operational setting ([0029] In some embodiments, the neural network may be configured to provide as an output a number of carriers (e.g., aggregated carriers) to be used in a next uplink data TX. In some embodiments, the RF channel factors input to the TX timing model may include current and/or historical signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), reference signal receive power (RSRP), reference signal receive quality (RSRQ), and/or similar measures of RF conditions available to the wireless device.);
arbitrate the plurality of potential operating configurations to determine a final set of operating configurations; and ([0029] In some embodiments, the TX timing model may include a neural network configured to operate on a plurality of RF channel factors to output TX time and TX power preferences.)
Shahi fails to disclose a radio configured to: update operation of the radio based on the final set of operating configurations.
However, Nentwig discloses a radio configured to: update operation of the radio based on the final set of operating configurations (Pg. 4, Para. 2: In S4, a transmission parameter configuration is selected for the transmission time instant on the basis of the interference predicted for the same transmission time instant in S3. The selection of the transmission parameter configuration may include selection of a modulation scheme, a channel coding scheme, a puncturing pattern, a multi-antenna processing scheme (selection between beamforming and spatial multiplexing, for example), etc.).
Shahi and Nentwig are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of cognitive radio communications in an interfered communication environment.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of Shahi with Nentwig to create a radio configured to: update operation of the radio based on the final set of operating configurations.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to mitigate the impact of interference on operating conditions.
Regarding claim 10, Shahi fails to disclose a radio, wherein the transmission parameter data comprises at least one of signal-to-noise ratio at the radio, detection of interference, jammer-to-noise ratio, jammer bandwidth, or throughput at the radio.
However, Nentwig discloses a radio, wherein the transmission parameter data comprises at least one of signal-to-noise ratio at the radio, detection of interference, jammer-to-noise ratio, jammer bandwidth, or throughput at the radio (Pg. 8, Para. 2: As a consequence, the duration of the SC-FDMA symbol (or another equivalent multi-carrier symbol carrying information symbols that localize in the time domain) may be divided into a plurality of sections and transmission parameters may be selected separately for each section. The interference prediction may provide a prediction with sufficient resolution that enables detection of the variance in interference strength within the SC-FDMA symbol.).
Shahi and Nentwig are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of cognitive radio communications in an interfered communication environment.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of Shahi with Nentwig to create a radio, wherein the transmission parameter data comprises at least one of signal-to-noise ratio at the radio, detection of interference, jammer-to-noise ratio, jammer bandwidth, or throughput at the radio.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to mitigate the impact of interference on operating conditions.
Regarding claim 15, Shahi discloses a method of operating a radio, the method comprising:
identifying transmission parameter data at a time period between successful communication of signal packets ([0030] In some embodiments, the TX timing model may be configured to identify a TX timing based on balancing TX performance of the data transmission against a predicted RF peak. The predicted RF peak may include a time of relatively high RF interference (e.g., as compared to other times) from other transmitters (e.g., other wireless devices). … In some embodiments, the TX timing model may be configured to determine a TX timing of an uplink transmission for the wireless device that avoids a predicted RF peak (or RF valley).);
storing the transmission parameter data in a buffer in a memory ([0004] In some aspects, applying a plurality of RF channel factors related to data uplink transmissions by the wireless device to a TX timing model configured to provide as an output TX timing for a data transmission to a base station may be performed in response to storing data in an uplink buffer.);
passing the transmission parameter data to a multilayer process stored in the memory to determine a plurality of potential operating configurations comprising at least one of a power operational setting, a frequency operational setting, a multiple-input multiple-output operational setting, or a time operational setting ([0029] In some embodiments, the neural network may be configured to provide as an output a number of carriers (e.g., aggregated carriers) to be used in a next uplink data TX. In some embodiments, the RF channel factors input to the TX timing model may include current and/or historical signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), reference signal receive power (RSRP), reference signal receive quality (RSRQ), and/or similar measures of RF conditions available to the wireless device.);
arbitrating the plurality of potential operating configurations to determine a final set of operating configurations ([0029] In some embodiments, the TX timing model may include a neural network configured to operate on a plurality of RF channel factors to output TX time and TX power preferences.).
Shahi fails to disclose a method, the method comprising: update operation of the radio based on the final set of operating configurations.
However, Nentwig discloses a method, the method comprising: update operation of the radio based on the final set of operating configurations (Pg. 4, Para. 2: In S4, a transmission parameter configuration is selected for the transmission time instant on the basis of the interference predicted for the same transmission time instant in S3. The selection of the transmission parameter configuration may include selection of a modulation scheme, a channel coding scheme, a puncturing pattern, a multi-antenna processing scheme (selection between beamforming and spatial multiplexing, for example), etc.).
Shahi and Nentwig are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of cognitive radio communications in an interfered communication environment.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of Shahi with Nentwig to create a method, the method comprising: update operation of the radio based on the final set of operating configurations.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to mitigate the impact of interference on operating conditions.
Claims 2, 12, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shahi in view of Nentwig, and further in view of Greel et al (US20200107216A1) (hereinafter "Greel").
Regarding claim 2, Shahi, as modified by Nentwig, fails to disclose the radio, wherein the transceiver is configured to communicate the signal packets with different multiple-input multiple-output (“MIMO”) radios of a mobile ad-hoc network (MANET).
However, Greel discloses the radio, wherein the transceiver is configured to communicate the signal packets with different multiple-input multiple-output (“MIMO”) radios of a mobile ad-hoc network (MANET) ([0035] A large-scale multihop mobile ad hoc network (MANET) equipped with MIMO antennas, termed as MIMO MANET, which can operate in peer-to-peer (P2P) networking environments can be configured to adopt security in various layers, such as Physical, MAC, and IP Routing. For scalability reason, a large-scale MANET network can have the hierarchical network topology adapting IP layer routing accordingly providing security hand-to-hand. … The multipath routing leads to some problems such as packet re-ordering and loss recovery.).
Shahi, as modified by Nentwig, and Greel are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor to improve network performance by enabling concurrent transmissions and managing interference.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of Shahi, as modified by Nentwig, with Greel to create the radio, wherein the transceiver is configured to communicate the signal packets with different multiple-input multiple-output (“MIMO”) radios of a mobile ad-hoc network (MANET).
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to maintain robust, high-bandwidth connections even when transceivers are moving around.
Regarding claim 12, Shahi, as modified by Nentwig, fails to disclose the radio, wherein the transceiver is configured for multiple-input multiple output (“MIMO) communication, and wherein the one or more hardware processors are further configured to manipulate interference cancellation through processing information from multiple receive antennas of the transceiver.
However, Greel discloses the radio, wherein the transceiver is configured for multiple-input multiple output (“MIMO) communication, and wherein the one or more hardware processors are further configured to manipulate interference cancellation through processing information from multiple receive antennas of the transceiver ([0130] This method exploits the multiplexing gain and interference cancelation properties of MIMO antennas. The proposed cross-layer QOS-aware routing algorithms performs end-to-end stream control for individual routes such that more than one MIMO transceivers can operate in the same area at the same time, while each MIMO receiver has enough streams to cancel out the interference generated by any adjacent transmission. This cross-layer MIMO QOS-aware routing algorithm can be implemented in both MANET physical and logical hierarchical routing.).
Shahi, as modified by Nentwig, and Greel are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor to improve network performance by enabling concurrent transmissions and managing interference.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of Shahi, as modified by Nentwig, with Greel to create the radio, wherein the transceiver is configured for multiple-input multiple output (“MIMO) communication, and wherein the one or more hardware processors are further configured to manipulate interference cancellation through processing information from multiple receive antennas of the transceiver.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to maintain robust, high-bandwidth connections even when transceivers are moving around.
Regarding claim 20, Shahi, as modified by Nentwig, fails to disclose the method, further comprising manipulating interference cancellation through processing information from multiple receive antennas of a multiple-input multiple output transceiver.
However, Greel discloses the method, further comprising manipulating interference cancellation through processing information from multiple receive antennas of a multiple-input multiple output transceiver ([0130] This method exploits the multiplexing gain and interference cancelation properties of MIMO antennas. The proposed cross-layer QOS-aware routing algorithms performs end-to-end stream control for individual routes such that more than one MIMO transceivers can operate in the same area at the same time, while each MIMO receiver has enough streams to cancel out the interference generated by any adjacent transmission. This cross-layer MIMO QOS-aware routing algorithm can be implemented in both MANET physical and logical hierarchical routing.).
Shahi, as modified by Nentwig, and Greel are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor to improve network performance by enabling concurrent transmissions and managing interference.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of Shahi, as modified by Nentwig, with Greel to create the method, further comprising manipulating interference cancellation through processing information from multiple receive antennas of a multiple-input multiple output transceiver.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to maintain robust, high-bandwidth connections even when transceivers are moving around.
Claims 3 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shahi in view of Nentwig, and further in view of Gonikberg et al (US20080238629A1) (hereinafter "Gonikberg").
Regarding claim 3, Shahi, as modified by Nentwig, fails to disclose the radio, wherein the transmission parameter data is identified after a failed data packet.
However, Gonikberg discloses the radio, wherein the transmission parameter data is identified after a failed data packet ([0044] In operation, receiver processing module 144 is operable to detect a packet transmission failure from a remote station, such as by determining that a packet transmitted by RF transceiver 125 was not acknowledged. Receiver processing module 144 provides feedback data 145 to transmitter processing module 146 that selects one of a plurality of transmission failure causes for the packet transmission failure, and adjusts at least one of a plurality of transmit parameters used to generate transmit signal 155, based on the selected one of the plurality of transmission failure causes.).
Shahi, as modified by Nentwig, and Gonikberg are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of adaptive transmission feedback.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of Shahi, as modified by Nentwig, with Gonikberg to create the radio, wherein the transmission parameter data is identified after a failed data packet.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to adjust transmission parameters for future transmission success.
Regarding claim 16, Shahi, as modified by Nentwig, fails to disclose the method, wherein the transmission parameter data is identified after a failed data packet.
However, Gonikberg discloses the method, wherein the transmission parameter data is identified after a failed data packet ([0044] In operation, receiver processing module 144 is operable to detect a packet transmission failure from a remote station, such as by determining that a packet transmitted by RF transceiver 125 was not acknowledged. Receiver processing module 144 provides feedback data 145 to transmitter processing module 146 that selects one of a plurality of transmission failure causes for the packet transmission failure, and adjusts at least one of a plurality of transmit parameters used to generate transmit signal 155, based on the selected one of the plurality of transmission failure causes.).
Shahi, as modified by Nentwig, and Gonikberg are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of adaptive transmission feedback.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of Shahi, as modified by Nentwig, with Gonikberg to create the method, wherein the transmission parameter data is identified after a failed data packet.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to adjust transmission parameters for future transmission success.
Claims 4 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shahi in view of Nentwig, and further in view of Jeong et al (US20230244534A1) (hereinafter "Jeong").
Regarding claim 4, Shahi, as modified by Nentwig, fails to disclose the radio, wherein the one or more hardware processors are configured to pass the transmission parameter data to the multilayer process when the buffer is full.
However, Jeong discloses the radio, wherein the one or more hardware processors are configured to pass the transmission parameter data to the multilayer process when the buffer is full ([0135] Specifically, a non-transitory computer-readable recording medium including a program for executing a control method of the electronic apparatus 100, a method for controlling an electronic apparatus including a memory for storing data with respect to a neural network model, and a neural network accelerator including a buffer for temporarily storing data with respect to the neural network model and a core for performing a computation on the neural network model based on data stored in the buffer, the method includes determining a plurality of combinations including fused layers and non-fused layers based on a method of selecting and fusing some of adjacent layers of the neural network model, based on a capacity of the buffer, … calculating a data transmission time between the buffer and the memory and computation time of the core according to the plurality of combinations to identify a combination to be used in a computation of the neural network model among the plurality of combinations.).
Shahi, as modified by Nentwig, and Jeong are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of mechanisms for conditional transmission.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of Shahi, as modified by Nentwig, with Jeong to create the radio, wherein the one or more hardware processors are configured to pass the transmission parameter data to the multilayer process when the buffer is full.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to minimize data transmission overhead and balance computation time based on buffer constraints.
Regarding claim 17, Shahi, as modified by Nentwig, fails to disclose the method, wherein passing the transmission parameter data to the multilayer process comprises passing the transmission parameter data to the multilayer process when the buffer is full.
However, Jeong discloses the method, wherein passing the transmission parameter data to the multilayer process comprises passing the transmission parameter data to the multilayer process when the buffer is full ([0135] Specifically, a non-transitory computer-readable recording medium including a program for executing a control method of the electronic apparatus 100, a method for controlling an electronic apparatus including a memory for storing data with respect to a neural network model, and a neural network accelerator including a buffer for temporarily storing data with respect to the neural network model and a core for performing a computation on the neural network model based on data stored in the buffer, the method includes determining a plurality of combinations including fused layers and non-fused layers based on a method of selecting and fusing some of adjacent layers of the neural network model, based on a capacity of the buffer, … calculating a data transmission time between the buffer and the memory and computation time of the core according to the plurality of combinations to identify a combination to be used in a computation of the neural network model among the plurality of combinations.).
Shahi, as modified by Nentwig, and Jeong are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of mechanisms for conditional transmission.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of Shahi, as modified by Nentwig, with Jeong to create the method, wherein passing the transmission parameter data to the multilayer process comprises passing the transmission parameter data to the multilayer process when the buffer is full.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to minimize data transmission overhead and balance computation time based on buffer constraints.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shahi in view of Nentwig, and further in view of Mogre et al (US20120307674A1) (hereinafter "Mogre").
Regarding claim 5, Shahi, as modified by Nentwig, fails to disclose the radio, wherein the one or more hardware processors are configured to continuously pass the transmission parameter data to the multilayer process.
However, Mogre discloses the radio, wherein the one or more hardware processors are configured to continuously pass the transmission parameter data to the multilayer process ([0033] In order to improve the forecast quality, one embodiment applies a signal correction in step c) on the outputs of the neural networks based on values of earlier training patterns. In order to adapt the neural networks to the actual arrival history, the neural networks may be trained during data transmission in regular time intervals or continuously.).
Shahi, as modified by Nentwig, and Mogre are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of correcting model outputs against historical training patterns.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of Shahi, as modified by Nentwig, with Mogre to create the radio, wherein the one or more hardware processors are configured to continuously pass the transmission parameter data to the multilayer process.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to improve overall forecast quality over time.
Claims 6, 13, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shahi in view of Nentwig, and further in view of Wang et al (US20210406677A1) (hereinafter "Wang").
Regarding claim 6, Shahi, as modified by Nentwig, fails to disclose the radio, wherein the memory is further configured to store one or more machine learning algorithms, and wherein the one or more hardware processors are configured to arbitrate the plurality of potential operating configurations to determine the final set of operating configurations using at least one machine learning algorithm of the one or more machine learning algorithms.
However, Wang discloses the radio, wherein the memory is further configured to store one or more machine learning algorithms, and wherein the one or more hardware processors are configured to arbitrate the plurality of potential operating configurations to determine the final set of operating configurations using at least one machine learning algorithm of the one or more machine learning algorithms ([0068] Alternatively, or additionally, the neural network generates NN formation configurations based on different transmission environments and/or transmission channel conditions. Training data 504 represents an example input to the DNN 502, such as data corresponding to a downlink communication and/or uplink communication with a particular operating configuration and/or a particular transmission environment.).
Shahi, as modified by Nentwig, and Wang are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor to dynamically optimize transmission operations.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of Shahi, as modified by Nentwig, with Wang to create the radio, wherein the memory is further configured to store one or more machine learning algorithms, and wherein the one or more hardware processors are configured to arbitrate the plurality of potential operating configurations to determine the final set of operating configurations using at least one machine learning algorithm of the one or more machine learning algorithms.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to dynamically manage transmissions to reduce interference and latency.
Regarding claim 13, Shahi, as modified by Nentwig, fails to disclose the radio, wherein the one or more hardware processors are further configured to:
receive a user defined condition metric associated with one or more predetermined operating conditions for the radio; and arbitrate the plurality of potential operating configurations and the user defined condition metric to determine the final set of operating configurations.
However, Wang discloses the radio, wherein the one or more hardware processors are further configured to:
receive a user defined condition metric associated with one or more predetermined operating conditions for the radio; and ([0054] The neural network table 316 stores multiple different NN formation configuration elements generated using the training module 314. In some implementations, the neural network table includes input characteristics for each NN formation configuration element and/or NN formation configuration, where the input characteristics describe properties about the training data used to generate the NN formation configuration. For instance, the input characteristics can include a number of UEs participating in a UECS, an estimated location of a target UE in the UECS, an estimated location of a coordinating UE in the UECS, a type of local wireless network link used by the UECS, power information, SINR information, CQI, CSI, Doppler feedback, RSS, error metrics, minimum end-to-end (E2E) latency, desired E2E latency, E2E QoS, E2E throughput, E2E packet loss ratio, cost of service, etc.)
arbitrate the plurality of potential operating configurations and the user defined condition metric to determine the final set of operating configurations ([0068] Some implementations generate input characteristics 506 that describe various qualities of the training data, such as an operating configuration, transmission channel metrics, UE capabilities, UE velocity, a number of UEs participating in a UECS, an estimated location of a target UE in the UECS, an estimated location of a coordinating UE in the UECS, a type of local wireless network link used by the UECS, and so forth.).
Shahi, as modified by Nentwig, and Wang are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor to dynamically optimize transmission operations.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of Shahi, as modified by Nentwig, with Wang to create the radio, the radio, wherein the one or more hardware processors are further configured to: receive a user defined condition metric associated with one or more predetermined operating conditions for the radio; and arbitrate the plurality of potential operating configurations and the user defined condition metric to determine the final set of operating configurations.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to dynamically manage transmissions to reduce interference and latency.
Regarding claim 14, Shahi, as modified by Nentwig, fails to disclose the radio, wherein the one or more predetermined operating conditions comprises at least one of undetectability, throughput, quality of service, and connectivity.
However, Wang discloses the radio, wherein the one or more predetermined operating conditions comprises at least one of undetectability, throughput, quality of service, and connectivity ([0043] For instance, the input characteristics include, by way of example and not of limitation, a number of UEs participating in a UECS, an estimated location of a target UE in the UECS, an estimated location of a coordinating UE in the UECS, a type of local wireless network link used by the UECS, power information, signal-to-interference-plus-noise ratio (SINR) information, channel quality indicator (CQI) information, channel state information (CSI), Doppler feedback, frequency bands, BLock Error Rate (BLER), Quality of Service (QoS), Hybrid Automatic Repeat reQuest (HARD) information (e.g., first transmission error rate, second transmission error rate, maximum retransmissions), latency, Radio Link Control (RLC), Automatic Repeat reQuest (ARQ) metrics, received signal strength (RSS), uplink SINR, timing measurements, error metrics, UE capabilities, BS capabilities, power mode, Internet Protocol (IP) layer throughput, end2end latency, end2end packet loss ratio, etc.).
Shahi, as modified by Nentwig, and Wang are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor to dynamically optimize transmission operations.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of Shahi, as modified by Nentwig, with Wang to create the radio, wherein the one or more predetermined operating conditions comprises at least one of undetectability, throughput, quality of service, and connectivity.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to dynamically manage transmissions to reduce interference and latency.
Claims 7 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shahi in view of Nentwig, and further in view of Parag et al (EP3633938A1) (hereinafter "Parag").
Regarding claim 7, Shahi, as modified by Nentwig, fails to disclose the radio, wherein the at least one machine learning algorithm of the one or more machine learning algorithms is trained using stored information of interference simulations.
However, Parag discloses the radio, wherein the at least one machine learning algorithm of the one or more machine learning algorithms is trained using stored information of interference simulations (Pg. 9, Para. 4: In some embodiments, estimation of these parameters enables a selection of best-suited modulation and coding scheme for a downlink channel. In some embodiments, network traffic patterns are shown to be significantly time-dependent. In some embodiments, traffic peaks that are characterized by bouncing busy hour for each site may be different. A time-series traffic prediction model may be derived using standard machine learning techniques, such as deep neural networks. In some embodiments, signal strengths are accurately predicted by a tuned RF propagation model, Signal to Noise Ratio (SINR) may be traffic intensity dependent.).
Shahi, as modified by Nentwig, and Parag are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of using artificial intelligence to mitigate signal degradation.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of Shahi, as modified by Nentwig, with Parag to create the radio, wherein the at least one machine learning algorithm of the one or more machine learning algorithms is trained using stored information of interference simulations.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to identify patterns to effectively adapt to potential future changes.
Regarding claim 18, Shahi, as modified by Nentwig, fails to disclose the method, wherein arbitrating the plurality of potential operating configurations comprising using at least on machine learning algorithm trained using stored information of interference simulations.
However, Parag discloses the method, wherein arbitrating the plurality of potential operating configurations comprising using at least on machine learning algorithm trained using stored information of interference simulations (Pg. 9, Para. 4: In some embodiments, estimation of these parameters enables a selection of best-suited modulation and coding scheme for a downlink channel. In some embodiments, network traffic patterns are shown to be significantly time-dependent. In some embodiments, traffic peaks that are characterized by bouncing busy hour for each site may be different. A time-series traffic prediction model may be derived using standard machine learning techniques, such as deep neural networks. In some embodiments, signal strengths are accurately predicted by a tuned RF propagation model, Signal to Noise Ratio (SINR) may be traffic intensity dependent.).
Shahi, as modified by Nentwig, and Parag are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of using artificial intelligence to mitigate signal degradation.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of Shahi, as modified by Nentwig, with Parag to create the method, wherein arbitrating the plurality of potential operating configurations comprising using at least on machine learning algorithm trained using stored information of interference simulations.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to identify patterns to effectively adapt to potential future changes.
Claims 8 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shahi in view of Nentwig, and further in view of Jia et al (US20220377746A1) (hereinafter "Jia").
Regarding claim 8, Shahi, as modified by Nentwig, fails to disclose the radio, wherein the interference simulations include multiple configurations of interferes and geographic distributions of a plurality radios.
However, Jia discloses the radio, wherein the interference simulations include multiple configurations of interferes and geographic distributions of a plurality radios ([0033] Alternatively, the network can create profiles of interference and traffic management, and input into the ML system. Based on UE location, report updates, learning procedures, earth station device locations, etc., feedback can be provided to an ML agent to improve the artificial intelligence (AI) models for better improvements of interference management.).
Shahi, as modified by Nentwig, and Jia are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of optimizing operating configurations by using machine learning algorithms.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of Shahi, as modified by Nentwig, with Jia to create the radio, wherein the interference simulations include multiple configurations of interferes and geographic distributions of a plurality radios.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to predict and mitigate interference without relying solely on traditional mathematical filtering.
Regarding claim 9, Shahi, as modified by Nentwig, fails to disclose the radio, wherein the one or more machine learning algorithms are further trained or re-trained using interference measurements collected in an environment over time.
However, Jia discloses the radio, wherein the one or more machine learning algorithms are further trained or re-trained using interference measurements collected in an environment over time ([0034] The benefits of the aforementioned system comprise allowing network and/or device driven optimization of C-band operation and suppression of interference towards earth stations, environment aware interference management, utilization of historical data to predict and guide optimized network/device C band operation for protection of earth stations, and device power savings. [0033] ML of object patterns can be used to train neural networks for better optimization in the interference minimization towards the earth station.).
Shahi, as modified by Nentwig, and Jia are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor f optimizing operating configurations by using machine learning algorithms.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of Shahi, as modified by Nentwig, with Jia to create the radio, wherein the one or more machine learning algorithms are further trained or re-trained using interference measurements collected in an environment over time.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to predict and mitigate interference without relying solely on traditional mathematical filtering.
Claims 11 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shahi in view of Nentwig, and further in view of Donley et al (US20210136508A1) (hereinafter "Donley").
Regarding claim 11, Shahi, as modified by Nentwig, fails to disclose the radio, wherein the multilayer process comprises two or more of a transmit power control engine, a noise-like spread signaling engine, a decoy relays engine, a directional radiation engine, an interference cancellation engine, or an interference avoidance engine.
However, Donley discloses the radio, wherein the multilayer process comprises two or more of a transmit power control engine, a noise-like spread signaling engine, a decoy relays engine, a directional radiation engine, an interference cancellation engine, or an interference avoidance engine ([0036] Additionally, in some embodiments, classifying the first beamformed signal and the second beamformed signal may include applying a deep learning model of sound classification to the first beamformed signal and the second beamformed signal. In some examples, the term “deep learning” may refer to a machine learning method that can learn from unlabeled data using multiple processing layers in a semi-supervised or unsupervised way.).
Shahi, as modified by Nentwig, and Donley are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of securing communications in RF noisy environments.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of Shahi, as modified by Nentwig, with Donley to create the radio, wherein the multilayer process comprises two or more of a transmit power control engine, a noise-like spread signaling engine, a decoy relays engine, a directional radiation engine, an interference cancellation engine, or an interference avoidance engine.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to avoid operating in spectrums with high interference.
Regarding claim 19, Shahi, as modified by Nentwig, fails to disclose the method, wherein the multilayer process comprises two or more of a transmit power control engine, a noise-like spread signaling engine, a decoy relays engine, a directional radiation engine, an interference cancellation engine, or an interference avoidance engine.
However, Donley discloses the method, wherein the multilayer process comprises two or more of a transmit power control engine, a noise-like spread signaling engine, a decoy relays engine, a directional radiation engine, an interference cancellation engine, or an interference avoidance engine ([0036] Additionally, in some embodiments, classifying the first beamformed signal and the second beamformed signal may include applying a deep learning model of sound classification to the first beamformed signal and the second beamformed signal. In some examples, the term “deep learning” may refer to a machine learning method that can learn from unlabeled data using multiple processing layers in a semi-supervised or unsupervised way.).
Shahi, as modified by Nentwig, and Donley are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of securing communications in RF noisy environments.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of Shahi, as modified by Nentwig, with Donley to create the method, wherein the multilayer process comprises two or more of a transmit power control engine, a noise-like spread signaling engine, a decoy relays engine, a directional radiation engine, an interference cancellation engine, or an interference avoidance engine.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to avoid operating in spectrums with high interference.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Schubert et al (US20240244482A1) discloses a method for controlling interference and congestion among autonomous wireless communication links.
Jagannath et al (US20210119675A1) discloses a method for providing a protocol stack design which resists active jammers for use with a variety of communication systems, including multiple input and multiple output communication systems.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to D LITTLE whose telephone number is (571)272-5748. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8-6 EST.
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, Nishant Divecha can be reached on 571-270-3125. 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.
/D LITTLE/Examiner, Art Unit 2419
/Nishant Divecha/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2419
Prosecution Insights