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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 08/05/2024 was filed. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner
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 pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-3, 7-16, and 19-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gong (US 2022/0346004 A1) in view of Bousia (IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 65, no. 11, pp. 9168-9180, Nov. 2016).
Regarding claim 1, Gong discloses: A method for power savings in a wireless network, the method comprising (Gong, para [0042] “to optimize power supply control on a base station through cooperative working of the OSS, the base station, and a power supply”).
Further, Gong discloses: receiving, by a cost power engine from an operations support system, traffic usage information from one or more base stations of the first wireless network, Gong teaches that the OSS obtains first operating data, including key performance indicator (KPI) data such as connected user count and physical resource block (PRB) utilization rate (i.e., “traffic usage information” as claimed), from a first base station unit that is in a power-on state (Gong, para [0010] “The KPI data may include a quantity of connected mode users, uplink physical resource block (PRB, physical resource block) utilization, downlink PRB utilization”).
Additionally, Gong discloses: wherein the traffic usage information is used to turn off power to one or more base stations in the first wireless network. that when the OSS determines, based on the operating data, that the first base station unit is in a low bearing capacity state by comparing the KPI data to a first preset threshold, the OSS controls the first base station unit to enter a power-off state or a sleep state, thereby reducing the power consumption and operational expenditure of the base station (Gong, para [0019] “the first base station unit in the low bearing capacity state is controlled to enter the power-off state or the sleep state from the power-on state or the wake-up state”).
With respect to claim 1, Gong discloses a method for power savings in a wireless network, including a base station control method applied through an operations support system that obtains operating data from base stations and controls base station power states to reduce operational expenditure (Gong, para [0042] “a base station control method, an operations support system OSS, and a distributed base station system DBS, to optimize power supply control on a base station through cooperative working of the OSS,”). Nevertheless, Gong does not explicitly disclose: employing, by a service provider, a first wireless network and a second wireless network, wherein the first wireless network is controlled by the service provider and the second wireless network is not controlled by the service provider.
However, Gong in view of Bousia discloses a network environment in which mobile network operators deploy their own base station infrastructure (i.e., “the first wireless network is controlled by the service provider” as claimed), and additionally have their traffic served by third-party small cells (i.e., “the second wireless network is not controlled by the service provider” as claimed), such that an operator employs both its own controlled network and a third-party network that the operator does not control (Bousia, pg. 9169, col. 1 “we introduce an offloading mechanism, where the operators lease the capacity of an SC network owned by a third party, to be able to switch off their BSs and maximize their energy efficiency, when the traffic demand is low”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the OSS-based base station power management system of Gong to operate within a multi-operator network environment as taught by Bousia, where the service provider employs both a network it controls and a third-party network it does not control, because Bousia recognizes that network underutilization during low traffic periods enables operators to save energy and reduce expenditures by having traffic served by third-party infrastructure.
Doing so would predictably allow the service provider to optimize base station power consumption in its own network while maintaining service continuity through the third-party network, thereby reducing both energy consumption and operational costs across the hybrid network.
Regarding claim 2, Gong discloses: The method of claim 1, further comprising: subscribing, by the cost power engine with the operations support system, to messages including the traffic usage information. Gong teaches that the OSS obtains operating data including KPI data from the base station units for the purpose of power state determinations, where the KPI data (i.e., “traffic usage information” as claimed) directly reflects the bearing capacity state of the base station unit (Gong, para [0025]-[0026]).
Regarding claim 3, Gong discloses that the OSS determines whether operating data falls below a preset threshold to identify base stations in a low bearing capacity state (Gong, para [0057] “if the KPI data is lower than the first preset threshold, the OSS determines that the first base station unit is in the low bearing capacity state”). Yet, Gong does not explicitly disclose: The method of claim 1, further comprising: generating, by the cost power engine, a power off list based on the traffic usage information falling below a cost power off threshold.
However, Gong in view of Bousia discloses generating lists of base stations to switch off based on cost-driven evaluations, where the switching decision considers the financial cost of keeping base stations active during low traffic periods against the cost of offloading traffic to third-party infrastructure (Bousia, pg. 9169, col. 1 “the MNOs aim to reduce their energy consumption and expenditures by offloading their traffic and switching off their BS infrastructure”).
Further, Gong discloses: sending, by the cost power engine to service provider components, the power off list to turn off power to base stations on the power off list. Gong teaches that the OSS controls the power supply state of base station units to enter the power-off state, and that the OSS works with the base station and power source components in a distributed base station system to implement the power control (Gong, para [0042] “a base station control method, an operations support system OSS, and a distributed base station system DBS, to optimize power supply control on a base station through cooperative working of the OSS,”).
Accordingly, the rationale to combine Gong and Bousia is the same as described in claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 7, Gong teaches that the OSS determines whether KPI data falls below a first preset threshold to identify base stations in a low bearing capacity state for power-off control (Gong, para [0057]). Yet, Gong does not explicitly disclose: The method of claim 3, wherein the cost power off threshold is a point where a cost to power a base station is substantially offset by savings gained by offloading traffic from the second wireless network to the first wireless network.
Nevertheless, Gong in view of Bousia teaches that the cost function for base station switching-off decisions incorporates the tradeoff between the energy and financial cost of keeping base stations active versus the savings obtained by offloading traffic to third-party infrastructure, such that operators switch off base stations when the cost of operation is substantially offset by the savings from offloading (Bousia, pg. 9170-9171). Accordingly, the rationale to combine Gong and Bousia is the same as described in claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 8, Gong teaches that the OSS determines whether KPI data falls below a first preset threshold to identify base stations in a low bearing capacity state for power-off control (Gong, para [0057]). Nevertheless, Gong does not explicitly disclose: The method of claim 3, wherein the cost power off threshold is a net present value of a cost to power a base station as compared to savings gained by offloading traffic from the second wireless network to the first wireless network.
However, Gong in view of Bousia teaches that the switching-off decision is based on a cost comparison that accounts for the present value of operating a base station relative to the savings from traffic offloading, where the cost function captures both energy and financial expenditures over the evaluation period (Bousia, pg. 9170-9172). Net present value is a well-known financial valuation technique for comparing present costs against present savings, and applying it to the cost comparison framework of Bousia would have been an obvious application of a known analytical method to a known cost-optimization problem. Accordingly, the rationale to combine Gong and Bousia is the same as described in claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 9, Gong teaches that the OSS determines whether KPI data falls below a first preset threshold to identify base stations in a low bearing capacity state for power-off control (Gong, para [0057]). Yet, Gong does not explicitly disclose: The method of claim 3, wherein a net present value is determined from the traffic usage information, the cost power off threshold is a net present value power off threshold, and the generating further comprising: comparing the net present value to the net present value power off threshold to generate the power off list.
On the other hand, Gong in view of Bousia teaches that the cost function evaluates traffic information to determine the financial merit of switching off base stations, and that the switching decision is made by comparing the calculated cost metric to a threshold value (Bousia, pg. 9170-9172). As discussed regarding claim 8, applying net present value analysis to this comparison would have been an obvious use of a standard financial technique to yield predictable results. Accordingly, the rationale to combine Gong and Bousia is the same as described in claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 10, Gong discloses that when a third base station unit in the first state has high bearing capacity, the OSS can control a previously powered-off base station unit to re-enter the power-on state to share the load (Gong, para [0017]-[0018] “when a bearing capacity of another base station unit in the base station is excessively high, the OSS may control the first base station unit to enter the first state to share running corresponding to the bearing capacity”).
Nevertheless, Gong does not explicitly disclose: The method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving, by the cost power engine from a connection manager, traffic usage information from one or more mobile devices operating in the second wireless network, wherein the traffic usage information from connection manager is used to turn on power to one or more base stations in the first wireless network.
However, Gong in view of Bousia discloses that in a multi-operator environment, traffic conditions on the third-party network are monitored and that when traffic demand increases, previously switched-off base stations can be reactivated to serve the increased demand, with the switching-on decision driven by monitored traffic data (See Bousia, pg. 9171 “The MNOs (buyers) want to offload their traffic to the SCs by requesting specific capacity resources to lease, based on the predictions of the traffic load. The number of the physical resource blocks (PRBs) is calculated”) from the cooperative network (Bousia, pg. 9172-9174). Accordingly, the rationale to combine Gong and Bousia is the same as described in claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 11, Gong teaches that the OSS controls base station units to enter the power-on state when bearing capacity of other base station units is too high, working with the power supply system in a distributed base station arrangement (Gong, para [0017]-[0018] “when a bearing capacity of another base station unit in the base station is excessively high, the OSS may control the first base station unit to enter the first state to share running corresponding to the bearing capacity”). Yet, Gong does not explicitly disclose: The method of claim 10, further comprising: generating, by the cost power engine, a power on list based on the traffic usage information from the connection manager meeting or exceeding a cost power on threshold; and sending, by the cost power engine to service provider components, the power on list to turn on power to base stations on the power on list.
Nevertheless, Gong in view of Bousia teaches that the multi-operator switching scheme generates lists of base stations to activate or deactivate based on threshold-driven cost evaluations, where base stations are powered on when traffic conditions meet or exceed a threshold indicating that reactivation is financially justified (Bousia, pg. 9172-9174). Accordingly, the rationale to combine Gong and Bousia is the same as described in claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 12, Gong teaches that the OSS obtains operating data from base station units through a data acquisition arrangement in which the OSS is connected to the base station units for receiving KPI data (Gong, para [0025]-[0026] “The KPI of the first base station unit and/or the power supply parameter of the first base station unit may directly or indirectly reflect the bearing capacity state of the first base station unit”). However, Gong does not explicitly disclose: The method of claim 10, further comprising: subscribing, by the cost power engine with the connection manager, to messages including the traffic usage information from the one or more mobile devices.
Yet, Gong in view of Bousia teaches that operators in a multi-operator environment exchange traffic information from devices operating in the cooperative network to coordinate switching decisions (Bousia, pg. 9172-9173). Accordingly, the rationale to combine Gong and Bousia is the same as described in claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 13, Gong teaches that the OSS controls base station units to enter power-on or power-off states based on threshold comparisons of operating data (Gong, para [0017]-[0018]). Nevertheless, Gong does not explicitly disclose: The method of claim 11, wherein the cost power on threshold is a point where a cost to power a base station is substantially offset by savings gained by offloading traffic from the second wireless network to the first wireless network.
However, Gong in view of Bousia teaches that the cost function applies symmetrically to both switching-off and switching-on decisions, where the threshold for reactivation represents the point at which the cost of powering a base station is justified by the savings from recapturing offloaded traffic (Bousia, pg. 9170-9172). Accordingly, the rationale to combine Gong and Bousia is the same as described in claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 14, Gong discloses: The method of claim 1, wherein a grace period is used to enable mobile devices to handoff to the second wireless network from the one or more base stations. Gong teaches that when controlling a base station unit to enter the power-off state, the OSS further determines whether a terminal connected to the base station unit meets a preset condition before triggering power-off, thereby providing a period for terminal handling (i.e., “grace period” as claimed) before the base station is deactivated (Gong, para [0014] “the OSS may further perform determining for the terminal accessing the first base station unit, that is, determine whether the terminal meets the preset condition”).
Regarding claim 15, Gong discloses: A service provider system, comprising: a service provider network including one or more base stations (Gong, para [0019] "The DBS includes a power supply, a base station, and an operations support system OSS").
Further, Gong's distributed base station system is described within a single-operator framework in which the operations support system manages the service provider's own base stations. Yet, Gong does not explicitly disclose: a wireless network used by the service provider
On the other hand, Gong in view of Bousia discloses a network environment in which the service provider operates its own base station infrastructure alongside a third-party small-cell network whose capacity it leases for traffic offloading, where the leased third-party network is a “wireless network used by the service provider” as claimed (Bousia, pg. 9169, col. 1 "we introduce an offloading mechanism, where the operators lease the capacity of an SC network owned by a third party, to be able to switch off their BSs and maximize their energy efficiency, when the traffic demand is low").
Additionally, Gong discloses: a cost power controller configured to: obtain, from an operations support system, traffic utilization data from the one or more base stations Gong teaches that the OSS functions as a controller that obtains operating data, including KPI data such as connected mode user count and PRB utilization, from the base station units and directs base station power state decisions based on that data (Gong, para [0010] "The KPI data may include a quantity of connected mode users, uplink physical resource block (PRB, physical resource block) utilization, downlink PRB utilization").
Moreover, Gong teaches that the OSS compares KPI data against a preset threshold to identify base stations in a low bearing capacity state (Gong, para [0057] "if the KPI data is lower than the first preset threshold, the OSS determines that the first base station unit is in the low bearing capacity state"). However, Gong does not explicitly disclose: determine which of the one or more base stations have traffic utilization data that breaches a cost power off threshold
Nevertheless, Gong in view of Bousia discloses evaluating base stations against a cost-driven criterion that considers whether the financial cost of continuing to operate a base station is outweighed by the savings from offloading its traffic to the third-party network, such that base stations satisfying the cost criterion are identified for switching off (Bousia, pg. 9169, col. 1 "the MNOs aim to reduce their energy consumption and expenditures by offloading their traffic and switching off their BS infrastructure").
In addition, Gong discloses: notify service provider components to turn off power for a base station having traffic utilization data that breaches the cost power off threshold. Gong teaches that the OSS works cooperatively with base station and power supply components in a distributed arrangement to effect the power-off state of the identified base stations, sending control signals to the power supply as a service provider component (Gong, para [0042] "a base station control method, an operations support system OSS, and a distributed base station system DBS, to optimize power supply control on a base station through cooperative working of the OSS").
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the OSS-based distributed base station system of Gong to operate within the multi-operator hybrid-network framework of Bousia, where the service provider's own base station infrastructure is complemented by a third-party network available for traffic offloading and where base station power-off decisions are made against a cost-driven threshold, because Bousia recognizes that network underutilization during low traffic periods enables operators to save energy and reduce expenditures by having traffic served by third-party infrastructure under cost-aware decisions.
Doing so would predictably yield a service provider system that optimizes base station power consumption against a cost-driven threshold while maintaining service continuity via the third-party network, thereby reducing both energy consumption and operational costs across the hybrid network.
Regarding claim 16, Gong discloses: The system of claim 15, the cost power controller further configured to: subscribe to traffic utilization data from the operations support system. Gong teaches that the OSS obtains operating data including KPI data from the base station units and that the cost power controller (i.e., the OSS or its control unit) is the consumer of that data for power-state determinations, thereby subscribing to the traffic utilization data sourced from the operations support system (Gong, para [0025]-[0026] "The KPI of the first base station unit and/or the power supply parameter of the first base station unit may directly or indirectly reflect the bearing capacity state of the first base station unit").
Regarding claim 19, Gong teaches that the OSS determines whether KPI data falls below a preset threshold to identify base stations in a low bearing capacity state for power-off control (Gong, para [0057]). On the other hand, Gong does not explicitly disclose: The system of claim 15, wherein the cost power off threshold is a point where a cost to power a base station is substantially offset by savings gained by offloading traffic from the wireless network to the service provider network.
However, Gong in view of Bousia teaches that the cost function for base station switching-off decisions incorporates the tradeoff between the energy and financial cost of keeping base stations active versus the savings obtained by offloading traffic to third-party infrastructure, such that operators switch off base stations when the cost of operation is substantially offset by the savings from offloading (Bousia, pg. 9170-9171). Accordingly, the rationale to combine Gong and Bousia is the same as set forth regarding claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 20, Gong in view of Bousia teaches threshold-based determination of base stations for power-off control as set forth regarding claim 15 above. Yet, Gong in view of Bousia does not explicitly disclose: The system of claim 15, wherein the cost power off threshold is a net present value power off threshold and the cost power controller further configured to: determine a net present value of traffic utilization data
On the other hand, Gong in view of Bousia teaches that the switching-off decision is based on a cost comparison that accounts for the present value of operating a base station relative to the savings from traffic offloading, where the cost function captures both energy and financial expenditures over the evaluation period (Bousia, pg. 9170-9172). Net present value is a well-known financial valuation technique for comparing present costs against present savings, and applying it to the cost-comparison framework of Bousia to compute a net present value of the controller's traffic utilization data would have been an obvious application of a known analytical method to a known cost-optimization problem.
Further, Gong teaches that the OSS works cooperatively with base station and power supply components to effect the power-off state upon a threshold-based determination (Gong, para [0042]). However, Gong does not explicitly disclose: and send notification to the service provider components when the net present value breaches the net present value power off threshold.
Nevertheless, Gong in view of Bousia teaches that the cost-driven switching scheme directs the power-off action upon the cost metric crossing a breakeven threshold, such that service provider components are instructed to deactivate a base station when the computed present-value cost metric falls on the unfavorable side of the threshold (Bousia, pg. 9170-9172). Accordingly, the rationale to combine Gong and Bousia is the same as set forth regarding claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 21, Gong teaches that the OSS obtains operating data from base station units for use in power state determinations (Gong, para [0025]-[0026]). On the other hand, Gong does not explicitly disclose: The system of claim 15, the cost power controller further configured to: obtain, from a connection manager, traffic utilization data from mobile devices operating in the wireless network
However, Gong in view of Bousia discloses that in a multi-operator environment the traffic conditions attributable to mobile devices operating on the third-party network are monitored and communicated to the cost-decision entity through a connection manager that aggregates cross-network mobile-device traffic data (Bousia, pg. 9172-9174).
Further, Gong teaches that the OSS controls base station units to enter the power-on state when bearing capacity conditions warrant reactivation (Gong, para [0017]-[0018] "when a bearing capacity of another base station unit in the base station is excessively high, the OSS may control the first base station unit to enter the first state to share running corresponding to the bearing capacity"). Nevertheless, Gong does not explicitly disclose: determine which of the one or more base stations have traffic utilization data from the connection manager that meets or exceeds a cost power on threshold; and notify the service provider components to turn on power for a base station having traffic utilization data from the connection manager that meets or exceeds the cost power on threshold.
Yet, Gong in view of Bousia teaches that the multi-operator switching scheme evaluates base stations against a cost power-on threshold based on traffic data from the cooperative third-party network and, upon the threshold being met or exceeded, directs service provider components to reactivate the corresponding base stations (Bousia, pg. 9172-9174). Accordingly, the rationale to combine Gong and Bousia is the same as set forth regarding claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 22, Gong teaches that the OSS controls base station units to enter power-on or power-off states based on threshold comparisons of operating data (Gong, para [0017]-[0018]). Yet, Gong does not explicitly disclose: The system of claim 21, wherein the cost power on threshold is a point where a cost to power a base station is substantially offset by savings gained by offloading traffic from the wireless network to the service provider network.
Nevertheless, Gong in view of Bousia teaches that the cost function applies symmetrically to both switching-off and switching-on decisions, where the threshold for reactivation represents the point at which the cost of powering a base station is justified by the savings from recapturing offloaded traffic (Bousia, pg. 9170-9172). Accordingly, the rationale to combine Gong and Bousia is the same as set forth regarding claim 1 above.
Claims 4-6 and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gong in view of Bousia and further in view of Song (US 2012/0244869 A1).
Regarding claim 4, Gong in view of Bousia teaches generating a power off list based on cost-driven evaluations as set forth regarding claim 3 above. However, Gong in view of Bousia does not explicitly disclose: The method of claim 3, the generating further comprising: applying, by the cost power engine, mobility issue factors during generation of the power off list.
Nevertheless, Gong in view of Bousia and further in view of Song teaches that when identifying candidate cells to power down, the system applies a variety of performance and coverage factors including traffic load, cell size, mobile device transmit power, downlink power consumption, and uplink/downlink coverage (Song, para [0007] “The method may include using performance statistics to rank the set of candidate cells based on uplink coverage, downlink coverage, call quality, or connection quality”), and that a selection may be canceled if the cell no longer satisfies the basic selection criteria due to traffic changes or network configuration changes (Song, para [0103] “a selection may be canceled if the cell no longer satisfies the basic selection criteria (due to traffic changes, network configuration changes, etc.). Cancelled cells are deleted from the list.”). These coverage and performance criteria (i.e., “mobility issue factors” as claimed) constrain which cells may be powered down.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the power off list generation of Gong in view of Bousia by incorporating the coverage-aware candidate selection criteria taught by Song, because Song teaches that applying such factors during the candidate selection process avoids service disruption and maintains network coverage integrity.
Doing so would predictably ensure that base stations are not powered off when doing so would create coverage gaps or disrupt user connectivity, thereby maintaining quality of service while achieving energy and cost savings.
Regarding claim 5, Gong in view of Bousia teaches the application of cost-aware criteria during power off list generation as set forth regarding claim 4 above. Yet, Gong in view of Bousia does not explicitly disclose: The method of claim 4, wherein the mobility issue factors prevent powering off a base station which is a middle base station in a cluster of base stations.
On the other hand, Gong in view of Bousia and further in view of Song teaches that sites in the network may be classified into coverage sites and capacity sites, where coverage sites ensure basic signal coverage in the planned service area and are preserved to maintain network coverage integrity (Song, para [0039] “sites may be classified into coverage sites and capacity sites. Coverage sites may ensure the basic signal coverage in the planned service area”). A middle base station in a cluster functions as a coverage site whose deactivation would create a coverage gap between surrounding base stations, and preventing its power-off to avoid such a gap is a direct application of the coverage-site preservation criteria taught by Song. Thus, the rationale set forth regarding claim 4 applies equally here.
Regarding claim 6, Gong in view of Bousia teaches applying cost-driven factors during power off list generation as set forth regarding claim 4 above. Nevertheless, Gong in view of Bousia does not explicitly disclose: The method of claim 4, wherein the mobility issue factors permit powering off a base station which is an edge base station in a cluster of base stations.
However, Gong in view of Bousia and further in view of Song teaches that capacity sites, which handle traffic hot spots rather than basic coverage, are favorable candidates for power-down during off-peak hours because switching them off does not compromise basic network coverage (Song, para [0039] “capacity sites may be needed to handle traffic hot spots. It may be desirable to switch off capacity sites in the absence of high traffic demand during the off-peak hours”). An edge base station in a cluster functions as a capacity site whose coverage area is at the boundary where its deactivation can be compensated by surrounding cluster stations. Accordingly, the rationale set forth regarding claim 4 applies equally here.
Regarding claim 17, Gong in view of Bousia teaches threshold-based determination and notification of base stations for power-off control as set forth regarding claim 15 above. Yet, Gong in view of Bousia does not explicitly disclose: The system of claim 15, for the base station, the cost power controller further configured to: forego notification to the service provider components if the base station is impacted by a mobility issue factor.
However, Gong in view of Bousia and further in view of Song teaches that when identifying candidate cells for power-down, the system applies coverage and performance criteria, and a selection may be canceled when the cell no longer satisfies the basic selection criteria due to traffic changes or network configuration changes, with cancelled cells deleted from the resulting list (Song, para [0103] "a selection may be canceled if the cell no longer satisfies the basic selection criteria (due to traffic changes, network configuration changes, etc.). Cancelled cells are deleted from the list."). Canceling a selection from the candidate list, thereby excluding the impacted base station from the resulting power-down notification sent to the service provider components, reads on foregoing notification for a base station impacted by a mobility issue factor (i.e., a coverage or selection-criteria constraint) as claimed. Accordingly, the rationale to combine Gong in view of Bousia with Song is the same as set forth regarding claim 4 above.
Regarding claim 18, Gong in view of Bousia teaches applying coverage-aware criteria to the power-off notification decision as set forth regarding claim 17 above. Nevertheless, Gong in view of Bousia does not explicitly disclose: The system of claim 17, wherein mobility issue factors prevent powering off a base station which is a middle base station in a cluster of base stations
On the other hand, Gong in view of Bousia and further in view of Song teaches classifying sites in a network into coverage sites and capacity sites, where coverage sites ensure basic signal coverage in the planned service area and are preserved to maintain network coverage integrity (Song, para [0039] “sites may be classified into coverage sites and capacity sites. Coverage sites may ensure the basic signal coverage in the planned service area”). A middle base station in a cluster functions as a coverage site whose deactivation would create a coverage gap between surrounding base stations, and preventing its power-off to avoid such a gap reads on the claimed mobility-issue-factor rule for middle base stations.
Further, Gong in view of Bousia teaches the coverage-aware power-off constraint as set forth above. However, Gong in view of Bousia does not explicitly disclose: and the mobility issue factors permit powering off a base station which is an edge base station in a cluster of base stations.
Yet, Gong in view of Bousia and further in view of Song teaches that capacity sites, which handle traffic hot spots rather than basic coverage, are favorable candidates for power-down during off-peak hours because switching them off does not compromise basic network coverage (Song, para [0039] "capacity sites may be needed to handle traffic hot spots. It may be desirable to switch off capacity sites in the absence of high traffic demand during the off-peak hours"). An edge base station in a cluster functions as a capacity site whose coverage area is at the boundary where its deactivation can be compensated by surrounding cluster stations without creating a coverage gap, thereby reading on the claimed mobility-issue-factor rule permitting power-off for edge base stations. Accordingly, the rationale set forth regarding claim 4 applies equally here.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHONGSUH (John) PARK whose telephone number is 408-918-7574. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00-5:30 PST
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, Avellino, Joseph can be reached at 571-272-3905 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.
/CHONGSUH PARK/Examiner, Art Unit 2478
/JOSEPH E AVELLINO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2478