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 .
Specification
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 § 102
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3, 6-7, and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ostrometzky et al (US 2022/0110012). Hereinafter referred to as Ostrometzky.
Regarding claims 1 and 12-13, Ostrometzky discloses a computer implemented method for controlling communications network, the method comprising obtaining first meteorological data comprising information about weather conditions at different locations (see at least paragraph [0084]); obtaining first performance data from the communications network at different network locations (see at least paragraphs [0067]-[0069]); mapping the first meteorological data and the first performance data to each other based on location information to obtain a plurality of data points of performance data and respective weather conditions (see at least fig.2); creating a model of impact of the weather conditions on performance data based on the plurality of data points (see at least paragraph [0087]); and providing the model for the purpose of controlling the communications network (see at least paragraph [0067]).
Regarding claim 2. Ostrometzky discloses a method wherein the method further comprises: obtaining second performance data from the communications network; obtaining second meteorological data comprising information about weather conditions associated with the second performance data; calculating further performance data based on the second performance data, the model and the second meteorological data; and providing the further performance data for the purpose of controlling the communications network (see at least paragraph [0069]).
Regarding claim 3, Ostrometzky discloses a method wherein calculating the further performance data comprises calculating a difference between values of the second performance data and performance data values obtained from the model based on the second meteorological data (see at least paragraph [0158]).
Regarding claim 6, Ostrometzky discloses a method wherein controlling the communications network comprises evaluation of operation of the communications network based on performance data (see at least paragraph [0005] and [0085]-[0086]).
Regarding claim 7. Ostrometzky discloses a method of claim wherein controlling the communications network comprises optimizing operation of the communications network based on performance data (see at least paragraph [0066]-[0067]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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.
Claims 4-5 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ostrometzky in view of Elkabetz et al (US 2019/0339416). Hereinafter referred to as Elkabetz.
Regarding claims 4-5, Ostrometzky discloses all the limitations of the claimed invention with the exception of calculating the further performance data further comprises calculating standard deviation of the difference for the plurality of data points. However, Elkabetz, from a similar field of endeavor, teaches calculating the further performance data further comprises calculating standard deviation of the difference for the plurality of data points (see at least table 3). Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the invention to employ the teaching of Elkabetz, as indicated, into the communication method of Ostrometzky for the purpose of understanding consistency and having a better data collection effectiveness.
Regarding claim 9, Ostrometzky discloses all the limitations of the claimed invention with the exception that obtaining third meteorological data comprising a weather forecast; obtaining forecasted performance data values from the model based on the third meteorological information; providing the forecasted performance data values for the purpose of controlling the communications network. However, Elkabetz, from the same field of endeavor, teaches obtaining third meteorological data comprising a weather forecast; obtaining forecasted performance data values from the model based on the third meteorological information; providing the forecasted performance data values for the purpose of controlling the communications network (see at least paragraph [0122]). Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the invention to employ the teaching of Elkabetz, as indicated, into the communication method of Ostrometzky for the purpose of improving network performance.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ostrometzky in view of Sudhakaran et al (US 2021/0302956). Hereinafter referred to as Sudhakaran.
Regarding clam 8, Ostrometzky discloses all the limitations of the claimed invention with the exception that the model is cell specific. However, Sudhakaran, from a similar field of endeavor, teaches the model is cell specific (see at least paragraphs [0024]). Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the invention to employ the teaching of Sudhakaran, as indicated, into the communication method of Ostrometzky for the purpose of optimizing network performance down to the cell level.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ostrometzky in view of Caldwell et al (EP 2 133 712).
Regarding claim 10, Ostrometzky discloses all the limitations of the claimed invention with the exception that the model is created by fitting a curve on the obtained data points. However, Caldwell, from the same field of endeavor, teaches a model is created by fitting a curve on the obtained data points (see at least paragraph [0085]). Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the invention to employ the teaching of Caldwell, indicated, into the communication method of Ostrometzky for the purpose of deriving true weather values.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO_892.
In the case of amending the claimed invention, Applicant is respectfully requested to indicate the portion(s) of the specification which dictate(s) the structure relied on for proper interpretation and also to verify and ascertain the metes and bounds of the claimed invention.
When responding to this office action, applicants are advised to clearly point out the patentable novelty which they think the claims present in view of the state of the art disclosed by the references cited or the objections made. Applicants must also show how the amendments avoid such references or objections. See 37C.F.R 1.111(c). In addition, applicants are advised to provide the examiner with the line numbers and pages numbers in the application and/or references cited to assist examiner in locating the appropriate paragraphs.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOUNIR MOUTAOUAKIL whose telephone number is (571)270-1416. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10AM-4PM 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, Ayaz Sheikh can be reached at 571-272-3795. 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.
/MOUNIR MOUTAOUAKIL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2476
