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 .
Election/Restrictions
During a telephone conversation with Attorney Ravi Mohan Reg # 71,912 on 09/14/2026 a provisional election was made without traverse to prosecute the invention of Group I, claims 1-16 and 20. Affirmation of this election must be made by applicant in replying to this Office action. Claims 17-19 are withdrawn from further consideration by the examiner, 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a non-elected invention.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in India on 12/28/2023. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the IN202341089384 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-7, 15-16 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over IDS Reference, Ouzieli; Ido et al US 20180288664 A1, hereinafter Ouzieli, in view of Koskinen; Jussi-Pekka et al US 20140362717 A1, hereinafter Koskinen.
Regarding claims 1 and 20, Ouzieli teaches, a device (see e.g., “AP1” in paragraph [0027] and in figure 1), comprising: a processor; a network interface controller configured to provide access to a network; and a memory communicatively coupled to the processor (see Fig. 2, memory, processor etc.), wherein the memory comprises an assisted roaming logic that is configured to:
identify a roaming candidate list for the set of mobile devices based on the one or more motion attributes (Ouzieli [27] “STA 150, after detecting its location, its movement and its direction of movement, may send to AP1 information regarding its movement. AP1 would then, having this information, and further having information regarding neighboring APs, generate and transmit information to STA 150 including a list of roaming candidate APs based on the information regarding a location of the STA 150, in this case a target location toward which the STA is estimated to be moving.”).
segment the roaming candidate list into one or more roaming candidate sub-lists (Ouzieli [27] "The list, in the shown scenario of FIG. 1, may for example include AP4 and AP6, different from AP2 and AP3 ... ", noting that the list including AP4 and AP6 is a sublist of the list of roaming candidate list which may include AP3 to AP6 as shown in figure 1); and
transmit a roaming candidate sub-list of the one or more roaming candidate sub-lists to at least one mobile device of the set of mobile devices (Ouzieli [27] " AP1 would then, having this information, and further having information regarding neighboring APs, generate and transmit information to STA 150 including a list of roaming candidate APs based on the information regarding a location of the STA 150, in this case a target location toward which the STA is estimated to be moving.”).
Ouzieli does not expressly teach, however, in the same field of endeavor, Koskinen teaches, group, based on similarity in one or more motion attributes, a set of mobile devices roaming in an area (Koskinen [49] in particular “The third apparatus further comprises at least one processing core configured to derive a motion pattern from the movement information. The movement information may comprise, for example, position and velocity information or information on agreeing velocity among a group of mobiles, wherein mobiles are determined to have substantially the same velocity vector.”, [0050] “In some embodiments, the motion pattern comprises as pattern where a group of mobile terminals is determined to be moving together as a group. In some embodiments, the motion pattern comprises a path information on a path that is determined to exist in a cell, wherein mobiles are observed to follow the path when roaming in the cell and to undergo handover substantially at an endpoint of the path in the cell”, thereby disclosing the principle of a base station which groups, based on similarity in one or more motion attributes, a set of mobile devices roaming in an area).
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 invention of Ouzieli to include the features as taught by Koskinen above in order to efficiently manage handovers in cellular communications (Koskinen [0001]).
With respect to claim 20, claim recites the identical features of claim 1 for a corresponding method. Therefore, it is subjected to the same rejection.
Regarding claim 2, Ouzieli, in view of Koskinen, teaches the device, as outlined in the rejection of claim 1.
Ouzieli further teaches, wherein each of the one or more roaming candidate sub-lists has a unique selection of roaming candidate access points (APs) (see Ouzieli [27] "The list, in the shown scenario of FIG. 1, may for example include AP4 and AP6 ... ").
Regarding claim 3, Ouzieli, in view of Koskinen, teaches the device, as outlined in the rejection of claim 2.
Ouzieli further teaches, wherein the unique selection of roaming candidate APs is based on one or more configuration parameters of the set of mobile devices (see Ouzieli [27]).
Regarding claim 4, Ouzieli, in view of Koskinen, teaches the device, as outlined in the rejection of claim 1.
Ouzieli further teaches, wherein the roaming candidate list comprises a plurality of roaming candidate APs for the set of mobile devices (see Ouzieli [27] "The list, in the shown scenario of FIG. 1, may for example include AP4 and AP6 ...").
Regarding claim 5, Ouzieli, in view of Koskinen, teaches the device, as outlined in the rejection of claim 4.
Ouzieli further teaches, wherein the roaming candidate list is segmented into the one or more roaming candidate sub-lists based on load balancing among the plurality of roaming candidate APs (see Ouzieli [27] " … when generating the list of roaming candidate APs, the current AP may increase a priority of APs whose locations match an estimated target location of the STA, and further optionally based on each AP's current operational status and load.”).
Regarding claim 6, Ouzieli, in view of Koskinen, teaches the device, as outlined in the rejection of claim 1.
Ouzieli further teaches, wherein the assisted roaming logic is further configured to: receive the one or more motion attributes of the set of mobile devices from a plurality of sensing devices in the area (Limit#1 Ouzieli [0042] “The system 200 may further include a sensing mechanism […] which may be configured to detect information regarding a location […]. The location information/information regarding a location of the system may include information indicating […] direction of movement, speed of movement, acceleration, etc.”).
Koskinen further teaches, determine that the similarity in the one or more motion attributes of the set of mobile devices is less than a similarity threshold, wherein the set of mobile devices is grouped based on the determination that the similarity in the one or more motion attributes of the set of mobile devices is less than the similarity threshold (Koskinen [49]-[51] teaches, grouping and similarity of motion attribute can be based on a threshold).
Regarding claim 7, Ouzieli, in view of Koskinen, teaches the device, as outlined in the rejection of claim 6.
Ouzieli further teaches, wherein the one or more motion attributes comprise at least one of a movement direction, a movement speed, or a movement velocity (Ouzieli [0020] “The location information/information regarding a location of the system may include information indicating […] vector of movement including direction of movement, speed of movement, and acceleration.”).
Regarding claim 15, Ouzieli, in view of Koskinen, teaches the device, as outlined in the rejection of claim 6.
Ouzieli further teaches, wherein the plurality of sensing devices comprises one or more sensing-enabled APs, one or more sensing-enabled wireless network controllers, or one or more sensing-enabled dynamic network access controllers (Ouzieli [0029] “Referring next to FIG. 2, a block diagram is shown of a wireless communication radio system 200 such as STA or AP (hereinafter STA/AP) such as the STA or any of the APs of FIG. 1, according to some demonstrative embodiments.”; [0042] “The system 200 may further include a sensing mechanism … engine 250, …”).
Regarding claim 16, Ouzieli, in view of Koskinen, teaches the device, as outlined in the rejection of claim 1.
Ouzieli further teaches, wherein the device is one of a wireless network controller, a dynamic network access controller, or an AP (see Ouzieli [27] teaching AP as device).
Claims 8-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ouzieli, in view of Koskinen, and further in view of YI; KI HAK et al US 20110260884 A1, hereinafter YI.
Regarding claim 8, Ouzieli, in view of Koskinen, teaches the device, as outlined in the rejection of claim 6.
Ouzieli and Koskinen do not expressly teach, however, in the same field of endeavor, YI teaches, wherein the assisted roaming logic is further configured to assign a common identifier to the plurality of sensing devices (YI [101] “The sensor(s) 114 can act upon the instructions contained in the message when the unique identifier corresponds with the particular sensor(s) 114. In another example, a group of sensors 114 may be associated with the same identifier, …”. Common identifier is interpreted as identical or same identifier).
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 invention of Ouzieli and Koskinen to include the features as taught by YI above to provide an advanced method for collecting sensor data (YI [0001]).
Regarding claim 9, Ouzieli, in view of Koskinen and YI, teaches the device, as outlined in the rejection of claim 8.
YI further teaches, wherein the plurality of sensing devices assigned with the common identifier operates as a coordinated sensing system that intercommunicates (YI [101] “In this example, the query message may identify all of the sensors 114 by virtue of the shared identifier or group number. These sensors 114 can then act upon the instructions contained in the message. The data message also instructs the sensor(s) 114 to broadcast (via the short-range communications network 116) the most recently acquired data. Such data may be gathered in response to the query or the most-recently stored data may be retrieved.”).
Regarding claim 10, Ouzieli, in view of Koskinen, teaches the device, as outlined in the rejection of claim 6.
Ouzieli and YI further teach, wherein the assisted roaming logic is further configured to activate an assisted sensing mode of the device (Implied in both Ouzieli [42] and YI [101]-[103]).
Regarding claim 11, Ouzieli, in view of Koskinen, teaches the device, as outlined in the rejection of claim 10.
Ouzieli and YI further teach, wherein activating the assisted sensing mode comprises operating the plurality of sensing devices along with one or more assisted sensing devices (Implied in both Ouzieli [42] and YI [101]-[103]).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ouzieli, in view of Koskinen and YI, and further in view of Wang; Jibing et al US 20220394562 A1, hereinafter Wang.
Regarding claim 12, Ouzieli, in view of Koskinen and YI, teaches the device, as outlined in the rejection of claim 11.
Ouzieli and Koskinen and YI do not expressly teach, however, in the same field of endeavor, Wang teaches, wherein the one or more assisted sensing devices includes at least one Internet of Things (IoT) sensor (Wang [20] “… UE 110 may be implemented as … an Internet-of-Things (IoT) device such as a sensor …”).
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 invention of Ouzieli and Koskinen and YI to include the features as taught by Wang above to provide a techniques for establishing group handovers for groups of user equipments to reduce latency of handovers and reduce overall signaling overhead compared to conventional individual handover (Wang [0017]).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ouzieli, in view of Koskinen and YI, and further in view of Katla; Satyanarayana et al US 20240049161 A1, hereinafter Katla.
Regarding claim 13, Ouzieli, in view of Koskinen and YI, teaches the device, as outlined in the rejection of claim 10.
Ouzieli and Koskinen and YI do not expressly teach, however, in the same field of endeavor, Katla teaches, wherein the assisted roaming logic is further configured to: compare a sensing resolution of the plurality of sensing devices with a sensing resolution threshold; and activate the assisted sensing mode in response to the sensing resolution of the plurality of sensing devices being less than the sensing resolution threshold (The claim is interpreted as initiating sensors with a required sensing threshold. Katla [89]-[90] teaches, multiple sensing devices for sensing purpose; [106]-[107] teaches, activating sensors having a required sensing resolution threshold).
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 invention of Ouzieli and Koskinen and YI to include the features as taught by Katla above to provide a technique to allow radar and communication systems to operate in the same bandwidth without causing excessive interference between each other (Katla [0002]).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ouzieli, in view of Koskinen and YI, and further in view of WU; Lianhai et al US 20250247680 A1, hereinafter WU.
Regarding claim 14, Ouzieli, in view of Koskinen and YI, teaches the device, as outlined in the rejection of claim 10.
Ouzieli and Koskinen and YI do not expressly teach, however, in the same field of endeavor, WU teaches, wherein the assisted roaming logic is further configured to: determine a count of mobile devices in the area served by the plurality of sensing devices; compare the determined count of mobile devices with a threshold count; and activate the assisted sensing mode based on the count of mobile devices in the area being greater than the threshold count (WU [58] teaches, determination to employ assisted sensing, and [77]-[78] teaches, perform sensing for a minimum number of UEs, therefore, suggesting number of UEs exceeding a threshold in the area).
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 invention of Ouzieli and Koskinen and YI to include the features as taught by WU above to provide a communication system (e.g., 5G system) that provides sensing services or sensing assisted communication to assist radio resource management, interference mitigation, beam management, mobility, etc. (WU [0004]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Cao, US 20140098682 A1 - Direction Aware Neighbor List Infrastructure Assisted Roaming.
Chang, US 20160112942 A1 - Access Point Assisted Roaming.
Ding, US 20230292229 A1 - TERMINAL SCANNING METHOD, SYSTEM, AND APPARATUS, ELECTRONIC DEVICE, AND STORAGE MEDIUM. Fig. 1 motion model for efficient roaming.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAHBUBUL BAR CHOWDHURY whose telephone number is (571)272-0232. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday 9AM-5PM EST; Friday variable.
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, Chi Pham can be reached on 571-272-3179. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MAHBUBUL BAR CHOWDHURY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2475
