DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to the application filed on 11/26/2024 in which claims 1-20 are pending.
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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1, 6-9, 14-17, and 20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 2, and 5 of U.S. Patent No. US12185129B2; hereinafter; “Thomas.” Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because:
As to claims 1, 9, and 17, Thomas teaches a method, comprising:
receiving, by a device, mobile radio data, associated with signaling between one or more base stations and one or more user devices in a mobile radio network, and geographical data associated with a geographical area of the mobile radio network; (Claim 1 A method, comprising: receiving, by a device, mobile radio data identifying utilization of a mobile radio network that includes base stations and user devices in a geographical area;)
generating, by the device, a spatiotemporal predictable component of a behavioral map based on the mobile radio data and the geographical data; (claim 1 processing, by the device, the mobile radio data, with a machine learning feature extraction model, to generate a behavioral representation, that is probabilistic in nature, of invariant aspects of spatiotemporal utilization of the mobile radio network; generating, by the device, one or more instances of the spatiotemporal utilization of the mobile radio network that reflects the probabilistic nature of a spatiotemporal predictable component of the behavioral representation;)
generating random obstruction probability data based on the geographical data; (claim 1 generating random obstruction probability data based on geographical data;)
generating angle dependent fast fading data based on the mobile radio data; and (claim 1 generating angle dependent fast fading data based on the mobile radio data;)
generating signature data based on the angle dependent fast fading data, the random obstruction probability data, and the spatiotemporal predictable component of the behavioral map. (claim 1 adding the random obstruction probability data and the angle dependent fast fading data to the spatiotemporal predictable component of the behavioral representation to generate signature data identifying a realistic discoverable spatiotemporal behavioral and fading signature.)
As to claims 6, and 14, Thomas teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the geographical data identifies one or more of: classification data of the mobile radio network, obstruction data associated with the geographical area, network topology data associated with the geographical area, or demographic data associated with the geographical area. (claim 2. The method of claim 1, wherein the geographical data identifies classification data of the mobile radio network, obstruction data, network topology data, and demographic data associated with the geographical area.)
As to claims 7, 15, and 20, Thomas teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising: performing one or more actions based on the signature data, wherein the one or more actions comprises: training a machine learning model with the signature data, storing the signature data in a data structure accessible to the machine learning model, updating the machine learning model based on the signature data, or causing the signature data to be provided to a network device utilizing the machine learning model. (claims 1 and 5)
As to claims 8 and 16, Thomas teaches the method of claim 7, wherein the one or more actions comprises training the machine learning model based on the signature data to generate results and modify the signature data based on the results. (claims 1 and 5)
Claims 2-5, 10-13, 18, and 19 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 7, and 13 of U.S. Patent No. (US12185129B2) in view of Flanagan et al. (US20160212633A1).
As to claims 2, 10, and 18, Thomas teaches the method of claim 1,
But does not specifically teach:
wherein the mobile radio data identifies one or more of: signaling transmitted from the one or more base stations to the one or more user devices, or signaling received by the one or more base stations from the one or more user devices.
However Flanagan teaches wherein the mobile radio data identifies one or more of: signaling transmitted from the one or more base stations to the one or more user devices, or signaling received by the one or more base stations from the one or more user devices. ([0012] A base station or base transceiver station (BTS) may contain configuration parameters that control various aspects of a cell site. Each of these parameters may be altered to change network behavior, based on observations of both the base station itself, measurements at the mobile station or handset, or other acquired data.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Thoms with the techniques for dynamic network optimization using geolocation and network modeling from Flanagan in order to optimize the network.
As to claims 3, 11, and 19, Thomas teaches the method of claim 1,
But does not specifically teach:
wherein the mobile radio data includes one or more measurements or one or more key performance indicators (KPIs) associated with signaling between the one or more base stations and the one or more user devices.
However Flanagan teaches wherein the mobile radio data includes one or more measurements or one or more key performance indicators (KPIs) associated with signaling between the one or more base stations and the one or more user devices. ([0019] As described herein, embodiments disclose a SON system that may be computationally efficient, since the system may simulate parts of a network that are focused on potential changes and the resulting simulations generally only cover parameters (and/or KPIs) of interest.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Thoms with the techniques for dynamic network optimization using geolocation and network modeling from Flanagan in order to optimize the network
As to claims 4, and 12, Thomas in view of Flanagan teaches the method of claim 3, wherein the one or more measurements includes one or more events recorded by performance encounters associated with the one or more base stations or the one or more user devices. (Flanagan [0034] The system 100 incorporating a geolocation system 130 may be capable of geolocating individual users and associating these users and their locations with the various performance and measurement statistics captured by the user's handset and the cellular network.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Thoms with the techniques for dynamic network optimization using geolocation and network modeling from Flanagan in order to optimize the network
As to claims 5, and 13, Thomas in view of Flanagan teaches the method of claim 3, wherein the one or more KPIs includes one or more of a bandwidth indicator, a throughput indicator, a signal strength indicator, an availability indicator, a network resource indicator, a handover indicator, a voice service indicator, or a data service indicator. (Flanagan [0036] The SON optimizer may also receive and process measurements taken by one or more UEs and/or reported by the OSS 120 (or similar network component). Such measurements may include received signal strengths,)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Thoms with the techniques for dynamic network optimization using geolocation and network modeling from Flanagan in order to optimize the network
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELTON S WILLIAMS whose telephone number is (571)272-9933. The examiner can normally be reached 8-4 Mon-Fri.
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, Gary Mui can be reached at (571) 270-1420. 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.
/Elton Williams/Examiner, Art Unit 2465
Prosecution Insights