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 communication is in response to the Applicant arguments/Remarks filed on 07/21/2026.
Claims 1-9 are rejected. Claims 10-20 have been withdrawn.
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.
Claims 1-5 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bartell (US 20240114426 A1) in view of Bleu-Laine (US 12610237 B1).
Regarding claim 1, Bartell teaches a network device capable of operating using at least three different network protocols, comprising:
a network interface ([0160] communication network interface or adapter);
a processing unit; and a memory device in communication with the processing unit, comprising instructions executable by the processing unit, the instructions comprising ([0029] a processing system including a processor; and a memory that stores executable instructions that, when executed by the processing system):
a first network stack to support a first network protocol ([0117] first data identifying a first network path between a switching center of a wireless network and an access point of the wireless network, wherein the first network path comprises at least one first intermediate router between the switching center and the access point);
a second network stack to support a second network protocol ([0117] second data identifying a second network path between the switching center and the access point, wherein the second network path comprises at least one second intermediate router between the switching center and the access point);
a third network stack to support a third network protocol ([0117] third data identifying a third network path between the switching center and the access point, wherein the third network path comprises at least one third intermediate router between the switching center and the access point);
a dynamic network selection module to select between the at least three network protocols ([0117] responsive to the first real-time latency being equal to or greater than a first threshold: selecting as a selected network path either the second network path or the third network path); and
a handoff module to manage a transition from one network protocol to another network protocol ([0117] facilitating a second communication of a second plurality of packets from the switching center to the access point via the selected network path).
Bartell does not explicitly teach
a first network protocol, a second network protocol, and a third network protocol.
Bleu-Laine teaches
a first network protocol, a second network protocol, and a third network protocol (fig. 1, col. 3, lines 46-57, the network devices 106 have multiple communication interfaces for communicating over the network 102 and with the endpoint devices 108. Other wireless or wired communication protocols that may also be used in various embodiments include, for example and without limitation, X10, RS-485, 6LoWPAN, Bluetooth LE (BLE), ZigBee, Z-Wave, and/or a low power wide-area networks (LPWAN), such as a chirp spread spectrum (CSS) modulation technology (e.g. LoRa) or network protocol (e.g., LoRaWAN), an Ultra Narrow Band modulation technology network (e.g., Sigfox, Telensa, NB-IoT, etc.), RingNet).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention made to include in the Bartell disclosure, different network protocols can be supported at a network device, as taught by Bleu-Laine. One would be motivated to do so to support different communications and use with low-powered devices.
Regarding claim 2, Bartell and Bleu-Laine teach the network device of claim 1, wherein Bartell further teaches the dynamic network selection module receives one or more inputs and determines an appropriate network protocol based on the one or more inputs ([0184], the classifier can be employed to determine a ranking or priority (inputs) of each network node, router, access point, base station, and/or network path; [0185] Thus, the classifier(s) can be used to automatically learn and perform a number of functions, including but not limited to determining according to predetermined criteria which of the network node(s), router(s), access point(s), base station(s), and/or network path(s) is to receive priority).
Regarding claim 3, Bartell and Bleu-Laine teach the network device of claim 2, wherein Bartell further teaches the one or more inputs comprise one or more of proximity (P) to a nearest external anchor device, current battery level (B), bandwidth/latency requirements (W), measured or estimated interference (I) from environment or security requirements (Sec) ([0178] The communication device 600 can use the transceiver 602 to also determine a proximity to a cellular, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth®, or other wireless access points by sensing techniques such as utilizing a received signal strength indicator (RSSI) and/or signal time of arrival (TOA) or time of flight (TOF) measurements).
Regarding claim 4, Bartell and Bleu-Laine teach the network device of claim 3, wherein Bartell further teaches the dynamic network selection module comprises a machine learning module that uses at least two of the one or more inputs to determine the appropriate network protocol ([0056] server(s) 2203 can be in communication (directly or indirectly) with the routers to perform functions to facilitate lowest latency non-shortest path routing; [0064] Input queues—on each input, until packet can be switched).
Regarding claim 5, Bartell and Bleu-Laine teach the network device of claim 4, wherein Bartell further teaches the machine learning module utilizes a decision function having weights associated with each network protocol and each of the at least two of the one or more inputs ([0185] For example, SVMs can be configured via a learning or training phase within a classifier constructor and feature selection module. Thus, the classifier(s) can be used to automatically learn and perform a number of functions, including but not limited to determining according to predetermined criteria which of the network node(s), router(s), access point(s), base station(s), and/or network path(s) is to receive priority).
Regarding claim 8, Bartell and Bleu-Laine teach the network device of claim 1, wherein Bleu-Laine teaches the first network protocol comprises Bluetooth LE, the second network protocol comprises a mesh network protocol and the third network protocol comprises a sub-GHz network protocol (col. 3, lines 51-55, Bluetooth LE, ZigBee, and LoRa).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention made to include in the Bartell disclosure, different network protocols can be supported at a network device, as taught by Bleu-Laine. One would be motivated to do so to support different communications and use with low-powered devices.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bartell (US 20240114426 A1) in view of Bleu-Laine (US 12610237 B1) and further in view of Aerrabotu (US 20130281154 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Bartell and Bleu-Laine teach the network device of claim 3, Bartell does not explicitly teach
wherein the dynamic network selection module estimates a battery level based on a current battery level and power consumed by a current network protocol, and selects the appropriate network protocol based on the estimated battery level.
Aerrabotu teaches
wherein the dynamic network selection module estimates a battery level based on a current battery level and power consumed by a current network protocol, and selects the appropriate network protocol based on the estimated battery level ([0015] switches the device from operation via the first communication protocol transceiver to operation via the second communication protocol transceiver, for example, in the event that the battery power level drops to a predetermined threshold while operating via the first communication transceiver).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention made to include in the Bartell disclosure, switching device to a communication based on battery level, as taught by Aerrabotu. One would be motivated to do so that the battery usability may be prolonged.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bartell (US 20240114426 A1) in view of Bleu-Laine (US 12610237 B1) and further in view of Cho (US 20020198977 A1
Regarding claim 7, Bartell and Bleu-Laine teach the network device of claim 2, Bartell does not explicitly teach wherein the dynamic network selection module selects the appropriate network protocol based on whether the network device is located indoors or outdoors.
Cho teaches
the dynamic network selection module selects the appropriate network protocol based on whether the network device is located indoors or outdoors ([0079] If the PDA has gone through the authentication of location registration, the PDA 10 switches its own mode from the outdoor mobile communication mode to the indoor Bluetooth mode that is the indoor connection mode).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention made to include in the Bartell disclosure, switching device to a communication based on location indoors or outdoors, as taught by Cho. One would be motivated to do so for better communication quality with a lower cost is guaranteed to the user since the network connection can be switched in accordance with the location or movement of the user.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bartell (US 20240114426 A1) in view of Bleu-Laine (US 12610237 B1) and further in view of Xu (US 20060291415 A1).
Regarding claim 9, Bartell and Bleu-Laine teach the network device of claim 1, Bartell does not explicitly teach wherein when a new network protocol is selected, the handoff module queries a newly selected network stack to establish parameters for a new link, performs security re-keying and authentication, and activates the new link and deactivates a current link.
Xu teaches
wherein when a new network protocol is selected, the handoff module queries a newly selected network stack to establish parameters for a new link, performs security re-keying and authentication, and activates the new link and deactivates a current link ([0052] During handoff, the method of first establishing a new link and then disconnecting original link is also used; and during handoff, re-negotiation for point to point PPP is not performed, and transmission of user data is not interrupted. [0053] In a WLAN system and CDMA 20001X system, identification of a user is unique, so the user can use its NAI (Network Access Identifier) or MSID (Mobile Station Identifier) in CDMA 20001X system for authentication and accounting under a WLAN mode.).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention made to include in the Bartell disclosure, add a new link and delete an old link, as taught by Xu. One would be motivated to do so for handing over a mobile station between system and wireless local area network.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANH NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-0657. The examiner can normally be reached M-F.
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, Umar Cheema can be reached at 5712703037. 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.
/ANH NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2458
Prosecution Insights