Ex Parte Alisawi

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Jun 25, 2018

14050211 (P.T.A.B. Jun. 25, 2018)

UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
14/050,211 10/09/2013 Rami Alisawi
118194 7590 06/27/2018
NK Patent Law- Seven Networks
4917 Waters Edge Drive
Suite 275
Raleigh, NC 27606
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office
Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
www .uspto.gov
ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.
455/176/2 UTIL 9534
EXAMINER
NGUYEN, STEVEN HD
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
2414
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
06/27/2018 ELECTRONIC
Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the
following e-mail address( es):
usptomail@nkpatentlaw.com
abackholm@seven.com
eofficeaction@appcoll.com
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Ex parte RAMI ALISA WI
Appeal2017-002954
Application 14/050,211
Technology Center 2400
Before CARL W. WHITEHEAD JR., JEREMY J. CURCURI, and
NABEEL U. KHAN, Administrative Patent Judges.
CURCURI, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
Appellant appeals under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from the Examiner's
rejection of claims 1-3, 5-7, and 55-57. Final Act. 1. We have jurisdiction
under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
Claims 1-3, 5-7, and 55-57 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(2)
as anticipated by Blasinski (US 2011/0194539 Al; Aug. 11, 2011). Final
Act. 2--4.
Claims 1, 2, and 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(2) as
anticipated by Backholm (US 2012/0149352 Al; Jun. 14, 2012). Final Act.
4---6.
Appeal2017-002954
Application 14/050,211
Claims 3 and 55-57 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as obvious
over Backholm and Blasinski. Final Act. 6-7.
We affirm.
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Appellant's invention relates to application servers, content providers,
and push technology. Spec. i-f 2. Claim 1 is illustrative and reproduced
below:
1. A system for aligning requests in a mobile network to enhance
mobile traffic management, comprising:
a proxy server associated with a mobile operator, and configured to:
align the requests initiated by third-party servers with a radio
state of a mobile device to reduce a number of network connections, wherein
the requests are aligned by delaying the requests;
detect promotion of a radio on the mobile device to a connected
state or a high power state on the mobile device; and
transfer the requests that were delayed to the mobile device
over a single connection between the mobile device and the mobile network
upon detecting promotion of the radio to the connected state or the high
power state.
PRINCIPLES OF LAW
We review the appealed rejections for error based upon the issues
identified by Appellant, and in light of the arguments and evidence produced
thereon. Ex parte Frye, 94 USPQ2d 1072, 1075 (BPAI 2010) (precedential).
2
Appeal2017-002954
Application 14/050,211
ANALYSIS
THE ANTICIPATION REJECTION OF CLAIMS 1-3, 5-7, AND 55-57 BY
BLAS INS KI
Contentions
The Examiner finds Blasinski describes all limitations of claim 1.
Final Act. 2-3. In particular, the Examiner finds Blasinski's access-window
envelope controller (A WEC) describes claim 1 's recited "detect promotion
of a radio on the mobile device to a connected state or a high power state on
the mobile device." See Final Act. 2-3.
Appellant presents the following principal argument:
The reliance upon scheduled transmissions is indeed why
Blasinski goes to such lengths to describe access-window-time
starts and durations (paragraphs [0040] and [0063]), and
synchronizations to limit clock disparities (paragraph [0064 ]). At
best, Blasinski, as it relates to packets held by the gateway 230,
teaches that a mobile or other recipient device changes from idle
to connected at a scheduled time, but does not teach a proxy
server detecting promotion of a radio on the mobile device to a
connected state or a high power state on the mobile device.
Br. 5---6.
In response, the Examiner further finds Blasinski's rule table 454 (Fig.
5D) and process for forwarding packets stored in a queue or a buff er to a
wireless node (Fig. 9) teaches claim 1 's recited "detect promotion of a radio
on the mobile device to a connected state or a high power state on the mobile
device." See Ans. 8-11.
Appellant does not file a Reply Brief in response to the additional
findings in the Examiner's Answer.
3
Appeal2017-002954
Application 14/050,211
Blasinski teaches:
Our Review
FIG. 9 is a flowchart of an exemplary process 900 for
forwarding packets stored in packet queue 440 and/ or packet
buffer 436. In one embodiment, packet queue logic 438 executes
process 900. As discussed above with respect to process 600
(block 608), sending packets to wireless nodes 202 may result in
a data connection (e.g., a data session) being established to a
wireless node. In this case, process 900 may consider sending
other packets stored in packet buffer 436 or packet queue 440
that are destined to the same wireless node. For example, assume
that an SNMP [Simple Network Management Protocol] packet
is scheduled for delivery to wireless node 202-2 during the next
window as a result of the application of rule 554-3 in process
600. Then, as a result of an unrelated event (e.g., a response to a
web resource request) a packet is forwarded to wireless node
202-2, thus opening a data session between PDSN [packet data
serving node] 222 and wireless node 202-2. In this case, the
scheduled SNMP packet may also be forwarded to wireless node
202-2 at the same time because of the application of rule 554-2
(e.g., a light data load and an active data session state).
Blasinski i-f 104.
Thus, Blasinski's disclosure of SNMP packets being scheduled for
delivery during the next window but then being sent immediately in
response to the data session state changing from idle to active (during data
load status< 25%) teaches claim 1 's recited "detect promotion of a radio on
the mobile device to a connected state or a high power state on the mobile
device." See Blasinski i-f 104; see also Blasinski Figs. 5D, 9. Specifically,
the detection in Blasinski occurs when the data session state changes from
idle to active. See Blasinski Fig. 9 (decision block 902, "status or condition
change?").
4
Appeal2017-002954
Application 14/050,211
Further, these same disclosures in Blasinski teach claim 1 's recited
"transfer the requests that were delayed to the mobile device over a single
connection between the mobile device and the mobile network upon
detecting promotion of the radio to the connected state or the high power
state." See Blasinski i-f 104; see also Blasinski Figs. 5D, 9. Specifically, the
transfer occurs when SNMP packets are sent. See Blasinski Fig. 9 (block
914, "forward packet to wireless node," decision block 920 "additional
packets?").
We, therefore, sustain the Examiner's rejection of claim 1. We also
sustain the Examiner's rejection of claims 2, 3, 5-7, and 55-57, which are
not separately argued with particularity.
THE ANTICIPATION REJECTION OF CLAIMS 1, 2, AND 5-7 BY BACKHOLM
Contentions
The Examiner finds Backholm teaches all limitations of claim 1. Final
Act. 4--5; see Backholm i-f 148 ("Data may also be cached at the server in
wireless communication with the mobile device to in order to modify
communication frequency with the mobile device."), Fig. 10 (block 1008
"Data transfer from the mobile device indicates radio use on the mobile
device," block 1016 "Batch transfer the cumulated events to the mobile
device."); see also Ans. 11.
Appellant presents the following principal argument:
Backholm fails to anticipate a proxy server or other device that
serves to "detect promotion of a radio on the mobile device to a
connected state or a high power state on the mobile device; and
transfer the requests that were delayed to the mobile device over
a single connection between the mobile device and the mobile
5
Appeal2017-002954
Application 14/050,211
network upon detecting promotion of the radio to the connected
state or the high power state" as recited in independent claim 1.
Br. 8; see also Br. 6-8 (discussing activity at mobile device 175).
Our Review
Backholm teaches:
In addition, data can be cached at the mobile device in
process 610 to adjust radio use. Data may also be cached at
the server in wireless communication with the mobile device
to in order to modifY communication frequency with the
mobile device. In one embodiment, in response to detection of
user activities on the mobile device, the characteristics of the
user activity can be communicated from the mobile device to
the server, in process 614.
Backholm i-f 148 (emphasis added).
Backholm further teaches:
In process 1002, multiple occurrences of events having a
first priority type are detected at a server wirelessly coupled to a
mobile device. In process 1004, the server cumulates the multiple
occurrences of events having a first priority type, before transfer
over the wireless network. The first priority type may not be of a
high priority type or having a priority exceeding a certain
threshold level indicating a level or time criticality or urgency.
Thus, such events, upon occurrence, may not be immediately
transferred to the mobile device, until certain criterion is met, or
until one or more triggering events occur.
For example, in process 1006, occurrence of an event of a
second priority type is detected at the server, which can trigger
batch transfer of the cumulated events to the mobile device, in
process 1016, when the second priority type is of a higher priority
than the first priority type. In another example, in process 1008,
data transfer from the mobile device indicates the radio use on
the mobile device, which can trigger batch transfer of the
cumulated events to the mobile device, in process 1016.
6
Appeal2017-002954
Application 14/050,211
Backhohn i-fi-f 165-166 (emphasis added).
Thus, Backholm' s disclosure of batch transfer of cumulated events
teaches claim 1 's recited "detect promotion of a radio on the mobile device
to a connected state or a high power state on the mobile device." See
Backholm i-fi-f 148, 165-166, Fig. 10 (block 1008 "Data transfer from the
mobile device indicates radio use on the mobile device.").
Further, Backholm's disclosure of batch transfer of cumulated events
teaches claim 1 's recited "transfer the requests that were delayed to the
mobile device over a single connection between the mobile device and the
mobile network upon detecting promotion of the radio to the connected state
or the high power state." See Backholm i-fi-f 148, 165-166, Fig. 10 (block
1016 "Batch transfer the cumulated events to the mobile device.").
We, therefore, sustain the Examiner's rejection of claim 1. We also
sustain the Examiner's rejection of claims 2 and 5-7, which are not
separately argued with particularity.
THE OBVIOUSNESS REJECTION OF CLAIMS 3 AND 55-57 OVER BACKHOLM
AND BLASINSKI
The Examiner finds Backholm and Blasinski teach all limitations of
claims 3 and 55-57. Final Act. 6-7; see also Ans. 12.
Appellant presents the same principal arguments for this ground of
rejection as presented for the anticipation rejections based on the references
individually. See Br. 6-13.
Claims 3 and 55-57 depend from claim 1. Accordingly, we sustain
the Examiner's rejection of claims 3 and 55-57 for reasons discussed above
7
Appeal2017-002954
Application 14/050,211
when addressing the anticipation rejections based on Backhohn and
Blasinski.
ORDER
The Examiner's decision rejecting claims 1-3, 5-7, and 55-57 is
affirmed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal maybe extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a)(l).
AFFIRMED
8