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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/04/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The Applicant amended and argued that the prior art references on record (i.e. Panchal, Agarwal, Mathew, Zhu, and Rost) does not teach ("...virtualizing, for the MOCN, how the UE couples to the first and/or second core network, thereby allowing the first RAT base station to appear as one of a second generation (2G) RAT, a third generation (3G) RAT or a fourth generation (4G) RAT, and allowing the second RAT base station to appear as one of a 2G RAT, a 3G RAT, a 4G RAT, or a fifth generation (5G) RAT so it appears to the first and second core networks that there is an anchoring connection for their respective RATs." ) (Emphasis added).
Applicant further specifically argued that “while Rost mentions MOCN, Rost does not overcome the deficiencies Panchal, Agarwal, Mathew and Zhu”.
In response the Examiner respectfully disagrees with the Applicant’s arguments and/or amendments for the following reasons:
First, Panchal in fig. 1 and pp0024, showed and/or discussed the concept of providing Dual-Connectivity communication network via different radio access networks for an End device. The figure described an End Device 110 in communication with one or multiple core network devices 150 of one or multiple types via different radio access networks 120 and 130. (Emphasis Added).
Thus, the core network devices 150 provides dual connectivity communication to device 110 via one or more radio access networks to simultaneously connect the End Device to different radio access technology (see, pp0002). Therefore, Panchal described multiple core network operations.
Although, Panchal does not explicitly mention that the multiple types of core networks are operated by multiple operators.
Rost, discussed the concept in a mobile network wherein the multiple core networks are operated by multiple operators (see fig. 1). Thus, it would have been an obvious modification for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Panchal with the teachings of Rost to achieve the goal of efficiently improving connectivity to satisfy the demand of multiple UEs in a communication system.
Secondly, in regards to the at least claimed limitations in question stated above, the Examiner kindly directs the Applicant Agarwal e.g. fig. 2, fig. 3, pp0032, pp0050, wherein a convergence gateway is enabled to interwork other radio access network interfaces with S1 or Iu, thereby providing connectivity to the RAN toward the core network and vital core network nodes such as authentication and mobility nodes. To the core network, a call or packet data session appears as an LTE call or bearer. To the user device, the call or session appears as a native RAT call/session, whether it is 2G, 3G, CDMA, or Wi-Fi. (Emphasis Added).
Agarwal further discussed the concept that multi-RAT gateway may be in communication with, and serves as a gateway for, a 3G packet core network node, a 3G circuit core network node, and a 4G evolved packet core (EPC) network node when in communication with the 3G RAT, the 4G RAT, or the WLAN RAT for signaling, voice, or user data flows received via the Iuh interface, thereby virtualizing the existing core and adding more capacity by offloading signaling and data. (Emphasis Added).
Thus, contrary to the Applicant’s arguments, the Applicant’s claimed limitations are very broad and/or vague so as to be clearly distinguished from the applied prior arts. During patent examination, the claims must be given their broadest reasonable interpretation. See also MPEP §2111. Therefore, based on the Applicant’s amendments, it is believed that Panchal in view of Agarwal, and Rost teaches the at least claimed limitations in question as discussed in the rejection below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim 1-18, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Panchal et al. (US Publication No. 20190373523) in view of Agarwal et al. (US Publication No. 20180049275) and further in view of Rost et al. (US Publication No. 20190159024).
As to claims 1 and 7, Panchal teaches a method for providing dual connectivity with different Radio Access Technologies (RATs) (fig. 1, pp0014, Dual connectivity solutions are employed when end devices (e.g., user equipment) can connect to different RAT types simultaneously), comprising: anchoring a User Equipment (UE) via a first RAT base station to a first core network using a first RAT (fig. 1, pp0023, eNBs 125-1 to serve as a dual-connectivity anchor to deliver packets between core network 140 and end device 110 via either wireless channel 170-1, pp0025, end device 110 maintaining data exchanges with core network 140 within the confines of the selected cell (e.g., associated with one of eNBs 125)); using a second RAT base station coupled to a second core network using a second RAT to supplement the first RAT base station (fig. 1, pp0023, via wireless channel 170-2 (e.g., using gNB 135), pp0024, 140 may include one or multiple networks of one or multiple types. For example, core network 140 may be implemented to include a terrestrial network and/or a satellite network. According to an exemplary implementation, core network 140 includes a complementary network pertaining to multiple RANs. For example, core network 140 may include the core part of an LTE network, an LTE-A network, a 5G network, a legacy network, and so forth), wherein the first core network and the second core network are combined to provide additional throughput to the UE anchored in the first core network or another UE anchored to the second core network (fig. 1, #140, pp0022, pp0020, mobile device having multiple coverage mode capabilities, and thus the capability to communicate simultaneously with different wireless stations (e.g., eNB 125, gNB 135, etc.) using different wireless channels (e.g., channels 170) corresponding to the different RANs (e.g., E-UTRAN 120 and 5G NR RAN 130), and pp0024). However, fails to explicitly mention virtualizing, for the [multiple core network], how the UE couples to the first and/or second core network, thereby allowing the first RAT base station to appear as one of a second generation (2G) RAT, a third generation (3G) RAT or a fourth generation (4G) RAT, and allowing the second RAT base station to appear as one of a 2G RAT, a 3G RAT, a 4G RAT, or a fifth generation (5G) RAT so it appears to the first and second core networks that there is an anchoring connection for their respective RATs.
In an analogous field of endeavor, Agarwal teaches the concept of virtualizing, for the [multiple core network], how the UE couples to the first and/or second core network (fig. 3, fig. 2, pp0032, pp0050, convergence gateway may be configured to virtualize the nodeB toward the core network, pp0059, pp0063, and pp0064, combining visibility at the convergence gateway across 3G, LTE, and Wi-Fi), thereby allowing the first RAT base station to appear as one of a second generation (2G) RAT, a third generation (3G) RAT or a fourth generation (4G) RAT (fig. 2, fig. 3, pp0032, a convergence gateway is enabled to interwork other radio access network interfaces with S1 or Iu, thereby providing connectivity to the RAN toward the core network and vital core network nodes such as authentication and mobility nodes. To the core network, a call or packet data session appears as an LTE call or bearer. To the user device, the call or session appears as a native RAT call/session, whether it is 2G, 3G, CDMA, or Wi-Fi, and pp0050, pp0064), and allowing the second RAT base station to appear as one of a 2G RAT, a 3G RAT, a 4G RAT, or a fifth generation (5G) RAT so it appears to the first and second core networks that there is an anchoring connection for their respective RATs (fig. 2, fig. 3, pp0032, a convergence gateway is enabled to interwork other radio access network interfaces with S1 or Iu, thereby providing connectivity to the RAN toward the core network and vital core network nodes such as authentication and mobility nodes. To the core network, a call or packet data session appears as an LTE call or bearer. To the user device, the call or session appears as a native RAT call/session, whether it is 2G, 3G, CDMA, or Wi-Fi, and pp0050, pp0064). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to combine the teachings of Panchal with the teachings of Agarwal to achieve the goal of efficiently and reliably reducing cost and complexity in a communication network (Agarwal, pp0028). However, they fail to explicitly mention that the multiple core network devices are combined in a multi-operator core network (MOCN).
In an analogous field of endeavor, Rost teaches that the multiple core network devices are combined in a multi-operator core network (MOCN) (fig. 1, fig. 2, pp0018, pp0046, in MOCN, the eUTRAN is common to several mobile network operators and shared between them). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to combine the teachings of Panchal and Agarwal with the teachings of Rost to achieve the goal of efficiently improving connectivity (or coverage), robustness (or frame errors), throughput, latency, mobility pattern, and/or number of connected devices. Each use case may require different technologies in order to satisfy the demands of one or multiple UEs (Rost, pp0004).
As to claims 2, 8, and 14, Panchal in view of Agarwal, and Rost, teaches the limitations of the independent claims as discussed above. Panchal further teaches wherein anchoring the UE to the first core network includes anchoring the UE to one of a 2G core network, a 3G core network or a 4G core network (fig. 1, pp0023, pp0024, core network 140 may include the core part of an LTE network, an LTE-A network, a 5G network, a legacy network, and so forth), and wherein the second RAT base station is a 5G gNodeB (gNB) (fig. 1, #135, #170-2).
As to claims 3, 9, and 15, Panchal in view of Agarwal, and Rost teaches the limitations of the independent claims as discussed above. However, Panchal fails to teach wherein anchoring the UE to the first core network includes anchoring the UE to a 4G core network enhanced using Multi-Operator Core Networks (MOCN).
In an analogous field of endeavor, Rost teaches wherein anchoring the UE to the first core network includes anchoring the UE to a 4G core network enhanced using Multi-Operator Core Networks (MOCN) (fig. 2, pp0018, pp0046, in MOCN, the eUTRAN is common to several mobile network operators and shared between them). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to combine the teachings of Panchal and Agarwal with the teachings of Rost to achieve the goal of efficiently improving connectivity (or coverage), robustness (or frame errors), throughput, latency, mobility pattern, and/or number of connected devices. Each use case may require different technologies in order to satisfy the demands of one or multiple UEs (Rost, pp0004).
As to claims 4, 10, and 16, Panchal in view of Agarwal, and Rost, teaches the limitations of the independent claims as discussed above. However, Panchal failed to teach further comprising enabling local breakout of typical user traffic.
In an analogous field of endeavor, Agarwal teaches enabling local breakout of typical user traffic (fig. 2, fig. 3, pp0007, pp0012, user data flows to either an outbound S1 interface or an outbound local breakout IP interface). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Panchal with the teachings of Agarwal to achieve the goal of efficiently and reliably reducing cost and complexity in a communication network (Agarwal, pp0028).
As to claims 5, 11, and 17, Panchal in view of Agarwal, and Rost teaches the limitations of the independent claims as discussed above. Panchal further teaches that dual connectivity solutions are employed when end devices (e.g., user equipment) can connect to different RAT types simultaneously. For example, wireless channel 170-1 may correspond to physical layer protocols for 4G RAN standards (e.g., 3GPP standards for 4G air interfaces, etc.), while wireless channel 170-2 may correspond to physical layer protocols for 5G New Radio standards (e.g., 3GPP standards for 5G air interfaces, etc.) (see, pp0019). However, Panchal fails to explicitly mention that wherein the first RAT is 3G and the second RAT is 4G.
In an analogous field of endeavor, Agarwal teaches wherein the first RAT is 3G and the second RAT is 4G (fig. 1). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Panchal with the teachings of Agarwal to achieve the goal of efficiently and reliably reducing cost and complexity in a communication network (Agarwal, pp0028).
As to claims 6, 12, and 18, Panchal in view of Agarwal, and Rost teaches the limitations of the independent claims as discussed above. Panchal further teaches wherein the second RAT is 3G or 5G (fig. 1, #130). Panchal further discussed that dual connectivity solutions are employed when end devices (e.g., user equipment) can connect to different RAT types simultaneously. For example, wireless channel 170-1 may correspond to physical layer protocols for 4G RAN standards (e.g., 3GPP standards for 4G air interfaces, etc.), while wireless channel 170-2 may correspond to physical layer protocols for 5G New Radio standards (e.g., 3GPP standards for 5G air interfaces, etc.) (see, pp0019). However, Panchal fails to explicitly mention that wherein the first RAT is 2G.
In an analogous field of endeavor, Agarwal teaches wherein the first RAT is 2G (fig. 1). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Panchal with the teachings of Agarwal to achieve the goal of efficiently and reliably reducing cost and complexity in a communication network (Agarwal, pp0028).
As to claim 13, Panchal teaches a system for providing dual connectivity with different Radio Access Technologies (RATs) (fig. 1, pp0014, Dual connectivity solutions are employed when end devices (e.g., user equipment) can connect to different RAT types simultaneously), comprising: a management gateway (fig. 1, #150, pp0024, gateway); a first base station in a first RAT in communication with the management gateway (fig. 1, pp0023, pp0025, end device 110 maintaining data exchanges with core network 140 within the confines of the selected cell (e.g., associated with one of eNBs 125)); and a second base station in a second RAT in communication with the management gateway and the first base station (fig. 1, pp0022, pp0020, mobile device having multiple coverage mode capabilities, and thus the capability to communicate simultaneously with different wireless stations (e.g., eNB 125, gNB 135, etc.) using different wireless channels (e.g., channels 170) corresponding to the different RANs (e.g., E-UTRAN 120 and 5G NR RAN 130)); wherein a User Equipment (UE) is in communication with the first base station and the second base station (fig. 1, pp0022, pp0020, mobile device having multiple coverage mode capabilities, and thus the capability to communicate simultaneously with different wireless stations (e.g., eNB 125, gNB 135, etc.) using different wireless channels (e.g., channels 170) corresponding to the different RANs (e.g., E-UTRAN 120 and 5G NR RAN 130)) and the UE is anchored via the first base station to a first core network using the first RAT (fig. 1, pp0023, pp0025, end device 110 maintaining data exchanges with core network 140 within the confines of the selected cell (e.g., associated with one of eNBs 125) e.g. 150, pp0024); wherein the second base station is in communication with a second core network using a second RAT to supplement the first base station (fig. 1, pp0022, pp0020, mobile device having multiple coverage mode capabilities, and thus the capability to communicate simultaneously with different wireless stations (e.g., eNB 125, gNB 135, etc.) using different wireless channels (e.g., channels 170) corresponding to the different RANs (e.g., E-UTRAN 120 and 5G NR RAN 130), and pp0024 multiple core network devices 150); wherein the first core network and the second core network are combined to provide additional throughput to the UE anchored in the first core network or another UE anchored to the second core network (fig. 1, #140, pp0022, pp0020, mobile device having multiple coverage mode capabilities, and thus the capability to communicate simultaneously with different wireless stations (e.g., eNB 125, gNB 135, etc.) using different wireless channels (e.g., channels 170) corresponding to the different RANs (e.g., E-UTRAN 120 and 5G NR RAN 130), and pp0024). However, fails to explicitly mention wherein the management gateway virtualizes, for the [multiple core network], how the UE couples to the first and/or second core network, thereby allowing the first RAT base station to appear as one of a second generation (2G) RAT, a third generation (3G) RAT or a fourth generation (4G) RAT, and allowing the second RAT base station to appear as one of a 2G RAT, a 3G RAT, a 4G RAT, or a fifth generation (5G) RAT so it appears to the first and second core networks that there is an anchoring connection for their respective RATs.
In an analogous field of endeavor, Agarwal teaches the concept of virtualizing, for the [multiple core network], how the UE couples to the first and/or second core network (fig. 3, fig. 2, pp0032, pp0050, convergence gateway may be configured to virtualize the nodeB toward the core network, pp0059, pp0063, and pp0064, combining visibility at the convergence gateway across 3G, LTE, and Wi-Fi), thereby allowing the first RAT base station to appear as one of a second generation (2G) RAT, a third generation (3G) RAT or a fourth generation (4G) RAT (fig. 2, fig. 3, pp0032, a convergence gateway is enabled to interwork other radio access network interfaces with S1 or Iu, thereby providing connectivity to the RAN toward the core network and vital core network nodes such as authentication and mobility nodes. To the core network, a call or packet data session appears as an LTE call or bearer. To the user device, the call or session appears as a native RAT call/session, whether it is 2G, 3G, CDMA, or Wi-Fi, and pp0050, pp0064), and allowing the second RAT base station to appear as one of a 2G RAT, a 3G RAT, a 4G RAT, or a fifth generation (5G) RAT so it appears to the first and second core networks that there is an anchoring connection for their respective RATs (fig. 2, fig. 3, pp0032, a convergence gateway is enabled to interwork other radio access network interfaces with S1 or Iu, thereby providing connectivity to the RAN toward the core network and vital core network nodes such as authentication and mobility nodes. To the core network, a call or packet data session appears as an LTE call or bearer. To the user device, the call or session appears as a native RAT call/session, whether it is 2G, 3G, CDMA, or Wi-Fi, and pp0050, pp0064). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to combine the teachings of Panchal with the teachings of Agarwal to achieve the goal of efficiently and reliably reducing cost and complexity in a communication network (Agarwal, pp0028). However, they fail to explicitly mention that the multiple core network devices are combined in a multi-operator core network (MOCN).
In an analogous field of endeavor, Rost teaches that the multiple core network devices are combined in a multi-operator core network (MOCN) (fig. 1, fig. 2, pp0018, pp0046, in MOCN, the eUTRAN is common to several mobile network operators and shared between them). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to combine the teachings of Panchal and Agarwal with the teachings of Rost to achieve the goal of efficiently improving connectivity (or coverage), robustness (or frame errors), throughput, latency, mobility pattern, and/or number of connected devices. Each use case may require different technologies in order to satisfy the demands of one or multiple UEs (Rost, pp0004).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OMONIYI OBAYANJU whose telephone number is (571)270-5885. The examiner can normally be reached M-Thur 10:30-7pm.
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, ANTHONY S ADDY can be reached at (571) 272-7795. 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.
/OMONIYI OBAYANJU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2645