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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This is in reply to arguments dated 03/02/2026. Status of Claims are:
** Claims 1-8, and 10-20 are pending in this Office Action.
** Claim 9 was cancelled previously
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 03/02/206, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The reasons are set forth below.
Applicant argues, page 4 – page 6 of arguments
Xu discloses only the RS is transmitted always at a low frequency, and when the interference is detected, the RS is transmitted more frequently. Xu is silent on when the RS is transmitted less frequently. That is, Xu is silent on the condition “in response to determining, by the target device, that a degree of the interference from the second base station to the first base station is less than or equal to a first threshold” in claim 1.
Further, nowhere in Xu discloses the aggressor BS sends to the victim BS an indication, the indication used to indicate the victim BS to stop sending the RS (corresponding to "sending, by the target device, fourth indication information to the first base station, wherein the fourth indication information is used to instruct the first base station to stop sending an RS to the second base station" in Alternative 1). and nowhere in Xu discloses the aggressor BS sends to the victim BS an indication, the indication used to indicate the second sending resource of the RS (corresponding to "sending, by the target device, fifth indication information to the first base station and the second base station, wherein the fifth indication information is used to indicate a second parameter of a Reference Signal (RS). and the second parameter comprises a second sending resource of the RS" in Alternative 2).
The Applicant thinks that Keskitalo discloses the RN 330-BS part 334 sends the measurement request stop indication to the candidate BS 320. According to Fig. 4 of Keskitalo, the candidate BS 320 belongs to the neighbor gNB. Keskitalo fails to disclose the RN 330 - BS part 334 is subject to interference from the neighbor gNB (candidate or target BS) 320. Paragraph 0040 of Keskitalo clearly shows that the neighbor BS is used for future handover:
[0040] Candidate (or target) BS 320 may be a neighbor BS. and which, for example, may be a candidate (or possible target) for a future handover of the RN self-backhaul link (from serving BS 310 to candidate BS 320, depending on one or more measured signal parameters (e.g., received power) with respect to the candidate BS 320
This means that the RN 330 -BS part 334 will not cause interference to the candidate or target BS 320 (because if the interference occurs, the RN 330-BS 334 will definitely not hand over to the target BS 320, and because the RN 330 is a relay node, which will not cause interference to the neighbor BS 320), RN 330-BS 334 will not determine the "degree of the interference from the RN 330-BS to the target BS 320" (corresponding to "degree of the interference from the second base station to the first base station is less than or equal to a first threshold" in claim I of the present application).
In view of this, Keskitalo fails to cure the deficiencies of Xu and shouprovide the motivation of combining with Xu.
Also, Keskitalo fails to disclose the Alternative 2 "in response to determining, by the target device, that a degree of the interference from the second base station to the first base station is less than or equal to a first threshold, sending, by the target device, fifth indication information to the first base station and the second base station, wherein the fifth indication information is used to indicate a second parameter of a Reference Signal (RS), and the second parameter comprises a second sending resource of the RS". Keskitalo disclose nothing about "a second sending resource of the RS".
Examiner’s response:
Examiner respectfully disagrees with Applicant’s extensive interpretation of mapped paragraphs, by integrating them with other paragraphs, since the mapped paragraphs by Examiner independently and without integration with other paragraphs, can also be understood as teaching the concept Examiner relied upon, and hence differently from Applicant’s interpretation of mapped paragraphs in combination with other paragraphs that Examiner did not rely upon.
First, Applicant’s applied claim language, for any one of independent claims and/or any one of dependent claims, do not indicate that if a specific “Alternative” segment (as marked by Applicant) of independent claims, is to be chosen, then the dependent claims, which also have various “or” statements, should be chosen or rejected as to be associated with “Alternative1” or “Alternative2” from the independent claims. Secondly, every limitation of each claim is mapped to the teachings of each cited paragraph as by Examiner. Further detailed interpretations of cited paragraphs, as Applicant thinks and interprets, are beyond the core teachings of those paragraphs that Examiner has relied upon. As an Example, Claim 1, as shown below shows as how each and every limitation is mapped, and to what specific term and teachings of the mapped paragraphs:
Claim 1. An interference processing method, wherein the method comprises:
receiving, by a target device (i.e., aggressor BS), interference information sent (i.e., RS sent by victim BS) by a first base station (i.e., victim BS), wherein the interference information is used to indicate an interference parameter for interference from a second base station (i.e., aggressor BS) to the first base station (i.e., victim BS) and the target device (i.e., aggressor BS) is the second base station (i.e., aggressor BS) or an interference management device; and determining, by the target device (i.e., aggressor BS), a processing mode of the interference (i.e., power reduction/not transmitting), based on the interference parameter (i.e., RS received)
(Xu: See Fig. 8, Fig. 10, and para[0075]-[0078] when a victim BS (i.e., a first base station) detects interference levels received from an aggressor BS (i.e., a target base station) are above a threshold amount, then the victim BS (i.e., a first base station) informs the aggressor BS (i.e., a target base station) of the remote interference, by using a reference signal transmission, and then the aggressor BS (i.e., a target base station) reduce transmission power of its transmission on the DL, or even not transmitting on certain resources on the DL, as to avoid causing interference)
wherein the method further comprises:
in response to determining, by the target device (i.e., aggressor BS), that a degree of the interference from the second base station (i.e., aggressor BS) to the first base station (i.e., victim BS) is less than or equal to a first threshold,
(Xu: See para[0100]-[0101], a victim or an aggressor BS can transmit RS, wherein transmission of such RS, may be according to threshold being at, or below, a threshold level (less than or equal to first threshold))
or
Although Xu teaches both victim BS and aggressor BS can be configured to continuously transmit RS until signaled to stop such RS transmissions (Xu: see para[0097]), however, Xu does not explicitly disclose such "reference signal stop" messaging being sent/received from one base station (BS) to another base station (BS), as to instruct one BS to stop RS transmissions, as understood by:
sending, by the target device, fourth indication information to the first base station, wherein the fourth indication information is used to instruct the first base station to stop sending an RS to the second base station;
However, in a similar field, Keskitalo, in Fig. 4, and para[0083] teaches, gNB 334 may send a "reference signal stop" indication to a candidate BS as to cause the candidate BS to stop or terminate transmissions of its reference signals.
Examiner has considered the broadest reasonable interpretation consistent specification. For example, the applied claim language indicates sending by the target device, fourth indication information to the first base station, wherein the fourth indication information is used to instruct the first base station to stop sending an RS to the second base station.
In this case, Keskitalo, in Fig. 4, and para[0083] teaches, gNB 334 may send a "reference signal stop" indication to a candidate BS as to cause the candidate BS to stop or terminate transmissions of its reference signals.
Applicant first admits that para[0083] teaches the notion and concept of RN 330-BS sends a measurement request stop indication to candidate BS to cause the candidate BS to stop or terminate transmission of the requested reference signal to RN 330, as Examiner intended to show, but then deviates and focuses on para[0040] and concludes that the RN 330-BS will not cause interference to the candidate or target BS 320 , therefore, RN 330-BS 334 will not determine the degree of the interference from the RN 3300BS to the target BS 320, and indicates that in view of this, Keskitalo fails to cure the deficiencies of Xu and should not provide the motivation for combining with Xu. Furthermore, it concludes that Keskitalo fails to disclose the Alternative2 and concludes that Keskitalo discloses nothing about a second sending resource of the RS, even though anyone of the “or” statements (i.e., Alternative1 or Alternative2) as identified in the independent claims is understood as being sufficient for rejection of the independent claims.
Had the applied claims been more specific, Examiner would have considered differently.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
3. 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.
4. Claims 1, 5, 11, 17, 18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20200044764 A1 to Xu et al., (hereinafter Xu) in view of US 20210176670 A1 to Keskitalo et al., (hereinafter Keskitalo).
Claim 1. An interference processing method, wherein the method comprises:
receiving, by a target device (i.e., aggressor BS), interference information sent (i.e., RS sent by victim BS) by a first base station (i.e., victim BS), wherein the interference information is used to indicate an interference parameter for interference from a second base station (i.e., aggressor BS) to the first base station (i.e., victim BS) and the target device (i.e., aggressor BS) is the second base station (i.e., aggressor BS) or an interference management device; and determining, by the target device(i.e., aggressor BS), a processing mode of the interference (i.e., power reduction/not transmitting), based on the interference parameter (i.e., RS received)
(Xu: See Fig. 8, Fig. 10, and para[0075]-[0078] when a victim BS (i.e., a first base station) detects interference levels received from an aggressor BS (i.e., a target base station) are above a threshold amount, then the victim BS (i.e., a first base station) informs the aggressor BS (i.e., a target base station) of the remote interference, by using a reference signal transmission, and then the aggressor BS (i.e., a target base station) reduce transmission power of its transmission on the DL, or even not transmitting on certain resources on the DL, as to avoid causing interference)
wherein the method further comprises:
in response to determining, by the target device (i.e., aggressor BS), that a degree of the interference from the second base station (i.e., aggressor BS) to the first base station (i.e., victim BS) is less than or equal to a first threshold,
(Xu: See para[0100]-[0101], a victim or an aggressor BS can transmit RS, wherein transmission of such RS, may be according to threshold being at, or below, a threshold level (less than or equal to first threshold))
or
in response to determining, by the target device that a degree of the interference from the second base station to the first base station is less than or equal to a first threshold, sending, by the target device, fifth indication information to the first base station and the second base station, wherein the fifth indication information is used to indicate a second parameter of a reference signal (RS), and the second parameter comprises a second sending resource of the RS.
Although Xu teaches both victim BS and aggressor BS can be configured to continuously transmit RS until signaled to stop such RS transmissions (Xu: see para[0097]), however, Xu does not explicitly disclose such “reference signal stop” messaging being sent/received from one base station (BS) to another base station (BS), as to instruct one BS to stop RS transmissions, as understood by:
sending, by the target device, fourth indication information to the first base station, wherein the fourth indication information is used to instruct the first base station to stop sending an RS to the second base station;
However, in a similar field, Keskitalo, in Fig. 4, and para[0083] teaches, gNB 334 may send a “reference signal stop” indication to a candidate BS as to cause the candidate BS to stop or terminate transmissions of its reference signals.
Xu teaches remote interference management techniques via reference signal, wherein a victim BS can notify an aggressor BS, via reference signal transmissions, of the interference that the victim BS is experiencing from the transmissions of the aggressor BS. (Xu: See Fig. 8, Fig. 10, and para[0075]-[0078] )
Keskitalo teaches base station-to-base station connection messaging techniques including reference signal transmissinos, wherein a gNB can cause a candidate BS to stop its reference signal transmissions, by sending a “reference signal stop” message to the candidate BS. (Xu: See Fig. 8, Fig. 10, and para[0075]-[0078])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing data to have included messaging techniques, as taught by Keskitalo, with the teachings of Xu, in order to benefit from enhancements of having a message transmission that instructs the receiving BS as to stop sending and/or transmitting its reference signal transmissions. (Keskitalo: See See Fig. 8, Fig. 10, and para[0075]-[0078])
Claim 5. The method according to claim 1, wherein the target device is the second base station; and the processing mode comprises at least one of the following: the second base station (i.e., aggressor BS) reduces transmit power of the second base station, the second base station performs downlink backoff, the second base station increases the transmit power after reducing the transmit power for third duration, or the second base station cancels downlink backoff after performing downlink backoff for fourth duration.
(Xu: See Fig. 8, Fig. 10, and para[0075]-[0078] when a victim BS (i.e., a first base station) detects interference levels received from an aggressor BS (i.e., a target base station) are above a threshold amount, then the victim BS (i.e., a first base station) informs the aggressor BS (i.e., a target base station) of the remote interference, by using a reference signal transmission, and then the aggressor BS (i.e., a target base station) reduce transmission power of its transmission on the DL, or even not transmitting on certain resources on the DL, as to avoid causing interference)
Claim 11. An interference processing method, wherein the method comprises:
sending, by a first base station(i.e., victim BS), interference information(i.e., RS sent by victim BS) to a target device(i.e., aggressor BS), wherein the interference information is used to indicate an interference parameter for interference from a second base station(i.e., aggressor BS) to the first base station(i.e., victim BS), and the target device (i.e., aggressor BS)is the second base station (i.e., aggressor BS) or an interference management device
(Xu: See Fig. 8, Fig. 10, and para[0075]-[0078] when a victim BS (i.e., a first base station) detects interference levels received from an aggressor BS (i.e., a target base station) are above a threshold amount, then the victim BS (i.e., a first base station) informs the aggressor BS (i.e., a target base station) of the remote interference, by using a reference signal transmission, and then the aggressor BS (i.e., a target base station) reduce transmission power of its transmission on the DL, or even not transmitting on certain resources on the DL, as to avoid causing interference)
wherein the method further comprises:
in response to determining, by the target device (i.e., aggressor BS) that a degree of the interference from the second base station (i.e., aggressor BS) to the first base station (i.e., victim BS) is less than or equal to a first threshold,
(Xu: See para[0100]-[0101], a victim or an aggressor BS can transmit RS, wherein transmission of such RS may be according to threshold being at or below a threshold level)
or
in response to determining, by the target device that a degree of the interference from the second base station to the first base station is less than or equal to a first threshold, sending, by the target device, fifth indication information to the first base station and the second base station, wherein the fifth indication information is used to indicate a second parameter of a reference signal (RS), and the second parameter comprises a second sending resource of the RS.
Although Xu teaches both victim BS and aggressor BS can be configured to continuously transmit RS until signaled to stop such RS transmissions (Xu: see para[0097]), however, Xu does not explicitly disclose such “reference signal stop” messaging being sent/received from one base station (BS) to another base station (BS), as to instruct one BS to stop RS transmissions, as understood by:
sending, by the target device, fourth indication information to the first base station, wherein the fourth indication information is used to instruct the first base station to stop sending an RS to the second base station;
However, in a similar field, Keskitalo, in Fig. 4, and para[0083] teaches, gNB 334 may send a “reference signal stop” indication to a candidate BS as to cause the candidate BS to stop or terminate transmissions of its reference signals.
Xu teaches remote interference management techniques via reference signal, wherein a victim BS can notify an aggressor BS, via reference signal transmissions, of the interference that the victim BS is experiencing from the transmissions of the aggressor BS. (Xu: See Fig. 8, Fig. 10, and para[0075]-[0078] )
Keskitalo teaches base station-to-base station connection messaging techniques including reference signal transmissinos, wherein a gNB can cause a candidate BS to stop its reference signal transmissions, by sending a “reference signal stop” message to the candidate BS. (Xu: See Fig. 8, Fig. 10, and para[0075]-[0078])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing data to have included messaging techniques, as taught by Keskitalo, with the teachings of Xu, in order to benefit from enhancements of having a message transmission that instructs the receiving BS as to stop sending and/or transmitting its reference signal transmissions. (Keskitalo: See See Fig. 8, Fig. 10, and para[0075]-[0078])
Claim 17. The method according to claim 11, wherein the method further comprises:
in response to that the degree of the interference from the second base station to the first base station is less than or equal to the second target threshold,
(Xu: See para[0100]-[0101], a victim or an aggressor BS can transmit RS, wherein transmission of such RS may be according to threshold being at or below a threshold level)
receiving, by the first base station, second target indication information sent by the target device, wherein the second target indication information is used to instruct the first base station to stop sending an RS to the second base station;
(Keskitalo: See Fig. 4, and para[0083] teaches, gNB 334 may send a “reference signal stop” indication to a candidate BS as to cause the candidate BS to stop or terminate transmissions of its reference signals.)
or
in response to that the degree of the interference from the second base station to the first base station is less than or equal to the second target threshold, receiving, by the first base station, third target indication information sent by the target device, wherein the third target indication information is used to indicate a second parameter of an RS, and the second parameter comprises a second sending resource of the RS.
Xu teaches remote interference management techniques via reference signal, wherein a victim BS can notify an aggressor BS, via reference signal transmissions, of the interference that the victim BS is experiencing from the transmissions of the aggressor BS. (Xu: See Fig. 8, Fig. 10, and para[0075]-[0078] )
Keskitalo teaches base station-to-base station connection messaging techniques including reference signal transmissinos, wherein a gNB can cause a candidate BS to stop its reference signal transmissions, by sending a “reference signal stop” message to the candidate BS. (Xu: See Fig. 8, Fig. 10, and para[0075]-[0078])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing data to have included messaging techniques, as taught by Keskitalo, with the teachings of Xu, in order to benefit from enhancements of having a message transmission that instructs the receiving BS as to stop sending and/or transmitting its reference signal transmissions. (Keskitalo: See See Fig. 8, Fig. 10, and para[0075]-[0078])
Claim 18. A target device (i.e., aggressor BS), wherein the target device is a second base station (i.e., aggressor BS) or an interference management device, and the target device (i.e., aggressor BS) comprises a processor, a memory, and a program that is stored in the memory and that can run on the processor (Xu: see para[0117]-[0119] processor, memory and software program stored in memory and processed by processor) wherein when the program is executed by the processor, the processor is configured to:
receive interference information sent by a first base station (i.e., victim BS), wherein the interference information is used to indicate an interference parameter for interference from a second base station (i.e., aggressor BS), to the first base station (i.e., victim BS), and the target device (i.e., aggressor BS) is the second base station (i.e., aggressor BS) or an interference management device; and determine a processing mode of the interference(i.e., power reduction/not transmitting) based on the interference parameter (i.e., RS received)
(Xu: See Fig. 8, Fig. 10, and para[0075]-[0078] when a victim BS (i.e., a first base station) detects interference levels received from an aggressor BS (i.e., a target base station) are above a threshold amount, then the victim BS (i.e., a first base station) informs the aggressor BS (i.e., a target base station) of the remote interference, by using a reference signal transmission, and then the aggressor BS (i.e., a target base station) reduce transmission power of its transmission on the DL, or even not transmitting on certain resources on the DL, as to avoid causing interference)
wherein the method further comprises:
in response to determining, by the target device (i.e., aggressor BS) that a degree of the interference from the second base station (i.e., aggressor BS) to the first base station (i.e., victim BS) is less than or equal to a first threshold,
(Xu: See para[0100]-[0101], a victim or an aggressor BS can transmit RS, wherein transmission of such RS, may be according to threshold being at or below a threshold level)
or
in the response to determining, by the target device that a degree of the interference from the second base station to the first base station is less than or equal to a first threshold, sending, by the target device, fifth indication information to the first base station and the second base station, wherein the fifth indication information is used to indicate a second parameter of an RS, and the second parameter comprises a second sending resource of the RS to the second base station;
Although Xu teaches both victim BS and aggressor BS can be configured to continuously transmit RS until signaled to stop such RS transmissions (Xu: see para[0097]), however, Xu does not explicitly disclose such “reference signal stop” messaging being sent/received from one base station (BS) to another base station (BS), as to instruct one BS to stop RS transmissions, as understood by:
sending, by the target device, fourth indication information to the first base station, wherein the fourth indication information is used to instruct the first base station to stop sending an RS to the second base station;
However, in a similar field, Keskitalo, in Fig. 4, and para[0083] teaches, gNB 334 may send a “reference signal stop” indication to a candidate BS as to cause the candidate BS to stop or terminate transmissions of its reference signals.
Xu teaches remote interference management techniques via reference signal, wherein a victim BS can notify an aggressor BS, via reference signal transmissions, of the interference that the victim BS is experiencing from the transmissions of the aggressor BS. (Xu: See Fig. 8, Fig. 10, and para[0075]-[0078] )
Keskitalo teaches base station-to-base station connection messaging techniques including reference signal transmissinos, wherein a gNB can cause a candidate BS to stop its reference signal transmissions, by sending a “reference signal stop” message to the candidate BS. (Xu: See Fig. 8, Fig. 10, and para[0075]-[0078])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing data to have included messaging techniques, as taught by Keskitalo, with the teachings of Xu, in order to benefit from enhancements of having a message transmission that instructs the receiving BS as to stop sending and/or transmitting its reference signal transmissions. (Keskitalo: See See Fig. 8, Fig. 10, and para[0075]-[0078])
Claim 20. A base station, wherein the base station is a first base station, and the base station comprises a processor, a memory, and a program that is stored in the memory and that can run on the processor, wherein when the program is executed by the processor, the processor is configured to implement steps of the interference processing method according to claim 11.
(Xu: see para[0117]-[0119] processor, memory and software program stored in memory and processed by processor)
5. Claims 8, 10 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20200044764 A1 to Xu et al., (hereinafter Xu) in view of US 20210176670 A1 to Keskitalo et al., (hereinafter Keskitalo), and in further view of US 20160112177 A1 to Zheng et al., (hereinafter Zheng).
Claim 8. Xu in view of Keskitalo teaches the method according to claim 1, including a feedback that can be sent, however, but they do not seem to explicitly disclose a message or a feedback message includes a degree of the interference indicated in it, as understood by :
wherein the method further comprises: after the target device processes the interference in the processing mode, receiving, by the target device, feedback information sent by the first base station, wherein the feedback information is used to indicate a degree of the interference from the second base station to the first base station is less than or equal to a first threshold.
However, in a similar field, Zhen teaches:
wherein the method further comprises: after the target device processes the interference in the processing mode, receiving, by the target device, feedback information sent by the first base station, wherein the feedback information is used to indicate a degree of the interference from the second base station to the first base station is less than or equal to a first threshold.
(Zheng: See para[0070]-[0071] for receiving “interference indicator information” sent by other network nodes, which corresponds to “interference thresholds”, and then adjusting a resource to avoid interference according to the “interference indicator information”. See para[0118] for interference notifications sent, includes “interference degree indicator” indicating level of interference such as “high interference”, “low interference” or “medium interference”)
Xu teaches remote interference management techniques via reference signal, wherein a victim BS can notify an aggressor BS, via reference signal transmissions, of the interference that the victim BS is experiencing from the transmissions of the aggressor BS. (Xu: See Fig. 8, Fig. 10, and para[0075]-[0078] )
Keskitalo teaches base station-to-base station connection messaging techniques including reference signal transmissinos, wherein a gNB can cause a candidate BS to stop its reference signal transmissions, by sending a “reference signal stop” message to the candidate BS. (Xu: See Fig. 8, Fig. 10, and para[0075]-[0078])
Zheng teaches different interference messaging techniques exchanged among network nodes, such as “interference indicator information” that is sent/received by network nodes, which includes “interference degree indicator” indicating level of interference such as “high interference”, “low interference” or “medium interference” (Zheng: See para[0118])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing data to have included messaging techniques, as taught by Zheng Keskitalo, with the teachings of Xu in view of Keskitalo, in order to benefit from enhancements of having a message transmission that indicates various levels of interference detected by the sending entity. (Zheng: See para[0118])
Claim 10. The method according to claim 8, wherein the degree of the interference from the second base station to the first base station is determined by at least one of the following: a result of measuring an RS sent by the first base station by the second base station, or the feedback information sent by the first base station.
(Zheng: See para[0118] for interference notifications sent, includes “interference degree indicator” indicating level of interference such as “high interference”, “low interference” or “medium interference”)
Xu teaches remote interference management techniques via reference signal, wherein a victim BS can notify an aggressor BS, via reference signal transmissions, of the interference that the victim BS is experiencing from the transmissions of the aggressor BS. (Xu: See Fig. 8, Fig. 10, and para[0075]-[0078] )
Keskitalo teaches base station-to-base station connection messaging techniques including reference signal transmissinos, wherein a gNB can cause a candidate BS to stop its reference signal transmissions, by sending a “reference signal stop” message to the candidate BS. (Xu: See Fig. 8, Fig. 10, and para[0075]-[0078])
Zheng teaches different interference messaging techniques exchanged among network nodes, such as “interference indicator information” that is sent/received by network nodes, which includes “interference degree indicator” indicating level of interference such as “high interference”, “low interference” or “medium interference” (Zheng: See para[0118])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing data to have included messaging techniques, as taught by Zheng Keskitalo, with the teachings of Xu in view of Keskitalo, in order to benefit from enhancements of having a message transmission that indicates various levels of interference detected by the sending entity. (Zheng: See para[0118])
Claim 16. Xu in view of Keskitalo teaches the method according to claim 11, including a feedback that can be sent, however, but they do not seem to explicitly disclose a message or a feedback message includes a degree of the interference indicated in it, as understood by:
wherein the method further comprises:
in response to that a degree of the interference from the second base station to the first base station is less than or equal to a second target threshold, sending, by the first base station, feedback information to the target device, wherein the feedback information is used to indicate that the degree of the interference from the second base station to the first base station is less than or equal to the second target threshold.
However, in a similar field, Zheng teaches:
in response to that a degree of the interference from the second base station to the first base station is less than or equal to a second target threshold, sending, by the first base station, feedback information to the target device, wherein the feedback information is used to indicate that the degree of the interference from the second base station to the first base station is less than or equal to the second target threshold.
(Zheng: See para[0118] for interference notifications sent, includes “interference degree indicator” indicating level of interference such as “high interference”, “low interference” or “medium interference” as well as, indicating transmitting power to be lower than the given interference power threshold.)
Xu teaches remote interference management techniques via reference signal, wherein a victim BS can notify an aggressor BS, via reference signal transmissions, of the interference that the victim BS is experiencing from the transmissions of the aggressor BS. (Xu: See Fig. 8, Fig. 10, and para[0075]-[0078] )
Keskitalo teaches base station-to-base station connection messaging techniques including reference signal transmissinos, wherein a gNB can cause a candidate BS to stop its reference signal transmissions, by sending a “reference signal stop” message to the candidate BS. (Xu: See Fig. 8, Fig. 10, and para[0075]-[0078])
Zheng teaches different interference messaging techniques exchanged among network nodes, such as “interference indicator information” that is sent/received by network nodes, which includes “interference degree indicator” indicating level of interference such as “high interference”, “low interference” or “medium interference” (Zheng: See para[0118])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing data to have included messaging techniques, as taught by Zheng Keskitalo, with the teachings of Xu in view of Keskitalo, in order to benefit from enhancements of having a message transmission that indicates various levels of interference detected by the sending entity. (Zheng: See para[0118])
6. Claims 2, 3, 12, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20200044764 A1 to Xu et al., (hereinafter Xu) in view of in view of US 20210176670 A1 to Keskitalo et al., (hereinafter Keskitalo) and in further view of US 20210152302 A1 to Kwak et al., (hereinafter Kwak).
Claim 2. The method according to claim 1, wherein the target device (i.e., aggressor BS) is the interference management device; and the determining, by the target device (i.e., aggressor BS), a processing mode of the interference based on the interference parameter comprises:
sending, by the interference management device (i.e., aggressor BS), first indication information to the first base station (i.e., victim BS) and the second base station (i.e., aggressor BS) based on the interference parameter (i.e., CSI-RS), wherein the first indication information is used to indicate a first parameter of a reference signal RS (i.e., CSI-RS dedicated resources),
(Keskitalo: see Fig. 6, target gNB sends CSI-RS, that includes dedicated resources, to both serving gNB and gNB #334)
receiving, by the interference management device (i.e., aggressor BS), a measurement result (i.e., RS) sent by the second base station (i.e., aggressor BS), and (Xu: See Fig. 10, aggressor BS (i.e., interference management device/ second base station) sending RS signal from aggressor BS to itself)
determining, by the interference management device (i.e., aggressor BS), the processing mode (i.e., power reduction/not transmitting) based on the measurement result (i.e., RS received)
(Xu: See Fig. 8, Fig. 10, and para[0075]-[0078] when a victim BS (i.e., a first base station) detects interference levels received from an aggressor BS (i.e., a target base station) are above a threshold amount, then the victim BS (i.e., a first base station) informs the aggressor BS (i.e., a target base station) of the remote interference, by using a reference signal transmission, and then the aggressor BS (i.e., a target base station) reduce transmission power of its transmission on the DL, or even not transmitting on certain resources on the DL, as to avoid causing interference)
Xu in view of Keskitalo do not explicitly disclose measurement reports are to be reported or transmitted in any specific resource location, or in the same location that RS was sent by a sending base station, as understood in:
and the first parameter comprises a first sending resource of the RS;
wherein the measurement result is a result of measuring the RS sent by the first base station on the first sending resource by the second base station;
However, in a similar field, Kwak in para[0056] teaches, IMR or Interference Measurement resource, corresponds to the resource location at which the CSI-RS (i.e., RS) is transmitted, such as those shown in Fig. 2.
Xu teaches remote interference management techniques via reference signal, wherein a victim BS can notify an aggressor BS, via reference signal transmissions, of the interference that the victim BS is experiencing from the transmissions of the aggressor BS. (Xu: See Fig. 8, Fig. 10, and para[0075]-[0078] )
Keskitalo teaches base station-to-base station connection messaging techniques including reference signal transmissinos, wherein a gNB can cause a candidate BS to stop its reference signal transmissions, by sending a “reference signal stop” message to the candidate BS. (Xu: See Fig. 8, Fig. 10, and para[0075]-[0078])
Kwak teaches IMR or Interference Measurement resource, corresponds to the resource location at which CSI-RS (i.e., RS) is transmitted. (Kwak: See para[0056])
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill before the time of effective filling, to have included Interference Measurement Resource, as taught by Kwak, with the teachings of Xu and Keskitalo, in order to benefit from information measurement resource, being or corresponding to the resource location at which CSI-RS (i.e., RS) is transmitted. (Kwak: See para[0056]
Claim 3. The method according to claim 2, wherein the processing mode comprises at least one of a first mode or a second mode;
the first mode is: the interference management device (i.e., aggressor BS) sends second indication information (i.e., “remote interference” message is “second indication information”) to the first base station (i.e., victim BS), wherein the second indication information is used to instruct the first base station to adjust at least one of information about an access channel, a sending resource of the first base station, or a level of a modulation and coding scheme MCS; and
(Xu: See Fig. 8, Fig. 10, and para[0075]-[0078] when a victim BS (i.e., a first base station) detects interference levels received from an aggressor BS (i.e., a target base station) are above a threshold amount, then the victim BS (i.e., a first base station) informs the aggressor BS (i.e., a target base station) of the remote interference, by using a reference signal transmission, and then the aggressor BS (i.e., a target base station) reduce transmission power of its transmission on the DL, or not transmitting on certain resources on the DL (i.e., adjust at least one of information about an access channel), as to avoid causing interference)
the second mode is: the interference management device sends third indication information to the second base station, wherein the third indication information is used to indicate at least one of the following: the second base station reduces transmit power of the second base station, the second base station performs downlink backoff, the second base station increases the transmit power after reducing the transmit power for first duration, or the second base station cancels downlink backoff after performing downlink backoff for second duration.
Claim 12. The method according to claim 11, wherein the target device is the interference management device; and after the sending, by a first base station, interference information to a target device, the method further comprises:
receiving, by the first base station (i.e., victim BS), first target indication information sent by the interference management device, wherein the first target indication information (i.e., CSI-RS) is used to indicate a first parameter of a reference signal RS (i.e., CSI-RS dedicated resources)
(Keskitalo: see Fig. 6, target gNB sends CSI-RS, that includes dedicated resources, to both serving gNB and gNB #334)
Xu in view of Keskitalo do not explicitly disclose measurement reports or IMR are to be reported or transmitted in any specific resource location, or in the same location that RS was sent by a sending base station, as understood in:
and the first parameter comprises a first sending resource of the RS; and sending, by the first base station, the RS on the first sending resource.
However, in a similar field, Kwak in para[0056] teaches, IMR or Interference Measurement resource, corresponds to the resource location at which the CSI-RS (i.e., RS) is transmitted, such as those shown in Fig. 2.
Xu teaches remote interference management techniques via reference signal, wherein a victim BS can notify an aggressor BS, via reference signal transmissions, of the interference that the victim BS is experiencing from the transmissions of the aggressor BS. (Xu: See Fig. 8, Fig. 10, and para[0075]-[0078] )
Keskitalo teaches base station-to-base station connection messaging techniques including reference signal transmissinos, wherein a gNB can cause a candidate BS to stop its reference signal transmissions, by sending a “reference signal stop” message to the candidate BS. (Xu: See Fig. 8, Fig. 10, and para[0075]-[0078])
Kwak teaches IMR or Interference Measurement resource, corresponds to the resource location at which CSI-RS (i.e., RS) is transmitted. (Kwak: See para[0056])
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill before the time of effective filling, to have included Interference Measurement Resource, as taught by Kwak, with the teachings of Xu and Keskitalo, in order to benefit from information measurement resource, being or corresponding to the resource location at which CSI-RS (i.e., RS) is transmitted. (Kwak: See para[0056]
Claim 19. The target device according to claim 18, wherein the target device is the interference management device; and the processor is further configured to:
send first indication information to the first base station (i.e., victim BS) and the second base station (i.e., aggressor BS) based on the interference parameter, (i.e., CSI-RS)
(Keskitalo: see Fig. 6, target gNB sends CSI-RS, that includes dedicated resources, to both serving gNB and gNB #334)
receive a measurement result sent by the second base station (i.e., aggressor BS), wherein the measurement result (i.e., RS) is a result of measuring the RS sent by the first base station on the first sending resource by the second base station (i.e., CSI-RS dedicated resources); and
(Keskitalo: see Fig. 6, target gNB sends CSI-RS, that includes dedicated resources, to both serving gNB and gNB #334)
determine the processing mode (i.e., power reduction/not transmitting) based on the measurement result (i.e., RS received).
(Xu: See Fig. 8, Fig. 10, and para[0075]-[0078] when a victim BS (i.e., a first base station) detects interference levels received from an aggressor BS (i.e., a target base station) are above a threshold amount, then the victim BS (i.e., a first base station) informs the aggressor BS (i.e., a target base station) of the remote interference, by using a reference signal transmission, and then the aggressor BS (i.e., a target base station) reduce transmission power of its transmission on the DL, or even not transmitting on certain resources on the DL, as to avoid causing interference)
Xu in view of Keskitalo do not explicitly disclose measurement reports are to be reported or transmitted in any specific resource location, or in the same location that RS was sent by a sending base station, as understood in:
wherein the first indication information is used to indicate a first parameter of a reference signal RS, and the first parameter comprises a first sending resource of the RS;
However, in a similar field, Kwak in para[0056] teaches, IMR or Interference Measurement resource, corresponds to the resource location at which the CSI-RS (i.e., RS) is transmitted, such as those shown in Fig. 2.
Xu teaches remote interference management techniques via reference signal, wherein a victim BS can notify an aggressor BS, via reference signal transmissions, of the interference that the victim BS is experiencing from the transmissions of the aggressor BS. (Xu: See Fig. 8, Fig. 10, and para[0075]-[0078] )
Keskitalo teaches base station-to-base station connection messaging techniques including reference signal transmissinos, wherein a gNB can cause a candidate BS to stop its reference signal transmissions, by sending a “reference signal stop” message to the candidate BS. (Xu: See Fig. 8, Fig. 10, and para[0075]-[0078])
Kwak teaches IMR or Interference Measurement resource, corresponds to the resource location at which CSI-RS (i.e., RS) is transmitted. (Kwak: See para[0056])
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill before the time of effective filling, to have included Interference Measurement Resource, as taught by Kwak, with the teachings of Xu and Keskitalo, in order to benefit from information measurement resource, being or corresponding to the resource location at which CSI-RS (i.e., RS) is transmitted. (Kwak: See para[0056]
7. Claims 4, 6, 7 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20200044764 A1 to Xu et al., (hereinafter Xu) in view of Keskitalo, Kwak and in further view of US 20100039987 A1 to Hedge et al., (hereinafter Hedge).
Claim 4. Xu in view of Keskitalo and Kwak teaches the method according to claim 2, however, they do not seem to explicitly disclose creating and/or releasing a link as understood by:
wherein before the receiving, by a target device, interference information sent by a first base station, the method further comprises: receiving, by the interference management device, a first request message sent by the first base station, and receiving a second request message sent by the second base station, wherein the first request message is used to request to establish an interface between the first base station and the interference management device, and the second request message is used to request to establish an interface between the second base station and the interference management device; and establishing, by the interference management device, the interface between the interference management device and the first base station based on the first request message, and establishing the interface between the interference management device and the second base station based on the second request message.
However, in a similar field, Hedge in para[0044]-[0051] teaches Originating Node B sends a request to a target Node B, in order to establish and/or to create a tunnel (i.e., a link) between two entities, wherein the request sent and response received, includes originating TEID (i.e., originating Node B ID) and target TEID (i.e., Target Node B ID) wherein such information were exchanged between Node Bs previously (i.e., received via system information, etc.)
Xu teaches remote interference management techniques via reference signal, wherein a victim BS can notify an aggressor BS, via reference signal transmissions, of the interference that the victim BS is experiencing from the transmissions of the aggressor BS. (Xu: See Fig. 8, Fig. 10, and para[0075]-[0078] )
Keskitalo teaches base station-to-base station connection messaging techniques including reference signal transmissinos, wherein a gNB can cause a candidate BS to stop its reference signal transmissions, by sending a “reference signal stop” message to the candidate BS. (Xu: See Fig. 8, Fig. 10, and para[0075]-[0078])
Kwak teaches IMR or Interference Measurement resource, corresponds to the resource location at which CSI-RS (i.e., RS) is transmitted. (Kwak: See para[0056])
Hedge teaches techniques related to tunnel creations among two eNode Bs, via sending a request, wherein such request/response includes IDs associated with originating and target devices that were previously exchanged between eNode Bs. (Hedge: See para[0044]-[0051])
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill before the time of effective filling, to have included tunnel creation technique between two eNode Bs, as taught by Hedge, with the teachings of Xu in view of Keskitalo and Kwak, in order to benefit from enhanced ability of two base stations that can send a request to one another in order to establish a communication tunnel or link between one another. (Hedge: See para[0044]-[0051])
Claim 6. Xu in view of Keskitalo and Kwak teaches the method according to claim 5, however, they do not seem to explicitly disclose creating and/or releasing a link as understood by:
wherein before the receiving, by a target device, interference information sent by a first base station, the method further comprises: sending, by the second base station, system information, wherein the system information is used to indicate an identifier of the second base station, the identifier of the second base station is used by the first base station to send a third request message to the second base station, and the third request message is used to request to establish an interface between the first base station and the second base station; receiving, by the second base station, the third request message sent by the first base station; and establishing, by the second base station, the interface between the second base station and the first base station based on the third request message.
However, in a similar field, Hedge in para[0044]-[0051] teaches Originating Node B sends a request to a target Node B, in order to establish and/or to create a tunnel (i.e., a link) between two entities, wherein the request sent and response received, includes originating TEID (i.e., originating Node B ID) and target TEID (i.e., Target Node B ID) wherein such information were exchanged between Node Bs previously (i.e., received via system information, etc.)
Xu teaches remote interference management techniques via reference signal, wherein a victim BS can notify an aggressor BS, via reference signal transmissions, of the interference that the victim BS is experiencing from the transmissions of the aggressor BS. (Xu: See Fig. 8, Fig. 10, and para[0075]-[0078] )
Keskitalo teaches base station-to-base station connection messaging techniques including reference signal transmissinos, wherein a gNB can cause a candidate BS to stop its reference signal transmissions, by sending a “reference signal stop” message to the candidate BS. (Xu: See Fig. 8, Fig. 10, and para[0075]-[0078])
Kwak teaches IMR or Interference Measurement resource, corresponds to the resource location at which CSI-RS (i.e., RS) is transmitted. (Kwak: See para[0056])
Hedge teaches techniques related to tunnel creations among two eNode Bs, via sending a request, wherein such request/response includes IDs associated with originating and target devices that were previously exchanged between eNode Bs. (Hedge: See para[0044]-[0051])
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill before the time of effective filling, to have included tunnel creation technique between two eNode Bs, as taught by Hedge, with the teachings of Xu in view of Keskitalo and Kwak, in order to benefit from enhanced ability of two base stations that can send a request to one another in order to establish a communication tunnel or link between one another. (Hedge: See para[0044]-[0051])
Claim 7. Xu in view of Keskitalo and Kwak teaches the method according to claim 6, but they do not seem to explicitly disclose creating and/or releasing a link as understood by:
wherein the method further comprises: after the second base station processes the interference in the processing mode, if the second base station fails, within fifth duration, to receive the interference information sent by the first base station, releasing, by the second base station, the interface between the second base station and the first base station after the fifth duration.
However, in a similar field, Hedge in para[0039]-[0040] teaches a tunnel (i.e., a link) between originating eNode B and a Terminating eNode B can be cancelled (i.e. releasing) by receiving instructions from network entities.)
Xu teaches remote interference management techniques via reference signal, wherein a victim BS can notify an aggressor BS, via reference signal transmissions, of the interference that the victim BS is experiencing from the transmissions of the aggressor BS. (Xu: See Fig. 8, Fig. 10, and para[0075]-[0078] )
Keskitalo teaches base station-to-base station connection messaging techniques including reference signal transmissinos, wherein a gNB can cause a candidate BS to stop its reference signal transmissions, by sending a “reference signal stop” message to the candidate BS. (Xu: See Fig. 8, Fig. 10, and para[0075]-[0078])
Kwak teaches IMR or Interference Measurement resource, corresponds to the resource location at which CSI-RS (i.e., RS) is transmitted. (Kwak: See para[0056])
Hedge teaches techniques related to tunnel creations among two eNode Bs, via sending a request, wherein such request/response includes IDs associated with originating and target devices that were previously exchanged between eNode Bs. (Hedge: See para[0044]-[0051])
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill before the time of effective filling, to have included tunnel creation technique between two eNode Bs, as taught by Hedge, with the teachings of Xu in view of Keskitalo and Kwak, in order to benefit from enhanced ability of two base stations that can send a request to one another in order to establish a communication tunnel or link between one another. (Hedge: See para[0044]-[0051])
Claim 13. Xu in view of Keskitalo and Kwak teaches the method according to claim 12, however, they do not seem to explicitly disclose creating and/or releasing a link as understood by:
wherein before the sending, by a first base station, interference information to a target device, the method further comprises: sending, by the first base station, a first target request message to the interference management device, wherein the first target request message is used to request to establish an interface between the first base station and the interference management device.
However, in a similar field, Hedge in para[0044]-[0051] teaches Originating Node B sends a request to a target Node B, in order to establish and/or to create a tunnel (i.e., a link) between two entities, wherein the request sent and response received, includes originating TEID (i.e., originating Node B ID) and target TEID (i.e., Target Node B ID) wherein such information were exchanged between Node Bs previously (i.e., received via system information, etc.)
Xu teaches remote interference management techniques via reference signal, wherein a victim BS can notify an aggressor BS, via reference signal transmissions, of the interference that the victim BS is experiencing from the transmissions of the aggressor BS. (Xu: See Fig. 8, Fig. 10, and para[0075]-[0078] )
Keskitalo teaches base station-to-base station connection messaging techniques including reference signal transmissinos, wherein a gNB can cause a candidate BS to stop its reference signal transmissions, by sending a “reference signal stop” message to the candidate BS. (Xu: See Fig. 8, Fig. 10, and para[0075]-[0078])
Kwak teaches IMR or Interference Measurement resource, corresponds to the resource location at which CSI-RS (i.e., RS) is transmitted. (Kwak: See para[0056])
Hedge teaches techniques related to tunnel creations among two eNode Bs, via sending a request, wherein such request/response includes IDs associated with originating and target devices that were previously exchanged between eNode Bs. (Hedge: See para[0044]-[0051])
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill before the time of effective filling, to have included tunnel creation technique between two eNode Bs, as taught by Hedge, with the teachings of Xu in view of Keskitalo and Kwak, in order to benefit from enhanced ability of two base stations that can send a request to one another in order to establish a communication tunnel or link between one another. (Hedge: See para[0044]-[0051])
8. Claims 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20200044764 A1 to Xu et al., (hereinafter Xu) in view of in view of US 20210176670 A1 to Keskitalo et al., (hereinafter Keskitalo) and in further view of US 20100039987 A1 to Hedge et al., (hereinafter Hedge).
Claim 14. Xu in view of Keskitalo teaches the method according to claim 11, wherein the target device is the second base station; and before the sending, by a first base station, interference information to a target device, the method further comprises: if the first base station is interfered with, obtaining, by the first base station, target system information, wherein signal strength of the target system information is greater than or equal to a first target threshold, (Xu: See para[0100]-[0101], a victim or an aggressor BS can transmit RS, wherein transmission of such RS, may be according to threshold being at or below a threshold level)
Xu in view of Keskitalo do not seem to explicitly disclose, creating and/or releasing a link as understood by:
and the target system information comprises an identifier of the second base station; sending, by the first base station, a second target request message to the second base station based on the identifier of the second base station, wherein the second target request message is used to request to establish an interface between the first base station and the second base station; and establishing, by the first base station, the interface between the first base station and the second base station.
However, in a similar field, Hedge in para[0044]-[0051] teaches Originating Node B sends a request to a target Node B, in order to establish and/or to create a tunnel (i.e., a link) between two entities, wherein the request sent and response received, includes originating TEID (i.e., originating Node B ID) and target TEID (i.e., Target Node B ID) wherein such information were exchanged between Node Bs previously (i.e., received via system information, etc.)
Xu teaches remote interference management techniques via reference signal, wherein a victim BS can notify an aggressor BS, via reference signal transmissions, of the interference that the victim BS is experiencing from the transmissions of the aggressor BS. (Xu: See Fig. 8, Fig. 10, and para[0075]-[0078] )
Keskitalo teaches base station-to-base station connection messaging techniques including reference signal transmissinos, wherein a gNB can cause a candidate BS to stop its reference signal transmissions, by sending a “reference signal stop” message to the candidate BS. (Xu: See Fig. 8, Fig. 10, and para[0075]-[0078])
Hedge teaches techniques related to tunnel creations among two eNode Bs, via sending a request, wherein such request/response includes IDs associated with originating and target devices that were previously exchanged between eNode Bs. (Hedge: See para[0044]-[0051])
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill before the time of effective filling, to have included tunnel creation technique between two eNode Bs, as taught by Hedge, with the teachings of Xu in view of Keskitalo, in order to benefit from enhanced ability of two base stations that can send a request to one another in order to establish a communication tunnel or link between one another. (Hedge: See para[0044]-[0051])
Claim 15. The method according to claim 14, wherein the method comprises: if a degree of the interference from the second base station to the first base station is less than or equal to a second target threshold, releasing, by the first base station, the interface between the first base station and the second base station. (Hedge see para[0039]-[0040] teaches a tunnel (i.e., a link) between originating eNode B and a Terminating eNode B can be cancelled (i.e. released) by receiving instructions from network entities.)
Xu teaches remote interference management techniques via reference signal, wherein a victim BS can notify an aggressor BS, via reference signal transmissions, of the interference that the victim BS is experiencing from the transmissions of the aggressor BS. (Xu: See Fig. 8, Fig. 10, and para[0075]-[0078] )
Keskitalo teaches base station-to-base station connection messaging techniques including reference signal transmissinos, wherein a gNB can cause a candidate BS to stop its reference signal transmissions, by sending a “reference signal stop” message to the candidate BS. (Xu: See Fig. 8, Fig. 10, and para[0075]-[0078])
Hedge teaches techniques related to tunnel creations among two eNode Bs, via sending a request, wherein such request/response includes IDs associated with originating and target devices that were previously exchanged between eNode Bs. (Hedge: See para[0044]-[0051])
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill before the time of effective filling, to have included tunnel creation technique between two eNode Bs, as taught by Hedge, with the teachings of Xu in view of Keskitalo, in order to benefit from enhanced ability of two base stations that can send a request to one another in order to establish a communication tunnel or link between one another. (Hedge: See para[0044]-[0051])
Conclusion
9. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAJID ESMAEILIAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7830. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Chirag Shah can be reached on 571-272-3144. 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.
/M. E./
Examiner, Art Unit 2477
/GREGORY B SEFCHECK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2477
