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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-16, 35, and 42 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Issue:
Claim 1 recites "…a configuration update including a request to change an activation status of a cell of the distributed unit, wherein the UE context message includes an indication that the distributed unit is in an energy saving mode, and wherein the request to change the activation status comprises a request to activate or deactivate the cell of the distributed unit in accordance with the distributed unit being in an energy saving mode…” [Emphasis Added]
The amended limitations are reviewed in light of the specification to determine whether the claimed elements are sufficiently supported by the description of the current application. In view of the specification, the specification only provides “a configuration update including a request to change an activation status of a cell of the distributed unit” and “a configuration update acknowledgement based at least in part on transmitting the configuration update including the request to change the activation status of the cell of the distributed unit.”. See paragraphs [0082], [0083] and [0130]. Nowhere does in the specification implicitly and/or explicitly provide “the request to change the activation status comprises a request to activate or deactivate the cell of the distributed unit in accordance with the distributed unit being in an energy saving mode”. More specifically, the specification fails to provide any type of relationship between such the request to change activation state in accordance with the status of the distributed unit’s energy saving mode. In view of the above analysis, the instant specification fails to support an adequate written description of the current claim. Thus, the instant claim introduces elements or limitations which are not supported by the as-filed disclosure violate the written description requirement. Therefore, the claim must be rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, para. 1, for lack of adequate written description. Independent claims 16, 35, and 42 are further rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, para. 1, based on the same/similar reason as discussed in above. Dependent claims 2-48 are also rejected as being dependency upon the rejected base claims.
New matter includes not only the addition of wholly unsupported subject matter but may also include adding specific percentages or compounds after a broader original disclosure, or even the omission of a step from a method. See MPEP § 608.04 to § 608.04(c). See In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976) and MPEP § 2163.05 for guidance in determining whether the addition of specific percentages or compounds after a broader original disclosure constitutes new matter. See, e.g., In re Lukach, 442 F.2d 967, 169 USPQ 795 (CCPA 1971).
Claims 50 and 52 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Issue:
Claim 1 recites "… refrain from deleting a context of the cell of the distributed unit.”
The amended limitations are reviewed in light of the specification to determine whether the claimed elements are sufficiently supported by the description of the current application. In view of the specification, the specification only provides “ If a DU fails to make a cell operational, the DU may delete the cell and report deletion of the cell to the CU. When a cell is deleted, the CU deletes the cell context. However, the DU may not be able to deactivate a cell, which may be desirable for energy saving, without deleting the cell, which may result in excessive network overhead to convey a new cell context when the cell is to be reactivated.”. See paragraphs [0004]. Nowhere does in the specification implicitly and/or explicitly provide “refrain from deleting a context of the cell of the distributed unit.”. In view of the above analysis, the instant specification fails to support an adequate written description of the current claim. Thus, the instant claim introduces elements or limitations which are not supported by the as-filed disclosure violate the written description requirement. Therefore, the claim must be rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, para. 1, for lack of adequate written description. Independent claims 16, 35, and 42 are further rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, para. 1, based on the same/similar reason as discussed in above.
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.
Claims 1-3, 5, 6, 16-18, 20, 21, 35-37, 40-44, and 47-52 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Khirallah et al. (US 2023/0345532 A1) in view of Liu et al. (US 2023/0100121 A1), and further in view of Byun et al. (US 2022/0264447 A1).
Regarding claims 1 and 35:
Khirallah et al. discloses a method for wireless communication at a central unit, a method for wireless communication at a distributed unit, a central unit for wireless communication, comprising: at least one processor; and at least one memory communicatively coupled with the at least one processor and storing processor-readable code, a distributed unit for wireless communication, comprising: at least one processor; and at least one memory communicatively coupled with the at least one processor and storing processor-readable code that, when executed by the at least one processor (Khirallah et al.; Fig. 3; [0083]-[0086]), is configured to cause the distributed unit to:
transmit, to a central unit associated with the distributed unit (See Fig. 6: a base station performs Listen-Before-Talk (LBT) communication with an item of user equipment (UE) via at least one cell. When the base station of the UE detects a failure associated with the LBT communication in at least one cell, the base station transmits a signaling message to another node (e.g., a central unit, a master node, a secondary node, or a core network node), the signaling message comprising information indicating that LBT failure has been detected. Thus, it would be reasonable to analyze that the signaling message transmitted within the gNB could be considered as a UE context message because the message is generated based on the LBT detection to communicate with the UE via a cell. See Khirallah’s Abstract and ¶ [0016]), a configuration update including a request to change an activation status of a cell of the distributed unit (See Fig. 6: the gNB-DU generates and transmits a formatted “Configuration Update” message to the gNB-CU. The Configuration Update message includes the detection of LBT failures on the DL. Based on the detected LBT failures, the gNB-DU includes the instruction (i.e., request to change) to delete the cells due to the LBT failures in the Configuration Update message. See ¶ [0098]); wherein the configuration update includes an indication that the distributed unit to change the activation status (See Fig. 6: the base station 5 (gNB-CU 5C/gNB-DU 5D) deactivates the affected cell(s)… The gNB-CU 5C may also instruct the gNB-DU 5D (and/or another gNB-DU 5D) to activate other cell(s). ¶ [0099]), and
receive, from the central unit, a configuration update acknowledgement based at least in part on transmitting the configuration update including the request to change the activation status of the cell of the distributed unit (See Fig. 6: once the affected cells are deactivated due to the LBT failures, the gNB-CU transmitted an appropriate Configuration Update Acknowledgement Message to the gNB-DU. The Acknowledgement message further includes an instruction of the gNB-DU 5D (and/or another gNB-DU 5D) to activate other cell(s) instead of (or in addition to) the serving cell(s) with the reported LBT failures. See ¶ [0099]).
PNG
media_image1.png
624
945
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Khirallah doesn’t explicitly states the method wherein the distributed unit is in an energy saving mode and to change the activation status comprising a request to activate or deactivate the cell of the DU being in the energy saving mode.
However, Liu et al. discloses the method wherein the distributed unit is in an energy saving mode (Liu: the fourth indication information is used to indicate energy saving state information of the IAB node. The IAB node includes an IAB-DU and an IAB-MT. Energy saving of the IAB node may be implemented in the following manner: The IAB-MT enters an inactive state, and the IAB-DU closes a cell served by the IAB-DU or a cell served by the IAB-DU enters a discontinuous transmission state, for example, a discontinuous transmission (DTX) state. ¶ [0248]-[0250]), and wherein to activate or deactivate the cell of the DU being in the energy saving mode (See Fig. 13: The reason for the IAB-DU unit entering into a Discontinuous Transmission (DTX) mode (i.e., changing the activation mode) is to save Energy or Power of the serving IAB node. In other words, the IAB node saves Energy due to entering into DTX mode because the served cell sends only common information such as a system broadcast, a paging message, and a long-period SSB, and does not perform data transmission. ¶ [0249]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide indication of power saving state when the cell is powered off taught by Liu et al. in the message taught by Khirallah not only to provide some beneficial effects include that an IAB node in an IAB network can obtain accurate configuration information but also ensure an improved operation of the IAB network. Liu: ¶ [0009].
Even though, Liu discloses the method of indicating of changing the activation state (i.e., entering DTX mode) to perform/indicate Energy Saving State (Liu: ¶ [0248-0249]), neither Khirallah nor Liu explicitly states requestting to activate or deactivate the cell of the DU being in the energy saving mode.
However, Byun further provides requesting to activate or deactivate (See Fig. 15: in step 1501, the CU may receive, from the DU, a first message including deactivation request (i.e., the request to change the activation state) for the DU just for the same reason of saving energy for DU unit as discussed by Liu. See Byun’s ¶ [0205] and Abstract).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide receiving the request to change message for the activation state as taught by Byun to have incorporated into the Khirallah’s system, so that it would provide that the power of IAB network could be used efficiently. In addition, the degradation of UE's experience by energy saving of the IAB-node could be avoided. Byun: ¶ [0268].
Regarding claims 16 and 42:
Khirallah et al. discloses a method for wireless communication at a central unit, a method for wireless communication at a distributed unit, a central unit for wireless communication, comprising: at least one processor; and at least one memory communicatively coupled with the at least one processor and storing processor-readable code, a distributed unit for wireless communication, comprising: at least one processor; and at least one memory communicatively coupled with the at least one processor and storing processor-readable code that, when executed by the at least one processor (Khirallah et al.; Fig. 3; [0083]-[0086]), is configured to cause the distributed unit to:
receive, to a distributed unit associated with the central unit, in a user equipment (UE) context message (See Fig. 6: a base station performs Listen-Before-Talk (LBT) communication with an item of user equipment (UE) via at least one cell. When the base station of the UE detects a failure associated with the LBT communication in at least one cell, the base station transmits a signaling message to another node (e.g., a central unit, a master node, a secondary node, or a core network node), the signaling message comprising information indicating that LBT failure has been detected. Thus, it would be reasonable to analyze that the signaling message transmitted within the gNB could be considered as a UE context message because the message is generated based on the LBT detection to communicate with the UE via a cell. See Khirallah’s Abstract and ¶ [0016]), a configuration update including a request to change an activation status of a cell of the distributed unit (See Fig. 6: the gNB-DU generates and transmits a formatted “Configuration Update” message to the gNB-CU. The Configuration Update message includes the detection of LBT failures on the DL. Based on the detected LBT failures, the gNB-DU includes the instruction (i.e., request to change) to delete the cells due to the LBT failures in the Configuration Update message. See ¶ [0098]); wherein the configuration update includes an indication that the distributed unit to change the activation status (See Fig. 6: the base station 5 (gNB-CU 5C/gNB-DU 5D) deactivates the affected cell(s)… The gNB-CU 5C may also instruct the gNB-DU 5D (and/or another gNB-DU 5D) to activate other cell(s). ¶ [0099]), and
transmit, to the DU, a configuration update acknowledgement based at least in part on transmitting the configuration update including the request to change the activation status of the cell of the distributed unit (See Fig. 6: once the affected cells are deactivated due to the LBT failures, the gNB-CU transmitted an appropriate Configuration Update Acknowledgement Message to the gNB-DU. The Acknowledgement message further includes an instruction of the gNB-DU 5D (and/or another gNB-DU 5D) to activate other cell(s) instead of (or in addition to) the serving cell(s) with the reported LBT failures. See ¶ [0099]).
Khirallah doesn’t explicitly states the method wherein the distributed unit is in an energy saving mode and to change the activation status comprising a request to activate or deactivate the cell of the DU being in the energy saving mode.
However, Liu et al. discloses the method wherein the distributed unit is in an energy saving mode (Liu: the fourth indication information is used to indicate energy saving state information of the IAB node. The IAB node includes an IAB-DU and an IAB-MT. Energy saving of the IAB node may be implemented in the following manner: The IAB-MT enters an inactive state, and the IAB-DU closes a cell served by the IAB-DU or a cell served by the IAB-DU enters a discontinuous transmission state, for example, a discontinuous transmission (DTX) state. ¶ [0248]-[0250]), and wherein to activate or deactivate the cell of the DU being in the energy saving mode (See Fig. 13: The reason for the IAB-DU unit entering into a Discontinuous Transmission (DTX) mode (i.e., changing the activation mode) is to save Energy or Power of the serving IAB node. In other words, the IAB node saves Energy due to entering into DTX mode because the served cell sends only common information such as a system broadcast, a paging message, and a long-period SSB, and does not perform data transmission. ¶ [0249]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide indication of power saving state when the cell is powered off taught by Liu et al. in the message taught by Khirallah not only to provide some beneficial effects include that an IAB node in an IAB network can obtain accurate configuration information but also ensure an improved operation of the IAB network. Liu: ¶ [0009].
Even though, Liu discloses the method of indicating of changing the activation state (i.e., entering DTX mode) to perform/indicate Energy Saving State (Liu: ¶ [0248-0249]), neither Khirallah nor Liu explicitly state receiving the request to change message for the activation state.
However, Byun further provides requesting to activate or deactivate (See Fig. 15: in step 1501, the CU may receive, from the DU, a first message including deactivation request (i.e., the request to change the activation state) for the DU just for the same reason of saving energy for DU unit as discussed by Liu. See Byun’s ¶ [0205] and Abstract).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide receiving the request to change message for the activation state as taught by Byun to have incorporated into the Khirallah’s system, so that it would provide that the power of IAB network could be used efficiently. In addition, the degradation of UE's experience by energy saving of the IAB-node could be avoided. Byun: ¶ [0268].
Claims 2, 17, 36 and 43:
Khirallah et al. and Liu et al. disclose the claimed invention as to claims above.
Khirallah et al. discloses the configuration update acknowledgement includes a confirmation of the change to the activation status of the cell of the distributed unit (Khirallah et al.; Fig. 6; [0097]-[0099]).
Claims 3, 18, 37 and 44:
Khirallah et al. and Liu et al. disclose the claimed invention as to claims above.
Khirallah et al. discloses the change to the activation status is an activation of the cell of the distributed unit or a deactivation of the cell of the distributed unit (Khirallah et al.; Fig. 6; [0097]-[0099]).
Claims 5, 20, 40 and 47:
Khirallah et al. and Liu et al. disclose the claimed invention as to claims above.
Khirallah et al. discloses the change to the activation status is a deactivation of the cell of the distributed unit, and wherein the processor-readable code, when executed by the at least one processor, is configured to cause the distributed unit to:
receive, from the central unit, a request to reactivate the cell of the distributed unit (activate in addition to the serving cell(s) with the reported LBT failures (e.g. the cell(s) with downlink LBT failures reported during s2); Khirallah et al.; Fig. 6; [0097]-[0099]).
Claims 6, 21, 41 and 48:
Khirallah et al. and Liu et al. disclose the claimed invention as to claims above.
Khirallah et al. discloses the request to reactivate the cell of the distributed unit occurs after the deactivation of the cell of the distributed unit without an intervening cell addition for the cell of the distributed unit (activate in addition to the serving cell(s) with the reported LBT failures (e.g. the cell(s) with downlink LBT failures reported during s2); Khirallah et al.; Fig. 6; [0097]-[0099]).
Claims 4, 19, 31, 33, 38, 39, 45 and 46 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Khirallah et al. US 2023/0345532 in view of Liu et al. US 2023/0100121 and further in view of Byun et al. US 2022/0264447 and Centonza et al. US 2023/0199481.
Claims 4, 19, 38 and 45:
Khirallah et al. and Liu et al. disclose the claimed invention as to claims 1, 16, 35 and 42 above.
Furthermore, Khirallah et al. discloses regarding claims 4, 19, 38 and 45, the change to the activation status is a deactivation of the cell of the distributed unit (Khirallah et al.; Fig. 6; [0097]-[0099]).
Khirallah et al. and Liu et al. fail to teach, but Byun et al. discloses for example, when the gNB-CU accepts the deactivation of the gNB-DU 1, the gNB-CU may maintain the context related to the gNB-DU 1. The gNB-CU may store the context related to the gNB-DU 1 while the gNB-DU 1 is deactivated. The gNB-CU may use the maintained context related to the gNB-DU 1 to activate the gNB-DU 1 subsequently (Byun et al.; [0252]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the maintained context related to the DU in the system taught by Khirallah et al. and Liu et al. as taught by Byun et al. in order to activate the DU subsequently.
Khirallah et al. fails to teach regarding claims 4, 19, 38 and 45, wherein a context of the cell is stored at the central unit based at least in part on the deactivation of the cell of the distributed unit.
However, Centonza et al. discloses the gNB-CU will need to store (i.e. create) information about all the served cells signaled by the gNB-DU in order to be able to activate any of such cells at any point in time (Centonza et al.; [0036]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to store (i.e. create) information about the served cells signaled (e.g. s2; Khirallah et al.; Fig. 6) by the gNB-DU in the system of Khirallah et al., Liu et al. and Byun et al. as taught by Centonza et al. in order to be able to activate any of such cells at any point in time in the system.
Claims 31, 33, 39 and 46:
Khirallah et al., Liu et al., Byun et al., and Centonza et al. disclose the claimed invention as to claims 4, 19, 38 and 45 above.
Furthermore, Centonza et al. discloses configuration update acknowledgement comprises an indication that the context of the cell is stored at the central unit (Centonza et al.; [0066]).
Regarding claim 49; Khirallah in view of Byun teaches the distributed unit wherein the processor-readable code, when executed by the at least one processor, is configured to cause the distributed unit to:
reactivate the cell of the distributed unit in accordance with the request to reactivate the cell of the distributed unit (Byun: The gNB-CU may use the maintained context related to the gNB-DU 1 to activate the gNB-DU 1 subsequently. ¶ [0252]).
Regarding claim 51; Khirallah teaches the method further comprising: reactivating the cell of the distributed unit in accordance with the request to reactivate the cell of the distributed unit.
Regarding claim 52; Khirallah teaches the method further comprising: refraining from deleting a context of the cell of the distributed unit (Byun: The gNB-CU may use the maintained context related to the gNB-DU 1 to activate the gNB-DU 1 subsequently. ¶ [0252]).
Claims 32 and 34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Khirallah et al. US 2023/0345532 in view of Liu et al. US 2023/0100121 and further in view of Centonza et al. US 2023/0199481.
Claims 32 and 34:
Khirallah et al. and Liu et al. disclose the claimed invention as to claims 1 and 16 above.
Furthermore, Khirallah et al. discloses regarding claims 32 and 34, the change to the activation status is an activation of the cell of the distributed unit (Khirallah et al.; Fig. 6; [0097]-[0099]).
Khirallah et al. fails to teach regarding claims 32 and 34, wherein the activation of the cell of the distributed unit is based at least in part on a context of the cell stored at the central unit.
However, Centonza et al. discloses the gNB-CU will need to store (i.e. create) information about all the served cells signaled by the gNB-DU in order to be able to activate any of such cells at any point in time (Centonza et al.; [0036]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to store (i.e. create) information about the served cells signaled (e.g. s2; Khirallah et al.; Fig. 6) by the gNB-DU in the system of Khirallah et al., and Liu et al. as taught by Centonza et al. in order to be able to activate any of such cells at any point in time in the system.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments submitted on 12/15/20254 with respect to claims 1-2, 5, 6, 16, 18, 20, 21, 35-37, 40-43, and 47-52 have been considered but they are not persuasive.
Arguments:
Applicant still argued that Khirallah fails to teach “transmitting to a central unit associated with the distributed unit, including a request to change an activation status of a cell of the distributed unit, wherein the configuration update includes an indication that the distributed unit to change the activation status”.
Examiner’s response:
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Khirallah discloses the method wherein the gNB-DU generates and transmits a formatted “Configuration Update” message to the gNB-CU. The Configuration Update message includes the detection of LBT failures on the DL. Based on the detected LBT failures, the gNB-DU includes the instruction to delete the cells due to the LBT failures in the Configuration Update message. See ¶ [0098].
Applicant also fails to provide the type of “a user equipment (UE) context message”. No further discussion of the UE context message was made throughout the claims. However, Khirallah explains that a base station performs Listen-Before-Talk (LBT) communication with an item of user equipment (UE) via at least one cell. When the base station of the UE detects a failure associated with the LBT communication in at least one cell, the base station transmits a signaling message to another node (e.g., a central unit, a master node, a secondary node, or a core network node), the signaling message comprising information indicating that LBT failure has been detected. Thus, it would be reasonable to analyze that the signaling message transmitted within the gNB could be considered as a UE context message because the message is generated based on the LBT detection to communicate with the UE via a cell. See Khirallah’s Abstract and ¶ [0016].
Khirallah further states that once the affected cells are deactivated due to the LBT failures, the gNB-CU transmitted an appropriate Configuration Update Acknowledgement Message to the gNB-DU. The Acknowlegement message further includes an instruction of the gNB-DU 5D (and/or another gNB-DU 5D) to activate other cell(s) instead of (or in addition to) the serving cell(s) with the reported LBT failures. See ¶ [0099].
Arguments:
Applicant further argued that LIU does not disclose or suggest “wherein the request to change the activation status comprises a request to activate or deactivate the cell of the distributed unit in accordance with the distributed unit being in an energy saving mode…” as recited in amended claim 1.
Examiner’s response:
Examiner further disagrees. In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Khirallah already teaches transmitting a configuration update including the request to change an activation status of a cell, and receiving a configuration update ACK message on the configuration update.
The Office Action relies upon LIU reference to teach the method of indicating the distributed unit that is in an energy saving mode. LIU states that the fourth indication information is used to indicate energy saving state information of the IAB node. The IAB node includes an IAB-DU and an IAB-MT. Energy saving of the IAB node may be implemented in the following manner: The IAB-MT enters an inactive state, and the IAB-DU closes a cell served by the IAB-DU or a cell served by the IAB-DU enters a discontinuous transmission state, for example, a discontinuous transmission (DTX) state. See Liu’s ¶ [0248-0249]. It’d be reasonable to insert the instruction of energy saving mode of gNB-DU into the signaling message to communicate within the gNB of Khirallah’s figure 6 components.
The motivation of combining the two prior arts is not only to provide some beneficial effects include that an IAB node in an IAB network can obtain accurate configuration information but also ensure an improved operation of the IAB network.
The Prior art “LIU” teaches that the fourth indication information is used to indicate energy saving state information of the IAB node. The IAB node includes an IAB-DU and an IAB-MT. Energy saving of the IAB node may be implemented in the following manner: The IAB-MT enters an inactive state, and the IAB-DU closes a cell served by the IAB-DU or a cell served by the IAB-DU enters a discontinuous transmission state, for example, a discontinuous transmission (DTX) state.. The reason for the IAB-DU unit entering into a Discontinuous Transmission (DTX) mode (i.e., changing the activation mode) is to save Energy or Power of the serving IAB node. In other words, the IAB node saves Energy due to entering into DTX mode because the served cell sends only common information such as a system broadcast, a paging message, and a long-period SSB, and does not perform data transmission. Thus, the change of activation state is processed based on the Energy Saving Mode. See ¶ [0248]-[0250].
The updated prior-art “Byun” further states the method receiving the request to change message for the activation state. Byun’s Fig. 15 illustrates that, in step 1501, the CU may receive, from the DU, a first message including deactivation request (i.e., the request to change the activation state) for the DU just for the same reason of saving energy for DU unit as discussed by Liu. See Byun’s ¶ [0205] and Abstract.
In view of the above reasoning, the combined teaching of Khirallah, Liu and Byun successfully teach each and every limitation of the claimed elements. As a consequence, the combined teaching also renders the rest of the dependent claims. Thus, Examiner believes that all the rejections shall be sustained.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAI AUNG whose telephone number is (571)272-3507. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday, Alt Fridays, 7:30 AM- 5:00 PM (EST).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Noel Beharry can be reached on 571-270-5630. 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.
/SAI AUNG/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2416