DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This action is in response to applicant’s amendment/arguments filed on 11/2026. Claims 1-3, 7, 12, 15-17, 19 and 20 have been amended. Currently, claims 1-20 are pending. This action is made FINAL.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments/amendments with respect to amended claims 1, 17 and 19 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Response to Amendments
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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.
Claim(s) 1-8 and 13-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang et al. (US 20210377903 A1) in view of Trujillo (US 20130336430 A1).
Consider claim 1, Yang discloses a method, comprising: receiving, by a system comprising a processor, a request to select, for deployment of hub equipment on a network, between site locations comprising a first site location and a second site location (read as system 100 comprising processor 160 that can facilitate sustaining a cellular network in a given geographic area by identifying candidate sites (i.e. first and second candidate site locations, and more) for placement of additional network components such as multiple antenna, figure 1, par [0019]-[0020] and [0024]), wherein the network comprises a fronthaul segment connected via backhaul connection equipment at a backhaul location to a core network segment (read as network system comprising a segment (antennas (remote radio units) to backhaul) connected via backhaul connection element at its location to the core network, par [0020]-[0024], [0033], [0042]-[0043] and [0104]), and wherein the deployment of the hub equipment is to connect, in the fronthaul segment, radio unit equipment that comprises a radio unit of the network at a radio location to the backhaul connection equipment (read as the connection between such as remote radio units (with the antennas) at the radio location and the backhaul connection equipment, which is part of the fronthaul and is aligned with how the hub equipment connects to radio units to the network, par [0019]-[0024], [0033] and [0104]);
based on the request, the radio location, and the backhaul location, comparing, by the system, a characteristic of the first site location and the second site location, resulting in a comparison of site locations (read as the siting selection component 124 that can facilitate for system 100 include selecting, by the device, a spatial arrangement in relation to the first antenna, of a subset of the group of geographic siting locations, with a selected spatial arrangement including an arrangement to maintain the predicted resource usage in the condition, which describes compares geographic siting location based on predicted resource usage/characteristic figures 3A to 4B, par [0028]-[0034] and [0042]-[0043]); and
responding, by the system, to the request with a selected site location that was selected based on a result of the comparing, wherein the selected site location is either the first site location or the second site location (read as the system selects optimal site (i.e. first or second candidate site location) based on resource requirements and predicted results after sites comparisons, figures 3A to 4B, par [0029]-[0034] and [0042]-[0043]).
However, Yang discloses the claimed invention above and identifying candidate sites for placement of additional network components (par [0019]) but does not disclose the hub equipment that comprises distributed unit equipment, and wherein the hub equipment is distinct from the radio unit equipment.
Nonetheless, Trujillo discloses a distributed unit (DU) 204 distinct from remote radio unit (RRU) 202, arranged within a radio access network 120 connected to core network 130, and further discloses implementing the DU 204 at a cell site or a local data center based on latency requirements, thereby teaching deployment of hub equipment (DU) 204 within a fronthaul architecture connecting radio units to core network, par [0059]-[0061], [0035], [0032] and [0075].
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the Trujillo’s distributed unit (DU) 204 fronthaul architecture into Yang’s geographic siting selection methodology in order to apply Yang’s predicted resource usage comparison technique to the placement of DU 204 at the candidate deployment locations (cell site vs local data center), thereby optimizing DU hub deployment within a 5G RAN while improving latency performance and network resource utilization.
Consider claim 2, as applied to claim 1 above, Yang discloses wherein the radio unit equipment comprises a remote radio unit that is remote from the system (read as the remote radio units of the system, par [0015]).
Consider claim 3, as applied to claim 1 above, Yang discloses wherein the hub equipment comprises distributed unit equipment, and wherein the distributed unit equipment is connected to the backhaul connection equipment via central unit equipment (read as the distribution network and the core node, par [0104]).
Consider claim 4, as applied to claim 3 above, Yang discloses wherein the central unit equipment is to be deployed with the hub equipment at the selected site location (read as the distribution network and the core node on the selected site location, figures 3A to 4B, par [0029]-[0034] and [0042]-[0043]).
Consider claim 5, as applied to claim 3 above, Yang discloses wherein the central unit equipment was deployed at a central unit location different from the site locations, wherein the characteristic further comprises an estimated cost representative of respective estimated costs of connecting the first site location and the second site location to the central unit equipment, and wherein the estimated costs are determined relative to the central unit location (read as an estimated cost determined to be associated with locating an antenna at a geographic location of the available group of geographic locations; in variations to this implementation, the estimated cost of locating the antenna can include different factors, e.g., as discussed with FIG. 3 below, a distance to a connection to a backhaul network, par [0033]).
Consider claim 6, as applied to claim 3 above, Yang discloses wherein a segment connecting the distributed unit equipment to the central unit equipment comprises a midhaul segment linking the fronthaul segment to the backhaul connection equipment (read as any segment can be midhaul segment between the antennas (part of fronthaul) and the backhaul, par [0019]-[0024], [0033] and [0104]).
Consider claim 7, as applied to claim 3 above, Yang discloses wherein the central unit equipment performs functions comprising a mobile core user plane function (read as the plane functionalities, par [0014]).
Consider claim 8, as applied to claim 3 above, Yang discloses wherein the central unit equipment comprises radio access network intelligent controller equipment (read as artificial intelligence component 128, par [0020]).
Consider claim 13, as applied to claim 1 above, Yang discloses wherein the hub equipment is first hub equipment location (read as system 100 comprising processor 160 that can facilitate sustaining a cellular network in a given geographic area by identifying candidate sites (i.e. first and second candidate site locations) for placement of additional network components such as multiple antenna, figure 1, par [0019]-[0020] and [0024]), wherein the radio unit equipment is first radio unit equipment (read as the remote radio units of the system, par [0015]), and wherein the characteristic further comprises respective estimates, for respective site locations, of third site locations for second hub equipment determined to be implicated to connect second radio unit equipment to the backhaul connection equipment (read as once the coverage area 355 is divided into geographic bins, the bins can be analyzed based on factors including, but not limited to, current spectrum-exhaustion, coverage, quality, capacity, and clutter; given the description herein, will appreciate that geographic bins can be qualified for clustering based on combination of characteristics that exceed a threshold, par [0042]).
Consider claim 14, as applied to claim 1 above, Yang discloses facilitating, by the system, deploying the hub equipment at the selected site location; and establishing, by the system, a virtual radio access network by linking functions of the radio unit equipment and the hub equipment (read as siting selection component 124 that can facilitate for system 100 include selecting, by the device, a spatial arrangement in relation to the first antenna, of a subset of the group of geographic siting locations, with a selected spatial arrangement including an arrangement to maintain the predicted resource usage in the condition, par [0032], [0042] and [0048]).
Consider claim 15, as applied to claim 1 above, Yang discloses wherein the request further comprises a request to select a redundant site location for deployment of redundant hub equipment for the hub equipment, and wherein the request further specifies selecting from among the first site location, the second site location, and a third site location for the deployment of the redundant hub reequipment (read as the different deployments for the different site locations, figure 1, par [0019]-[0020] and [0024]).
Consider claim 16, as applied to claim 1 above, Yang discloses wherein the hub equipment comprises distributed unit equipment implemented in accordance with at least a fifth generation communication network protocol (read as 5G, par [0013] and [0018]).
Consider claim 17, Yang discloses a system, comprising: a processor; and a memory that stores executable instructions that, when executed by the processor, facilitate performance of operations, comprising: identifying candidate locations for deployment of a group of distributed unit hub equipment within a network enabling coverage that spans a geographic area (read as system 100 comprising memory 165 and processor 160 that can facilitate sustaining a cellular network in a given geographic area by identifying candidate sites (i.e. first and second candidate site locations, and more) for placement of additional network components such as multiple antenna, figure 1, par [0019]-[0020] and [0024]), wherein the network comprises remote radio access equipment to be connected to core network equipment via the group of distributed unit hub equipment deployed in selected locations of the candidate locations (read as the siting selection component 124 that can facilitate for system 100 include selecting, by the device, a spatial arrangement in relation to the first antenna, of a subset of the group of geographic siting locations, with a selected spatial arrangement including an arrangement to maintain the predicted resource usage in the condition, which describes compares geographic siting location based on predicted resource usage/characteristic figures 3A to 4B, par [0028]-[0034] and [0042]-[0043]); and receiving, from site selection equipment, a response to a request to select from the candidate locations according to a criterion based on respective locations of a group of remote radio access equipment (read as the siting selection component 124 that can facilitate for system 100 include selecting, by the device, a spatial arrangement in relation to the first antenna, of a subset of the group of geographic siting locations, with a selected spatial arrangement including an arrangement to maintain the predicted resource usage in the condition, which describes compares geographic siting location based on predicted resource usage/characteristic figures 3A to 4B, par [0028]-[0034] and [0042]-[0043]), comprising the remote radio access equipment, and a core location corresponding to the core network equipment (read as network system comprising a segment (antennas (remote radio units) to backhaul) connected via backhaul connection element at its location to the core network, par [0020]-[0024], [0033], [0042]-[0043] and [0104]), the response comprising the selected locations for the deployment of the group of distributed unit hub equipment (read as the system selects optimal sites based on resource requirements and predicted results after sites comparisons, figures 3A to 4B, par [0029]-[0034] and [0042]-[0043]).
However, Yang discloses the claimed invention above and identifying candidate sites for placement of additional network components (par [0019]) but does not disclose wherein the group of distributed unit hub equipment is distinct from the group of remote radio access equipment.
Nonetheless, Trujillo discloses a distributed unit (DU) 204 distinct from remote radio unit (RRU) 202, arranged within a radio access network 120 connected to core network 130, and further discloses implementing the DU 204 at a cell site or a local data center based on latency requirements, thereby teaching deployment of hub equipment (DU) within a fronthaul architecture connecting radio units to core network, par [0059]-[0061], [0035], [0032] and [0075].
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the Trujillo’s distributed unit (DU) 204 fronthaul architecture into Yang’s geographic siting selection methodology in order to apply Yang’s predicted resource usage comparison technique to the placement of DU 204 at the candidate deployment locations (cell site vs local data center), thereby optimizing DU hub deployment within a 5G RAN while improving latency performance and network resource utilization.
Consider claim 18, as applied to claim 17 above, Yang discloses wherein the criterion is further based on performance requirements for the group of distributed unit hub equipment deployed at the selected locations (read as the siting selection component 124 that can facilitate for system 100 include selecting, by the device, a spatial arrangement in relation to the first antenna, of a subset of the group of geographic siting locations, with a selected spatial arrangement including an arrangement to maintain the predicted resource usage in the condition, which describes compares geographic siting location based on predicted resource usage/characteristic figures 3A to 4B, par [0028]-[0034] and [0042]-[0043])
Consider claim 19, Yang discloses a non-transitory machine-readable medium, comprising executable instructions that, when executed by a processor of a site selection device, facilitate performance of operations, comprising: identifying a group of access point equipment that comprises a plurality of radio units for combination with edge equipment to establish a virtual radio access network (read as system 100 comprising processor 160 that can facilitate sustaining a cellular network in a given geographic area by identifying candidate sites (i.e. first and second candidate site locations, and more) for placement of additional network components such as multiple antennas, figure 1, par [0019]-[0020] and [0024]); predicting respective levels of performance of the virtual radio access network based on respective locations of the group of access point equipment and respective candidate locations for deployment of the edge equipment (read as the siting selection component 124 that can facilitate for system 100 include selecting, by the device, a spatial arrangement in relation to the first antenna, of a subset of the group of geographic siting locations, with a selected spatial arrangement including an arrangement to maintain the predicted resource usage in the condition, which describes compares geographic siting location based on predicted resource usage/characteristic figures 3A to 4B, par [0028]-[0034] and [0042]-[0043]); and selecting deployment locations from the respective candidate locations for which corresponding levels of performance, of the respective levels of performance of the virtual radio access network, exceed a threshold level of performance (read as the system selects optimal sites based on resource requirements and predicted results after sites comparisons, figures 3A to 4B, par [0029]-[0034] and [0042]-[0043]).
However, Yang discloses the claimed invention above and identifying candidate sites for placement of additional network components (par [0019]) but does not disclose edge equipment that comprises distributed unit reequipment and wherein the edge equipment is distinct from the group of access point equipment
Nonetheless, Trujillo discloses a distributed unit (DU) 204 distinct from remote radio unit (RRU) 202, arranged within a radio access network 120 connected to core network 130, and further discloses implementing the DU 204 at a cell site or a local data center based on latency requirements, thereby teaching deployment of hub equipment (DU) 204 within a fronthaul architecture connecting radio units to core network, par [0059]-[0061], [0035], [0032] and [0075].
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the Trujillo’s distributed unit (DU) 204 fronthaul architecture into Yang’s geographic siting selection methodology in order to apply Yang’s predicted resource usage comparison technique to the placement of DU 204 at the candidate deployment locations (cell site vs local data center), thereby optimizing DU hub deployment within a 5G RAN while improving latency performance and network resource utilization.
Consider claim 20, as applied to claim 19 above, Yang discloses wherein selecting the deployment locations is further based on a predicted cost determined based on respective predicted costs of the deployment and maintenance of the edge equipment at the respective candidate locations (read as an estimated cost determined to be associated with locating an antenna at a geographic location of the available group of geographic locations; in variations to this implementation, the estimated cost of locating the antenna can include different factors, e.g., as discussed with FIG. 3 below, a distance to a connection to a backhaul network, par [0033]).
Claims 9-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang et al. (US 20210377903 A1) in view of Trujillo (US 20130336430 A1), and in further view of Glennon et al. (US 20200112888 A1).
Consider claim 9, as applied to claim 1 above, Yang, as modified by Trujillo, discloses wherein the characteristic comprises a factor/characteristic value determined based on respective factors/characteristics corresponding to a first estimated factor/characteristic of a first communication between the first site location and the radio unit equipment and a second estimated factor/characteristic of a second communication between the second site location and the radio unit equipment (read as the siting selection component 124 that can facilitate for system 100 include selecting, by the device, a spatial arrangement in relation to the first antenna, of a subset of the group of geographic siting locations, with a selected spatial arrangement including an arrangement to maintain the predicted resource usage in the condition, which describes compares geographic siting location based on predicted resource usage/characteristic figures 3A to 4B, par [0028]-[0034] and [0042]-[0043]) but does not specifically disclose the factor/characteristic as latency.
Nonetheless, in related art, Glennon discloses a radio access system comprising node deployment, which the latency is being considered (minimized) to obtain desirable performance, par [0006].
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Glennon into the teachings of Yang, as modified by Trujillo, for the purpose of using latency as one of the factor/characteristic in selecting site location in order to obtain desirable performance.
Consider claim 10, as applied to claim 9 above, Yang, as modified by Trujillo and Glennon, discloses wherein the first estimated latency is determined based on a first factor comprising a first distance corresponding to a first connection distance of a first connection between the radio location and the first site location, and wherein the second estimated latency is determined based on a second factor comprising a second distance corresponding to a second connection distance of a second connection between the radio location and the second site location (read as one way that one or more embodiments can assess cost of siting equipment is by determining a distance from the site to a backhaul connection for operation of the microcell; in this example, the backhaul connections are fiber backhaul lines 320A-B, but other types of backhaul connections can be evaluated by one or more embodiments; thus, when selecting site 310C for potential placement of a microcell, to augment the performance (i.e. latency) of coverage area 355, the distance from site 310C to fiber backhaul 320A can be considered, par [0033] and [0042]).
Consider claim 11, as applied to claim 10 above, Yang, as modified by Trujillo and Glennon, discloses wherein the characteristic further comprises an estimated cost representative of respective estimated costs, respectively determined based on the first distance, for connecting the hub equipment at the first site location to the radio unit equipment and determined based on the second distance, for connecting the hub equipment at the second site location to the radio unit equipment (read as one or more embodiments can assess sites 310A-G based on a cost of placing microcell equipment at a particular site; ... in addition, by using this measurement as an indication of the cost of deployment, other costs of deployment can be used for comparison, e.g., site 310B is more distant than site 310C from fiber backhauls 320A-B, and this can be used to favor site 310C over 310B, par [0033] and [0042]).
Claim 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang et al. (US 20210377903 A1) in view of Trujillo (US 20130336430 A1), and in further view of Glennon et al. (US 20200112888 A1), and in further view of Parkin (US 20200044734 A1).
Consider claim 12, as applied to claim 10 above, Yang, as modified by Trujillo and Glennon, discloses wherein at least one of the first connection or the second connection comprises a fiber optic connection (read as the backhaul connections are fiber backhaul lines 320A-B, par [0042]) but does not specifically disclose wherein the latency value is further determined based on a refractive index of the fiber optic connection.
Nonetheless, Parkin discloses lower latency corresponds to a lower refractive index of the transmission medium of the fiber and a higher speed for the transmission of light through the fiber, par [0005].
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Parkin into the teachings of Yang, as modified by Trujillo and Glennon, for the purpose of taking the refractive index of the fiber into consideration while determining the latency as the refractive index of the fiber into consideration would directly affect the latency of the transmission.
Conclusion
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 Junpeng Chen whose telephone number is (571) 270-1112. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Thursday, 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m., EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, Applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Anthony S Addy can be reached on 571-272-7795. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of 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).
/Junpeng Chen/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2645