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 request of Continued Examination (RCE) filed on 05/20/2026 on amendments/arguments filed on 05/20/2026. Claim 15 has been canceled. Claim 21 has been added. Claims 1, 17 and 19 have been amended. Currently, claims 1-14 and 16-21 are pending for consideration.
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.
Claims 1-4, 9-11, 13, 14 and 16-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guan et al. (US 20190320324 A1) in view of Noriega (US 20210377801 A1).
Consider claim 1, Guan discloses a method (read as a method in which server 109 implements the edge cloud (EC) network design system, obtains first information and scenario setting information, process that information through database 151 and math programming model 153, and determines EC network design information 154 with selected location of EC nodes and BS to EC node assignment, figures 1-4, par [0020]-[0021], [0039] and [0042]), comprising:
receiving, by a system comprising a processor, a request to select, for a deployment of hub equipment on a network, between site locations comprising a first site location and a second site location, wherein the network comprises a fiber transport network, wherein the deployment of the hub equipment is to connect, wireless base stations to selected EC nodes, wherein the hub equipment is distinct from wireless base station equipment, wherein the request further comprises a request to select a redundant site location for a deployment of redundant hub equipment for the hub equipment, and wherein the request further specifies selecting from among the first site location and the second site location for the deployment of the redundant hub equipment (read as server 109 with processor 302 receiving design triggers and scenario setting information for math programming model 153 to select from candidate EC (CEC) nodes for an EC network design; the selected EC node is the hub-side site, wireless base stations provide the radio-side sites, and reliability requirements 149 require at least two EC nodes within latency limits, so one EC node and a different redundant EC node are selected from the candidate CEC locations, including the first CEC location and second CEC location when those are the candidate sites under consideration, figures 1-3 and 6, par [0016]-[0017], [0020]-[0021], [0026], [0035] and [0050]-[0053]);
based on the request, the radio location, and the backhaul side network location information, comparing, by the system, a characteristic of the first site location and the second site location, resulting in a comparison of the site locations (read as comparing first and second CEC locations by applying Y variables for candidate EC nodes, X variables for BS to CEC pairs, and objective and constraint calculations using Cost-EC, Cost per route, route length, latency limit, capacity, traffic coverage and reliability requirements; these calculations uses base station locations, CEC or central office locations, and central office distance information in the transport network, which corresponds to the claimed radio location and backhaul location site comparison, figures 1 and 3, par [0019], [0023]-[0029], [0031]-[0036] and [0048]-[0050]); 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 for the deployment of the hub equipment, and wherein the redundant hub equipment is to be deployed at a different site location that is distinct from the selected site location (read as responding with location of EC nodes, GPS location information for selected central office EC nodes and BS to EC node assignment after math programming model 153 evaluates the candidate EC nodes; the redundancy requirement selects at least two different EC nodes within the latency limit for a BS, which provides a selected EC location and a distinct redundant EC location, figures 3 and 4, par [0028], [0035], [0039], [0050]-[0051] and [0080]).
However, Guan discloses the claimed invention above with EC node vRAN placement with redundancy (figures 1-3, par [0015], [0017], [0021], [0026] and [0035]) but does not disclose hub equipment that comprises distributed unit equipment, radio unit equipment comprising a radio unit connected through a fronthaul segment; a backhaul path from the hub equipment toward a core network segment, and redundant hub implementation using distributed unit hub resources.
Nonetheless, Noriega discloses BBU Pool design in which RUs 210 connected by eCPRI fronthaul to hub 208 BBU Pool 502, where BBU in Pool 300 includes DU pooling component 408 and CU component 404 and there BBUs 300a and 300b are organized in B-Pods with DU resources; the BBU side connects by backhaul toward the virtual evolved packet core, and while redundant links and redundant front plane switch component 406 support availability of the hub implementation, figures 2, 3, 5 and 6, par [0061]-[0062], [0065], [0067], [0072]-[0074] and [0076].
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 Noriega into the teachings of Guan, to configure Guan’s selected and redundant EC node locations using Noriega’s BBU Pool distributed unit hub design, in order to allow Guan’s EC location model to place vRAN hubs that connect radio units over fronthaul and allocate BBU and DU resources among active radio units while reducing unused resources from inactive radio units (see par [0044] and [0072] of Noriega).
Consider claim 2, as applied to claim 1 above, Guan, as modified by Noriega, discloses wherein the radio unit is remote from the system (read as server 109and network device 300 as edge cloud network design system, while wireless base stations 110-116 are separated radio side network elements, figures 1, 3 and 6, par [0019]-[0021] and [0052]-[0053]).
Consider claim 3, as applied to claim 1 above, Guan, as modified by Noriega, discloses the claimed invention above with selected EC node traffic processing (figures 1 and 4, par [0016]-[0017] and [0046]) but does not specifically disclose wherein the distributed unit equipment is connected to the backhaul connection equipment via central unit equipment.
Nonetheless, Noriega further discloses BBU 300 with CU component 404 and DU pooling component 408; packet data arrives through a backhaul connection, is handled with a centralized unit resource, and is then sent through a selected distributed unit device to a radio device, with CU to DU F1 forwarding tables used inside the B-Pd, figures, 3, 4 and 6, par [0065], [0067] and [0076].
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 Noriega into the teachings of Guan, which modified by Noriega, to configure the selected EC node traffic processing using Noriega’s CU-DU BBU pooling, in order to allow the selected EC site to route backhaul traffic through CU resource allocated before DU radio processing (see par [0046] and [0067 of Noriega).
Consider claim 4, as applied to claim 3 above, Guan, as modified by Noriega, discloses the claimed invention above with selected EC node deployment (figures 3 and 4, par [0028] and [0029]) wherein the central unit equipment is to be deployed with the hub equipment at the selected site location.
Nonetheless, Noriega further discloses hub 208 BBU Pool 52 at a hub location, where BBUs 300a and 300b are organized in B-Pods that include DU pooling component 408 and CU component 404, which corresponds the central unit resources deployed with hub resources at the same selected hub location, figure 5, par [0072] and [0074].
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 Noriega into the teachings of Guan, which modified by Noriega, to configure the selected EC node deployment using Noriega’s B-Pod CU and DU resources technique, in order to provide centralized baseband processing at the selected hub location for many radio sites.
Consider claim 9, as applied to claim 1 above, Guan, as modified by Noriega, discloses wherein the characteristic comprises a latency value determined based on respective latencies corresponding to a first estimated latency of a first communication between the first site location and the radio unit equipment and a second estimated latency of a second communication between the second site location and the radio unit equipment (read as the math programming model 153 using base station locations, candidate node locations, network topology data 43, latency requirements 148, route length, latency limit and NBR candidate EC nodes within latency limits for each BS; the model therefore evaluates latency for communications between teach candidate CEC location and the radio side BS locations, including the first and second candidate site communication, figure 3, par [0023]-[0027], [0036] and [0048]-[0049]).
Consider claim 10, as applied to claim 9 above, Guan, as modified by Noriega, 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 9read as calculating BS to CEC path distance from the BS to wire center distance and the wire center to CEC distance, then using route length with the latency limit in math programming model 153, which corresponds to distance driven latency estimates for the first and second candidate CED paths, figures 1 and 3, par [0019], [0027], [0036] and [0049]).
Consider claim 11, as applied to claim 10 above, Guan, as modified by Noriega, 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 cost data 145, Cost per route for connecting each BS to each CEC, CostEC for building the EC at the candidate site, and an objective function minimizing those costs; the model therefore evaluates the cost of connecting each candidate EC site to the radio side BS using the route path for that candidate, figure 3, par [0025], [0027], [0029] and [0031]).
Consider claim 13, as applied to claim 1 above, Guan, as modified by Noriega, discloses wherein the hub equipment is first hub equipment, wherein the radio unit equipment is first radio unit equipment, 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 math programming 153 evaluating multiple BSs, multiple CEC locations, Y selections for EC nodes, and X assignments for each BS to selected EC nodes; this teaches estimates for additional CEC locations implicated by additional BS traffic and redundancy needs in the same network design, figures 3-5B, par [0027]-[0029], [0035], [0039] and [0050]-[0051]).
Consider claim 14, as applied to claim 1 above, Guan, as modified by Noriega, discloses facilitating, by the system, deploying the hub equipment at the selected site location (read as location of EC nodes and then building or remotely turning on compute, storage and network capacity at the chosen CEC node, figures 1, 3 and 4, par [0016], [0019] and [0045]); and establishing, by the system, a virtual radio access network by linking functions of BS functions and EC nodes (read as establishing 5G vRAN by moving some BS functions to a shared EC node and processing BS traffic at the EC node, which corresponds to lining radio side and hub side functions, figure 1, par [0015] and [0017]) but does not specifically disclose establishing a virtual radio access network by linking functions of radio unit equipment and distributed unit hub equipment.
Nonetheless, Noriega further discloses RUs 210 lined by eCPRI fronthaul to hub 208 BBU Pool 502, where BBU in Pool 300 includes DU pooling component 408 and CU component 404, which corresponds to establishing the vRAN by connecting remote radio side functions with the deployed distributed unit hub group, figures 2, 3 and 5, par [0061]-[0062], [0065], [0072] and [0074].
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 Noriega into the teachings of Guan, which modified by Noriega, to configure Guan’s selected EC node deployment using Noriega’s DU hub linking, in order to deploy the selected EC sites as distributed unit vRAN hubs for remote radio units (see par [0062] and [0072] of Noriega).
Consider claim 16, as applied to claim 1 above, Guan, as modified by Noriega, discloses wherein the hub equipment comprises the distributed unit equipment implemented in accordance with at least a fifth generation communication network protocol (read as the 5G edge cloud design in which BS functions are moved to a shared EC node, which corresponds to the fifth generation protocol aspect of the selected distributed unit hub deployment, figure 1, par [0003] and [0015]).
Consider claim 17, Guan discloses system (read as system through server 109 and network device 300, which implement the edge cloud (EC) network design system used to determine location of EC nodes and BS to EC node assignment, figures 1, 3, 4 and 6, par [0020]-[0021], [0039] and [0052]), comprising:
a processor; and a memory that stores executable instructions that, when executed by the processor, facilitate performance of operations (read as network 300 with processor 302 and memory 304, and also the computer system 500 with processor 504, main memory 506 and stored instruction 526, which execute the edge cloud network design operations, figures 6 and 7, par [0052]-[0053] and [0061]-[0063]), the operations comprising:
identifying candidate locations for a deployment of a group of hub equipment within a network enabling a coverage that spans a geographic area, wherein the network comprises remote radio access equipment to be connected to core network equipment via the group of hub equipment deployed in selected locations of the candidate locations (read as identifying candidate EC (CEC) locations from central offices and other network nodes, choosing selected EC nodes for a service area using traffic coverage and other requirements, and assigning wireless base station to those EC nodes within a telecommunications network that includes RAN 604 and core network 606; the selected EC nodes corresponds to hub equipment locations, while the wireless base stations correspond to the remote radio access equipment, figures 1, 3, 4 and 8, par [0016], [0019], [0039], [0051], [0063]-[0065], [0071] and [0080]) ; 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, comprising the remote radio access equipment, and a core location corresponding to the core network equipment, the response comprising the selected locations for the deployment of the group of hub equipment, wherein the group of hub equipment is distinct from the group of remote radio access equipment, wherein the request includes a request to select a redundant site location for a deployment of a redundant hub equipment for one or more of the group of hub equipment, wherein the request further specifies selecting from among the candidate locations for the redundant hub equipment, and wherein the response further comprises the redundant site location (read as server 109 and math programming model 153 generating EC network design information 154 that includes location of EC nodes, GPS location information for selected central office EC nodes and BS to EC node assignment, using base station locations, central office or CEC locations, topology, route length, latency, coverage, capacity and reliability requirements 149; the wireless base stations are separate (i.e. distinct) from selected EC nodes, and the reliability requirement selects redundant EC locations from the same CEC set and includes those redundant EC locations in the output, figures 1-4, par [0021], [0026]-[0027], [0035], [0039], [0050]-[0051] and [0080]).
However, Guan discloses the claimed invention above and selected EC locations with redundancy (figures 1-4, par [0021], [[26], [0035] and [0039]) but does not specifically disclose the selected hub group and redundant hub equipment configured as distributed unit hub equipment through which remote access equipment connects to the core network equipment, while remaining distinct from the remote radio access equipment.
Nonetheless, Noriega discloses BBU Pool design in which RUs 210 connected by eCPRI fronthaul to hub 208 BBU Pool 502, where BBU in Pool 300 includes DU pooling component 408 and CU component 404 and there BBUs 300a and 300b are organized in B-Pods with DU resources; the BBU side connects by backhaul toward the virtual evolved packet core, and while redundant links and redundant front plane switch component 406 support availability of the hub implementation, figures 2, 3, 5 and 6, par [0061]-[0062], [0065], [0067], [0072]-[0074] and [0076].
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 Noriega into the teachings of Guan, to configure Guan’s selected and redundant EC node locations using Noriega’s BBU Pool distributed unit hub design, in order to allow Guan’s EC location model to place vRAN hubs that connect radio units over fronthaul and allocate BBU and DU resources among active radio units while reducing unused resources from inactive radio units (see par [0044] and [0072] of Noriega).
Consider claim 18, as applied to claim 17 above, Guan, as modified by Noriega, discloses wherein the criterion is further based on performance requirements for the group of hub equipment deployed at the selected locations (read as math programing model 153 selecting EC nodes using latency requirements 148, reliability requirements 149, EC capacity, traffic coverage and transport link capacity, which corresponds to performance criteria for selected hub group, figure 3, par [0026]-[0027], [0033]-[0037] and [0050]) but does not specifically disclose performance requirements for the group of distributed unit hub equipment deployed at the selected locations.
Nonetheless, Noriega further discloses distributed unit (DU) pooling component 408 and load balancing component 410 tracking PRB load, radio scheduler load, active users and packets per second for DU pool, and further disclose B-Pod load balancing and availability for hub 208 BBU Pool 502, which corresponds to performance requirements for the distributed unit hub group, figures 3 and 5, par [0064]-[0067] and [0072]-[0074].
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 further incorporate the teachings of Noriega into the teachings of Guan, which modified by Noriega, to configure Guan’s performance driven EC selection using Noriega’s DU hub performance metric, in order to select hub locations that support DU radio load and availability needs (see par [0067] and [0073] of Noriega).
Consider claim 19, Guan 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 (read as memory 304 and tangible computer readable storage medium 524 storing executable instructions 526, executed by processor 302 or processor 504, to operate server 109, and the edge cloud network design system that selects edge cloud (EC) node locations and BS assignment, figures 2, 3, 6 and 7, par [0021], [0039], [0053], [0057] and [0062]), the operations comprising:
identifying a group of access point equipment s for combination with edge equipment to establish a virtual radio access network, wherein the edge equipment is distinct from the group of access point equipment (read as identifying wireless base stations as the access side and combining BS functions with selected EC nodes for vRAN operation, while the candidate EC nodes remain separate from the wireless base stations in the network design mode, figures 1, 3 and 8, par [0003], [0015], [0019], [0027 and [0064]-[0065]);
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 a deployment of the edge equipment (read as calculating EC design performance using base station locations, CEC locations, route length, latency limit, capacity, traffic coverage, reliability requirments, CostEC and Cost per route in math programming model 153, so each candidate EC deployment is evaluated using access side and candidate EC location data, figure 3, par [0023], [0027], [0031]-[0036]); 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, wherein the deployment locations include a redundant deployment location for a redundant edge equipment for one or more of the edge equipment (read as selecting EC deployment locations by setting Y for candidate EC nodes and outputting locations of EC locations, where the selected EC locations satisfy threshold type requirement such as covered traffic larger than or equal to a required percentage, route length within a latency limit and at least N EC nodes within latency limits for each BS, including redundant EC location, figures 2-4, par [0026]-[0028] and [0034]-[0036]). However, Guan discloses the claimed invention above with vRAN EC selection with redundant EC locations (figures 1, 3 and 4, par [0015], [0023], [0027], [0034]-[0035 and [0039]) but does not specifically disclose access point equipment comprising a plurality of radio units; edge equipment comprising distributed units equipment; and a redundant deployment location for redundant distributed unit equipment.
Nonetheless, Noriega discloses BBU Pool design in which RUs 210 connected by eCPRI fronthaul to hub 208 BBU Pool 502, where BBU in Pool 300 includes DU pooling component 408 and CU component 404 and there BBUs 300a and 300b are organized in B-Pods with DU resources; the BBU side connects by backhaul toward the virtual evolved packet core, and while redundant links and redundant front plane switch component 406 support availability of the hub implementation, figures 2, 3, 5 and 6, par [0061]-[0062], [0065], [0067], [0072]-[0074] and [0076].
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 Noriega into the teachings of Guan, to configure Guan’s selected and redundant EC node locations using Noriega’s BBU Pool distributed unit hub design, in order to allow Guan’s EC location model to place vRAN hubs that connect radio units over fronthaul and allocate BBU and DU resources among active radio units while reducing unused resources from inactive radio units (see par [0044] and [0072] of Noriega).
Consider claim 20, as applied to claim 19 above, Guan, as modified by Noriega, discloses wherein the selecting the deployment locations is further based on a predicted cost determined based on respective predicted costs of the deployment and a maintenance of the edge equipment at the respective candidate locations (read as selecting EC deployment locations using cost data 145, EC capital, transport cost, CostEC, Cost per route, investment expenses and ongoing operation cost such as power and maintenance; the cost teachings are applied to hub 208 BBU Pool 502 edge equipment with DU resources, figures 3 and 4, par [0025], [0028]-[0029], [0031] and [0039] of Guan, figures 3 and 5, par [0065] and [0072] of Noriega).
Consider claim 21, as applied to claim 17 above, Guan, as modified by Noriega, discloses wherein the operations further comprise: facilitating deploying the group of hub equipment at the selected locations for the deployment of the group of hub equipment (read as outputting selected location of EC nodes and including computer, storage and network capacity at selected CEC nodes, which corresponds to facilitating deployment of the selected hub group at the selected location, figures 3 and 4, par [0016], [0039] and [0045]); and establishing a virtual radio access network by linking functions of the remote radio access equipment and the group of hub equipment (read as establishing a 5G vRAN by moving some BS functions to shared EC nodes, assigning BSs to EC nodes and processing BS traffic at the EC nodes, which corresponds to linking radio side and hub side functions, figures 1, 3 and 4, par [0015], [0017] and [0039]) but does not specifically disclose the distributed unit of the deployed hub group, and establishing the virtual radio access network by linking functions of the remote radio access equipment and the group of the distributed unit hub equipment.
Nonetheless, Noriega further discloses RUs 210 lined by eCPRI fronthaul to hub 208 BBU Pool 502, where BBU in Pool 300 includes DU pooling component 408 and CU component 404, which corresponds to establishing the vRAN by connecting remote radio side functions with the deployed distributed unit hub group, figures 2, 3 and 5, par [0061]-[0062], [0065], [0072] and [0074].
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 Noriega into the teachings of Guan, which modified by Noriega, to configure Guan’s selected EC node deployment using Noriega’s DU hub linking, in order to deploy the selected EC sites as distributed unit vRAN hubs for remote radio units (see par [0062] and [0072] of Noriega).
Claims 5-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guan et al. (US 20190320324 A1) in view of Noriega (US 20210377801 A1), and in further view of Trujillo et al. (US 20230336439 A1).
Consider claim 5, as applied to claim 3 above, Guan, as modified by Noriega, 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 network equipment, and wherein the estimated costs are determined relative to network locations (read as math programming model 153 using network topology data 143, cost data 145, transport cost of candidate node routes, shortest CEC path data 147, CostEC and Cost per route to compare candidate EC locations, which corresponds to estimated site-connection costs, figures 1, 3 and 4, par [0016], [0024]-[0027], [0031] and [0039]) but does not specifically disclose wherein the central unit equipment deployed at a central unit location different from the site locations, with the cost analysis applied to connecting the first site location and the second site location to the central unit equipment related to the central unit location.
Nonetheless, Trujillo discloses DU 204 or virtualized distributed unit (VDU) 210 at one site and corresponding CU-UP 216, CU-CP 214 or VCU 220 at a different data center in a hierarchy of LDC 304 and BEDC 306, and reginal data center 308, which corresponds to central unit equipment at a different central unit location from the distributed unit site locations, figures 2A and 3A, par [0084]-[0085], [0088] and [0104].
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 Trujillo into the teachings of Guan, which modified by Noriega, to configure the costed CEC routing using Trujillo’s separate DU and CU data center placement, in order to select hub sites while accounting for transport cost to a separate centralized unit site (see par [0088] and [0104] of Trujillo).
Consider claim 6, as applied to claim 3 above, Guan, as modified by Noriega, discloses the claimed invention above but does not specifically disclose 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.
Nonetheless, Trujillo discloses RRUs 202 connected to Dus by fronthaul interface 203, Dus controlled by CU through midhaul F1 interface, and a backhaul transport network using the N3 interface toward UPF 132, which corresponds to fronthaul to midhaul to backhaul segmentation, figures 2A and 3A, par [0085]-[0086] and [0107]).
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 Trujillo into the teachings of Guan, which modified by Noriega, to configure the DU and CU hub connection using Trujillo’s fronthaul, midhaul and backhaul segmentation, in order to provide clear RU-to-DU and DU-to-CU separation in the selected vRAN hub deployment (see par [0085]-[0086] of Trujillo).
Consider claim 7, as applied to claim 3 above, Guan, as modified by Noriega, discloses the claimed invention above with wherein the EC node performs traffic processing (read as selected EC nodes processing BS traffic after the CEC node is chosen and built with compute, storage and networking capacity, figures 1 and 4, par [0016]-[0017] and [0046]) but does not specifically disclose wherein the central unit equipment performs at least one function comprising a mobile core user plane function.
Nonetheless, Trujillo discloses VCU 220 and UPF 132 running in the same edge or local data center, with UPF 132 performing pack processing, routing, forwarding, QoS handling and PDU session management; which supports central unit equipment configured at the same processing location to include mobile core user plane processing, figures 1A, 1B and 3A, par [0047], [0068], [0104] and [0107].
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 Trujillo into the teachings of Guan, which modified by Noriega, to configure the CU edge processing using Trujillo’s VCU and UPF placement, in order to reduce backhaul transport burden when user plane processing is placed closer to the RAN edge (see par [0107] of Trujillo).
Consider claim 8, as applied to claim 3 above, Guan, as modified by Noriega, discloses the claimed invention above with wherein the EC node provides edge cloud network processing (read as selected EC nodes with compute, storage and networking capacity and design outputs identifying location of EC nodes and BS to EC node assignment, figures 1, 3 and 4, par [0016], [0020] and [0039]) but does not specifically disclose wherein the central unit equipment comprises radio access network intelligent controller equipment.
Nonetheless, Trujillo discloses RAN intelligent controller 230, VCU 220 and VDU 210 as software-level components running on common hardware-level component, with RIC 230 connected through the E2 interface to CU-CP 214 and CU-UP 216, which provides RIC equipment in the central unit equipment environment, figures 2A and 2B, par [0084], [0087] and [0090]).
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 Trujillo into the teachings of Guan, which modified by Noriega, to configure the CU controlled RAN resources using Trujillo’s RIC with VCU implementation, in order to support near-real-time control and optimization of CU and DU radio access resources.
Claim 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guan et al. (US 20190320324 A1) in view of Noriega (US 20210377801 A1), and in further view of Parkin (US 20200044734 A1).
Consider claim 12, as applied to claim 10 above, Guan, as modified by Noriega, discloses wherein at least one of the first connection or the second connection comprises a fiber optic connection, and wherein the latency value is determined using latency or distance calculations (read as fiber links and a fiber transport network between the radio side and candidate EC sites, and using route length and latency calculation for selected path, figures 1 and 3, par [0016], [0019], [0025], [0036] and [0049]) 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 Guan, as modified by Noriega, for the purpose of taking the refractive index of the fiber into consideration while determining the latency as the refractive index of the fiber would directly affect the latency of the transmission.
Conclusion
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
Prosecution Insights