DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
.Applicant’s arguments, filed02/09/26, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-30 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of De Benedittis (Pub No 20120250513) in view of Werner (Pub No 20220166572), Liu (Pub No 20240031907), and newly cited Liu (Pub No 20180220409)
Regarding claim 1,
Applicant argues the prior art does not teach the amended limitation.
The examiner relies on newly cited Liu (Pub No 20180220409) cited Liu to teach the amended limitation.
All other arguments are fully addressed 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.
Claim(s) 1, 12, 22, 27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over De Benedittis (Pub No 20120250513) in view of Werner (Pub No 20220166572), Liu (Pub No 20240031907), and Liu (Pub No 20180220409)
Regarding claim 1 and 22,
De Benedittis Embodiment I teaches A network node (HenB, fig. 6) for wireless communication, comprising:
a memory; and one or more processors that, based at least in part on information stored in the memory, are configured to: (see para [0058], [0017])
transmit, to a network node, information associated with a multiplexing compatibility of the network node for communications with a first mobile station and a second mobile station, the first mobile station and the second mobile station connected to the network node via the network node; and (interpreted as In case of additional downlink multiplex/compression support, the enhancements as described before are also needed in HNB REGISTER REQUEST 252 to inform the HNB-GW about the HNB capabilities with respect to multiplexing/compression, see para [0197])
receive, from the network node, a first communication for the first mobile station multiplexed with a second communication for the second mobile station. (interpreted as Also see For example, if optimization is supported/activated in uplink and downlink direction, one network node may be a first network node in view of an uplink transmission and may be a second network node in view of a downlink transmission. However, according to other embodiments optimization is supported/activated only in one direction (uplink or downlink), see para [0048])
wherein the multiplexing compatibility comprises a capability of the network node to multiplex data (interpreted as In case of additional downlink multiplex/compression support, the enhancements as described before are also needed in HNB REGISTER REQUEST 252 to inform the HNB-GW about the HNB capabilities with respect to multiplexing/compression, see para [0197])
However Embodiment I does not teach the first communication and the second communication multiplexed based at least in part on the information associated with the multiplexing compatibility of the network node for communications with the first mobile station and the second mobile station.
De Benedittis Embodiment II teaches the first communication and the second communication multiplexed based at least in part on the information associated with the multiplexing compatibility of the network node for communications with the first mobile station and the second mobile station. (interpreted as all voice frames 228a, 228b, 228c until that from the last active terminal has arrived, and thereafter creates an IP packet 220 where a (compressed) RTP header 232a, 232b, 232c is added to each voice frame 228a, 228b, 228c and they are concatenated one after the other, e.g. according to the principles already defined for the Nb-interface (3GPP TS 29.414 V8.2.0 (2008 December)), see para [0181])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the downlink multiplexing capability taught by De Benedittis Embodiment I with the multiplexed communication for the first mobile station and second mobile station as taught by De Benedittis Embodiment II with the motivation being to increase the efficiency by multiplexing data over the same resources.
However De Benedittis does not teach transmit the first communication multiplexed with the second communication to the first mobile station and the second mobile station.
Werner teaches transmit the first communication multiplexed with the second communication to the first mobile station and the second mobile station. (interpreted as downlink transmissions 202 for a first UE (UE1) can be frequency multiplexed with simultaneous downlink transmissions 204 for a second UE (UE2) as the total of the bandwidths used is less than a total available bandwidth 206, see para [0036])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the multiplexed data taught by De Benedittis with the multiplexed communication to the mobile station as taught by Werner with the motivation being to increase the efficiency by multiplexing data over the same resources.
However De Benedittis in view of Werner does not teach to a parent network node;
Liu teaches to a parent network node; (interpreted as Capability of routers may be allocated by its parent node (either a gateway or a router) when connected, see para [0050]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the gateway taught by De Benedittis in view of Werner with the gateway being a parent node as taught by Liu with the motivation being to route data upstream or downstream from the parent node.
However De Benedittis in view of Werner and Liu’907 does not teach multiplex data with a system information block (SIB).
Liu’409 teaches multiplex data with a system information block (SIB). (interpreted as Frequency division multiplexing is performed on the SIBs and unicast data transmitted on the channel, see para [0114]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the multiplexing of data taught by De Benedittis in view of Werner and Liu with the multiplexing of data with the SIB as taught by Liu with the motivation being to route data upstream or downstream from the parent node.
Regarding claim 12 and 27,
De Benedittis Embodiment I teaches A network node (HenB-GW, fig.6) for wireless communication, comprising:
a memory; and one or more processors that, based at least in part on information stored in the memory, are configured to: (see para [0058], [0017])
receive, from a network node, information associated with a multiplexing compatibility of the network node for communications with a first mobile station and a second mobile station, the first mobile station and the second mobile station connected to the parent network node via the network node; and (interpreted as In case of additional downlink multiplex/compression support, the enhancements as described before are also needed in HNB REGISTER REQUEST 252 to inform the HNB-GW about the HNB capabilities with respect to multiplexing/compression, see para [0197])
transmit, to the network node, a first communication for the first mobile station and a second communication for the second mobile station. (interpreted as Also see For example, if optimization is supported/activated in uplink and downlink direction, one network node may be a first network node in view of an uplink transmission and may be a second network node in view of a downlink transmission. However, according to other embodiments optimization is supported/activated only in one direction (uplink or downlink), see para [0048])
However Embodiment I does not teach the first communication and the second communication multiplexed based at least in part on the information associated with the multiplexing compatibility of the network node for communications with the first mobile station and the second mobile station.
De Benedittis Embodiment II teaches the first communication and the second communication multiplexed based at least in part on the information associated with the multiplexing compatibility of the network node for communications with the first mobile station and the second mobile station. (interpreted as all voice frames 228a, 228b, 228c until that from the last active terminal has arrived, and thereafter creates an IP packet 220 where a (compressed) RTP header 232a, 232b, 232c is added to each voice frame 228a, 228b, 228c and they are concatenated one after the other, e.g. according to the principles already defined for the Nb-interface (3GPP TS 29.414 V8.2.0 (2008 December)), see para [0181])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the downlink multiplexing capability taught by De Benedittis Embodiment I with the multiplexed communication for the first mobile station and second mobile station as taught by De Benedittis Embodiment II with the motivation being to increase the efficiency by multiplexing data over the same resources.
However De Benedittis does not teach transmit the first communication multiplexed with the second communication to the first mobile station and the second mobile station.
Werner teaches transmit the first communication multiplexed with the second communication to the first mobile station and the second mobile station. (interpreted as downlink transmissions 202 for a first UE (UE1) can be frequency multiplexed with simultaneous downlink transmissions 204 for a second UE (UE2) as the total of the bandwidths used is less than a total available bandwidth 206, see para [0036])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the multiplexed data taught by De Benedittis with the multiplexed communication to the mobile station as taught by Werner with the motivation being to increase the efficiency by multiplexing data over the same resources.
However De Benedittis in view of Werner does not teach to a parent network node;
Liu teaches to a parent network node; (interpreted as Capability of routers may be allocated by its parent node (either a gateway or a router) when connected, see para [0050]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the gateway taught by De Benedittis in view of Werner with the gateway being a parent node as taught by Liu with the motivation being to route data upstream or downstream from the parent node.
Claim(s) 2-3, 5-6, 13-14, 16, 23-24, 26, 28-29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over De Benedittis (Pub No 20120250513) further in view of Werner (Pub No 20220166572), Liu (Pub No 20240031907), Liu (Pub No 20180220409), and Athley (Pub No 20230119660)
Regarding claim 2 and 13 and 23 and 28,
De Benedittis in view of Werner, Liu’409, and Liu’907 teaches The network node of claim 1, however does not teach wherein the first communication and the second communication are multiplexed with frequency division multiplexing (FDM) based at least in part on one or more of: the first mobile station and the second mobile station being associated with a same beam of the network node, or the first mobile station and the second mobile station having signal strengths, associated with the same beam of the network node, that satisfy a threshold.
Athley teaches wherein the first communication and the second communication are multiplexed with frequency division multiplexing (FDM) based at least in part on one or more of: the first mobile station and the second mobile station being associated with a same beam of the network node, or the first mobile station and the second mobile station having signal strengths, associated with the same beam of the network node, that satisfy a threshold. (interpreted as two or more terminal devices 150a, 150b might thereby be frequency-multiplexed in one beam, despite one or more of those terminal devices 150a, 150b not having reported that beam as the top ranked one. That is, in some embodiments, the communication is scheduled to, in the first beam 160a, B2, B3, use frequency multiplexed communication for at least the first terminal device 150a and the second terminal device 150b, where the terminal devices 150a, 150b thus are multiplexed in different parts of the frequency band. That is, the frequency multiplexed communication is scheduled in a frequency band, and each of the at least the first terminal device 150a and the second terminal device 150b is allocated its own part of the frequency band, see para [0047])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the downlink transmissions taught by De Benedittis with the multiplexed downlink transmissions as taught by Athley with the motivation being to increase efficiency by multiplexing data over the same resources.
Regarding claim 3 and 14 and 24 and 29,
De Benedittis in view of Werner, Liu’409, and Liu’907 teaches the network node of claim 2, however does not teach wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: transmit the first communication and the second communication using resources that at least partially overlap in time.
Athley teaches wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: transmit the first communication and the second communication using resources that at least partially overlap in time. (interpreted as Thus, per time instant, only one of the beams is active for communicating with the terminal devices 150a, 150b, see para [0051])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the downlink transmissions taught by De Benedittis with the frequency multiplexed using overlapping time as taught by Athley with the motivation being to increase efficiency by multiplexing data over the same resources.
Regarding claim 6,
De Benedittis in view of Werner, Liu’409, and Liu’907 teaches the network node of claim 1, however does not teach wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: perform, before transmitting the information associated with the multiplexing capability of the network node, a beam management procedure with the first mobile station and the second mobile station.
Athley teaches wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: perform, before transmitting the information associated with the multiplexing capability of the network node, a beam management procedure with the first mobile station and the second mobile station (interpreted as The method comprises receiving, in response to having performed a beam management procedure involving transmission of reference signals in a set of beams, a beam report from each of the terminal devices, see para [0010])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the transmissions taught by De Benedittis with the beam management procedure as taught by Athley with the motivation being for determining beam scheduling for terminal devices.
Regarding claim 5 and 26,
De Benedittis in view of Werner, Liu’409, and Liu’907 teaches the network node of claim 1, however does not teach wherein the information associated with the multiplexing compatibility of the network node comprises: a report of beam assignments of connected mobile stations, indications of signal strengths of signals communicated between the network node and the connected mobile stations per beam of the network node, or an indication of one or more mobile stations in sets that support frequency division multiplexing (FDM).
Athley teaches wherein the information associated with the multiplexing compatibility of the network node comprises: a report of beam assignments of connected mobile stations, indications of signal strengths of signals communicated between the network node and the connected mobile stations per beam of the network node, or an indication of one or more mobile stations in sets that support frequency division multiplexing (FDM). (interpreted as Assume that the TRP 140 is configured to generate X>1 different narrow beams, where, for example X is in the order of 10, 50, 100 or more, and that each terminal device 150a, 150b is configured to, in a beam report, report at least the beam out of the Xbeams in which a reference signal (such as a channel state information reference signal; CSI-RS) was best received according to some quality criterion, such as highest received power (such as reference signal received power; RSRP), see para [0037])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the capability information taught by De Benedittis with the signal strength as taught by Athley with the motivation being to select the most optimal beam based on measurements.
Regarding claim 16,
De Benedittis in view of Werner, Liu’409, and Liu’907 teaches the parent network node of claim 12, however does not teach wherein the information associated with the multiplexing compatibility of the network node comprises: a report of beam assignments of connected mobile stations, indications of signal strengths of signals communicated between the network node and the connected mobile stations per beam of the network node, or an indication of one or more mobile stations in sets that support time division multiplexing (TDM).
Athley teaches wherein the information associated with the multiplexing compatibility of the network node comprises: a report of beam assignments of connected mobile stations, indications of signal strengths of signals communicated between the network node and the connected mobile stations per beam of the network node, or an indication of one or more mobile stations in sets that support time division multiplexing (TDM). (interpreted as Assume that the TRP 140 is configured to generate X>1 different narrow beams, where, for example X is in the order of 10, 50, 100 or more, and that each terminal device 150a, 150b is configured to, in a beam report, report at least the beam out of the Xbeams in which a reference signal (such as a channel state information reference signal; CSI-RS) was best received according to some quality criterion, such as highest received power (such as reference signal received power; RSRP), see para [0037])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the capability information taught by De Benedittis with the signal strength as taught by Athley with the motivation being to select the most optimal beam based on measurements.
Claim(s) 4, 15, 25, 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over De Benedittis (Pub No 20120250513) further in view of Werner (Pub No 20220166572), Liu (Pub No 20240031907), Liu (Pub No 20180220409), and Pawar (Pub No 20190158331)
Regarding claim 4 and 15 and 25 and 30,
De Benedittis in view of Werner, Liu’409, and Liu’907 teaches the network node of claim 1, however does not teach wherein the first communication and the second communication are multiplexed with time division multiplexing (TDM) based at least in part on one or more of: the first mobile station and the second mobile station being associated with different beams of the network node, or the first mobile station and the second mobile station having signal strengths, associated with the same beam of the network node, that fail to satisfy a threshold.
Pawar teaches wherein the first communication and the second communication are multiplexed with time division multiplexing (TDM) based at least in part on one or more of: the first mobile station and the second mobile station being associated with different beams of the network node, or the first mobile station and the second mobile station having signal strengths, associated with the same beam of the network node, that fail to satisfy a threshold. (interpreted as In one example, when switching between the first UE and the second UE, a beam forming can change for the second UE. A last GI/ZT sequence in the first region (corresponding to the first UE) of the subframe cannot be used for the second region (corresponding to the second UE) of the subframe because the GI/ZT sequence in the first region can be transmitted or received with a different beam as compared to the GI/ZT sequence in the second region….As a result, the two UEs can be scheduled within the same subframe in a time division multiplex (TDM) manner, see para [0035])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the downlink transmissions taught by De Benedittis with the time division multiplexed downlink transmissions as taught by Pawar with the motivation being to conserve resources by transmitting over the same resources.
Claim(s) 7, 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over De Benedittis (Pub No 20120250513) further in view of Werner (Pub No 20220166572), Liu (Pub No 20240031907), Liu (Pub No 20180220409), and Horn (Pub No 20190313239)
Regarding clam 7 and 17,
De Benedittis in view of Werner, Liu’409, and Liu’907 teaches the network node of claim 1, however does not teach wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: transmit an update to the information based at least in part on detection of a change in the multiplexing compatibility of the network node associated with communications with the first mobile station and the second mobile station.
Horn teaches wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: transmit an update to the information based at least in part on detection of a change in the multiplexing compatibility of the network node associated with communications with the first mobile station and the second mobile station. (interpreted as Note that, in some cases, the UE may update the capability identifier (associated with radio capabilities) by performing a detach procedure and a re-attach procedure with an updated capability identifier. In some cases, the UE may update the capability identifier without performing a detach and re-attach procedure, see para [0094])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the capability information taught by De Benedittis with the updating capability as taught by Yang with the motivation being to update the system to provide the most up to date services.
Claim(s) 8 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over De Benedittis (Pub No 20120250513) further in view of Werner (Pub No 20220166572), Liu (Pub No 20240031907), Liu (Pub No 20180220409), and Liu (Pub No 20220394737)
Regarding clam 8 and 18,
De Benedittis in view of Werner, Liu’409, and Liu’907 teaches the network node of claim 1, however does not teach wherein transmitting the information associated with the multiplexing capability of the network node is based at least in part on one or more of: identification of a beam that supports communication with the first mobile station and the second mobile station, identification that the beam no longer supports communication with the first mobile station and the second mobile station, receiving a request for the information, or a configuration of a periodicity for transmitting the information.
Liu’737 teaches wherein transmitting the information associated with the multiplexing capability of the network node is based at least in part on one or more of: identification of a beam that supports communication with the first mobile station and the second mobile station, identification that the beam no longer supports communication with the first mobile station and the second mobile station, receiving a request for the information, or a configuration of a periodicity for transmitting the information. (interpreted as a condition that is further indicated by the second information and that needs to be met for the resource multiplexing capability supported by the DU of the first node specifically includes one or more of the following conditions: an uplink receive power of the DU set in a specific interval; a downlink transmit power of the DU set in a specific interval; a timing mode for uplink receiving of the DU set to a specific mode; a downlink transmit beam ID supported by the DU; or an uplink receive beam ID supported by the DU, see para [0021])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the capability information taught by De Benedittis with the specific information in the capability as taught by Liu’737 with the motivation being to perform the most optimal services according to the capabilities of the device.
Claim(s) 9-11, 19-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over De Benedittis (Pub No 20120250513) further in view of Werner (Pub No 20220166572), Liu (Pub No 20240031907), Liu (Pub No 20180220409), and Lee (Pub No 20150195774)
Regarding clam 9 and 19,
De Benedittis in view of Werner, Liu’409, and Liu’907 teaches the network node of claim 1, wherein the first communication comprises a data communication,
However does not teach and wherein the second communication comprises a mobile station-requested system information block (SIB).
Lee teaches wherein the second communication comprises a mobile station-requested system information block (SIB). (interpreted as UE may indicate an SIB request and SIB related UE capability to the second eNB via the RRC connection reconfiguration complete message, see para [0137])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the capability information taught by De Benedittis with the SIB request including the capability as taught by Lee with the motivation being to relay configurations for setting up the communications.
Regarding clam 10 and 20,
De Benedittis in view of Werner and Liu teaches the network node of claim 9, however does not teach wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: forward a request, from the second mobile station and to the parent network node, for the mobile station-requested SIB.
Lee teaches wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: forward a request, from the second mobile station and to the parent network node, for the mobile station-requested SIB. (interpreted as UE may indicate an SIB request and SIB related UE capability to the second eNB via the RRC connection reconfiguration complete message, see para [0137])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the capability information taught by De Benedittis with the SIB request including the capability as taught by Lee with the motivation being to relay configurations for setting up the communications.
Regarding clam 11 and 21,
De Benedittis in view of Werner, Liu’409, and Liu’907 teaches the network node of claim 10, however does not teach wherein transmitting of the information associated with the multiplexing capability of the network node is based at least in part on forwarding the request for the mobile station-requested SIB.
Lee teaches wherein transmitting of the information associated with the multiplexing capability of the network node is based at least in part on forwarding the request for the mobile station-requested SIB. (interpreted as UE may indicate an SIB request and SIB related UE capability to the second eNB via the RRC connection reconfiguration complete message, see para [0137])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the capability information taught by De Benedittis with the SIB request including the capability as taught by Lee with the motivation being to relay configurations for setting up the communications.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BAO G NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-7732. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10pm - 6:30pm.
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, Huy Vu can be reached on 571-272-3155. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/BAO G NGUYEN/Examiner, Art Unit 2461
/HUY D VU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2461