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 .
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.
The factual inquiries 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.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4, 14, 15, 17 and 26-30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park, et al. (US Pre Grant Publication No. 2013/0010684 A1) in view of Yi, et al. (S. Yi, M. Lei, Backhaul Resource Allocation in LTE-Advanced Relaying Systems, pages 1-5, 2012) and Liu, et al. (US Pre Grant Publication No. 2010/0074194).
Regarding claims 1 and 26, Park discloses an apparatus for wireless communication, comprising a memory; and at least one processor coupled to the memory (paragraph 0065) and configured to and a method for wireless communication performed, comprising
a. track a fronthaul load in a first frequency band of a fronthaul link between a first multi-link device (MLD) and a network entity; (Park discloses a second MLD/apparatus/NodeB/base station may track traffic load on the backhaul and UE/fronthaul links [paragraphs 0132, 0144]. These links may include a first frequency band that is multiplexed/shared between a first backhaul of the relay node/first MLD and the MLD/apparatus/NodeB/base station and a first fronthaul between the relay node/first MLD and a network entity/UE and a second frequency band that is multiplexed/shared between a second backhaul of the relay node/first MLD and the MLD/apparatus/NodeB/base station and a second fronthaul between the relay node/first MLD. [i.e. The component carriers may be in-band with sharing of the backhaul and fronthaul frequency and there may be more than one component carrier and associated backhaul and fronthaul per relay node/first MLD, forming the first and second front/backhaul and frequency bands [0111, 0005, 0007 – different PHY links and frequencies associated with different component carriers/CC; 0044 – carrier frequency band used for forward and reverse link with relay node/first MLD; 0133-0135 – multiple CC assigned per relay; 0127- CCs may be in-band and share the same frequency on fronthaul and backhaul].)
b. determine a first backhaul load in the first frequency band of a first backhaul link between the apparatus and the first MLD, and a second load in a second frequency band of a second backhaul link between the apparatus and the first MLD, the apparatus being in a second MLD (paragraphs 0132, 0144 – load on backhaul and UE/fronthaul link is considered in assigning and partitioning the fronthaul/backhaul ratio on the first and second frequency band)
c. selectively transmit or prevent transmission of data over the first backhaul link to the first MLD based at least in part on the fronthaul load, the first backhaul load, or the second backhaul load. (paragraphs 0132, 0144 in view of 0134-0135 – based on load on the first frequency/fronthaul/backhaul the relay node and base station may operate over the first frequency/fronthaul/backhaul only and then a second the first frequency/fronthaul/backhaul only may be added when load requires it).
Park fails to disclose receiving a report In the same field of endeavor Yi discloses receiving a repost (Yi discloses that a relay node reports channel and buffer conditions to it’s upstream base station/eNB [page 1202, section II, second column of the page].)
Therefore, since Yi discloses channel status reporting, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the channel status reporting of Yi with the system of Park by having the relay of Park report the channel status and load of the backhaul and forward links of the first and second frequency to the apparatus/base station. The motive to combine is to allow the apparatus/base station to have accurate information related to the channel status and load for making the scheduling decisions over the backhaul and forward links of the first and second frequency for improved scheduling.
Park as modified by Yi fails to disclose the load metrics reported could be airtime utilization. In the same field of endeavor Liu discloses the load metrics reported could be airtime utilization. (Liu discloses that airtime utilization may be used as a channel load metric [paragraph 0024].)
Therefore, since Liu discloses airtime utilization, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the airtime utilization of Liu with the system of Park as modified by Yi by calculating and reporting the load on the front and backhaul using airtime utilization. The motive to combine is to allow the apparatus/base station to consider actual channel utilization when determining channel scheduling for enhanced scheduling accuracy.
Regarding claims 2 and 27, Park discloses the apparatus is a root access point, the network entity is a user equipment and the first MLD comprises a repeater (paragraph 0041 – the root connection/base station may be an access point; fig. 1 – first MLD is a relay, network entity is a UE).
Regarding claims 4 and 28, Park discloses the report further comprises a second fronthaul airtime utilization in the second frequency band of a second fronthaul link between the first MLD and the network entity or a second network entity (as discussed in the combination with Liu and Yi in the in the independent claim, supra, the report includes utilization for the front and backhaul of the first and second frequency band) wherein the at least one processor is configured to determine the first backhaul airtime utilization in the first frequency band of the first backhaul link and the second backhaul link airtime utilization in the second frequency band of the second backhaul link based on the first MLD being connected to the network entity or the second network entity with the second fronthaul link. (Furthermore, the utilization of, for example, the second backhaul link is based on the first MLD being connected to the network entity/UE with the second fronthaul link, as the second fronthaul and backhaul of Park are linked together as a single transmission chain and the load of the second backhaul is only calculated in the context of it being linked with the second fronthaul when it is assigned as a component carrier to the relay/first MLD [paragraphs 0132, 0144 in view of 0134-0135 -see independent claim, supra].)
Regarding claims 14 and 29, Park discloses an apparatus for wireless communication, comprising: a memory; and at least one processor coupled to the memory (paragraph 0065) and configured to and a method for wireless communication, comprising:
a. track, at a base station/second MLD, a fronthaul load in a first frequency band of a fronthaul link between a first multi-link device (MLD) and a network entity; (Park discloses a second MLD/apparatus/NodeB/base station may track traffic load on the backhaul and UE/fronthaul links [paragraphs 0132, 0144]. These links may include a first frequency band that is multiplexed/shared between a first backhaul of the relay node/first MLD and the MLD/apparatus/NodeB/base station and a first fronthaul between the relay node/first MLD and a network entity/UE and a second frequency band that is multiplexed/shared between a second backhaul of the relay node/first MLD and the MLD/apparatus/NodeB/base station and a second fronthaul between the relay node/first MLD. [i.e. The component carriers may be in-band with sharing of the backhaul and fronthaul frequency and there may be more than one component carrier and associated backhaul and fronthaul per relay node/first MLD, forming the first and second front/backhaul and frequency bands [0111, 0005, 0007 – different PHY links and frequencies associated with different component carriers/CC; 0044 – carrier frequency band used for forward and reverse link with relay node/first MLD; 0133-0135 – multiple CC assigned per relay; 0127- CCs may be in-band and share the same frequency on fronthaul and backhaul].)
b. selectively receive or prevent reception of data over a first backhaul link between the apparatus and a second MLD based at least in part on the fronthaul load, a first backhaul load in the first frequency band of the first backhaul link, or a second backhaul load in a second frequency band of a second backhaul link between the apparatus and the second MLD. (paragraphs 0132, 0144 in view of 0134-0135 – based on load on the first frequency/fronthaul/backhaul the relay node may operate over the first frequency/fronthaul/backhaul only and then a second the first frequency/fronthaul/backhaul only may be added when load requires it).
Park fails to disclose transmitting a report. In the same field of endeavor Yi discloses transmitting a report (Yi discloses that a relay node reports channel and buffer conditions to it’s upstream base station/eNB [page 1202, section II, second column of the page].)
Therefore, since Yi discloses channel status reporting, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the channel status reporting of Yi with the system of Park by having the relay of Park report/transmit the channel status and load of the backhaul and forward links of the first and second frequency to the apparatus/base station. The motive to combine is to allow the apparatus/base station to have accurate information related to the channel status and load for making the scheduling decisions over the backhaul and forward links of the first and second frequency for improved scheduling.
Park as modified by Yi fails to disclose the load metrics reported/transmitted could be airtime utilization. In the same field of endeavor Liu discloses the load metrics reported/transmitted could be airtime utilization. (Liu discloses that airtime utilization may be used as a channel load metric [paragraph 0024].)
Therefore, since Liu discloses airtime utilization, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the airtime utilization of Liu with the system of Park as modified by Yi by calculating and reporting the load on the front and backhaul using airtime utilization. The motive to combine is to allow the apparatus/base station to consider actual channel utilization when determining channel scheduling for enhanced scheduling accuracy.
Regarding claims 15 and 30, Park discloses the apparatus comprises a station (STA) or an AP serving as a repeater or relay, the network entity is a user equipment (UE), and the first MLD comprises a root access point (AP) (paragraph 0041 – the root connection/base station may be an access point; fig. 1 – first MLD is a relay, network entity is a UE).
Regarding claim 17, Park discloses the report further comprises a second fronthaul airtime utilization in the second frequency band of a second fronthaul link between the first MLD and the network entity or a second network entity (as discussed in the combination with Liu and Yi in the in the independent claim, supra, the report includes utilization for the front and backhaul of the first and second frequency band) wherein the at least one processor is configured to determine the first backhaul airtime utilization in the first frequency band of the first backhaul link and the second backhaul link airtime utilization in the second frequency band of the second backhaul link based on the first MLD being connected to the network entity or the second network entity with the second fronthaul link. (Furthermore, the utilization of, for example, the second backhaul link is based on the first MLD being connected to the network entity/UE with the second fronthaul link, as the second fronthaul and backhaul of Park are linked together as a single transmission chain and the load of the second backhaul is only calculated in the context of it being linked with the second fronthaul when it is assigned as a component carrier to the relay/first MLD [paragraphs 0132, 0144 in view of 0134-0135 -see independent claim, supra].)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 5-13 and 16 and 18-25 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claims 3 and 16, the prior art fails to teach, suggest or disclose the report comprises an in network basic service set (BSS) traffic airtime percentage, an overlapping basic service set (OBSS) traffic airtime percentage, an idle airtime percentage, and a station (STA) traffic load, wherein the at least one processor is configured to selectively transmit or prevent transmission of the data over the first backhaul link to the first MLD based at least in part on the BSS traffic airtime percentage, the OBSS traffic airtime percentage, the idle airtime percentage, and the STA traffic load. That is, no report comprising all the claimed elements in a transmitted report from a relay device could be located. Furthermore, even if such art did exist, it is difficult to see how it could be combined with Park which relates to a cellular system that does not have a basic service set or overlapping basic service set. Therefore, the prior art fails to teach, suggest or disclose all elements of the invention.
Regarding claim 5 and 18, the prior art fails to teach suggest or disclose the at least one processor is configured to prevent transmission of the data over the first backhaul link to the first MLD based at least in part on the fronthaul airtime utilization in the first frequency band exceeding a first threshold and the second fronthaul airtime utilization in the second frequency band falling below a second threshold. That is, looking to the primary reference of Park discloses loosely that carrier aggregation may be used on the access and backhaul links (paragraph 0158) based on load (paragraph 0132). However, Park lacks distinctly defined frequency bands to which particular thresholds could be applied. That is, Park aggregates available channels as sets of component carriers based on load, but there is no clear delineation between a particular component carrier and adding a particular second frequency band. This is important because it is not clear why you would track, for example, the load on the second frequency band for comparison to a threshold if it is not currently a utilized band for transmission since Park would merely track load on the first band and add the second band if necessary. Furthermore, given the number and type of combinations already made, the further modification of the system of Park as modified by Yi and Liu would amount to hindsight reconstruction of the invention. Finally, looking to the available prior art, Roddy (US Pre Grant Publication No. 2015/0024771), for example, discloses multiple backhauls with load threshold based switching (see for example, claim 4) but it is difficult to see how this will interoperate with the component carriers of Park which are not pre-assigned discrete channels that are always available but which are instead allocated on an as-needed basis across multiple devices and channels and further does not teach the claimed dual-threshold type switching technique where a threshold is used for both channels. Therefore, the prior art fails to teach, suggest or disclose all elements of the invention.
Regarding claim 6, 7, 19 and 20, the claims depend form claims 5 and 18 and are allowable for the same reasons stated with respect to those claims, supra.
Regarding claims 8 and 21, the prior art fails to teach suggest or disclose the at least one processor is configured to: reduce an amount of the data transmitted over the first backhaul link to the first MLD based at least in part on the fronthaul airtime utilization in the first frequency band exceeding a first threshold. Regarding these claims, the rationale is largely the same as that set forth with respect to claims 5 and 18, but it is additionally noted that it is unclear how or way Park would be modified to reduce the amount of data sent over the first channel, as, at best, what would happen is that the same amount of data would be sent over the first channel, as it is at capacity, and an additional channel would be added to allow for additional data transmission.
Regarding claim 9 and 22, the prior art fails to teach suggest or disclose the at least one processor is configured to: reduce an amount of the data transmitted over the first backhaul link to the first MLD based at least in part on the fronthaul airtime utilization in the first frequency band exceeding a first threshold. Regarding these claims, the rationale is largely the same as that set forth with respect to claims 5 and 18, but it is additionally noted that it is unclear how or way Park would be modified to reduce the amount of data sent over the first channel, as, at best, what would happen is that the same amount of data would be sent over the first channel, as it is at capacity, and an additional channel would be added to allow for additional data transmission.
Regarding claims 10 and 23, the claims depend form claims 9 and 22 and are allowable for the same reasons stated with respect to those claims, supra.
Regarding claims 11 and 24, the prior art fails to teach suggest or disclose he at least one processor is configured to: transmit the data over the first backhaul link to the first MLD and an amount of the data transmitted is reduced based at least in part on: for a most congested band from the first frequency band and the second frequency band, a difference between a backhaul airtime utilization in the most congested band and a backhaul airtime utilization in a least congested band from the first frequency band and the second frequency band exceeding a fourth threshold, and the first backhaul airtime utilization in the most congested band exceeding a fifth threshold. Regarding these claims, the rationale is largely the same as that set forth with respect to claims 5 and 18, and it is further noted that the use of different between backhaul airtimes used to determine an amount of data is likewise unknown in the prior art.
Regarding claims 12 and 25, the claims depend form claims 11 and 24 and are allowable for the same reasons stated with respect to those claims, supra.
Regarding claims 13 and 26, the prior art fails to teach suggest or disclose he data is transmitted over the first backhaul link to the first MLD based at least in part on a difference between: a first total airtime utilization of the fronthaul airtime utilization and the first backhaul airtime utilization, and a second total airtime utilization of: a third fronthaul airtime utilization in the second frequency band of a third fronthaul link between a third MLD and a second network entity, and a third backhaul airtime utilization in the second frequency band of a third backhaul link between the apparatus and the third MLD, the difference exceeding a first threshold, and based at least in part on the fronthaul airtime utilization in the first frequency band exceeding a second threshold, wherein the second total airtime utilization is a maximum total airtime utilization in the second frequency band for a plurality of MLDs including the third MLD. Regarding these claims, the rationale is largely the same as that set forth with respect to claims 5 and 18, and it is further noted that a third MLD and backhaul utilization is further not taught by the prior art. Therefore, the prior art fails to teach, suggest or disclose all elements of the claimed invention.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Liu, et al. (US Pre Grant Publication No. 2015/0155930) – disclosing a multi-backhaul relay device
Chang, et al. (US Pre Grant Publication No. 2013/0301517) – disclosing carrier aggregation for relay nodes
Dai, et al. (X. Dai, J. Gui, Joint access and backhaul resource allocation for D2D-assisted dense mmWave cellular networks, pages 1-20, 2020) – disclosing resource allocations considering backhaul utilization
Semiari, et al. (Omid Semiarit, Walid Saadt, Zaher Dawy, Mehdi Bennis, Matching Theory for Backhaul Management in Small Cell Networks with mmWave Capabilities, pages 1-6, 2015) – disclosing multiple backhaul relay devices with mmWave and cellular backhaul
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER M CRUTCHFIELD whose telephone number is (571)270-3989. The examiner can normally be reached 9am-5pm M-F.
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, Faruk Hamza can be reached at (571) 272-7969. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER M CRUTCHFIELD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2466