DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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 action is responsive to the RCE filed on 8/4/25.
Claim(s) 1-17 & 19-20 is/are presented for examination.
Claim Objections
Claim(s) 1 is/are unclear to the examiner; what does it mean by stating “causes UE (User Equipment) capabilities of a given UE to be acquired for use by both an LTE (Long Term Evolution) packet network and an NR (New Radio) packet network, the UE capabilities being reused by both the LTE packet network and the NR packet network, without reacquiring the UE capabilities of the given UE that were acquired”? The Examiner is not entirely sure what exactly the Applicant trying to accomplished? What exactly are the UE capabilities and what are the capabilities that both the NR and LTE network? Please clarify
Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-3, 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Mueller, U.S. Patent/Pub. No. 2023/0038751 A1 in view of Parekh, US 2021/0235277 A1, and further in view of Gholmeh, US 2018/0049213 A1.
As to claim 1, Mueller teaches a system comprising:
a processor;
a non-transicent memory
c) a converged core supporting combined EPC (evolved packet core) and 5GC (5th generation packet core) with multiple RATs (radio access technologies) in a deployment (Mueller, figure 10; page 2, paragraph 31; page 3, paragraph 36; i.e., [0031] the user device 106 communicates via the network device 102, that is, the eNodeB (eNB) for LTE or gNodeB (gNB) for standalone new radio, or eNB and gNB both for non-standalone new radio and/or in a dual connectivity mode. The eNB and/or gNB are coupled (e.g., via an S5 or N3 interface, respectively) to a core network 108 (the evolved packet core (EPC) network 108 or 5G core network, respectively). In turn, the core network 108 is coupled (via a packet gateway and the sGI interface for EPC or user plane function and the N6 interface for 5GC) to an external internet protocol (IP) domain; [0036] In FIG. 1, a radio access network (RAN) intelligent controller (RIC 116), in conjunction with an application program (referred to as an xApp 118) provides for one way in which dynamic spectrum allocation is adaptable for a wireless communication usage scenario. When configured, the xApp 118 can communicate with the SAS 112 (e.g., via an interface la) and the domain proxy 114 (e.g., via an interface la). The device 102 communicates with the RIC 114 via O-RAN (Open RAN) interfaces, including the E2/Al/O1 interfaces. Other ways described herein include extending a CBSD's capabilities) (Parekh, page 3, paragraph 37, 40-42; page 5, paragraph 66; i.e., [0040] gNB: New Radio (NR) Base stations which have capability to interface with 5G Core named as NG-CN over NG-C/U (NG2/NG3) interface as well as 4G Core known as Evolved Packet Core (EPC) over Sl-C/U interface; [0041] LTE eNB: An LTE eNB is evolved eNodeB that can support connectivity to EPC as well as NG-CN; [0042] Non-standalone NR: It is a 5G Network deployment configuration, where a gNB needs an LTE eNodeB as an anchor for control plane connectivity to 4G EPC or LTE eNB as anchor for control plane connectivity to NG-CN; [0043] Standalone NR: It is a 5G Network deployment configuration where gNB does not need any assistance for connectivity to core Network, it can connect by its own to NG-CN over NG2 and NG3 interfaces; [0044] Non-standalone E-UTRA: It is a 5G Network deployment configuration where the LTE eNB requires a gNB as anchor for control plane connectivity to NG-CN; [0066] The communication may be performed e.g., between the UEs (800-1 and 800-2), between each UE 800-1/800-2 and the server via the RAN (500), and possibly one or more core networks (EPC/NG core) (400) comprised within the wireless communication system (1000));
(2) wherein how to partition the bandwidth across a CBSD (Citizens Broadband Radio Service Device) of the LTE and a CBSD of the NR (Mueller, figure 10; page 2, paragraph 31; page 3, paragraph 36; i.e., [0031] the user device 106 communicates via the network device 102, that is, the eNodeB (eNB) for LTE or gNodeB (gNB) for standalone new radio, or eNB and gNB both for non-standalone new radio and/or in a dual connectivity mode. The eNB and/or gNB are coupled (e.g., via an S5 or N3 interface, respectively) to a core network 108 (the evolved packet core (EPC) network 108 or 5G core network, respectively). In turn, the core network 108 is coupled (via a packet gateway and the sGI interface for EPC or user plane function and the N6 interface for 5GC) to an external internet protocol (IP) domain; [0036] In FIG. 1, a radio access network (RAN) intelligent controller (RIC 116), in conjunction with an application program (referred to as an xApp 118) provides for one way in which dynamic spectrum allocation is adaptable for a wireless communication usage scenario. When configured, the xApp 118 can communicate with the SAS 112 (e.g., via an interface la) and the domain proxy 114 (e.g., via an interface la). The device 102 communicates with the RIC 114 via O-RAN (Open RAN) interfaces, including the E2/Al/O1 interfaces. Other ways described herein include extending a CBSD's capabilities).
But Parekh failed to teach the claim limitation wherein (1) machine instructions being stored in the non-transient memory, invoking the machine instructions, by the processor, causes UE (User Equipment) capabilities of a given UE to be acquired for use by both an LTE (Long Term Evolution) packet network and an NR (New Radio) packet network, the UE capabilities being reused by both the LTE packet network and the NR packet network, without reacquiring the UE capabilities of the given UE that were acquired: and (2) the converged core provides seamless mobility between the LTE packet net- work and the NR packet network, wherein the converged core authorizes the given UE access to both the LTE packet network and the NR packet network when the given VE initially accesses either one of the LTE packet network and the NR packet network; and d) a memory system having a non-transitory storage medium, storing one or more machine instructions, which when implemented, causes the processor to dynamically allocate bandwidth between multiple radio access technologies, by dynamically allocating bandwidth between multiple radio access technology, (1) the dynamically the allocating of the bandwidth between the multiple radio access technologies including allocating the bandwidth between the LTE packet network and the NR packet network, the EPC being part of the LTE packet network and the 5GC being part of the NR packet network; and (2) wherein how to partition the bandwidth based on predicted traffic demand, and LTE capabilities and NR packet network capabilities associated with a population of UEs.
However, Parekh teaches the limitation wherein d) a memory system having a non-transitory storage medium, storing one or more machine instructions, which when implemented, causes the processor to dynamically allocate bandwidth between multiple radio access technologies, by dynamically allocating bandwidth between multiple radio access technology, (1) the dynamically the allocating of the bandwidth between the multiple radio access technologies including allocating the bandwidth between the LTE packet network and the NR packet network, the EPC being part of the LTE packet network and the 5GC being part of the NR packet network (Parekh, page 3, paragraph 39 & 46; page 5, paragraph 63-64 & 67; page 6, paragraph 74-76; page 7, paragraph 78-81; page 8, paragraph 79; i.e., [0039] New RAN: A Radio Access Network which can support either NR/E-UTRA or both and have capabilities to interface with Next Generation Core Network (NG-CN); [0046] Xn Interface: It is a logical interface which interconnects the New RAN nodes i.e. it interconnects gNB to gNB and LTE eNB to gNB and vice versa; [0063] Embedded intelligence, applied at both component and network levels, enables dynamic local radio resource allocation and optimizes network wide efficiency. In combination with O-RAN's open interfaces, AI-optimized closed-loop automation is a new era for network operations; [0067] the type one network scheduler (600) may be in eNB, herein, that supports 4G/Long term evolution (LTE) RAT and the type two network scheduler (700) may be in gNB (Next Generation Node Base Station), herein, that supports 5G/NR RAT or vice-versa. That is, the type one network scheduler (600) corresponds to a 4G (fourth generation) base station, 4G scheduler, or evolved node base station and the type two network scheduler (700) corresponds to a 5G (fifth generation) base station, gNB; [007 4] Further, one such advantage of using the DSS in the wireless communication system (1000) is that DSS can be processed using the intellectualization of the Non-RT-RIC (200) and the Near-RT-RIC (300), that can dynamically generate a vendor independent bandwidth allocation (unlike conventional/existing vendor proprietary limitation)); (2) wherein how to partition the bandwidth based on predicted traffic demand, and LTE capabilities and NR packet network capabilities associated with a population of UEs (Parekh, page 1, paragraph 15; page 5, paragraph 63-64 & 67; page 6, paragraph 74-76; page 7, paragraph 78-81; page 8, paragraph 89; i.e., [0015] Another object of the present invention is to provide dynamic bandwidth allocation between 4G and 5G schedulers based on resource sharing policy, network conditions (traffic load/demand, current requirements and estimated requirement of bandwidth, resource utilization, etc) and key performance indicators (KPis including QoS metrics- throughput, delay, packet loss, etc.) of base stations (BSs) and user equipment (UEs ); [0063] Embedded intelligence, applied at both component and network levels, enables dynamic local radio resource allocation and optimizes network wide efficiency. In combination with O-RAN's open interfaces, AI-optimized closed-loop automation is a new era for network operations; [0067] the type one network scheduler (600) may be in eNB, herein, that supports 4G/Long term evolution (LTE) RAT and the type two network scheduler (700) may be in gNB (Next Generation Node Base Station), herein, that supports 5G/NR RAT or vice-versa. That is, the type one network scheduler (600) corresponds to a 4G (fourth generation) base station, 4G scheduler, or evolved node base station and the type two network scheduler (700) corresponds to a 5G (fifth generation) base station, gNB); [0080] Unlike conventional bandwidth allocation/sharing systems, the proposed bandwidth allocation between 4G and 5G schedulers is based on the DSS policy configuration message and on the plurality of KPis (including current bandwidth requirements, traffic, and estimated bandwidth requirement and traffic) of the type one network scheduler; [0089] The AI/ML unit (302) may be configured to assist the DSS allocation unit (304) to predict a traffic that enhances the spectrum allocation and/or to effectively manage the interoperability interference).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to modify Mueller to substitute CPE from Parekh for user equipment from Mueller to ensuring uninterrupted services with quality and efficiency. On the other hand, in order to meet this desire, the cellular operators require a favorable balance among customer experience
and satisfaction, network performance, and costs (Parekh, page 1, paragraph 5).
However, Gholmeh teaches the limitation wherein 1) machine instructions being stored in the non-transient memory, invoking the machine instructions, by the processor, causes UE (User Equipment) capabilities of a given UE to be acquired for use by both an LTE (Long Term Evolution) packet network and an NR (New Radio) packet network, the UE capabilities being reused by both the LTE packet network and the NR packet network, without reacquiring the UE capabilities of the given UE that were acquired (Gholmeh, page 10, paragraph 111 – page 11, paragraph 114; page 12, paragraph 123-127; i.e., [0111] the NR capabilities information of a UE. Such information may include, for example, which LTE bands and band combinations; [0112] Thus, the management of multi-RAT UE capabilities, whether in LTE, NR and potentially in WLAN presents a challenge; [0113] the UE may report its NR capabilities to the LTE network by either adding them or encapsulating them in the LTE capabilities, or by sending them in a separate message. Similarly, if requested by an NR network, the UE may report its LTE capabilities to the NR network by either adding them or encapsulating them in the NR capabilities, or by sending them in a separate message. In some cases, the UE may be able to report its NR measurement capabilities to the LTE network, and may be able to report its LTE measurement capabilities to the NR network; [0123] The UE capability updates may need not be as frequent as in 3G (every RRC connection). In some cases, however, the UE may be able to initiate an NR capabilities update. The rate of updates may be limited in a standard. For example, a UE may be able to initiate an LTE capabilities update; [0124] As noted above, the UE may report a capability per RAT. In some cases, the UE may not report its NR capabilities to the LTE network, nor report its LTE capabilities to the NR network. However, the UE may be able to report its NR measurement capabilities to the LTE network and, similarly, may be able to report its LTE measurement capabilities to the NR network); and (2) the converged core provides seamless mobility between the LTE packet net- work and the NR packet network, wherein the converged core authorizes the given UE access to both the LTE packet network and the NR packet network when the given VE initially accesses either one of the LTE packet network and the NR packet network (Gholmeh, page 10, paragraph 111 – page 11, paragraph 114; page 12, paragraph 123-127; i.e., [0111] the NR capabilities information of a UE. Such information may include, for example, which LTE bands and band combinations; [0112] Thus, the management of multi-RAT UE capabilities, whether in LTE, NR and potentially in WLAN presents a challenge; [0113] the UE may report its NR capabilities to the LTE network by either adding them or encapsulating them in the LTE capabilities, or by sending them in a separate message. Similarly, if requested by an NR network, the UE may report its LTE capabilities to the NR network by either adding them or encapsulating them in the NR capabilities, or by sending them in a separate message. In some cases, the UE may be able to report its NR measurement capabilities to the LTE network, and may be able to report its LTE measurement capabilities to the NR network; [0123] The UE capability updates may need not be as frequent as in 3G (every RRC connection). In some cases, however, the UE may be able to initiate an NR capabilities update. The rate of updates may be limited in a standard. For example, a UE may be able to initiate an LTE capabilities update; [0124] As noted above, the UE may report a capability per RAT. In some cases, the UE may not report its NR capabilities to the LTE network, nor report its LTE capabilities to the NR network. However, the UE may be able to report its NR measurement capabilities to the LTE network and, similarly, may be able to report its LTE measurement capabilities to the NR network).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to modify Mueller to substitute radio access technologies from Gholmeh for broadband radio from Mueller to enable and provide efficient decision making (e.g., regarding inter-RAT mobility or aggregation) (Gholmeh, page 1, paragraph 2).
As to claim 2, Mueller-Parekh-Gholmeh teaches the system as recited in claim 1, wherein the deployment supports multiple sites and each site supporting LTE (Long Term Evolution) and 5G NR (5th Generation New Radio) base stations (Mueller, figure 10; page 2, paragraph 29; i.e., [0029] CBRS spectrum via citizens broadband radio service devices (CBSDs) 102 and 104, however it is understood that this is a non-limiting example. Dynamic spectrum allocation technology as described herein can be implemented based on any available spectrum).
As to claim 3, Mueller-Parekh-Gholmeh teaches the system as recited in claim 1, wherein:
the converged core queries the UEs (User Equipment) and acquire their individual UE capabilities for LTE and NR RAT support (Mueller, figure 10; page 2, paragraph 29; i.e., [0029] CBRS spectrum via citizens broadband radio service devices (CBSDs) 102 and 104, however it is understood that this is a non-limiting example. Dynamic spectrum allocation technology as described herein can be implemented based on
any available spectrum).
But Parekh failed to teach the claim limitation wherein the converged core determines the population of the UEs currently in the deployment and populations of the UEs associated with each site.
However, Parekh teaches the limitation wherein the converged core determines the population of the UEs currently in the deployment and populations of the UEs associated with each Parekh, page 1, paragraph 15; page 5, paragraph 63-64 & 67; page 6, paragraph 74-76; page 7, paragraph 78-81; page 8, paragraph 89; i.e., [0015] Another object of the present invention is to provide dynamic bandwidth allocation between 4G and 5G schedulers based on resource sharing policy, network conditions (traffic load/demand, current requirements and estimated requirement of bandwidth, resource utilization, etc) and key performance indicators (KPis including QoS metrics- throughput, delay, packet loss, etc.) of base stations (BSs) and user equipment (UEs ); [0063] Embedded intelligence, applied at both component and network levels, enables dynamic local radio resource allocation and optimizes network wide efficiency. In combination with O-RAN's open interfaces, AI-optimized closed-loop automation is a new era for network operations; [0067] the type one network scheduler (600) may be in eNB, herein, that supports 4G/Long term evolution (LTE) RAT and the type two network scheduler (700) may be in gNB (Next Generation Node Base Station), herein, that supports 5G/NR RAT or vice-versa. That is, the type one network scheduler (600) corresponds to a 4G (fourth generation) base station, 4G scheduler, or evolved node base station and the type two network scheduler (700) corresponds to a 5G (fifth generation) base station, gNB); [0080] Unlike conventional bandwidth allocation/sharing systems, the proposed bandwidth allocation between 4G and 5G schedulers is based on the DSS policy configuration message and on the plurality of KPis (including current bandwidth requirements, traffic, and estimated bandwidth requirement and traffic) of the type one network scheduler; [0089] The AI/ML unit (302) may be configured to assist the DSS allocation unit (304) to predict a traffic that enhances the spectrum allocation and/or to effectively manage the interoperability interference).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to modify Mueller to substitute CPE from Parekh for user equipment from Mueller to ensuring uninterrupted services with quality and efficiency. On the other hand, in order to meet this desire, the cellular operators require a favorable balance among customer experience
and satisfaction, network performance, and costs (Parekh, page 1, paragraph 5).
As to claim 4, Mueller-Parekh-Gholmeh teaches the system as recited in claim 3, wherein dividing the bandwidth allocation of each site to a CBSD (Citizens Broadband Radio Service Device) associated with that site (Mueller, figure 10; page 2, paragraph 29-30; i.e., [0029] CBRS spectrum via citizens broadband radio service devices (CBSDs) 102 and 104, however it is understood that this is a non-limiting example. Dynamic spectrum allocation technology as described herein can be implemented based on any available spectrum; [0030] In the example of FIG. 1, a user equipment (UE) device 106 connects to other elements of the system 100 via the eNodeB (eNB) or gNodeB (gNB), which as exemplified in FIG. 1 are incorporated into a device 102 that supports citizens broadband radio service, as a CBSD. Communications can be based on conventional fourth generation long term evolution (LTE) technology and new radio (NR) technology such as fifth generation (5G) and beyond. The exemplified UE device 106 is configured to communicate over the CBRS spectrum, if the device 102 schedules the device 106 to do so, or can be scheduled to use LTE and/or new radio cellular frequencies. Note that in an implementation in which CBRS spectrum is dynamically allocated in a coverage area, as long as one or more user devices can operate in the CBRS spectrum, benefits of dynamic allocation via CBRS).
But Mueller failed to teach the claim limitation wherein the converged core determines a bandwidth allocation to each site within the deployment.
However, Parekh teaches the limitation wherein the converged core determines a bandwidth allocation to each site within the deployment (Parekh, page 3, paragraph 39 & 46; page 5, paragraph 63-64 & 67; page 6, paragraph 74-76; page 7, paragraph 78-81; page 8, paragraph 79; i.e., [0039] New RAN: A Radio Access Network which can support either NR/E-UTRA or both and have capabilities to interface with Next Generation Core Network (NG-CN); [0046] Xn Interface: It is a logical interface which interconnects the New RAN nodes i.e. it interconnects gNB to gNB and LTE eNB to gNB and vice versa; [0063] Embedded intelligence, applied at both component and network levels, enables dynamic local radio resource allocation and optimizes network wide efficiency. In combination with O-RAN's open interfaces, AI-optimized closed-loop automation is a new era for network operations; [0067] the type one network scheduler (600) may be in eNB, herein, that supports 4G/Long term evolution (LTE) RAT and the type two network scheduler (700) may be in gNB (Next Generation Node Base Station), herein, that supports 5G/NR RAT or vice-versa. That is, the type one network scheduler (600) corresponds to a 4G (fourth generation) base station, 4G scheduler, or evolved node base station and the type two network scheduler (700) corresponds to a 5G (fifth generation) base station, gNB; [007 4] Further, one such advantage of using the DSS in the wireless communication system (1000) is that DSS can be processed using the intellectualization of the Non-RT-RIC (200) and the Near-RT-RIC (300), that can dynamically generate a vendor independent bandwidth allocation (unlike conventional/existing vendor proprietary limitation)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to modify Mueller to substitute CPE from Parekh for user equipment from Mueller to ensuring uninterrupted services with quality and efficiency. On the other hand, in order to meet this desire, the cellular operators require a favorable balance among customer experience
and satisfaction, network performance, and costs (Parekh, page 1, paragraph 5)
As to claim 5, Mueller-Parekh-Gholmeh teaches the system as recited in claim 4, wherein the CBSD is an eNB (eNodeB) (Mueller, figure 10; page 2, paragraph 30; i.e., [0030] In the example of FIG. 1, a user equipment (UE) device 106 connects to other elements of the system 100 via the eNodeB (eNB) or gNodeB (gNB), which as exemplified in FIG. 1 are incorporated into a device 102 that supports citizens broadband radio service, as a CBSD. Communications can be based on conventional fourth generation long term evolution (LTE) technology and new radio (NR) technology such as fifth generation (5G) and beyond. The exemplified UE device 106 is configured to communicate over the CBRS spectrum, if the device 102 schedules the device 106 to do so, or can be scheduled to use LTE and/or new radio cellular frequencies. Note that in an implementation in which CBRS spectrum is dynamically allocated in a coverage area, as long as one or more user devices can operate in the CBRS spectrum, benefits of dynamic allocation via CBRS).
As to claim 6, Mueller-Parekh-Gholmeh teaches the system as recited in claim 4, wherein the CBSD is a gNB (gNodeB) (Mueller, figure 10; page 2, paragraph 30; i.e., [0030] In the example of FIG. 1, a user equipment (UE) device 106 connects to other elements of the system 100 via the eNodeB (eNB) or gNodeB (gNB), which as exemplified in FIG. 1 are incorporated into a device 102 that supports citizens broadband radio service, as a CBSD. Communications can be based on conventional fourth generation long term evolution (LTE) technology and new radio (NR) technology such as fifth generation (5G) and beyond. The exemplified UE device 106 is configured to communicate over the CBRS spectrum, if the device 102 schedules the device 106 to do so, or can be scheduled to use LTE and/or new radio cellular frequencies. Note that in an implementation in which CBRS spectrum is dynamically allocated in a coverage area, as long as one or more user devices can operate in the CBRS spectrum, benefits of dynamic allocation via CBRS).
As to claim 7, Mueller-Parekh-Gholmeh teaches the system as recited in claim 4, wherein:
requests from all the sites and RATs of the full deployment are accumulated ((Mueller, figure 10; page 2, paragraph 31; page 3, paragraph 36; i.e., [0031] the user device 106 communicates via the network device 102, that is, the eNodeB (eNB) for LTE or gNodeB (gNB) for standalone new radio, or eNB and gNB both for non-standalone new radio and/or in a dual connectivity mode. The eNB and/or gNB are coupled (e.g., via an S5 or N3 interface, respectively) to a core network 108 (the evolved packet core (EPC) network 108 or 5G core network, respectively). In turn, the core network 108 is coupled (via a packet gateway and the sGI interface for EPC or user plane function and the N6 interface for 5GC) to an external internet protocol (IP) domain; [0036] In FIG. 1, a radio access network (RAN) intelligent controller (RIC 116), in conjunction with an application program (referred to as an xApp 118) provides for one way in which dynamic spectrum allocation is adaptable for a wireless communication usage scenario. When configured, the xApp 118 can communicate with the SAS 112 (e.g., via an interface la) and the domain proxy 114 (e.g., via an interface la). The device 102 communicates with the RIC 114 via O-RAN (Open RAN) interfaces, including the E2/Al/O1 interfaces. Other ways described herein include extending a CBSD's capabilities) (Parekh, page 3, paragraph 37, 40-42; page 5, paragraph 66; i.e., [0040] gNB: New Radio (NR) Base stations which have capability to interface with 5G Core named as NG-CN over NG-C/U (NG2/NG3) interface as well as 4G Core known as Evolved Packet Core (EPC) over Sl-C/U interface; [0041] LTE eNB: An LTE eNB is evolved eNodeB that can support connectivity to EPC as well as NG-CN; [0042] Non-standalone NR: It is a 5G Network deployment configuration, where a gNB needs an LTE eNodeB as an anchor for control plane connectivity to 4G EPC or LTE eNB as anchor for control plane connectivity to NG-CN; [0043] Standalone NR: It is a 5G Network deployment configuration where gNB does not need any assistance for connectivity to core Network, it can connect by its own to
NG-CN over NG2 and NG3 interfaces; [0044] Non-standalone E-UTRA: It is a 5G Network
deployment configuration where the LTE eNB requires a gNB as anchor for control plane connectivity to NG-CN; [0066] The communication may be performed e.g., between the UEs
(800-1 and 800-2), between each UE 800-1/800-2 and the server via the RAN (500), and possibly one or more core networks (EPC/NG core) (400) comprised within the wireless
communication system (1000)));
the LTE CBSD (eNB) and 5G NR CBSD (gNB) request a SAS to provide the required spectrum allocations based on the determined bandwidth requirements based on the requests that are accumulated (Mueller, figure 10; page 3, paragraph 36; i.e., [0036] In FIG. 1, a radio access network (RAN) intelligent controller (RIC 116), in conjunction with an application program (referred to as an xApp 118) provides for one way in which dynamic spectrum allocation is adaptable for a wireless communication usage scenario. When configured, the xApp 118 can communicate with the SAS 112 (e.g., via an interface la) and the domain proxy 114 (e.g., via an interface la). The device 102 communicates with the RIC 114 via O-RAN (Open RAN) interfaces, including the E2/Al/O1 interfaces. Other ways described herein include extending a CBSD's capabilities);
the request is sent to the SAS (Spectrum Access System) (Mueller, figure 10; page 4, paragraph 48; i.e., [0048] RAN Intelligent Controller (RIC). Such an implementation facilitates adaptive dynamic spectrum allocation over multiple eNBs/gNBs,).
As to claim 8, Mueller-Parekh-Gholmeh teaches the system as recited in claim 7, wherein the request to the SAS placed as a combined requests for the LTE CBSD (eNB) and the 5G NR CBSD (gNB) (Mueller, figure 10; page 2, paragraph 32; i.e., [0032] to operate in the CBRS spectrum, the eNB/gNB 102 couples to a spectrum access system 112 through a domain proxy 114 via a SAS-CBSD interface. The domain proxy 114 facilitates the coupling of multiple eNBs/gNBs to couple to the spectrum access system 112, rather than have a group of individual eNBs/gNBs).
As to claim 12, Mueller-Parekh-Gholmeh teaches the system as recited in claim 3, wherein UE capability information is retained in a common location across 5G NR, LTE, and Wi-Fi RAT networks (Mueller, figure 10; page 2, paragraph 30; i.e., [0030] FIG. 1, a user equipment (UE) device 106 connects to other elements of the system 100 via the eNodeB (eNB) or gNodeB (gNB), which as exemplified in FIG. 1 are incorporated into a device 102 that supports citizens broadband radio service, as a CBSD. Communications can be based on conventional fourth generation long term evolution (LTE) technology and new radio (NR) technology such as fifth generation (5G) and beyond. The exemplified UE device 106 is configured to communicate over the CBRS spectrum, if the device 102 schedules the device 106 to do so, or can be scheduled to use LTE and/or new radio cellular frequencies. Note that in an implementation in which CBRS spectrum is dynamically allocated in a coverage area, as long as one or more user devices can operate in the CBRS spectrum, benefits of dynamic allocation via CBRS).
As to claim 13, Mueller-Parekh-Gholmeh teaches the system as recited in claim 12, wherein:
the UE capability information is used to select the UEs to be transitioned to one of a 5G NR RAT, LTE RAT (Mueller, figure 10; page 2, paragraph 30; i.e., [0030] FIG. 1, a user equipment (UE) device 106 connects to other elements of the system 100 via
the eNodeB (eNB) or gNodeB (gNB), which as exemplified in FIG. 1 are incorporated into a device 102 that supports citizens broadband radio service, as a CBSD. Communications
can be based on conventional fourth generation long term evolution (LTE) technology and new radio (NR) technology such as fifth generation (5G) and beyond. The exemplified UE device 106 is configured to communicate over the CBRS spectrum, if the device 102 schedules the device 106 to do so, or can be scheduled to use LTE and/or new radio cellular frequencies. Note that in an implementation in which CBRS spectrum is dynamically allocated in a coverage area, as long as one or more user devices can operate in the CBRS spectrum, benefits of dynamic allocation via CBRS), or
Wi-Fi RAT, based on a determined load balancing requirement within a given site and across sites for the deployment.
As to claim 19, Mueller-Parekh-Gholmeh teaches the system as recited in claim 1, wherein invoking
the one or more machine instructions by the processor causes one of the CBSD (Citizens Broadband Radio Service Device) of the LTE packet network and the CBSD of the NR _ packet network registers with a Spectrum Access System (SAS) as a single entity for channel allocation; and
the one or more machine instructions by the processor invokes a Self-Organizing Net- work (SON) algorithm, invoking the SON causes the processor, when partition- ing channels of the CBSD that registered, to perform a combined allocation for both the LTE packet network and the NR packet network.
As to claim 20, Mueller-Parekh teaches the system as recited in claim 1, wherein the UE capabilities of the given UE include at least one of (1) whether an individual UE is LTE capable, and (II) whether the individual UE is NR capable.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Mueller, U.S. Patent/Pub. No. 2023/0038751 A1 in view of Parekh, US 2021/0235277 A1, and Gholmeh, US 2018/0049213 A1, and further in view of Nama, U.S. Pub. No. 2018/0035301 A1.
As to claim 9, Mueller-Parekh-Gholmeh teaches the system as recited in claim 8. But Mueller-Parekh-Gholmeh failed to teach the claim limitation wherein the SAS provides the allocations to the CBSDs and a Self-Organizing Network (SON) algorithm is run to further balance the bandwidth across the sites based on determined UE demands.
However, Nama teaches the limitation wherein the SAS provides the allocations to the CBSDs and a Self-Organizing Network (SON) algorithm is run to further balance the bandwidth across the sites based on determined UE demands (Nama, page 3, paragraph 55; i.e., [0055] The SN as the domain proxy may have a single SAS interface for multiple RNs, where the RNs act as the CBSDs. Centralized SON
allows an optimized allocation of GAA channels provided by SAS across RNs. That is, given a set of channels, the centralized SON).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to modify Mueller-Parekh-Gholmeh to substitute control access from Nama for user equipment from Mueller-Parekh-Gholmeh to dynamically adjust channel usage if needed, e.g., if an incumbent is detected) (Nama, page 1, paragraph 18).
Claim(s) 10-11 & 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Mueller, U.S. Patent/Pub. No. 2023/0038751 A1 in view of Parekh, US 2021/0235277 A1, and Gholmeh, US 2018/0049213 A1, and Nama, U.S. Pub. No. 2018/0035301 A1, and further in view of Shaheen, U.S. Pub. No. 2007/0019575 A1.
As to claim 10, Mueller-Parekh-Gholmeh-Nama teaches the system as recited in claim 9. But Mueller-Parekh-Gholmeh-Nama failed to teach the claim limitation wherein the UEs are actively moved to an alternative RAT to offload capacity prior to initiating the bandwidth allocation changes.
However, Shaheen teaches the limitation wherein the UEs are actively moved to an alternative RAT to offload capacity prior to initiating the bandwidth allocation changes (Shaheen, page 2, paragraph 17-18; i.e., [0017] alternative RATs, (such as E-UTRAN), in its current geographic location and switches between them, (e.g., between the UTRAN and the E-UTRAN). The automatic handoff process may be initiated by the WTRU 250, or by the RAN 210a, 210b or the core network 220; [0018] In the WTRU-initiated handoff, the WTRU 250 detects the existence of alternative RATs, (such as an E-UTRAN), and initiates a handoff process).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to modify Mueller-Parekh-Gholmeh-Nama to substitute capability information from Shaheen for global orchestration capability from Mueller-Parekh-Gholmeh-Nama to provide E-UTRAN services based on the list through handoff procedures or system reselection procedures (Shaheen, page 1, paragraph 7).
As to claim 11, Mueller-Parekh-Gholmeh-Nama teaches the system as recited in claim 10, wherein UE flows are transitioned to Wi-Fi AP to free up resources temporarily in the CBSD prior to initiating the bandwidth allocation changes (Mueller, figure 10; page 13, paragraph 148; i.e., [0148] a wireless access point (AP) disposed thereon for communicating with the adapter 2158 in a wireless mode).
As to claim 17, Mueller-Parekh-Gholmeh-Nama teaches the system as recited in claim 10, wherein transitions across RATs are managed by anchoring the UE in 5GC with both LTE and 5G NR connectivity for the UE is anchored in a single packet core network (Mueller, figure 10; page 2, paragraph 29-30; i.e., [0029] CBRS spectrum via citizens broadband radio service devices (CBSDs) 102 and 104, however it is understood that this is a non-limiting example. Dynamic spectrum allocation technology as described herein can be implemented based on any available spectrum; [0030] In the example of FIG. 1, a user equipment (UE) device 106 connects to other elements of the system 100 via the eNodeB (eNB) or gNodeB (gNB), which as exemplified in FIG. 1 are incorporated into a device 102 that supports citizens broadband radio service, as a CBSD. Communications can be based on conventional fourth generation long term evolution (LTE) technology and new radio (NR) technology such as fifth generation (5G) and beyond. The exemplified UE device 106 is configured to communicate over the CBRS spectrum, if the device 102 schedules the device 106 to do so, or can be scheduled to use LTE and/or new radio cellular frequencies. Note that in an implementation in which CBRS spectrum is dynamically allocated in a coverage area, as long as one or more user devices can operate in the CBRS spectrum, benefits of dynamic allocation via CBRS).
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Mueller, U.S. Patent/Pub. No. 2023/0038751 A1 in view of Parekh, US 2021/0235277 A1, and Gholmeh, US 2018/0049213 A1, and further in view of Wang, U.S. Pub. No. 2023/0142993 A1.
As to claim 14, Mueller-Parekh-Gholmeh teaches the system as recited in claim 13. But Mueller-Parekh-Gholmeh failed to teach the claim limitation wherein inter-RAT packet-switched transitions are employed to ensure continuity of operation for UE QoS flows.
However, Wang teaches the limitation wherein inter-RAT packet-switched transitions are employed to ensure continuity of operation for UE QoS flows (Wang, page 9, paragraph 208; i.e., [0208] QCI, SQI, remote UE QoS flows mapped to the relaying
BH bearer).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to modify Mueller-Parekh-Gholmeh to substitute D2D communication from Wang for component communication from Mueller-Parekh-Gholmeh to supporting the high data rate services and the proximity services (Wang, page 1, paragraph 3).
Claim(s) 15-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Mueller, U.S. Patent/Pub. No. 2023/0038751 A1 in view of Parekh, US 2021/0235277 A1, and Gholmeh, US 2018/0049213 A1, and Wang, U.S. Pub. No. 2023/0142993 A1, and further in view of Tripathi, U.S. Pub. No. 2022/0070738 A1.
As to claim 15, Mueller-Parekh-Gholmeh-Wang teaches the system as recited in claim 14. But Mueller-Parekh-Gholmeh-Wang failed to teach the claim limitation wherein transitioning QoS criteria across 5GC-5QIs and EPC-QCI parameterization to maintain consistency of operations across RAT transitions.
However, Tripathi teaches the limitation transitioning QoS criteria across 5GC-5QIs and EPC-QCI parameterization to maintain consistency of operations across RAT transitions (Tripathi, page 11, paragraph 130; i.e., [0130] the Packet Error Rate (PER) are a function of the network or RAT type (e.g., NR-GEO, NRMEO, NR-LEO, NR-HAPS, and Air-to-Ground or ATG). In certain embodiments, scaling factors for the already-defined standardized QoS parameters are a function of the 5QI or QCI. In certain embodiments, the scaling factors for the already-defined standardized QoS parameters are a function of both the network/RAT type and 5QI/QCI).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to modify Mueller-Parekh-Gholmeh-Wang to substitute capability message from Tripathi for global orchestration capability from Mueller-Parekh-Gholmeh-Wang to meet the high growth in mobile data traffic and support new applications and deployments, improvements in radio interface efficiency (Tripathi, page 1, paragraph 3).
As to claim 16, Mueller-Parekh-Gholmeh-Wang-Tripathi teaches the system as recited in claim 15. But Mueller-Parekh-Gholmeh-Tripathi failed to teach the claim limitation wherein a VPN tunnel is established that allow for single IP context to be used across the RATs to prevent break due to IP address changes during inter-RAT transitions.
However, Parekh teaches the limitation wherein a VPN tunnel is established that allow for single IP context to be used across the RATs to prevent break due to IP address changes during inter-RAT transitions (Parekh, page 6, paragraph 54; i.e., [0054] establishing (at 510) the deterministic path may include building a VPN tunnel from the particular CPE to the closest PoP).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to modify Mueller-Parekh-Gholmeh-Tripathi to substitute CPE from Parekh for user equipment from Mueller-Parekh-Gholmeh-Tripathi to migrate from on-premises hosted devices to "cloud" systems and/or remote data centers that are accessible via the public IP network (Parekh, page 1, paragraph 1).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-17 & 19-20 has/have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection. Applicant’s arguments include the failure of previously applied art to expressly disclose “machine instructions being stored in the non-transient memory, invoking the machine instructions, by the processor, causes UE (User Equipment) capabilities of a given VE to be acquired for use by both an LTE (Long Term Evolution) packet network and an NR (New Radio) packet network, the VE capabilities being reused by both the LTE packet network and the NR packet network, without reacquiring the UE capabilities of the given UE that were acquired” (see Applicant’s response, 8/4/25, page 10-11). It is evident from the detailed mappings found in the above rejection(s) that Gholmeh disclosed this functionality (see Gholmeh, page 10, paragraph 111 – page 11, paragraph 114; page 12, paragraph 123-127). Further, it is clear from the numerous teachings (previously and currently cited) that the provision for “machine instructions being stored in the non-transient memory, invoking the machine instructions, by the processor, causes UE (User Equipment) capabilities of a given VE to be acquired for use by both an LTE (Long Term Evolution) packet network and an NR (New Radio) packet network, the VE capabilities being reused by both the LTE packet network and the NR packet network, without reacquiring the UE capabilities of the given UE that were acquired” was widely implemented in the networking art. Thus, Applicant’s arguments drawn toward distinction of the claimed invention and the prior art teachings on this point are not considered persuasive.
Listing of Relevant Arts
Hoshizaki, U.S. Patent/Pub. No. US 20230247591 A1 discloses LTE part of capabilities and NR capabilities.
Yilmaz, U.S. Patent/Pub. No. US 20200267791 A1 discloses NR, UE, LTE capability.
Contact Information
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
THUONG NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-3864. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 9:00-6:00.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Noel Beharry can be reached on 571-270-5630. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/THUONG NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2416