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 .
Detail Action
In the response filed on 1/20/2026, Claims 1-26 are pending.
That is a Final Action.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 01/20/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
35 USC § 101
Applicant argued that claims 1, 14, and 26 meets Steps 2A and 2B of Subject Mater Eligibility because:
2A: Applicant recites a practical application.
2B: Applicant’s claims are directed to managing a data exchange between first communication layer-second communication layer interface and a plurality of hard accelerator queues.
Examiner disagrees:
Claims 1, 14, and 26 fail to meet Step 2A and 2B.
2A: The step of determine first messaging is associated with a predefined messaging characteristic and queue of the message based on the characteristic is an abstract idea/mental process.
The court has found following to be abstract idea:
a claim to "collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis," where the data analysis steps are recited at a high level of generality such that they could practically be performed in the human mind, Electric Power Group v. Alstom, S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 1353-54, 119 USPQ2d 1739, 1741-42 (Fed. Cir. 2016);
a claim to collecting and comparing known information (claim 1), which are steps that can be practically performed in the human mind, Classen Immunotherapies, Inc. v. Biogen IDEC, 659 F.3d 1057, 1067, 100 USPQ2d 1492, 1500 (Fed. Cir. 2011);
Here, the applicant is claiming collecting information from the first message compare with a know pre-defined information; and storing the information based on result of the comparison. Therefore, the claims are reciting an abstract idea.
2B: Limitation that are directed towards managing a data exchange between first communication layer-second communication layer interface and a plurality of hard accelerator queues are well-understood, routine, conventional activity.
Courts have found following to be well-understood, routine, conventional activity:
Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g., using the Internet to gather data, Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1321, 120 USPQ2d at 1362 (utilizing an intermediary computer to forward information); TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto. LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 610, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1745 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (using a telephone for image transmission); OIP Techs., Inc., v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1093 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (sending messages over a network); buySAFE, Inc. v. Google, Inc., 765 F.3d 1350, 1355, 112 USPQ2d 1093, 1096 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (computer receives and sends information over a network); but see DDR Holdings, LLC v. Hotels.com, L.P., 773 F.3d 1245, 1258, 113 USPQ2d 1097, 1106 (Fed. Cir. 2014)
Electronic recordkeeping, Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int'l, 573 U.S. 208, 225, 110 USPQ2d 1984 (2014) (creating and maintaining "shadow accounts"); Ultramercial, 772 F.3d at 716, 112 USPQ2d at 1755 (updating an activity log);
Storing and retrieving information in memory, Versata Dev. Group, Inc. v. SAP Am., Inc., 793 F.3d 1306, 1334, 115 USPQ2d 1681, 1701 (Fed. Cir. 2015); OIP Techs., 788 F.3d at 1363, 115 USPQ2d at 1092-93;
Here, managing a data exchange between first communication layer-second communication layer interface and a plurality of hard accelerator queues can be considered storing and retrieving information in memory of the communication layer or electronic recordkeeping between the layers. Therefore, these limitations are well-understood, routine, conventional activity.
35 USC § 103
Applicant argued that the combination of Agostini and Khawer fail to teach “queue of the plurality of hardware accelerator queues based on the at least one predefined messaging characteristic of the first messaging.”
Examiner disagrees.
The combination of Agostini and Khawer teaches this limitation. Agostini teaches “standard to define communication protocol between the Distributed unit and the Radio Unit
Distributed Unit (O-DU): a logical node hosting RLC/MAC/High-PHY Layers based on a lower layer functional split
Radio Unit (O-RU): a logical node hosting Low-PHY layer and RF processing based on a lower layer functional split.”
And Khawer teaches identify whether message is TCP/IP packets. Therefore, the combination would identify whether message is TCP/IP, which identify whether the message is Low-PHY layer message or High-PHY layer message, and distribute it to Distributed Unit (O-DU) or Radio Unit (O-RU). Therefore, the combination teaches “based on the at least predefined messaging characteristic of the first messaging.”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 1-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to abstract idea/ mental process without significantly more.
Claim 1 recites the step of:
determine that the first messaging is associated with at least one predefined messaging characteristic; and
communicate the first messaging to a first hardware accelerator queue of the plurality of hardware accelerator queues based on the at least one predefined messaging characteristic of the first messaging…
This step can reasonably be performed in the human mind, through observation, judgement and opinion, with the aid of pen and paper, and therefore recite a mental process.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the claim only recites mere instructions to apply an exception (a system), with additional elements comprising only insignificant extra-solution activity.
Claim 1 recites the additional element of:
receive a first messaging from the first communication layer-second communication layer interface;
amount to insignificant extra-solution activity of mere data outputting, and are additionally well-understood, routine or conventional activities for storing data. Further, these additional elements merely recite using computing components in their ordinary capacity to store data that is a result of the recited mental process, and thus can be considered mere instructions to apply an exception. These additional elements of insignificant extra-solution activity and mere instructions to apply are not indicative of integration into a practical application. Even when considered in combination, the additional elements do not provide an inventive concept, thus the claim is not eligible.
Claim 2 is dependent on claim 1, and therefore inherits the same judicial exception recited in claim 1.
The judicial exceptions recited in claims 2 and 1 are not integrated into a practical application because the recited additional elements comprise only mere instructions to apply an exception (a system) and insignificant extra-solution activity.
Claim 2 recites the additional element of:
….one of uplink and downlink messaging; cell specific messaging; and sub-interface type messaging.
amount to insignificant extra-solution activity of mere data outputting, and are additionally well-understood, routine or conventional activities for storing data. Additionally, these additional elements merely recite using computing components in their ordinary capacity to store data that is a result of the recited mental process, and thus can be considered mere instructions to apply an exception. These additional elements of insignificant extra-solution activity and mere instructions to apply recited in claim 2 are not indicative of integration into a practical application. Even when considered in combination with the additional elements of claim 1, the additional elements do not provide an inventive concept, thus the claim is not eligible.
Claim 3 is dependent on claim 1, and therefore inherits the same judicial exception recited in claim 1.
The judicial exceptions recited in claims 3 and 1 are not integrated into a practical application because the recited additional elements comprise only mere instructions to apply an exception (a system) and insignificant extra-solution activity.
Claim 3 recites the additional element of:
…. physical downlink shared channel, PDSCH, messaging; physical downlink control channel, PDCCH, messaging; physical broadcast channel, PBCH, messaging; and reference signal messaging.
amount to insignificant extra-solution activity of mere data outputting, and are additionally well-understood, routine or conventional activities for storing data. Additionally, these additional elements merely recite using computing components in their ordinary capacity to store data that is a result of the recited mental process, and thus can be considered mere instructions to apply an exception. These additional elements of insignificant extra-solution activity and mere instructions to apply recited in claim 3 are not indicative of integration into a practical application. Even when considered in combination with the additional elements of claim 1, the additional elements do not provide an inventive concept, thus the claim is not eligible.
Claim 4 is dependent on claim 1, and therefore inherits the same judicial exception recited in claim 1. Claim 4 also recites the step of:
the communicating of messaging from the first communication layer-second communication layer interface to one of the plurality of hardware accelerator queues being based on whether the messaging corresponds to one of the plurality of respective groups of messaging characteristics.
This step can reasonably be performed in the human mind, through observation, judgement and opinion, with the aid of pen and paper, and therefore recites a mental process.
The judicial exceptions recited in claims 4 and 1 are not integrated into a practical application because the recited additional elements comprise only mere instructions to apply an exception (The system) and insignificant extra-solution activity.
Claim 4 recites the additional element of:
wherein each of the plurality of hardware accelerator queues are associated with one of a plurality of respective groups of messaging characteristics,
amount to insignificant extra-solution activity of mere data outputting, and are additionally well-understood, routine or conventional activities for storing data. Additionally, these additional elements merely recite using computing components in their ordinary capacity to store data that is a result of the recited mental process, and thus can be considered mere instructions to apply an exception. These additional elements of insignificant extra-solution activity and mere instructions to apply recited in claim 4are not indicative of integration into a practical application. Even when considered in combination with the additional elements of claim 1, the additional elements do not provide an inventive concept, thus the claim is not eligible.
Claim 5 is dependent on claims 1 and 4, and therefore inherits the same judicial exception recited in claim 1.
The judicial exceptions recited in claims 5, 4, and 1 are not integrated into a practical application because the recited additional elements comprise only mere instructions to apply an exception (a system) and insignificant extra-solution activity.
Claim 5 recites the additional element of:
wherein a first group of messaging characteristics of the plurality of respective groups of messaging characteristics for the first hardware accelerator queue corresponds to uplink messaging for sub-interface messaging for a plurality of cells; and a second group of messaging characteristics of the plurality of respective groups of messaging characteristics for a second hardware accelerator queue of the plurality of hardware accelerator queues corresponds to downlink messaging for sub-interface messaging for a plurality of cells.
amount to insignificant extra-solution activity of mere data outputting, and are additionally well-understood, routine or conventional activities for storing data. Additionally, these additional elements merely recite using computing components in their ordinary capacity to store data that is a result of the recited mental process, and thus can be considered mere instructions to apply an exception. These additional elements of insignificant extra-solution activity and mere instructions to apply recited in claim 5 are not indicative of integration into a practical application. Even when considered in combination with the additional elements of claims 1 and 4, the additional elements do not provide an inventive concept, thus the claim is not eligible.
Claim 6 is dependent on claim 1, and therefore inherits the same judicial exception recited in claim 1.
The judicial exceptions recited in claims 6 and 1 are not integrated into a practical application because the recited additional elements comprise only mere instructions to apply an exception (a system) and insignificant extra-solution activity.
Claim 6 recites the additional element of:
herein each hardware accelerator queue of the plurality of hardware accelerator (29) queues is associated with a respective one of uplink and downlink messaging of a respective cell.
amount to insignificant extra-solution activity of mere data outputting, and are additionally well-understood, routine or conventional activities for storing data. Additionally, these additional elements merely recite using computing components in their ordinary capacity to store data that is a result of the recited mental process, and thus can be considered mere instructions to apply an exception. These additional elements of insignificant extra-solution activity and mere instructions to apply recited in claim 6 are not indicative of integration into a practical application. Even when considered in combination with the additional elements of claim 1, the additional elements do not provide an inventive concept, thus the claim is not eligible.
Claim 7 is dependent on claims 1 and 6, and therefore inherits the same judicial exception recited in claim 1.
The judicial exceptions recited in claims 6, and 1 are not integrated into a practical application because the recited additional elements comprise only mere instructions to apply an exception (a system) and insignificant extra-solution activity.
Claim 7 recites the additional element of:
first sub-interface messaging associated with the first communication layer; and a second sub-interface messaging associated with the first communication layer..
amount to insignificant extra-solution activity of mere data outputting, and are additionally well-understood, routine or conventional activities for storing data. Additionally, these additional elements merely recite using computing components in their ordinary capacity to store data that is a result of the recited mental process, and thus can be considered mere instructions to apply an exception. These additional elements of insignificant extra-solution activity and mere instructions to apply recited in claim 7 are not indicative of integration into a practical application. Even when considered in combination with the additional elements of claims 1 and 6, the additional elements do not provide an inventive concept, thus the claim is not eligible.
Claim 8 is dependent on claims 1 and 6, and therefore inherits the same judicial exception recited in claim 1.
The judicial exceptions recited in claims 6, and 1 are not integrated into a practical application because the recited additional elements comprise only mere instructions to apply an exception (a system) and insignificant extra-solution activity.
Claim 8 recites the additional element of:
first sub-interface messaging corresponds to femto application platform interface, FAPI, P5 messaging and the second sub-interface messaging corresponds to FAPI P7 messaging.
amount to insignificant extra-solution activity of mere data outputting, and are additionally well-understood, routine or conventional activities for storing data. Additionally, these additional elements merely recite using computing components in their ordinary capacity to store data that is a result of the recited mental process, and thus can be considered mere instructions to apply an exception. These additional elements of insignificant extra-solution activity and mere instructions to apply recited in claim 7 are not indicative of integration into a practical application. Even when considered in combination with the additional elements of claims 1 and 6, the additional elements do not provide an inventive concept, thus the claim is not eligible.
Claim 9 is dependent on claim 1, and therefore inherits the same judicial exception recited in claim 1.
The judicial exceptions recited in claims 9 and 1 are not integrated into a practical application because the recited additional elements comprise only mere instructions to apply an exception (a system) and insignificant extra-solution activity.
Claim 9 recites the additional element of:
first sub-interface messaging corresponds to femto application platform interface, FAPI, P5 messaging and the second sub-interface messaging corresponds to FAPI P7 messaging.
amount to insignificant extra-solution activity of mere data outputting, and are additionally well-understood, routine or conventional activities for storing data. Additionally, these additional elements merely recite using computing components in their ordinary capacity to store data that is a result of the recited mental process, and thus can be considered mere instructions to apply an exception. These additional elements of insignificant extra-solution activity and mere instructions to apply recited in claim 6 are not indicative of integration into a practical application. Even when considered in combination with the additional elements of claim 1, the additional elements do not provide an inventive concept, thus the claim is not eligible.
Claim 10 is dependent on claim 1, and therefore inherits the same judicial exception recited in claim 1.
The judicial exceptions recited in claims 10 and 1 are not integrated into a practical application because the recited additional elements comprise only mere instructions to apply an exception (a system) and insignificant extra-solution activity.
Claim 10 recites the additional element of:
the plurality of hardware accelerator (29) queues corresponds to first communication layer hardware accelerator (29) queues for performing inline interface processing.
amount to insignificant extra-solution activity of mere data outputting, and are additionally well-understood, routine or conventional activities for storing data. Additionally, these additional elements merely recite using computing components in their ordinary capacity to store data that is a result of the recited mental process, and thus can be considered mere instructions to apply an exception. These additional elements of insignificant extra-solution activity and mere instructions to apply recited in claim 10 are not indicative of integration into a practical application. Even when considered in combination with the additional elements of claim 1, the additional elements do not provide an inventive concept, thus the claim is not eligible.
Claim 11 is dependent on claim 1, and therefore inherits the same judicial exception recited in claim 1.
The judicial exceptions recited in claims 11 and 1 are not integrated into a practical application because the recited additional elements comprise only mere instructions to apply an exception (a system) and insignificant extra-solution activity.
Claim 11 recites the additional element of:
into a server (27) to manage the data exchange between the first communication layer-second communication layer interface of the server (17) and the plurality of hardware accelerator (29) queues of the server.
amount to insignificant extra-solution activity of mere data outputting, and are additionally well-understood, routine or conventional activities for storing data. Additionally, these additional elements merely recite using computing components in their ordinary capacity to store data that is a result of the recited mental process, and thus can be considered mere instructions to apply an exception. These additional elements of insignificant extra-solution activity and mere instructions to apply recited in claim 11 are not indicative of integration into a practical application. Even when considered in combination with the additional elements of claim 1, the additional elements do not provide an inventive concept, thus the claim is not eligible.
Claim 12 is dependent on claim 1, and therefore inherits the same judicial exception recited in claim 1.
The judicial exceptions recited in claims 12 and 1 are not integrated into a practical application because the recited additional elements comprise only mere instructions to apply an exception (a system) and insignificant extra-solution activity.
Claim 12 recites the additional element of:
is configured to be pluggable into a network node (16) to manage the data exchange between the first communication layer-second communication layer interface of the network node (16) and the plurality of hardware accelerator (29) queues of the network node (16).
amount to insignificant extra-solution activity of mere data outputting, and are additionally well-understood, routine or conventional activities for storing data. Additionally, these additional elements merely recite using computing components in their ordinary capacity to store data that is a result of the recited mental process, and thus can be considered mere instructions to apply an exception. These additional elements of insignificant extra-solution activity and mere instructions to apply recited in claim 12 are not indicative of integration into a practical application. Even when considered in combination with the additional elements of claim 1, the additional elements do not provide an inventive concept, thus the claim is not eligible.
Claim 13 is dependent on claim 1, and therefore inherits the same judicial exception recited in claim 1.
The judicial exceptions recited in claims 13 and 1 are not integrated into a practical application because the recited additional elements comprise only mere instructions to apply an exception (a system) and insignificant extra-solution activity.
Claim 13 recites the additional element of:
the first communication layer corresponds to open systems interconnection, OSI, layer 1 and the second communication layer corresponds to open systems interconnection, OSI, layer 2.
amount to insignificant extra-solution activity of mere data outputting, and are additionally well-understood, routine or conventional activities for storing data. Additionally, these additional elements merely recite using computing components in their ordinary capacity to store data that is a result of the recited mental process, and thus can be considered mere instructions to apply an exception. These additional elements of insignificant extra-solution activity and mere instructions to apply recited in claim 13 are not indicative of integration into a practical application. Even when considered in combination with the additional elements of claim 1, the additional elements do not provide an inventive concept, thus the claim is not eligible.
Claims 14-25 are directed to a method comprise the steps which the at least one processing platform of the system of claims 1-11 and 13 are configured to perform. Claims 14-25 recite the same limitations as claims 1-11 and 13, respectively; therefore, claims 14-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea of a method process without significantly more for the same reasons presented with respect to claims 1-11 and 13. See above.
Claim 26 is directed to a readable medium comprise the steps which the at least one processing platform of the system of claim 1 is configured to perform. Claims 26 recites the same limitations as claim 1, respectively; therefore, claim 26 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea of a method process without significantly more for the same reasons presented with respect to claim 1. See 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.
Claims 1-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Agostini: Building O-Ran Based High Performance 5G Ran systems with Nvidia GPU and Mellanox Nic. view of Khawer US Publication 2012/0134320.
18/005,087
Agostini view of Khawer US Publication 2012/0134320.
Claim 1
A node for managing data exchange between a first communication layer-second communication layer interface and a plurality of hardware accelerator queues, the first layer being different from the second communication layer, the node comprising:
Agostini p9-p29: page 9 hard interface l2 and l1; see p 11 O-Ran Fh Split Option 7.2, and p 12 and 13, blue arrow interface in DU; p29 Left hand figure and distributed Unit : a logical node hosting RLC/Mac/High-Phy Layer based on a lower layer functional split.
Khawer teaches queue up hardware. See Khawer p0053-p0056;
It would have been obvious at the time of the invention for a person ordinary skill in the art (POSITA) to include Khawer’s teaching with method Agostini in order to allow system schedule hardware efficiently.
processing circuitry configured to: receive a first messaging from the first communication layer-second communication layer interface;
Agostini p9-p29: page 9 hard interface l2 and l1; see p 11 O-Ran Fh Split Option 7.2, and p 12 and 13, blue arrow interface in DU;
P23-24 GPU memory; p25 New pockets;
p29 Left hand figure and distributed Unit : a logical node hosting RLC/Mac/High-Phy Layer based on a lower layer functional split.
determine that the first messaging is associated with at least one predefined messaging characteristic; and
Khawer teaches distributing packet based on packet information (TCP and UDP IP). (see Khawer p0050)
It would have been obvious at the time of the invention for a person ordinary skill in the art (POSITA) to include Khawer’s teaching with method Agostini in order to allow accurately direct the system messages based on protocol.
communicate the first messaging to a first hardware accelerator queue of the plurality of hardware accelerator queues based on the at least one predefined messaging characteristic of the first messaging.
Agostini p9-p29: page 9 hard interface l2 and l1; see p 11 O-Ran Fh Split Option 7.2, and p 12 and 13, blue arrow interface in DU;
P23-24 GPU memory; p25 New pokets;
p29 Left hand figure and distributed Unit : a logical node hosting RLC/Mac/High-Phy Layer based on a lower layer functional split.
Khawer teaches distributing packet based on packet information (TCP and UDP IP). (see Khawer p0050)
Claim 2
The node of Claim 1, wherein the at least one predefined messaging characteristic is associated with at least one of:
one of uplink and downlink messaging;
cell specific messaging; and
sub-interface type messaging.
Agostini p9-p29: page 9 hard interface l2 and l1; see p 11 O-Ran Fh Split Option 7.2, and p 12 and 13, blue arrow interface in DU;
P23-24 GPU memory; p25 New pokets;
p29 Left hand figure and distributed Unit : a logical node hosting RLC/Mac/High-Phy Layer based on a lower layer functional split.
Khawer teaches distributing packet based on packet information (TCP and UDP IP). (see Khawer p0050)
Khawer teaches queue up hardware. See Khawer p0053-p0056;
Claim 3
The node of Claim1, wherein the first messaging is one of: physical downlink shared channel, PDSCH, messaging;
physical downlink control channel, PDCCH, messaging; physical broadcast channel, PBCH, messaging; and
reference signal messaging.
Agostini p31-32; Uplink procedure Downlink procedure.
Claim 4
The node of Claim1, wherein each of the plurality of hardware accelerator queues are associated with one of a plurality of respective groups of messaging characteristics, the communicating of messaging from the first communication layer-second communication layer interface to one of the plurality of hardware accelerator queues being based on whether the messaging corresponds to one of the plurality of respective groups of messaging characteristics.
Agostini p9-p29: page 9 hard interface l2 and l1; see p 11 O-Ran Fh Split Option 7.2, and p 12 and 13, blue arrow interface in DU;
P23-24 GPU memory; p25 New pokets;
p29 Left hand figure and distributed Unit : a logical node hosting RLC/Mac/High-Phy Layer based on a lower layer functional split.
Khawer teaches distributing packet based on packet information (TCP and UDP IP). (see Khawer p0050)
Khawer teaches queue up hardware. See Khawer p0053-p0056;
Claim 5
The node of Claim 4, wherein a first group of messaging characteristics of the plurality of respective groups of messaging characteristics for the first hardware accelerator queue corresponds to uplink messaging for sub-interface messaging for a plurality of cells; and a second group of messaging characteristics of the plurality of respective groups of messaging characteristics for a second hardware accelerator queue of the plurality of hardware accelerator queues corresponds to downlink messaging for sub-interface messaging for a plurality of cells.
Agostini p9-p29: page 9 hard interface l2 and l1; see p 11 O-Ran Fh Split Option 7.2, and p 12 and 13, blue arrow interface in DU;
P23-24 GPU memory; p25 New pokets;
p29 Left hand figure and distributed Unit : a logical node hosting RLC/Mac/High-Phy Layer based on a lower layer functional split.
Khawer teaches distributing packet based on packet information (TCP and UDP IP). (see Khawer p0050)
Khawer teaches queue up hardware. See Khawer p0053-p0056;
Claim 6
The node of Claim1, wherein each hardware accelerator queue of the plurality of hardware accelerator queues is associated with a respective one of uplink and downlink messaging of a respective cell.
Agostini p9-p29: page 9 hard interface l2 and l1; see p 11 O-Ran Fh Split Option 7.2, and p 12 and 13, blue arrow interface in DU;
P23-24 GPU memory; p25 New parkets;
p29 Left hand figure and distributed Unit : a logical node hosting RLC/Mac/High-Phy Layer based on a lower layer functional split.
Agostini p31-32; Uplink procedure Downlink procedure.
Khawer p0049-p0056;
Claim 7
The node of Claim 6, wherein the respective one of uplink and downlink messaging includes:
first sub-interface messaging associated with the first communication layer; and
a second sub-interface messaging associated with the first communication layer.
Agostini p9-p29: page 9 hard interface l2 and l1; see p 11 O-Ran Fh Split Option 7.2, and p 12 and 13, blue arrow interface in DU;
P23-24 GPU memory; p25 New parkets;
p29 Left hand figure and distributed Unit : a logical node hosting RLC/Mac/High-Phy Layer based on a lower layer functional split.
Agostini p31-32; Uplink procedure Downlink procedure.
Khawer p0049-p0056;
Clam 8
The node (25) of Claim 6, wherein the respective one of uplink and downlink messaging includes only one of:
a first sub-interface messaging associated with the first communication layer; and
a second sub-interface messaging associated with the first communication layer.
Agostini p9-p29: page 9 hard interface l2 and l1; see p 11 O-Ran Fh Split Option 7.2, and p 12 and 13, blue arrow interface in DU;
P23-24 GPU memory; p25 New parkets;
p29 Left hand figure and distributed Unit : a logical node hosting RLC/Mac/High-Phy Layer based on a lower layer functional split.
Agostini p31-32; Uplink procedure Downlink procedure.
Khawer p0049-p0056;
Claim 9
The node (25) of Claim7, wherein the first sub-interface messaging corresponds to femto application platform interface, FAPI, P5 messaging and the second sub-interface messaging corresponds to FAPI P7 messaging.
Agostini p9-p29: page 9 hard interface l2 and l1; see p 11 O-Ran Fh Split Option 7.2, and p 12 and 13, blue arrow interface in DU;
P23-24 GPU memory; p25 New parkets;
p29 Left hand figure and distributed Unit : a logical node hosting RLC/Mac/High-Phy Layer based on a lower layer functional split.
Agostini p31-32; Uplink procedure Downlink procedure.
Khawer p0049-p0056;
Clam 10
(Currently Amended) The node of claim 1, wherein the plurality of hardware accelerator queues corresponds to first communication layer hardware accelerator queues for performing inline interface processing.
Agostini p9-p29: page 9 hard interface l2 and l1; see p 11 O-Ran Fh Split Option 7.2, and p 12 and 13, blue arrow interface in DU;
P23-24 GPU memory; p25 New parkets;
p29 Left hand figure and distributed Unit : a logical node hosting RLC/Mac/High-Phy Layer based on a lower layer functional split.
Agostini p31-32; Uplink procedure Downlink procedure.
Khawer p0049-p0056;
Claim 11
The node of Claim 1, wherein the node is configured to be pluggable into a server to manage the data exchange between the first communication layer-second communication layer interface of the server and the plurality of hardware accelerator queues of the server.
Agostini p9-p29: page 9 hard interface l2 and l1; see p 11 O-Ran Fh Split Option 7.2, and p 12 and 13, blue arrow interface in DU;
P23-24 GPU memory; p25 New parkets;
p29 Left hand figure and distributed Unit : a logical node hosting RLC/Mac/High-Phy Layer based on a lower layer functional split.
Agostini p31-32; Uplink procedure Downlink procedure.
Khawer p0049-p0056;
Claim 12
The node of Claim1, wherein the node is configured to be pluggable into a network node to manage the data exchange between the first communication layer-second communication layer interface of the network node and the plurality of hardware accelerator queues of the network node.
Agostini p9-p29: page 9 hard interface l2 and l1; see p 11 O-Ran Fh Split Option 7.2, and p 12 and 13, blue arrow interface in DU;
P23-24 GPU memory; p25 New parkets;
p29 Left hand figure and distributed Unit : a logical node hosting RLC/Mac/High-Phy Layer based on a lower layer functional split.
Agostini p31-32; Uplink procedure Downlink procedure.
Khawer p0049-p0056;
Claim 13
The node of Claim1, wherein the first communication layer corresponds to open systems interconnection, OSI, layer 1 and the second communication layer corresponds to open systems interconnection, OSI, layer 2
Agostini p9-p29: page 9 hard interface l2 and l1; see p 11 O-Ran Fh Split Option 7.2, and p 12 and 13, blue arrow interface in DU;
P23-24 GPU memory; p25 New pokets;
p29 Left hand figure and distributed Unit : a logical node hosting RLC/Mac/High-Phy Layer based on a lower layer functional split.
Khawer teaches distributing packet based on packet information (TCP and UDP IP). (see Khawer p0050)
Khawer teaches queue up hardware. See Khawer p0053-p0056;
As per claims 14-25, they are rejected under the same rationale as claims 1-11 and 13. See rejections above.
As per claim 26, it is rejected under the same rationale as claim 1. See rejection above.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PENG KE whose telephone number is (571)272-4062. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6:30-5:00.
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, Kevin Young can be reached at (571) 270-3180. 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.
/PENG KE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2194