Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment filed on 05/29/2026 has been entered. Independent Claims 1, 10, and 18 have been amended. Dependent claims 4, 5, and 9 have been amended. No claims have been cancelled. No claims are new and have been entered. Claims 1-20 are still pending in this application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the independent claim, under 35 USC § 103, are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specified challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1, 5, 9, 10, 11, 14, 18, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Faxér (Pub. No.: US 20220352950 A1, hereafter “Faxér”) in view of Huang (Pub. No: US 20220095324 A1, hereafter “Huang”), further in view of Park (Pub. No.: US 20230085104 A1, hereafter “Park’104”), and even further in view of Seidel (Pub. No.: US 20230092324 A1, hereafter “Seidel”).
Regarding Claim 1, Claim 10, and Claim 18
Faxér teaches a Method, a Network Device, and a Non-Transitory Computer-Readable Medium comprising
sending, by the one or more network devices and to the base station (Faxér ¶0130: configure the UE from the gNB, e.g. the Base Station), the selected one of the resource management policies (Faxér ¶0130: CSI timeline requirement; Faxér teaches the base station sending CSI requirements to the UE, see ¶0130).
Faxér does not explicitly teach teaches
determining, by the one or more network devices, that the URLLC service level is required for a communication session requested by a user equipment (UE) device;
However, Huang teaches
determining (Huang ¶0081: scheduling), by the one or more network devices (Huang Fig. 1: 102), that the URLLC service level (Huang ¶0081: priority level) is required for a communication session (Huang ¶0041: base station may be responsible for session management) requested by a user equipment (UE) device (Huang ¶0064: UE requests uplink resources; Huang teaches the UE receiving priority scheduling information from the base station, for maintaining URLLC, see Fig. 1, ¶0041, ¶0064, and ¶0081);
It would have been obvious for one skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Faxér, by way of Huang, to include the UE receiving priority scheduling information from the base station, for maintaining URLLC, as taught by Huang in ¶0081, to increase various telecommunication services to reduce bandwidth problems with multiple users sharing available system resources.
Faxér in view of Huang does not explicitly teach
selecting, by the one or more network devices, one of the resource management policies for the communication session based whether on a number of antennas used by a base station supporting the communication session exceeds a threshold number of antennas: an estimated available bandwidth the base station for the communication session, and a transmission delay for processing a packet in the communication session;
However, Park’104 teaches
selecting (Park’104 ¶0190: select), by the one or more network devices (Park’104 ¶0190: UE), one of the resource management policies (Park’104 ¶0190: optimal CSI-RS) for the communication session (Park’104 ¶0190: suitable for its own channel environment) based whether on a number of antennas used by a base station supporting the communication session (Park’104 ¶0190: limitation, such as the number of Tx/Rx antennas limited to 1) exceeds a threshold number of antennas (Park’104 ¶0190: limitation): an estimated available bandwidth (Park’104 ¶0190: reduced bandwidth) of the base station for the communication session (Park’104 ¶0190: from the base station), and a transmission delay for processing a packet in the communication session (Park’104 ¶0195: RO offset, e.g. random access occasion, see ¶0008; Park’104 teaches selecting an optimal CSI-RS factoring in the Tx/Rx antenna limitation, and reduced bandwidth with a configured RO offset, see ¶0008 and ¶0195);
It would have been obvious for one skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Faxér in view of Huang by way of Park’104, to include an element that teaches selecting an optimal CSI-RS factoring in the Tx/Rx antenna limitation, and reduced bandwidth with a configured RO offset, as taught by Park’104 in ¶0008 and ¶0195, to use a known element with another known element for a well understood result to help improve communication systems in a reduced capacity environment by enabling increased flexibility in allowing more options for a more independent environment, thereby improving the end-to-end quality of service.
Faxér in view of Huang, further in view of Park’104 does not explicitly teach
storing, by one or more network device in a core network, a plurality of resource management policies for implementing communication sessions for an Ultra-Reliable Low-Latency Communications (URLLC) service level;
However, Seidel teaches
storing (Seidel ¶0220: stored in the core network), by one or more network device (Seidel ¶0220: like a gNB) in a core network (Seidel ¶0220: stored in the core network), a plurality of resource management policies (Seidel ¶0220: RACH resource configuration policy) for implementing communication sessions (Seidel ¶0220: UL pulls the updated RACH policies from a server in the core network) for an Ultra-Reliable Low-Latency Communications (URLLC) service level (Seidel ¶0220: URLLC services or slices; Seidel teaches an URLLC RACH policy within the core network to be submitted to a UE, see ¶0220);
It would have been obvious for one skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Faxér in view of Huang, further in view of Park’104 by way of Seidel, to include an element that teaches an URLLC RACH policy within the core network to be submitted to a UE, as taught by Seidel in ¶0220, to combine multiple known elements to further enable better policy management systems and allow responsive policy updates especially for communication systems that require high reliability with low throughput needs to ensure a fully stable communication and benefit end to end communication.
Claim 18 differs by the following limitation, which is also taught by the prior art,
A non-transitory computer-readable medium containing instructions (Faxér Fig. 16: 1606), executable by one processors (Faxér Fig. 16: 1604), for: storing resource management policies (Faxér ¶0153: functions stored in memory; Faxér teaches instructions in memory being executed by a processor, see Fig. 16 and ¶0153)
Regarding Claim 5, Claim 14, and Claim 20
Faxér in view of Huang, further in view of Park’104, and even further in view of Seidel teaches the method, device, and medium with instructions as explained above in Claim 1. Faxér further discloses
wherein selecting the one of the resource management policies (Faxér ¶0018: CSI) include selecting from: a time-based policy (Faxér ¶0022: time-domain behavior), a bandwidth-based policy (Faxér ¶0027: BWP), and a retransmission with frequency hopping policy (Faxér ¶0023: frequency granularity; Faxér teaches a CSI report with elements such as time, bandwidth, and frequency hopping, see ¶0018, ¶0022-¶0023, and ¶0027).
Regarding Claim 9 and Claim 11
Faxér in view of Huang, further in view of Park’104, and even further in view of Seidel teaches the method, device, and medium with instructions as explained above in Claim 1. Faxér further discloses
wherein the one or more network devices includes a Radio Access Network (RAN) intelligent controller (Faxér ¶0108: Base station includes RAN node; Faxér teaches a network device being a RAN base station, see ¶0108).
Claim(s) 2, 3, 12, 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Faxér (Pub.: No.: US 20220352950 A1, hereafter “Faxér”) in view of Huang (Pub. No: US 20220095324 A1, hereafter “Huang”), further in view of Park (Pub. No.: US 20230085104 A1, hereafter “Park’104”), even further Seidel (Pub. No.: US 20230092324 A1, hereafter “Seidel”), and even further in view of Park (Pub. No.: US 20150271814 A1, hereafter “Park”).
Regarding Claim 2, Claim 12, and Claim 19
Faxér in view of Huang, further in view of Park’104, and even further in view of Seidel teaches the method, device, and medium with instructions as explained above in Claim 1. Faxér further discloses
wherein selecting the one of the resource management policies further comprises: identifying an antenna count threshold (Faxér ¶0013: supported number of antenna ports) and the number of antennas used by the base station supporting the communication session (Faxér ¶0013: CSI-RS ports; Faxér teaches a CSI report with the number of antenna ports, see ¶0013);
Faxér in view of Huang, further in view of Park’104, and even further in view of Seidel, does not explicitly teach
and comparing the number of antennas used by the access station to the antenna count threshold.
However, Park teaches
and comparing the number of antennas (Park ¶0081: compared) used by the base station (Park ¶0081: Rx antennas) to the antenna count threshold (Park ¶0081: channel transmission compacity; Park teaches comparing the number of Rx antennas to a capacity, see ¶0081).
It would have been obvious for one skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Faxér in view of Huang, further in view of Park’104, and even further in view of Seidel, by way of Park, to include comparing the number of Rx antennas to a known capacity, as taught by Park in ¶0081, to increase throughput through carrier aggregation technology and MIMO in a restricted frequency.
Regarding Claim 3
Faxér in view of Huang, further in view of Park’104, and even further in view of Seidel, and even further in view of Park teaches the method, device, and medium with instructions as explained above in Claim 2. Faxér further discloses
wherein the antenna count threshold is a number between 4 and 32 (Faxér ¶0013: supported number of NR antenna ports are 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32; Faxér teaches a CSI report where the number is between 4 and 32, see ¶0013).
Claim(s) 4, 6, 7, 8, 13, 15-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Faxér (Pub.: No.: US 20220352950 A1, hereafter “Faxér”) in view of Huang (Pub. No: US 20220095324 A1, hereafter “Huang”), further in view of Park (Pub. No.: US 20230085104 A1, hereafter “Park’104”), further in view of Park (Pub. No.: US 20150271814 A1, hereafter “Park”), even further Seidel (Pub. No.: US 20230092324 A1, hereafter “Seidel”), and further in view of Fakoorian (Pub. No.: US 20190313419 A1, hereafter “Fakoorian”).
Regarding Claim 4 and Claim 13
Faxér in view of Huang, further in view of Park’104, even further in view of Seidel, and even further in view of Park teaches the method, device, and medium with instructions as explained above in Claim 2. Faxér further discloses
determining, by the one or more network devices, a minimum required bandwidth for a URLLC communication session (Faxér ¶0008: channel requirements) and the estimated available bandwidth for the base station (Faxér ¶0008: defined by BWP size; Faxér teaches setting channel requirements, one of which is BWP, see ¶0008);
Faxér in view of Huang, further in view of Park’104, even further in view of Seidel, and even further in view of Park does not explicitly teach
and determining, by the one or more network devices, a minimum delay requirement for the communication session and the transmission delay for processing a packet in the communication session.
However, Fakoorian teaches
and determining, by the one or more network devices, a minimum delay requirement for the communication session (Fakoorian ¶0072: deadline constraint) and the transmission delay for processing a packet in the communication session (Fakoorian ¶0072: latency requirement; Fakoorian teaches having a minimum time requirement and a method for causing that delay, see ¶0072).
It would have been obvious for one skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Faxér in view of Huang, further in view of Park’104, even further in view of Seidel, and even further in view of Park, by way of Fakoorian, to include having a minimum time requirement and system for causing that delay, as taught by Fakoorian in ¶0072, to handle overlapping frequencies on different transmissions on different communication protocols.
Regarding Claim 6 and Claim 16
Faxér in view of Huang, further in view of Park’104, and even further in view of Seidel teaches the method, device, and medium with instructions as explained above in Claim 5.
wherein the time-based policy includes: instructions for increasing a transmission duration for a packet to at least two frames of a first URLLC frame (Fakoorian ¶0118: subframes may be increased; Fakoorian teaches a policy that includes increasing the packet duration, see ¶0118).
It would have been obvious for one skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Faxér in view of Huang, further in view of Park’104, and even further in view of Seidel, by way of Fakoorian, to include a policy that has an increased packet duration, as taught by Fakoorian in ¶0118, to handle overlapping frequencies on different transmissions on different communication protocols.
Regarding Claim 7 and Claim 17
Faxér in view of Huang, further in view of Park’104, and even further in view of Seidel teaches the method, device, and medium with instructions as explained above in Claim 5.
wherein the bandwidth-based policy includes: instructions for increasing a bandwidth in frequency band to at least double a first URLLC bandwidth (Fakoorian ¶0018: first bandwidth may be larger than a second bandwidth; Fakoorian teaches a protocol for increasing the bandwidth, see ¶0018).
It would have been obvious for one skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Faxér, in view of Huang, further in view of Park’104, and even further in view of Seidel, by way of Fakoorian, to include a policy that has an increased bandwidth, as taught by Fakoorian in ¶0018, to handle overlapping frequencies on different transmissions on different communication protocols.
Regarding Claim 8 and Claim 15
Faxér in view of Huang, further in view of Park’104, and even further in view of Seidel teaches the method, device, and medium with instructions as explained above in Claim 5.
wherein the retransmission with frequency hopping policy includes: instructions for retransmitting packets with frequency hopping over separate subchannels (Fakoorian ¶0018: frequency hopped; Fakoorian teaches a protocol for hopping frequencies, see ¶0018).
It would have been obvious for one skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Faxér, further in view of Huang, further in view of Park’104, and even further in view of Seidel, by way of Fakoorian, to include a policy that has a hopping frequency, as taught by Fakoorian in ¶0018, to handle overlapping frequencies on different transmissions on different communication protocols.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUSTIN MICHAEL WHITAKER whose telephone number is (703)756-4763. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 7:30am - 4:00pm.
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, Jeffrey Rutkowski can be reached on (571) 270-1215. 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.
/JUSTIN MICHAEL WHITAKER/Examiner, Art Unit 2415
/Sudesh M. Patidar/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2415
Prosecution Insights