DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1, 3, 7-17 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Noh et al (US 2022/0232655, hereinafter Noh), in view of Tong et al (US 2024/0022927, hereinafter Tong), in view of Lee et al (US 2022/0303808, hereinafter Lee) and in view of Kim et al (US 2020/017003, hereinafter Kim).
Regarding claim 1, Noh discloses a method, comprising: communicating, by a processor of an apparatus, with a network node of a wireless network by utilizing a lean protocol stack (processor, Para [0402], communicating between communication nodes using protocol stack, Para [0294], the stack can be divided into a user plane and control plane stack, Para [0295], thereby a more efficient or “lean” protocol stack), wherein the utilizing of the lean protocol stack comprises one or more of: performing a split-stack operation (the protocol stack is divided into a user plane protocol stack and a control plane protocol stack, Para [0295]); but does not disclose performing data concatenation and performing uplink (UL) scheduling optimization. Tong discloses UE protocol stack capable of performing dynamic scheduling of uplink transmissions, Para [0460] with usage of two-stage DCI, Para [0825]. Lee discloses control plane and user plane protocol stacks, where RLC layer can perform data concatenation, Para [0064]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to utilize the techniques taught by Tong and Lee in the system of Noh in order to increase efficiency of DCI scheduling and lower power consumption; and does not explicitly disclose processing a first flow through a thin pipe, wherein the thin pipe includes some or all of packet data convergence protocol (PDCP), radio link control (RLC), medium access control (MAC), physical (PHY) layer functionalities and processing one or more second flows of high-throughput data through one or more fat pipes, wherein each fat pipe includes at least one of upper layer 2 (L2) lower L2, and PHY layer functionalities. Kim discloses receiving signals over different bearers (pipes), Para [0059]/Fig. 2c, both pipes have MAC layer functionality or lower layer 2, Fig. 2c and one bearer is used for low data throughput (thin pipe) and another bearer for high data throughput (fat pipe), table 2. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to utilize the techniques taught by Kim in the system of Noh in view of Tong and Lee in order to better manage bearers and improve user experience; and does not disclose wherein the performing of the data concatenation comprises concatenating layer 2 (L2) data to form a plurality of data chunks of a fixed chunk size such that L2 processing of data is at a per-chunk basis (the limitation requires two of the three options, therefore data concatenation is optional).
Regarding claim 17, Noh discloses an apparatus (communication node, Para [0402]), comprising: a transceiver configured to communicate wirelessly (transceiver performing communication, Para [0402]); and a processor communicatively coupled to the transceiver, the processor configured to communicate, via the transceiver, with a network node of a wireless network by utilizing a lean protocol stack (communicating between communication nodes using protocol stack, Para [0294], the stack can be divided into a user plane and control plane stack, Para [0295], thereby a more efficient or “lean” protocol stack), wherein the utilizing of the lean protocol stack comprises one or more of: performing a split-stack operation (the protocol stack is divided into a user plane protocol stack and a control plane protocol stack, Para [0295]); but does not disclose performing data concatenation and performing uplink (UL) scheduling optimization. Tong discloses UE protocol stack capable of performing dynamic scheduling of uplink transmissions, Para [0460] with usage of two-stage DCI, Para [0825]. Lee discloses control plane and user plane protocol stacks, where RLC layer can perform data concatenation, Para [0064]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to utilize the techniques taught by Tong and Lee in the system of Noh in order to increase efficiency of DCI scheduling and lower power consumption; and does not explicitly disclose processing a first flow through a thin pipe, wherein the thin pipe includes some or all of packet data convergence protocol (PDCP), radio link control (RLC), medium access control (MAC), physical (PHY) layer functionalities and processing one or more second flows of high-throughput data through one or more fat pipes, wherein each fat pipe includes at least one of upper layer 2 (L2) lower L2, and PHY layer functionalities. Kim discloses receiving signals over different bearers (pipes), Para [0059]/Fig. 2c, both pipes have MAC layer functionality or lower layer 2, Fig. 2c and one bearer is used for low data throughput (thin pipe) and another bearer for high data throughput (fat pipe), table 2. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to utilize the techniques taught by Kim in the system of Noh in view of Tong and Lee in order to better manage bearers and improve user experience; and does not disclose wherein the performing of the data concatenation comprises concatenating layer 2 (L2) data to form a plurality of data chunks of a fixed chunk size such that L2 processing of data is at a per-chunk basis (the limitation requires two of the three options, therefore data concatenation is optional).
Regarding claim 3, Noh discloses the method of claim 2, but not wherein the first flow comprises a flow of low-throughput data, control information, or both, and wherein each of the one or more second flows comprises a flow of high-throughput data, information, or both. Kim discloses one bearer is used for low throughput data and another bearer used for low-throughput data, table 2.
Regarding claim 7, Noh discloses the method of claim 6, wherein each of a buffer status report (BSR) and a grant size is a multiple of the chunk size (optional limitation).
Regarding claim 8, Noh discloses the method of claim 6, wherein each header at a Packet Data Convergence Protocol (PDCP) layer, a Radio Link Control (RLC) layer and a Medium Access Control (MAC) layer is associated with a respective data chunk of the plurality of data chunks (optional limitation).
Regarding claim 9, Noh discloses the method of claim 6, wherein the performing of the data concatenation further comprises performing logical channel prioritization (LCP) within each of the one or more data chunks of the plurality of data chunks (optional limitation).
Regarding claim 10, Noh discloses the method of claim 6, wherein the performing of the data concatenation further comprises performing logical channel prioritization (LCP) across multiple data chunks of the plurality of data chunks carried in a transport block (TB) (optional limitation).
Regarding claim 11, Noh discloses the method of claim 6, wherein the chunk size is mapped to a codeblock (CB) size or a CB group (CBG) size (optional limitation).
Regarding claim 12, Noh discloses the method of claim 11, wherein the performing of the data concatenation further comprises performing integrity protection at a chunk level, a CB level or a CBG level (optional limitation).
Regarding claims 13 and 20, Noh discloses the method/apparatus of claim 1/17, wherein the performing of the UL scheduling optimization comprises utilizing two levels of UL downlink control information (DCI) such that a grant size adaptation deadline is decoupled from a scheduling deadline. Tong discloses UE protocol stack capable of performing dynamic scheduling of uplink transmissions, Para [0460] with usage of two-stage DCI, Para [0825], “such that” is the intended result of the using two levels of DCI.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Noh, in view of Tong, in view of Lee, in view of Kim and in view of Sun (US 2024/0022649, hereinafter Sun).
Regarding claim 4, Noh discloses the method of claim 2, but not wherein the thin pipe includes some or all of New Radio (NR) functionality (new radio communication, Para [0003], obvious to one of ordinary skill the split stack would have some or all NR functionality), and wherein each of the one or more fat pipes includes reduced functionality compared to the thin pipe. Sun discloses the user plane in 5G protocol stack can have a more simplified architecture with the processing functions of each protocol layer being reduced, Para [0090], where data is transmitted in the fat pipe. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to utilize the techniques taught by Sun in the system of Noh in view of Tong, Lee and Kim in order to simplify the processing flow and improve network efficiency.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Noh, in view of Tong, in view of Lee, in view of Kim and in view of Grobicki (US 5,471,474, hereinafter Grobicki).
Regarding claim 5, Noh discloses the method of claim 2, but not wherein the performing of the split-stack operation further comprises applying data concatenation in the fat pipe. Grobicki discloses concatenation of data packets allows for higher throughput of data, C: 3 R: 56-60, where fat pipe is used for higher throughput. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to utilize the techniques taught by Grobicki in the system of Noh in view of Tong, Lee and Kim in order to reduce packet overhead and allow for high throughput.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 14-16 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 4/13/20256 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant amends the limitations in the claim and argues the references do not disclose the amended limitations. The limitation requires the lean protocol stack to comprise at least two of the three options. Applicant amends the lean protocol stack to include data concatenation further comprises concatenating L2 data to form a plurality of data chunks of a fixed chunk size such that L2 processing of data is at a per-chunk basis. Applicant argues Stephens and the other references do not disclose the amended limitation. In response, arguments are moot, the claim requires at least two options of operations: split-stack, data concatenation and UL scheduling optimization. Even if the Applicant’s argument was correct, the specific limitation for data concatenation further comprising concatenating L2 data to form a plurality of data chunks of a fixed chunk size such that L2 processing of data is at a per-chunk basis, was not disclosed, the other two options would still be disclosed by the references. Applicant has no argument against the other two options/limitations being disclosed.
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN CUNNINGHAM whose telephone number is (571) 272-1765. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Thursday 7:30-18:00 (EST).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Huy Vu can be reached on (571) 272-3155. The fax 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.
/KEVIN M CUNNINGHAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2461
Prosecution Insights