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 .
This office action is in response to remarks filed on 05/05/2026.
Claims 1, 3-4, 7, 9-10, 13, 15-17, and 19-20 are pending and presented for examination. Claims 1, 3-4, 7, 9-10, 13, 15-17, and 19-20 are amended.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 02/04/2026 and 04/28/2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendments
Claims 1, 3-4, 7, 9-10, 13, 15-17, and 19-20 have been considered based on amendments.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or non-obviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 7, 13, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over O-RAN et al (O-RAN.WG4.CUS.0-v04.00) (hereinafter "O-RAN") in view of Lee et al (US20210126760A1) (hereinafter "Lee").
Regarding claim 1, O-RAN discloses a method performed by a distributed unit (DU) in a wireless communication system, the method comprising (Pg. 20, Ln. 18-19: ln case of lower layer fronthaul based on split option 7-2x for DL and UL, the required external data (excluding M-plane) to exchange information between O-DU and O-RU can be categorized as follows. Pg. 20-21, Ln. 1-2: C-Plane Data Flow 2a: Scheduling commands (DL and UL) & Beamforming commands):
transmitting, to a radio unit (RU), a control message (Pg. 21, Fig. 2-8: 2a: Scheduling commands (DL and UL) & Beamforming commands) for user equipment (UE) identifier (ID) based beamforming (Pg. 65, Ln. 31: 5.4.2 Scheduling and Beamforming Commands Pg. 68, Ln. 22: ueld (UE identifier) field 15 bits),
wherein a type of the control message includes a section type 5 for scheduling information or a section type 6 for channel information (Pg. 67, Ln. 37: Section Type "5" Fields (used for UE scheduling information) Pg. 68, Ln. 23: Section Type "6" Fields (used for sending channel information for a specific UE ID)),
wherein a section extension of the section type 5 or the section type 6 includes fields, and the fields include an extension flag (ef) (Pg. 68, Ln. 21: ef (extension flag) field: 1 bit), an extension type (extType) (Pg. 99: Table 5-26: SectionFormat for SectionExtension 5(one scaler value, modulation compression parameters) extType = 0x05), an extension length (extLen) (Pg. 99: Table 5-26: SectionFormat for SectionExtension 5(one scaler value, modulation compression parameters) extLen = 0x2 (2 words)), a frame structure (Pg. 67, Ln. 22: frameStructure (frame structure) field: 8 bits), a frequency offset (Pg. 67, Ln. 35: freqOffset (frequency offset) field: 24 bits), and a cyclic prefix (CP) length (Pg. 67, Ln. 23: cpLength (cyclic prefix length) field: 16 bits).
O-RAN fails to disclose the method comprising: transmitting, to a radio unit (RU), information on mixed-numerology, wherein the extType indicates that the section extension of the section type 5 or the section type 6 is for the mixed-numerology.
However, Lee discloses the method comprising: transmitting, to a radio unit (RU), information on mixed-numerology ([0124] In order to solve the above-described problem, the existing section type 5 message and section type 6 message may be newly defined by being extended to include information on a mixed numerology channel. The message type newly defined by extending the section type 5 message and the section type 6 message may be used to support beamforming using the channel information transmission scheme (i.e., referred to as ‘Scheme 1’).),
wherein the extType indicates that the section extension of the section type 5 or the section type 6 is for the mixed-numerology ([0122] In order to solve the above-described problem, the section type 5 message and the section type 6 message may be extended to include numerology information. [0122] In order to solve the above-described problem, the section type 5 message and the section type 6 message may be extended to include numerology information. [0156] Table 26 below may be an example of a section extension that can be added to the section type 5 message or the section type 6 message. The section extension defined in Table 26 below may be defined as ‘section extension 15’. [0157] The extension type (i.e., extType) may indicate the type of section extension. The of may indicate whether there is an additional section extension afterwards. The extension length (i.e., extLen) may indicate the length of the section extension. [0158] For example, by setting ef=1 in the section type 5 message defined in Tables 9 and 10, and adding the section extension 15 immediately after the corresponding section, an extended section type 5 message in which numerology-related information is added to the corresponding section may be generated.).
O-RAN and Lee are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of performing communication by using a fronthaul interface supporting mixed numerologies.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of O-RAN with Lee to create the method comprising: transmitting, to a radio unit (RU), information on mixed-numerology, wherein the extType indicates that the section extension of the section type 5 or the section type 6 is for the mixed-numerology.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to support mixed numerologies without increasing signaling overhead between the O-DU and the O-RU.
Regarding claim 7, O-RAN discloses a method performed by a radio unit (RU) in a wireless communication system, the method comprising (Pg. 20, Ln. 18-19: ln case of lower layer fronthaul based on split option 7-2x for DL and UL, the required external data (excluding M-plane) to exchange information between O-DU and O-RU can be categorized as follows. Pg. 20-21, Ln. 1-2: C-Plane Data Flow 2a: Scheduling commands (DL and UL) & Beamforming commands):
receiving, from a distributed unit (DU), a control message (Pg. 21, Fig. 2-8: 2a: Scheduling commands (DL and UL) & Beamforming commands) for user equipment (UE) identifier (ID) based beamforming (Pg. 65, Ln. 31: 5.4.2 Scheduling and Beamforming Commands Pg. 68, Ln. 22: ueld (UE identifier) field 15 bits),
wherein a type of the control message includes a section type 5 for scheduling information or a section type 6 for channel information (Pg. 67, Ln. 37: Section Type "5" Fields (used for UE scheduling information) Pg. 68, Ln. 23: Section Type "6" Fields (used for sending channel information for a specific UE ID)),
wherein a section extension of the section type 5 or the section type 6 includes fields, and the fields include an extension flag (ef) (Pg. 68, Ln. 21: ef (extension flag) field: 1 bit), an extension type (extType) (Pg. 99: Table 5-26: SectionFormat for SectionExtension 5(one scaler value, modulation compression parameters) extType = 0x05), an extension length (extLen) (Pg. 99: Table 5-26: SectionFormat for SectionExtension 5(one scaler value, modulation compression parameters) extLen = 0x2 (2 words)), a frame structure (Pg. 67, Ln. 22: frameStructure (frame structure) field: 8 bits), a frequency offset (Pg. 67, Ln. 35: freqOffset (frequency offset) field: 24 bits), and a cyclic prefix (CP) length (Pg. 67, Ln. 23: cpLength (cyclic prefix length) field: 16 bits).
O-RAN fails to disclose the method comprising: receiving, from a distributed unit (DU), information on mixed-numerology, wherein the extType indicates that the section extension of the section type 5 or the section type 6 is for the mixed-numerology.
However, Lee discloses the method comprising: receiving, from a distributed unit (DU), information on mixed-numerology ([0124] In order to solve the above-described problem, the existing section type 5 message and section type 6 message may be newly defined by being extended to include information on a mixed numerology channel. The message type newly defined by extending the section type 5 message and the section type 6 message may be used to support beamforming using the channel information transmission scheme (i.e., referred to as ‘Scheme 1’).),
wherein the extType indicates that the section extension of the section type 5 or the section type 6 is for the mixed-numerology ([0122] In order to solve the above-described problem, the section type 5 message and the section type 6 message may be extended to include numerology information. [0122] In order to solve the above-described problem, the section type 5 message and the section type 6 message may be extended to include numerology information. [0156] Table 26 below may be an example of a section extension that can be added to the section type 5 message or the section type 6 message. The section extension defined in Table 26 below may be defined as ‘section extension 15’. [0157] The extension type (i.e., extType) may indicate the type of section extension. The of may indicate whether there is an additional section extension afterwards. The extension length (i.e., extLen) may indicate the length of the section extension. [0158] For example, by setting ef=1 in the section type 5 message defined in Tables 9 and 10, and adding the section extension 15 immediately after the corresponding section, an extended section type 5 message in which numerology-related information is added to the corresponding section may be generated.).
O-RAN and Lee are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of performing communication by using a fronthaul interface supporting mixed numerologies.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of O-RAN with Lee to create the method comprising: receiving, from a distributed unit (DU), information on mixed-numerology, wherein the extType indicates that the section extension of the section type 5 or the section type 6 is for the mixed-numerology.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to support mixed numerologies without increasing signaling overhead between the O-DU and the O-RU.
Regarding claim 13, O-RAN discloses a distributed unit (DU) in a wireless communication system, the DU comprising: (Pg. 20, Ln. 18-19: ln case of lower layer fronthaul based on split option 7-2x for DL and UL, the required external data (excluding M-plane) to exchange information between O-DU and O-RU can be categorized as follows. Pg. 20-21, Ln. 1-2: C-Plane Data Flow 2a: Scheduling commands (DL and UL) & Beamforming commands):
transmit, to a radio unit (RU), a control message (Pg. 21, Fig. 2-8: 2a: Scheduling commands (DL and UL) & Beamforming commands) for user equipment (UE) identifier (ID) based beamforming (Pg. 65, Ln. 31: 5.4.2 Scheduling and Beamforming Commands Pg. 68, Ln. 22: ueld (UE identifier) field 15 bits),
wherein a type of the control message includes a section type 5 for scheduling information or a section type 6 for channel information (Pg. 67, Ln. 37: Section Type "5" Fields (used for UE scheduling information) Pg. 68, Ln. 23: Section Type "6" Fields (used for sending channel information for a specific UE ID)),
wherein a section extension of the section type 5 or the section type 6 includes fields, and the fields include an extension flag (ef) (Pg. 68, Ln. 21: ef (extension flag) field: 1 bit), an extension type (extType) (Pg. 99: Table 5-26: SectionFormat for SectionExtension 5(one scaler value, modulation compression parameters) extType = 0x05), an extension length (extLen) (Pg. 99: Table 5-26: SectionFormat for SectionExtension 5(one scaler value, modulation compression parameters) extLen = 0x2 (2 words)), a frame structure (Pg. 67, Ln. 22: frameStructure (frame structure) field: 8 bits), a frequency offset (Pg. 67, Ln. 35: freqOffset (frequency offset) field: 24 bits), and a cyclic prefix (CP) length (Pg. 67, Ln. 23: cpLength (cyclic prefix length) field: 16 bits).
O-RAN fails to disclose a distributed unit (DU) in a wireless communication system, the DU comprising: a transceiver; at least one processor; and memory storing instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the DU to: transmit, to a radio unit (RU), information on mixed-numerology, wherein the extType indicates that the section extension of the section type 5 or the section type 6 is for the mixed-numerology.
However, Lee discloses a distributed unit (DU) in a wireless communication system, the DU comprising:
a transceiver ([0051] Referring to FIG. 2, a communication node 200 may comprise at least one processor 210, a memory 220, and a transceiver 230 connected to the network for performing communications.);
at least one processor; and ([0051] Referring to FIG. 2, a communication node 200 may comprise at least one processor 210, a memory 220, and a transceiver 230 connected to the network for performing communications.)
memory storing instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor , cause the DU to ([0051] Referring to FIG. 2, a communication node 200 may comprise at least one processor 210, a memory 220, and a transceiver 230 connected to the network for performing communications.):
transmit, to a radio unit (RU), information on mixed-numerology ([0124] In order to solve the above-described problem, the existing section type 5 message and section type 6 message may be newly defined by being extended to include information on a mixed numerology channel. The message type newly defined by extending the section type 5 message and the section type 6 message may be used to support beamforming using the channel information transmission scheme (i.e., referred to as ‘Scheme 1’).),
wherein the extType indicates that the section extension of the section type 5 or the section type 6 is for the mixed-numerology ([0122] In order to solve the above-described problem, the section type 5 message and the section type 6 message may be extended to include numerology information. [0122] In order to solve the above-described problem, the section type 5 message and the section type 6 message may be extended to include numerology information. [0156] Table 26 below may be an example of a section extension that can be added to the section type 5 message or the section type 6 message. The section extension defined in Table 26 below may be defined as ‘section extension 15’. [0157] The extension type (i.e., extType) may indicate the type of section extension. The of may indicate whether there is an additional section extension afterwards. The extension length (i.e., extLen) may indicate the length of the section extension. [0158] For example, by setting ef=1 in the section type 5 message defined in Tables 9 and 10, and adding the section extension 15 immediately after the corresponding section, an extended section type 5 message in which numerology-related information is added to the corresponding section may be generated.).
O-RAN and Lee are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of performing communication by using a fronthaul interface supporting mixed numerologies.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of O-RAN with Lee to create a distributed unit (DU) in a wireless communication system, the DU comprising: a transceiver; at least one processor; and memory storing instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the DU to: transmit, to a radio unit (RU), information on mixed-numerology, wherein the extType indicates that the section extension of the section type 5 or the section type 6 is for the mixed-numerology.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to support mixed numerologies without increasing signaling overhead between the O-DU and the O-RU.
Regarding claim 17, O-RAN discloses a radio unit (RU) in a wireless communication system, the RU comprising: (Pg. 20, Ln. 18-19: ln case of lower layer fronthaul based on split option 7-2x for DL and UL, the required external data (excluding M-plane) to exchange information between O-DU and O-RU can be categorized as follows. Pg. 20-21, Ln. 1-2: C-Plane Data Flow 2a: Scheduling commands (DL and UL) & Beamforming commands)
receive, from a distributed unit (DU), a control message (Pg. 21, Fig. 2-8: 2a: Scheduling commands (DL and UL) & Beamforming commands) for user equipment (UE) identifier (ID) based beamforming (Pg. 65, Ln. 31: 5.4.2 Scheduling and Beamforming Commands Pg. 68, Ln. 22: ueld (UE identifier) field 15 bits),
wherein a type of the control message includes a section type 5 for scheduling information or a section type 6 for channel information (Pg. 67, Ln. 37: Section Type "5" Fields (used for UE scheduling information) Pg. 68, Ln. 23: Section Type "6" Fields (used for sending channel information for a specific UE ID)),
wherein a section extension of the section type 5 or the section type 6 includes fields, and the fields include an extension flag (ef) (Pg. 68, Ln. 21: ef (extension flag) field: 1 bit), an extension type (extType) (Pg. 99: Table 5-26: SectionFormat for SectionExtension 5(one scaler value, modulation compression parameters) extType = 0x05), an extension length (extLen) (Pg. 99: Table 5-26: SectionFormat for SectionExtension 5(one scaler value, modulation compression parameters) extLen = 0x2 (2 words)), a frame structure (Pg. 67, Ln. 22: frameStructure (frame structure) field: 8 bits), a frequency offset (Pg. 67, Ln. 35: freqOffset (frequency offset) field: 24 bits), and a cyclic prefix (CP) length (Pg. 67, Ln. 23: cpLength (cyclic prefix length) field: 16 bits).
O-RAN fails to disclose a radio unit (RU) in a wireless communication system, the RU comprising: a transceiver; at least one processor; and memory storing instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the RU to: receive, from a distributed unit (DU), information on mixed-numerology, wherein the extType indicates that the section extension of the section type 5 or the section type 6 is for the mixed-numerology.
However, Lee discloses a radio unit (RU) in a wireless communication system, the RU comprising:
a transceiver ([0051] Referring to FIG. 2, a communication node 200 may comprise at least one processor 210, a memory 220, and a transceiver 230 connected to the network for performing communications.);
at least one processor; and ([0051] Referring to FIG. 2, a communication node 200 may comprise at least one processor 210, a memory 220, and a transceiver 230 connected to the network for performing communications.)
memory storing instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the RU to ([0051] Referring to FIG. 2, a communication node 200 may comprise at least one processor 210, a memory 220, and a transceiver 230 connected to the network for performing communications.):
receive, from a distributed unit (DU), information on mixed-numerology ([0124] In order to solve the above-described problem, the existing section type 5 message and section type 6 message may be newly defined by being extended to include information on a mixed numerology channel. The message type newly defined by extending the section type 5 message and the section type 6 message may be used to support beamforming using the channel information transmission scheme (i.e., referred to as ‘Scheme 1’).),
wherein the extType indicates that the section extension of the section type 5 or the section type 6 is for the mixed-numerology ([0122] In order to solve the above-described problem, the section type 5 message and the section type 6 message may be extended to include numerology information. [0122] In order to solve the above-described problem, the section type 5 message and the section type 6 message may be extended to include numerology information. [0156] Table 26 below may be an example of a section extension that can be added to the section type 5 message or the section type 6 message. The section extension defined in Table 26 below may be defined as ‘section extension 15’. [0157] The extension type (i.e., extType) may indicate the type of section extension. The of may indicate whether there is an additional section extension afterwards. The extension length (i.e., extLen) may indicate the length of the section extension. [0158] For example, by setting ef=1 in the section type 5 message defined in Tables 9 and 10, and adding the section extension 15 immediately after the corresponding section, an extended section type 5 message in which numerology-related information is added to the corresponding section may be generated.).
O-RAN and Lee are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of performing communication by using a fronthaul interface supporting mixed numerologies.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of O-RAN with Lee to create a radio unit (RU) in a wireless communication system, the RU comprising: a transceiver; at least one processor; and memory storing instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the RU to: receive, from a distributed unit (DU), information on mixed-numerology, wherein the extType indicates that the section extension of the section type 5 or the section type 6 is for the mixed-numerology.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to support mixed numerologies without increasing signaling overhead between the O-DU and the O-RU.
Claims 3, 9, 15, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over O-RAN in view of Lee as applied to claims 1, 7, 13, or 17 above, and further in view of Kwon et al (US20160150514A1) (hereinafter "Kwon").
Regarding claim 3, O-RAN, as modified by Lee, discloses the method, wherein a field length of the frame structure is 8 bits (Pg. 67, Ln. 22: frameStructure (frame structure) field: 8 bits).
O-RAN, as modified by Lee, fails to discloses the method, wherein first 4 bits among the 8 bits indicate a size of fast Fourier transform (FFT)/inverse fast Fourier transform (IFFT), and second 4 bits among the 8 bits indicate a sub-carrier spacing.
However, Kwon discloses the method wherein a field length of the frame structure is 8 bits, and wherein first 4 bits among the 8 bits indicate a size of fast Fourier transform (FFT)/inverse fast Fourier transform (IFFT), and second 4 bits among the 8 bits indicate a sub- carrier spacing ([0105] the subcarrier spacing indicator may indicate the subcarrier spacing by using 2 bits information. For example, the subcarrier spacing indicator configured as ‘00,’ ‘01,’ or ‘10’ may respectively indicate the subcarrier spacing of 312.5 kHz, 156.25 kHz, or 78.125 kHz. [0106] the FFT/IFFT structure indicator may indicate the size of FFT/IFFT by using 2 bits information. For example, the FFT/IFFT structure indicator configured as ‘00,’ ‘01.’ ‘10,’ or ‘11’ may respectively indicate the FFT/IFFT having the size of 32-points, 62-points, 128-points, or 256-points).
O-RAN, as modified by Lee, and Kwon are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of techniques for signal coordination between a transmitter and receiver.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to manipulate the bits to represent the size and subcarrier spacing, each with 4 bits of the 8 bits size. Where the claimed differences involved substitution of interchangeable or replaceable equivalents, and the reason for the selection of one equivalent for another was not to solve an existing problem, such substitution has been judicially determined to have been obvious. See In re Ruff, 118, USPQ, 343 (CCPA 1958). This supporting is based on a recognition that the claimed difference exists not a result of an attempt by applicant to solve a problem, but merely amounts to selection of expedients known to the artisan of ordinary skill as design choices.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to provide a means for denoting the size/configuration of FFT/IFFT and SCS.
Regarding claim 9, O-RAN, as modified by Lee, discloses the method wherein a field length of the frame structure is 8 bits, and (Pg. 67, Ln. 22: frameStructure (frame structure) field: 8 bits).
O-RAN, as modified by Lee, fails to discloses the method wherein first 4 bits among the 8 bits indicate a size of fast Fourier transform (FFT)/inverse fast Fourier transform (IFFT), and second 4 bits among the 8 bits indicate a sub-carrier spacing.
However, Kwon discloses the method wherein first 4 bits among the 8 bits indicate a size of fast Fourier transform (FFT)/inverse fast Fourier transform (IFFT), and second 4 bits among the 8 bits indicate a sub- carrier spacing ([0105] the subcarrier spacing indicator may indicate the subcarrier spacing by using 2 bits information. For example, the subcarrier spacing indicator configured as ‘00,’ ‘01,’ or ‘10’ may respectively indicate the subcarrier spacing of 312.5 kHz, 156.25 kHz, or 78.125 kHz. [0106] the FFT/IFFT structure indicator may indicate the size of FFT/IFFT by using 2 bits information. For example, the FFT/IFFT structure indicator configured as ‘00,’ ‘01.’ ‘10,’ or ‘11’ may respectively indicate the FFT/IFFT having the size of 32-points, 62-points, 128-points, or 256-points).
O-RAN, as modified by Lee, and Kwon are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of techniques for signal coordination between a transmitter and receiver.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to manipulate the bits to represent the size and subcarrier spacing, each with 4 bits of the 8 bits size. Where the claimed differences involved substitution of interchangeable or replaceable equivalents, and the reason for the selection of one equivalent for another was not to solve an existing problem, such substitution has been judicially determined to have been obvious. See In re Ruff, 118, USPQ, 343 (CCPA 1958). This supporting is based on a recognition that the claimed difference exists not a result of an attempt by applicant to solve a problem, but merely amounts to selection of expedients known to the artisan of ordinary skill as design choices.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to provide a means for denoting the size/configuration of FFT/IFFT and SCS.
Regarding claim 15, O-RAN, as modified by Lee, discloses the DU wherein a field length of the frame structure is 8 bits, and (Pg. 67, Ln. 22: frameStructure (frame structure) field: 8 bits).
O-RAN, as modified by Lee, fails to disclose the DU wherein first 4 bits among the 8 bits indicate a size of fast Fourier transform (FFT)/inverse fast Fourier transform (IFFT), and second 4 bits among the 8 bits indicate a sub-carrier spacing.
However, Kwon discloses the DU wherein first 4 bits among the 8 bits indicate a size of fast Fourier transform (FFT)/inverse fast Fourier transform (IFFT), and second 4 bits among the 8 bits indicate a sub- carrier spacing ([0105] the subcarrier spacing indicator may indicate the subcarrier spacing by using 2 bits information. For example, the subcarrier spacing indicator configured as ‘00,’ ‘01,’ or ‘10’ may respectively indicate the subcarrier spacing of 312.5 kHz, 156.25 kHz, or 78.125 kHz. [0106] the FFT/IFFT structure indicator may indicate the size of FFT/IFFT by using 2 bits information. For example, the FFT/IFFT structure indicator configured as ‘00,’ ‘01.’ ‘10,’ or ‘11’ may respectively indicate the FFT/IFFT having the size of 32-points, 62-points, 128-points, or 256-points).
O-RAN, as modified by Lee, and Kwon are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of techniques for signal coordination between a transmitter and receiver.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to manipulate the bits to represent the size and subcarrier spacing, each with 4 bits of the 8 bits size. Where the claimed differences involved substitution of interchangeable or replaceable equivalents, and the reason for the selection of one equivalent for another was not to solve an existing problem, such substitution has been judicially determined to have been obvious. See In re Ruff, 118, USPQ, 343 (CCPA 1958). This supporting is based on a recognition that the claimed difference exists not a result of an attempt by applicant to solve a problem, but merely amounts to selection of expedients known to the artisan of ordinary skill as design choices.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to provide a means for denoting the size/configuration of FFT/IFFT and SCS.
Regarding claim 19, O-RAN, as modified by Lee, discloses the RU wherein a field length of the frame structure is 8 bits, and (Pg. 67, Ln. 22: frameStructure (frame structure) field: 8 bits).
O-RAN, as modified by Lee, fails to disclose the RU wherein first 4 bits among the 8 bits indicate a size of fast Fourier transform (FFT)/inverse fast Fourier transform (IFFT), and second 4 bits among the 8 bits indicate a sub-carrier spacing.
However, Kwon discloses the RU wherein first 4 bits among the 8 bits indicate a size of fast Fourier transform (FFT)/inverse fast Fourier transform (IFFT), and second 4 bits among the 8 bits indicate a sub- carrier spacing ([0105] the subcarrier spacing indicator may indicate the subcarrier spacing by using 2 bits information. For example, the subcarrier spacing indicator configured as ‘00,’ ‘01,’ or ‘10’ may respectively indicate the subcarrier spacing of 312.5 kHz, 156.25 kHz, or 78.125 kHz. [0106] the FFT/IFFT structure indicator may indicate the size of FFT/IFFT by using 2 bits information. For example, the FFT/IFFT structure indicator configured as ‘00,’ ‘01.’ ‘10,’ or ‘11’ may respectively indicate the FFT/IFFT having the size of 32-points, 62-points, 128-points, or 256-points).
O-RAN, as modified by Lee, and Kwon are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of techniques for signal coordination between a transmitter and receiver.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to manipulate the bits to represent the size and subcarrier spacing, each with 4 bits of the 8 bits size. Where the claimed differences involved substitution of interchangeable or replaceable equivalents, and the reason for the selection of one equivalent for another was not to solve an existing problem, such substitution has been judicially determined to have been obvious. See In re Ruff, 118, USPQ, 343 (CCPA 1958). This supporting is based on a recognition that the claimed difference exists not a result of an attempt by applicant to solve a problem, but merely amounts to selection of expedients known to the artisan of ordinary skill as design choices.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to provide a means for denoting the size/configuration of FFT/IFFT and SCS.
Claims 4, 10, 16, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over O-RAN in view of Lee as applied to claims 1, 7, 13, or 17 above, and further in view of Ahmed et al (US20210135722A1) (hereinafter "Ahmed").
Regarding claim 4, O-RAN, as modified by Lee, fails to discloses the method, wherein the CP length indicates a length of a CP per symbol.
However, Ahmed discloses the method, wherein the CP length indicates a length of a CP per symbol ([0053] The fields of section type 9 can be explained as follows: … startSymbolid (start symbol identifier) field: 6 bits … cpLength ( cyclic prefix length) field: 16 bits … symlnc (symbol number increment command) field: 1 bit … numSymbol (number of symbols) field: 4 bits).
O-RAN, as modified by Lee, and Ahmed are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of techniques for communication within an open-radio access network.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of O-RAN, as modified by Lee, with Ahmed to create the method, wherein the CP length indicates a length of a CP per symbol.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to reduce interference due to multipath propagation.
Regarding claim 10, O-RAN, as modified by Lee, fails to discloses the method, wherein the CP length indicates a length of a CP per symbol.
However, Ahmed discloses the method, wherein the CP length indicates a length of a CP per symbol ([0053] The fields of section type 9 can be explained as follows: … startSymbolid (start symbol identifier) field: 6 bits … cpLength ( cyclic prefix length) field: 16 bits … symlnc (symbol number increment command) field: 1 bit … numSymbol (number of symbols) field: 4 bits).
O-RAN, as modified by Lee, and Ahmed are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of techniques for communication within an open-radio access network.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of O-RAN, as modified by Lee, with Ahmed to create the method, wherein the CP length indicates a length of a CP per symbol.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to reduce interference due to multipath propagation.
Regarding claim 16, O-RAN, as modified by Lee, fails to discloses the DU, wherein the CP length indicates a duration of a CP per symbol.
However, Ahmed discloses the DU, wherein the CP length indicates a duration of a CP per symbol ([0053] The fields of section type 9 can be explained as follows: … startSymbolid (start symbol identifier) field: 6 bits … cpLength ( cyclic prefix length) field: 16 bits … symlnc (symbol number increment command) field: 1 bit … numSymbol (number of symbols) field: 4 bits).
O-RAN, as modified by Lee, and Ahmed are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of techniques for communication within an open-radio access network.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of O-RAN, as modified by Lee, with Ahmed to create the DU, wherein the CP length indicates a duration of a CP per symbol.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to reduce interference due to multipath propagation.
Regarding claim 20, O-RAN, as modified by Lee, fails to discloses the RU, wherein the CP length indicates a duration of a CP per symbol.
However, Ahmed discloses the RU, wherein the CP length indicates a duration of a CP per symbol ([0053] The fields of section type 9 can be explained as follows: … startSymbolid (start symbol identifier) field: 6 bits … cpLength ( cyclic prefix length) field: 16 bits … symlnc (symbol number increment command) field: 1 bit … numSymbol (number of symbols) field: 4 bits).
O-RAN, as modified by Lee, and Ahmed are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of techniques for communication within an open-radio access network.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of O-RAN, as modified by Lee, with Ahmed to create the RU, wherein the CP length indicates a duration of a CP per symbol.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to reduce interference due to multipath propagation.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 03/04/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On pages 2 and 3 of Applicant's remarks, Applicant submits that "… the combined references do not teach or suggest at least the claimed feature of "wherein the extType indicates that the section extension of the section type 5 or the section type 6 is for the mixed-numerology. To allegedly teach the claimed feature of "mixed-numerology," the Examiner cites paragraph [0124] of Lee. … However, this cannot be relied upon to allegedly teach the claimed feature of "wherein the extType indicates that the section extension of the section type 5 or the section type 6 is for the mixed-numerology" in view of the priority documents that supports this paragraph. … Accordingly, for the above teaching of Lee to qualify as prior art, the specific subject matter (i.e., what is described in paragraph [0124] of Lee) must be supported by the Earliest Priority Document instead of the Intermediate Priority Document. Applicant respectfully submits that paragraph [0124] of Lee should be interpreted in view of the Earliest Priority Document to be considered prior art. For example, paragraphs [0094] and [0099] of Korean Application No. 10-2019-0126364 (reproduced below) merely describe that the section type 5 and section type 6 messages are inefficient for mixed numerology channel and that a new section types 8 and 9 needs to be defined."
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. In a cursory review of Lee, the subject matter is disclosed. In an English translation of Korean application 10-2019-0126364, Lee [0122, 0171-0172] discusses the extension of section type 5 or section type 6 for use with mixed numerology. Accordingly, the Examiner maintains rejection of claims 2 and 3 based on 35 USC 103 and thus maintains rejection of claims 1, 7, 13, and 17, and associated dependent claims based on 35 USC 103.
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 D. Little whose telephone number is (571)272-5748. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8-6 ET.
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, Nishant Divecha can be reached at 571-270-3125. 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.
/D LITTLE/Examiner, Art Unit 2419
/Nishant Divecha/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2419
Prosecution Insights