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 .
Claims 1-4, 6-21 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant arguments presented in the Remarks of record (01/02/2026) are fully considered but are not considered persuasive in view of a new ground of rejection. Specifically, the arguments are directed to the amendments of the intelligence layer is deployed in a public cloud where the different respective DUs are deployed. A new reference is concorporated to address the limitation.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-4, 6-21 is/are under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Independent claims 1, 13, and 17 are amended with the following : “wherein the intelligence layer is deployed in a public cloud at a far edge location within the wireless cellular telecommunication network where a centralized unit (CU) of the wireless cellular telecommunication network and the different respective DUs are deployed”.
The claims effectively asserts the intelligence layer is deploy is a public cloud and such public cloud is at the far edge location.
The Specification states:
“The network intelligence layer may be deployed anywhere within the wireless network including, but not limited to: Far Edge Location (where the DU and/or CU is deployed); a data center (where the DU and/or CU is deployed); a public cloud where DU and/or CU is deployed, management functions, and other network functions that can be deployed; an isolated logical or physical location within the network. The data center can include a local data center, a private edge data center or any other data center that is capable of supporting the RAN.”
The Specification indicates that Far Edge Location and public cloud are separate examples of possible implementation. There is no evidence or indication of a combined/integrated embodiment where the network intelligence is both at a public cloud that is also at Far Edge Location. There is simply no suggestion where the public cloud is located, left alone at a specific Far Edge Location. Dependent claims fall together with their respective base claims.
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 nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwok et al. (US 2024/0121855) in view of Paladugu et al (US 2019/0387561) and in view of Song et al. (US 2023/0276465) in further view of Wolman et al. (US 2023/0110752).
As to claim 1:
Kwok discloses:
A method comprising electronically determining, by a network intelligence layer of a wireless cellular telecommunication network, for each user equipment device (UE) of a plurality of user UEs to which the wireless cellular telecommunication network provides services, whether using carrier aggregation across cells in which the UE is located using dual connectivity for the cells is preferable;
(¶0050, 0057, 0010, server 304 comprising a selection component that logically (i.e. network intelligence layer) configured to select between NR DC and NR CA based at least in part on one or more network conditions detected by the specific UE, i.e. the selection is per UE’s basis for each and every respective UEs served)
and triggering, by the network intelligence layer, for each UE of the plurality of user UEs, an assignment dynamically to the UE to use one or more of the carrier aggregation and the dual connectivity based on the determination. (See ¶0054-0057, triggering the chosen assignment (i.e. DC vs. CA) dynamically upon the selection based on the criteria for the specific UE)
Kwok, however does not explicitly disclose other details regarding the context of the cellular network, specifically “cells that are each managed by different respective distributed units (DUs) of a plurality of DUs in the wireless cellular telecommunication network”
Paladugu, in a related field of endeavor discloses a network supportive of dual connectivity and carrier aggregation (¶0126), wherein cells are each managed by different respective distributed units (DUs) of a plurality of DUs in the wireless cellular telecommunication network in at least Abstract, 0133.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing time of the invention that the system/method in Kwok wherein cells are each managed by different respective distributed DUs of the plurality of Dus in the network. Both Kwok and Paladugu concern with networks offering multi-connectivity and carrier aggregation involving multi cells/cell groups, which might involve higher traffic of overheads by design. Distributed DU architecture advantageously allows enhanced load scaling/distribution as Dus offload lower layer processing from CU (¶0133 of Paladugu). Furthermore, placing DUs at their respective cells allow for less control signaling and latency (i.e. less traffic to central core network elements).
None of the cited references discloses:
wherein the intelligence layer is deployed in a public cloud where the different respective DUs are deployed.
Song, in a related field of network controlling for wireless communication, discloses a network arrangement wherein DUs and network controlling layer (RIC) can be implemented in a public cloud (See ¶0081, intelligence layer RIC, DU all embodied in an open Cloud platform).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing time of the invention that the network controlling layer, DUs of Kwok, Paladugu to be embodied in an open Cloud platform. This implementation provides an advantageous flexibility layer to network design, for example for the purpose of distribution in a crowded city area with plenty fronthaul capacity that allows for a BBU function pooled in the central location and with low latency that is low enough to satisfy an O-DU standby time requirement (¶0081 of Song). And furthermore, by having the key functions to be located in same cloud platform, this significantly simplifies inter-function communications and overheads as signals do not have to travel over a long-distance backhaul, aside from the bonus of saving in infrastructure and storage space.
Kwok in view of Paladugu and Song already discloses the network units being hosted in public cloud as discussed above, however does not explicitly indicate intelligence layer in a public cloud at a far edge location within the wireless cellular telecommunication network where a centralized unit (CU) of the wireless cellular telecommunication network and the different DU are deployed.
Wolman, in a related field of managing UE connectivity and traffic, discloses a network architecture, See at least Fig. 2, 3A, Fig. 9, ¶0081, ¶0132-0134, where in this implementation, the smart decision making layer for UE connectivity and traffic (i.e. UPF, Edge Compute Server, etc.) are hosted in centralized datacenter as well as in far edge location 920, in which a plurality of different DUs and a CU of the wireless cellular network are deployed.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing time of the invention that the network infrastructure of Kwok in view of Paladugu and Song can be implemented such that intelligence layer in a public cloud at a far edge location within the wireless cellular telecommunication network where a centralized unit (CU) of the wireless cellular telecommunication network and the different DU are deployed. The benefit of far-edge virtual implementation is well understood and discussed in Wolman at least ¶0064, 0009, providing intelligent scaling of computing resources while decreasing energy consumption, expenditure, as well as effective latency control. Furthermore, Off-the-shelf hardware computing platform allows services to continue working even in case of backhaul outages, thus improving robustness of the services and system.
As to claim 2:
Kwok in view of Paladugu, Song and Wolman discloses all limitations of claim 1 wherein, for each UE of the plurality of UEs, the determination whether using the carrier aggregation or using the dual connectivity is preferable is based on feedback from Radio Access Network (RAN) functions of the wireless cellular telecommunication network. (See at least Kwok, ¶0011, 0038, 0056, feedback from RAN/UE)
As to claim 3:
Kwok in view of Paladugu, Song and Wolman discloses all limitations of claim 1 wherein, for each UE of the plurality of UEs, the determination whether using the carrier aggregation or using the dual connectivity is preferable is based on one or more of: UE communication characteristics of the UE and inter-distributed unit (inter-DU) communication characteristics of communication between the different respective DUs. (Kwok, ¶0038, “a gNB connected to the UE 106 can monitor PHRs received from the UE 106. The gNb may use data from the PHRs to determine when to switch from/to NR DC and/or pass this data to one or more other nodes to determine when to switch from/to NR DC”. See also ¶0012, 0013, 0056)
As to claim 4:
Kwok in view of Paladugu, Song and Wolman discloses all limitations of claim 3 wherein, for each UE of the plurality of UEs, the determination whether using the carrier aggregation or using the dual connectivity is preferable includes: the intelligence layer working with a centralized unit (CU) of the wireless cellular telecommunication network and the plurality of DUs to receive information regarding one or more of: the UE communication characteristics and the inter-DU communication characteristics. (Kwok, ¶0038, “use data from the PHRs to determine when to switch from/to NR DC and/or pass this data to one or more other nodes to determine when to switch from/to NR DC”. Also Paladugu, ¶0059, 0060, 0063, “determining, at a CU of the base station and based on information received from the UE and associated DUs of the base station”, i.e. decisions are made at CU)
As to claim 6:
Kwok in view of Paladugu, Song and Wolman discloses all limitations of claim 1 wherein the intelligence layer is deployed at a data center of the wireless cellular telecommunication network where a centralized unit (CU) of the wireless cellular telecommunication network is deployed or where one or more DUs of the plurality of DUs is deployed. (Kwok, ¶0040, the server with the selection function can be within access network 102, i.e. at base station per Fig. 1, Paladugu, CU/Dus are located also in access network 102, i.e. at base station)
As to claim 8:
Kwok in view of Paladugu, Song and Wolman discloses all limitations of claim 1 wherein the intelligence layer is deployed at a location isolated from one or more of: network management functions of the wireless cellular telecommunication network and other network functions of the of the wireless cellular telecommunication network. (See Fig. 1, ¶0040 of Kwok, “”The server 304 can represent a computing device, such as one or more of the servers within the access network 102, the 5G CN 110, network 114, and/or some other computing device”, namely the server 304 can be flexibly implemented in various location of choice in the system. In this case, should the server be deployed at network 114, i.e. a different network environment from both the access network 102 and the management functions such as AMF, SMF etc.)
As to claim 9:
Kwok in view of Paladugu, Song and Wolman discloses all limitations of claim 1 wherein the intelligence layer is a sub- function of: a network orchestrator of the wireless cellular telecommunication network, a Radio Access Network (RAN) Intelligent Controller (RIC), or another entity that provides intelligent decisions based on feedback from RAN functions. (See Kwok, ¶0050, selection component 432 is part of server 304, which is an intelligent entity that logically made decisions dynamically based on network condition)
As to claim 10:
Kwok in view of Paladugu, Song and Wolman discloses all limitations of claim 1, wherein: the determining whether using carrier aggregation across the cells or using dual connectivity for the cells is preferable occurs continuously; and the triggering, the assignment to the UE to use one or more of the carrier aggregation and the dual connectivity occurs dynamically based on the continuous determination. (See Kwok, Fig. 5, the process is continuous loop, the determining to switch between two modes occurs continuously, as more updates of the network condition are coming in. Even after switching, the network condition reports will still be updated, and the loop continues on.)
As to claim 11:
Kwok in view of Paladugu, Song and Wolman discloses all limitations of claim 1 wherein the dual connectivity uses an F1 interface to split Packet Data Convergence Protocol (PDCP) packets across the different respective DUs. (See Paladugu, ¶0063, 0091, F1/W1 interface between CU and DUs)
As to claim 12:
Kwok in view of Paladugu, Song and Wolman discloses all limitations of claim 1 wherein the triggering, for each UE of the plurality of user UEs, the assignment dynamically to the UE to use one or more of the carrier aggregation and the dual connectivity includes the network intelligence layer sending a command to a Radio Access Network (RAN) including the different respective DUs to use the one or more of the carrier aggregation and the dual connectivity. ( Kwok, ¶0050, “server 304 can include one or more processors 328 and one or more CRM 330. The CRM 330 can be used to store processor-executable instructions of a selection component 432 which may be configured to select between NR DC and NR CA based, at least in part, on one or more network conditions (e.g., TX power) detected by UE 106”, since decision is made at the server, the signaling that carries the decision to the UE is implied. Paladugu further verifies this in ¶0046, 0060, where centralized decisions are signaled to the RANs)
As to claims 13 and 17:
Kwok discloses:
A system comprising: at least one computer processor; and a memory coupled to the at least one computer processor, wherein the memory has computer-executable instructions stored thereon that, when executed by at least one processor, cause operations to be performed, and non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having computer-executable instructions stored thereon that, when executed by at least one processor, (See ¶0050, server comprising processors and memory/CRMs) cause operations to be performed, the operations including:
electronically determining, by a network intelligence layer of a wireless cellular telecommunication network, for each user equipment device (UE) of a plurality of user UEs to which the wireless cellular telecommunication network provides services, whether using carrier aggregation across cells in which the UE is located and that are each managed by different respective distributed units (DUs) of a plurality of DUs in the wireless cellular telecommunication network or using dual connectivity for the cells is preferable;
(¶0050, 0057, 0010, server 304 comprising a selection component that logically (i.e. network intelligence layer) configured to select between NR DC and NR CA based at least in part on one or more network conditions detected by the specific UE, i.e. the selection is per UE’s basis for each and every respective UEs served)
and triggering, by the network intelligence layer, for each UE of the plurality of user UEs, an assignment dynamically to the UE to use one or more of the carrier aggregation and the dual connectivity based on the determination. (See ¶0054-0057, triggering the chosen assignment (i.e. DC vs. CA) dynamically upon the selection based on the criteria for the specific UE)
Kwok, however does not explicitly disclose other details regarding the context of the cellular network, specifically “cells that are each managed by different respective distributed units (DUs) of a plurality of DUs in the wireless cellular telecommunication network”
Paladugu, in a related field of endeavor discloses a network supportive of dual connectivity and carrier aggregation (¶0126), wherein cells are each managed by different respective distributed units (DUs) of a plurality of DUs in the wireless cellular telecommunication network in at least Abstract, 0133.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing time of the invention that the system/method in Kwok wherein cells are each managed by different respective distributed DUs of the plurality of Dus in the network. Both Kwok and Paladugu concern with networks offering multi-connectivity and carrier aggregation involving multi cells/cell groups, which might involve higher traffic of overheads by design. Distributed DU architecture advantageously allows enhanced load scaling/distribution as Dus offload lower layer processing from CU (¶0133 of Paladugu). Furthermore, placing DUs at their respective cells allow for less control signaling and latency (i.e. less traffic to central core network elements).
None of the cited references discloses:
wherein the intelligence layer is deployed in a public cloud where the different respective DUs are deployed.
Song, in a related field of network controlling for wireless communication, discloses a network arrangement wherein DUs and network controlling layer (RIC) can be implemented in a public cloud (See ¶0081, intelligence layer RIC, DU all embodied in an open Cloud platform).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing time of the invention that the network controlling layer, DUs of Kwok, Paladugu to be embodied in an open Cloud platform. This implementation provides an advantageous flexibility layer to network design, for example for the purpose of distribution in a crowded city area with plenty fronthaul capacity that allows for a BBU function pooled in the central location and with low latency that is low enough to satisfy an O-DU standby time requirement (¶0081 of Song). And furthermore, by having the key functions to be located in same cloud platform, this significantly simplifies inter-function communications and overheads as signals do not have to travel over a long-distance backhaul, aside from the bonus of saving in infrastructure and storage space.
Kwok in view of Paladugu and Song already discloses the network units being hosted in public cloud as discussed above, however does not explicitly indicate intelligence layer in a public cloud at a far edge location within the wireless cellular telecommunication network where a centralized unit (CU) of the wireless cellular telecommunication network and the different DU are deployed.
Wolman, in a related field of managing UE connectivity and traffic, discloses a network architecture, See at least Fig. 2, 3A, Fig. 9, ¶0081, ¶0132-0134, where in this implementation, the smart decision making layer for UE connectivity and traffic (i.e. UPF, Edge Compute Server, etc.) are hosted in centralized datacenter as well as in far edge location 920, in which a plurality of different DUs and a CU of the wireless cellular network are deployed.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing time of the invention that the network infrastructure of Kwok in view of Paladugu and Song can be implemented such that intelligence layer in a public cloud at a far edge location within the wireless cellular telecommunication network where a centralized unit (CU) of the wireless cellular telecommunication network and the different DU are deployed. The benefit of far-edge virtual implementation is well understood and discussed in Wolman at least ¶0064, 0009, providing intelligent scaling of computing resources while decreasing energy consumption, expenditure, as well as effective latency control. Furthermore, Off-the-shelf hardware computing platform allows services to continue working even in case of backhaul outages, thus improving robustness of the services and system.
As to claims 14, 18:
Kwok in view of Paladugu, Song and Wolman discloses all limitations of claim 13/17 wherein, for each UE of the plurality of UEs, the determination whether using the carrier aggregation or using the dual connectivity is preferable is based on feedback from Radio Access Network (RAN) functions of the wireless cellular telecommunication network. See at least Kwok, ¶0011, 0038, 0056, feedback from RAN/UE)
As to claims 15, 19:
Kwok in view of Paladugu, Song and Wolman discloses all limitations of claim 13/17 wherein, for each UE of the plurality of UEs, the determination whether using the carrier aggregation or using the dual connectivity is preferable is based on one or more of: UE communication characteristics of the UE and inter-distributed unit (inter-DU) communication characteristics of communication between the different respective DUs. (Kwok, ¶0038, “a gNB connected to the UE 106 can monitor PHRs received from the UE 106. The gNb may use data from the PHRs to determine when to switch from/to NR DC and/or pass this data to one or more other nodes to determine when to switch from/to NR DC”. See also ¶0012, 0013, 0056)
As to claim 16, 20:
Kwok in view of Paladugu, Song and Wolman discloses all limitations of claim 15/19 wherein, for each UE of the plurality of UEs, the determination whether using the carrier aggregation or using the dual connectivity is preferable includes: the intelligence layer working with a centralized unit (CU) of the wireless cellular telecommunication network and the plurality of DUs to receive information regarding one or more of: the UE communication characteristics and the inter-DU communication characteristics. . (Kwok, ¶0038, “use data from the PHRs to determine when to switch from/to NR DC and/or pass this data to one or more other nodes to determine when to switch from/to NR DC”. Also Paladugu, ¶0059, 0060, 0063, “determining, at a CU of the base station and based on information received from the UE and associated DUs of the base station”, i.e. decisions are made at CU)
As to claim 7:
Kwok in view of Paladugu, Song and Wolman discloses all limitations of claim 1, regarding: wherein at least one of network management functions or other network functions of the wireless cellular telecommunication network are able to be deployed in public cloud wherein the intelligence layer is deployed. (In view of Wolman, ¶0061, 0074 it can be shown that network function such as CPF is also be hosted in a centralized public cloud, as such can be deployed in any public cloud the system of Kwock, Paladugu and Song in combination can afford in a centralized manner, i.e. with other entities that are hosted in public cloud )
Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwok et al. (US 2024/0121855) in view of Paladugu et al (US 2019/0387561) and in view of Song et al. (US 2023/0276465) in further view of Wolman et al. (US 2023/0110752) and in further view of Yang (CN 101494908).
As to claim 21:
Kwok in view of Paladugu, Song and Wolman discloses all limitations of claim 1, regarding: wherein electronically determining whether using carrier aggregation or dual connectivity for the cells is preferable further comprises determining whether any of the plurality of user UEs is a high priority UE
Kwok in at least ¶0029, 0030, 0038, discloses systematically determining the UE is near cell, mid-cell, or cell edge based on measurement results, thus stratifying the user. While Kwok does not explicitly use the term priority, however it is known in the art that edge-cell users and near-cell users are typically given different priority depends on criteria/design.
In a related field of endeavor, Yang, in Abstract, discloses UE detected as at cell edge to be given high priority to guarantee data transmission.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing time of the invention that the UE in cell-edge in Kwok can be referred to as high priority user as they are more vulnerable to connection issue. Both Kwok and Yang seek to protect user from poor performance (¶0013 of Kwok), this implementation advantageously ensure the network to provide appropriate treatment to vulnerable users to avoid data loss (Abstract of Yang).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
WO 2021/173339 - Certain aspects of the present disclosure provide a technique for signaling user equipment (UE) assistance information (UAI) that is specific to a particular cell group (CG) (e.g., a secondary CG (SCG)). For example, the technique may be executed to generate CG specific UAI, which may indicate a configuration parameter for the UE when operating in a multiple radio dual connectivity (MR-DC) mode. The UE may signal the UAI to a network entity along with an indication of the CG to which the UAI is to be applied.
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 QUAN M HUA whose telephone number is (571)270-7232. The examiner can normally be reached 10:30-6:30.
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, Anthony Addy can be reached at 571-272-7795. 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.
/QUAN M HUA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2645
Prosecution Insights