DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to the Amendment filed 2/27/2026. Claim 7-10, 13-14, and 17 have been canceled. New claims 21-25 have been added. Claims 1-6, 11-12, 15-16, and 18-25 are currently pending in the application.
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 Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot because they do not apply to the new grounds of rejection made in view of newly cited Akl et al. (U.S. Publication US 2022/0217570 A1).
Independent claims 1, 12, and 19 have been amended to delete several previous claimed alternatives and to add a further previous alternative limitation from a dependent claim. Specifically, a limitation stating “receiving, by the IAB node, a third indication sent by the target CU or the target donor DU, wherein the third indication is configured to instruct to route the second BAP PDU to the target donor DU”. Applicant argues that this limitation is not taught by previously cited Zhu et al. since the handover command in Zhu et al. is sent from a source IAB donor CU, while the claimed third indication is sent by the target CU or the target donor DU. The Examiner agrees with this interpretation of Zhu et al. However, it is believed that the amended claim limitations are rendered obvious in view of the teachings of newly cited Akl et al.
Specifically, Akl et al. discloses a procedure where an IAB node is handed over from a first source IAB-donor-CU to a second target IAB-donor-CU (See paragraph 111 and Figure 14 of Akl et al.). Akl et al. also discloses that the handover process includes the target IAB-donor-CU providing to the IAB node, via a context setup/modification request, a second traffic mapping configuration (See paragraph 113 and Figure 14 of Akl et al.), wherein the second traffic mapping indicates to the IAB node BAP routing information including traffic mapping configuration indicating that the IAB node should route BAP traffic to the second target IAB-donor-CU (See paragraphs 118-119 and Figure 14 of Akl et al.). The IAB node receiving the second traffic mapping configuration of Akl et al. has the advantage of allowing the IAB node to be informed of BAP routing and traffic mapping updates made as a result of a handover procedure. Thus, based on these teachings of Akl et al., it is believed that the amended claim limitations are rendered obvious. Please see the rejections below for further detail.
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 1-4, 6, 11-12, 15-16, 18-23, and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhu et al. (U.S. Publication US 2023/0247521 A1) in view of Akl et al. (U.S. Publication US 2022/0217570 A1).
With respect to claims 1 and 19, Zhu et al. discloses an integrated access backhaul (IAB) node, comprising: a memory, a processor, and a program or an instruction stored in the memory and executable on the processor, wherein the program or the instruction, when executed by the processor, causes the IAB node to perform a data unit processing method (See the abstract, paragraph 126, paragraphs 326-331, and Figures 1A and 6 of Zhu et al. for reference to a lossless data transmission communication method performed by an IAB node comprising a memory storing instructions executed by a processor). Zhu et al. also discloses performing, by an integrated access backhaul (IAB) node, a data unit processing operation during a switching association period (See paragraphs 170-171 and Figure 2A of Zhu et al. for reference to performing the lossless data transmission communication method during a topology update, which is a switching association period). Zhu et al. further discloses wherein the data unit processing operation comprises routing, to a target donor distributed unit (DU), a second backhaul adaptation protocol (BAP) protocol data unit (PDU) whose target BAP address is an original donor DU (See paragraph 165, paragraphs 172-173, paragraph 178 and paragraph 191 of Zhu et al. for reference to handing data packets that are PDUs during the topology update by embodiments including sending a data packet to a second network node that may be a target DU wherein the destination address of the data packet is a third network node that is a source DU as shown in step S230A). Although Zhu et al. does disclose scenarios including performing topology updates in response to handover between a source IAB donor node and target IAB donor node (See paragraphs 158-161 of Zhu et al.), Zhu et al. does not specifically disclose receiving, by the IAB node, a third indication sent by the target CU or the target donor DU, wherein the third indication is configured to instruct to route the second BAP PDU to the target donor DU. However, Akl et al., in the field of communications, discloses a procedure where an IAB node is handed over from a first source IAB-donor-CU to a second target IAB-donor-CU (See paragraph 111 and Figure 14 of Akl et al.). Akl et al. also discloses that the handover process includes the target IAB-donor-CU providing to the IAB node, via a context setup/modification request, a second traffic mapping configuration (See paragraph 113 and Figure 14 of Akl et al.), wherein the second traffic mapping indicates to the IAB node BAP routing information including a traffic mapping configuration indicating that the IAB node should route BAP traffic to the second target IAB-donor-CU (See paragraphs 118-119 and Figure 14 of Akl et al.). The IAB node receiving the second traffic mapping configuration of Akl et al. from the target IAB-donor-CU has the advantage of allowing the IAB node to be informed of BAP routing and traffic mapping updates made as a result of a handover procedure. Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing, when presented with the work of Akl et al., to combine receiving the second traffic mapping configuration from the target IAB-donor-CU, as suggested by Akl et al., within the system and method of Zhu et al., with the motivation being to allow the IAB node to be informed of BAP routing and traffic mapping updates made as a result of a handover procedure.
With respect to claim 2 and 21, Zhu et al. discloses wherein the switching association period comprises one of: a period associated with a switching process of switching from the original donor DU to the target donor DU in a same centralized unit (CU) by the IAB node; and a period associated with a switching process of switching from an original CU to a target CU by the IAB node, wherein the original donor DU is a DU belonging to the original CU, and the target donor DU is a DU belonging to the target CU (See paragraphs 157-161 and Figures 1F and 1G of Zhu et al. for reference to scenarios wherein the topology update comprises a process of switching between donor DUs of a same IAB donor CU, as shown in Figure 1G, and scenarios wherein the topology update comprises a process of switching between donor DUs of different IAP donor CUs, as shown in Figure 1F).
With respect to claims 3 and 22, as shown above in the rejection of claims 1 and 19, Akl et al. renders obvious receiving, by the IAB node, a third indication sent by the target CU or the target donor DU, wherein the third indication is configured to instruct to route the second BAP PDU to the target donor DU (See paragraphs 111-119 and Figure 14 of Akl et al. for reference to a target IAB-donor-CU a sending context setup/modification request to an IAB node including second traffic mapping information indicating to the IAB node BAP routing information including a traffic mapping configuration indicating that the IAB node should route BAP traffic to the second target IAB-donor-CU). Akl et al. also discloses wherein the third indication is carried in a switching command or received before switching starts; or the third indication is received after switching is completed (See paragraphs 111-119 and Figure 14 of Akl et al. for reference to the context setup/modification request being sent before the switching is performed). Thus, these claims are rendered obvious for the same reasons as applied above to claims 1 and 19.
With respect to claims 4 and 23, Zhu et al. discloses wherein the switching association period comprises a first period after switching is completed, and the method further comprises: in a case that the first period ends, receiving, by the IAB node, a fourth indication sent by a target centralized unit (CU) or the target donor DU, wherein the fourth indication instructs to stop performing the data unit processing operation (See paragraphs 285-290 and Figure 4 of Zhu et al. for reference to after the switching has been completed, receiving an indication to stop scheduling the first network node and release a context of the first network node, which results in the ending the process of sending the data packet through the source donor DU using encapsulation).
With respect to claims 6 and 25, Zhu et al. discloses wherein the routing, to a target donor DU, a second BAP PDU whose target BAP address is an original donor DU comprises: performing a rewriting operation on the second BAP PDU, and routing the second BAP PDU after the rewriting operation to the target donor DU, wherein the rewriting operation comprises at least one of: rewriting a first routing identifier of the second BAP PDU to a second routing identifier, wherein the first routing identifier is configured to route to the original donor DU, and the second routing identifier is configured to route to the target donor DU; or rewriting a BAP path of the second BAP PDU to a BAP path of the target donor DU (See paragraph 173 of Zhu et al. for reference to the process including performing processing to update a header information of a BAP layer of a data packet by replacing or encapsulating the routing information such that the data packet is sent to the target donor DU).
With respect to claim 11, Zhu et al. discloses wherein the method further comprises at least one of: in a case that the IAB node receives a fourth BAP PDU, routing the fourth BAP PDU to the target donor DU, wherein a target BAP address of the fourth BAP PDU matches a BAP address of the target donor DU; in a case that the IAB node receives a fifth BAP PDU, discarding the fifth BAP PDU, wherein a target BAP address of the fifth BAP PDU does not match a BAP address of the original donor DU, and does not match the BAP address of the target donor DU; or in a case that the IAB node receives a sixth BAP PDU, discarding the sixth BAP PDU, wherein a target BAP address of the sixth BAP PDU does not match at least one of: an old BAP address of an IAB node that BAP routing configuration of the IAB node can reach; a new BAP address of an IAB node that BAP routing configuration of the IAB node can reach; or a BAP address of the IAB node (See paragraph 168 and paragraphs 173-174 of Zhu et al. for reference to determining whether to route or discard packets based on address filtering rules updated during the topology update process).
With respect to claims 12 and 20, Zhu et al. discloses a network node, comprising: a memory, a processor, and a program or an instruction stored in the memory and executable on the processor, wherein when the program or the instruction is executed by the processor to perform a data unit processing method (See the abstract, paragraph 126, paragraphs 326-331, and Figures 1A and 6 of Zhu et al. for reference to a lossless data transmission communication method performed by a node comprising a memory storing instructions executed by a processor). Zhu et al. also discloses sending, by a control node, indication information to an integrated access backhaul (IAB) node, wherein the indication information is configured to instruct the IAB node to perform a data unit processing operation during a switching association period (See paragraphs 170-171, paragraphs 239-241, and Figures 2A and 3 of Zhu et al. for reference to a network node sending a handover command to an IAB node, that instructs the IAB node to perform a lossless data communication method during a topology update, which is a switching association period). Zhu et al. further discloses wherein the data unit processing operation comprises routing, to a target donor distributed unit (DU), a second backhaul adaptation protocol (BAP) protocol data unit (PDU) whose target BAP address is an original donor DU (See paragraph 165, paragraphs 172-173, paragraph 178 and paragraph 191 of Zhu et al. for reference to handing data packets that are PDUs during the topology update by embodiments including sending a data packet to a second network node that may be a target DU wherein the destination address of the data packet is a third network node that is a source DU as shown in step S230A). Zhu et al. does not specifically disclose wherein the control node comprises one of: the target donor DU, and a target control unit (CU), and sending, by the control node, a third indication to the IAB node, wherein the third indication is configured to instruct to route the second BAP PDU to the target donor DU. However, Akl et al., in the field of communications, discloses a procedure where an IAB node is handed over from a first source IAB-donor-CU to a second target IAB-donor-CU (See paragraph 111 and Figure 14 of Akl et al.). Akl et al. also discloses that the handover process includes the target IAB-donor-CU providing to the IAB node, via a context setup/modification request, a second traffic mapping configuration (See paragraph 113 and Figure 14 of Akl et al.), wherein the second traffic mapping indicates to the IAB node BAP routing information including a traffic mapping configuration indicating that the IAB node should route BAP traffic to the second target IAB-donor-CU (See paragraphs 118-119 and Figure 14 of Akl et al.). The IAB node receiving the second traffic mapping configuration of Akl et al. from the target IAB-donor-CU has the advantage of allowing the IAB node to be informed of BAP routing and traffic mapping updates made as a result of a handover procedure. Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing, when presented with the work of Akl et al., to combine sending the second traffic mapping configuration from the target IAB-donor-CU, as suggested by Akl et al., within the system and method of Zhu et al., with the motivation being to allow the IAB node to be informed of BAP routing and traffic mapping updates made as a result of a handover procedure.
With respect to claim 15, as shown above in the rejection of claims 12 and 20, Akl et al. renders obvious sending, by the control node to the IAB node, a third indication, wherein the third indication is configured to instruct to route the second BAP PDU to the target donor DU (See paragraphs 111-119 and Figure 14 of Akl et al. for reference to a target IAB-donor-CU a sending context setup/modification request to an IAB node including second traffic mapping information indicating to the IAB node BAP routing information including a traffic mapping configuration indicating that the IAB node should route BAP traffic to the second target IAB-donor-CU). Akl et al. also discloses wherein the third indication is carried in a switching command or received before switching starts; or the third indication is received after switching is completed (See paragraphs 111-119 and Figure 14 of Akl et al. for reference to the context setup/modification request being sent before the switching is performed). Thus, this claim is rendered obvious for the same reasons as applied above to claims 12 and 20.
With respect to claim 16, Zhu et al. discloses wherein the switching association period comprises a first period after switching is completed, and the method further comprises: in a case that the first period ends, sending, by the control node, an indication for stopping performing the data unit processing operation to the IAB node (See paragraphs 285-290 and Figure 4 of Zhu et al. for reference to after the switching has been completed, receiving an indication to stop scheduling the first network node and release a context of the first network node, which results in the ending the process of sending the data packet through the source donor DU using encapsulation).
With respect to claim 18, Zhu et al. discloses wherein, the method further comprises: in a case that the control node receives an abnormal BAP PDU, discarding the abnormal BAP PDU, wherein a destination BAP address carried by the abnormal BAP PDU does not match a BAP address of the control node and does not match a BAP address of the original donor DU or the original CU (See paragraph 168 of Zhu et al. for reference to discarding packets that do not belong to a range of source IP addresses allowed to be forwarded).
Claims 5 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhu et al. in view of Akl et al., and in further view of Wang et al. (U.S. Publication US 2020/0351854 A1).
With respect to claims 5 and 24, although Zhu et al. does disclose a topology update period that corresponds to the claimed switching association period wherein IP address filtering rules are updated to avoid discarding packet during the topology update (See paragraph 233 of Zhu et al.), Zhu et al. does not specifically disclose the switching association period comprises a first period after the switching is completed, the IAB node retains a BAP address of the original donor DU during the first period, and after the first period ends, the IAB node removes the BAP address of the original donor DU. However, Wang et al., in the field of communications, discloses during a time period after a topology update, a node deletes or releases or removes an address that is no longer used (See paragraph 453 of Wang et al.). Removing an address after switching is complete has the advantage of ensuring that future packets are routed according the new topology after the topology update. Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing, when presented with the work of Wang et al., to combine removing an address after switching is complete, as suggested by Wang et al., within the system and method of Zhu et al., with the motivation being to ensure that future packets are routed according the new topology after the topology update.
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 Jason E Mattis whose telephone number is (571)272-3154. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00am-4:30pm.
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, Huy Vu can be reached at 571-2723155. 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.
/JASON E MATTIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2461
Prosecution Insights