DETAILED ACTION
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 the submission filed 2025-11-12 (herein referred to as the Reply) where claim(s) 1-16, 19-20, 31-32 are pending for consideration.
Election/Restrictions
The argument and amendments were found persuasive. The restriction is withdrawn. Claim(s) 1-16, 19-20, 31-32 are pending for consideration.
35 USC §112(a) – Claim Rejections
The following is a quotation 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.
Claim(s) is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a)
Claim(s) 6, 20
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 pre-AIA the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
The claim(s) recite variants of:
wherein the obtaining the target policy information comprises:
obtaining service related information, wherein the service related information comprises: first data for representing a service scenario and second data for representing a service requirement; and
performing, according to the service related information, a calculation to obtain the reliability index.
However, the Specification simply repeats the same high level language of this feature without providing further details as to how the calculation is carried out. The best section the Examiner found is: (using citation of the corresponding US Publication)
[0268] a1. An Non-RT RIC performs a calculation to obtain the reliability index according to a specific service scenario and requirement.
[0269] For example, the Internet of Vehicles scenario is 99.9999%, and the data packet size is 300 bytes.
Here we it appears the “specific service scenario” corresponds to “Internet of Vehicles scenario is 99.9999%” and the “requirement” corresponds to “data packet size is 300 bytes” however the Specification fails to describe how the calculation is carried out to obtain the reliability index. In other words, what math or operation is used on the “Internet of Vehicles scenario is 99.9999%” and “data packet size is 300 bytes” variables to arrive at a reliability index? The Specification fails to describe any details of the calculation.
Claim(s) 14
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 pre-AIA the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
The claim(s) recite variants of:
obtaining radio resource related information of a radio access network (RAN) side; and performing a radio resource optimization according to the radio resource related information and the target policy information.
In other words, the claims require using radio resource related information and the target policy information to perform radio resource optimization. The Specification describes:
[0251] As an optional implementation, after receiving the target policy information, the method of embodiments in the present disclosure further comprises:
[0252] obtaining radio resource related information of a radio access network RAN side; and
[0253] performing a radio resource optimization according to the radio resource related information and the target policy information.
[0254] Here, the radio resource related information of the RAN (Radio Access Network, radio access network) side may be reported by the terminal or be obtained by performing a calculation according to information reported by the terminal.
[0255] It should be noted that the radio resource related information includes, but is not limited to: s radio resource occupied by the terminal, a priority of the resource occupied by the terminal, a target cell to which the terminal is switched, and the like.
[0256] Here, in a case that the target policy information includes the reliability index, the step of performing a radio resource optimization may specifically include:
[0257] determining, according to the radio resource related information, a current value or a predicted value of a reliability index of a corresponding target service; and
[0258] in a case that the current value or the predicted value of the reliability index of the target service does not meet the reliability index in the target policy information, performing the radio resource optimization.
[0259] In other words, in a case that the current value or the predicted value of the reliability index of the target service does not meet the reliability index in the target policy information, the second communications device initiates an optimization and control process to perform the radio resource optimization, so as to guarantee the policy target for the reliability of the target service.
[0260] Here, in a case that the target policy information includes the bandwidth index, the step of performing a radio resource optimization may specifically include:
[0261] performing a radio resource reconfiguration and optimization according to the radio resource related information and the target policy information.
[0262] Here, the radio resource is reconfigured and optimized according to the system bandwidth carried in the target policy information in conjunction with the radio resource related information, the KPI indicator on the radio side can be ensured in a case that the bandwidth index is met.
There are two primary issues:
radio resource related information used to determine a predicted/current reliability index
Para. 0254 discloses that the radio resource related information can include: radio resource occupied by the terminal, a priority of the resource occupied by the terminal, a target cell to which the terminal is switched, and the like.
Para. 0257 then recites that a current value or a predicted value of a reliability index of a corresponding target service is determined according to the radio resource related information.
Here there is a lack of detail as to how “a current value or a predicted value of a reliability index” is determined from the radio resource related information. The Specification fails to disclose important details as to how this operation is carried out. Using the examples in para. 0254, how does one determine a predicted value of a reliability index from…e.g., a priority of the resource occupied by the terminal. The Specification fails to provide enough details in this operation to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
perform a radio resource optimization
Performing an “optimization” is generic verb used to describe doing something with the intent of making something more efficient. The Specification fails to provide any deals of what this “optimization” entails. Rather, the Specification simply recites the end results of the optimization without details how the result is achieved. The closest the Examiner found is at:
[0266] In other words, in a case that the current value or the predicted value of the spectral efficiency index of the target cell or the target base station does not meet the spectral efficiency index in the target policy information, the second communications device initiates an optimization and control process to perform the radio resource optimization, so as to guarantee the policy target for the spectral efficiency of the target cell or target base station.
[0273] a5. The Near-RT RIC analyzes radio resource related information of an RAN side which is obtained from a base station. In a case that a current value or a predicted value of a reliability index of a corresponding service does not meet a target in the A1 policy, the Near-RT RIC initiates an optimization and control process to perform a radio resource optimization, so as to guarantee the policy target for the reliability of the service.
[0278] b5. The Near-RT RIC reconfigures and optimizes the radio resource according to a system bandwidth carried in the A1 policy and radio resource related information of an RAN side obtained from a base station, so as to guarantee a KPI indicator on a radio side in a case that the bandwidth index is met.
[0283] c5. The Near-RT RIC analyzes obtained radio resource related information of an RAN side. In a case that a current value or a predicted value of a spectral efficiency index of a target cell/target base station does not meet a policy target, the Near-RT RIC initiates an optimization and control process to perform a radio resource optimization, so as to guarantee the spectral efficiency target of the cell/base station.
In all the examples above, the optimization is described in a high-level manner such that all is recited is a nebulous re-configuration/optimization/control process in order to achieve a goal. In other words, the Specification effectively discloses a “tool kit” that describes: the exemplary breadth of variables to be used, conditions in which optimization should occur, and the result of the optimization but fails to discloses critical deals as to how the optimization is actually carried out in a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed. The Specification effectively is directed to instances of generic language that amounts to “use this information and this information to optimize reconfiguration such that target goals are met” – without one specific example using particular variables and particular operations is provided.
35 USC §103 - Claim Rejections
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claim(s) is/are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Admitted Prior Art (instant Specification) in view of LIU_131 (US20210022131) and further view of TR38.913 (NPL – 3GPP TR32.913, 2020-07)
Claim(s) 1, 15
Admitted Prior Art teaches
“An information communication method, performed by a communications device, wherein the communications device is a first communications device, the first communications device is a non-real-time radio access network intelligent controller in an open radio access network (0-RAN) architecture, and the method comprises: obtaining target policy information; and sending the target policy information to a second communications device, wherein the second communications device is a near real time radio access network intelligent controller in the O-RAN architecture; wherein the target policy information comprises A1 policy information”
The Specification (using US Publication citations) recite:
[0003] As an object and a guidance for performing an intelligent network optimization control by a near real time radio access network intelligent controller (Near Real Time RAN Intelligent Controller, Near-RT RIC), The A1 policy may directly affect the result of the optimization control on the radio network performed by the Near-RT RIC.
[0004] In related technology, the A1 policy is only limited to indexes including quality of service (Quality of Service, QoS), quality of experience (Quality of Experience, QoE) and traffic steering preference (traffic steering preference). These indexes cannot meet various service requirements and system requirements of the radio network, so that the Near-RT RIC lacks of a capability for flexibly ensuring the resource optimization.
[0176] As shown in FIG. 1, the non-real-time radio access network intelligent controller (Non Real Time RAN Intelligent Controller, Non-RT RIC) in the O-RAN architecture adopts an intelligent method for providing, through an A1 interface to the Near-RT RIC, a policy for the radio access network (Radio Access Network, RAN) optimization as a guidance for RAN intelligent optimization and control.
[0177] Currently, in O-RAN related specifications, policies provided by the A1 interface are only limited to some indexes such as QoS, QoE and traffic steering preference. The inventors have found, through the research, that the indexes which can be currently provided by O-RAN are not enough to meet various service requirements and the system requirements of the radio network in various service applications for individuals (To Consumer, ToC) and enterprises (To Business, ToB). As a result, the conventional Near-RT RIC lacks of a capability for flexibly ensuring the resource optimization.
In view of the above, the Admitted Prior Art teaches the standard features of the O-RAN protocol which discloses a non-real time (RT) RIC provides target policy information in the form of A1 policy to a near-RT RIC. This is consistent with the Examiner’s finding of the O-RAN protocol (see Relevant Cited References for O-Ran related specification documents).
Admitted Prior Art purports the O-RAN lacks A1 policies pertaining to reliability information such that:
Admitted Prior Art does not explicitly teach
a reliability index for indicating a success probability of data transmission;
wherein the reliability index comprises:
a first quantity of bytes of data transmission
a first time required for data transmission; and
a success probability of transmitting the first quantity of bytes within the first time.
However in a similar endeavor, LIU_131 teaches
a reliability index for indicating a success probability of data transmission; UE obtains transmission reliability requirement for to-be-transmitted data and sends the reliability to a base station. <FIG. 2; para. 0045-0048, 0057-0061>
Before the effective filing date of the claim invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art to have modified the system/techniques disclosed by Admitted Prior Art with the embodiment(s) disclosed by LIU_131. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to improve data transmission reliability <para. 0009>.
However in a similar endeavor, TR38.913 teaches
wherein the reliability index comprises: a first quantity of bytes of data transmission, a first time required for data transmission; and a success probability of transmitting the first quantity of bytes within the first time. Transmission reliability can be defined as metric of successful with regards to X bytes transmitted within a certain delay <Section 7.9>
Before the effective filing date of the claim invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art to have modified the system/techniques disclosed by Admitted Prior Art and LIU_131 with the embodiment(s) disclosed by TR38.913. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to operate in accordance with 3GPP standards and protocols.
As discussed above, the Examiner has interpreted the claimed invention to be an improvement upon known O-RAN practices where the improvement is the use of reliability information (index) where the O-RAN specification fails to utilize reliability information in A1 policies. However, LIU_131 demonstrates that it is well known in the art that reliability information is communicated between network devices in order to improve data transmission reliability among said devices. Furthermore, it is well known in the art that a reliability metric for transmission would be in the context of a transmitted amount, time constraints, and probability of success. However, LIU_131 does not explicitly defined the reliability requirement in these variables, hence the Examiners bring in TR38.913 to demonstrate that using transmitted amount, time constraints, and probability of success with regards to a reliability index are well known.
Consequently, it’s the Examiner’s sentiment that the independent claims are directed to a well-known principle (O-RAN policy management) being applied to well-known information (reliability) which is an obvious combination.
Claim(s) 9, 31
Admitted Prior Art teaches
An information communication method, performed by a communications device, wherein the communications device is a second communications device, the second communications device is a near real time radio access network intelligent controller in an open radio access network (0-RAN) architecture, and the method comprise: receiving target policy information from a first communications device, wherein the first communications device is a non-real-time radio access network intelligent controller in the O-RAN architecture; wherein the target policy information comprises A1 policy information,
The Specification (using US Publication citations) recite:
[0003] As an object and a guidance for performing an intelligent network optimization control by a near real time radio access network intelligent controller (Near Real Time RAN Intelligent Controller, Near-RT RIC), The A1 policy may directly affect the result of the optimization control on the radio network performed by the Near-RT RIC.
[0004] In related technology, the A1 policy is only limited to indexes including quality of service (Quality of Service, QoS), quality of experience (Quality of Experience, QoE) and traffic steering preference (traffic steering preference). These indexes cannot meet various service requirements and system requirements of the radio network, so that the Near-RT RIC lacks of a capability for flexibly ensuring the resource optimization.
[0176] As shown in FIG. 1, the non-real-time radio access network intelligent controller (Non Real Time RAN Intelligent Controller, Non-RT RIC) in the O-RAN architecture adopts an intelligent method for providing, through an A1 interface to the Near-RT RIC, a policy for the radio access network (Radio Access Network, RAN) optimization as a guidance for RAN intelligent optimization and control.
[0177] Currently, in O-RAN related specifications, policies provided by the A1 interface are only limited to some indexes such as QoS, QoE and traffic steering preference. The inventors have found, through the research, that the indexes which can be currently provided by O-RAN are not enough to meet various service requirements and the system requirements of the radio network in various service applications for individuals (To Consumer, ToC) and enterprises (To Business, ToB). As a result, the conventional Near-RT RIC lacks of a capability for flexibly ensuring the resource optimization.
In view of the above, the Admitted Prior Art teaches the standard features of the O-RAN protocol which discloses a non-real time (RT) RIC provides target policy information in the form of A1 policy to a near-RT RIC. This is consistent with the Examiner’s finding of the O-RAN protocol (see Relevant Cited References for O-Ran related specification documents).
Admitted Prior Art purports the O-RAN lacks A1 policies pertaining to reliability information such that:
Admitted Prior Art does not explicitly teach
reliability index for indicating a success probability of data transmission; wherein the reliability index comprises:
a first quantity of bytes of data transmission;
a first time required for data transmission; and
a success probability of transmitting the first quantity of bytes within the first time.
However in a similar endeavor, LIU_131 teaches
a reliability index for indicating a success probability of data transmission; UE obtains transmission reliability requirement for to-be-transmitted data and sends the reliability to a base station. <FIG. 2; para. 0045-0048, 0057-0061>
Before the effective filing date of the claim invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art to have modified the system/techniques disclosed by Admitted Prior Art with the embodiment(s) disclosed by LIU_131. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to improve data transmission reliability <para. 0009>.
However in a similar endeavor, TR38.913 teaches
wherein the reliability index comprises: a first quantity of bytes of data transmission, a first time required for data transmission; and a success probability of transmitting the first quantity of bytes within the first time. Transmission reliability can be defined as metric of successful with regards to X bytes transmitted within a certain delay <Section 7.9>
Before the effective filing date of the claim invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art to have modified the system/techniques disclosed by Admitted Prior Art and LIU_131 with the embodiment(s) disclosed by TR38.913. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to operate in accordance with 3GPP standards and protocols.
As discussed above, the Examiner has interpreted the claimed invention to be an improvement upon known O-RAN practices where the improvement is the use of reliability information (index) where the O-RAN specification fails to utilize reliability information in A1 policies. However, LIU_131 demonstrates that it is well known in the art that reliability information is communicated between network devices in order to improve data transmission reliability among said devices. Furthermore, it is well known in the art that a reliability metric for transmission would be in the context of a transmitted amount, time constraints, and probability of success. However, LIU_131 does not explicitly defined the reliability requirement in these variables, hence the Examiners bring in TR38.913 to demonstrate that using transmitted amount, time constraints, and probability of success with regards to a reliability index are well known.
Consequently, it’s the Examiner’s sentiment that the independent claims are directed to a well-known principle (O-RAN policy management) being applied to well-known information (reliability) which is an obvious combination.
Claim(s) is/are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Admitted Prior Art () in view of LIU_131 (US20210022131), in view of TR38.913 (NPL – 3GPP TR32.913, 2020-07), and further view of O-RAN_Slicingv2.0 (NPL - RAN Study-on-O-RAN-Slicing-v02.00)
Claim(s) 5, 13, 19
Admitted Prior Art does not explicitly teach
wherein the sending the target policy information to the second communications device comprises:
sending, through an A1 interface, the target policy information to the second communications device.
However in a similar endeavor, O-RAN_Slicingv2.0 teaches
wherein the sending the target policy information to the second communications device comprises:
sending, through an A1 interface, the target policy information to the second communications device. A1: Interface between non-RT RIC and Near-RT RIC to enable policy-driven guidance of Near-RT RIC 18 applications/functions, and support AI/ML workflow. <Section: 1.3, 5.1.5>
Before the effective filing date of the claim invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art to have modified the system/techniques disclosed by Admitted Prior Art, LIU_131 and TR38.913 with the embodiment(s) disclosed by O-RAN_Slicingv2.0. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to function in accordance with O-RAN protocols and procedures.
Claim(s) is/are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Admitted Prior Art (instant Specification) in view of LIU_131 (US20210022131), in view of TR38.913 (NPL – 3GPP TR32.913, 2020-07), and in further view of LEE_652 (US20170324652)
Claim(s) 2, 10
Admitted Prior Art does not explicitly teach
wherein the target policy information further comprises at least one of:
a bandwidth index for indicating a system bandwidth; or
a spectral efficiency index for indicating a spectral efficiency
However LEE_652 teaches
wherein the target policy information further comprises at least one of:
a bandwidth index for indicating a system bandwidth; Network traffic policy may include Quality of Service (QoS) parameters including, for example, service priority, maximum bandwidth, guaranteed bandwidth, and/or maximum delay. In this context the QoS is not exclusive to a sub-set of resource and therefore implicitly the maximum bandwidth would be directed to the total bandwidth. <para. 0083>
Before the effective filing date of the claim invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art to have modified the system/techniques disclosed by Admitted Prior Art, LIU_131 and TR38.913 with the embodiment(s) disclosed by LEE_652. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to use of packet identification markings, and more specifically to use of one or more identification values (where an identification value may be a packet-set marking and/or a token) for in-flow packet prioritization and data-dependent flexible QoS policy. <para. 0002>.
Claim(s) 3, 11
Admitted Prior Art does not explicitly teach
wherein the bandwidth index comprises: a maximum aggregation total system bandwidth
However LEE_652 teaches
wherein the bandwidth index comprises: a maximum aggregation total system bandwidth; Network traffic policy may include Quality of Service (QoS) parameters including, for example, service priority, maximum bandwidth, guaranteed bandwidth, and/or maximum delay. In this context the QoS is not exclusive to a sub-set of resource and therefore implicitly the maximum bandwidth would be directed to the total bandwidth. <para. 0083>Before the effective filing date of the claim invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art to have modified the system/techniques disclosed by Admitted Prior Art, LIU_131 and TR38.913 with the embodiment(s) disclosed by LEE_652. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to use of packet identification markings, and more specifically to use of one or more identification values (where an identification value may be a packet-set marking and/or a token) for in-flow packet prioritization and data-dependent flexible QoS policy. <para. 0002>.
Claim(s) 4, 12
The claim is directed to limitations that further narrow an alternative embodiment. As discussed herein, the base claim was anticipated using another embodiment (i.e., not the alternative embodiment). Consequently, the claim is rejected for the same reasons as the given for the base claim.
Claim(s) 16, 32
Admitted Prior Art does not explicitly teach
wherein the target policy information further comprises at least one of:
a bandwidth index for indicating a system bandwidth; or
a spectral efficiency index for indicating a spectral efficiency
wherein the bandwidth index comprises:
a maximum aggregation total system bandwidth;
wherein the spectral efficiency index comprises at least one of the following:
a spectral efficiency of a cell;
a spectral efficiency of a transmission point;
a spectral efficiency of a transmission reception point (TRxP); or
an edge spectral efficiency,
wherein the edge spectral efficiency is a user spectral efficiency corresponding to a preset percentage of a cumulative distribution function.
However LEE_652 teaches
wherein the target policy information further comprises at least one of:
a bandwidth index for indicating a system bandwidth; wherein the bandwidth index comprises: a maximum aggregation total system bandwidth; Network traffic policy may include Quality of Service (QoS) parameters including, for example, service priority, maximum bandwidth, guaranteed bandwidth, and/or maximum delay. In this context the QoS is not exclusive to a sub-set of resource and therefore implicitly the maximum bandwidth would be directed to the total bandwidth. <para. 0083>
Before the effective filing date of the claim invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art to have modified the system/techniques disclosed by Admitted Prior Art, LIU_131 and TR38.913 with the embodiment(s) disclosed by LEE_652. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to use of packet identification markings, and more specifically to use of one or more identification values (where an identification value may be a packet-set marking and/or a token) for in-flow packet prioritization and data-dependent flexible QoS policy. <para. 0002>.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) is/are indicated as having allowable subject matter and objected to.
Claim(s) 7, 8
The claim(s) is/are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Reasons for Allowance
Claim 7 requires target policy information comprises A1 policy information comprising:
a reliability index for indicating a success probability of data transmission
a bandwidth index for indicating a system bandwidth
the obtaining the target policy information comprises:
obtaining a bandwidth requirement of a first cell or a first base station; and
generating, according to the bandwidth requirement, a bandwidth index corresponding to the first cell or the first base station.
Effectively claim 7 requires two bandwidth indices: a first for indicating system bandwidth and a second for a first cell/base station. Closest prior art is LEE_652 (US20170324652) teaches a system bandwidth but does not teach obtaining a second a bandwidth requirement of a first cell or a first base station and generating a bandwidth index corresponding to the first cell or the first base station.
Claim 8 requires target policy information comprises A1 policy information comprising:
a reliability index for indicating a success probability of data transmission
a spectral efficiency index for indicating a spectral efficiency
the obtaining the target policy information comprises:
obtaining a key performance indicator of operation management and currently managed radio network information; and
obtaining, according to the key performance indicator and the radio network information, a spectral efficiency index for each cell or each base station managed.
Effectively claim 8 requires two spectral efficiency indices: a first spectral efficiency index for indicating a spectral efficiency and a second spectral efficiency index for a first cell/base station.
Closest art is:
JUNG - US20110044186 teaching a calculated spectral efficiency in an index set but not teach use of KIPs to determine said index set.
WU - US20210144707 teaching a spectral efficiency range identified by UE 305-1 may be associated with a first index value and a second index value that correlate to a mapping of spectral efficiency indices to spectral efficiency values but not teach use of KIPs to determine said mapping.
Relevant Cited References
O-RAN. A1 Policy Management Service API. 2009.
O-RAN.WG1.Study-on-O-RAN-Slicing-v02.00. 2020.
US20110044186
US20210144707
Examiner’s Notes
Claim Interpretation
The term “A1 policy” is a term of art as defined by the Open Radio Access Network (0-RAN) specification (see Specification’ Background and Relevant Cited Art’s “A1 Policy Management Service API”). Consequently, the claimed “A1 policy information” is interpreted to mean information pertaining to an O-RAN A1 Policy.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDRE TACDIRAN whose telephone number is 571-272-1717. The examiner can normally be reached on M-TH, 10-5PM EST. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jeffrey Rutkowski can be reached on 571-270-1215. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ANDRE TACDIRAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2415