Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/291,033

DETERMINATION OF COMPATIBLE RESOURCE CONFIGURATIONS IN INTEGRATED ACCESS AND BACKHAUL MIGRATION AND TOPOLOGICAL REDUNDANCY

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Jan 22, 2024
Examiner
ASRES, HERMON
Art Unit
2449
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Telefonaktiebolaget Lm Ericsson (Publ)
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
80%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 80% — above average
80%
Career Allow Rate
294 granted / 368 resolved
+21.9% vs TC avg
Strong +20% interview lift
Without
With
+19.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
20 currently pending
Career history
388
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
10.9%
-29.1% vs TC avg
§103
52.1%
+12.1% vs TC avg
§102
16.0%
-24.0% vs TC avg
§112
9.1%
-30.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 368 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Claims 1-19 have been examined and are rejected. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 02/08/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Abedini et al. (USPGPub 2022/0124706). As per claim 1, Abedini teaches a first integrated access and backhaul, IAB, donor node, (Abedini, see paragraph [0030], a gNB such as an IAB-donor connected to a terminal) the first IAB donor node including processing circuitry configured to: receive a first resource configuration for a first parent IAB node from a second IAB donor node, the first parent IAB node being in communication with a child IAB node (Abedini, see paragraph [0038], generates and transmits a message to a DU that includes the DU cell-specific configuration, an identity of child nodes and/or cells, and other information. The CU may identify another cell, such as the DU's own cell, another parent cell serving the child node, etc., in the list of child cells. The CU also includes a resource configuration (Note: this is the resource configuration received) for the identified child cell) determine compatibility between the first resource configuration and a second resource configuration for a second parent IAB node; (Abedini, see paragraph [0038], Upon receiving the message, the DU may compare the cell-related information for different parent or child nodes. Based on this and potentially other information, the DU may determine that the cell identifier (ID) for the child node in the received message is incorrect) and determine whether to accept a request to establish a connection between the second parent IAB node and the child IAB node based at least in part on the compatibility determination (Abedini, see paragraph [0038], the DU may substitute the child-specific resource configuration information for its cell-specific configuration and may proceed to communicate via its cell with the child node using the substituted child specific resource configuration). As per claim 2, Abedini teaches the first IAB donor node of Claim 1, wherein, when it is determined that there is a compatibility between the first and second resource configurations, the processing circuitry is further configured to configure the second parent IAB node with the second resource configuration. (Abedini, see paragraph [0038], the DU may substitute the child-specific resource configuration information for its cell-specific configuration and may proceed to communicate via its cell with the child node using the substituted child specific resource configuration). As per claim 3, Abedini teaches the first IAB donor node wherein, when it is determined that there is a compatibility between the first and second resource configurations, the processing circuitry is further configured to send the second resource configuration to the second IAB donor node. (Abedini, see paragraph [0069], the CU and resource configuration component 252 may be configured to prepare a GNB-DU RESOURCE CONFIGURATION information element (IE) which includes a gNB-DU Cell Resource Configuration (IE) for sending to the DU, which includes the resource configuration information used for data transmissions between nodes) As per claim 4, Abedini teaches the first IAB donor node of Claim 1, wherein determining compatibility between the first and second resource configurations is based at least in part on a ratio of an amount of conflicting resources to an amount of compatible resources between the first and second resource configurations. (Abedini, see paragraph [0134], identifying a conflict between the configurations, the CU evaluating potential consequences of the conflict may determine that the RRC-based TDD configuration may be used (or temporarily adjusted) to change the overall configuration and thereby avoid data errors while also not backing off from the communication) As per claim 5, Abedini teaches the first IAB donor node of Claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to determine conflicting resources between the first and second resource configurations and to deactivate the conflicting resources for at least one of the first parent IAB node and the second parent IAB node. (Abedini, see paragraph [0038], the DU may determine that the cell identifier (ID) for the child node in the received message is incorrect. The received cell ID may in fact be its own cell or the cell of another node in the IAB network. The DU thereupon recognizes that for the identified child node, the provided resource configuration for the child cell is in fact “side information” representing a child-node specific resource configuration. The DU may therefore modify the resource configuration of the DU cell serving the identified child node) As per claim 6, Abedini teaches the first IAB donor node of Claim 1, wherein determining compatibility between the first and second resource configurations is based at least in part on a priority associated with each of the first and second parent IAB nodes. (Abedini, see paragraph [0132], The DU can then modify the resource configuration to communicate with the child node. While both fields in FIG. 10 may coexist if a priority or order is provided the DU, in the case where it is not desirable to add further signaling overhead). As per claim 7, Abedini teaches the first IAB donor node of Claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to determine whether to accept the request to establish the connection based at least in part on an amount of congestion in one of the first and second parent IAB nodes. (Abedini, see paragraph [0100], This may result in implications, such as, but not limited to, power consumption, interference, and incorrect inference of the channel/link quality at the child-node. Furthermore, such resources may have been used for other communications of the child-node (e.g. communication with grand-children, or with another parent)) As per claim 8, Abedini teaches a method in a first integrated access and backhaul, IAB, donor node, (Abedini, see paragraph [0030], a gNB such as an IAB-donor connected to a terminal) the method comprising: receiving a first resource configuration for the first parent IAB node from a second IAB donor node, the first parent IAB node being in communication with a child IAB node; (Abedini, see paragraph [0038], generates and transmits a message to a DU that includes the DU cell-specific configuration, an identity of child nodes and/or cells, and other information. The CU may identify another cell, such as the DU's own cell, another parent cell serving the child node, etc., in the list of child cells. The CU also includes a resource configuration (Note: this is the resource configuration received) for the identified child cell) determining compatibility between the first resource configuration and a second resource configuration for a second parent IAB node (Abedini, see paragraph [0038], Upon receiving the message, the DU may compare the cell-related information for different parent or child nodes. Based on this and potentially other information, the DU may determine that the cell identifier (ID) for the child node in the received message is incorrect) and determining whether to accept a request to establish a connection between the second parent IAB node and the child IAB node based at least in part on the compatibility determination. (Abedini, see paragraph [0038], the DU may substitute the child-specific resource configuration information for its cell-specific configuration and may proceed to communicate via its cell with the child node using the substituted child specific resource configuration). As per claim 9, Abedini teaches the method of Claim 8, further comprising, when it is determined that there is a compatibility between the first and second resource configurations, configuring the second parent IAB node with the second resource configuration. (Abedini, see paragraph [0038], the DU may substitute the child-specific resource configuration information for its cell-specific configuration and may proceed to communicate via its cell with the child node using the substituted child specific resource configuration). As per claim 10, Abedini teaches the method of Claim 8, further comprising, when it is determined that there is a compatibility between the first and second resource configurations, sending the second resource configuration to the second IAB donor node. (Abedini, see paragraph [0069], the CU and resource configuration component 252 may be configured to prepare a GNB-DU RESOURCE CONFIGURATION information element (IE) which includes a gNB-DU Cell Resource Configuration (IE) for sending to the DU, which includes the resource configuration information used for data transmissions between nodes) As per claim 11, Abedini teaches the method of Claim 8, wherein determining compatibility between the first and second resource configurations is based at least in part on a ratio of an amount of conflicting resources to an amount of compatible resources between the first and second resource configurations. (Abedini, see paragraph [0134], identifying a conflict between the configurations, the CU evaluating potential consequences of the conflict may determine that the RRC-based TDD configuration may be used (or temporarily adjusted) to change the overall configuration and thereby avoid data errors while also not backing off from the communication) As per claim 12, Abedini teaches the method of Claim 8, further comprising determining conflicting resources between the first and second resource configurations and to deactivate the conflicting resources for at least one of the first parent IAB node and the second parent IAB node. (Abedini, see paragraph [0038], the DU may determine that the cell identifier (ID) for the child node in the received message is incorrect. The received cell ID may in fact be its own cell or the cell of another node in the IAB network. The DU thereupon recognizes that for the identified child node, the provided resource configuration for the child cell is in fact “side information” representing a child-node specific resource configuration. The DU may therefore modify the resource configuration of the DU cell serving the identified child node) As per claim 13, Abedini teaches the method of Claim 8, wherein determining compatibility between the first and second resource configurations is based at least in part on a priority associated with each of the first and second parent IAB nodes. (Abedini, see paragraph [0132], The DU can then modify the resource configuration to communicate with the child node. While both fields in FIG. 10 may coexist if a priority or order is provided the DU, in the case where it is not desirable to add further signaling overhead). As per claim 14, Abedini teaches the method of Claim 8, further comprising determining whether to accept the request to establish the connection based at least in part on an amount of congestion in one of the first and second parent IAB nodes. (Abedini, see paragraph [0100], This may result in implications, such as, but not limited to, power consumption, interference, and incorrect inference of the channel/link quality at the child-node. Furthermore, such resources may have been used for other communications of the child-node (e.g. communication with grand-children, or with another parent)). As per claim 15, Abedini teaches a first integrated access and backhaul, IAB, donor node (Abedini, see paragraph [0030], a gNB such as an IAB-donor connected to a terminal) the first IAB donor node comprising processing circuitry configured to: send to a second IAB donor node a request to establish a connection between a child IAB node and a second parent IAB node, the child IAB node being in communication with a first parent IAB node (Abedini, see paragraph [0137], …one or more child nodes. The CU may therefore revise the then-current RRC TDD configuration to provide a per-child configuration and proceed with communications to or from the child node(s)…the DU that is looking to make the RRC TDD configuration adjustment first sends a request to the DU, and the DU may grant the request) send a first resource configuration of the first parent IAB node to the second IAB donor node and receive a second resource configuration for the second parent IAB node from the second IAB donor node (Abedini, see paragraph [0038], generates and transmits a message to a DU that includes the DU cell-specific configuration, an identity of child nodes and/or cells, and other information. The CU may identify another cell, such as the DU's own cell, another parent cell serving the child node, etc., in the list of child cells. The CU also includes a resource configuration for the identified child cell) the second resource configuration based at least in part on a determination of compatibility between the first resource configuration and a second resource configuration for the second parent IAB node. (Abedini, see paragraph [0038], Upon receiving the message, the DU may compare the cell-related information for different parent or child nodes. Based on this and potentially other information, the DU may determine that the cell identifier (ID) for the child node in the received message is incorrect. Also see paragraph [0038], the DU may substitute the child-specific resource configuration information for its cell-specific configuration and may proceed to communicate via its cell with the child node using the substituted child specific resource configuration).) As per claim 16, Abedini teaches the first IAB donor node of Claim 15, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to send a second resource configuration of the first parent IAB node to the first parent IAB node, the second resource configuration based at least in part on the determination of compatibility. (Abedini, see paragraph [0038], Upon receiving the message, the DU may compare the cell-related information for different parent or child nodes. Based on this and potentially other information, the DU may determine that the cell identifier (ID) for the child node in the received message is incorrect. Also see paragraph [0038], the DU may substitute the child-specific resource configuration information for its cell-specific configuration and may proceed to communicate via its cell with the child node using the substituted child specific resource configuration).) As per claim 17, Abedini teaches the first IAB donor node of Claim 15, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to receive the second resource configuration of the first parent IAB node. (Abedini, see paragraph [0134], identifying a conflict between the configurations, the CU evaluating potential consequences of the conflict may determine that the RRC-based TDD configuration may be used (or temporarily adjusted) to change the overall configuration and thereby avoid data errors while also not backing off from the communication) As per claim 18, Abedini teaches the first IAB donor node of Claim 15, wherein the second resource configuration includes an indication of conflicting resources to be deactivated by the first IAB donor node. (Abedini, see paragraph [0038], the DU may determine that the cell identifier (ID) for the child node in the received message is incorrect. The received cell ID may in fact be its own cell or the cell of another node in the IAB network. The DU thereupon recognizes that for the identified child node, the provided resource configuration for the child cell is in fact “side information” representing a child-node specific resource configuration. The DU may therefore modify the resource configuration of the DU cell serving the identified child node) As per claim 19, Abedini teaches the first IAB donor node of Claim 15, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to perform the determination of compatibility between the first resource configuration and the second resource configuration. (Abedini, see paragraph [0132], The DU can then modify the resource configuration to communicate with the child node. While both fields in FIG. 10 may coexist if a priority or order is provided the DU, in the case where it is not desirable to add further signaling overhead). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HERMON ASRES whose telephone number is (571)272-4257. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 9AM to 5PM. 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, Vivek Srivastava can be reached at (571)272-7304. 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. /HERMON ASRES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2449
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 22, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 10, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604334
SIGNAL TRANSMISSION AND RECEPTION METHODS AND APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12598133
PACKET FLOW CONTROL IN A HEADER OF A PACKET
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12592885
Reduced Outage Time With Improved Download to Hardware Tables Based on Different Entries
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12587589
METHOD FOR USING STATELESS SOFTWARE DATABASE DATA TO PERFORM DATA AND CONTROL COUPLING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12580859
OPTIMIZING HASH TABLE SELECTION FOR PACKET PROCESSING DRIVEN BY MACHINE LEARNING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
80%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+19.5%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 368 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month