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 .
This Office Action is in response to communication received on 10/28/2025.
Claims1-20 are pending and rejected.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. 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.
5. 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.
6. 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.
7. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kurian et al (US 20240205690 A1) (hereinafter “Kurian”) in view of Fiorani et al. (US 20200084655 A1) (hereinafter “Fiorani”).
Regarding claim 1, Kurian discloses a method for at least one of stale user equipment (UE) context detection and removal in Open Radio Access Network (O-RAN) (see Fig. 4 (ORAN), para. [0057];[0068];[0072];[0095]-[0096] discloses Cloud RAN and ORAN; Interface F1 and ORAN E2 interface), the method comprising: one of:
1) i) configuring periodic reporting requirement for periodically exchanging, between the gNB-CU and the gNB-DU, UE contexts maintained at the gNB- CU and UE contexts maintained at the gNB-DU (see Fig. 7 (configuration update messages), para. [0117]-[0118];[0121] discloses distributed unit (gNB-DU) configured to inform baseband processing resource capacity according to a reporting periodicity. The gNB-DU may be configured to report the capacity according to ReportingPeriodicity parameter. The pooled resource capacity information can be used by the gNB-CU for control decisions, such as admission control of new RRC users or bearers in a cell; DU is configured to set at least one threshold received from a CU, for a load in baseband processing resource allocation and send an update).
Kurian does not disclose deleting UE contexts present only in one of the gNB-CU or the gNB-DU.
However, Fiorani teaches deleting UE contexts present only in one of the gNB-CU or the gNB-DU (see para. [0068]; [0070]- [0076] disclose the gNB-DU monitoring the UE (constantly, periodically, ad hoc) and determines if the UE does not transmit or receive data, or little data for a given time. Based on a timer determine that the UE is inactive; with this information and the UE Activity Indicator the CU may determine to take actions (step 207 the gNB-CU sends a F1AP UE Context Release Command to the gNB-DU and step 208 the gNB-DU removes the context and responds with Context Release Complete message and the DRBs are removed after UE context Modification Request from gNB-CU);
or
2) i) configuring periodic reporting requirement for periodically exchanging, between gNB-CU Control Plane (gNB-CU-CP) and gNB-CU User Plane (gNB-CU-UP), UE contexts maintained at the gNB-CU-CP and UE contexts maintained at the gNB-CU-UP (This part is optional), and
ii) deleting UE contexts present only in one of the gNB-CU-CP or the gNB- CU-UP (This part is optional).
Kurian and Fiorani are considered analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the field of wireless communications.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kurian to include the context deletion as described by Fiorani.
The motivation to combine both references would come from efficiency of enhanced decision making in order to adjust operational parameters.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kurian et al (US 20240205690 A1) (hereinafter “Kurian”) in view Fiorani et al. (US 20200084655 A1) (hereinafter “Fiorani”)”) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Tripathi et al. (US 20220046490 A1) (hereinafter “Tripathi”).
Regarding claim 2, Kurian discloses a method.
Kurian does not clearly disclose a method wherein the gNB-CU implements the reporting requirement, and wherein the reporting requirement is configured as a periodic timer with a specified reporting interval for transmitting measurement reports from the UE.
However, Tripathi teaches wherein the reporting requirement is configured as a periodic timer with a specified reporting interval for transmitting measurement reports from the UE (see para. [0272] discloses a gNB using a timer as a standalone trigger to determine the instant for the UE to send the measurement reports).
Kurian and Tripathi are considered analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the field of wireless communication methods.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kurian to include a periodic timer as described by Tripathi.
The motivation to combine both references would come from enhanced decision making in order to adjust operational reliability.
Claims 3, 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kurian et al (US 20240205690 A1) (hereinafter “Kurian”) in view Fiorani et al. (US 20200084655 A1) (hereinafter “Fiorani”) and Tripathi et al. (US 20220046490 A1) (hereinafter “Tripathi”) as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Payyappilly et al. (US 20170127330 A1) (hereinafter “Payyappilly).
Regarding claim 3, Kurian discloses a method.
Kurian does not clearly disclose a method wherein: the gNB-CU configures, for every stored UE context, a special event A1 with the following reporting requirements:
A1 Threshold= -120 dBm; report interval= 512 ms; and report amount= 2; and at least one stored UE context for which no measurement report is received within a specified time period is deleted.
However, Payyappilly teaches the method wherein: the gNB-CU configures, for every stored UE context, a special event A1 with the following reporting requirements:
A1 Threshold= -120 dBm; report interval= 512 ms; and report amount= 2; and at least one stored UE context for which no measurement report is received within a specified time period is deleted.
(see Fig. 12A, para. [0095] disclose A1 event based on signal quality measurement triggered when the signal becomes better than a threshold, a total number of reports (reportAmount) to be send, set for a periodic report (report interval, the amount of time between reports) and a time to trigger representing the length of time when the entering condition is met and a first report may be set).
Kurian and Payyappilly are considered analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the field of wireless communication methods.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kurian to include a method as described by Payyappilly.
The motivation to combine both references would come from enhanced decision making in order to adjust operational reliability.
Regarding claim 4, Kurian discloses a method.
Kurian does not clearly disclose a method wherein: the gNB-CU configures, for every stored UE context, a special event A1 with the following reporting requirements:
A1 Threshold= -120 dBm; report interval= 1 minute; and report amount= infinity; and at least one stored UE context for which no measurement report is received within a specified time period is deleted.
However, Payyappilly teaches the method wherein: the gNB-CU configures, for every stored UE context, a special event A1 with the following reporting requirements:
A1 Threshold= -120 dBm; report interval= 1 minute; and report amount= infinity; and at least one stored UE context for which no measurement report is received within a specified time period is deleted (see Fig. 12A, para. [0095] disclose A1 event based on signal quality measurement triggered when the signal becomes better than a threshold, a total number of reports (reportAmount) to be send, set for a periodic report (report interval, the amount of time between reports) and a time to trigger representing the length of time when the entering condition is met and a first report may be set).
Kurian and Payyappilly are considered analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the field of wireless communication methods.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kurian to include a method as described by Payyappilly.
The motivation to combine both references would come from enhanced decision making in order to adjust operational reliability.
Claims 5-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kurian et al (US 20240205690 A1) (hereinafter “Kurian”) in view Fiorani et al. (US 20200084655 A1) (hereinafter “Fiorani”) and Tripathi et al. (US 20220046490 A1) (hereinafter “Tripathi”) as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Miao et al. (US 20220167359 A1) (hereinafter “Miao”).
Regarding claim 5, Kurian discloses a method.
Kurian does not clearly disclose a method wherein the gNB-DU implements the reporting requirement, and wherein the reporting requirement is configured as periodic transmission of Channel State Information (CSI) reports from the UE.
However, Miao teaches the method wherein the gNB-DU implements the reporting requirement, and wherein the reporting requirement is configured as periodic transmission of Channel State Information (CSI) reports from the UE (see para. [0016]; [0033] disclose some implementations where the CSI reporting is periodic or semi-persistent or with a periodicity in the CSI reporting configuration is 2,4 or 5 slots).
Kurian and Miao are considered analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the field of wireless communication methods.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kurian to include a method as described by Miao.
The motivation to combine both references would come from enhanced decision making in order to adjust operational reliability.
Regarding claim 6, Kurian discloses a method.
Kurian does not clearly disclose a method wherein: the reporting requirement is specified by configuring a CSI reporting configuration parameter csi-ReportConfigToAddModlist, and reporting configuration type block reportConfigType in the parameter csi-ReportConfigToAddModlist is set to periodic.
However, Miao teaches the method wherein: the reporting requirement is specified by configuring a CSI reporting configuration parameter csi-ReportConfigToAddModlist, and reporting configuration type block reportConfigType in the parameter csi-ReportConfigToAddModlist is set to periodic (see para. [0016]; [0033]; [0155]; [0161]; [0165] discloses disclose some implementations where the CSI reporting is periodic or semi-persistent or with a periodicity in the CSI reporting configuration is 2,4 or 5 slots; Table -US-00001 with reportConfigType periodic; parameter csi-ReportConfigToAddModlist includes a list of reporting configuration).
Kurian and Miao are considered analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the field of wireless communication methods.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kurian to include a method as described by Miao.
The motivation to combine both references would come from enhanced decision making in order to adjust operational reliability.
Regarding claim 7, Kurian discloses a method.
Kurian does not clearly disclose a method wherein the reporting configuration type block reportConfigType in the parameter csi-ReportConfigToAddModlist is set to periodic in one of Radio Resource Control (RRC) Setup Request or RRC Reconfiguration message sent to the UE.
However, Miao teaches the method wherein the reporting configuration type block reportConfigType in the parameter csi-ReportConfigToAddModlist is set to periodic in
one of Radio Resource Control (RRC) Setup Request or RRC Reconfiguration message sent to the UE. (see para. [0155];[0161];[0165];[0179] discloses Table -US-00001 with reportConfigType periodic; parameter csi-ReportConfigToAddModlist includes a list of reporting configuration; the CSI configuration data is configured by radio resource channel (RRC)).
Kurian and Miao are considered analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the field of wireless communication methods.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kurian to include a method as described by Miao.
The motivation to combine both references would come from enhanced decision making in order to adjust operational reliability.
Regarding claim 8, Kurian does not clearly disclose a method wherein: in the case consecutive n number of periodic CSI reports are not received at the gNB-DU for a UE context, n>= 2, the UE context is deleted.
However, Miao teaches the method wherein: in the case consecutive n number of periodic CSI reports are not received at the gNB-DU for a UE context, n>= 2 (see para. [0179]; [0181] disclose number of CSI reports 1 to 16; the process includes receiving a particular number of CSI reports in accordance with CSI configuration data).
Kurian and Miao are considered analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the field of wireless communication methods.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kurian to include a method as described by Miao.
The motivation to combine both references would come from enhanced decision making in order to adjust operational reliability.
The motivation to combine both references would come from enhanced decision making in order to adjust operational reliability.
Claims 9, 10,12, 13, 15, 16 are rejected under U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Kurian (US 20240205690 A1) (hereinafter “Kurian”) in view of Fiorani et al (US20200084655A1) (hereinafter “Fiorani”) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Li et al
(US 20220225142 A1) (hereinafter “Li”).
Regarding claim 9, Kurian does note clearly disclose a method wherein: the gNB-CU initiates UE context audit procedure by sending an ACTIVE UE STATUS REQUEST message to gNB-DU to request reporting of the UE contexts maintained at the gNB-DU.
However, Li teaches a method wherein the gNB-CU initiates UE Context Create Request message to the target DU (see para. [0223] disclose a UE context create request message to the target DU to establish the UE context, and a connection assistance information request can
be carried in the message, the request indicates that the target DU feeds back the access network connection assistance information).
Kurian and Li are considered analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the field of wireless communication methods.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kurian to include a method as described by Li.
The motivation to combine both references would come from enhanced decision making in order to adjust operational reliability.
Regarding claim 10, Kurian does not clearly disclose a method wherein: gNB-DU sends to the gNB-CU an Active UE Status Response message including each Active UE context present at the gNB-DU.
However, Li teaches the method wherein the gNB-DU transmits a UE context Response Message to the gNB-CU (see para. [0227] disclose DU transmits a UE context setup response message to the CU, and the message may contain UE specific assistance information).
Kurian and Li are considered analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the field of wireless communication methods.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kurian to include a method as described by Li.
The motivation to combine both references would come from enhanced decision making in order to adjust operational reliability.
Regarding claim 12, Kurian does not clearly disclose a method wherein:
the gNB-DU initiates UE context audit procedure by sending an ACTIVE UE STATUS REQUEST message to gNB-CU to request reporting of the UE contexts maintained at the gNB-CU.
However, Li teaches the method wherein the gNB-DU initiates UE context procedure by sending an ACTIVE UE Context Setup message to gNB-CU (see para. [0084] disclose the UE
specific connection assistance information can be transmitted by a message of UE. UE context setup message transmitted by the DU to the CU).
Kurian and Li are considered analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the field of wireless communication methods.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kurian to include a method as described by Li.
The motivation to combine both references would come from enhanced decision making in order to adjust operational reliability.
Regarding claim 13, Kurian does not clearly disclose a method wherein gNB-CU sends to the gNB-CDU an Active UE Status Response message including each Active UE context present at the gNB-CU.
However, Li teaches the method wherein gNB-CU sends to the gNB-CDU a UE Context Setup Response message (see para. [0160] disclose the DU transmits a UE context
setup response message to the CU, in which the specific connection assistance information is carried).
Kurian and Li are considered analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the field of wireless communication methods.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kurian to include a method as described by Li.
The motivation to combine both references would come from enhanced decision making in order to adjust operational reliability.
Regarding claim 15, Kurian does not clearly disclose a method wherein: the gNB-CU-CP initiates UE context audit procedure by sending an ACTIVE UE STATUS
REQUEST message to gNB-CU-UP to request reporting of the UE contexts maintained at the gNB-CU-UP.
However, Li teaches the method wherein: with a bearer Context Setup Request message from CU-CP to CU-UP (see para. [0064] discloses a bearer context setup request transmitted message by CU-CP to the CU-UP).
Kurian and Li are considered analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the field of wireless communication methods.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kurian to include a method as described by Li.
The motivation to combine both references would come from enhanced decision making in order to adjust operational reliability.
Regarding claim 16, Kurian does not clearly disclose a method wherein:
gNB-CU-UP sends to the gNB-CU-CP an Active UE Status Response message including each Active UE context present at the gNB-CU-UP.
However, Li teaches the method wherein: gNB-CU-UP sends to the gNB-CU-CP a bearer Context Setup Response message. (see para. [0184] discloses CU-UP transmits a bearer context setup
response message to the CU-CP; in which the UE specific connection assistance information can be carried, CU-CP receives the message).
Kurian and Li are considered analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the field of wireless communication methods.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kurian to include a method as described by Li.
The motivation to combine both references would come from enhanced decision making in order to adjust operational reliability.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kurian et al (US 20240205690 A1) (hereinafter “Kurian”) in view Fiorani et al. (US 20200084655 A1) (hereinafter “Fiorani”) and further in view of Li et al. (US 20220225142 A1) (hereinafter “Li”) as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Ma et al. (US 20240196233 A1) (hereinafter “Ma”).
Regarding claim 11, Kurian does not clearly disclose a method wherein: gNB-DU periodically sends an ACTIVE UE STATUS UPDATE message to gNB-CU to report the list of Active UE contexts present at GNB-DU.
However, Ma teaches the method where the DU sends a periodic Status Update message to the CU (see para. [0899]; [1063] disclose the DU begins periodic or aperiodic measurement and sends Resource Status Update to CU and the message includes information of the load information).
Kurian and Ma are considered analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the field of wireless communication methods.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kurian to include a method as described by Ma.
The motivation to combine both references would come from enhanced messaging in order to adjust operational reliability and efficiency.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kurian et al (US 20240205690 A1) (hereinafter “Kurian”) in view Fiorani et al. (US 20200084655 A1) (hereinafter “Fiorani”) and further in view of Li et al. (US 20220225142 A1) (hereinafter “Li”) as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of Ma et al. (US 20240196233 A1) (hereinafter “Ma”).
Regarding claim 14, Kurian does not clearly disclose a method wherein gNB-CU periodically sends an ACTIVE UE STATUS UPDATE message to gNB-DU to report the list of Active UE contexts present at GNB-CU.
However, Ma teaches the method wherein the DU sends a periodic Status Update message to the CU (see para. [0899]; [1063] disclose the DU begins periodic or aperiodic measurement and sends Resource Status Update to CU and the message includes information of the load information).
Kurian and Ma are considered analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the field of wireless communication methods.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kurian to include a method as described by Ma.
The motivation to combine both references would come from enhanced messaging in order to adjust operational reliability and efficiency.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kurian et al (US 20240205690 A1) (hereinafter “Kurian”) in view Fiorani et al. (US 20200084655 A1) (hereinafter “Fiorani”) and further in view of Li et al. (US 20220225142 A1) (hereinafter “Li”) as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of Ma et al. (US 20240196233 A1) (hereinafter “Ma”).
Regarding claim 17, Kurian does not clearly disclose a method wherein: gNB-CU-UP periodically sends an ACTIVE UE STATUS UPDATE message to gNB- CU-CP to report the list of Active UE contexts present at GNB-CU-UP.
However, Li teaches a method wherein: gNB-CU-UP sends an Setup Request Message to gNB¬ CU-CP (see para. [0386] disclose connection information included gNB CU-UP setup request message transmitted to the CU-CP).
Kurian and Li are considered analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the field of wireless communication methods.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kurian to include a method as described by Li.
The motivation to combine both references would come from enhanced reporting messaging in order to adjust operational reliability and efficiency.
Li does not clearly disclose a method wherein: gNB-CU-UP periodically sends an ACTIVE UE STATUS UPDATE message to gNB- CU-CP.
However, Ma discloses a method wherein the DU sends a periodic Status Update message to the CU (see para. [0899]; [1063] disclose the DU begins periodic or aperiodic measurement and
sends Resource Status Update to CU and the message includes information of the load information).
Kurian and Ma are considered analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the field of wireless communication methods.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kurian to include a method as described by Ma.
The motivation to combine both references would come from enhanced messaging in order to adjust operational reliability and efficiency.
Claim 18, 19, 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kurian et al (US 20240205690 A1) in view Fiorani et al. (US 20200084655 A1) (hereinafter “Fiorani”) as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Li et al. (US 20220225142 A1) (hereinafter “Li”) and further in view of Ma et al. (US 20240196233 A1) (hereinafter “Ma”).
Regarding claim 18, Kurian does note clearly disclose a method wherein:
gNB-CU-UP periodically sends an ACTIVE UE STATUS UPDATE message to gNB- CU-CP to report the list of Active UE contexts present at GNB-CU-UP.
However, Li teaches the method wherein: the gNB-CU-UP sends a Setup Request Message to the CUP-CP with connection information. (see para. [0386] disclose connection information included gNB CU-UP Setup Request message transmitted to the CU-CP by the CU-UP).
Kurian and Li are considered analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the field of wireless communication methods.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kurian to include a method as described by Li.
The motivation to combine both references would come from enhanced messaging in order to adjust operational reliability and efficiency.
Li does not clearly disclose a method wherein gNB-CU-UP periodically sends an ACTIVE UE STATUS UPDATE message to gNB- CU-CP.
However, Ma discloses the method wherein the DU sends a periodic Status Update message to the CU (see para. [0899]; [1063] disclose the DU begins periodic or aperiodic measurement and sends Resource Status Update to CU and the message includes information of the load information).
Kurian and Ma are considered analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the field of wireless communication methods.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kurian to include a method as described Ma.
The motivation to combine both references would come from enhanced decision making in order to adjust operational reliability.
Regarding claim 19, Kurian does not clearly disclose a method wherein gNB-CU-CP sends to the gNB-CU-UP an Active UE Status Response message including each Active UE context present at the gNB-CU-CP.
However, Li teaches a method wherein gNB-CU-CP sends to the gNB-CU-UP a context Setup Response message present at the gNB-CU-CP. (see para. [0184] discloses CU-UP transmits a
bearer context setup Response message to the CU-CP; in which the UE specific connection assistance information can be carried).
Kurian and Li are considered analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the field of wireless communication methods.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kurian to include a method as described by Li.
The motivation to combine both references would come from enhanced decision making in order to adjust operational reliability.
Regarding claim 20, Kurian does not clearly disclose a method wherein gNB-CU-CP periodically sends an ACTIVE UE STATUS UPDATE message to gNB¬ CU-UP to report the list of Active UE contexts present at GNB-CU-CP.
However, Ma teaches the method where the DU sends a periodic Status Update message to the CU (see para. [0899]; [1063] disclose the DU begins periodic or aperiodic measurement and
sends Resource Status Update to CU and the message includes information of the load information).
Kurian and Ma are considered analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the field of wireless communication methods.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kurian to include a method as described by Ma.
The motivation to combine both references would come from enhanced decision making in order to adjust operational reliability.
Response to Arguments
8. Applicant’s arguments, see pages 6-7, filed 10/28/205, with respect to the rejections of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is made in view of Kurian et al (US 20240205690 A1).
Conclusion
9. THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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.
10. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LUIS GUILLERMO LEMA LEMOS whose telephone number is (571)-272-5710. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5 EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Nishant Divecha, can be reached at 571-270-3125. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/LUIS LEMA LEMOS/
Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2419
/Nishant Divecha/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2419