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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 10/28/2025 has been entered.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 14 are objected to because of the following informalities:
in claim 1, “based on the request from the third device” should read “based on the requesting by the third device” for clarity that this references the “requesting” step of the method.
in claim 14, “wherein the second device is further configured to determine” should read “wherein the third device is further configured to determine” for consistency in the amendments of independent claim 10 and parallel claim 5.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitations use a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitations are: “a first device configured to perform routing and forwarding, inspection, and quality of service (QoS) handling”, “a second device configured to acquire information”, and “a third device configured to request the information” in claim 10.
Because these claim limitations are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, they are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. The structure is defined in the Applicant’s specification at least in Figs. 2 and 3A-3B and pars. [0046-0067]. For the limitations, there is support for the functional language in the Applicant’s specification at least in Fig. 4 and pars. [0068-0074].
If applicant does not intend to have these limitations interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitations to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitations recite sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Karaki et al. (US 2024/0224175), hereinafter "Karaki", in view of Nikopour et al. (US 2024/0023028), hereinafter “Nikopour”.
Regarding claim 1, Karaki teaches:
A method comprising:
acquiring, by a second device, the second device being part of the cellular network, information indicating a utilization status of renewable energy (see Karaki, Fig. 2, par. [0044], lines 1-6: the second node can send to the first node a SECOND MESSAGE (203), indicating a success, indicating that the second node can initiate part of or the complete set of the requested measurements and/or estimates of the energy consumption status according to the parameters indicated in the request, and see Karaki, par. [0044], lines 11-14: The second node can send to the first node, via a THIRD MESSAGE (205), the requested measurements and/or estimates concerning energy consumption status, and see Karaki, par. [0057], lines 5-7: The reported energy consumption metric may indicate one or more of the following non-limiting examples, and see Karaki, par. [0070], lines 1-3: An indication of the energy source, for example whether the energy consumed origins from renewable sources, such as wind or solar power; in this case, Karaki teaches a second node (corresponding to a second device) which verifies it can perform measurements on energy consumption status (corresponding to a utilization status), performs the measurements (corresponding to acquiring information), and transmits the results in a network);
requesting, by a third device, the third device being part of the cellular network, the information indicating the utilization status of the renewable energy (see Karaki, Fig. 2, par. [0042]: in FIG. 2, the first network node initiates the procedure by sending a FIRST MESSAGE (201) comprising the request to a second network node to acquire measurements and/or estimates about the energy consumption status over a past period or over a future time interval, and see Karaki, par. [0057], lines 5-7: The reported energy consumption metric may indicate one or more of the following non-limiting examples, and see Karaki, par. [0070], lines 1-3: An indication of the energy source, for example whether the energy consumed origins from renewable sources, such as wind or solar power; in this case, a first node (corresponding to the third device) sends a request for energy consumption status (i.e. utilization status)); and
reporting, by the second device, to the third device, the information indicating the utilization status of the renewable energy based on the request from the third device (see Karaki, Fig. 2, par. [0044], lines 11-14: The second node can send to the first node, via a THIRD MESSAGE (205), the requested measurements and/or estimates concerning energy consumption status, and see Karaki, par. [0057], lines 5-7: The reported energy consumption metric may indicate one or more of the following non-limiting examples, and see Karaki, par. [0070], lines 1-3: An indication of the energy source, for example whether the energy consumed origins from renewable sources, such as wind or solar power; in this case, the second node (corresponding to the second device) sends energy consumption status information (corresponding to information indicating the utilization status) to the first node (corresponding to the third device)).
However, Karaki does not teach:
performing, by a first device, the first device being part of a cellular network, routing and forwarding, inspection, and quality of service (QoS) handling for user plane communication;
wherein the information is indicating the utilization status of the renewable energy of the user plane communication;
Nikopour, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
performing, by a first device, the first device being part of a cellular network, routing and forwarding, inspection, and quality of service (QoS) handling for user plane communication (see Nikopour, Fig. 1, par. [0044]: The CN 142 is a component of a telecommunications or computer network that performs functions related to data routing, service delivery, mobility management, Quality of Service (QoS) management, authorization, policy enforcement, network security, and/or other functions, and see par. [0045]: Each of the edge cloud, regional cloud, and core cloud (collectively referred to as “clouds” or “cloud sites”) includes functionality to support both user plane (also referred to as the “deployment plane”) and control plane (also referred to as the “management plane”) services; in this case, the CN corresponds to a first device);
wherein the information is indicating the utilization status of the renewable energy of the user plane communication (see Nikopour, Fig. 1, par. [0050]: Under the Option 2 split, the CU 132 can connect to multiple DU 131 (e.g., the CU 132 is centralized), which allows RRC and PDCP anchor change to be eliminated during a handover across DUs 131 and allows the centralized CU 132 to pool resources across several DUs 131. In these ways, the option 2 function split can improve resource efficiencies, and see par. [0068]: It should be noted that the parameters listed in table 1.2-1 and the various energy efficiency metrics described herein are examples, and additional or alternative parameters and/or metrics can be used in other implementations, including any of those discussed herein. Additionally, the parameter names/labels listed in table 1.2-1 and the aforementioned metrics are examples, and other names/labels can be used to represent the listed parameters/metrics. Moreover, other types of data can be used for energy efficiency determinations, such as historical data, environmental data (e.g., data related to weather including sunshine/daylight hours, geographic features, infrastructure-related data, and/or other information about a given area/region), telemetry data, availability and/or usage of renewable energy/electricity sources, and see par. [0045]: Each of the edge cloud, regional cloud, and core cloud (collectively referred to as “clouds” or “cloud sites”) includes functionality to support both user plane (also referred to as the “deployment plane”) and control plane (also referred to as the “management plane”) services; in this case, energy efficiency procedures are performed for the network including user plane services);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the method of Karaki with the first device and user plane communication of Nikopour with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of maximizing network energy efficiency while maintaining QoS (see Nikopour, par. [0023]).
Regarding claim 10, Karaki teaches:
A system comprising:
a second device, the second device being part of the cellular network (see Karaki, Fig. 2, Target Node) and configured to acquire information indicating a utilization status of renewable energy (see Karaki, par. [0044], lines 1-6: the second node can send to the first node a SECOND MESSAGE (203), indicating a success, indicating that the second node can initiate part of or the complete set of the requested measurements and/or estimates of the energy consumption status according to the parameters indicated in the request, and see Karaki, par. [0044], lines 11-14: The second node can send to the first node, via a THIRD MESSAGE (205), the requested measurements and/or estimates concerning energy consumption status, and see Karaki, par. [0057], lines 5-7: The reported energy consumption metric may indicate one or more of the following non-limiting examples, and see Karaki, par. [0070], lines 1-3: An indication of the energy source, for example whether the energy consumed origins from renewable sources, such as wind or solar power; in this case, Karaki teaches a second node (corresponding to a second device) which verifies it can perform measurements on energy consumption status (corresponding to a utilization status), performs the measurements (corresponding to acquiring information), and transmits the results in a network); and
a third device, the third device being part of the cellular network (see Karaki, Fig. 2, Source Node) and configured to request the information indicating the utilization status of the renewable energy (see Karaki, Fig. 2, par. [0042]: in FIG. 2, the first network node initiates the procedure by sending a FIRST MESSAGE (201) comprising the request to a second network node to acquire measurements and/or estimates about the energy consumption status over a past period or over a future time interval, and see Karaki, par. [0057], lines 5-7: The reported energy consumption metric may indicate one or more of the following non-limiting examples, and see Karaki, par. [0070], lines 1-3: An indication of the energy source, for example whether the energy consumed origins from renewable sources, such as wind or solar power; in this case, a first node (corresponding to the third device) sends a request for energy consumption status (i.e. utilization status));
wherein, the second device is configured to report, to the third device, the information indicating the utilization status of the renewable energy based on the request from the third device (see Karaki, Fig. 2, par. [0044], lines 11-14: The second node can send to the first node, via a THIRD MESSAGE (205), the requested measurements and/or estimates concerning energy consumption status, and see Karaki, par. [0057], lines 5-7: The reported energy consumption metric may indicate one or more of the following non-limiting examples, and see Karaki, par. [0070], lines 1-3: An indication of the energy source, for example whether the energy consumed origins from renewable sources, such as wind or solar power; in this case, the second node (corresponding to the second device) sends energy consumption status information (corresponding to information indicating the utilization status) to the first node (corresponding to the third device)).
However, Karaki does not teach:
a first device, the first device being part of a cellular network and configured to perform routing and forwarding, inspection, and quality of service (QoS) handling for user plane communication;
wherein the information is indicating the utilization status of the renewable energy of the user plane communication;
Nikopour, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
a first device, the first device being part of a cellular network and configured to perform routing and forwarding, inspection, and quality of service (QoS) handling for user plane communication (see Nikopour, Fig. 1, par. [0044]: The CN 142 is a component of a telecommunications or computer network that performs functions related to data routing, service delivery, mobility management, Quality of Service (QoS) management, authorization, policy enforcement, network security, and/or other functions, and see par. [0045]: Each of the edge cloud, regional cloud, and core cloud (collectively referred to as “clouds” or “cloud sites”) includes functionality to support both user plane (also referred to as the “deployment plane”) and control plane (also referred to as the “management plane”) services; in this case, the CN corresponds to a first device);
wherein the information is indicating the utilization status of the renewable energy of the user plane communication (see Nikopour, Fig. 1, par. [0050]: Under the Option 2 split, the CU 132 can connect to multiple DU 131 (e.g., the CU 132 is centralized), which allows RRC and PDCP anchor change to be eliminated during a handover across DUs 131 and allows the centralized CU 132 to pool resources across several DUs 131. In these ways, the option 2 function split can improve resource efficiencies, and see par. [0068]: It should be noted that the parameters listed in table 1.2-1 and the various energy efficiency metrics described herein are examples, and additional or alternative parameters and/or metrics can be used in other implementations, including any of those discussed herein. Additionally, the parameter names/labels listed in table 1.2-1 and the aforementioned metrics are examples, and other names/labels can be used to represent the listed parameters/metrics. Moreover, other types of data can be used for energy efficiency determinations, such as historical data, environmental data (e.g., data related to weather including sunshine/daylight hours, geographic features, infrastructure-related data, and/or other information about a given area/region), telemetry data, availability and/or usage of renewable energy/electricity sources, and see par. [0045]: Each of the edge cloud, regional cloud, and core cloud (collectively referred to as “clouds” or “cloud sites”) includes functionality to support both user plane (also referred to as the “deployment plane”) and control plane (also referred to as the “management plane”) services; in this case, energy efficiency procedures are performed for the network including user plane services);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the system of Karaki with the first device and user plane communication of Nikopour with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of maximizing network energy efficiency while maintaining QoS (see Nikopour, par. [0023]).
Claims 2-3, 8-9, 11-12, and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Karaki in view of Nikopour, as applied to claims 1 and 10 above, and further in view of Örtenblad et al. (US 2022/0124522), hereinafter "Örtenblad".
Regarding claims 2, 11, the combination of Karaki in view of Nikopour teaches the method or system. Karaki further teaches:
a value indicating the utilization status of the renewable energy (see Karaki, par. [0057], lines 5-7: The reported energy consumption metric may indicate one or more of the following non-limiting examples, and see Karaki, par. [0070], lines 1-3: An indication of the energy source, for example whether the energy consumed origins from renewable sources, such as wind or solar power)
Karaki does not teach, but Nikopour teaches:
wherein the utilization status of the renewable energy is of the user plane communication (see Nikopour, Fig. 1, par. [0050]: Under the Option 2 split, the CU 132 can connect to multiple DU 131 (e.g., the CU 132 is centralized), which allows RRC and PDCP anchor change to be eliminated during a handover across DUs 131 and allows the centralized CU 132 to pool resources across several DUs 131. In these ways, the option 2 function split can improve resource efficiencies, and see par. [0068]: It should be noted that the parameters listed in table 1.2-1 and the various energy efficiency metrics described herein are examples, and additional or alternative parameters and/or metrics can be used in other implementations, including any of those discussed herein. Additionally, the parameter names/labels listed in table 1.2-1 and the aforementioned metrics are examples, and other names/labels can be used to represent the listed parameters/metrics. Moreover, other types of data can be used for energy efficiency determinations, such as historical data, environmental data (e.g., data related to weather including sunshine/daylight hours, geographic features, infrastructure-related data, and/or other information about a given area/region), telemetry data, availability and/or usage of renewable energy/electricity sources, and see par. [0045]: Each of the edge cloud, regional cloud, and core cloud (collectively referred to as “clouds” or “cloud sites”) includes functionality to support both user plane (also referred to as the “deployment plane”) and control plane (also referred to as the “management plane”) services; in this case, energy efficiency procedures are performed for the network including user plane services);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the method or system of Karaki with user plane communication of Nikopour with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of maximizing network energy efficiency while maintaining QoS (see Nikopour, par. [0023]).
However, the combination of Karaki in view of Nikopour does not teach:
further comprising:
giving, by the second device, a notification to the third device when a value is greater than a threshold.
Örtenblad, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
further comprising:
giving, by the second device, a notification to the third device (see Örtenblad, par. [0053], lines 1-5: the NWDAF 13 (the service provider) provides analytics insights (e.g. load level information) either by means of a subscribe/notify operation or a request/response operation (to the service consumer), and see Örtenblad, Fig. 4, item S303, par. [0079], lines 1-4: In step S303, the NWDAF 13 sends the periodically requested network analytics information in the form of an Nnwdaf_EventsSubscription_Notify message to the PCF 14) when a value is greater than a threshold (see Örtenblad, pars. [0056-0058]: In the subscribe/notify case, the NWDAF 13 provides insights to the subscribed consumer: (a) periodically (period value provided by the consumer in the subscription request), or (b) when the insight value changes exceed a certain threshold value (the threshold value is provided by the consumer as well); in this case, the NWDAF (corresponding to the first device) sends a notification message to the PCF (corresponding to the second device) either periodically or when a value exceeds a threshold).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the method or system of the combination of Karaki in view of Nikopour with the giving a notification of Örtenblad with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of reducing unnecessary signaling (see Örtenblad, par. [0019], lines 9-17).
Regarding claims 3, 12, the combination of Karaki in view of Nikopour teaches the method or system. Karaki further teaches:
a value indicating the utilization status of the renewable energy (see Karaki, par. [0057], lines 5-7: The reported energy consumption metric may indicate one or more of the following non-limiting examples, and see Karaki, par. [0070], lines 1-3: An indication of the energy source, for example whether the energy consumed origins from renewable sources, such as wind or solar power)
Karaki does not teach, but Nikopour teaches:
wherein the utilization status of the renewable energy is of the user plane communication (see Nikopour, Fig. 1, par. [0050]: Under the Option 2 split, the CU 132 can connect to multiple DU 131 (e.g., the CU 132 is centralized), which allows RRC and PDCP anchor change to be eliminated during a handover across DUs 131 and allows the centralized CU 132 to pool resources across several DUs 131. In these ways, the option 2 function split can improve resource efficiencies, and see par. [0068]: It should be noted that the parameters listed in table 1.2-1 and the various energy efficiency metrics described herein are examples, and additional or alternative parameters and/or metrics can be used in other implementations, including any of those discussed herein. Additionally, the parameter names/labels listed in table 1.2-1 and the aforementioned metrics are examples, and other names/labels can be used to represent the listed parameters/metrics. Moreover, other types of data can be used for energy efficiency determinations, such as historical data, environmental data (e.g., data related to weather including sunshine/daylight hours, geographic features, infrastructure-related data, and/or other information about a given area/region), telemetry data, availability and/or usage of renewable energy/electricity sources, and see par. [0045]: Each of the edge cloud, regional cloud, and core cloud (collectively referred to as “clouds” or “cloud sites”) includes functionality to support both user plane (also referred to as the “deployment plane”) and control plane (also referred to as the “management plane”) services; in this case, energy efficiency procedures are performed for the network including user plane services);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the method or system of Karaki with user plane communication of Nikopour with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of maximizing network energy efficiency while maintaining QoS (see Nikopour, par. [0023]).
However, the combination of Karaki in view of Nikopour does not teach:
further comprising:
giving, by the second device, a notification to the third device when a value is less than a threshold.
Örtenblad, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
further comprising:
giving, by the second device, a notification to the third device (see Örtenblad, par. [0053], lines 1-5: the NWDAF 13 (the service provider) provides analytics insights (e.g. load level information) either by means of a subscribe/notify operation or a request/response operation (to the service consumer), and see Örtenblad, Fig. 4, item S303, par. [0079], lines 1-4: In step S303, the NWDAF 13 sends the periodically requested network analytics information in the form of an Nnwdaf_EventsSubscription_Notify message to the PCF 14) when a value is lower than a threshold (see Örtenblad, pars. [0056-0058]: In the subscribe/notify case, the NWDAF 13 provides insights to the subscribed consumer: (a) periodically (period value provided by the consumer in the subscription request), or (b) when the insight value changes exceed a certain threshold value (the threshold value is provided by the consumer as well); in this case, the NWDAF (corresponding to the first device) sends a notification message to the PCF (corresponding to the second device) either periodically or when a value exceeds a threshold. In the case that the NWDAF sends a notification message periodically, it is not triggered by a value exceeding a threshold (i.e. the value is less than a threshold)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the method or system of the combination of Karaki in view of Nikopour with the giving a notification and changing a parameter of Örtenblad with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of reducing unnecessary signaling (see Örtenblad, par. [0019], lines 9-17).
Regarding claims 8, 17, the combination of Karaki in view of Nikopour teaches the method or system.
However, the combination of Karaki in view of Nikopour does not teach:
wherein: the second device is a device configured to operate as a network data analytics function of the cellular network.
Örtenblad, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
wherein: the second device is a device configured to operate as a network data analytics function of the cellular network (see Örtenblad, Fig. 1, item 13, par. [0050], lines 1-3: the NWDAF 13 is responsible for providing network analytics information upon request or subscription from NFs, and see Örtenblad, par. [0053], lines 1-5: the NWDAF 13 (the service provider) provides analytics insights (e.g. load level information) either by means of a subscribe/notify operation or a request/response operation (to the service consumer)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the method or system of the combination of Karaki in view of Nikopour with the second device being configured as a NWDAF of Örtenblad with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of reducing unnecessary signaling (see Örtenblad, par. [0019], lines 9-17).
Regarding claims 9, 18, the combination of Karaki in view of Nikopour teaches the method or system.
However, the combination of Karaki in view of Nikopour does not teach:
wherein: the third device is a device configured to operate as a policy control function of the cellular network.
Örtenblad, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
wherein: the third device is a device configured to operate as a policy control function of the cellular network (see Örtenblad, Fig. 1, item 14, par. [0005], lines 13-19: The NWDAF 13 notifies/publishes slice specific network status analytic information to the PCF(s) and NSSF that are subscribed to it. The PCF(s) and NSSF may collect directly slice specific network status analytic information from NWDAF. This information is not subscriber specific. The PCF 14 uses that data in its policy decisions).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the method of the combination of Karaki in view of Nikopour with the third device being configured as a PCF of Örtenblad with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of reducing unnecessary signaling (see Örtenblad, par. [0019], lines 9-17).
Claims 5 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Karaki in view of Nikopour, as applied to claims 1 and 10 above, and further in view of Nair et al. (US 2024/0406831), hereinafter “Nair”.
Regarding claims 5, 14, the combination of Karaki in view of Nikopour teaches the method or system. Karaki further teaches:
further comprising:
determining, by the third device, a policy of the communication of the terminal depending on the information indicating the utilization status of the renewable energy (see Karaki, Fig. 10, items 1002 and 1004, par. [0134], lines 1-3: At step 1002, the source node monitors and collects input data (e.g. energy consumption status, load situation, etc.) from neighboring nodes, and see Karaki, par. [0135], lines 1-6: At step 1004, based on the collected data, the source node predicts an energy saving action that maximizes the energy efficiency of the network, while fulfilling the quality-of-service requirements. Such actions may include (offloading of UEs, turning on/off capacity cells, adjusting its own configuration, etc.), and see Karaki, par. [0057], lines 5-7: The reported energy consumption metric may indicate one or more of the following non-limiting examples, and see Karaki, par. [0070], lines 1-3: An indication of the energy source, for example whether the energy consumed origins from renewable sources, such as wind or solar power; in this case, a source node (corresponding to a second device) predicts and implements an energy saving action (corresponding to determining a policy) for communication with a UE based on energy consumption status (corresponding to utilization status))
Karaki does not teach, but Nikopour teaches:
wherein the utilization status of the renewable energy is of the user plane communication (see Nikopour, Fig. 1, par. [0050]: Under the Option 2 split, the CU 132 can connect to multiple DU 131 (e.g., the CU 132 is centralized), which allows RRC and PDCP anchor change to be eliminated during a handover across DUs 131 and allows the centralized CU 132 to pool resources across several DUs 131. In these ways, the option 2 function split can improve resource efficiencies, and see par. [0068]: It should be noted that the parameters listed in table 1.2-1 and the various energy efficiency metrics described herein are examples, and additional or alternative parameters and/or metrics can be used in other implementations, including any of those discussed herein. Additionally, the parameter names/labels listed in table 1.2-1 and the aforementioned metrics are examples, and other names/labels can be used to represent the listed parameters/metrics. Moreover, other types of data can be used for energy efficiency determinations, such as historical data, environmental data (e.g., data related to weather including sunshine/daylight hours, geographic features, infrastructure-related data, and/or other information about a given area/region), telemetry data, availability and/or usage of renewable energy/electricity sources, and see par. [0045]: Each of the edge cloud, regional cloud, and core cloud (collectively referred to as “clouds” or “cloud sites”) includes functionality to support both user plane (also referred to as the “deployment plane”) and control plane (also referred to as the “management plane”) services; in this case, energy efficiency procedures are performed for the network including user plane services);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the method or system of Karaki with user plane communication of Nikopour with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of maximizing network energy efficiency while maintaining QoS (see Nikopour, par. [0023]).
However, the combination of Karaki in view of Nikopour does not teach:
determining, by the third device, a policy on a route of the communication of the terminal
Nair, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
determining, by the third device, a policy on a route of the communication of the terminal (see Nair, par. [0075], lines 1-4: The first node 101, based on the collected information may then aim to control the priority of the data for any data download or upload for optimal usage of green energy, and see Nair, Fig. 3, item 304, par. [0076], lines 1-4: In this Action 304, the first node 101 determines a scheduling of a transfer of data to or from the device 130 along the predicted route 140 to be followed by the device 130 during a time period; in this case, Nair teaches that a first node (corresponding to the second device) determines scheduling on a route (corresponding to a policy on a route) for a device (corresponding to the terminal))
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the determination of a policy of the combination of Karaki in view of Nikopour with the determination of a policy on a route of Nair with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of maximizing green energy usage (see Nair, par. [0166], lines 1-3).
Claims 6 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Karaki in view of Nikopour, and further in view of Nair, as applied to claims 5 and 14 above, and further in view of Örtenblad.
Regarding claims 6, 15, the combination of Karaki in view of Nikopour, and further in view of Nair teaches the method or system. Karaki further teaches:
further comprising:
determining, by the third device, a policy of the communication of the terminal through the cellular network (see Karaki, Fig. 10, items 1002 and 1004, par. [0134], lines 1-3: At step 1002, the source node monitors and collects input data (e.g. energy consumption status, load situation, etc.) from neighboring nodes, and see Karaki, par. [0135], lines 1-6: At step 1004, based on the collected data, the source node predicts an energy saving action that maximizes the energy efficiency of the network, while fulfilling the quality-of-service requirements. Such actions may include (offloading of UEs, turning on/off capacity cells, adjusting its own configuration, etc.); in this case, a source node (corresponding to a second device) predicts and implements an energy saving action (corresponding to determining a policy)) an available amount or a utilization rate of the renewable energy (see Karaki, par. [0057], lines 5-7: The reported energy consumption metric may indicate one or more of the following non-limiting examples, and see Karaki, par. [0070], lines 1-3: An indication of the energy source, for example whether the energy consumed origins from renewable sources, such as wind or solar power)
Karaki does not teach, but Nikopour teaches:
wherein the utilization status of the renewable energy is of the user plane communication (see Nikopour, Fig. 1, par. [0050]: Under the Option 2 split, the CU 132 can connect to multiple DU 131 (e.g., the CU 132 is centralized), which allows RRC and PDCP anchor change to be eliminated during a handover across DUs 131 and allows the centralized CU 132 to pool resources across several DUs 131. In these ways, the option 2 function split can improve resource efficiencies, and see par. [0068]: It should be noted that the parameters listed in table 1.2-1 and the various energy efficiency metrics described herein are examples, and additional or alternative parameters and/or metrics can be used in other implementations, including any of those discussed herein. Additionally, the parameter names/labels listed in table 1.2-1 and the aforementioned metrics are examples, and other names/labels can be used to represent the listed parameters/metrics. Moreover, other types of data can be used for energy efficiency determinations, such as historical data, environmental data (e.g., data related to weather including sunshine/daylight hours, geographic features, infrastructure-related data, and/or other information about a given area/region), telemetry data, availability and/or usage of renewable energy/electricity sources, and see par. [0045]: Each of the edge cloud, regional cloud, and core cloud (collectively referred to as “clouds” or “cloud sites”) includes functionality to support both user plane (also referred to as the “deployment plane”) and control plane (also referred to as the “management plane”) services; in this case, energy efficiency procedures are performed for the network including user plane services);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the method or system of Karaki with user plane communication of Nikopour with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of maximizing network energy efficiency while maintaining QoS (see Nikopour, par. [0023]).
The combination of Karaki in view of Nikopour does not teach, but Nair teaches:
determining, by the third device, a policy on a route of the communication of the terminal through the cellular network (see Nair, par. [0075], lines 1-4: The first node 101, based on the collected information may then aim to control the priority of the data for any data download or upload for optimal usage of green energy, and see Nair, Fig. 3, item 304, par. [0076], lines 1-4: In this Action 304, the first node 101 determines a scheduling of a transfer of data to or from the device 130 along the predicted route 140 to be followed by the device 130 during a time period; in this case, Nair teaches that a first node (corresponding to the second device) determines scheduling on a route (corresponding to a policy on a route) for a device (corresponding to the terminal))
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the determination of a policy of the combination of Karaki in view of Nikopour with the determination of a policy on a route of Nair with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of maximizing green energy usage (see Nair, par. [0166], lines 1-3).
However, the combination of Karaki in view of Nikopour, and further in view of Nair does not teach:
when a determination is made that an available amount or a utilization rate is greater than a threshold.
Örtenblad, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
determining, by the second device, a policy when a determination is made that an available amount or a utilization rate is greater than a threshold (see Örtenblad, par. [0053], lines 1-5: the NWDAF 13 (the service provider) provides analytics insights (e.g. load level information) either by means of a subscribe/notify operation or a request/response operation (to the service consumer), and see Örtenblad, Fig. 4, item S303, par. [0079], lines 1-4: In step S303, the NWDAF 13 sends the periodically requested network analytics information in the form of an Nnwdaf_EventsSubscription_Notify message to the PCF 14, and see Örtenblad, pars. [0056-0058]: In the subscribe/notify case, the NWDAF 13 provides insights to the subscribed consumer: (a) periodically (period value provided by the consumer in the subscription request), or (b) when the insight value changes exceed a certain threshold value (the threshold value is provided by the consumer as well), and see Örtenblad, par. [0065], lines 1-9: with the expiry time associated with the requested network analytics information, the PCF 14 may come to a number of conclusions. For instance, the PCF 14 may (1) conclude that it is not necessary to request the information again until the expiry time has expired in the case of a request/response operation, or (2) update the periodicity with which it expects to receive the requested network analytics information in the case of a subscribe/notify operation, and see Örtenblad, par. [0064], lines 7-9: Thereafter, in step S103, the NWDAF 13 sends the requested network analytics information and the associated expiry time to the PCF 14; in this case, the PCF (corresponding to the second device) determines a policy based on the load level information (corresponding to an available amount or a utilization rate) which is determined to be sent and thereafter used for policy determination when a threshold is exceeded).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the method of the combination of Karaki in view of Nikopour, and further in view of Nair with the determining a policy based a threshold of Örtenblad with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of reducing unnecessary signaling (see Örtenblad, par. [0019], lines 9-17).
Claims 7 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Karaki in view of Nikopour, and further in view of Nair as applied to claims 5 and 14 above, and further in view of Sirotkin et al. (US 10,897,732), hereinafter “Sirotkin”, and further in view of Örtenblad.
Regarding claims 7, 16, the combination of Karaki in view of Nikopour, and further in view of Nair teaches the method or system. Karaki further teaches:
further comprising:
determining, by the third device, a policy that offloads the communication of the terminal (see Karaki, Fig. 10, items 1002 and 1004, par. [0134], lines 1-3: At step 1002, the source node monitors and collects input data (e.g. energy consumption status, load situation, etc.) from neighboring nodes, and see Karaki, par. [0135], lines 1-6: At step 1004, based on the collected data, the source node predicts an energy saving action that maximizes the energy efficiency of the network, while fulfilling the quality-of-service requirements. Such actions may include (offloading of UEs, turning on/off capacity cells, adjusting its own configuration, etc.); in this case, a source node (corresponding to a second device) predicts and implements an energy saving action (corresponding to determining a policy)) an available amount or a utilization rate of the renewable energy (see Karaki, par. [0057], lines 5-7: The reported energy consumption metric may indicate one or more of the following non-limiting examples, and see Karaki, par. [0070], lines 1-3: An indication of the energy source, for example whether the energy consumed origins from renewable sources, such as wind or solar power)
Karaki does not teach, but Nikopour teaches:
wherein the utilization status of the renewable energy is of the user plane communication (see Nikopour, Fig. 1, par. [0050]: Under the Option 2 split, the CU 132 can connect to multiple DU 131 (e.g., the CU 132 is centralized), which allows RRC and PDCP anchor change to be eliminated during a handover across DUs 131 and allows the centralized CU 132 to pool resources across several DUs 131. In these ways, the option 2 function split can improve resource efficiencies, and see par. [0068]: It should be noted that the parameters listed in table 1.2-1 and the various energy efficiency metrics described herein are examples, and additional or alternative parameters and/or metrics can be used in other implementations, including any of those discussed herein. Additionally, the parameter names/labels listed in table 1.2-1 and the aforementioned metrics are examples, and other names/labels can be used to represent the listed parameters/metrics. Moreover, other types of data can be used for energy efficiency determinations, such as historical data, environmental data (e.g., data related to weather including sunshine/daylight hours, geographic features, infrastructure-related data, and/or other information about a given area/region), telemetry data, availability and/or usage of renewable energy/electricity sources, and see par. [0045]: Each of the edge cloud, regional cloud, and core cloud (collectively referred to as “clouds” or “cloud sites”) includes functionality to support both user plane (also referred to as the “deployment plane”) and control plane (also referred to as the “management plane”) services; in this case, energy efficiency procedures are performed for the network including user plane services);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the method or system of Karaki with user plane communication of Nikopour with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of maximizing network energy efficiency while maintaining QoS (see Nikopour, par. [0023]).
The combination of Karaki in view of Nikopour does not teach, but Nair teaches:
determining, by the third device, a policy on a route (see Nair, par. [0075], lines 1-4: The first node 101, based on the collected information may then aim to control the priority of the data for any data download or upload for optimal usage of green energy, and see Nair, Fig. 3, item 304, par. [0076], lines 1-4: In this Action 304, the first node 101 determines a scheduling of a transfer of data to or from the device 130 along the predicted route 140 to be followed by the device 130 during a time period; in this case, Nair teaches that a first node (corresponding to the second device) determines scheduling on a route (corresponding to a policy on a route) for a device (corresponding to the terminal))
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the determination of a policy of the combination of Karaki in view of Nikopour with the determination of a policy on a route of Nair with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of maximizing green energy usage (see Nair, par. [0166], lines 1-3).
However, the combination of Karaki in view of Nikopour, and further in view of Nair does not teach:
determining, by the third device, a policy that offloads the communication of the terminal to a non-cellular network when a determination is made that an available amount or a utilization rate is less than a threshold.
Sirotkin, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
determining, by the third device, a policy that offloads the communication of the terminal to a non-cellular network (see Sirotkin, col. 10, lines 48-54: ANDSF policy module 168 may determine an ANDSF MO 163 including one or more ANDSF policies corresponding to UE 102. The ANDSF policies may include the ANDSF assistance information and one or more ANDSF rules configured to select between RAN 119 and WLAN AP 106, e.g., as described below, and see Sirotkin, col. 10, lines 55-67: the ANDSF assistance parameters may include, for example, offload preference information. For example, the offload preference information may include an offload preference indication to indicate, for example, a preference between accessing network 180 via cellular access, e.g., via RAN 119, or via WLAN access, e.g., via WLAN AP 106. The offload preference information may be based, for example, on a cellular load of RAN 119, and/or based on operator load balancing and/or traffic offloading preferences. The offload preference information may indicate, for example, how “aggressive” the operator may allow UE 102 to use offloading to the WLAN; in this case, a ANDSF policy module (corresponding to the second device) determines policies that are applied to the UE to determine when to offload to WLAN (corresponding to a non-cellular network))
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the determination of a policy of the combination of Karaki in view of Nikopour, and further in view of Nair with the determination of a policy for offloading communication to a non-cellular network of Sirotkin with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of improving load balancing between cellular and non-cellular networks (see Sirotkin, col. 12, lines 1-6).
However, the combination of Karaki in view of Nikopour, and further in view of Nair, and further in view of Sirotkin, does not teach:
when a determination is made that an available amount or a utilization rate of the renewable energy is less than a threshold.
Örtenblad, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
when a determination is made that an available amount or a utilization rate of the renewable energy is less than a threshold (see Örtenblad, par. [0053], lines 1-5: the NWDAF 13 (the service provider) provides analytics insights (e.g. load level information) either by means of a subscribe/notify operation or a request/response operation (to the service consumer), and see Örtenblad, Fig. 4, item S303, par. [0079], lines 1-4: In step S303, the NWDAF 13 sends the periodically requested network analytics information in the form of an Nnwdaf_EventsSubscription_Notify message to the PCF 14, and see Örtenblad, pars. [0056-0058]: In the subscribe/notify case, the NWDAF 13 provides insights to the subscribed consumer: (a) periodically (period value provided by the consumer in the subscription request), or (b) when the insight value changes exceed a certain threshold value (the threshold value is provided by the consumer as well), and see Örtenblad, par. [0065], lines 1-9: with the expiry time associated with the requested network analytics information, the PCF 14 may come to a number of conclusions. For instance, the PCF 14 may (1) conclude that it is not necessary to request the information again until the expiry time has expired in the case of a request/response operation, or (2) update the periodicity with which it expects to receive the requested network analytics information in the case of a subscribe/notify operation, and see Örtenblad, par. [0064], lines 7-9: Thereafter, in step S103, the NWDAF 13 sends the requested network analytics information and the associated expiry time to the PCF 14; in this case, the PCF (corresponding to the second device) receives load level information (corresponding to an available amount or a utilization rate) for determining a policy periodically when it is not triggered by a value exceeding a threshold (i.e. when the value is less than a threshold)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the method of the combination of Karaki in view of Nikopour, and further in view of Nair, and further in view of Sirotkin, with the determining a policy based on a threshold of Örtenblad with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of reducing unnecessary signaling (see Örtenblad, par. [0019], lines 9-17).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1 and 10 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Ansari et al. (US 9,277,497) teaches technologies for reducing the from-power-grid energy consumption of a wireless network such as a cellular network over a period of time through cell size adaptations.
Bhangu (US 2025/0005687) teaches a system, method, and device for renewable energy usage within a network.
N. Ansari and T. Han, ("Freenet: Spectrum and energy harvesting wireless networks") teaches a network which increases the spectrum and energy efficiency of wireless networks and enhances network availability for accommodating the dynamics of the spare spectrum and employing renewable energy.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CALEB J BALLOWE whose telephone number is (571)270-0410. The examiner can normally be reached MON-FRI 7:30-5.
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 B. 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.
/C.J.B./Examiner, Art Unit 2419
/Nishant Divecha/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2419