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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1 – 2, 5 – 6, 13 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Lee et al. US 20230082294 A1, hereinafter Lee (Lee: para. [0001] claims the benefit of Korean Application No. 10-2021-0100193, filed on Jul. 29, 2021).
Regarding claim 1, Lee teaches a data routing method, comprising:
(Lee: Summary, Abstract, Fig. 14 and para. [0006] IAB node comprising: at least one transceiver; at least one processor; and at least one computer memory operably connectable to the at least one processor and storing instructions that, when executed, cause the at least one processor to perform operations)
receiving, by a boundary node (the description for the claimed term “boundary node” is found in instant published Specification para. [00064] - Lee: Fig. 14 node 5 para. [0251]), a packet in a first topology; (Lee: para. [0251] When the node 4 receives the packet 2, the node 4 forwards the packet 2 to the node 5 as a next hop node after routing operation based on the routing information in the packet 2. When the node 5 receives the packet 2)
determining, by the boundary node, ownership of a destination node of the packet based on first information in a header of the packet;
(the description for the claimed term “ownership of a destination node” is found in instant published Specification para. [0213] - Lee: [0224 & 0251-0252] and Fig. 14 If the packet is received from a link which is used to connect to the first topology and the routing information in the packet matches an identifier of the node, the node delivers the packet to an upper layer. If the routing information in the packet matches an identifier of the node but the packet is received not from the link which is used to connect to the first topology, the node rewrites the routing information in the header of the packet and then transmits the packets to a next node)
in a case that the destination node of the packet belongs to a second topology, re-writing, by the boundary node, the header of the packet based on the first information; and transmitting, by the boundary node, a re-written packet to the destination node in the second topology.
(Lee: para. Lee: [0224] If the packet is received from a link which is used to connect to the first topology and the routing information in the packet matches an identifier of the node, the node delivers the packet to an upper layer. If the routing information in the packet matches an identifier of the node but the packet is received not from the link which is used to connect to the first topology, the node rewrites the routing information in the header of the packet and then transmits the packets to a next node. Para. [0251] and Fig. 14 When the node 4 receives the packet 3, the node 4 forwards the packet 3 to the node 5 as a next hop node after routing operation based on the routing information in the packet 3. When the node 5 receives the packet 3, the node 5 recognizes that the link for reception of packet 3 is the link used to connect the second topology and the destination of the packet 3 matches the identifier of the node 5 for the second topology, but the path ID of the packet 3 does not match the identifier of the node 5 for the second topology. The node 5 checks the remapping table and find the entry to rewrite the routing information of the packet 3 with (dst:6, pid:1) and transmit the packet 3 to the node 6 after routing operation based on the rewritten routing information in the packet 3)
Regarding claim 2, Lee teaches the data routing method according to claim 1, wherein the determining, by the boundary node, ownership of a destination node of the packet based on first information in a header of the packet (Lee: [0224 & 0251-0252] and Fig. 14 If the packet is received from a link which is used to connect to the first topology and the routing information in the packet matches an identifier of the node, the node delivers the packet to an upper layer. If the routing information in the packet matches an identifier of the node but the packet is received not from the link which is used to connect to the first topology, the node rewrites the routing information in the header of the packet and then transmits the packets to a next node) comprises:
in a case that the boundary node determines that a backhaul adaptation protocol (BAP) destination address in the first information is the same as a first BAP virtual address of the boundary node, determining that the destination node of the packet belongs to the second topology, (Lee: para. [0251] When the node 4 receives the packet 2, the node 4 forwards the packet 2 to the node 5 as a next hop node after routing operation based on the routing information in the packet 2. When the node 5 receives the packet 2, the node 5 recognizes that the routing information of the packet 2 matches the identifier of the node 5 for the second topology and the link for reception of packet 2 is the link used to connect the second topology and determines the destination of the packet 2 is the node 5 and then delivers the packet 2 to an upper layer)
wherein there is a mapping relationship between the first BAP virtual address and a first destination node information group of the packet,
(Lee: para. [0005 & 0006] (IAB) node configured with a first Backhaul Adaptation Protocol (BAP) address related to a first donor IAB node and a second BAP address related to a second donor IAB node in a wireless communication system)
the first destination node information group comprises a first destination address and a first path identifier path ID of the destination node in the second topology, and the first path ID is used to indicate a routing path from the boundary node to the destination node in the second topology. (Lee: para. [0005-0006] receiving a packet including a destination BAP address and a path identifier (ID); based on the packet being received through the second link and the destination BAP address not matching with the second BAP address, determining whether the destination BAP address and the path ID of the packet match with at least one entry of a configured rewriting table or not; and based on the destination BAP address and the path ID of the packet matching with the at least one entry, rewriting a header of the packet by setting the destination BAP address and the path ID of the packet according to the at least one entry, and transmitting the packet to a next hop node)
Regarding claim 5, Lee teaches the data routing method according to claim 1, wherein the determining, by the boundary node, ownership of a destination node of the packet based on first information in a header of the packet (Lee: [0224 & 0251-0252] and Fig. 14 If the packet is received from a link which is used to connect to the first topology and the routing information in the packet matches an identifier of the node, the node delivers the packet to an upper layer. If the routing information in the packet matches an identifier of the node but the packet is received not from the link which is used to connect to the first topology, the node rewrites the routing information in the header of the packet and then transmits the packets to a next node) comprises: in a case that the boundary node determines that a BAP destination address in the first information is the same as a real address of the boundary node and the first information comprises first indication information, determining that the destination node of the packet belongs to the second topology, (Lee: para. [0252 & 0249] When the node 5 receives the packet 3, the node 5 recognizes that the link for reception of packet 3 is the link used to connect the second topology and the destination of the packet 3 matches the identifier of the node 5 for the second topology) wherein the first indication information is used to directly indicate that cross-topology routing needs to be performed for the packet. (Lee: para. [0252 & 0249] When the node 5 receives the packet 3, the node 5 recognizes that the link for reception of packet 3 is the link used to connect the second topology and the destination of the packet 3 matches the identifier of the node 5 for the second topology, but the path ID of the packet 3 does not match the identifier of the node 5 for the second topology. The node 5 checks the remapping table and find the entry to rewrite the routing information of the packet 3 with (dst:6, pid:1) and transmit the packet 3 to the node 6 after routing operation based on the rewritten routing information in the packet 3)
Regarding claim 6, Lee teaches the data routing method according to claim 5, wherein the first information further comprises a second path ID, and the second path ID is used to indicate a routing path from the boundary node to the destination node in the second topology. (Lee: para. [0255] and FIG. 15 , it is assumed that the node 5 are configured with two topologies: the first topology is under the donor node 1 and the second topology is under the donor node 2. The node 5 has one remapping table for the second topology and configured with identifier (node 5, pid:2) for the second topology. Further, the node 6 in the second topology is configured with identifier (node 6, pid:1))
Regarding claim 13, Lee teaches a data routing method, comprising:
generating, by a generation node in a first topology (Lee: para. [0249-0251] and Fig. 14 donor node), a packet, wherein a header of the packet comprises first information,
(Lee: para. [0251] When the node 4 receives the packet 2, the node 4 forwards the packet 2 to the node 5 as a next hop node after routing operation based on the routing information in the packet 2. When the node 5 receives the packet 2)
and the first information is used to indicate ownership of a destination node of the packet;
(the description for the claimed term “ownership of a destination node” is found in instant published Specification para. [0213] - Lee: [0224 & 0251-0252] and Fig. 14 If the packet is received from a link which is used to connect to the first topology and the routing information in the packet matches an identifier of the node, the node delivers the packet to an upper layer. If the routing information in the packet matches an identifier of the node but the packet is received not from the link which is used to connect to the first topology, the node rewrites the routing information in the header of the packet and then transmits the packets to a next node)
and
sending, by the generation node, the packet (Lee: para. [0251] When the node 4 receives the packet 2, the node 4 forwards the packet 2 to the node 5 as a next hop node after routing operation based on the routing information in the packet 2. When the node 5 receives the packet 2) to a boundary node (the description for the claimed term “boundary node” is found in instant published Specification para. [00064] - Lee: Fig. 14 node 5 para. [0251]).
Regarding claim 16, Lee teaches all the limitations as discussed in the rejection of claim 5, and therefore method claim 16 is rejected using the same rationales.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
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.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of Akl et al. US20240349168A1, hereinafter Akl (Akl: para. [0001] which claims the benefit of and priority to U.S. Provisional Application No. 63/104,353, entitled “Rewriting BAP Headers in IAB” and filed on Oct. 22, 2020, hereinafter Akl’353).
Regarding claim 4, Lee teaches the data routing method according to claim 2, wherein the determining, by the boundary node, ownership of a destination node of the packet based on first information in a header of the packet further (Lee: [0224 & 0251-0252] and Fig. 14 If the packet is received from a link which is used to connect to the first topology and the routing information in the packet matches an identifier of the node, the node delivers the packet to an upper layer. If the routing information in the packet matches an identifier of the node but the packet is received not from the link which is used to connect to the first topology, the node rewrites the routing information in the header of the packet and then transmits the packets to a next node) comprises:
in a case that the boundary node determines that the BAP destination address in the first information is the same as a real address of the boundary node, determining that the destination node of the packet is the boundary node;
(Lee: para. [0251 & 0256] When the node 4 receives the packet 2, the node 4 forwards the packet 2 to the node 5 as a next hop node after routing operation based on the routing information in the packet 2. When the node 5 receives the packet 2, the node 5 recognizes that the routing information of the packet 2 matches the identifier of the node 5 for the second topology and the link for reception of packet 2 is the link used to connect the second topology and determines the destination of the packet 2 is the node 5)
Lee does not explicitly teaches: and the method further comprises: removing the header of the packet; and delivering the packet after the removal of the header to an upper layer of a BAP layer of the boundary node.
Akl from the same or similar fields of endeavor teaches: removing the header of the packet; and delivering the packet after the removal of the header to an upper layer of a BAP layer of the boundary node. (Akl: Para. [0075] removes the BAP header, and forwards the IP packet to upper layer processing for transmission to a UE; Akl’353: para. [0070]) Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the teaching of Akl in the method of Lee. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so for provide a configuration to rewrite BAP headers in IAB networks (Akl: para. [0082]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 7 – 12, 14 – 15 and 17 – 20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please also see PTO-892.
Tesanovic et al. US20240179608A1 in para. [0071] and Fig. 2 teaches second CU (300); Donor1 of second CU (310); target parent node of IAB node at second CU (320); a first CU (330); Donor1 of first CU (340); source parent node of IAB node at first CU (350); IAB node 1 (360); and IAB node 2 (370).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WUTCHUNG CHU whose telephone number is (571)272-4064. The examiner can normally be reached 10:00 AM - 4:00 PM.
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, Moo R Jeong can be reached at (571) 272-9617. 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.
/WUTCHUNG CHU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2418