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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 16 recites the limitation “the DU” in line 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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.
Claims 1, 4, 6, 9, 11, 14, 16 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over 3GPP TSG-RAN WGS3 NR AdHoc 1801 R3-180180 (hereinafter, ‘180) in view of Toeda et al. (US 2020/0396740) and Sirotkin et al. (US 2019/0075023).
Regarding claim 1, ‘180 discloses a method performed by a distributed unit (DU) of a next generation node B (gNB) in a wireless communication system, the method comprising:
transmitting, to a central unit (CU) of the gNB, a user equipment (UE) context modification required message to request a UE context modification (page 6, FIG. 8.3.4.3-1: gNB-DU sends UE CONTEXT MODIFICATION REQUIRED message to gNB- CU); and
receiving, from the CU, a UE context modification refuse message indicating that the UE context modification is unsuccessful based on an evolved node B (eNB) (FIG. 8.3.4.3-1: gNB-DU receives UE CONTEXT MODIFICATION REFUSE message from gNB- CU. “In case none of the requested modifications of the UE context can be successfully performed, the eNB-CU shall respond with the UE CONTEXT MODIFICATION REFUSE message with an appropriate cause value.”),
wherein the eNB and the gNB are configured in a dual connectivity (Section 8.3.5: “the gNB-CU received the MeNB Resource Coordination as defined in TS 36.423”),
wherein the UE context modification required message includes a gNB-CU UE identifier (ID) for identifying a UE within the CU, a gNB -DU UE ID for identifying a UE within the DU (page 17, Section 9.2.2.10: the UE CONTEXT MODFICATION REQUIRED message contains the gNB-CU UE F1AP ID and the gNB-DU UE F1AP ID), and a resource coordination transfer container (Section 8.3.5: “If the Resource Coordination Transfer Container IE is included in the UE CONTEXT MODIFICATION REQUIRED, the gNB-CU shall transparently transfer this information for the purpose of resource coordination”),
wherein the UE context modification refuse message includes the gNB-CU UE ID, the gNB-DU UE ID, and information on a cause of the unsuccessful UE context modification (Page 6, Section 8.3.5.3: the UE CONTEXT MODIFICATION REFUSE message contains an appropriate cause value. Page 19, Section 9.2.2.x: The UE CONTEXT MODIFICATION REFUSE message contains the gNB-CU UE F1AP ID, the gNB-DU UE F1AP ID and the Cause).
‘180 fails to disclose that the resource coordination transfer container includes a secondary gNB (SgNB) resource coordination information element (IE) for the eNB, and that the SgNB resource coordination IE includes information on a new radio (NR) cell global identity (CGI) and coordination information.
However, in an analogous art, Toeda discloses that the resource coordination transfer container includes a secondary gNB (SgNB) resource coordination information element (IE) for the eNB (paragraph 101, lines 1-2: “The “UE CONTEXT MODIFICATION REQUIRED” message includes information on the radio resource allocation of the SgNB, such that the MeNB may use the information to optimize the radio resource allocation.” Paragraph 102, lines 1-3: “FIG. 19 is a diagram illustrating a message example (3) communicating between gNB-DU and gNB-CU according to an embodiment of the present invention. As illustrated in FIG. 19, the “UE CONTEXT MODIFICATION REQUIRED” message includes an information element “gNB Resource Allocation”.”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method in ‘180 by incorporating these features taught in Toeda for the purpose of reducing the adverse effect of intra-device interference in dual connectivity executed in a radio communication system.
The combination of ‘180 and Toeda fails to disclose that the SgNB resource coordination IE includes information on a new radio (NR) cell global identity (CGI) and coordination information.
However, in an analogous art, Sirotkin discloses that an SgNB resource coordination IE includes information on a new radio (NR) cell global identity (CGI) (an NR cell identifier) and coordination information (paragraph 55, lines 1-7: “The message may further include IEs related to cells to be activated by a DU of an access node. For example, the message may include a cells to be activated list IE 404, a cells to be activated list item IE 406, an NR cell identifier IE 408, a gNB-CU system information IE 410, a broadcast PLMN IE 412, a TAI IE 414, or some combination thereof. The cells to be activated list IE 404 indicates whether there are cells to be activated or modified. The cells to be activated list item IE 406 indicates a list of cells to be activated. The NR cell identifier IE 408 indicates NR cell identifiers for the cells to be activated. The gNB-CU system information IE 410 includes an RRC container with system information owned by the gNB-CU. The broadcast PLMN IE 412 indicates available PLMNs. The TAI IE 414 indicates supported single-network slice selection assistance information.”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method in ‘180 and Toeda by incorporating these features taught in Sirotkin for the purpose of enabling precise inter-node resource management and avoiding conflicts of SgNB resources.
Regarding claim 4, Toeda further discloses that the DU of the gNB and the CU of the gNB are connected through a F1 interface, and wherein the CU of the gNB and the eNB are connected through an X2 interface (paragraph 87, lines 3-5: “As illustrated in FIG. 13, a base station device 100B acting as gNB may include gNB-CU 100C and gNB-DU 100D. The gNB-CU 100C and the gNB-DU 100D are connected via an F1-C interface. In addition, the gNB-CU 100C and the eNB 100A are connected by an X2-C interface.”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method in ‘180, Toeda and Sirotkin by incorporating these features further taught in Toeda for the purpose of allowing the NR to interwork with the LTE for EN-DC mobility continuity and maintain low latency in the DU.
Regarding claim 6, ‘180 discloses a method performed by a central unit (CU) of a next generation node B (gNB) in a wireless communication system, the method comprising:
receiving, from a distributed unit (DU) of the gNB, a user equipment (UE) context modification required message to request a UE context modification (page 6, FIG. 8.3.4.3-1: gNB-DU sends UE CONTEXT MODIFICATION REQUIRED message to gNB- CU); and
transmitting, to the DU of the gNB, a UE context modification refuse message, in case that the UE context modification is unsuccessful based on an evolved node B (eNB) (FIG. 8.3.4.3-1: gNB-DU receives UE CONTEXT MODIFICATION REFUSE message from gNB- CU. “In case none of the requested modifications of the UE context can be successfully performed, the eNB-CU shall respond with the UE CONTEXT MODIFICATION REFUSE message with an appropriate cause value.”),
wherein the eNB and the gNB are configured in a dual connectivity (Section 8.3.5: “the gNB-CU received the MeNB Resource Coordination as defined in TS 36.423”),
wherein the UE context modification required message includes a gNB-CU UE identifier (ID) for identifying a UE within the CU, a gNB -DU UE ID for identifying a UE within the DU (page 17, Section 9.2.2.10: the UE CONTEXT MODFICATION REQUIRED message contains the gNB-CU UE F1AP ID and the gNB-DU UE F1AP ID), and a resource coordination transfer container (Section 8.3.5: “If the Resource Coordination Transfer Container IE is included in the UE CONTEXT MODIFICATION REQUIRED, the gNB-CU shall transparently transfer this information for the purpose of resource coordination”),
wherein the UE context modification refuse message includes the gNB-CU UE ID, the gNB-DU UE ID, and information on a cause of the unsuccessful UE context modification (Page 6, Section 8.3.5.3: the UE CONTEXT MODIFICATION REFUSE message contains an appropriate cause value. Page 19, Section 9.2.2.x: The UE CONTEXT MODIFICATION REFUSE message contains the gNB-CU UE F1AP ID, the gNB-DU UE F1AP ID and the Cause).
‘180 fails to disclose that the resource coordination transfer container includes a secondary gNB (SgNB) resource coordination information element (IE) for the eNB, and that the SgNB resource coordination IE includes information on a new radio (NR) cell global identity (CGI) and coordination information.
However, in an analogous art, Toeda discloses that the resource coordination transfer container includes a secondary gNB (SgNB) resource coordination information element (IE) for the eNB (paragraph 101, lines 1-2: “The “UE CONTEXT MODIFICATION REQUIRED” message includes information on the radio resource allocation of the SgNB, such that the MeNB may use the information to optimize the radio resource allocation.” Paragraph 102, lines 1-3: “FIG. 19 is a diagram illustrating a message example (3) communicating between gNB-DU and gNB-CU according to an embodiment of the present invention. As illustrated in FIG. 19, the “UE CONTEXT MODIFICATION REQUIRED” message includes an information element “gNB Resource Allocation”.”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method in ‘180 by incorporating these features taught in Toeda for the purpose of reducing the adverse effect of intra-device interference in dual connectivity executed in a radio communication system.
The combination of ‘180 and Toeda fails to disclose that the SgNB resource coordination IE includes information on a new radio (NR) cell global identity (CGI) and coordination information.
However, in an analogous art, Sirotkin discloses that an SgNB resource coordination IE includes information on a new radio (NR) cell global identity (CGI) (an NR cell identifier) and coordination information (paragraph 55, lines 1-7: “The message may further include IEs related to cells to be activated by a DU of an access node. For example, the message may include a cells to be activated list IE 404, a cells to be activated list item IE 406, an NR cell identifier IE 408, a gNB-CU system information IE 410, a broadcast PLMN IE 412, a TAI IE 414, or some combination thereof. The cells to be activated list IE 404 indicates whether there are cells to be activated or modified. The cells to be activated list item IE 406 indicates a list of cells to be activated. The NR cell identifier IE 408 indicates NR cell identifiers for the cells to be activated. The gNB-CU system information IE 410 includes an RRC container with system information owned by the gNB-CU. The broadcast PLMN IE 412 indicates available PLMNs. The TAI IE 414 indicates supported single-network slice selection assistance information.”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method in ‘180 and Toeda by incorporating these features taught in Sirotkin for the purpose of enabling precise inter-node resource management and avoiding conflicts of SgNB resources.
Claim 9 incorporates the limitations of claim 4 and 6, and is therefore rejected for the same reasons as these claims.
Claim 11 incorporates the limitations of claim 1 and further recites the DU of the gNB comprising: a memory configured to store instructions; and at least one transceiver; and at least one processor, wherein the instructions cause, when executed by the processor, the DU to perform the steps in the method in claim 1.
Toeda further discloses the DU of the gNB comprising: a memory configured to store instructions; and at least one transceiver; and at least one processor, wherein the instructions cause, when executed by the processor, the DU to perform the method in claim 1 (paragraph 120, lines 1-3: “FIG. 22 is a diagram illustrating a functional configuration example of a base station device 100. As illustrated in FIG. 22, the base station device 100 includes a transmitter 110, a receiver 120, a configuration information manager 130, and a radio resource controller 140.”; Paragraph 124, lines 1-3: “Note that the base station device 100A acting as the eNB, the base station device 100B acting as the gNB, the base station device 100C acting as the gNB-CU, and the base station device 100D acting as the gNB-DU have a part of or all of the functions similar to those of the base station device 100 described above.”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method in ‘180, Toeda and Sirotkin by incorporating these features further taught in Toeda for the purpose of implementing a concrete network element in NR systems and supporting real-time execution at the DU.
Claim 14 incorporates the limitations of claim 4 and 11, and is therefore rejected for the same reasons as these claims.
Claim 16 incorporates the limitations of claim 6 and further recites the CU of the gNB comprising: a memory configured to store instructions; and at least one transceiver; and at least one processor, wherein the instructions cause, when executed by the processor, the CU to perform the steps in the method in claim 1.
Toeda further discloses the CU of the gNB comprising: a memory configured to store instructions; and at least one transceiver; and at least one processor, wherein the instructions cause, when executed by the processor, the CU to perform the method in claim 1 (paragraph 120, lines 1-3: “FIG. 22 is a diagram illustrating a functional configuration example of a base station device 100. As illustrated in FIG. 22, the base station device 100 includes a transmitter 110, a receiver 120, a configuration information manager 130, and a radio resource controller 140.”; Paragraph 124, lines 1-3: “Note that the base station device 100A acting as the eNB, the base station device 100B acting as the gNB, the base station device 100C acting as the gNB-CU, and the base station device 100D acting as the gNB-DU have a part of or all of the functions similar to those of the base station device 100 described above.”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method in ‘180, Toeda and Sirotkin by incorporating these features further taught in Toeda for the purpose of implementing a concrete network element in NR systems and supporting real-time execution at the CU.
Claim 19 incorporates the limitations of claim 4 and 16, and is therefore rejected for the same reasons as these claims.
Claims 2, 7, 12 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘180 in view of Toeda et al. (US 2020/0396740) and Sirotkin et al. (US 2019/0075023), and further in view of Turtinen et al. (US 2020/0351954).
Regarding claims 2, 7 and 12 and 17, the combination of ‘180, Toeda and Sirotkin fails to disclose that the CU is associated with a radio resource control (RRC) layer and a packet data convergence protocol (PDCP) layer, and wherein the DU is associated with a radio link control (RLC) layer, a medium access control (MAC) layer, and a physical (PHY) layer.
However, in an analogous art, Turtinen discloses that a CU is associated with a radio resource control (RRC) layer and a packet data convergence protocol (PDCP) layer, and that a DU is associated with a radio link control (RLC) layer, a medium access control (MAC) layer, and a physical (PHY) layer (paragraph 17, lines 4-7: “the gNB-DUs (also called DUs) may comprise e.g. a radio link control (RLC), medium access control (MAC) layer and a physical (PHY) layer, whereas the gNB-CU (also called a CU) may comprise the layers above RLC layer, such as a packet data convergence protocol (PDCP) layer, a radio resource control (RRC) and an internet protocol (IP) layers.”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method in ‘180, Toeda and Sirotkin by incorporating these features taught in Turtinen for the purpose of reducing latency by placing time-critical layers in the DU and centralizing higher layer control and mobility management in the CU.
Claims 5, 10, 15 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘180 in view of Toeda et al. (US 2020/0396740) and Sirotkin et al. (US 2019/0075023), and further in view of Baghel et al. (US 2015/0143463).
Regarding claims 5, 10, 15 and 20, the combination of ‘180, Toeda and Sirotkin fails to disclose that the UE context modification required message includes identification information on one or more data radio bearers (DRBs) to be modified and downlink (DL) user plane (UP) tunnel (TNL) information.
However, in an analogous art, Baghel discloses that a UE context modification required message includes identification information on one or more data radio bearers (DRBs) to be modified and downlink (DL) user plane (UP) tunnel (TNL) information (paragraph 116, lines 1-2: “the S1 UE 300 context modification request includes but not limited to S1-U TEID (S1-U Tunnel End Point Identifier) and/or EPS bearer ID and/or protocol for which the security needs to be disabled.”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method in ‘180, Toeda and Sirotkin by incorporating these features taught in Baghel for the purpose of ensuring that downlink user-plane packets are forwarded to the correct destination after modification.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 8 and 13 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.
Claim 18 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art fails to disclose the recited combination of elements in a method performed by a distributed unit (DU) or a central unit (CU) of a next generation node B (gNB) in a wireless communication system, including a UE context modification refuse message that is based on a modification refuse message transmitted from the eNB to the CU of the gNB, as in claims 3, 8, 13 and 18.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Park et al. (US 2019/0380128) discloses a UE context modification failure message, a UE context modification required message, an F1 message transmitted from the gNB-DU to the selected gNB-CU.
Park et al. (US 2019/0053183) discloses that a user plane for a gNB may be connected to an S-GW through an LTE eNB via an Xx-U interface between LTE eNB and gNB and an S1-U interface between LTE eNB and S-GW.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAM BHATTACHARYA whose telephone number is (571)272-7917. The examiner can normally be reached weekdays, 9-5:30.
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, Matthew D. Anderson can be reached at (571) 272-4177. 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.
/SAM BHATTACHARYA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2646