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 § 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, 16, 20, 23, 25, and 27-34 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Li et al ( US 2023/0354136), referred to herein as Li.
Regarding claim 1, Li teaches in the abstract and figs. 3, 4, 8, 10-12 of method performed by an integrated access and backhaul (IAB) node, the method comprising:
receiving, at a backhaul adaptation protocol (BAP) layer of the IAB node [see abstract, fig. 8 and 10-12, block 1101, where a IAB child node], a first backhaul (BH) radio failure link (RLF) indication from a parent node of the IAB node [See abstract, figs. 8, 10-12, block 1101, where IAB (child) node receives radio link failure indication information on a backhaul link between the IAB node and a parent node], and
the first BH RLF indication indicating an RLF detection on a radio link between the parent node of the IAB node (IAB node) and a parent node of the parent node of the JAB node [see abstract, figs. 8, 10-12, where a first back haul indication indicates an RLF detection between the parent node (herein referred to a IAB node) and the parent node of the parent node of the IAB nod (herein referred to as IAB parent node)].
Regarding claim 16, Li teaches in the abstract and figs. 3, 4, 8, 10-12, 22-23 an integrated access and backhaul (IAB) node for wireless communication, comprising:
at least one memory [see fig. 22 and 23, block 2320]; and
at least one processor [see fig. 22 and 23, block 2310] coupled with the at least one memory and configured to cause the IAB node to:
receive, at a backhaul adaptation protocol (BAP) layer of the IAB node [see abstract, fig. 8 and 10-12, block 1101, where a IAB child node], a first backhaul (BH) radio failure link (RLF) indication from a parent node of the IAB node [See abstract, figs. 8, 10-12, block 1101, where IAB (child) node receives radio link failure indication information on a backhaul link between the IAB node and a parent node], and
the first BH RLF indication indicating an RLF detection on a radio link between the parent node of the IAB node (IAB node) and a parent node of the parent node of the JAB node [see abstract, figs. 8, 10-12, where a first back haul indication indicates an RLF detection between the parent node (herein referred to a IAB node) and the parent node of the parent node of the IAB nod (herein referred to as IAB parent node)].
Regarding claim 32, , Li teaches in the abstract and figs. 3, 4, 8, 10-12, 22-23 an integrated access and backhaul (IAB) node for wireless communication, comprising:
at least one memory [see fig. 22 and 23, block 2320]; and
at least one processor [see fig. 22 and 23, block 2310] coupled with the at least one memory and configured to cause the IAB node to:
transmit, from a backhaul adaptation protocol (BAP) layer of the IAB node [see abstract, fig. 8 and 10-12, block 1101, where the IAB node transmits the first indication information to the IAB child node], a first backhaul (BH) radio failure link (RLF) indication to a child IAB node of the IAB node [See abstract, figs. 8, 10-12, block 1101, where IAB (child) node receives radio link failure indication information on a backhaul link between the IAB node and a parent node], and
the first BH RLF indication indicating an RLF detection on a radio link between the IAB node and a parent node of the IAB node [see abstract, figs. 8, 10-12, where a first back haul indication indicates an RLF detection between the parent node (herein referred to a IAB node) and the parent node of the parent node of the IAB nod (herein referred to as IAB parent node)].
Regarding claim 34, Li teaches in the abstract and figs. 3, 4, 8, 10-12, 22-23 a method performed by an integrated access and backhaul (IAB) node for wireless communication, the method comprising:
transmitting, from a backhaul adaptation protocol (BAP) layer of the IAB node[see abstract, fig. 8 and 10-12, block 1101, where the IAB node transmits the first indication information to the IAB child node], a first backhaul (BH) radio failure link (RLF) indication to a child IAB node of the IAB node [See abstract, figs. 8, 10-12, block 1101, where IAB (child) node receives radio link failure indication information on a backhaul link between the IAB node and a parent node], and
the first BH RLF indication indicating an RLF detection on a radio link between the IAB node and a parent node of the IAB node [see abstract, figs. 8, 10-12, where a first back haul indication indicates an RLF detection between the parent node (herein referred to a IAB node) and the parent node of the parent node of the IAB nod (herein referred to as IAB parent node)].
Regarding claim 20, Li teaches in figs. 3, 4, 8, 10-12, 16-17 and 21 wherein the at least one processor [processor of fig. 21] is configured to cause the IAB node [in fig. 16 and 17] to: receive, at the BAP layer of the IAB node [IAB child node, see fig. 16 and 17], a second BH RLF indication from the parent node of the IAB node , wherein the second BH RLF indication indicates an RLF recovery success on the radio link between the parent node of the IAB node and the parent node of the parent node of the IAB node [see fig. 16, 17, 0290-0300, a second indication from target CU to IAB node to IAB child node], .
Regarding claim 23, Li teaches wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the IAB node to: reroute buffered data associated with the parent node of the IAB node in response to reception of the first BH RLF indication [see Li 0434-0440, where upon the first indication of RLF message, there is a performance of RLF recovery, handover migration suggesting the data associated with the IAB node is migrated and recovered].
Regarding claim 25, Li teaches wherein the at least one processor [fig. 21-23, processing portion 2102] is configured to cause the IAB node to, in response to reception of the first BH RLF indication, at least one of: suspend uplink (UL) data transmission to the parent node of the IAB node [see 0184-0186, 0298 and figs. 3, 4, 8, 10-12, 22-23 where UE my configure lower layers to suspend].
Regarding claim 27, Li teaches wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the IAB node to, in response to reception of the second BH RLF indication, at least one of: resume uplink (UL) data transmission to the parent node of the IAB node [see fig. 16 and 0194, the processed second indication information is transmitted to the IAB node performing recovery]
Regarding claim 28, Li teaches wherein the first BH RLF indication is indicated by a RLF type field [0100] of a BAP control packet data unit (PDU )[see paragraphs 0235, 0240-0242, fig. 16 and Tables 4] .
Regarding claim 29, Li teaches wherein the second BH RLF indication is indicated by a RLF type field [0101] of a BAP control packet data unit (PDU [see paragraph 0240-0242, fig. 16, claim 10, and Tables 4 and 5].
Regarding claim 30, Li teaches wherein the RLF type field of the BAP control PDU includes one bit to indicate an RLF detection [bit detection indication, see paragraph 0240-0242, fig. 16, claim 10, and Tables 4 and 5].
Regarding claim 31, Li teaches in wherein the RLF type field of the BAP control PDU includes one bit to indicate an RLF detection [bit detection indication, see paragraph 0240-0242, fig. 16, claim 10, and Tables 4 and 5].
Regarding claim 33, Li teaches in figs. 3, 4, 8, 10-12, 16-17 and 21 wherein the at least one processor [processor of fig. 21] is configured to cause the IAB node [in fig. 16 and 17] to: transmit, from the BAP layer of the IAB node [IAB child node, see fig. 16 and 17], a second BH RLF indication from the parent node of the IAB node, a second BH RLF indication to the child IAB node of the IAB node, wherein the second BH RLF indication indicates an RLF recovery success on the radio link between the IAB node and a parent node of the IAB node [see fig. 16, 17, 0290-0300, a second indication from target CU to IAB node to IAB child node].
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) 17, 18, 19, 21, 22 and 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al ( US 2023/0354136), referred to herein as Li in view of Wen et al (WO 2022199482 – this application claims priority to Chinese Patent App filed on March 25, 2021), referred to herein as Wen.
Regarding claim 18, Li teaches in the abstract and figs. 3, 4, 8, 10-12 and 0252 of a first BH RLF indication and a BSR report. Li is silent on wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the IAB node to: stop a periodic buffer status report (BSR) timer associated with the parent node of the IAB node in response to reception of the first BH RLF indication; and stop a retransmission BSR timer associated with the parent node of the IAB node in response to the reception of the first BH RLF indication. Wen teaches in the “BSR triggered by back RLF indication processing” section after the IAB node receives the type-2 return RLF indication, it can still trigger a new BSR, but the BSR will be re-determined as deactivated/suspended, that is, the processing of the BSR will stop. Specifically, if the IAB node receives the type-2 backhaul RLF indication on the backhaul link with its parent IAB node, and has not received any indication from the upper layers, the link where the RLF occurred has returned to normal , and the BSR procedure determines that at least one BSR will be triggered and not cancelled, then: 1) Determine that at least one BSR is a deactivated/suspended BSR, that is, stop the operation on at least one BSR, and stop the corresponding retxBSR-Timer Or periodicaBSR-Timer (if the timer is running); 2) Optionally, no SR will be triggered. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to incorporate stopping BSR timer and retransmission BSR timer as taught by Wen into Li’s invention in order to ensure the stability of data transmission in the IAB network.
Regarding claims 17, 19 and 24, Li teaches in the abstract and figs. 3, 4, 8, 10-12 and 0252 of a BSR report. Li is slient on wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause canceling all pending SR, BSR and a triggered pre-emptive BSR (associated with data radio bearer) to the parent node of the IAB node and to causes the IAB node to: prohibit triggering of any of a scheduling request (SR), a buffer status report (BSR), and a pre-emptive BSR associated with the parent node of the IAB node. Wen teaches in fig. 4 and 6 The processing module 42 is configured to cancel or suspend the triggered data transmission. triggered scheduling request SR; Triggered buffer status report BSR; triggered preemptive buffer status reports PBSR. When the terminal 600 receives the backhaul RLF indication on the backhaul link with the parent IAB node of the terminal 600, it cancels or suspends the first SR; wherein, the first SR is to be sent to the parent The pending SR triggered by the BSR of the IAB node; When the terminal 600 receives the backhaul RLF indication on the backhaul link with the parent IAB node of the terminal 600, it cancels or suspends the second SR; wherein the second SR is not due to be sent to the parent The pending SR triggered by the BSR of the IAB node. Optionally, when the MAC entity of the terminal 600 does not have valid uplink resources configured for the first SR, the first SR will not trigger the RACH process until the terminal 600 receives an indication that the backhaul link is back to normal. Optionally, the processor 610 is further configured to: When canceling or suspending the first SR, when the first timer corresponding to the first SR is running, stop running the first timer.
Optionally, the processor 610 is further configured to: When canceling or suspending the second SR, when the second timer corresponding to the second SR is running, stop running the second timer. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to incorporate stopping BSR timer and retransmission BSR timer as taught by Wen into Li’s invention in order to ensure the stability of data transmission in the IAB network.
Regarding claim 21, Li fails to explicitly teach wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the IAB node to: start a periodic buffer status report (BSR) timer associated with the parent node of the IAB node in response to reception of the second BH RLF indication. Wen teaches in figure 4, 6 and associated portions of the specification of optionally, the processor 610 is further configured to: After suspending the second SR and stopping the running of the second timer, when receiving an indication that the backhaul link is back to normal, restart the second timer, and set the the value is set to the remaining time value corresponding to when the second timer is suspended, or the value of the second timer is set to the initial value of the timer. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to incorporate stopping BSR timer and retransmission BSR timer as taught by Wen into Li’s invention in order to ensure the stability of data transmission in the IAB network.
Regarding claim 22, Li teaches in the abstract and figs. 3, 4, 8, 10-12 and 0252 of a BSR report. Lis is silent on wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the IAB node to trigger at least one of a buffer status report (BSR) and a pre-emptive BSR associated with the parent node of the IAB node in response to reception of the second BH RLF indication : Wen teaches in the “SR triggered by back RLF indication processing” section, For another example, after suspending/deactivating pending SRs, if the IAB node receives an indication that the backhaul link from the upper layer is back to normal, it indicates that "the backhaul link that previously received the type-2 backhaul RLF indication has returned to normal." , you can resume the operation of the previously suspended/deactivated pending SRs, that is, resume the pending SRs that were previously stopped due to the type-2 return RLF indication. And if the timer is triggered before the pending SRs, the timer is restarted, and the value of the timer is set to the remaining time corresponding to the timer when it is suspended/deactivated, or is set to the initial value of the timer. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to incorporate stopping BSR timer and retransmission BSR timer as taught by Wen into Li’s invention in order to ensure the stability of data transmission in the IAB network.
Claim(s) 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al ( US 2023/0354136), referred to herein as Li in view of Shan et al (US 20200022184).
Regarding claim 26, Li teaches in the abstract and figs. 3, 4, 8, 10-12 of method performed by an integrated access and backhaul (IAB) node. Li is slient on wherein to perform the measurement of the non-serving cell comprises ignoring a threshold for triggering a measurement on a non-serving cell. Shen teaches of a terminal device that ignores a measurement trigger threshold of cells. Shen teaches in paragraph 0107 that the terminal starts performing neighboring cell measurement comprises ignoring a measurement trigger threshold. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to modify to incorporate the teachings of ignoring a threshold for triggering a measurement on a cell as taught by Shan into the intention of Li in order to load balance the network.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHIRAG SHAH whose telephone number is 571-272-3144. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 6AM-4PM.
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.
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.
/CHIRAG G SHAH/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2477