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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group 1 claims 1-11 in the reply filed on 06/29/2026 is acknowledged.
Claim Status
Claims 1-11 and 21-29 are pending and claims 12-20 are canceled, and claims 21-29 are newly added.
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) 1 – 3, 5, 9 – 11, 21 – 23 and 27 – 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Krasilnikov et al. US20240111603A1, hereinafter Krasilnikov in view of Lee et al. US 20260023840 A1 (Lee: para. [0001] claims the benefit of a Korean patent application number 10-2023-0041021, filed on Mar. 29, 2023, in the Korean Intellectual Property Office, and of a Korean patent application number 10-2023-0053412, filed on Apr. 24, 2023), hereinafter Lee.
Regarding claim 1, Krasilnikov teaches a method implemented in a communication system to update an application software providing for a user equipment (UE), wherein the method comprises:
(Krasilnikov: Summary, Para. [0109 & 0116 & 0017] VM 1058-2 with an updated version of the application)
executing, by an application of a mobile edge computing system (edge location/MEC) comprising one or more servers at a serving cell site of the UE,
(Krasilnikov: Para. [0060] edge locations may be considered a possible implementation of Multi-access Edge Computing (MEC). Fig. 2 and para. [0042] edge locations 202 can include cloud provider network-managed edge locations 240 (e.g., formed by servers located in a cloud provider-managed facility separate from those associated with the cloud provider network 100), communications service provider edge locations 242 (e.g., formed by servers associated with communications service provider facilities), user-managed edge locations 244 (e.g., formed by servers located on-premise in a user or partner facility), among other possible types of substrate extensions)
an instance of a first virtual machine hosting at least one user application for the UE,
(Krasilnikov: para. [0034-0035] Users can also refer to other services or applications executing within the cloud provider network (e.g., one service or application executing on one virtual machine request the launch of another virtual machine). Para. [0138] service(s) or application(s) by their respective server(s))
wherein the executing the instance of the first virtual machine (Krasilnikov: para. [0077] and Fig. 1 hardware virtualization services 110 receives a launch request from an electronic device 101 as indicated at circle (1), which may be operated by a user 108. In this example workflow, the launch request includes an indication of an existing virtual machine with which the requested virtual machine will share resources. For example, the request can include an identification of the virtual machine 168-1 that, until the requested virtual machine is launched. Para. [0079-0082] hardware virtualization services 110 can send a request to cause a launch of a resource-sharing VM to a VMM 166 (or other hypervisor, agent) of the host computer system 160 that manages hosted virtual machines as indicated at circle (2))
comprises communicating, by the UE,
(Krasilnikov: para. [0035 & 0032-0038] Communications between the user and the cloud provider network typically transit one or more intermediate network(s) (e.g., the public Internet). For example, a user 238 of an electronic device 234 can interact with the cloud provider network 100 via intermediate network(s) 236)
first user interface (“APIs”) traffic associated with execution of the at least one user application (Krasilnikov: para. [0035-0036] interact with the cloud provider network resources and services using various interfaces—typically application programming interfaces (“APIs”). Communications between the user and the cloud provider network typically transit one or more intermediate network(s) (e.g., the public Internet). For example, a user 238 of an electronic device 234 can interact with the cloud provider network 100 via intermediate network(s) 236. The interactions can be via interface(s) 204, such as using APIs or a command-line, web-based, or other interface) on the instance of the first virtual machine; (Krasilnikov: para. [0048] CP proxies 230 provide infrastructure for tunneling management API traffic destined for edge location servers out of the region substrate and to the edge location 202. For example, a virtualized computing service of the cloud provider network 100 can issue a command to a VM NI of a server of an edge location 202 to launch a compute instance 222. A CP proxy maintains a tunnel (e.g., a VPN) to a local network manager 228 of the edge location. The software implemented within the CP proxies ensures that only well-formed API traffic leaves from and returns to the substrate)
receiving, by the application of the mobile edge computing system, an application patch (updated version of the application) for updating the at least one user application;
(Krasilnikov: para. [0107] network manager 814 receives a switch signal. The switch signal typically originates from an external entity such as another customer-owned application, the hardware virtualization service, a health monitoring service, etc., and may be routed through another local entity such as a VMM. Regardless of its origin, the switch signal changes a “backup” or “shadow” VM into the primary VM. In this example, the switch signal causes the network manager 814 to change the attachment of VNI 822 from VM 812-1 to 812-2, as indicated at circle (3). Para. [0116] For example, the VM 1058-1 can remain executing while VMM 1054 launches VM 1058-2 with an updated version of the application. Para. [0079] identified host computer system is part of an edge location (or MEC))
launching, by the application of the mobile edge computing system in response to receiving the application patch (launches VM 1058-2 with an updated version of the application), an instance of a second virtual machine to host at least an updated version of the at least one user application for the UE, wherein the updated version of the at least one user application comprises the application patch;
(Krasilnikov: para. [0116] For example, the VM 1058-1 can remain executing while VMM 1054 launches VM 1058-2 with an updated version of the application. Thus, rather than terminate VM 1058-1 to free capacity for the launch of VM 1058-2, the time associated with the launch of VM 1058-2, including the time to transfer the machine image 1056, can elapse while VM 1058-1 remains active. Once the VMM 1054 has launched the VM 1058-2, the VMM 1054 can terminate the VM 1058-1)
transferring, by the application of the mobile edge computing system, data (update the configuration) of the UE to the instance of the second virtual machine; and
(Krasilnikov: para. [0109] and Fig. 8 network manager 814 has attached the VNI 862-1 to VM 812-1 and VNI 862-2 to VM 812-2. Again, such an example can be used in the case of a backup resource-sharing VM. As indicated at circle (2), the network manager 814 receives a switch signal. In this example, the switch signal causes the network manager 814 to update the configuration of VNI 862-2 to match one or more configuration parameters of VNI 862-1, such as the network address. Additionally, the network manager 814 can change the configuration of VNI 862-1 (e.g., to change its network address). Based on the configuration update, VM 812-2 now appears to be VM 812-1 from the perspective of other entities on the VPC or that were previously communicating with VM 812-1 (e.g., the network address of VM 812-1 moves to VM 812-2 with the configuration change))
executing, by the application of the mobile edge computing system, the instance of the second virtual machine hosting at least the updated version of the at least one user application for the UE, wherein the executing the instance of the second virtual machine comprises communicating, by the instance of the second virtual machine with the UE, second user interface traffic for execution of the updated version of the at least one user application on the instance of the second virtual machine.
(Krasilnikov: para. [0109] Fig. 8 network manager 814 has attached the VNI 862-1 to VM 812-1 and VNI 862-2 to VM 812-2. Again, such an example can be used in the case of a backup resource-sharing VM. As indicated at circle (2), the network manager 814 receives a switch signal. In this example, the switch signal causes the network manager 814 to update the configuration of VNI 862-2 to match one or more configuration parameters of VNI 862-1, such as the network address. Additionally, the network manager 814 can change the configuration of VNI 862-1 (e.g., to change its network address). Based on the configuration update, VM 812-2 now appears to be VM 812-1 from the perspective of other entities on the VPC or that were previously communicating with VM 812-1 (e.g., the network address of VM 812-1 moves to VM 812-2 with the configuration change))
It is noted that Krasilnikov does not explicitly disclose: update an application software providing real-time remote computation for a user equipment (UE);
communicating, by the instance of the first virtual machine with the UE;
transferring, by the application of the mobile edge computing system, user data of the UE from the instance of the first virtual machine to the instance of the second virtual machine.
However, Lee from the same or similar fields of endeavor teaches the use of: update an application software providing real-time remote computation for a user equipment (UE)
(Lee: para. [0072 & 0080 & 0094] obtaining real-time approval from the data owner for the data encrypted by an external electronic device (or other user) or an external server)
communicating, by the instance of the first virtual machine with the UE,
(Lee: para. [0130] and Fig. 7 operating an electronic device (or a processor (e.g., the processor 120 of FIG. 1 )) performing authentication using a virtual machine may comprise identifying a user input, in a first virtual machine, for an application or data requiring authentication. Para. [0086 & 0084] and Fig. 4 When the user accesses the encrypted data 441 by the user input, the encrypted file manager 411 may load the encrypted data 441 into the shared area 470)
transferring, by the application of the mobile edge computing system, user data (identification of the user access) of the UE from the instance of the first virtual machine to the instance of the second virtual machine
(Lee: Fig. 7 and para. [0107-0118] and para. [0109] application launcher 711 may hand over control authority to the application manager 721 operating in the Android framework of the second virtual machine 720. Para. [0118] the application launcher 711 of the first virtual machine 710 hands the control right over to the application manager 721 of the second virtual machine 720, and as in the case of data, the movement of the control right or information between virtual machines may be performed, and para. [0129] first virtual machine in response to the identification of the user access. In operation 905, the electronic device (or the processor 120 of FIG. 1 ) may set the control authority for the application or the data to the authentication manager of the second virtual machine through the hypervisor) 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 Lee in the method of Krasilnikov. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so for concurrently executing a plurality of operating systems in an electronic device (e.g., a host device). The hypervisor may be implemented in software, hardware, and/or a combination of software and hardware. The hypervisor may be a solution for managing a virtual machine (Lee: para. [0067-0068]), and electronic device may implement security functions that require a space independent from the host operating system (host OS), such as biometric authentication and encryption, that may be implemented in a trusted application, as the virtual machine. (Lee: para. [0074])
Regarding claim 2, Krasilnikov and Lee teach the method of claim 1, wherein the launching the instance of the second virtual machine is further based on a base virtual machine image (machine image) comprising the updated version of the at least one user application. (Krasilnikov: para. [0031] hardware virtualization services 110 receive a launch request including one or more parameters. One such parameter is an indication of a type of virtual machine to launch. Virtual machine types typically define various resource amounts and/or levels to be provided to the virtual machine from the underlying host's physical hardware resources. Other parameters can include an identification of the software environment for the virtual machine (e.g., an identification of a guest operating system) or an identification of a machine image—typically a snapshot of a virtual machine, including various pre-loaded software—from which to launch the virtual machine. Para. [0032] hardware virtualization services 110 can identify a host with sufficient resources to launch the requested virtual machine and then cause or otherwise direct an agent (e.g., a hypervisor, VMM) on the identified host to configure and launch the virtual machine using a particular machine image (whether specified in the request or associated with the identified software environment))
Regarding claim 3, Krasilnikov and Lee teach the method of claim 2, further comprising:
building the base virtual machine image based on a virtual machine image of the first virtual machine and the application patch.
(Krasilnikov: para. [0116] VM 1058-1 can remain executing while VMM 1054 launches VM 1058-2 with an updated version of the application. Thus, rather than terminate VM 1058-1 to free capacity for the launch of VM 1058-2, the time associated with the launch of VM 1058-2, including the time to transfer the machine image 1056)
Regarding claim 5, Krasilnikov and Lee teach the method of claim 2, further comprising:
launching, by the application of the mobile edge computing system, based on the base virtual machine image, (Krasilnikov: para. [0031] hardware virtualization services 110 receive a launch request including one or more parameters. One such parameter is an indication of a type of virtual machine to launch. Virtual machine types typically define various resource amounts and/or levels to be provided to the virtual machine from the underlying host's physical hardware resources. Other parameters can include an identification of the software environment for the virtual machine (e.g., an identification of a guest operating system) or an identification of a machine image—typically a snapshot of a virtual machine, including various pre-loaded software—from which to launch the virtual machine. Para. [0032] hardware virtualization services 110 can identify a host with sufficient resources to launch the requested virtual machine and then cause or otherwise direct an agent (e.g., a hypervisor, VMM) on the identified host to configure and launch the virtual machine using a particular machine image (whether specified in the request or associated with the identified software environment))
an instance of a third virtual machine (Krasilnikov: para. [0091] resource-sharing virtual machines such as VMs 158 and VMs 168, the launch of additional resource-sharing VMs using the same resource allocation is possible using the techniques described herein resulting in resource-sharing groups of two or more virtual machines) to host at least the updated version of the at least one user application (Krasilnikov: para. [0116] For example, the VM 1058-1 can remain executing while VMM 1054 launches VM 1058-2 with an updated version of the application. Thus, rather than terminate VM 1058-1 to free capacity for the launch of VM 1058-2, the time associated with the launch of VM 1058-2, including the time to transfer the machine image 1056, can elapse while VM 1058-1 remains active. Once the VMM 1054 has launched the VM 1058-2, the VMM 1054 can terminate the VM 1058-1) for another UE served by the serving cell site of the UE (Krasilnikov: para. [0091] users of the provider network 100 to provision and manage virtualized computing environments such as virtual machines).
Regarding claim 9, Krasilnikov and Lee teach the method of claim 1, further comprising: deleting (terminate VM 1058-1), by the application of the mobile edge computing system, the instance of the first virtual machine hosting the at least one user application for the UE; and routing (launch of VM 1058-2), by the application of the mobile edge computing system in response to deleting the instance of the first virtual machine, the second user interface traffic of the UE to the instance of the second virtual machine. (Krasilnikov: para. [0116] For example, the VM 1058-1 can remain executing while VMM 1054 launches VM 1058-2 with an updated version of the application. Thus, rather than terminate VM 1058-1 to free capacity for the launch of VM 1058-2, the time associated with the launch of VM 1058-2, including the time to transfer the machine image 1056, can elapse while VM 1058-1 remains active. Once the VMM 1054 has launched the VM 1058-2, the VMM 1054 can terminate the VM 1058-1)
Regarding claim 10, Krasilnikov and Lee teach the method of claim 1, Krasilnikov does not explicitly teach: further comprising: launching, by the application of the mobile edge computing system, based on a user configuration of the UE, the instance of the first virtual machine to host the at least one user application for the UE, wherein the launching the instance of the second virtual machine to host the updated version of the at least one user application for the UE is further based on the user configuration of the UE.
However, Lee from the same or similar fields of endeavor teaches the use of: launching, by the application of the mobile edge computing system, based on a user configuration (control right) of the UE, the instance of the first virtual machine to host the at least one user application for the UE, wherein the launching the instance of the second virtual machine to host the updated version of the at least one user application for the UE is further based on the user configuration of the UE (Lee: Fig. 7 and para. [0107-0118] and para. [0109] application launcher 711 may hand over control authority to the application manager 721 operating in the Android framework of the second virtual machine 720. Para. [0118] the application launcher 711 of the first virtual machine 710 hands the control right over to the application manager 721 of the second virtual machine 720, and as in the case of data, the movement of the control right or information between virtual machines may be performed, and para. [0129] first virtual machine in response to the identification of the user access. In operation 905, the electronic device (or the processor 120 of FIG. 1 ) may set the control authority for the application or the data to the authentication manager of the second virtual machine through the hypervisor) 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 Lee in the method of Krasilnikov. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so for concurrently executing a plurality of operating systems in an electronic device (e.g., a host device). The hypervisor may be implemented in software, hardware, and/or a combination of software and hardware. The hypervisor may be a solution for managing a virtual machine (Lee: para. [0067-0068]), and electronic device may implement security functions that require a space independent from the host operating system (host OS), such as biometric authentication and encryption, that may be implemented in a trusted application, as the virtual machine. (Lee: para. [0074])
Regarding claim 11, Krasilnikov and Lee teach the method of claim 1, Krasilnikov does not explicitly teaches: wherein the UE comprises a wearable compute device.
However, Lee from the same or similar fields of endeavor teaches the use of: wherein the UE comprises a wearable compute device. (Lee: para. [0051] electronic devices may include, for example, a portable communication device (e.g., a smartphone), a computer device, a portable multimedia device, a portable medical device, a camera, a wearable device) 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 Lee in the method of Krasilnikov. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so for concurrently executing a plurality of operating systems in an electronic device (e.g., a host device). The hypervisor may be implemented in software, hardware, and/or a combination of software and hardware. The hypervisor may be a solution for managing a virtual machine (Lee: para. [0067-0068]), and electronic device may implement security functions that require a space independent from the host operating system (host OS), such as biometric authentication and encryption, that may be implemented in a trusted application, as the virtual machine. (Lee: para. [0074])
Regarding claims 21 – 23, 27 and 28, Krasilnikov and Lee teach a communication system to update an application software providing real- time remote computation for a user equipment (UE), wherein the communication system comprises a mobile edge computing system, wherein the mobile edge computing system comprises: one or more servers at a serving cell site of the UE; memory configured to store instructions; and a processor coupled to the memory and configured to execute the instructions to cause the mobile edge computing system to perform acts comprising: (Krasilnikov: Summary, Para. [0109 & 0116 & 0017] VM 1058-2 with an updated version of the application. Para. [0134] computer system 1400 can act as a host electronic device, includes processor 1410A,B, N. and para. [0135] system memory 1420 can be one example of a computer-accessible medium configured to store program instructions and data) and Krasilnikov and Lee teach all the limitations as discussed in the rejection of claims 1 – 3 and 9 – 10, and therefore apparatus claims 21 – 23, 27 and 28 are rejected using the same rationales.
Regarding claim 29, Krasilnikov and Lee teach a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing instructions, wherein a communication system to update an application software providing real-time remote computation for a user equipment (UE) comprises a mobile edge computing system, wherein the mobile edge computing system comprises: one or more servers at a serving cell site of the UE; the non-transitory computer-readable medium; and a processor coupled to the non-transitory computer-readable medium and configured to execute the instructions to cause the mobile edge computing system to perform acts comprising: (Krasilnikov: Summary, Para. [0109 & 0116 & 0017] VM 1058-2 with an updated version of the application. Para. [0134] computer system 1400 can act as a host electronic device, includes processor 1410A,B, N. and para. [0135] system memory 1420 can be one example of a computer-accessible medium configured to store program instructions and data) and Krasilnikov and Lee teach all the limitations as discussed in the rejection of claim 1, and therefore apparatus claim 29 is rejected using the same rationales.
Claim(s) 4 and 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Krasilnikov and Lee as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of White et al. US20240394031A1, hereinafter White.
Regarding claim 4, Krasilnikov and Lee teach the method of claim 2, Krasilnikov and Lee do not explicitly teach: wherein the application patch is a common application patch for a plurality of UEs located in a specific geographical region or associated with a specific cell site.
White from the same or similar fields of endeavor teaches: wherein the application patch is a common application patch for a plurality of UEs located in a specific geographical region or associated with a specific cell site. (White: para. [0025] network and configuration data, and other information can be specific to a particular target computing environment where an update is to be deployed. The target computing environment can be a data center, a portion of a data center, a region, or any logical or geographic zone comprising computing resources) 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 White in the method of Krasilnikov and Lee. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so for MEC is a type of edge computing that uses cellular networks and 5G and enables a data center to extend cloud services to local deployments using a distributed architecture that provide federated options for local and remote data and control management. MEC architectures may be implemented at cellular base stations or other edge nodes and enable operators to host content closer to the edge of the network, delivering high-bandwidth, low-latency applications to end users. For example, the cloud provider's footprint may be co-located at a carrier site (e.g., carrier data center), allowing for the edge infrastructure and applications to run closer to the end user via the 5G network (White: para. [0019]).
Regarding claim 24, Krasilnikov, Lee and White teach all the limitations as discussed in the rejection of claim 4, and therefore apparatus claim 24 is rejected using the same rationales.
Claim(s) 6 – 8 and 25 – 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Krasilnikov and Lee as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Ghanbarinejad et al. US 20240414763 A1, hereinafter Ghanbarinejad.
Regarding claim 6, Krasilnikov and Lee teach the method of claim 2, wherein the receiving the application patch comprises: receiving, by the application of the mobile edge computing system, the application patch. (Krasilnikov: para. [0107] network manager 814 receives a switch signal. The switch signal typically originates from an external entity such as another customer-owned application, the hardware virtualization service, a health monitoring service, etc., and may be routed through another local entity such as a VMM. Regardless of its origin, the switch signal changes a “backup” or “shadow” VM into the primary VM. In this example, the switch signal causes the network manager 814 to change the attachment of VNI 822 from VM 812-1 to 812-2, as indicated at circle (3). Para. [0116] For example, the VM 1058-1 can remain executing while VMM 1054 launches VM 1058-2 with an updated version of the application. Para. [0079] identified host computer system is part of an edge location (or MEC))
Krasilnikov and Lee do not explicitly teach: receiving via a backhaul link.
Ghanbarinejad from the same or similar fields of endeavor teaches: receiving via a backhaul link (Ghanbarinejad: para. [0080] and FIG. 2B an IAB system 200. The core network 202 is connected to an IAB donor 204 of an IAB system 200 through a backhaul link 203, which is typically wired). 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 Ghanbarinejad in the method of Krasilnikov and Lee. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so for support multi-hop wireless self-backhauling to enable a flexible extension of range and coverage area (Ghanbarinejad: para. [0041-0054]).
Regarding claim 7, Krasilnikov and Lee teach the method of claim 1, wherein the receiving the application patch comprises:
receiving, by the application of the mobile edge computing system from another cell site via a line-of-sight (LOS) link, at least a portion of the application patch. (Krasilnikov: para. [0107] network manager 814 receives a switch signal. The switch signal typically originates from an external entity such as another customer-owned application, the hardware virtualization service, a health monitoring service, etc., and may be routed through another local entity such as a VMM. Regardless of its origin, the switch signal changes a “backup” or “shadow” VM into the primary VM. In this example, the switch signal causes the network manager 814 to change the attachment of VNI 822 from VM 812-1 to 812-2, as indicated at circle (3). Para. [0116] For example, the VM 1058-1 can remain executing while VMM 1054 launches VM 1058-2 with an updated version of the application. Para. [0079] identified host computer system is part of an edge location (or MEC))
Krasilnikov and Lee do not explicitly teach: receiving via a line-of-sight (LOS) link.
Ghanbarinejad from the same or similar fields of endeavor teaches: receiving via a line-of-sight (LOS) link (Ghanbarinejad: para. [0042] and FIG. 2B operate with line of sight (“LOS”)). 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 Ghanbarinejad in the method of Krasilnikov and Lee. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so for support multi-hop wireless self-backhauling to enable a flexible extension of range and coverage area (Ghanbarinejad: para. [0041-0054]).
Regarding claim 8, Krasilnikov and Lee teach the method of claim 7, wherein the receiving the application patch from the other cell site coupled to the mobile edge computing system. (Krasilnikov: para. [0107] network manager 814 receives a switch signal. The switch signal typically originates from an external entity such as another customer-owned application, the hardware virtualization service, a health monitoring service, etc., and may be routed through another local entity such as a VMM. Regardless of its origin, the switch signal changes a “backup” or “shadow” VM into the primary VM. In this example, the switch signal causes the network manager 814 to change the attachment of VNI 822 from VM 812-1 to 812-2, as indicated at circle (3). Para. [0116] For example, the VM 1058-1 can remain executing while VMM 1054 launches VM 1058-2 with an updated version of the application. Para. [0079] identified host computer system is part of an edge location (or MEC))
Krasilnikov and Lee do not explicitly teach: receiving via the LOS link is further in response to a fault at a backhaul link.
Ghanbarinejad from the same or similar fields of endeavor teaches: receiving via the LOS link is further in response to a fault at a backhaul link (Ghanbarinejad: para. [0042] and FIG. 2B backhauling deployment when optical or dedicated wireless backhaul is unavailable or inconvenient. Such backhauling can take advantage from the currently developed NR IAB, where some nodes serve both backhaul and access. In this use case, devices operate with line of sight (“LOS”)). 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 Ghanbarinejad in the method of Krasilnikov and Lee. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so for support multi-hop wireless self-backhauling to enable a flexible extension of range and coverage area (Ghanbarinejad: para. [0041-0054]).
Regarding claims 25-26, Krasilnikov, Lee and Ghanbarinejad teach all the limitations as discussed in the rejection of claims 6-7, and therefore apparatus claims 25-26 are rejected using the same rationales.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please also see PTO-892.
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
Prosecution Insights