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 .
Preliminary Amendment
The present Office Action is based upon the original patent application filed on 02/15/2024 as modified by the preliminary amendment filed on 02/15/2024. Claims 1-4 and 7 are now pending in the present application.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement submitted on 02/15/2024 has been considered by the Examiner and made of record in the application file.
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) (1) as being anticipated by Applicant provided NPL document Ericsson (3GPP TSG RAN WG3 Meeting #97b, 09-13, October 2017, R3-173959, hereinafter Ericsson).
Regarding claim 1, Ericsson discloses a method of a gNB Distributed Unit (gNB-DU) (see e.g., gNB DU of Fig. 2, page 2 ) apparatus, the method comprising:
communicating with a User Equipment (see e.g. “the logical DU may be implemented in an internally disaggregated fashion…to allow the DU to request a new association for UE common signaling”, section 2.2 lines 15-16 and/or “allow one or more SCTP associations for F1AP procedures using UE associated signaling…”, section 2.2, proposal 4 and/or “to allow the DU to indicate it intends to use a different association…by allowing it to answer a UE context setup request…”, section 2.2, proposal 5); and
communicating with a plurality of a gNB Centralized Unit Control Plane (gNB-CU-CP) apparatuses (see e.g., “logical CU-CP may be composed of multiple CU-CP processing instances, for example there could be one primary CU-CP processing instance and one (or more) backup CU-CP processing instances (see example in Fig. 2), in case the multiple network elements constituting the logical CU-CP are used to realize a hot standby”, section 2.1, page 2, line 1-4 and/or “…the standard should allow to establish multipole SCTP association between a DU and a (logical) CU (CU-CP)”, section2.1, page 2, proposal 1).
Regarding claim 7, Ericsson discloses a gNB Distributed Unit (gNB-DU) apparatus (see e.g., gNB DU of Fig. 2, page 2 ), comprising one or more memories storing instructions (see e.g., gNB DU of Fig. 2, with inherent memory, page 2 ) and one or more processors (see e.g., gNB DU of Fig. 2, with inherent processor, page 2 ) configured to execute the instructions to: the method comprising:
communicate with a User Equipment (see e.g. “the logical DU may be implemented in an internally disaggregated fashion…to allow the DU to request a new association for UE common signaling”, section 2.2 lines 15-16 and/or “allow one or more SCTP associations for F1AP procedures using UE associated signaling…”, section 2.2, proposal 4 and/or “to allow the DU to indicate it intends to use a different association…by allowing it to answer a UE context setup request…”, section 2.2, proposal 5); and
communicate with a plurality of a gNB Centralized Unit Control Plane (gNB-CU-CP) apparatuses (see e.g., “logical CU-CP may be composed of multiple CU-CP processing instances, for example there could be one primary CU-CP processing instance and one (or more) backup CU-CP processing instances (see example in Fig. 2), in case the multiple network elements constituting the logical CU-CP are used to realize a hot standby”, section 2.1, page 2, line 1-4 and/or “…the standard should allow to establish multipole SCTP association between a DU and a (logical) CU (CU-CP)”, section2.1, page 2, proposal 1).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) (1) as being anticipated by WALLDEEN et al. (US 2023/0269641 A1, hereinafter Walldeen).
Regarding Claim 4, Walldeen discloses, a method of a gNB Centralized Unit User Plane (gNB-CU-UP) apparatus (see e.g., “Each node comprises a signaling control unit, which in this case is a gNB-CU-CP i.e. a control plane control unit of the node and a number of user data control units in the form of one or more gNB-CU-UP…”, Fig. 1, [0071] and/or “first signaling control unit SCU 16 and three user data control units UDCU 24-28…”, Fig. 1, [0071]), the method comprising:
detecting failure of a first gNB Centralized Unit Control Plane (gNB-CU-CP) apparatus of a plurality of gNB-CU-CP apparatuses (see e.g., “If the first signaling control unit 16 acting as a primary signaling control unit becomes faulty, step 122”, Fig. 19, [0114] and/or “Redundancy is achieved through the provision of two signaling control units, such as two gNB-CU- CPs”, [0069]); and
communicating with a second gNB-CU-CP apparatus of the plurality of gNB-CU- CP apparatuses in a case of detecting the failure of the first gNB-CU-CP apparatus (see e.g., “then the redundancy control element 68 of the first local control unit 18 may instruct the second signaling control unit 32 to become a primary signaling control unit, step 124”, Fig. 19, [0114] and/or “The first local control unit 18 may now communicate with the second signaling control unit 32 for implementing redundancy measures for the first cell CA making the secondary signaling control unit into a backup signaling control unit for the primary signaling control unit, step 90…”, Fig. 9, [0089] and/or “If the second signaling control unit 32 is acting as a primary signaling control unit after the first signaling control unit has become faulty, step 130, the first signaling control unit may again become functional and resume its role as a primary signaling control unit, step 132…The handover handling block 80 may additionally hand over one or more connections to the restored primary signaling control unit, step 136, which may be done upon receiving the instruction from the local control unit 18”, Fig. 20, [0117] and/or “Redundancy is achieved through the provision of two signaling control units, such as two gNB-CU- CPs”, [0069]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Ericsson , in view of Applicant provided document, WALLDEEN et al. (US 2023/0269641 A1, hereinafter Walldeen).
Regarding Claim 2, Ericsson fails to explicitly disclose receiving system information from a first gNB-CU-CP apparatus of the plurality of gNB-CU-CP apparatuses; and receiving the system information from a second gNB-CU-CP apparatus of the plurality of gNB-CU-CP apparatuses.
In the same field of endeavor, Walldeen discloses receiving system information from a first gNB-CU-CP apparatus of the plurality of gNB-CU-CP apparatuses (see e.g., “The paging handling element 64 of the local control unit 18 may then select which page it is to used for paging a wireless communication device…the paging handling element 64 selects the page Pp from the primary signaling control unit”, Fig. 16, [0112] and/or “If then the first signaling control unit 16 again becomes functional…the redundancy control element 68 of the local control unit 16 may instruct the second signaling control unit 32 to resume being secondary signaling control unit…which may then be reflected in the system information broadcast to the wireless communication devices”, [0116]; Examiner’s note: providing information on changes from secondary signaling control unit into primary signaling control unit upon failure of first signaling control unit and/or resuming the secondary signaling control unit by the secondary signaling unit upon first signaling unit becoming functional reflected in the system information for broadcasting to wireless device via distributed unit corresponding to system information received by the distributed unit); and
receiving the system information from a second gNB-CU-CP apparatus of the plurality of gNB-CU-CP apparatuses (see e.g., “If it is determined that a primary signaling control unit is down, it can thereby be decided to change the secondary signaling control unit into a primary signaling control unit, which may then be reflected in the system information broadcast to the wireless communication devices.”, [0116] and/or “The pages and are thus received by the local control unit 18 from both the primary and the secondary control unit…control unit 18 may then select which page it is to used for paging a wireless communication device”, Fig. 16, [0112]: Examiner’s note: providing information on changes from secondary signaling control unit into primary signaling control unit upon failure of first signaling control unit and/or resuming the secondary signaling control unit by the secondary signaling unit upon first signaling unit becoming functional reflected in the system information for broadcasting to wireless device via distributed unit corresponding to system information received by the distributed unit).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine teachings of Ericsson with Walldeen, in order to provide signaling redundancy (please see Walldeen, para. [0076]).
Regarding Claim 3, Ericsson fails to explicitly disclose detecting failure of a first gNB-CU-CP apparatus of the plurality of gNB-CU-CP apparatuses; and communicating with a second gNB-CU-CP apparatus of the plurality of gNB-CU- CP apparatuses in a case of detecting the failure of the first gNB-CU-CP apparatus.
In the same field of endeavor, Walldeen discloses detecting failure of a first gNB-CU-CP apparatus of the plurality of gNB-CU-CP apparatuses (see e.g., “If the first signaling control unit 16 acting as a primary signaling control unit becomes faulty, step 122”, Fig. 19, [0114]); and
communicating with a second gNB-CU-CP apparatus of the plurality of gNB-CU- CP apparatuses in a case of detecting the failure of the first gNB-CU-CP apparatus (see e.g., “then the redundancy control element 68 of the first local control unit 18 may instruct the second signaling control unit 32 to become a primary signaling control unit, step 124”, Fig. 19, [0114] and/or “The first local control unit 18 may now communicate with the second signaling control unit 32 for implementing redundancy measures for the first cell CA making the secondary signaling control unit into a backup signaling control unit for the primary signaling control unit, step 90…”, Fig. 9, [0089] and/or “If the second signaling control unit 32 is acting as a primary signaling control unit after the first signaling control unit has become faulty, step 130, the first signaling control unit may again become functional and resume its role as a primary signaling control unit, step 132…The handover handling block 80 may additionally hand over one or more connections to the restored primary signaling control unit, step 136, which may be done upon receiving the instruction from the local control unit 18”, Fig. 20, [0117]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine teachings of Ericsson with Walldeen, in order to provide signaling redundancy (please see Walldeen, para. [0076]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FARID SEYEDVOSOGHI whose telephone number is (571)272-9679. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:00-5:00.
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, Anthony S. Addy can be reached at 5712727795. 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.
/FARID SEYEDVOSOGHI/Examiner, Art Unit 2645