DETAILED ACTION
This Office action is in response to the application filed on27 December 2023.
Claims 1-20 are presented for examination.
Drawings
Figure 1 should be designated by a legend such as --Prior Art-- because only that which is old is illustrated in the Background section. See MPEP § 608.02(g). Corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The replacement sheet(s) should be labeled “Replacement Sheet” in the page header (as per 37 CFR 1.84(c)) so as not to obstruct any portion of the drawing figures. If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GARYANTES et al. US 2024/0214927 A1 in view of KANG et al. US 2024/0224305 A1.
As to claim 1, GARYANTES discloses substantially the invention as claimed, including an apparatus (the SMO, NRT RIC 315, nRT RIC 325) comprising:
a higher-layer network function (in light of instant Figure 2A , element 201A, SMO framework 305, Non-Real Time RIC 315, Near-Real Time RIC 325) of an open radio access network (O-RAN) (Figures 3, [70]-[71]), the higher-layer network function configured to:
monitor (receive), for implementing a dynamical antenna array reconfiguration ([52]), at least one network parameter (parameters, [78]) via an O1 interface (Figure 3, and associated paragraphs, the Non-RT RIC 315 may monitor long-term trends and patterns for performance and employ AI/ML models to perform corrective actions through the SMO Framework 305 (such as reconfiguration via O1 interface) or via creation of RAN management policies (such as A1 interface policies); the Non-RT RIC 315 may receive parameters or external enrichment information from external servers…, [78]); and
However, GARYANTES does not explicitly disclose the claimed element of “request, based on the monitored at least one network parameter satisfying a predetermined condition, a distributed unit (O-DU) to reconfigure an antenna array”.
KANG discloses in Figure 2B illustrating an example of the architecture for an O-RAN, Figure 10A illustrating example of a connection between and RIC, an E2 node and a terminal in a RAN network, and Figure 8-15 and associated paragraphs that, “(the RIC 1020) request (controls and identifies), based on the monitored at least one network parameter (the throughput in the SLA required by the operator) satisfying a predetermined condition (a reference value), a distributed unit (O-DU) (the DU 1010) to reconfigure an antenna array (the antenna array 412)”.
KANG suggests that, “[107] The RIC 1020 may control the DU 1010, based on a state (or the KPI) of the service provided through the E2 interface. For example, the RIC 1020 may identify whether a service provided to terminals 1030-1, 1030-2, 1030-3, and 1030-4 satisfy the SLA required by the operator. The RIC 1020 may control the DU 1010 according to identification result. For example, identifying whether the SLA required by the operator is satisfied may be understood as identifying whether throughput of a terminal level is greater than or equal to a reference value. The throughput of the terminal level may be identified based on data volume for a specific time”.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the AI/ML/deep learning art before the effective filing date of the claimed to have modified KANG’s teachings of the RIC’s controlling and identifying the network parameter as in SLA with the teachings of GARYANTES’s, for the purpose of providing the optimal service through all cells/slices supportable the DU 1010 in the antenna configuration/ reconfiguration (KANG, [108]-[109]).
As to claim 2, GARYANTES-KANG, the claimed element of (KANG, “(the RIC 1020) request (controls and identifies), based on the monitored at least one network parameter (the throughput in the SLA required by the operator) satisfying a predetermined condition (a reference value), a radio unit (O-RU) (Figure 8) to reconfigure an antenna array via a management plane Fronthaul (FH M-Plane) (Figure 8, Open fronthaul interface between the DU and O-RU/RU)” for the purpose of for the purpose of providing the optimal service through all cells/slices supportable the DU 1010 in the antenna configuration/ reconfiguration (KANG, [108]-[109]).
Claims 10-11 correspond to the method claims of the apparatus claims 1-2; therefore, they are rejected under the same rationale as in the apparatus claims 1-2 shown above.
As to claim 3, GARYANTES discloses substantially the invention as claimed, including an apparatus (the O-DU 330/402) comprising:
a distributed unit (O-DU) (Figures 3, 4, the DU 330, DU 402), the O-DU configured to:
receive configuration capability information (Figure 4A, capability information element 408) from a radio unit (O-RU) (Figure 4, the RU 404) via management plane (M-Plane) messaging (management plane messaging 422) (Figures 3, 4, and associated paragraphs);
However, GARYANTES does not explicitly disclose the claimed elements of “receive a request to reconfigure an antenna array from a higher-layer network function”;
KANG discloses in Figure 8 illustrating an implementation of E2 node and RIC [94]-[95], Figure 10A illustrating example of a connection between and RIC, an E2 node and a terminal in a RAN network, and Figure 11-15 and associated paragraphs that, “KANG, (the DU 1010) receive a request to reconfigure an antenna array (control information including the resource allocation information, [105]) from a higher-layer network function (the RIC 1020, [105]-[109], [191])”;
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the AI/ML/deep learning art before the effective filing date of the claimed to have modified KANG’s teachings of the RIC’s control information sent to the DU 1010 with the teachings of GARYANTES’s, for the purpose of providing resource allocations to optimize communication service through all cells/slices supportable the DU 1010 in the antenna configuration/ reconfiguration (KANG, [108]-[109]).
GARYANTES-KANG discloses, “based on the configuration capability information from the O-RU (GARYANTES, Figure 4, element 408) and based on the request to reconfigure the antenna array from the higher-layer network function (KANG, Figures 8-15, control information), determine an antenna array configuration supported by the O-RU (GARYANTES, Figure 4 and [96]-[98]); and “activate the supported antenna array configuration via control plane (C-Plane) messaging (GARYANTES, Figure 4 and associated paragraphs, the slot level control plane configuration message 414, [96]-[98])”.
As to claim 4, GARYANTES-KANG discloses, wherein the O-DU is configured to: activate the supported antenna array configuration via the management plane (M-Plane) messaging (the management plane message 422) (GARYANTES, Figure 4 and associated paragraphs, [96]-[98]).
As to claim 5, GARYANTES-KANG discloses, wherein the supported antenna array configuration is at least one of a configuration for implementing a TRx Control (Figures 4B, 4C and associated paragraphs) and a configuration for implementing at least one of sleep mode (Figure 4A and associated paragraphs), wherein the configuration for implementing the at least one of sleep mode comprising at least one of a configuration for implementing an Advanced Sleep Mode and Deep Sleep (GARYANTES, Figure 4 and associated paragraphs, [96]-[98]).
Claims 12-14 correspond to the method claims of the apparatus claims 3-5; therefore, they are rejected under the same rationale as in the apparatus claims 3-5 shown above.
As to claim 6, GARYANTES discloses an apparatus (the O-RU 340/404) comprising:
a radio unit (O-RU) (Figures 3, 4, the RU 340/404), the O-RU configured to:
send, to a distributed unit (O-DU) (Figures 3, 4, the DU 330/402), configuration capability information (Figure 4A, the capability information element 408) via management plane (M-Plane) messaging (the management plane message 422) (Figures 4, and associated paragraphs);
receive, from the O-DU, an antenna array configuration (Figures 4, antenna array 412) supported by the O-RU via control plane (C-Plane) messaging (Figure 4A, the slot level control plane configuration message element 414), wherein the supported antenna array configuration is based on the configuration capability information of the O-RU (Figures 4A-4D, and associated paragraphs) and GARYANTES discloses O-RU communicate directly with the higher-layer function, e.g., SMO 305, NRT RIC 315, nRT RIC 325 in Figure 3.
However, GARYANTES does not explicitly disclose the claimed element of “the O-RU receive a request to reconfigure the antenna array from the higher-layer network function”;
KANG discloses in Figure 8 illustrating an implementation of E2 node and RIC [94]-[95], Figure 10A illustrating example of a connection between and RIC, an E2 node and a terminal in a RAN network, and Figure 11-15 and associated paragraphs that, “KANG, (the O-RU/RU) optionally receive a request to reconfigure an antenna array (control information including the resource allocation information 1510) via E2 interface from a higher-layer network function (the Near-RT RIC, [102]-[109], [191])”;
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the AI/ML/deep learning art before the effective filing date of the claimed to have modified KANG’s teachings of the RIC’s control information sent to the DU 1010 with the teachings of GARYANTES’s, for the purpose of providing resource allocations to optimize communication service through all cells/slices supportable the DU 1010 in the antenna configuration/ reconfiguration (KANG, [108]-[109]);
and
“based on the supported antenna array configuration for the O-RU, reconfigure the antenna array configuration of the O-RU 404” (GARYANTES, Figure 4 and [96]-[98]).
As to claim 7, GARYANTES-KANG discloses, wherein the O-RU is further configured to: receive, from the higher-layer network function, the request to reconfigure the antenna array via a management plane Fronthaul (FH M-Plane) Interface; and based on the request to reconfigure the antenna array from the higher-layer network function, reconfigure the antenna array configuration of the O-RU (KANG, (the O-RU/RU) optionally receive a request to reconfigure an antenna array (control information including the resource allocation information 1510) via E2 interface from a higher-layer network function (the Near-RT RIC, [102]-[109], [191]) for the purpose of for the purpose of providing the optimal service through all cells/slices supportable the DU and RU in the antenna configuration/reconfiguration (KANG, [108]-[109]).
As to claim 8, GARYANTES discloses, wherein the O-RU is further configured to: receive, from the O-DU, an antenna array configuration supported by the O-RU via management plane (M-Plane) messaging, wherein the supported antenna array configuration is based on the configuration capability information of the O-RU and a request to reconfigure an antenna array from a higher-layer network function (KANG, (the O-RU/RU) optionally receive a request to reconfigure an antenna array (control information including the resource allocation information 1510) via E2 interface from a higher-layer network function (the Near-RT RIC, [102]-[109], [191]) for the purpose of for the purpose of providing the optimal service through all cells/slices supportable the DU 1010 in the antenna configuration/ reconfiguration (KANG, [108]-[109]).
As to claim 9, ARYANTES-KANG discloses, wherein the O-RU is further configured to: notify (to report) a configuration change from one antenna array configuration to another antenna array configuration via management plane (M-Plane) messaging (the management plane message 422) (GARYANTES, Figure 4 and associated paragraphs).
Claims 15-19 correspond to the method claims of the apparatus claims 6-8, 14, 9; therefore, they are rejected under the same rationale as in the apparatus claims 6-8, 14, 9 shown above.
As to claim 20, GARYANTES-KANG discloses, wherein the method further comprises: upon initializing, sending, by the O-RU, configuration capability information (capability information element 408) via management plane (M-Plane) messaging (the management plane message 422) (GARYANTES, Figure 4 and associated paragraphs).
The prior art cited in this Office action is: GARYANTES et al. US 2024/0214927 A1; KANG et al. US 2024/0224305 A1.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HAI V NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-3901. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6:00AM -3:30PM.
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, Kevin Pan can be reached at 571-272-7855. 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.
/HAI V NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2649