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 Status
This office action is in response to the communication(s) filed on 05/31/2024.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are currently presenting for examination.
Claim(s) 1 and 12 is/are independent claim(s).
Claim(s) 1-2, 5-13, and 16-20 is/are rejected.
Claim(s) 3-4, and 14-15 is/are objected to.
This action has been made NON-FINAL.
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 5, 7-13, 16, and 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US_20210258866_A1_Chou (hereinafter, “Chou-66”) in view of WO_2020242987_A1_Chou (hereinafter, “Chou-87”).
Regarding claim 1, Chou-66 teaches a system to provide wireless service to user equipment (UEs) (Chou-66 figures 1A, 2), the system comprising: a scalable cloud environment (Chou-66 figure 5, paragraph 106, O-cloud) configured to execute a set of multi-cell virtual network functions (VNFs) (Chou-66 paragraph 106, “…The 0-RAN NFs 504 can be virtualized network functions (VNFs)…) configured to natively perform baseband processing (Chou-66 paragraph 56, virtual baseband unit) necessary to provide wireless service to the UEs using multiple cells using one or more resources (Chou-66 figures 1A, 2); wherein the set of multi-cell VNFs is configured to: determine respective demand information for each cell that is indicative of a respective demand for the one or more resources in connection with serving that cell (Chou-66 paragraph 164, “…It then uses the AI/ML model to predict the traffic demand patterns of 5G networks in different times and locations for each network slice…”); determine a respective allocation of the one or more resources for each cell based on the demand information for the multiple cells (Chou-66 paragraph 164, “…automatically re-allocates the network resources ahead of the network issues surfaced.…”);
Chou-66 does not teach for each cell: perform scheduling of respective UEs for that cell with an objective of ensuring that a respective demand for the one or more resources in connection with serving that cell does not exceed a capacity associated with the respective allocation of the one or more resources for that cell; and perform baseband processing necessary to provide respective wireless service via that cell in accordance with the scheduling for that cell.
Chou-87 from the same or similar fields of endeavor teaches: perform scheduling of respective UEs for that cell with an objective of ensuring that a respective demand for the one or more resources in connection with serving that cell does not exceed a capacity associated with the respective allocation of the one or more resources for that cell (Chou-87 paragraphs 152, “…The near-real-time RIC may analyze the measurements. In some embodiments, the analysis may include comparing measured LBO performance against performance targets (e.g., received from the SMOFW) to determine if (and/or when) a cell has been loaded (e.g., over-loaded) and may require load balancing. In some embodiments, when a cell requires load balancing, the near-real-time RIC may request an O-DU and/or an O-CU to update UE selection parameters, cell selection parameters, and/or handover parameters.…”, paragraph 161, “…an LBO management and control function may set a target of a distributed LBO (D-LBO) function and may activate the D-LBO function to balance cell load among base stations (e.g., such as gNB(s) 604 and/or base stations 102) automatically. In some embodiments, the LBO management and control function may initiate changes of virtualized resources…” That is, resources will be re-allocated when a cell has been loaded (over its capacity), and the UE selection parameters, cell selection parameters, and/or handover parameters will be updated); and perform baseband processing necessary to provide respective wireless service via that cell in accordance with the scheduling for that cell (Chou-87 paragraph 338, “The aforementioned circuitry and/or control logic of the baseband circuitry 17110 may include one or more single or multi-core processors… which when executed by the CPU 17104E (or other baseband processor), is to cause the CPU l 7104E (or other baseband processor) to manage resources of the baseband circuitry 17110, schedule tasks…”).
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the teachings of Chou-87 into Chou-66, since Chou-66 suggests a technique for the VNF allocates resource for cells, and Chou-87 suggests the beneficial way of performing load balancing when a cell has been loaded and initiating changes of virtualized resources thus prevents localized network congestion, and ensures consistent QoS for UE in the analogous art of communication.
Regarding claim 2, Chou-66 and Chou-87 teach the system of claim 1, and Chou-66 further teaches wherein the set of multi-cell VNFs is further configured to: determine if an overload condition exists for any multi-cell VNF included in the set of multi-cell VNFs in connection with performing the baseband processing necessary to provide the respective wireless service via any cell; and for each multi-cell VNF and cell for which an overload condition exists, reduce the respective usage of the one or more resources by that multi-cell VNF in accordance with a portion of the respective demand for the one or more resources allocated for that cell for which the overload condition exists (Chou-87 paragraph 152 and 161, comparing measured LBO performance against performance targets to determine if (and/or when) a cell has been loaded (e.g., over-loaded) and may require load balancing, and balancing cell load among base stations).
Regarding claim 5, Chou-66 and Chou-87 teach the system of claim 1, and Chou-66 further teaches wherein the set of multi-cell VNFs comprises at least one multi-cell VNF that is configured to implement a super scheduler entity; wherein the super scheduler entity is configured to determine the respective demand information for each cell; wherein the super scheduler entity is configured to determine the respective allocation of the one or more resources for each cell based on the demand information for the multiple cells; and wherein the super scheduler entity is configured to, for each of the cells, perform the scheduling of the respective UEs for that cell with the objective of ensuring that the respective demand for the one or more resources in connection with serving that cell does not exceed the respective capacity associated with the allocation of the one or more resources for that cell (Chou-66 paragraph 164, “…It then uses the AI/ML model to predict the traffic demand patterns of 5G networks in different times and locations for each network slice and automatically re-allocates the network resources ahead of the network issues surfaced”).
Regarding claim 7, Chou-66 and Chou-87 teach the system of claim 1, wherein the system comprises at least one remote unit (RU) (Chou-66 figure 6, O-RU), wherein each RU is used to serve at least one of the cells and is communicatively coupled to the scalable cloud environment (Chou-66 figure 5, and paragraph 106, “…The O-RAN NFs 504 can be virtualized network functions (VNFs) such as virtual machines (VMs) or containers, sitting above the O-Cloud 506 and/or Physical Network Functions (PNFs) utilizing customized hardware. All O-RAN NFs 504 are expected to support the O1 interface when interfacing with the SMO framework 502. The O-RAN NFs 504 connect to the NG-Core 508 via the NG interface (which is a 3GPP-defined interface). The Open Fronthaul M-plane interface between the O-RAN Distributed Unit (DU) and the O-RAN Radio Unit (O-RU) 516 supports the O-RU 516 management in the O-RAN hybrid model as specified in [O16]….”), wherein each RU is associated with a respective set of one or more antennas via which downlink radio frequency signals are radiated to at least some of the UEs and via which uplink radio frequency signals transmitted by at least some of the UEs are received (Chou-66 figure 3, paragraphs 92, 96, 227, plurality of antennas).
Regarding claim 8, Chou-66 and Chou-87 teach the system of claim 7, wherein the set of multi-cell VNFs are configured to implement, for each cell, a respective distributed unit (DU) to serve that cell, each DU implements Layer-2 functions and some Layer-1 functions for the respective cell served by that DU (Chou-66 paragraph 110, “…The O-DU 615 is a logical node hosting RLC, MAC, and higher PHY layer entities/elements (High-PHY layers) based on a lower layer functional split…”).; and wherein each RU is configured to implement, for each cell served by that RU, any Layer-1 functions not implemented by the DU for that cell and radio frequency (RF) functions (Chou-66 paragraph 110, “…The O-RU 616 is a logical node hosting lower PHY layer entities/elements (Low-PHY layer) (e.g., FFT/iFFT, PRACH extraction, etc.) and RF processing elements based on a lower layer functional split…”).
Regarding claim 9, Chou-66 and Chou-87 teach the system of claim 1, wherein the respective demand information for each cell comprises information about one or more of: a respective number of active UEs, a respective number of connected UEs, a respective number of scheduled UEs per transmission time interval (TTI), a respective throughput, respective coding rates used, a respective carrier bandwidth, a respective number of constituent carriers used, respective modulation modes used, a respective sub-carrier spacing used, a respective duplexing mode used, a respective slot format used, respective transmission ranks used, a respective number physical resource blocks (PRBs) communicated, a respective bit rate, and a respective number of packets per second (Chou-66 paragraph 166, “Monitoring. For example, the non-RT RIC monitors the radio network(s) by collecting resource usage and performance-related data via the O1 interface. including the following performance measurements that are measured on per NSSI: downlink (DL) physical resource blocks (PRBs) used for data traffic; uplink (UL) PRBs used for data traffic; an average DL user equipment (UE) throughput in a next generation Node-B (gNB) of the O-RAN network; an average UL UE throughput in the gNB; a number of protocol data unit (PDU) sessions requested for setup in the O-RAN network; a number of PDU sessions successfully set up in the O-RAN network; and a number of PDU sessions failed to set up in the O-RAN network”).
Regarding claim 10, Chou-66 and Chou-87 teach the system of claim 1, wherein the respective demand information for each cell is determined, at least in part, by a radio access network (RAN) intelligent controller (RIC) (Chou-66 paragraphs 164-174, RIC).
Regarding claim 11, Chou-66 and Chou-87 teach the system of claim 1, wherein the respective allocation of the one or more resources for each cell is determined, at least in part, by at least one entity not implemented by the set of multi-cell VNFs (Chou-66 figure 8, and paragraph 81, RAN nodes).
Regarding claim 12, Chou-66 and Chou-87 teach the limitations as set forth in claim 1.
Regarding claim 13, Chou-66 and Chou-87 teach the limitations as set forth in claim 2.
Regarding claim 16, Chou-66 and Chou-87 teach the limitations as set forth in claim 5.
Regarding claim 18, Chou-66 and Chou-87 teach the limitations as set forth in claim 7.
Regarding claim 19, Chou-66 and Chou-87 teach the limitations as set forth in claim 8.
Regarding claim 20, Chou-66 and Chou-87 teach the limitations as set forth in claim 9.
Claim(s) 6 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US_20210258866_A1_Chou (hereinafter, “Chou-66”) in view of WO_2020242987_A1_Chou (hereinafter, “Chou-87”) and US_20160127169_A1_Rosa.
Regarding claim 6, Chou-66 and Chou-87 teach the system of claim 1, but do not teach wherein at least one multi-cell VNF included in the set of multi-cell VNFs comprises a task scheduling function that is configured to schedule tasks implemented by that multi-cell VNF with an objective of ensuring that one or more latency requirements are met.
Rosa from the same or similar fields of endeavor teaches: wherein at least one multi-cell VNF included in the set of multi-cell VNFs comprises a task scheduling function that is configured to schedule tasks implemented by that multi-cell VNF with an objective of ensuring that one or more latency requirements are met (Rosa paragraph 59, “…upper MAC VNFs can provide one or more operations associated with, but not limited to, one or MAC scheduling functions operating at a first scheduler rate and lower MAC VNFs can provide one or more operations associated with, but not limited to, one or more MAC scheduling functions operating at a second scheduler rate, in which the second scheduler rate may be faster than the first scheduler rate in order to meet latency requirements imposed for over-the-air communications between a given RF termination point and a given UE…”).
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the teachings of Rosa into Chou-66 and Chou-87, since Chou-66 and Chou-87 suggests a technique for the VNF allocates resource for cells, and Rosa suggests the beneficial way of the VNFs includes MAC scheduling functions for meeting latency requirements thus provide enhanced services to the UE (Rosa paragraph 31) in the analogous art of communication.
Regarding claim 17, Chou-66, Chou-87 and Rosa teach the limitations as set forth in claim 6.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-4 and 14-15 is/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.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
The reference US_20170295409_A1_Simon, teaches Within the data center, the IP data flows are first processed by VNFs in the IP core and then by VNFs in the BC-RAN to construct specific digital waveforms. In particular, the control plane data from the BMX to the regional cloud data center may dictate the VNFs that are applied to the IP data flows for each of the tenants. The digital I/Q digital baseband signal is then transported to the broadcast generic modulator or RRH at the transmitter sites in a SFN on a given channel using concepts of broadcast C-RAN (Simon figures 5 and 8, paragraph 11, 73).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WEIBIN HUANG whose telephone number is (571)270-3695. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:30AM - 6:00PM.
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, Sujoy Kundu can be reached at (571)272-8586. 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.
/W.H/Examiner, Art Unit 2471
/SUJOY K KUNDU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2471
Prosecution Insights