DETAILED ACTION
Notice of 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 .
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.
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged. In particular, this Application is the bypass application of an international application, which claims a domestic benefit to a US provisional application field on 4 Jan 2022.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement, submitted on 2 Jul 2024, is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
The Reply alleges “Lagrange fails to disclose or suggest that a notification is transmitted in response to the determination that a failure has occurred in all the links.” Reply, 5. The Reply reaches this conclusion because Lagrange’s “processing is repeated as many times as the number of links in which a failure has occurred, and the notifications are transmitted as many times as the number of links in which a failure has occurred.” Ibid. The argument appears to be premised on Lagrange’s iterative process for determining a link’s condition precludes it from teaching a notification of a failure on all links. An iterative process would still detect a failure, and notify others of the failure, on “all links.” Additionally, the claimed invention does not preclude an embodiment in which one link constitutes “all links.” In other words, if only one link fails, that failure constitutes “a radio link failure at all links.” Moreover, even if the claimed invention were asserted to require two or more links, Lagrange teaches its backhaul radio link failure indication message being “sent over all or part of its egress BH links.” Lagrange, ¶277 (emphasis added). In another embodiment similar to the described invention, when an IAB-MT is informed of BH RLF, it transmits the BH RLF Indication message “over the egress BH radio links associated with the collocated IAB-DU.” Lagrange, ¶327. The Examiner contends this failure message of Lagrange is sent over all links between the IAB-MT and IAB-DU. As a result, the claimed invention remains anticipated by Lagrange given the breadth of how “all links” may be interpreted.
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.
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Lagrange (US 20240056940).
Regarding claims 1-5, Lagrange teaches a communication control method in a cellular communication system comprising:
a relay node (Lagrange, figure 7 – detecting IAB node 705 or figure 4 – IAB node 402); and
a child node of the relay node (Lagrange, figure 7 – IAB nodes 707 or 708 or figure 4 – IAB node 403 and 404),
wherein the relay node, comprising transceiver circuitry and processing circuitry, a non-transitory computer storage medium, or a chipset (Lagrange, figure 11 – components of communication station 1100), configures the relay node to execute the method comprising:
detecting, by a Mobile Termination (MT) of the relay node, a radio link failure at all links providing an F1-U protocol on a BAP (Backhaul Adaptation Protocol) (Lagrange, ¶¶12, 223, 230 – IAB-MT of IAB node 705 detects BH RLF recovery failure or radio link deficiency [see Response to Arguments for further explanation]);
determining that local rerouting cannot be executed (Lagrange, figure 8 and ¶¶257, 261, 263 - detecting IAB node buffers BAP packets until deficient backhaul links are recovered, when the detecting IAB node decide not to perform local re-routing of the incoming BAP packets); and
transmitting, by a Distributed Unit (DU) of the relay node (Lagrange, ¶12 – collocated IAB-DU sends BH RLF indication message on all of its egress links), a failure detection notification to a child node (Lagrange, ¶¶172, 282 and figure 8, steps 808 or 814 - BH RLF indication 600 is transmitted from detecting IAB node to child IAB node), in response to detecting a radio link failure at the all links providing the F1-U protocol on the BAP and determining that the local rerouting cannot be executed. Lagrange, ¶¶112, 115 (F1-U interface between IAB nodes); Lagrange, figure 8 and ¶¶257, 261, 263 (detecting IAB node buffers BAP packets until deficient backhaul links are recovered, when the detecting IAB node decide not to perform local re-routing of the incoming BAP packets).
Regarding claim 6, Lagrange also teaches wherein the relay node has dual connectivity with a first parent node and a second parent node, and the all backhaul links include a first backhaul link connected with the first parent node and a second backhaul link connected with the second parent node. Lagrange, ¶361 (in some embodiments, an IAB node may have dual connectivity with two parents); Lagrange, figure 7 (in such an embodiment, relay node 705 would have dual connectivity with parent nodes 702 and 703 via links 725 and 735, respectively).
Conclusion
Other pertinent art includes figure 8 of Lu, which teaches a node, which has dual connectivity to its two parent nodes, detecting a failure on both (i.e. “all”) links with its parent nodes. Lu, ¶75.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENJAMIN S LAMONT whose telephone number is (571) 270-7514 and email address is benjamin.lamont@uspto.gov (see MPEP 502.03 for using EFS or mail, but not email to authorize electronic communications). The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7am to 3pm EST.
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, Huy Vu can be reached at 571-272-3155. 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.
/Benjamin Lamont/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2461
Prosecution Insights