DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-16 are pending.
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 Objections
Claims 1-3 are objected to because of the following informalities: the formula for claim 1 should be the formula from claim 2, the formula for claim 2 should be the formula from claim 3, the formula for claim 3 should be the formula from claim 1. See claims 9, 10 and 11 for reference. Appropriate correction is required.
Applicant is advised that should claim 11 be found allowable, claim 12 will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate thereof. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
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.
Claim(s) 1-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jonsson et al. (US 2022/0182883 A1) in view of Grinshpun et al. (US 2016/0135076 A1).
With respect to claim 1, Jonsson discloses: a method (i.e., computerized method implemented on a processor and memory for executing instructions, Jonsson, ¶0008) for optimizing midhaul flow control between a control unit (CU) and a distributed unit (DU) of an Open Radio Access Network (O-RAN) (i.e., flow control between CU and DU; keeping the buffer level appropriate in Jonsson, ¶0008, ¶0013), comprising:
computing, by the DU, desired data rate (DDR) for each data radio bearer (DRB) (i.e., indicating how much data can be sent with desired data rate per bearer in Jonsson, ¶0009-0010); and
sending, by the DU, the DDR every time when desired buffer size (DBS) is sent from DU to CU-user plane (CU-UP), along with Downlink Data Delivery Status (DDDS) (i.e., DDDS message includes desired buffer size and desired data rate; appropriate buffering avoids underfill and latency in Jonsson, ¶0008-0009);
wherein the DU computes DDR for a DRB (i.e., corresponding node, CN, calculates the DDR in Jonsson, ¶0070).
Jonsson discloses provides a formula with correction factor, K, which can be applied to DBS and DDR (¶0048-0050; ¶0070). Jonsson do(es) not explicitly disclose the following. Grinshpun, in order to reducing throughput by a configurable factor (¶0148), discloses: as follows:
DDR=TBS (MCS″, prb″, rank)*(number of slots in 1 sec)*(beta)*(beta_drb)
(i.e., modulation and coding schema (MCS) defines how many bits may be packed into Physical Resource Blocks (PRBs); resulting throughput can be modified by a configurable factor in Grinshpun, ¶0018, ¶0148),
with TBS being the transport block size computation (i.e., number of bits packed by scheduler into a PRB in Grinshpun, ¶0142), and
wherein one of: prb’’=max(PRBmax / #UE s , PRB avg, 1) (i.e., total number of PRBs per second, ¶0083; a number of active bearers, ¶0105-0107; average number of PRBs, ¶0133 in Grinshpun, ¶0083, ¶0105-0107, ¶0133)
wherein current MCS is an instantaneous current value of MCS at a current time instant t (i.e., scheduler determines MCS using CQI in Grinshpun, ¶0018),
avgMCScurrent is current weighted average MCS at a current time instant t (i.e., average MCS reported by scheduler in Grinshpun, ¶0142),
MCSmax is the maximum possible MCS (i.e., configuration range of 0 to 28 for MCS in Grinshpun, ¶0063), and
MCS_Step is a correction factor for the current MCS and the average MCScurrent (i.e., average channel conditions include average MCS and scheduler determining current MCS in Grinshpun, ¶0018, ¶0142), and
MCS_Step is one of positive or negative depending on channel quality indicator (CQI) consistency. (i.e., MCS is computed based on CQI values in Grinshpun, ¶0018).
Based on Jonsson in view of Grinshpun, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of prior art according to known mathematical operations to arrive at the claimed formula for the purpose of calculating desired data rate, because the prior art disclosed or suggested each element, performed the same function in the combination, and the resulting formula would have yielded nothing more than predictable results.
Based on Jonsson in view of Grinshpun, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings of Grinshpun to improve upon those of Jonsson in order to reducing throughput by a configurable factor.
With respect to claim 2, Jonsson discloses provides a formula with correction factor, K, which can be applied to DBS and DDR (¶0048-0050; ¶0070). Jonsson do(es) not explicitly disclose the following. Grinshpun, in order to reducing throughput by a configurable factor (¶0148), discloses: the method of claim 1, wherein for
b) MCS″=min {(average MCS(current)+MCS_step), MCSmax}, current weighted average MCS at a current time instant t
(i.e., average MCS; and applying a moving average window in Grinshpun, ¶0060, ¶0142),
avgMCScurrent, of a user equipment (UE) is computed as follows:
PNG
media_image1.png
200
400
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(i.e., scheduler determining MCS from CQI and PRB allocation in Grinshpun, ¶0018),
wherein alpha is between 0 and 1 (i.e., smoothing as a statistical average and noise reduction filtering in Grinshpun, ¶0135), and
avgMCSprevious is a weighted average of MCS at previous time instant t-1 (i.e., sliding window suggests previous averages taken in Grinshpun, ¶0060).
Based on Jonsson in view of Grinshpun, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of prior art according to known mathematical operations to arrive at the claimed formula for the purpose of calculating desired data rate, because the prior art disclosed or suggested each element, performed the same function in the combination, and the resulting formula would have yielded nothing more than predictable results.
Based on Jonsson in view of Grinshpun, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings of Grinshpun to improve upon those of Jonsson in order to reducing throughput by a configurable factor.
With respect to claim 3, Jonsson discloses provides a formula with correction factor, K, which can be applied to DBS and DDR (¶0048-0050; ¶0070). Jonsson do(es) not explicitly disclose the following. Grinshpun, in order to reducing throughput by a configurable factor (¶0148), discloses: the method of claim 1,
wherein: avgMCS current = avgMCS previous * ( 1 - alpha ) + current MCS * alpha (i.e., average MCS; and applying a moving average window in Grinshpun, ¶0060, ¶0142),
PRB_avg is the average number of physical resource blocks (PRBs) allocated to UE counting all downlink (DL) slots (i.e., transmission time interval data including number of allocated PRBs in Grinshpun, ¶0078),
#UEs is the number of active UEs in the cell (i.e., a number of UEs suggested by classifying all active bearers in Grinshpun, ¶0099), and
PRBmax is the maximum number of possible PRBs in the cell (i.e., a total number of system PRBs per second in Grinshpun, ¶0083).
Based on Jonsson in view of Grinshpun, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of prior art according to known mathematical operations to arrive at the claimed formula for the purpose of calculating desired data rate, because the prior art disclosed or suggested each element, performed the same function in the combination, and the resulting formula would have yielded nothing more than predictable results.
Based on Jonsson in view of Grinshpun, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings of Grinshpun to improve upon those of Jonsson in order to reducing throughput by a configurable factor.
With respect to claim 4, Jonsson discloses provides a formula with correction factor, K, which can be applied to DBS and DDR (¶0048-0050; ¶0070). Jonsson do(es) not explicitly disclose the following. Grinshpun, in order to reducing throughput by a configurable factor (¶0148), discloses: 4. The method of claim 1, wherein:
PNG
media_image2.png
200
400
media_image2.png
Greyscale
(i.e., fair share methodology with weighted sum over all bearers in Grinshpun, ¶0149),
PRB_avg is the average number of physical resource blocks (PRBs) allocated to UE counting all downlink (DL) slots (i.e., transmission time interval data including number of allocated PRBs in Grinshpun, ¶0078),
#UEs is the number of active UEs in the cell (i.e., a number of UEs suggested by classifying all active bearers in Grinshpun, ¶0099), and
PRBmax is the maximum number of possible PRBs in the cell (i.e., a total number of system PRBs per second in Grinshpun, ¶0083).
Based on Jonsson in view of Grinshpun, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of prior art according to known mathematical operations to arrive at the claimed formula for the purpose of calculating desired data rate, because the prior art disclosed or suggested each element, performed the same function in the combination, and the resulting formula would have yielded nothing more than predictable results.
Based on Jonsson in view of Grinshpun, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings of Grinshpun to improve upon those of Jonsson in order to reducing throughput by a configurable factor.
With respect to claim 5, Jonsson discloses indicating how much data the DU can send based on feedback that includes highest transmitted sequence number and highest successfully delivered sequence number; adjusting flow control based on sequence numbers (¶0009, ¶0147). Jonsson do(es) not explicitly disclose the following. Grinshpun, in order to mitigate packet drops/delays by adjusting throughput capacity (¶0058), discloses: the method of claim 1, further comprising: reducing, by the DU, the computed DDR for a DRB by a reduction value δ which depends on an amount of loss of downlink (DL) new radio user-plane sequence numbers (NR-UP SNs) in a specified time interval over a midhaul connection between the CU and the DU (i.e., congestion mitigation by adjusting amount of data sent based on IP packet drops, suggesting sequence number issues in Grinshpun, ¶0058).
Based on Jonsson in view of Grinshpun, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings of Grinshpun to improve upon those of Jonsson in order to mitigate packet drops/delays by adjusting throughput capacity.
With respect to claim 6, Jonsson discloses indicating how much data the DU can send based on feedback that includes highest transmitted sequence number and highest successfully delivered sequence number; adjusting flow control based on sequence numbers (¶0009, ¶0147). Jonsson do(es) not explicitly disclose the following. Grinshpun, in order to mitigate packet drops/delays by adjusting throughput capacity (¶0058), discloses: the method of claim 5, further comprising: at least one of: i) sending, by the DU to the CU-UP, a flag along with the DDDS to indicate the computed DDR has been reduced to reflect the loss of DL NR-UP SNs; ii) sending, by the DU to the CU-UP, the DDDS after the DU discovers that the amount of loss of DL NR-UP SNs in the specified time interval over the midhaul connection between the CU and DU is above a specified threshold; and iii) adjusting, by the DU, a frequency of sending the DDDS, depending on whether packet loss ratio estimate at DU based on the amount of loss of DL NR-UP SNs in the specified time interval over the midhaul connection between the CU and DU is above a specified threshold. (i.e., (ii) congestion leads to packet drops/delays therefore data should be adjusted to actual throughput capacity in Grinshpun, ¶0027, ¶0058).
Based on Jonsson in view of Grinshpun, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings of Grinshpun to improve upon those of Jonsson in order to mitigate packet drops/delays by adjusting throughput capacity.
With respect to claim 7, Jonsson discloses indicating how much data the DU can send based on feedback that includes highest transmitted sequence number and highest successfully delivered sequence number; adjusting flow control based on sequence numbers (¶0009, ¶0147). Jonsson do(es) not explicitly disclose the following. Grinshpun, in order to mitigate packet drops/delays by adjusting throughput capacity (¶0058), discloses: the method of claim 1, further comprising: reducing, by the CU-UP, the received DDR for a DRB by a reduction value ε which depends on an amount of loss of downlink (DL) new radio user-plane sequence numbers (NR-UP SNs) in a specified time interval over a midhaul connection between the CU and the DU. (i.e., adjusting sent data according to quality metrics; a useful ratio calculated by useful PRBs in Grinshpun, ¶0058, ¶0087, ¶0097).
Based on Jonsson in view of Grinshpun, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings of Grinshpun to improve upon those of Jonsson in order to mitigate packet drops/delays by adjusting throughput capacity.
With respect to claim 8, Jonsson discloses indicating how much data the DU can send based on feedback that includes highest transmitted sequence number and highest successfully delivered sequence number; adjusting flow control based on sequence numbers (¶0009, ¶0147). Jonsson do(es) not explicitly disclose the following. Grinshpun, in order to mitigate packet drops/delays by adjusting throughput capacity (¶0058), discloses: the method of claim 1, further comprising:
computing, by the CU-UP, an effective DDR for a DRB based on the received DDR and information derived from the DDDS regarding a proportion of lost DL NR-UP SNs relative to transmitted NR-UP SNs in a specified time interval over a midhaul connection between the CU and the DU (i.e., adjusting sent data according to quality metrics; a useful ratio calculated by useful PRBs in Grinshpun, ¶0058, ¶0087, ¶0097),
wherein the effective DDR is the minimum value between i) the received DDR and ii) the proportion of lost DL NR-UP SNs relative to transmitted NR-UP SNs in the specified time interval (i.e., determining useful ratio of PRBs, identifying received and lost/retransmitted PRBs in Grinshpun, ¶0058, ¶0087, ¶0097).
Based on Jonsson in view of Grinshpun, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings of Grinshpun to improve upon those of Jonsson in order to mitigate packet drops/delays by adjusting throughput capacity.
With respect to claim 9, the limitation(s) of claim 9 are similar to those of claim(s) 1. Therefore, claim 9 is rejected with the same reasoning as claim(s) 1.
With respect to claim 10, the limitation(s) of claim 10 are similar to those of claim(s) 2. Therefore, claim 10 is rejected with the same reasoning as claim(s) 2.
With respect to claim 11, the limitation(s) of claim 11 are similar to those of claim(s) 3. Therefore, claim 11 is rejected with the same reasoning as claim(s) 3.
With respect to claim 12, the limitation(s) of claim 12 are similar to those of claim(s) 4. Therefore, claim 12 is rejected with the same reasoning as claim(s) 4.
With respect to claim 13, the limitation(s) of claim 13 are similar to those of claim(s) 5. Therefore, claim 13 is rejected with the same reasoning as claim(s) 5.
With respect to claim 14, the limitation(s) of claim 14 are similar to those of claim(s) 6. Therefore, claim 14 is rejected with the same reasoning as claim(s) 6.
With respect to claim 15, the limitation(s) of claim 15 are similar to those of claim(s) 7. Therefore, claim 15 is rejected with the same reasoning as claim(s) 7.
With respect to claim 16, the limitation(s) of claim 16 are similar to those of claim(s) 8. Therefore, claim 16 is rejected with the same reasoning as claim(s) 8.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHERMAN L LIN whose telephone number is (571)270-7446. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM (Eastern).
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, Joon Hwang can be reached at 571-272-4036. 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.
Sherman Lin
3/7/2026
/S. L./Examiner, Art Unit 2447
/JOON H HWANG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2447