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 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) 1-8, 12-14, 16, 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Barbieri (11,943,045) in view of Mitra (2025/0374079)
Regarding claim 1, Barbieri comprises a device (orchestration 350 or 45) comprising: a processing system including a processor, and a memory that stores executable instructions that when executed (note Col 8; 50-55, OS running on a server discloses a processor), facilitate performance of operations, the operations comprising: storing a first set of data related to a pool of radio units (RU) offered by a first group of vendors; storing a second set of data relating to a pool of base band units (BBU) offered by a second group of vendors (note Co;; 37;40-Col. 38;15, where the network allows for customers in the radio network); wherein the RU and the BBU are connected via a fronthaul interface (Figures 2-4, use of RRUs and BBUs as well as fronthaul monitoring Figure 7, 707 or Figure 8, 833). Barbieri Discloses maintaining a third set of data relating to performance of a plurality of different combinations between the RU and BBU pools; and at least based on the third set of data, selecting an RU among the pool of RUs and a BBU among the pool of BBUs and generating a target combination. (Col 24; 40-60 and Col. 25;25-62 regarding requirement). Barbieri also discloses a target combination meeting a determined service level requirements (col 32; 25-50 and Col 35; 35-36;25). Barbieri doesn’t explicitly state that the network is part of an open access radio network . However, Mitra teaches in an analogous art, using a determined service and performance requirement of an UE (Figure 6, CQI of a UE connection and traffic demand requests, also Figure 9) in an O-RAN network, para 130. Mitra also shows that DU (equivalent of BBU) and RUs in the O-Ran are part of the optimization process (para 132-134). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include O-RAN networks as well as UE requirements in order to optimize the communications links according to measured data.
Regarding claim 8, Barbieri discloses a non-transitory machine readable medium (orchestration 350 as well as 450, Col 8;10-60) , comprising executable instructions that when executed by a processing system including a processor (note Col 8; 50-55, OS running on a server discloses a processor), Barbieri discloses a plurality of RUs and BBUs (Figures 2-4, RU and BBU) and wherein performance requirements are utilized to facilitate performance of operations by generating a target combination of RUs and BBUs amongst the plurality of RUs and BBUs in the network. (Figures 7 and 8, assigning groups of RRU and BBU based on fronthaul quality 707 or 833). Also see, Col 24; 40-60 and Col. 25;25-62 regarding requirement). Barbieri also discloses a target combination meeting a determined service level requirements (col 32; 25-50 and Col 35; 35-36;25). Barbieri doesn’t explicitly state that the network is part of an open access radio network . However, Mitra teaches in an analogous art, using a determined service and performance requirement of an UE (Figure 6, CQI of a UE connection and traffic demand requests, also Figure 9) in an O-RAN network, para 130. Mitra also shows that DU (equivalent of BBU) and RUs in the O-Ran are part of the optimization process (para 132-134). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include O-RAN networks as well as UE requirements in order to optimize the communications links according to measured data.
Regarding claim 14, Barbieri discloses a method comprising: maintaining by a processing system including a processor (orchestration 350 as well as 450, Col 8;10-60) and note Col 8; 50-55, OS running on a server discloses a processor), Barbieri discloses a plurality of RUs and BBUs (Figures 2-4, RU and BBU) and wherein performance requirements are utilized to facilitate performance of operations by generating a target combination of mixing and matching RUs and BBUs amongst the plurality of RUs and BBUs in the network. (Figures 7 and 8, assigning groups of RRU and BBU based on fronthaul quality 707 or 833). Also see, Col 24; 40-60 and Col. 25;25-62 regarding requirements for selection). Barbieri also discloses a target combination meeting a determined service level requirements (col 32; 25-50 and Col 35; 35-36;25). Note that moving RUs and BBUs based on the clusters is a mix/match as claimed. Barbieri doesn’t explicitly state that the network is part of an open access radio network However, Mitra teaches in an analogous art, using a determined service and performance requirement of an UE (Figure 6, CQI of a UE connection and traffic demand requests, also Figure 9) in an O-RAN network, para 130. Mitra also shows that DU (equivalent of BBU) and RUs in the O-Ran are part of the optimization process (para 132-134). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include O-RAN networks as well as UE requirements in order to optimize the communications links according to measured data.
Regarding claims 2-4, 13, 19, Barbieri discloses wherein the one or more BBUs among the pool of BBUs is arranged at a respective cell site (Figure 4, 460 – Col; 21;50-22;6), arranged in a RAN hub (stored in data center 202 or 310) or arranged at a cloud RAN as one or more virtual machines (Figure 2 – virtual machines 206 are also BBUs).
Regarding claims 5, 7, and 16, Barbieri further discloses that the selecting is based on multiple parameters, such as performance of the target combination (fronthaul quality, Col; 24-3-60), or an available coverage of the target combination (Col; 23;55-60, geographic location for coverage). Barbieri discloses that the system generates the target combination that meet these metrics of a user equipment (Col; 23-55-60, location of UE as well as Col. 27;5-20, handover of a user equipment). Mitra also teaches that energy consumption can be used as a requirement (Figure 5, 506) and that the user equipment metrics are used as well (para 6). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include energy metrics in order to optimize the power requirements of the system for communications.
Regarding claim 6, Mitra teaches determining service and performance requirements for the UE (Figure 6, CQI of a UE connection and traffic demand requests, also Figure 9) in an O-RAN network, para 130.
Regarding claim 12, Barbieri further discloses maintaining the performance data by the processing system arranged at a cell site (Figure 4, orchestration module 450 maintains performance data from the RRU, Col. 23;38-62) and the generating the target combination with the processing system arranged at the cell site (Barbieri, Figure 4, combination of BBU and RRU are a RAN, which is a cell site, also Mitra, para 148- processor 716 and data store 718 perform policies and defined configuration management criteria).
Claim(s) 9-10, 12, 15, 17-18, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Barbieri and Mitra as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Veluchamy (WO 2025/075727).
Regarding claims 9-10, 15, 17-18, the combination of Barbieri and Mitra suggests the use of vendors for the selection of RUs and BBUs (Col. 37;40-Col. 38;15 – RaaS is software as a service, and the BBU may be run by AWS or Google as well as RAN RaaS) but doesn’t explicitly disclose that they are vendors. However, Veluchamy in an analogous art, teaches that an O-RAN network includes vendors (para 3-5). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include vendors in the virtual machines in order to allow for different companies to provide services.
Regarding claims 11 and 20, the combination of Barbieri and Mitra suggests the use of vendors for the selection of RUs and BBUs (Col. 37;40-Col. 38;15 – RaaS is software as a service, and the BBU may be run by AWS or Google as well as RAN RaaS) but doesn’t explicitly disclose that they are vendors. Mitra further discloses the use of a service management and orchestration (SMO) platform in the ORAN (SMO 302) where the SMO maintains the data relating to the performance metrics as well as being connected to the plurality of RUs (316) via the BBUs (CU/DU in Mitra, 312, 314). However, Veluchamy in an analogous art, teaches that an O-RAN network includes vendors (para 3-5). Veluchamy also teaches the SMO uses performance metrics to affect performance of the RAN (Figure 3b, SMO triggering energy savings based on observed data for the ORAN). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include vendors in the virtual machines in order to allow for different companies to provide services.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Huang (2018/0063847) discloses RU and BBU pools with an orchestrator.
Raghavachari (2022/0264437) discloses RAN performance measurement and adjustment.
Ahmed (2022/0345896) discloses O-RAN fronthaul management with power constraints.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM GEORGE TROST IV whose telephone number is (571)272-7872. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7a-4p, Fridays 7a-2p.
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, Charles Appiah can be reached at 571-272-7904. 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.
WILLIAM GEORGE TROST IV
Primary Patent Examiner
Art Unit 2641
/WILLIAM G TROST IV/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2641
Prosecution Insights