DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Application
2 This instant Office Action is in response to Original Filing filed on 10/17/2024.
3. This Office Action is made Non-Final.
4. Claims 1-9 are pending.
5. Claims 1-9 are objected to for allowable subject matter.
Information Disclosure Statement
6. Prior to the examination of this application, no information disclosure statement (IDS) was filed or submitted.
Specification
7. The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it is less than 50 words in length. The abstract in an application filed under 35 U.S.C. 111 should be between 50-150 words in length. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Claim Objections
8. Claims 1-9 are objected to because of the following informalities: They include abbreviations that needs to be spelled out at the first occurrence of the abbreviation. Claim 1 recites the acronyms “DU,” “RU,” “IQ,” “FHM;” and Claim 2 recites acronym “DMA” and Claim 9 recites acronyms “DU,” “RU,” “IQ,” “FHM.” See MPEP § 608.01(m). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
9. Claims 1-8 are interpreted under 35 U.S.C 112 (f). This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation are: “that receives” in claims 1-8.
Claim 1 recites “a downlink DU that receives and converts” and “an FHM unit that receives and transmits” and “an uplink DU that acquires”
In addition, dependent claims 2-8 are included in the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) claim interpretation.
A review of the specification shows that the following: Fig. 4 and Sections [0039-0040, 0072-0075] appears to be the corresponding structure described in the specification for the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph limitation. Therefore, the claims will not be rejected under 35 USC 112b as being indefinite. It is suggested that the claims be amended to recite a Processor or known structure.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Allowable Subject Matter
1. Claims 1-9 would be allowed if the current claim objections, objection to abstract, and 35 USC 112f are corrected.
As to Independent Claims 1 and 9, the limitations recited in the claims along with its dependent claims would be allowed because in combination with their dependent claims the closest prior arts, Sriram et al. US 20250365614 discloses respectively in Sections [0044] Each O-RAN donor unit serves as an interface between each served O-RAN DU and receives downlink base station signals from, and outputs uplink base station signals to, each O-RAN DU; performs conversion processing; downlink and uplink fronthaul data generated and formatted in accordance with the O-RAN baseband fronthaul interface, where the user-plane data comprises frequency-domain baseband IQ data; downlink data received from each O-RAN DU to the multiple RUs and performing combining or summing of the uplink data received from the RUs; [0051] DAS for communicating time-domain baseband data (for example, by re-sampling, synchronizing, combining, separating, gain adjusting, etc. the CPRI baseband IQ data, and formatting the resulting baseband IQ data into packets), and communicates the resulting packets of downlink transport data to the various RUs; [0138] The resulting frequency-domain IQ samples are compressed and resulting frequency-domain IQ samples communicated in one or more O-RAN user-plane messages; The corresponding O-RAN user-plane messages for each antenna port by converting the corresponding time-domain IQ samples; each RU uses the O-RAN user-plane data to generate corresponding RF signals associated with that RU; the O-RAN user-plane messages can be communicated to front haul multiplexer (FHM) that forwards or replicates messages;
However, Sriram does not explicitly state transmits each of the first compressed IQ data to RU corresponding to the RU group identification information, receives each second compressed IQ data from the at least one RU, decompresses each of the second compressed IQ data, generates each second original IQ data, merges each of the second original IQ data, generates merged IQ data, and transmits a merged message including the merged IQ data to an uplink DU; and the uplink DU that acquires the merged message from the FHM unit, generates uplink data from the merged IQ data, and transmits the uplink data to the network function.
The prior art, Jeong et al. US 20260046692 discloses respectively in Sections [0066] The communication unit include circuitry and performs functions for transmitting and receiving a signal through a radio channel, and up-converts a baseband signal into an RF signal and thereafter transmits it through an antenna; [0100] A structure of a fronthaul interface between DU-RUs and the structure of the fronthaul structure may be realized in a Fronthaul-Multiplexing (FHM) mode; the FHM mode refer, to a structure in which a plurality of O-RUs are multiplexed to one O-DU; [0113] In order for the FHM to combine the IQ data, the FHM identify IQ data corresponding to the same radio resource element from information elements; the FHM retrieve compression information, e.g., iSample and qSample, and calculate the combined iSample and qSample by individually adding each of iSample and qSample; [0123] In order for O-RU to combine the IQ data, the O-RU identify IQ data corresponding to the same radio resource element from information elements; [0124] The combined process of iSample and/or qSample-may be fixed to the closest value which may be expressed in a compression format used for the combined IQ data.
However, Jeong does not explicitly state transmits each of the first compressed IQ data to RU corresponding to the RU group identification information, receives each second compressed IQ data from the at least one RU, decompresses each of the second compressed IQ data, generates each second original IQ data, merges each of the second original IQ data, generates merged IQ data, and transmits a merged message including the merged IQ data to an uplink DU; and the uplink DU that acquires the merged message from the FHM unit, generates uplink data from the merged IQ data, and transmits the uplink data to the network function.
Therefore, Sriram in view of Jeong do not render obvious in combination with other limitations in the independent claims the claim elements An apparatus for controlling wireless equipment, comprising: a downlink DU that receives downlink data and RU group identification
information from a network function, converts the downlink data into first IQ data, compresses the first IQ data, generates first compressed IQ data, and transmits a first message including the first compressed IQ data and the RU group identification information to an FHM unit; the FHM unit that receives the first message from the downlink DU, transmits each of the first compressed IQ data to at least one RU corresponding to the RU group identification information, receives each second compressed IQ data from the at least one RU, decompresses each of the second compressed IQ data, generates each second original IQ data, merges each of the second original IQ data, generates merged IQ data, and transmits a merged message including the merged IQ data to an uplink DU; and the uplink DU that acquires the merged message from the FHM unit, generates uplink data from the merged IQ data, and transmits the uplink data to the network function.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure, see PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAEL M ULYSSE whose telephone number is (571)272-1228. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5pm.
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, Chirag G. Shah can be reached at (571)272-3144. 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.
July 31, 2026
/JAEL M ULYSSE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2477
Prosecution Insights