DETAILED ACTION
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 11/13/ 2025 has been entered.
Claims 1-42, 44, 51, and 58 were cancelled. Claims 43, 45-50, 52-57, and 59-64 are pending in the application for examination, of which, claims 43, 50, 57 were amended and claims 63-64 were newly added.
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 9/16/25 is compliant with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived 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(a) are summarized as follows:
Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or non-obviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims under 35 U.S.C. 103(a), the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned at the time any inventions covered therein were made absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and invention dates of each claim that was not commonly owned at the time a later invention was made in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 103(c) and potential 35 U.S.C. 102(e), (f) or (g) prior art under 35 U.S.C. 103(a).
Claims 43, 45, 50, 54, 57 and 60 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu et al. (US 20190364137 A1), hereinafter referred to as Liu. Regarding claim 43:
Liu discloses a method comprising:
determining a plurality of packets having extended reality {XR} data traffic are associated with one another (obtaining a plurality of packets of different attributes, e.g., importance or non-importance, provided in video transmission service [0186, 0061], which includes video data packets with first data packet as I-frame [0132, lines 1-4, and 0070]);
determining that a first packet of the plurality of packets is a critical packet (determining I-frame, e.g., first packet, of plurality of packets has important attribute, e.g., critical packet [0140, lines 1-4]); and
generating, for transmission based on determining that the first packet is a critical packet, a status report to indicate a data volume associated with the critical packet (determining that the data packets corresponding to important attribute are to be scheduled {for transmission} and reporting data volume of packets corresponding to important attribute [0166, lines 19-28]).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to report a data volume associated with the critical/ important video packet, wherein the video packet is known to model Augmented Reality, e.g., included in XR, traffic [Bhattacharyya – US 20190253475 A1 [0045]); thus ensuring reliable transmission of critical data packet – while avoiding data packet having an unimportant attribute occupying many network resources [0011].
Regarding claim 45:
Liu discloses all features of claim 43.
Liu further discloses the plurality of packets are associated with one another based on packet association information (data packet of important attribute is scheduled at a high priority in a transmission process, and data packet of unimportant attribute has low priority level in a transmission process [0109-0110]).
Regarding claim 50:
Claim 50 is rejected for substantially same reason as applied to claim 43 above, except that claim 50 is in a non-transitory, computer-readable media format having instructions that, when executed, cause processing circuitry to perform claimed functionalities [0027 in Liu].
Regarding claim 54:
Liu discloses all features of claim 50, and -
Claim 54 is rejected for substantially same reason as applied to claim 45 above, except that claim 54 is in a non-transitory, computer-readable media format.
Regarding claim 57:
Claim 57 is rejected for substantially same reason as applied to claim 43 above, except that claim 57 is in an apparatus claim format, and wherein Liu discloses an apparatus (terminal, element 1 in Fig.9a) comprising: a processing circuitry (processing unit, element 15 in Fig.9a) and interface circuitry (transmission unit/ receiving unit, elements 11, 12 in Fig.9a) coupled with the processing circuitry to enable communication and perform claimed functionalities.
Regarding claim 60:
Liu discloses all features of claim 57, and -
Claim 60 is rejected for substantially same reason as applied to claim 45, except that claim 60 is in a device claim format.
Claims 46-47, 52-53 and 59 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu, as applied to claims 43, 50, and 57 above, respectively. and further in view of Bhattacharyya et al. (20190253475 A1), hereinafter referred to as Bhatta.
Regarding claim 46:
Liu discloses all features of claim 43, and -
Liu does not disclose wherein the plurality of packets correspond to a same frame; which is known in the art and commonly applied in communications field for data communications, as taught in Bhatta’s disclosure as below.
Bhatta, from the same field of endeavor, discloses the plurality of packets correspond to a same frame (a plurality of segments, e.g., packets, are included in a frame of streaming media, [0054]).
Therefore, it would be obvious by one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to determine packets corresponding to a same frame; thus being able to treat packets as critical or non-critical in a quick manner – Bhatta [0086].
Regarding claim 47:
Liu in view of Bhatta discloses all features of claim 46, and -
Liu further discloses the frame is a video frame ([0005]).
Regarding claims 52-53:
Liu discloses all features of claim 50, and -
Claims 52-53 are rejected for substantially same reason as applied to claims 46-47 above, respectively, except that claims 52-53 are in a non-transitory, computer-readable media format.
Regarding claim 59:
Liu discloses all features of claim 57, and -
Claim 59 is rejected for substantially same reason as applied to claim 46, except that claim 59 is in a device claim format.
Claims 48-49, 55-56 and 61-62 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu, as applied to claims 43, 50, and 57 above, respectively, and further in view of Suh in US Pub. No.2012/0250690 A1, hereinafter referred to as Suh.
Regarding claim 48:
Liu discloses all features of claim 45, and -
Liu does not disclose receiving, at an access stratum layer, the packet association information from an upper layer; which is known in the art and commonly applied in communications field for data communications, as suggested in Suh’s disclosure as below.
Suh, from the same field of endeavor, discloses receiving, at an access stratum layer, the packet association information from an upper layer (receiving, at lower protocol layer, e.g., access stratum layer, information on importance of packet, from upper layer protocol layer, [0047]).
Therefore, it would be obvious by one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to receive, at a lower layer, e.g., an access stratum layer, the packet association information from an upper layer; thus allowing the lower layer/ access stratum layer, to further process packets according to their specific transmission characteristics.
Regarding claim 49:
Liu discloses all features of claim 45.
Liu discloses each data packet has an attribute used to indicate the importance of data packet [Abstract].
However, Liu does not disclose the attribute or the packet association information includes a flag set in each of the plurality of packets; which is known in the art and commonly applied in communications field for data communications, as suggested in Suh’s disclosure as below.
Suh, from the same field of endeavor, discloses the packet association information includes a flag set in each of the plurality of packets (importance and priority information of packets are included in form of label or tag, [0062]).
Therefore, it would be obvious by one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a tag indicating the level of importance or priority in each packet; thus enabling a device to adaptively process packets based on priority value or label/ tag value – Suh [0092].
Regarding claims 55-56:
Liu discloses all features of claim 54, and -
Claims 55-56 are rejected for substantially same reason as applied to claims 48-49 above, respectively, except that claims 55-56 are in a non-transitory, computer-readable media format.
Regarding claims 61-62:
Liu discloses all features of claim 60, and -
Claims 61-62 are rejected for substantially same reason as applied to claims 48-49 above, respectively, except that claims 61-62 are in a device claim format.
Claims 63-64 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu, as applied to claim 43 above, and further in view of Lee et al. (20210377786 A1), hereinafter referred to as Lee.
Regarding claim 63:
Liu discloses all features of claim 43.
Liu does not disclose generating a scheduling request for transmission to request dedicated scheduling for the critical packet; which is well known in the art and commonly applied in communications field for data communications, as taught in Lee’s disclosure as below.
Lee, from the same field of endeavor, discloses generating a scheduling request for transmission to request dedicated scheduling for the critical packet (triggering scheduling request {SR} to request uplink shared channel {UL-SCH} resources for transmission [0202] wherein resources are scheduled based on priority [0117] and wherein higher priority logical channel data, e.g., critical packet, are transmitted first [0143]).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to request dedicated scheduling for the critical packet; thus enhancing critical packets transmission while reducing or minimizing their data transmission latency -- Lee [0101].
Regarding claim 64:
Liu discloses all features of claim 43.
Liu further discloses transmitting data packets of important attributes using logical channels [0014 and 0152].
Liu does not disclose the status report is associated with logical channel group {LCG}; which is known in the art and commonly applied in communications field for data communications, as taught in Lee’s disclosure as below.
Lee, from the same field of endeavor, discloses the status report is associated with logical channel group {LCG} (buffer status report {BSR} should include buffer status information for data of a specific logical channel belonging to a LCG [0149] wherein BSR is performed in BSR procedure used to provide information about UL data volume [0108]).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to transmit the status report associated with LCG; thus facilitating the network to schedule data/ traffic by considering buffer size information – Lee [0149].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Cho (US-20180070237 A1 [0030, 0198, 0246],
Jo (US-20220183026 A1 [0164];
are cited to show that reporting {XR} data volume associated with critical video packets for the scheduler to assign resources required for transmission; thus ensuring reliable transmission of critical data packet – while avoiding data packet having an unimportant attribute occupying many network resources [0011].
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CAMQUYEN THAI whose telephone number is (571)270-7245. The examiner can normally be reached on 9:00am-5:00pm. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and videoconferencing 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, Ayman A. Abaza be reached on 571-270-0422. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/C.Q.T./
/AYMAN A ABAZA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2465