DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Applicant’s RCE filed 1/2/26 is acknowledged.
Claim 1, 11, 15, and 18 have been amended.
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the independent claims (pages 9-15) in a reply filed 1/2/2026 have been considered but are moot because the arguments are based on newly changed limitations in the amendment and new ground of rejections using newly introduced references or a newly introduced portion of an existing reference are applied in the current rejection.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 1/2/26 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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) 1-3, 6-9, 12, 14, 15, 17, 18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yuan et al. US 20210051529 (hereinafter “Yuan”) in view of Li et al. US 20240276244 (hereinafter “Li”) and in further view of Sivakumar US 20080225843 (hereinafter “Sivakumar”)
As to claim 1, 15, and 18 (claim 1 is the method claim for the system and non-transitory machine-readable medium in claim 15 and 18 respectively):
Yuan discloses:
A method, comprising: receiving, from first network equipment by second network equipment comprising a memory and a processor, (FIG. 1 show first and second network, Yuan) (“FIG. 3 illustrates an exemplary configuration of UE 110. Other devices in environment 100, such as eNodeB 120-1, gNodeB 120-2, network devices 145 and 155 and elements in data network 160 may be configured in a similar manner.”, Yuan [0029])
a connection request that comprises an indication of a fall back procedure, wherein the connection request is associated with a user equipment via which a voice communication is scheduled to occur; facilitating, by the second network equipment, control of the voice communication for the user equipment; (“Implementations described herein relate to performing a fallback from, for example, a higher bandwidth connection to a lower bandwidth connection (e.g., from 5G to 4G) in response to a user device receiving or initiating a voice call.”, Yuan [0010])(“ In this example, assume that cell 220 includes gNodeB 120-2 and that gNodeB 120-2 is able to initiate a handover to a base station, such as eNodeB 120-1. Further assume that cell 210 includes eNodeB 120-1 and is able to initiate a handover to gNodeB 120-2.”, Yuan [0027])
after a first determination that the voice communication has completed at the user equipment, determining, by the second network equipment, whether a condition at a third network equipment fails to satisfy a defined condition associated with a data centric application that is executing at the user equipment, that is facilitated by a first network element, and that is distinct from an application on the user equipment for the voice communication, wherein the defined condition is associated with a latency criterion, a throughput criterion, and/or a delay jitter criterion related to the data centric application; (“For example, FIG. 7 illustrates exemplary processing associated with block 680 and determining whether to attempt to reconnect UE 110 to a 5G cell. Referring to FIG. 7, processing may include determining data throughput and/or latency requirements associated with operation of UE 110 (block 710). Continuing with the example above in which UE 110 was executing a AR video game prior to the voice communication session and is still executing the video game application, device monitoring logic 420 in UE 110 may estimate the current and future data throughput and/or latency requirements associated with playing the AR game. For example, device monitoring logic 420 may estimate the future data throughput based on the historical throughput requirements associated with playing the AR game.”, Yuan [0055]) (“If device monitoring logic 420 and/or data throughput monitoring logic 520 determines that the data throughput requirement for UE 110 is not greater than the threshold (block 720—no), UE 110 may continue to operate in a 4G mode (block 730). In this case, the service provider associated with the 4G LTE and 5G networks (e.g., EPC 140 and 5G core network 150) may determine that keeping UE 110 on the 4G LTE network saves network resources and does not adversely impact the user experience. Maintaining the 4G connection may allow the service provider to manage and optimize use of network resources and also reduce possible issues with performing handovers, such as a lost connection, when the 4G LTE network provides UE 110 with adequate service.”, Yuan [0058])
Yuan as described above does not explicitly teach:
delaying, by the second network equipment, a release of the control of the user equipment from the second network equipment to the third network equipment based on a second determination that the condition fails to satisfy the defined condition, wherein the delaying involves initiation of a timer; upon or after expiration of the timer, further delaying, by the second network equipment, the release of the control of the user equipment based on a particular determination that the condition has not changed,
wherein the further delaying involves re-initiation of the timer or initiation of another timer; and upon or after expiration of the re-initiated timer or the another timer, repeating, by the second network equipment, the further delaying until a subsequent determination is made that the data centric application is no longer executing at the user equipment.
However, Li further teaches delaying release of UE from 4G to 5G based on the determination that a condition is not satisfied which includes:
delaying, by the second network equipment, a release of the control of the user equipment from the second network equipment to the third network equipment based on a second determination that the condition fails to satisfy the defined condition, wherein the delaying involves initiation of a timer; upon or after expiration of the timer, further delaying, by the second network equipment, the release of the control of the user equipment based on a particular determination that the condition has not changed, (“Assuming that the data service of UE5 is always good within the execution duration but UE5 fails in fast returning to the 5G system, and UE5 still resides in the 4G system after the execution duration expires, it is considered that the 5G coverage condition is not satisfied, and the 4G base station deletes the fast return measurement task and restores the previously cached measurement tasks.”, Li [0097])(“With regard to the EPS Fallback users, the 4G base station evaluates whether there is ongoing data service during a voice call, and with regard to a user without a data service, RRC release is performed when the voice service ends, so that the user returns to a 5G system through an idle state reselection; with regard to a user having a data service, only a fast return measurement task is executed by stopping other measurement tasks, and a timer is started to control the maximum execution duration of the fast return measurement task. By means of the method, indexes such as the time delay of fast return and the success rate of fast return can be effectively improved.”, Li [0098]) (“In an exemplary embodiment, for a user having a data service, in addition to controlling the execution duration of fast return measurement to prevent a user's off-line problem caused by stopping other measurement tasks, channel condition, interference and other data service perception conditions may be further evaluated for the data service. When the voice call ends or in a process of executing the fast return measurement task, blind redirection operation may be directed triggered for a user whose detection evaluation result is poor. In some exemplary implementations, a channel condition, interference and other data service perception conditions of the data service are detected and evaluated to obtain a detection and evaluation result;”, Li [0084]) (“The channel condition, interference and other data service perception conditions may be detected and evaluated based on, but are not limited to, the following judgment conditions (any judgment condition): a measurement result (including Reference Signal Received Power (RSRP), Reference Signal Received Quality (RSRQ), Signal to Interference & Noise Ratio (SINR), etc.) for a serving cell reported by the user satisfies a specified threshold (corresponding to the described first preset threshold); the interference (including but not limited to uplink SINR, Noise and Interference (NI), Modulation and Coding Scheme (MCS), Channel Quality Information (CQI), Block Error Rate (BLER), etc.) to a user in a serving cell satisfies a specified threshold (corresponding to the described second preset threshold); other data service perception conditions (including but not limited to spectrum efficiency, packet loss rate, time delay, etc.) of the user in the serving cell satisfy a specified threshold (a third preset threshold value).”, Li [0086]) (Examiner’s Note: time delay maps to latency)
Yuan and Li are analogous because they pertain to fallback and fast return procedure.
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include delaying release of UE from 4G to 5G based on the determination that a condition is not satisfied as described in Li into Yuan. By modifying the method to include delaying release of UE from 4G to 5G based on the determination that a condition is not satisfied as taught by Li, the benefits of improved handover process (Yuan [0058] and Li [0098]) are achieved.
The combination of Yuan and Li as described above does not explicitly teach:
wherein the further delaying involves re-initiation of the timer or initiation of another timer; and upon or after expiration of the re-initiated timer or the another timer, repeating, by the second network equipment, the further delaying until a subsequent determination is made that the data centric application is no longer executing at the user equipment.
However, Sivakumar further teaches delaying the release after a timer expires and restarting the timer when the control entity detects data activity which includes:
wherein the further delaying involves re-initiation of the timer or initiation of another timer; and upon or after expiration of the re-initiated timer or the another timer, repeating, by the second network equipment, the further delaying until a subsequent determination is made that the data centric application is no longer executing at the user equipment. (“In cellular systems a network entity in the form of a base station provides a node for communication with mobile devices in one or more cells or sectors. It is noted that in certain systems a base station is called `Node B`. Typically the operation of a base station apparatus and other apparatus of an access system required for the communication is controlled by a particular control entity. The control entity is typically interconnected with other control entities of the particular communication network.”, Sivakumar [0007]) (“In accordance with a more specific embodiment the control entity comprises a medium layer protocol entity. The medium layer protocol entity may comprise, for example, a medium access control entity. The control entity may comprise at least one timer configured to detect an end of a data packet flow. The control entity may further comprise at least one second timer. The at least one second timer may be configured to start in response to an indication by the at least one first timer, to initiate the procedure for releasing packet data resources after expiry thereof and to restart the at least one first timer in response to detection of activity on the packet data context. The second timer may be configured to be responsive to signalling from a packet data convergence protocol entity.”, Sivakumar [0016] – Examiner’s Note: after the first timer expires, the first timer is restarted if there is still data activity) (“It is noted that whilst embodiments have been described in relation to user devices such as mobile terminals, embodiments of the present invention are applicable to any other suitable type of apparatus suitable for communication via access systems.”, Sivakumar [0063])
Yuan, Li, and Sivakumar are analogous because they pertain to releasing connection between a network node and user equipment.
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include delaying the release after a timer expires and restarting the timer when the control entity detect data activity as described in Sivakumar into Yuan as modified by Li. By modifying the method to include delaying the release after a timer expires and restarting the timer when the control entity detect data activity as taught by Sivakumar, the benefits of improved handover process (Yuan [0058] and Li [0098]) and improved connection release procedure (Sivakumar [0016]) are achieved.
As to claim 2:
Yuan discloses:
The method of claim 1, wherein the method further comprises: (“Fallback and fast return logic 410 may include logic associated with UE 110 performing a fallback from a higher bandwidth connection to a lower bandwidth connection for conducting a voice communication session. Fallback and fast return logic 410 may provide information indicating UE 110's capability and/or preference to perform a fallback when a voice call is initiated or received. For example, fallback and fast return logic 410 may insert a tag or field in a communication message (e.g., a SIP signaling message, a radio resource control (RRC) protocol message) transmitted to gNodeB 120-2 indicating that UE 110 is to use an LTE connection for voice calls, such as VoLTE. The indicator may be used by other elements in environment 100, such as EPC 140, 5G core network 150 and/or data network 160, when UE 110 registers or camps on a 5G NR cell/network to ensure that voice communication sessions for UE 110 are conducted via an LTE network.”, Yuan [0036])
The combination of Yuan and Li as described above does not explicitly teach:
after expiration of a defined interval and based on a third determination that the data centric application that is executing at the user equipment has completed, triggering, by the second network equipment, the release of the control of the user equipment from the second network equipment;
However, Sivakumar further teaches delaying the release after a timer expires and restarting the timer when the control entity detect data activity which includes:
The method of claim 1, wherein the method further comprises: after expiration of a defined interval and based on a third determination that the data centric application that is executing at the user equipment has completed, triggering, by the second network equipment, the release of the control of the user equipment from the second network equipment; (“In cellular systems a network entity in the form of a base station provides a node for communication with mobile devices in one or more cells or sectors. It is noted that in certain systems a base station is called `Node B`. Typically the operation of a base station apparatus and other apparatus of an access system required for the communication is controlled by a particular control entity. The control entity is typically interconnected with other control entities of the particular communication network.”, Sivakumar [0007]) (“In accordance with a more specific embodiment the control entity comprises a medium layer protocol entity. The medium layer protocol entity may comprise, for example, a medium access control entity. The control entity may comprise at least one timer configured to detect an end of a data packet flow. The control entity may further comprise at least one second timer. The at least one second timer may be configured to start in response to an indication by the at least one first timer, to initiate the procedure for releasing packet data resources after expiry thereof and to restart the at least one first timer in response to detection of activity on the packet data context. The second timer may be configured to be responsive to signalling from a packet data convergence protocol entity.”, Sivakumar [0016] – Examiner’s Note: after the first timer expires, the first timer is restarted if there is data activity) (“It is noted that whilst embodiments have been described in relation to user devices such as mobile terminals, embodiments of the present invention are applicable to any other suitable type of apparatus suitable for communication via access systems.”, Sivakumar [0063])
Yuan, Li, and Sivakumar are analogous because they pertain to releasing connection between a network node and user equipment.
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include delaying the release after a timer expires and restarting the timer when the control entity detect data activity as described in Sivakumar into Yuan as modified by Li. By modifying the method to include delaying the release after a timer expires and restarting the timer when the control entity detect data activity as taught by Sivakumar, the benefits of improved handover process (Yuan [0058] and Li [0098]) and improved connection release procedure (Sivakumar [0016]) are achieved.
As to claim 3:
Yuan discloses:
The method of claim 2, further comprising: prior to triggering the release of the user equipment, evaluating, by the second network equipment, the capability of the user equipment based on the first determination that the voice communication has completed at the user equipment. (“Data throughput monitoring logic 520 may include logic to determine the current and future estimated data throughput required by a particular UE 110. For example, UE 110 may be executing one or more applications, such as an online game that requires a certain data throughput and latency. Data throughput monitoring logic 520 may monitor the data throughput at UE 110 and use this information to determine or estimate current or future data throughput requirements. Data throughput monitoring logic 520 may use this information to determine whether UE 110 should be switched to a 5G connection after a voice communication session ends, as described in detail below.”, Yuan [0043])
As to claim 6:
Yuan discloses:
The method of claim 1, wherein the defined condition is identified for an uplink transmission. (“For example, FIG. 7 illustrates exemplary processing associated with block 680 and determining whether to attempt to reconnect UE 110 to a 5G cell. Referring to FIG. 7, processing may include determining data throughput and/or latency requirements associated with operation of UE 110 (block 710). Continuing with the example above in which UE 110 was executing a AR video game prior to the voice communication session and is still executing the video game application, device monitoring logic 420 in UE 110 may estimate the current and future data throughput and/or latency requirements associated with playing the AR game. For example, device monitoring logic 420 may estimate the future data throughput based on the historical throughput requirements associated with playing the AR game.”, Yuan [0055]) (“If device monitoring logic 420 and/or data throughput monitoring logic 520 determines that the data throughput requirement for UE 110 is not greater than the threshold (block 720—no), UE 110 may continue to operate in a 4G mode (block 730). In this case, the service provider associated with the 4G LTE and 5G networks (e.g., EPC 140 and 5G core network 150) may determine that keeping UE 110 on the 4G LTE network saves network resources and does not adversely impact the user experience. Maintaining the 4G connection may allow the service provider to manage and optimize use of network resources and also reduce possible issues with performing handovers, such as a lost connection, when the 4G LTE network provides UE 110 with adequate service.”, Yuan [0058])
As to claim 7:
Yuan discloses:
The method of claim 1, wherein the defined condition is identified for a downlink transmission. (“For example, FIG. 7 illustrates exemplary processing associated with block 680 and determining whether to attempt to reconnect UE 110 to a 5G cell. Referring to FIG. 7, processing may include determining data throughput and/or latency requirements associated with operation of UE 110 (block 710). Continuing with the example above in which UE 110 was executing a AR video game prior to the voice communication session and is still executing the video game application, device monitoring logic 420 in UE 110 may estimate the current and future data throughput and/or latency requirements associated with playing the AR game. For example, device monitoring logic 420 may estimate the future data throughput based on the historical throughput requirements associated with playing the AR game.”, Yuan [0055]) (“If device monitoring logic 420 and/or data throughput monitoring logic 520 determines that the data throughput requirement for UE 110 is not greater than the threshold (block 720—no), UE 110 may continue to operate in a 4G mode (block 730). In this case, the service provider associated with the 4G LTE and 5G networks (e.g., EPC 140 and 5G core network 150) may determine that keeping UE 110 on the 4G LTE network saves network resources and does not adversely impact the user experience. Maintaining the 4G connection may allow the service provider to manage and optimize use of network resources and also reduce possible issues with performing handovers, such as a lost connection, when the 4G LTE network provides UE 110 with adequate service.”, Yuan [0058])
As to claim 8:
Yuan discloses:
The method of claim 1, wherein the data centric application that is executing at the user equipment is a latency and interruption sensitive application, and wherein the defined condition is a latency criterion of network traffic. (“For example, FIG. 7 illustrates exemplary processing associated with block 680 and determining whether to attempt to reconnect UE 110 to a 5G cell. Referring to FIG. 7, processing may include determining data throughput and/or latency requirements associated with operation of UE 110 (block 710). Continuing with the example above in which UE 110 was executing a AR video game prior to the voice communication session and is still executing the video game application, device monitoring logic 420 in UE 110 may estimate the current and future data throughput and/or latency requirements associated with playing the AR game. For example, device monitoring logic 420 may estimate the future data throughput based on the historical throughput requirements associated with playing the AR game.”, Yuan [0055]) (“If device monitoring logic 420 and/or data throughput monitoring logic 520 determines that the data throughput requirement for UE 110 is not greater than the threshold (block 720—no), UE 110 may continue to operate in a 4G mode (block 730). In this case, the service provider associated with the 4G LTE and 5G networks (e.g., EPC 140 and 5G core network 150) may determine that keeping UE 110 on the 4G LTE network saves network resources and does not adversely impact the user experience. Maintaining the 4G connection may allow the service provider to manage and optimize use of network resources and also reduce possible issues with performing handovers, such as a lost connection, when the 4G LTE network provides UE 110 with adequate service.”, Yuan [0058])
As to claim 9:
Yuan discloses:
The method of claim 1, wherein the defined condition is a throughput criterion of network traffic utilized by the data centric application that is executing on the user equipment. (“For example, FIG. 7 illustrates exemplary processing associated with block 680 and determining whether to attempt to reconnect UE 110 to a 5G cell. Referring to FIG. 7, processing may include determining data throughput and/or latency requirements associated with operation of UE 110 (block 710). Continuing with the example above in which UE 110 was executing a AR video game prior to the voice communication session and is still executing the video game application, device monitoring logic 420 in UE 110 may estimate the current and future data throughput and/or latency requirements associated with playing the AR game. For example, device monitoring logic 420 may estimate the future data throughput based on the historical throughput requirements associated with playing the AR game.”, Yuan [0055]) (“If device monitoring logic 420 and/or data throughput monitoring logic 520 determines that the data throughput requirement for UE 110 is not greater than the threshold (block 720—no), UE 110 may continue to operate in a 4G mode (block 730). In this case, the service provider associated with the 4G LTE and 5G networks (e.g., EPC 140 and 5G core network 150) may determine that keeping UE 110 on the 4G LTE network saves network resources and does not adversely impact the user experience. Maintaining the 4G connection may allow the service provider to manage and optimize use of network resources and also reduce possible issues with performing handovers, such as a lost connection, when the 4G LTE network provides UE 110 with adequate service.”, Yuan [0058])
As to claim 12:
Yuan discloses:
The method of claim 1, wherein the first network equipment is configured to operate according to a new radio network communication protocol. (FIG. 1 Yuan)
As to claim 14:
Yuan discloses:
The method of claim 1, wherein the second network equipment is configured to operate according to a long term evolution network communication protocol. (FIG. 1 Yuan)
As to claim 17:
The combination of Yuan and Li as described above does not explicitly teach:
The system of claim 15, wherein the operations further comprise: after a defined interval and based on a third determination that the service executing on the user equipment has completed, releasing a control of the user equipment to the network equipment.
However, Sivakumar further teaches delaying the release after a timer expires and restarting the timer when the control entity detect data activity which includes:
The system of claim 15, wherein the operations further comprise: after a defined interval and based on a third determination that the service executing on the user equipment has completed, releasing a control of the user equipment to the network equipment. (“In cellular systems a network entity in the form of a base station provides a node for communication with mobile devices in one or more cells or sectors. It is noted that in certain systems a base station is called `Node B`. Typically the operation of a base station apparatus and other apparatus of an access system required for the communication is controlled by a particular control entity. The control entity is typically interconnected with other control entities of the particular communication network.”, Sivakumar [0007]) (“In accordance with a more specific embodiment the control entity comprises a medium layer protocol entity. The medium layer protocol entity may comprise, for example, a medium access control entity. The control entity may comprise at least one timer configured to detect an end of a data packet flow. The control entity may further comprise at least one second timer. The at least one second timer may be configured to start in response to an indication by the at least one first timer, to initiate the procedure for releasing packet data resources after expiry thereof and to restart the at least one first timer in response to detection of activity on the packet data context. The second timer may be configured to be responsive to signalling from a packet data convergence protocol entity.”, Sivakumar [0016] – Examiner’s Note: after the first timer expires, the first timer is restarted if there is data activity) (“It is noted that whilst embodiments have been described in relation to user devices such as mobile terminals, embodiments of the present invention are applicable to any other suitable type of apparatus suitable for communication via access systems.”, Sivakumar [0063])
Yuan, Li, and Sivakumar are analogous because they pertain to releasing connection between a network node and user equipment.
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include delaying the release after a timer expires and restarting the timer when the control entity detect data activity as described in Sivakumar into Yuan as modified by Li. By modifying the method to include delaying the release after a timer expires and restarting the timer when the control entity detect data activity as taught by Sivakumar, the benefits of improved handover process (Yuan [0058] and Li [0098]) and improved connection release procedure (Sivakumar [0016]) are achieved.
As to claim 20:
Yuan discloses:
The non-transitory machine-readable medium of claim 18, wherein the service criterion is defined for at least one of an uplink transmission or a downlink transmission. (“For example, FIG. 7 illustrates exemplary processing associated with block 680 and determining whether to attempt to reconnect UE 110 to a 5G cell. Referring to FIG. 7, processing may include determining data throughput and/or latency requirements associated with operation of UE 110 (block 710). Continuing with the example above in which UE 110 was executing a AR video game prior to the voice communication session and is still executing the video game application, device monitoring logic 420 in UE 110 may estimate the current and future data throughput and/or latency requirements associated with playing the AR game. For example, device monitoring logic 420 may estimate the future data throughput based on the historical throughput requirements associated with playing the AR game.”, Yuan [0055]) (“If device monitoring logic 420 and/or data throughput monitoring logic 520 determines that the data throughput requirement for UE 110 is not greater than the threshold (block 720—no), UE 110 may continue to operate in a 4G mode (block 730). In this case, the service provider associated with the 4G LTE and 5G networks (e.g., EPC 140 and 5G core network 150) may determine that keeping UE 110 on the 4G LTE network saves network resources and does not adversely impact the user experience. Maintaining the 4G connection may allow the service provider to manage and optimize use of network resources and also reduce possible issues with performing handovers, such as a lost connection, when the 4G LTE network provides UE 110 with adequate service.”, Yuan [0058])
Claim(s) 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yuan in view of Li and Sivakumar, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Chen CN 114245418 (hereinafter “Chen”, Examiner’s Note: citations are from the attached translated copy)
As to claim 13:
The combination of Yuan, Li, and Sivakumar as described above does not explicitly teach:
The method of claim 1, wherein the first network equipment is deployed in a standalone deployment architecture.
However, Chen further teaches returning from NSA to SA after fallback which includes:
The method of claim 1, wherein the first network equipment is deployed in a standalone deployment architecture. (“the first type cell is SA cell, the second type cell is NSA cell”, Chen [page 6, line 42 – using translated copy])
Yuan, Li, Sivakumar, and Chen are analogous because they pertain to releasing connection between a network node and user equipment.
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include returning from NSA to SA after fallback as described in Chen into Yuan as modified by Sivakumar and Li. By modifying the method to include returning from NSA to SA after fallback as taught by Chen, the benefits of improved handover process (Yuan [0058], Li [0098], Chen [page 6, line 42]) and improved connection release procedure (Sivakumar [0016]) are achieved.
Claim(s) 4 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yuan in view of Li and Sivakumar, as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Prabhakar et al. US 20230397072 (hereinafter “Prabhakar”)
As to claim 4:
The combination of Yuan, Li, and Sivakumar as described above does not explicitly teach:
The method of claim 2, wherein receiving the indication of the fall back procedure comprises receiving an information element that comprises a release cause code.
However, Prabhakar further teaches release cause code during fallback indication which includes:
The method of claim 2, wherein receiving the indication of the fall back procedure comprises receiving an information element that comprises a release cause code. (“FIG. 11 is a call flow diagram illustrating possible signaling that could be used to perform a PDU session release with a cause code indicating to perform EPS fallback, according to some embodiments;”, Prabhakar [0020])
Li, Sivakumar, Yuan, and Prabhakar are analogous because they pertain to releasing connection between a network node and user equipment.
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include release cause code as described in Prabhakar into Yuan as modified by Sivakumar and Li. By modifying the method to include release cause code as taught by Prabhakar, the benefits of improved release process (Prabhakar [0020]), improved handover process (Yuan [0058] and Li [0098]) and improved connection release procedure (Sivakumar [0016]) are achieved.
As to claim 19:
The combination of Yuan, Li, and Sivakumar as described above does not explicitly teach:
The non-transitory machine-readable medium of claim 18, wherein the operations further comprise: prior to the determining that the first communication is to be controlled by the second network equipment, receiving the indication of the fall back procedure and an information element that comprises a release cause code.
However, Prabhakar further teaches release cause code during fallback indication which includes:
The non-transitory machine-readable medium of claim 18, wherein the operations further comprise: prior to the determining that the first communication is to be controlled by the second network equipment, receiving the indication of the fall back procedure and an information element that comprises a release cause code. (“FIG. 11 is a call flow diagram illustrating possible signaling that could be used to perform a PDU session release with a cause code indicating to perform EPS fallback, according to some embodiments;”, Prabhakar [0020])
Li, Kodali, Yuan, and Prabhakar are analogous because they pertain to releasing connection between a network node and user equipment.
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include release cause code as described in Prabhakar into Yuan as modified by Sivakumar and Li. By modifying the method to include release cause code as taught by Prabhakar, the benefits of improved release process (Prabhakar [0020]), improved handover process (Yuan [0058] and Li [0098]) and improved connection release procedure (Sivakumar [0016]) are achieved.
Claim(s) 5 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yuan in view of Li, Sivakumar, and Prabhakar, as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Xu et al. US 20250048192 (hereinafter “Xu”)
As to claim 5:
The combination of Sivakumar, Li, Yuan, and Prabhakar as described above does not explicitly teach:
The method of claim 4, wherein the information element is a first information element, and wherein redirecting the user equipment to the third network equipment comprises receiving a second information element that comprises redirected carrier information.
However, Xu further teaches redirected carrier information which includes:
The method of claim 4, wherein the information element is a first information element, and wherein redirecting the user equipment to the third network equipment comprises receiving a second information element that comprises redirected carrier information.(“The RRC release message may include the HPLMN redirection information in a redirected carrier information (redirectedCarrierInfo) IE or a voice fallback indication (voiceFallbackIndication) IE.”, Xu [0041])
Li, Sivakumar, Yuan, Xu, and Prabhakar are analogous because they pertain to releasing connection between a network node and user equipment.
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include redirected carrier information as described in Xu into Yuan as modified by Li, Sivakumar, and Prabhakar. By modifying the method to include redirected carrier information as taught by Xu, the benefits of fallback versatility (Kodali [0028]), improved release process (Prabhakar [0020] and Xu [0041]), and improved handover process (Yuan [0058] and Li [0098]) are achieved.
As to claim 16:
The combination of Yuan, Li, and Sivakumar as described above does not explicitly teach:
The system of claim 15, wherein the indication comprises a first information element that comprises a release cause code, and wherein redirecting the user equipment comprises receiving a second information element that comprises redirected carrier information.
However, Prabhakar further teaches release cause code during fallback indication which includes:
The system of claim 15, wherein the indication comprises a first information element that comprises a release cause code, (“FIG. 11 is a call flow diagram illustrating possible signaling that could be used to perform a PDU session release with a cause code indicating to perform EPS fallback, according to some embodiments;”, Prabhakar [0020])
Li, Kodali, Yuan, and Prabhakar are analogous because they pertain to releasing connection between a network node and user equipment.
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include release cause code as described in Prabhakar into Yuan as modified by Sivakumar and Li. By modifying the method to include release cause code as taught by Prabhakar, the benefits of improved release process (Prabhakar [0020]), improved handover process (Yuan [0058] and Li [0098]) and improved connection release procedure (Sivakumar [0016]) are achieved.
The combination of Sivakumar, Li, Yuan, and Prabhakar as described above does not explicitly teach:
and wherein redirecting the user equipment comprises receiving a second information element that comprises redirected carrier information.
However, Xu further teaches redirected carrier information which includes:
and wherein redirecting the user equipment comprises receiving a second information element that comprises redirected carrier information. (“The RRC release message may include the HPLMN redirection information in a redirected carrier information (redirectedCarrierInfo) IE or a voice fallback indication (voiceFallbackIndication) IE.”, Xu [0041])
Li, Sivakumar, Yuan, Xu, and Prabhakar are analogous because they pertain to UE fallback procedure.
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include redirected carrier information as described in Xu into Yuan as modified by Li, Sivakumar, and Prabhakar. By modifying the method to include redirected carrier information as taught by Xu, the benefits of improved connection release procedure (Sivakumar [0016]), improved release process (Prabhakar [0020] and Xu [0041]), and improved handover process (Yuan [0058] and Li [0098]) are achieved.
Claim(s) 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yuan in view of Li and Sivakumar, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Anchan et al. US 20180352489 (hereinafter “Anchan”)
As to claim 10:
The combination of Yuan, Li, and Sivakumar as described above does not explicitly teach:
The method of claim 1, wherein the defined condition is a delay jitter criterion of network traffic utilized by the data centric application that is executing on the user equipment.
However, Anchan further teaches latency, throughput, delay jitter, and packet loss condition of network traffic which includes:
The method of claim 1, wherein the defined condition is a delay jitter criterion of network traffic utilized by the data centric application that is executing on the user equipment. (“LTE system selection for multimedia services like VoLTE or Video telephony is performed based on system camping algorithms that rely on signal strength, broadcasted system information, and other network side metrics. These algorithms may bar the UE 110 from selecting the LTE network when the network explicitly informs the UE about barring or congestion. However, as VoLTE is sensitive to jitter, voice quality can be affected well before the network load reaches a level that meets a network congestion threshold. AP selection policies that rely entirely on network-determined metrics cannot ensure adequate voice or video quality in VoLTE calls. Further, VoLTE quality may be affected because of user mobility, intra LTE handoff, SRVCC, handoff to VoWiFi, variations in radio conditions or network load that add delay variation (i.e. jitter or packet loss). A typical throughput indicator may not work as it does not factor the latency and jitter. Voice quality during multimedia services may be improved if the UE 110 “learns” the network characteristic of APs (e.g., eNB or gNB, Wi-Fi Access Points) of the LTE or Wi-Fi “cluster” and applies the learned information to future AP selection to avoid habitually congested APs. Pattern recognition based on UE 110 determined metrics may reduce latency and jitter, because the metrics account for negative impacts experienced by the UE 110 itself rather than network metrics.”, Anchan [0061-0063])
Li, Sivakumar, Yuan, and Anchan are analogous because they both pertain to releasing connection between a network node and user equipment.
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include latency, throughput, delay jitter, and packet loss condition of network traffic as described in Anchan into Yuan as modified by Sivakumar and Li. By modifying the method to include latency, throughput, delay jitter, and packet loss condition of network traffic as taught by Anchan, the benefits of improved release process (Prabhakar [0020]), improved handover process (Yuan [0058], Anchan [0061], and Li [0098]) and improved connection release procedure (Sivakumar [0016]) are achieved.
As to claim 11:
The combination of Yuan, Li, and Sivakumar as described above does not explicitly teach:
The method of claim 1, wherein the defined condition is further associated with a packet loss threshold associated with the data centric application that is executing on the user equipment.
However, Anchan further teaches latency, throughput, delay jitter, and packet loss condition of network traffic which includes:
The method of claim 1, wherein the defined condition is further associated with a packet loss threshold associated with the data centric application that is executing on the user equipment.(“LTE system selection for multimedia services like VoLTE or Video telephony is performed based on system camping algorithms that rely on signal strength, broadcasted system information, and other network side metrics. These algorithms may bar the UE 110 from selecting the LTE network when the network explicitly informs the UE about barring or congestion. However, as VoLTE is sensitive to jitter, voice quality can be affected well before the network load reaches a level that meets a network congestion threshold. AP selection policies that rely entirely on network-determined metrics cannot ensure adequate voice or video quality in VoLTE calls. Further, VoLTE quality may be affected because of user mobility, intra LTE handoff, SRVCC, handoff to VoWiFi, variations in radio conditions or network load that add delay variation (i.e. jitter or packet loss). A typical throughput indicator may not work as it does not factor the latency and jitter. Voice quality during multimedia services may be improved if the UE 110 “learns” the network characteristic of APs (e.g., eNB or gNB, Wi-Fi Access Points) of the LTE or Wi-Fi “cluster” and applies the learned information to future AP selection to avoid habitually congested APs. Pattern recognition based on UE 110 determined metrics may reduce latency and jitter, because the metrics account for negative impacts experienced by the UE 110 itself rather than network metrics.”, Anchan [0061-0063])
Li, Sivakumar, Yuan, and Anchan are analogous because they both pertain to releasing connection between a network node and user equipment.
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include latency, throughput, delay jitter, and packet loss condition of network traffic as described in Anchan into Yuan as modified by Sivakumar and Li. By modifying the method to include latency, throughput, delay jitter, and packet loss condition of network traffic as taught by Anchan, the benefits of improved release process (Prabhakar [0020]), improved handover process (Yuan [0058], Anchan [0061], and Li [0098]) and improved connection release procedure (Sivakumar [0016]) are achieved.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW C KIM whose telephone number is (703)756-5607. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9AM - 5PM (PST).
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, Sujoy K Kundu can be reached at (571) 272-8586. 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.
/A.C.K./
Examiner
Art Unit 2471
/MOHAMMAD S ADHAMI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2471