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 .
This Office Action is in response to the Amendment Request Applicant Arguments/REMARKS correspondence filed on 02/05/2026.
Claims 1-3, 5-7, 9-13, 15-23 are pending and rejected.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Amendment Request Applicant Arguments/REMARKS, filed 02/05/2026, with respect to the rejections of claims 1-3, 5-7, 9-13, 15-23 under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of new use of the of the same references.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-3, 5-7, 9-13, 15-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Akl et al (US 20230284204) (hereinafter "Akl") in view of Singh et al (WO2022131981A1).
Regarding claim 1, Akl teaches a processor of a user equipment (UE) (Fig 1 104) configured to perform operations comprising:
generating, for transmission to a network, a medium access control (MAC) control element (CE) comprising a periodic cadence report (PCR), wherein the PCR indicates one or more characteristics of upcoming uplink traffic (Fig 1 104 198, [0058]-[0059], [0168], configured with a traffic prediction module, output (transmit) an indication of an expected communication, indication of expected communication is output for transmission via…MAC CE—identifier in MAC CE (pattern ID) that activates or configures a predefined UL configured grant pattern (slot-based uplink resource allocation;
for an application hosted on the UE including at least an application ID configured to indicate a type of application corresponding to the application hosted on the UE ([0041], [0058], [0106], [0111], discloses that different services, applications, logical channels, and traffic types associated with a UE may be individually identified and tracked by the network using corresponding if identifiers and bearer information; further teaches that a UE may provide assistance information regarding expected communications associated with such traffic, allowing the network to distinguish and schedule resources based on the corresponding communication type; under the BRI interpretation, the identifiers associated with the UE’s traffic, services, or bearers function as an application ID indicating a type of application);
But Akl does not fully teach and receiving for data transmissions, wherein the configured grant indicates uplink resources assigned to the UE based on the PCR.
However, Singh teaches and receiving for data transmissions, wherein the configured grant indicates uplink resources assigned to the UE based on the PCR (Abstract, Claim 1, and description page 33 lines 17-24; receiving signaling for at least one configured grant allocation from a network node; the CG allocation resources for the uplink transmissions in one or more CG periods; and determining a traffic pattern for UL transmissions…selecting a CG pattern in dependence on the determined traffic pattern and configuring…based on predicted traffic behavior” or a periodic cadence report).
Akl discloses that the UE includes a traffic prediction module that outputs an indication of expected communication (expected application data). Furthermore, Singh discloses receiving signaling for at least one configured grant allocation from a network node. The base station uses this to provide updates uplink scheduling.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to combine the CG pattern identification in the MAC CE from Miao with the application aware traffic prediction techniques of Akl as well as the receiving signaling for at least one configured grant allocation from a network node from Singh, in order to optimize uplink grant configuration and resource allocation for predicted application traffic. Furthermore, it would have been logical to combine these combination of teachings, enabling the UE not only to indicate expected traffic, but also to confirm or request activation of corresponding CG pattern via a MAC CE, using a pattern ID tied to the UE-hosted application.
Regarding claim 2, Akl teaches the processor wherein the MAC CE is transmitted prior to receiving a first packet in a UE uplink buffer (Fig 1 104 198, Fig 9 904 902 908, [0111]-[0112],[0121] initial transmit a portion of UL data using the granted UL resources include a buffer status report).
Regarding claim 3, Akl teaches the processor wherein a scheduling request (SR) is not transmitted to the network by the UE in a duration between transmitting the MAC CE and receiving the configured grant (Fig 10 1006 [0121] may transmit SR requesting deferred UL grant , deferred until duration of the time window expires. Thus after the time window, base station may transmit an UL grant to UE- not transmit SR during the time window before base station transmits UL grant with assigned resources).
Regarding claim 5, Akl teaches the processor wherein the configured grant is received via downlink control information (DCI) (Fig 2A, 2B, [0062], [0066] subcarriers dedicated for DL or UL, or may be TDD - UEs configured with the slot format – dynamically through DCI –from base station signal).
Regarding claim 6, Akl teaches the processor wherein the configured grant is received via a radio resource control (RRC) reconfiguration message (Fig 10 1002, 1012, 1004, 1006 -[0041], [0062], [0111] RRC messaging, assistance information (UE's expected communication reports) helps network node perform procedures such as SR/BSR, RRC connection handling, resource reservation; configuration by base station via RRC messaging).
Regarding claim 7, Akl teaches the processor wherein the configured grant is received via a second MAC CE (Fig 11 1106, 1108, 1112, [0129]-[0130] network node may transmit an UL grant in a second transmission to the UE…network node then transmits another UL grant in response to BSR).
Regarding claim 9, Akl teaches the processor wherein the MAC CE further comprises at least a burst cadence parameter and a burst size parameter (Fig 8 816, Fig 16 1610 - [0166], [0186] - determine that a process or app running on the UE has a predictable pattern of uplink/sidelink transmissions. Based on a determination that the UE will likely have future uplink/sidelink transmission, the UE may notify (burst cadence parameter) the network node that the next uplink/sidelink transmission will be in the future).
Regarding claim 10, Akl teaches the processor wherein the MAC CE further comprises at least an estimated time of arrival (ETA) parameter and a duration parameter (Fig 11 1104, [0058]-[0059], [0168], [0133] UE may generate an transmit a deferred SR requesting an IL grant for a future time--expected UL communication and a time when that communication is expected from the UE , configured with a traffic prediction module, output (transmit) an indication of an expected communication, indication of expected communication is output for transmission via…MAC CE).
Regarding claim 11, Akl teaches the processor wherein the UE is prohibited from transmitting a second MAC CE comprising a PCR when a timer is running (Fig 10 1002 [0121]-[0124] deferred UL grant may implicitly indicate that the UE may not transmit another SR during the time window; UE expects that it will not have any UL data to transmit for the duration of the time window to all logic channel groups (LCGs) , then the UE may communicate the UE assistance information 1002 via MAC CE, MAC CE may indicate the UE may not transmit an SR to the base station for the duration of the time window (timer is running).
Regarding claim 12, Akl teaches a base station processor (Fig. 3 102 356 368 359) configured to perform operations comprising:
receiving, from a user equipment (UE), a medium access control (MAC) control element (CE) comprising a periodic cadence report (PCR) that indicates one or more characteristics of upcoming uplink traffic from the UE and the MAC CE comprises at least an estimated time of arrival (ETA) parameter for uplink (UL) data to arrive at a buffer of the UE, wherein the UL data is generated by an application hosted by the UE (Fig 1 104 198, [0058]-[0059], [0168], configured with a traffic prediction module, output (transmit) an indication of an expected communication, indication of expected communication is output for transmission via…MAC CE——identifier in MAC CE (pattern ID) that activates or configures a predefined UL configured grant pattern (slot-based uplink resource allocation; ([0168]) teaches that this deferred communication (and the associated timing) is transmitted via a MAC CE satisfying the claim element that the ETA parameter is included in a MAC CE);
But Akl fails to teach for an application hosted by the UE including at least an application ID configured to indicate a type of application corresponding to the application hosted by the UE ([0029], [0034], [0036]-[0038], disclosing that a UE handles multiple services/applications via distinct traffic flows used for scheduling and resource allocation; specifically teaches that traffic associated with QoS flows and/or logical channels corresponding to different services and that these flows are identified using identifiers (QFI and LCID) to distinguish traffic types; these identifiers functions as an applications ID because they indicate the type of application generating the traffic; Applicant’s claim language is broad read in vacuum and in light of the Applicant’s spec under BRI—application ID indicates a type of application or traffic profile [0061]);
But Akl fails to teach but Singh teaches and generating, for transmission to the UE, a configured grant for a data transmission by the UE, wherein the configured grant grant indicates uplink resources assigned to the UE based on the PCR (Abstract, Claim 1, and description page 33 lines 17-24; receiving signaling for at least one configured grant allocation from a network node; the CG allocation resources for the uplink transmissions in one or more CG periods; and determining a traffic pattern for UL transmissions…selecting a CG pattern in dependence on the determined traffic pattern and configuring…based on predicted traffic behavior” or a periodic cadence report).
Akl discloses that the UE includes a traffic prediction module that outputs an indication of expected communication (expected application data). Furthermore, Singh discloses receiving signaling for at least one configured grant allocation from a network node. The base station uses this to provide updates uplink scheduling.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to combine the CG pattern identification in the MAC CE from Miao with the application aware traffic prediction techniques of Akl as well as the receiving signaling for at least one configured grant allocation from a network node from Singh, in order to optimize uplink grant configuration and resource allocation for predicted application traffic. Furthermore, it would have been logical to combine these combination of teachings, enabling the UE not only to indicate expected traffic, but also to confirm or request activation of corresponding CG pattern via a MAC CE, using a pattern ID tied to the UE-hosted application.
Regarding claim 13, Akl teaches the processor wherein a scheduling request (SR) is not received from the UE in a duration between receiving the MAC CE and transmitting the configured grant (Fig 10 1006 [0121] may transmit SR requesting deferred UL grant , deferred until duration of the time window expires. Thus after the time window, base station may transmit an UL grant to UE- not transmit SR during the time window before base station transmits UL grant with assigned resources).
Regarding claim 15, Akl teaches the processor wherein the configured grant is transmitted via downlink control information (DCI) (Fig 2A, 2B, [0062], [0066] subcarriers dedicated for DL or UL, or may be TDD - UEs configured with the slot format – dynamically through DCI –from base station signal).
Regarding claim 16, Akl teaches the processor wherein the configured grant is transmitted via a radio resource control (RRC) reconfiguration message (Fig 10 1002, 1012, 1004, 1006 -[0041], [0062], [0111] RRC messaging, assistance information (UE's expected communication reports) helps network node perform procedures such as SR/BSR, RRC connection handling, resource reservation; configuration by base station via RRC messaging).
Regarding claim 17, Akl teaches the processor wherein the configured grant is transmitted via a second MAC CE (Fig 11 1106, 1108, 1112, [0129]-[0130] network node may transmit an UL grant in a second transmission to the UE…network node then transmits another UL grant in response to BSR).
Regarding claim 18, Akl teaches the processor wherein the MAC CE further comprises at least an application ID or a pattern ID (Fig 8 816, Fig 16 1610 - [0166], [0186] UE inactivity notification, indication expected communication, may also include additional information--UE may request different services for different applications(app ID) or processing (pattern ID) running on the UE; indication of expected communication--UE may determine that a process or application running on the UE has a predictable pattern of UL/sidelink transmissions).
Regarding claim 19, Akl teaches the processor wherein the MAC CE further comprises at least a burst cadence parameter and a burst size parameter (Fig 8 816, Fig 16 1610 - [0166], [0186] - determine that a process or app running on the UE has a predictable pattern of uplink/sidelink transmissions. Based on a determination that the UE will likely have future uplink/sidelink transmission, the UE may notify (burst cadence parameter) the network node that the next uplink/sidelink transmission will be in the future).
Regarding claim 20, Akl teaches the processor wherein the MAC CE further comprises a duration parameter (Fig 11 1104, [0058]-[0059], [0168], [0133] UE may generate an transmit a deferred SR requesting an IL grant for a future time--expected UL communication and a time when that communication is expected from the UE , configured with a traffic prediction module, output (transmit) an indication of an expected communication, indication of expected communication is output for transmission via…MAC CE).
Regarding claim 21, a user equipment (UE) ([0071], user equipment with receiver/transmitter – transceiver, processors), comprising:
a transceiver configured to communicate with a network ([0071], user equipment with receiver/transmitter – transceiver, processors); and
a processor communicatively coupled to the transceiver ([0071], user equipment with receiver/transmitter – transceiver, processors) and configured to:
generate, for transmission to a network, a medium access control (MAC) control element (CE) comprising a periodic cadence report (PCR), wherein the PCR indicates one or more characteristics of upcoming uplink traffic (Fig 1 104 198, [0058]-[0059], [0168], configured with a traffic prediction module, output (transmit) an indication of an expected communication, indication of expected communication is output for transmission via…MAC CE); and
associated with an application hosted on the UE including at least a jitter constraint associated with the application hosted on the UE ([0029], [0034], [0036]-[0038], disclosing that a UE handles multiple services/applications via distinct traffic flows used for scheduling and resource allocation; specifically teaches that traffic associated with QoS flows and/or logical channels corresponding to different services and that these flows are identified using identifiers (QFI and LCID) to distinguish traffic types; these identifiers functions as an applications ID because they indicate the type of application generating the traffic; Applicant’s claim language is broad read in vacuum and in light of the Applicant’s spec under BRI—application ID indicates a type of application or traffic profile [0061]).
But Akl fails to teach process, based on signaling from the network, a configured grant for data transmission from the network, wherein the configured grant indicates uplink resources assigned to the UE based on the PCR.
But Singh teaches process, based on signaling from the network, a configured grant for data transmission from the network, wherein the configured grant indicates uplink resources assigned to the UE based on the PCR (Abstract, Claim 1, and description page 33 lines 17-24; receiving signaling for at least one configured grant allocation from a network node; the CG allocation resources for the uplink transmissions in one or more CG periods; and determining a traffic pattern for UL transmissions…selecting a CG pattern in dependence on the determined traffic pattern and configuring…based on predicted traffic behavior” or a periodic cadence report).
Akl discloses that the UE includes a traffic prediction module that outputs an indication of expected communication (expected application data). Furthermore, Singh discloses receiving signaling for at least one configured grant allocation from a network node. The base station uses this to provide updates uplink scheduling.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to combine the CG pattern identification in the MAC CE from Miao with the application aware traffic prediction techniques of Akl as well as the receiving signaling for at least one configured grant allocation from a network node from Singh, in order to optimize uplink grant configuration and resource allocation for predicted application traffic. Furthermore, it would have been logical to combine these combination of teachings, enabling the UE not only to indicate expected traffic, but also to confirm or request activation of corresponding CG pattern via a MAC CE, using a pattern ID tied to the UE-hosted application.
Regarding claim 22, Akl teaches wherein the MAC CE is transmitted prior to receiving a first packet in a UE UL buffer (Fig 1 104 198, Fig 9 904 902 908, [0111]-[0112],[0121] initial transmit a portion of UL data using the granted UL resources include a buffer status report).
Regarding claim 23, wherein a scheduling request (SR) is not transmitted to the network by the UE in a duration between transmitting the MAC CE and receiving the configured grant (Fig 10 1006 [0121] may transmit SR requesting deferred UL grant , deferred until duration of the time window expires. Thus after the time window, base station may transmit an UL grant to UE- not transmit SR during the time window before base station transmits UL grant with assigned resources).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL WILLIAM ABBATINE whose telephone number is (571)272-0192. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 0830-1700 EST.
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, Nishant Divecha can be reached at (571) 270-3125. 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.
/MICHAEL WILLIAM ABBATINE JR./Examiner, Art Unit 2419
/Nishant Divecha/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2419
Prosecution Insights