DETAILED ACTION
This office action is a response to the Request for Continued Examination (RCE) filed on 09/29/2025.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 09/29/2025 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed on 09/29/2025 has been entered.
Claims 1 and 6-8 are pending
Claims 1 and 6 are amended
Claims 2-5 are canceled
Claims 7-8 are new
Claims 1 and 6-8 remain rejected.
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 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 of this title, 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.
Claims 1 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over HISANO et al. (US 20210036885 A1), hereinafter referenced as Hisano, in view of Ozaki et al. (US 20070294212 A1), hereinafter referenced as Ozaki.
Regarding claims 1 and 6, Hisano teaches a terminal comprising: a transceiver configured to perform communication (Para. [0001-0002]-Hisano discloses a transfer device and a transfer method ... a packet transfer device (hereinafter referred to as a “transfer device”) that performs data traffic transfer processing concentrates data traffic for multiple services. The transfer device multiplexes the data traffic of multiple services and transfers the multiplexed data traffic through an edge router to a core network. Para. [0078]-Hisano discloses a part or all of the transfer device in the embodiment described above may be realized as an integrated circuit such as a large scale integration (LSI). Respective functional blocks of the transfer device may be individually configured as processors, or some or all of the functional blocks may be integrated into a processor); and
a processor configured to request a service with priority control related to the communication (Figs. 3, 6 and 7, Para. [0046]-Hisano discloses Frame Fragmentation Control Unit. Para. [0076-0077]-Hisano discloses the transfer device may be realized by recording a program for realizing a control function. Para. [0018]-Hisano discloses the standard service of which the transfer order has been determined by the priority control unit, and re-transfer the held signal of a standard service in response to a re-transfer request from the device connected to the transfer route in the transfer path),
the processor is: an application that performs configuration related to a resource control unit for distributing communication packets associated with a communication path; or a client of the service with priority control related to the communication (Para. [0076-0077]-Hisano discloses the transfer device may be realized by recording a program {Application} for realizing a control function … a communication line when the program is transmitted over a network such as the Internet … including a server and a client. Para. [0002]-Hisano discloses a packet transfer device (hereinafter referred to as a “transfer device”) that performs data traffic transfer. Para. [0015]-Hisano discloses a reception unit configured to receive ...; a priority control unit configured to determine a transfer order ...; a transmission unit configured to transmit the signal for each service to a device connected to the transfer route in the transfer path).
Hisano fails to teach when the transceiver starts the communication, in a case where there is no resource control unit, which satisfies a request, for distributing communication packets, the processor performs no priority control, and wherein the priority control is quality of service (QoS) control, and a communication requirement is defined based on a quality of service class identifier (QCI) associated with a communication requirement required per service.
However, Ozaki teaches when the transceiver starts the communication, in a case where there is no resource control unit, which satisfies a request, for distributing communication packets, the processor performs no priority control (Fig. 8, Para. [0119]-Ozaki discloses When it is found as the result of the determination at step S83 that there is no effective system resource control method, the information processing apparatus 101 notifies the user that it can not perform data acquisition priority control (step S85)), and
the priority control is quality of service (QoS) control (Para. [0102]-Ozaki discloses as a system resource control method, first, band control in communication may be mentioned. QoS (Quality of Service) technology is used for band control to allocate a band to high priority communication and perform reliable communication), and
a communication requirement is defined based on a quality of service class identifier (QCI) associated with a communication requirement required per service (Para. [0102]-Ozaki discloses band control technology such as packet classification, queue control, scheduling, and shaping in routing that performs control so that network packets are properly sent are also known as QoS technology).
Hisano and Ozaki are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of communication network, dealing with information processing apparatus that processes data that is input from peripheral devices, and a method therefor, as well as a program and a storage medium.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the Hisano to incorporate the teachings of Ozaki on resource and priority control, with a motivation for no priority control without resource control, and guarantee alleviating the stress of a user by clearly showing the acquisition status of contents data that is held by a peripheral device in a situation in which a plurality of devices are connected by a network, a control method of the information processing apparatus, a program, and a storage medium, (Ozaki, Para. [0011]).
Regarding claim 7, Hisano in view of Ozaki teaches the terminal according to claim 1,
Hisano further teaches the communication requirement includes at least one of a Loss Rate or a Delay Budget (Para. [0071]-Hisano discloses in a case in which transfer is performed from a transfer source node to a transfer destination node via a plurality of relay nodes, the transfer destination node detects a frame loss and sends a re-transfer request to the transfer source node in the case in which the frame loss occurs in the relay node or the relay link. Para. [0004]-Hisano discloses in data traffic over the MFH, high level requirements for a delay in data transfer between the CU and the DUs (hereinafter referred to as “e2e (end-to-end) delay”) are demanded. For example, in Third Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) TR 38.801 Option 6, the worst case value of e2e delay is defined as 250 microseconds (μs)).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over HISANO et al. (US 20210036885 A1), hereinafter referenced as Hisano, in view of Ozaki et al. (US 20070294212 A1), hereinafter referenced as Ozaki, and further in view of Nishida et al. (US 20130040645 A1), hereinafter referenced as Nishida.
Regarding claim 8, Hisano in view of Ozaki teaches the terminal according to claim 7,
Hisano further teaches a server of the application that performs configuration related to the resource control unit for distributing communication packets associated with the communication path is a network (Para. [0076-0077]-Hisano discloses the transfer device may be realized by recording a program {Application} for realizing a control function … a recording medium that dynamically holds a program for a short period of time, such as a communication line when the program is transmitted over a network such as the Internet or a communication line such as a telephone line or a recording medium that holds a program for a certain period of time, such as a volatile memory inside a computer system including a server and a client in such a case. Further, the program may be a program for realizing some of the above-described functions or may be a program capable of realizing the above-described functions in a combination with a program already recorded on the computer system).
Hisano fails to teach in a case where there is no resource control unit, which satisfies a request, for distributing communication packets, the network performs no priority control.
However, Nishida teaches in a case where there is no resource control unit, which satisfies a request, for distributing communication packets, the network performs no priority control (Para. [0005]-Nishida discloses the problem of being unable to preferentially establish RRC (Radio Resource Control) connection for transmission of a signal to request a start of circuit-switched type of communications from a prioritized mobile station UE. Figs. 3-6, Para. [0052-0053]-Nishida discloses when determining that such resources are not available, the radio base station eNodeB determines whether or not the priority call information is contained in the "Initial UE Context Setup Request" ... When determining that the priority call information is not contained, the radio base station eNodeB sends the mobility management node MME a "Negative Response" indicating that the resource allocation is not possible in step S105. Para. [0118]-Nishida discloses the radio base station eNodeB may transmit a "Paging" not containing the priority call information to the mobile station UE in step S2007. In this case, the radio base station eNodeB does not perform the priority control processing).
Nishida is considered to be analogous because it is in the same field of communication network, dealing with mobile communication method, a radio access network apparatus and a mobile station.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the Hisano in view of Ozaki to incorporate the teachings of Nishida on resource and priority control, with a motivation for no priority control without resource control, and guarantee enable preferential setup of E-RAB (Evolved Radio Access Bearer) and RAB as packet bearers and priority control for a RRC signal in the CSFB (Circuit Switched Fallback) procedure, (Nishida, Para. [0018]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's Arguments/Remarks, filed on 09/29/2025, with respect to the 35 USC § 103 rejection of claims 1 and 6 have been fully considered. Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive.
In the remarks, on pages 5 and 6, Lines [16-20 and 1-4 respectively], Applicant argues that, “independent claim 1 is amended to recite, in part, "wherein the priority control is quality of service (QoS) control, and a communication requirement is defined based on a quality of service class identifier (QCI) associated with a communication requirement required per service." Amended independent claim 6 recites a substantially similar limitation ... Applicant respectfully asserts that Hisano and Ozaki, whether considered separately or in combination, fail to teach at least the above-referenced limitation of amended independent claim 1. The same is true regarding amended independent claim 6, which recites a substantially similar limitation.”
However, Ozika teaches the priority control is quality of service (QoS) control (Para. [0102]-Ozaki discloses as a system resource control method, first, band control in communication may be mentioned. QoS (Quality of Service) technology is used for band control to allocate a band to high priority communication and perform reliable communication), and a communication requirement is defined based on a quality of service class identifier (QCI) associated with a communication requirement required per service (Para. [0102]-Ozaki discloses band control technology such as packet classification, queue control, scheduling, and shaping in routing that performs control so that network packets are properly sent are also known as QoS technology).
Conclusion
Listed below are the prior arts made of record and not relied upon but are considered pertinent to applicant`s disclosure.
Jari Mutikainen (US 20140341031 A1)-discloses the priority control is quality of service (QoS) control (Figs. 2-4, Para. [0037]-Mutikainen discloses at 405, the apparatus schedules data packet for transmission based on the traffic level QCI value. When scheduling data packet transmission to a user equipment, the apparatus may give priority to data packets based on the traffic level QCI value. For example, in FIG. 2, if QCI.sub.3=7 and QCI.sub.5=6, the apparatus may give priority to data packets from traffic flow 5 in preference to data packets from traffic flow 3), and a communication requirement is defined based on a quality of service class identifier (QCI) associated with a communication requirement required per service (Para. [0018]-Mutikainen discloses network creates multiple bearers for the traffic flows that require different QCI. Para. [0003-0005]-Mutikainen discloses bearer is the enabler for traffic separation, it provides differential treatment for traffic with differing QoS requirements ... at least one processor, cause the apparatus to perform at least the following: receive at least one traffic flow; establish at least one bearer for communication; assign a first quality of service class identifier value associated with the at least one bearer; map the at least one traffic flow to the at least one bearer; and determine a second quality of service class identifier value for a data packet of the at least one traffic flow) ... wherein the communication requirement includes at least one of a Loss Rate or a Delay Budget (Claim [4]-Mutikainen discloses quality of service class identifier value is determined based on the following characteristics associated with the data packet: resource type, priority, packet delay budget and packet error loss rate).
CHANG et al. (US 20190082344 A1)-discloses the priority control is quality of service (QoS) control (Fig. 2, Para. [0050]-Chang discloses the controller 260 executes the one or multiple applications and performs communication in the connected state by using the one or multiple applications. Priority control (that is, QoS control) according to the application type is applied to the communication between the UE 200 and the network (eNB 100)), and a communication requirement is defined based on a quality of service class identifier (QCI) associated with a communication requirement required per service (Para. [0011]-Chang discloses user equipment receiving a Minimization of Drive Test (MDT) configuration message from a base station, the MDT configuration message including a packet delay threshold, measuring a packet delay in communication between the user equipment and the base station, where the packet delay is measured for each of a plurality of quality of service class identifiers (QCIs), and transmitting an MDT report to the base station) ... wherein the communication requirement includes at least one of a Loss Rate or a Delay Budget (Fig. 4, Para. [0051]-Chang discloses QCI-required thresholds for a delay allowable time (a delay budget) and a packet loss rate).
Nishida et al. (US 20130040645 A1)-discloses Figs. 3-6, Para. [0052-0053]-Nishida discloses when determining that such resources are not available, the radio base station eNodeB determines whether or not the priority call information is contained in the "Initial UE Context Setup Request" ... When determining that the priority call information is not contained, the radio base station eNodeB sends the mobility management node MME a "Negative Response" indicating that the resource allocation is not possible in step S105. Para. [0118]-Nishida discloses the radio base station eNodeB may transmit a "Paging" not containing the priority call information to the mobile station UE in step S2007. In this case, the radio base station eNodeB does not perform the priority control processing. Para. [0005]-Nishida discloses the problem of being unable to preferentially establish RRC (Radio Resource Control) connection for transmission of a signal to request a start of circuit-switched type of communications from a prioritized mobile station UE…. …Fig. 1-5
NAGASAKA et al. (US 20180027456 A1)-discloses Para. [0049]-Nagasaka discloses the MAC layer performs priority control of data, ... when the RRC {Radio Resource Control} connection is established {Without radio resource control, the MAC layer will not perform priority control of data}…. …Fig. 1-5
TOSHIO OHIRA (JP 2009239374 A)-discloses FIg. 21, Para. [0008-0009]-Ohira discloses packet transmission operation. Fig. 4, Para. [0037]-Ohira discloses when the number of high-priority transmission packet information reaches this predetermined value, in order to avoid transmission sinking of low-priority transmission packet information, The selection determination logic unit has a function of performing logical control such that low-priority transmission packet information is transmitted. This predetermined value is referred to as a selection criterion.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OLADIRAN GIDEON OLALEYE whose telephone number is (571)272-5377. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday: 07:30am - 05:30pm.
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 SPE, NICHOLAS A. JENSEN can be reached on (571) 270-5443. 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.
/OO/
Examiner, Art Unit 2472
/NICHOLAS A JENSEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2472