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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 02/12/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 04/09/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the applied references do not disclose or teach the limitation of “wherein initiating the redistribution of the bandwidth comprises initiating providing a second indication to a third node operating in the communications network, the second indication indicating a result of the determination”.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Dao discloses “wherein initiating the redistribution of the bandwidth comprises initiating providing a second indication to a third node operating in the communications network, the second indication indicating a result of the determination”; Dao discloses that the PCF receives congestion notifications and uses the notifications/reports to assign network resources fairly to the PDU flows (0032-0033). Dao further discloses that the AF sends QoS and QoE reports for the real-time video/voice calls to the NWDA (0064); Dao clearly discloses recommendations for QoS parameters to the PCF; the QoS parameters include GBR, MBR, etc. for real-time PDU flows (0068). Since Dao discloses that reports, for utilization of resources of network functions, RAN nodes and other elements in the network, are sent which leads to fair distribution of resources (i.e. bandwidth). See other relevant passages such as 0046 and 0078-0079.
Thus, all the claimed and argued limitations have been met.
Previous Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 10/23/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues “Dao failed to disclose prediction of QoS threshold in real-time during the communication.”
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Dao discloses that the NWDA predicts the network function resource utilization and provides potential congestion times during the day and the length of congestion (0046). This is clearly a prediction. Dao discloses that the NWDA provides a QoS policy recommendation for certain criteria, including certain network slices, certain services, such as real-time video calls and real-time voice calls (0046). Dao discloses that the AF sends QoS and QoE reports for the real-time video/voice calls to the NWDA (0064). Dao clearly discloses recommendations for QoS parameters to the PCF; the QoS parameters include GBR, MBR, etc. for real-time PDU flows (0068). Thus, Dao clearly discloses predictions of QoS thresholds in real-time during the communication.
Applicant argues that Dao does not disclose or suggest the feature "determining, in real time, whether or not a respective quality of service threshold is predicted to be exceeded or underachieved in respective communications provided to one or more communication devices operating in the communications network".
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. As can be seen from the above response, Dao clearly discloses predictions in real-time of real-time video/voice calls of QoS parameters such as GBR, i.e. threshold. Dao discloses real-time measurement collection and prediction of resource utilization and congestion, and use of those analytics to estimate QoS parameters and congestion times. NWDA receives measurement reports in real-time (measurement requests/acknowledgements, Nd2/Nd3/Nd4 flows), thus determination in real-time and predicts the network function resource utilization and provide potential congestion times during the day and the length of congestion, thus prediction to be exceeded or underachieved (0046, 0076-0079). Thus, Dao clearly discloses determining, in real time, whether or not a respective quality of service threshold is predicted to be exceeded or underachieved in respective communications provided to one or more communication devices operating in the communications network.
Applicant states that “Additionally, independent Claims 11, 16, and 17 recite, inter alia, features similar to those recited above in independent Claim 1. Accordingly, Applicant respectfully submits that independent Claims 11, 16, and 17 are patentable for at least the same reasons discussed above regarding independent Claim 1, the allowance of which is respectfully requested”.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Dao clearly discloses claim 1 as seen by the above response as well as the passages cited in the rejection below. The same reasoning is applied to claims 11, 16 and 17. Hence, all the argued and claimed limitations have been met.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1, 2 and 4-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20180262924 herein Dao in view of herein US 20160323758 Georke.
Claim 1, Dao discloses A method, performed by a first node, the method being for handling quality of service in a communications network, the first node operating the communications network, the method comprising: -determining, in real time, whether or not a respective quality of service threshold is predicted to be exceeded or underachieved in respective communications provided to one or more communication devices operating in the communications network (see para 0046 where it mentions that the QoS policy recommendation can be done based on NMF), the determining being based on one or more first indications received, in real time, from one or more second nodes operating in the communications network, the one or more first indications indicating, in real time, one or more respective quality of service parameters for the respective communications provided to the one or more communication devices (see claim 1 of Dao where the data is collected from network entities by NWDA for analyzing the received data), and
initiating a redistribution of a bandwidth available in the communications network to at least one of the one or more communication devices, the initiation of the redistribution being based on a result of the determination (0032-0033, the PCF receives congestion notifications and uses the notifications/reports to assign network resources fairly to the PDU flows).
Dao may not explicitly disclose redistribution of bandwidth to the communication devices is done in case of QoS requirement is not met.
Georke discloses redistribution of bandwidth to the communication devices is done in case of QoS requirement is not met (modifying packet flows to decrease the bandwidth needed and switching one or more packet flows to another radio access transceiver in case of load balancing). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Dao to include redistribution as taught by Georke so as to benefit operations of user equipment on underloaded networks.
Claim 2, as analyzed with respect to the limitations as discussed in claim 1.
Claim 4, Dao may not explicitly disclose receiving (200) a subscription from the third node (113) to receive the second indication in real time, and wherein the providing of the second indication is based on the received subscription.
Georke discloses receiving (200) a subscription from the third node (113) to receive the second indication in real time, and wherein the providing of the second indication is based on the received subscription (0065, 0019). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Dao to include redistribution as taught by Georke so as to benefit operations of user equipment on underloaded networks.
Claim 5, Dao discloses wherein the second indication comprises at least one of a. data consumption per at least one of: geographical area, radio coverage area, network slice, communication device (130), and/or group of communication devices (130), b. type of data used, c. uplink and/or downlink data usage per communication device (130) and/or per group of communication devices (130), d. quality of service provisioned for data sessions per communication device (130) and/or per group of communication devices (130), and e. application usage data per communication device (130) and/or per group of communication devices (130) (0030, QoS).
Claim 6, Dao discloses wherein the method further comprises: a) one of: [[-]] subscribing (201a) with the one or more second nodes (112) to receive the one or more first indications in real time, and [[-]] sending (201b) one or more requests to the one or more second nodes (112) to receive the one or more first indications in real time[[,]]; and b)[[-]] receiving (202) the one or more first indications in real time from the one or more second nodes (112)based on one of: a) the one or more subscriptions, and b) the sent one or more requests, wherein the one or more first indications are received as one or more responses (0030, 0064).
Claim 7, Dao discloses wherein the second indication comprises at least one of:a. data consumption per geographical area, communication device (130), group of communication devices (130) and/or per radio coverage area received from a Session Management Function, SMF, b. type of data used from an SMF, c. uplink and/or downlink data usage per communication device (130) and/or per group of communication devices (130) from an SMF, d. quality of service provisioned for data sessions per communication device (130) and/or per group of communication devices (130) received from a Policy Control Function, PCF, and e. application usage data per communication device (130) and/or per group of communication devices (130) received from an Application Function, AF (0030, 0107, resource usage and QoS).
Claim 8, Dao discloses the method further comprising one of:[[-]] changing (202) at least one of the one or more subscriptions, and [[-]] deleting (203) at least one of the one or more subscriptions, and wherein the received one or more first indications are further based on the changed or deleted at least one of the one or more subscriptions (0147).
Claim 9, Dao discloses wherein the first node (111) is a Network Data Analytics Function, NWDAF, the one or more second nodes (112) comprise at least one of: an SMF, a User Plane Function, UPF, an AF, and a PCF, and the third node (113) is a Converged Charging Function, CHF (0008).
Claim 10, Dao discloses wherein the first node (111) is a Management and Data Analytics Function, MDAF, the one or more second nodes (112) comprise at least one of: an SMF, a UPF, an AF, and a PCF, the third node (113) is a CHF, and wherein the first node (111) receives the one or more first indications via an NWDAF (0008) .
Claim 11, as analyzed with respect to the limitations as discussed in claim 1.
Claim 12, as analyzed with respect to the limitations as discussed in claim 3.
Claim 13, as analyzed with respect to the limitations as discussed in claim 4.
Claim 14, as analyzed with respect to the limitations as discussed in claim 5.
Claim 15, as analyzed with respect to the limitations as discussed in claim 10.
Claim 16, as analyzed with respect to the limitations as discussed in claim 1.
Claim 17, as analyzed with respect to the limitations as discussed in claim 1.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 20240284246 A1 - This disclosure discloses a first network element and a second network element. The first network element has data analytics capability, and includes a transceiver, a memory configured to store executable instructions, and a processor configured to execute the executable instructions stored in the memory to cause the transceiver to notify, to a second network element, QoS of an analytics target according to a QoS analytics request from the second network element. The analytics target is indicated by the QoS analytics request.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Mehmood B. Khan whose telephone number is (571)272-9277. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30 am-6:30 pm.
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.
/Mehmood B. Khan/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2419
Prosecution Insights