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 .
DETAILED ACTION
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, 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) 1,4-8,11-16,18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu et al (US 20240323997 A1) hereinafter as Xu in view of JIANG et al (US 20240244457 A1) hereinafter as JIANG.
Regarding claim(s) 1,8,16 Xu discloses a user equipment (UE) (See Fig(s). 1 UE as 101) comprising:
a processor; and a plurality of programming instructions that, when executed by the processor (See Fig(s). 21), perform operations including:
determining that a service which utilizes a telecommunication network is active on the UE (See Fig(s). 1, See ¶ 70.. The terminal 101 and the terminal 102 may be VR/AR terminals. The terminal 101 and the terminal 102 may be connected to a network via the base station 103 or another access point, and obtain a VR service/AR service from the cloud/edge cloud 104.); and
wherein the service is an extended reality (XR) service having a service type indicator indicating that the service is XR service (See ¶ (3, a video transmission service, cloud gaming (cloud gaming, CG), and extended reality (extended reality, XR), and the service type indicator indicates that the service is an XR service (See ¶ 147, The network device may determine, based on the statistical parameter of the delay jitter indicated by the first indication information, the DRX parameter and/or the CG resource that are/is required for transmitting an XR service. Alternatively, the network device determines, based on the statistical parameter of the burst length indicated by the first indication information, the DRX parameter and/or the CG resource that are/is required for transmitting an XR service.);
providing multiple service type indicators in a user assistance information message to a base station of the telecommunication network for multiple services that are active on the UE (See Fig(s). 1, See ¶ 66, 70, 230, services such as virtual reality (virtual reality, VR), augmented reality (augmented reality, AR), mixed reality (mixed reality, MR), and extended reality (XR).
Xu fails to disclose the multiple services including at least the XR service and at least one of a voice calling service, a video calling service, a messaging service, a video streaming service, a data browsing service, a video conferencing service, and a security camera service.
JIANG discloses multiple services including at least the XR service and at least one of a voice calling service, a video calling service, a messaging service, a video streaming service, a data browsing service, a video conferencing service, and a security camera service (See ¶ 205-206, the XR service source includes many different types of service flows. The different types of service flows may be a video flow, an audio flow, a data flow, and an action or control flow.). The optimum bandwidth for uplink/downlink communications ensures there is continuous communications without loss of data and/or signal.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the teachings of JIANG within Xu, so as to have continuous communications without loss of data and/or signal between base station and devices of interest.
Regarding claim(s) 4,11,18, JIANG discloses wherein the providing includes providing, in a traffic characteristics field of the UAI message, indication(s) of desired uplink or downlink bandwidth (See ¶ 86 the terminal sends UE assistance information (UAI) to the network side device. The assistance information includes a discontinuous reception (DRX) related parameter, a secondary cell group (SCG) configuration, a quantity of configured serving cells (Scells), an aggregate bandwidth).
The optimum bandwidth for uplink/downlink communications ensures there is continuous communications without loss of data and/or signal.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the teachings of JIANG within Xu, so as to have continuous communications without loss of data and/or signal.
Regarding claim(s) 5,19, Xu discloses wherein the determining and the providing are in response to an activation of the service on the UE (See ¶ 93, UAI specified in an existing protocol includes a DRX parameter. An InactivityTimer field describing the DRX parameter indicates a length of an activity period in a DRX cycle.).
Regarding claim(s) 6,15, Xu discloses wherein the providing is performed after transmission from the UE of a radio resource control (RRC) connection request and before receiving an RRC reconfiguration message (See ¶ 183, After receiving the DRX parameter in the RRC signaling, the terminal monitors the PDCCH based on the configured monitoring occasion, and transmits the XR service after detecting the PDCCH..
Regarding claim(s) 7,20, Xu discloses wherein the providing is performed conditionally based on a base station type of the base station (See Fig(s). 1, See ¶ 70 base station type may be an access point).
Regarding claim(s) 12, JIANG discloses wherein the taking the action includes determining that insufficient resources are available to the base station and the action is one of terminating a connection with the UE or handing the UE off to another base station or wireless access point (See ¶ 54, deactivation of resource from the network is same as terminating a connection).
Regarding claim(s) 13, JIANG discloses wherein the taking the action includes determining that sufficient resources are available to the base station and the action is proceeding with establishing a protocol data unit (PDU) session between the UE and a core network of the telecommunication network to use for the service (See ¶ 54, 96).
Regarding claim(s) 14, Xu discloses wherein the action includes adaptation of network traffic between the UE and the base station for lower resolution service (See ¶ abstract,8, delay jitter is type of lower resolution service).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed May 19, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With respect to 35 U.S.C. § 103/102(a) rejection of Claim(s) 1, Applicant contends inter alia “…Jiang's "service flows" are not the same as the "services" of claim 1. Jiang explicitly describes "service flows" as component data flows within a single AR service, not separate distinct services running concurrently on the UE…”.
Examiner respectfully disagrees, first off Applicant's arguments fail to comply with 37 CFR 1.111(b) because they amount to a general allegation that the claims define a patentable invention without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references.
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., services concurrently) are not recited in the rejected claim(s), nor does is lead one of skill in the art that suggests that the services in question are concurrent. Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Examiner asserts that Jiang explicitly discloses the XR services as having different types of service flows (See ¶ 205-206) which may include video, audio and/or data flow. Although the two concepts are distinct they are however related. For example “video services” and “video flow” are related as- one refers to the type of platform or delivering video content, while the other refers to the technical process of transmitting video data. One of skill in the art will appreciate that in order to transmit or deliver the video data it is inherent to have some method of delivering (i.e. service) said video data.
Further, Jiang explicitly discloses throughout the reference as “XR service flow generated by XR service source” (again See ¶ 206,209,217-218,241,277-281).
Examiner further asserts Applicant's arguments fail to comply with 37 CFR 1.111(b) because they amount to a general allegation that the claims define a patentable invention without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references. To establish a case of patentability (against an Office Action), the Applicant must provide some articulated reasoning with some rational underpinning to support the conclusion that the cited reference(s) fails to teach/suggest the contended limitation(s). The Applicant must do more than merely "recite" each limitation and claim as being not taught within the referenced art(s).
Thus, based on the foregoing reasoning’s’ Examiner asserts the cited references either alone or in combination teach/suggest limitations of claims 1 and therefore the rejection to said claim(s) is sustained.
Further, claims 8 and 1 recite similar features as claim 1 and therefore rejection to said claims is sustained.
Further, rejection to claims 4-7,11-15 and 18-20 is sustained as features being suggested/taught by above cited prior art(s).
Lastly, Examiner believes all of Applicant’s contentions have been appropriately addressed in this Office Action, however, the arguments made above are not intended to be exhaustive, and therefore nothing in this Action should be construed as an intent to concede with any issue with regard to any claim, except as specifically stated in this Office Action.
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 RAJ JAIN whose telephone number is (571)272-3145. The examiner can normally be reached on M-Th 8-5.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Derrick Ferris can be reached 571-272-2123. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/RAJ JAIN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2411
Prosecution Insights