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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to new claims 15-24 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
Claims 15-16, 18, 20-21 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pan (US 2023/0038430) in view of Wang (US 2021/0258385).
Regarding claims 15 and 20, Pan describes a method by a packet data unit session anchor user plane function (PSA UPF)/PSA UPF entity in a wireless communication system (fig. 4A & para. 186 [PSA] UPF), comprising:
[a transceiver; and a processor operably coupled to the transceiver for]: (fig. 8 & para. 100, communication apparatus implemented with processor 810 & communication interface 830 (transceiver))]
receiving information related to application data, wherein the application data is associated with a protocol data unit (PDU) set (fig. 4A steps 401-403 & para. 181-186, UPF receives network information (rate, QoS) originally sent from video (application) server via SMF for streaming media (application) data from video (application) server to UE. The streaming media data transmission comprises PDU session (PDU set));
determining PDU set information related to the PDU set, based on the information related to the application data including downlink (DL) transport protocol information (fig. 4A step 404, UPF accepts & stores (determines) the received bit rate indicator + PDR (PDU set information including DL transport protocol information) for the steaming media comprising PDUs (PDU set) from video server to UE),
marking the PDU set information in a general packet radio service tunneling protocol (GTP) header (fig. 4B step 408 & para. 199, UPF performs, according to a PDR corresponding to the target bit rate indicator in the PDRs, QoS parameter configuration on the PDU session for the streaming media data transmission where target bit rate indicator is sent (marked) via a GTP header);
transmitting, to a base station, the PDU set information, wherein the PDU set comprises one or more PDUs for the application data (para. 179, PDU session (set) for streaming of media [via the RAN (base station)] is between the video server and UE).
Pan describes one single video (application) server fails to further explicitly describe:
wherein the one or more PDUs comprise various types of the application data.
Wang also describes application data transmission between network & UE (fig. 2), further describe:
wherein the one or more PDUs comprise various types of the application data (fig. 1 or 2 & para. 25, UE with various application services (data) from servers 109A & 109B).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to specify that the UPF of Pan to supply various application data types to UE as in Wang.
The motivation for combining the teachings is that this enables network to transport to user device various types of data in connection with applications/services (Wang, para. 1).
Regarding claims 16 and 21, Pan describes:
the PDU set information comprises importance information for the PDU set (para. 199, QoS parameter configuration on the PDU session (importance information for the PDU set/session).
Regarding claims 18 and 23, Pan describes:
wherein the DL transport protocol information is received from a policy control function (PCF) (fig. 4 steps 402 & 403 and fig. 5 steps 502 & 503, bit rate indicator & QoS parameters (DL transport protocol information) are sent from PCF to receiving UPF via SMF).
Claims 17 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pan and Wang as applied to claims 15 and 20 respectively, and further in view of Reider (US 2015/0289165).
Regarding claim 17 and 22, Pan fails to further explicitly describe:
In case that congestion in packet transmission is detected, discarding the PDU set, based on importance information of the PDU set.
wherein at least one PDU in the PDU set is discarded in presence of congestion based on importance information.
Reider also describes transmission of PDUs in a cellular system (fig. 1a-b), further describing:
wherein at least one PDU in the PDU set is discarded in presence of congestion based on importance information (para. 70, during congesting PDUs of low priority (importance) can be dropped (discarded)).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to specify that at least one PDU in Pan in view of Wang be discarded during congestion based on importance information as in Reider.
The motivation for combining the teachings is that this enables congestion avoidance mechanism while supporting QoS differentiation (Reider, para. 4 in view of para. 11).
Claims 19 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pan in view of Wang as applied to claim 15 and 20 respectively, and further in view of Tripathi (US 2021/0070738).
Regarding claim 19 and 24, Pan and Wang combined fail to further explicitly describe:
the application data is for an extended reality (XR) service.
Tripathi also describes wireless communication of QoS-based application between UE & network, comprising UPF (abstract & fig. 10), further describing:
the application data is for an extended reality (XR) service (para. 97, communication setup between UE & network for XR application).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to specify that the application data in Pan and Wang to be an XR application/service as in Triparthi.
The motivation for combining the teachings is that this enable network to support new applications and deployments (Triparthi, para. 3).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 WARNER WONG whose telephone number is (571)272-8197. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7am - 3:30pm.
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 supervisor, Ian Moore can be reached at 571-272-3085. 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.
WARNER WONG
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2469
/WARNER WONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2469
Prosecution Insights