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 filed 5/21/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Hong and Choi fail to disclose or suggest:
Feature A: “notifying, through an application layer, the computing power requirement information to a communication layer; and sending the computing power requirement information to a first network node through the communication layer; wherein the first network node is a core network node”; and
Feature B: sending the computing power requirement information to the first network node by at least one of:
a user-plane data packet,
a NAS message on a control plane, or
a first computing power sensing layer above NAS.
These arguments have been fully considered but are not persuasive.
I. Response regarding Feature A
Hong teaches the terminal generating and sending computing-resource-related information in response to application demand. Hong discloses that in response to a requirement for configuration of computing power resources, the first communication node sends a request message to the second communication node, see Hong [0166]; and when the first communication node is a terminal, the terminal sends the request message to the base station through physical layer signaling, see Hong [0167]-[0169]. Hong further discloses that the requirement for computing power resources may arise when starting an application, including VR/AR applications requiring massive image processing, see Hong [0057], [0114]-[0115]. Thus, Hong teaches that application-driven computing-resource demand at the terminal results in transmission of corresponding information by the terminal communication stack. The claimed “notifying, through an application layer … to a communication layer” is reasonably met or at least suggested under a broad interpretation. Applicant argues that Hong does not expressly disclose a separate step of first notifying a communication layer through an application layer. However, claim 1 does not require any narrowly defined proprietary interface or specific internal signaling syntax between layers. Under the broadest reasonable interpretation, the recited step encompasses the application-originated requirement information being provided from application functionality to the communication functionality of the terminal for transmission. A UE that sends an application-triggered request message necessarily includes software and/or protocol functionality by which the application-originated information is processed by lower communication functionality prior to transmission. In other words, for Hong’s terminal to send a request message reflecting application-driven computing resource needs, the information is reasonably understood as being passed from higher-layer terminal functionality to communication-layer functionality. Therefore, Hong at least suggests the claimed notifying/sending sequence.
Choi further evidences communication-layer/NAS transmission to a core network node. To the extent Applicant argues that Hong alone does not disclose a core network node, the rejection relies on Choi for this aspect. Choi expressly discloses a mobility management node in a core network, such as an MME or SGSN, see Choi claim 1, claims 8/17; and receiving a NAS message from the UE at the mobility management node in the core network, see Choi claim 1. Accordingly, the combination of Hong and Choi teaches or suggests sending terminal-originated information through communication-layer signaling to a core network node.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to adapt Hong’s terminal-originated computing-resource request signaling to the NAS/core-network signaling framework taught by Choi in order to allow centralized mobility-management/core-network handling of terminal-originated service information, improve coordination with network-side resource management, and use known control-plane signaling paths between the UE and the core network. Using a known UE-to-core NAS signaling path for terminal-originated information would have been no more than the predictable use of prior art elements according to their established functions.
Therefore, Applicant’s arguments regarding Feature A are not persuasive.
II. Response regarding Feature B
Applicant argues that Choi does not disclose using a NAS message on a control plane to transmit information to a core network node, and that Choi’s NAS procedures are only for mobility management. This argument is not persuasive.
Choi expressly discloses UE transmission of NAS messages to a core network node. Choi expressly teaches receiving, by a mobility management node in a core network, a first NAS message from a UE, see Choi claim 1; the mobility management node being an MME or SGSN, see Choi claims 8 and 17; the first NAS message being, for example, a Tracking Area Update Request, Routing Area Update, or paging response, see Choi claim 7; and UE initiation of TRACKING AREA UPDATE REQUEST messages to the MME, see Choi [0210]-[0229].
Thus, contrary to Applicant’s argument, Choi expressly discloses that a UE transmits a NAS message on the control plane to a core network node.
The claim does not require that NAS messaging be used only for the same purpose as in the reference. Applicant argues that Choi’s NAS messages are used for mobility management or release of LIPA PDN connectivity rather than for carrying computing power requirement information. However, in an obviousness analysis, the test is not whether the secondary reference uses the message for the identical purpose recited in the claim. Rather, the question is whether the reference teaches the claimed communication mechanism and whether it would have been obvious to use that known mechanism for the claimed information.
Choi teaches the mechanism of UE-originated NAS control-plane signaling and sent to a core network node. Hong teaches terminal-originated information reflecting a need for computing resources. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the known NAS control-plane signaling path of Choi to convey Hong’s terminal-originated computing-resource-related information to a core-network function, especially where the information concerns network-side allocation or handling.
Claim 1 recites “at least one of,” and the NAS-message alternative is sufficient. Therefore, the rejection need not show all three alternatives. Teaching or suggesting one of the recited alternatives is sufficient. Since Choi teaches UE transmission by NAS message on a control plane to a core network node, the limitation is met. Applicant’s arguments directed to the absence of the user-plane data packet alternative and the computing power sensing layer alternative are therefore not persuasive, because the claim is written in the disjunctive: “at least one of.”
III. Applicant’s argument that Choi does not disclose “transmitting information to the core network node” is inconsistent with Choi.
Applicant states that Choi’s NAS messages are limited to location update or paging response and are not used to transmit information to a core network node. This is not supported by the reference. Choi explicitly discloses that the mobility management node in the core network receives a first NAS message from the UE, and that the first NAS message may be a TAU request, RAU message, service request, or paging response. These are transmissions of information from the UE to the core network node. The fact that Choi uses those messages in a mobility/LIPA context does not negate that they are UE-to-core-network NAS transmissions. Thus, Applicant’s reading of Choi is unduly narrow.
For the reasons above, Hong teaches terminal-originated computing-resource request information arising from application need and being sent by terminal communication functionality. Choi teaches UE transmission of NAS control-plane messages to a core network node such as an MME/SGSN. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use Choi’s known NAS/core-network signaling path for Hong’s terminal-originated computing-resource-related information to obtain predictable benefits of centralized network handling and known UE-to-core signaling. Accordingly, Applicant’s arguments concerning Features A and B are not persuasive.
IV. Claims 10 and 20 includes similar features as in the subject matter of claim 1. Thus, for similar considerations and conclusions as with respect to claim 1, claims 10 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Hong and Choi.
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.
Claims 1, 3-4, 6,10, 12-17 and 20-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hong, Wei (US 2023/0276430 A1, hereinafter referred to as “Hong”.) in view of Choi; Noun (US20190124717A1, hereinafter referred to as “Choi”.)
Regarding claims 1, 4, 6, 12 & 20, Hong teaches a resource scheduling method in which a first communication node sends a request message for requesting configuration of computing power resources to a second communication node, and receives a response message carrying configuration information of the configured computing power resources. See Hong, Abstract; paragraphs [0005]-[0010], [0046]-[0048], [0163]-[0165]. Hong further teaches that the first communication node may be a terminal, and the second communication node may be a base station, [0052]-[0053], [0110]-[0111]; when starting an application, such as a VR or AR application requiring massive image data processing, the first communication node sends a message requesting configuration of computing power resources, [0057], [0114]-[0115]; the first communication node may, based on a requirement for computing power resources, send a request message requesting configuration of computing power resources, [0063]-[0067], [0121]-[0124]; the request message may include information such as amount and category of computing power resources, [0067]-[0071], [0124]-[0128]; in response to a requirement of the first communication node for configuration of the computing power resources, the request message is sent to the second communication node, [0090]-[0093], [0166]; and where the first communication node is a terminal and the second communication node is a base station, the terminal may send the request message through physical layer signaling, including PUCCH or SR, [0094]-[0100], [0167]-[0169]. Thus, Hong teaches or at least suggests: a terminal-side determination of computing-resource-related requirement information responsive to application execution and processing demand; and sending that information from the terminal using terminal communication functionality. More specifically, Hong teaches the limitation of “determining computing power requirement information, wherein the computing power requirement information indicates computing power resource information required when the terminal performs data transmission and/or data processing” because Hong discloses that the terminal, based on its requirement for computing power resources, including requirements arising when starting applications such as VR/AR applications performing massive image processing, generates and sends a request for computing power resources, including amount/category information of the requested resources. Hong [0057], [0063]-[0067], [0114]-[0115], [0121]-[0128]. Hong also teaches or suggests “notifying, through an application layer, the computing power requirement information to a communication layer” because Hong discloses that the computing-resource request arises from application execution at the terminal and is then sent by terminal communication functionality. Under the broadest reasonable interpretation, application-originated computing-resource requirement information being provided for transmission by terminal communication functionality reasonably reads on or at least suggests notifying, through an application layer, the computing power requirement information to a communication layer. Hong [0057], [0090]-[0100], [0114]-[0115], [0166]-[0169].
Hong further teaches “sending the computing power requirement information … through the communication layer” because Hong discloses sending the request message from the terminal using communication signaling, including physical layer signaling, PUCCH, or SR. Hong [0094]-[0100], [0167]-[0169].
However, Hong does not expressly teach that the first network node is a core network node, nor does Hong expressly teach transmitting the information by NAS message on a control plane.
Choi teaches a method in a core network in which a mobility management node in the core network receives a first NAS message from a UE via a network element. Choi, Abstract; claim 1; [0032]-[0040], [0121]-[0125], [0210]-[0229].
Choi further teaches that the mobility management node may be an MME or SGSN, claim 8 / claim 17; the first NAS message may be a Tracking Area Update Request, Routing Area Update, Service Request, Extended Service Request, or paging response, claim 6 / claim 7; the UE initiates a TRACKING AREA UPDATE REQUEST to the MME, [0210]-[0229]; and the UE receives an indication from lower layers and then triggers NAS signaling toward the core network, [0118]-[0125], [0121]-[0125], [0132]-[0135]. Thus, Choi teaches or at least suggests a first network node that is a core network node; and sending information from the UE to that core network node by using a NAS message on a control plane. More specifically, Choi teaches the limitations of: “wherein the first network node is a core network node” because the first network node in Choi is a mobility management node in the core network, such as an MME or SGSN. Choi claim 1; claim 8; claim 17.
Choi also teaches the sending … comprises at least one of … transmitting the computing power requirement information to the first network node by using a non-access stratum (NAS) message on a control plane” because Choi discloses the UE transmitting a NAS message to the core-network mobility management node, including TAU, RAU, Service Request, or paging response messages. Choi claim 1; claim 6; claim 7; [0210]-[0229]. Although Choi uses NAS signaling in a mobility/LIPA context, Choi nevertheless teaches the communication mechanism of UE-originated NAS control-plane signaling to a core network node.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hong’s terminal-originated computing-resource request signaling to use the known NAS control-plane signaling path to a core network node as taught by Choi. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to: enable core-network-level handling of terminal-originated service or resource-related information; use a known and established UE-to-core signaling mechanism for information relevant to network-side resource management; improve coordination of terminal requests with network-side control and allocation functions; and achieve the predictable result of communicating terminal-originated requirement information to a core-network entity using established control-plane procedures.
Regarding claims 3, 21 and 15, Hong further teaches an application scope of the computing power requirement information comprises an application data flow; an application data packet; a session channel; or the terminal (Figs. 2-10 shows data flow/channel/bearer/wireless connection between the first communication node (base station) and the second communication node (terminal)).
Regarding claims 16, 17, Hong further teaches sending first information to the terminal, wherein the first information comprises at least one basic computational unit supported by the first network node; and wherein the computing power requirement information comprises a type of the basic computational unit and a computational amount corresponding to a target computational requirement, wherein the target computational requirement is a computational requirement when the terminal performs the data transmission and/or the data processing (Para [0059 & 0068]).
Regarding claim 10, Hong teaches a data transmission method, performed by a first network node, wherein the method comprises: receiving computing power requirement information, wherein the computing power requirement information indicates computing power resource information required when a terminal performs data transmission and/or data processing (Fig. 8, Step 71, receiving a request message for requesting configuration of computing power resources from a first communication node); selecting a target computing power resource that satisfies the computing power requirement information and/or an identifier of a network element function that satisfies the target computing power resource from a preset computing power resource; and performing the data processing and/or the data transmission based on the target computing power resource and/or the identifier of the network element function (Fig. 8, Step 81, and Para [0147-0154]).
However, Hong fails to teach receiving the computing power requirement information to the first network node by using a non-access stratum (NAS) message on a control plane for providing a mobility management message or a session management message.
In the same field of endeavor, Choi teaches the standard use of NAS control‑plane messaging (see Choi FIGs.1–6 and associated paragraphs regarding NAS/TAU/RAU and NAS containers. Choi discloses that NAS messages are routinely used to deliver UE‑originated reporting and control information to network functions and describes procedures by which higher‑layer information can be encapsulated in NAS messages and forwarded to appropriate core functions). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Hong’s teaching of the terminal forming and needing to send computing‑power requirement information to the network with Choi’s teaching that NAS control‑plane messages are the routine, standard means for delivering UE control/assistance information to core network functions. Hong teaches the new information type (compute requirement); Choi teaches a well‑known transport (NAS). The combination is a straightforward application of a known signaling channel (NAS) to carry a new kind of UE assistance/control information. The motivation to combine is explicit and practical: once a UE needs to report control/assistance information to core functions, NAS is an established, reliable mechanism to deliver such information to core nodes (registration/SMF/AMF), particularly for UE capabilities, registration and session management payloads. Choi shows that NAS containers and NAS message types are designed to carry comparable UE data to core NFs.
Regarding claim 13, Hong further teaches wherein the receiving the computing power requirement information transmitted by using a first computing power sensing layer further comprises: receiving, through a second computing power sensing layer, the computing power requirement information transmitted by using the first computing power sensing layer, wherein the second computing power sensing layer is an upper layer of an NAS layer in the first network node (Hong further discloses a “first computing power sensing layer” above NAS in the terminal, and describes transmission of the sensing‑layer message to the network (see Hong ¶ [0064]–[0066], FIG. 4B, FIG. 4C, FIG. 4D). Hong further describes a corresponding “second computing power sensing layer” on the network side (peer layer to the terminal’s first sensing layer), and shows the network node receiving the sensing‑layer message (see Hong ¶ [0064]–[0078], FIG. 4B–4D).
Claims 7 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hong in view of Choi and further view of Lei et al. (US 20220294574 A1, hereinafter referred to as “Lei”).
Hong in combination of Choi teaches using the physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) for sending computing resource information, but silent on wherein the information is set in a reserved field of the data packet header. However, Lei teaches using one or more reserved fields or unused fields to carry PUCCH signaling information (Claims 7 and 42 of Lei). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to set the computing resources information in the reserved fields or unused fields of the packet header for enhancing signaling between the terminal and the base station without changing the format of the packet.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hong in view of Choi and further in view of Ahmadi (US 2014/0038654 A1).
Regarding claim 14, Hong and Choi fail to teach wherein the receiving computing power requirement information comprises: receiving computing power requirement information forwarded by a second network node, wherein the computing power requirement information is sent by the terminal to the second network node. However, Ahmadi, in the same field of endeavor teaches when UE 708 requests a computing resource, the computing resource may be provided by one or more of serving BS 704, non-serving BS 702, UE 706, and/or one or more other nodes in the cellular network (Fig. 7, Para 0092-0093]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teaching of Ahmadi in the system of Hong in combination with Choi for providing the system with distributed computing processing.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-9 and 18-19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
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 RICKY QUOC NGO whose telephone number is (571)272-3139. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:00 AM - 5:00 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.
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.
/RICKY Q NGO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2464
Prosecution Insights