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 .
Status of Claims
This Office Action is in response to claims filed on 8/8/2023.
Claims 1-27 and 37-63 have been cancelled.
Claims 28-36 and 64-72 remain pending in the application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 28, 32, 34, 36, 64, 67, 69-70 and 72 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Pateromichelakis et al. (US 2023/0328580 A1).
Regarding claim 28; Pateromichelakis discloses an apparatus comprising: at least one processor (processor 605; see Fig. 6); and at least one memory including computer program code (memory 610 may store program code; see paragraph [0183] and Fig. 6); the at least one memory and the computer program code configured to, with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus at least to perform steps comprising: generating, by a base station (BS), a user equipment (UE) report for a UE associated with the BS (a gNB generates a message indicating QoS parameters for at least one QoS flow to P-QoS xAPP; the at least one QoS flow corresponding to at least one UE; a UE is associated with a serving E2 node (gNB); see paragraphs [0005], [0096], [0130] and Fig. 1, Fig. 4); associating, by the BS, an application identification or correlation (ID) along with the UE report, the ID being associated with an application category being served by at least one data radio bearer (DRB) (the message includes a QoS flow ID, in a 5GS, QoS flows are mapped in the access network to DRBs; a DRB established between the UE and the gNB may support a QoS flow; a QoS flow corresponds to a QoS flow type/an application category (e.g. GBR, non-GBR et al.); see paragraphs [0063], [0130] and Fig. 4) or it is an identifier referring to a specific application detection filter identifying an application that is served by the DRB (no patentable weight is given due to the claim language or); receiving, by the BS, assistance information based on the reports sent for the DRB, the assistance information being associated with the application (the gNB receives a control report message with an expected QoS adaptation pattern for the QoS flow from the P-QoS xAPP; xAPP is an application included in the near-RT RIC; the QoS flow is associated with a xAPP and maps to the DRB; the P-QoS xAPP considers the list of QoS profiles and their priorities received from the gNB when generating the expected QoS adaptation pattern; see paragraphs [0063], [0069], [0130], [0141], [0149] and Fig. 4); and scheduling, by the BS, resources for the UE based on the assistance information (the gNB applies QoS flow re-mapping to perform RAN-level adaptation (e.g., scheduling, adaptation of DRB resources/mapping); see paragraph [0157] and Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 64; Pateromichelakis discloses an apparatus comprising: at least one processor (processor 605; see Fig. 6); and at least one memory including computer program code (memory 610 may store program code; see paragraph [0183] and Fig. 6); the at least one memory and the computer program code configured to, with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus at least to perform steps comprising: receiving, by a RAN intelligent controller (RIC) from a base station (BS), a user equipment (UE) report, the UE report including an identification (ID) associating the UE with an application (P-QoS xAPP receives a message indicating QoS parameters for at least one QoS flow from a serving RAN node (gNB); the at least one QoS flow corresponding to at least one UE; the message includes a QoS flow ID; the xAPP is an application included in a near-RT RIC; see paragraphs [0005], [0063], [0069], [0130] and Fig. 4); generating, by the RIC, application traffic patterns based on the UE report using a machine learning (ML) or a statistical model (the RIC translates the trained AI/ML model to an expected QoS adaptation patter for the respective QoS flow; the P-QoS xAPP considers the list of QoS profiles and their priorities received from the gNB when generating the expected QoS adaptation pattern; see paragraphs [130], [0138] - [0142] and Fig. 4); generating, by the RIC, assistance information based on the traffic patterns using the ML or statistical model (the P-QoS xAPP generates a control report message with the expected QoS adaptation pattern for the QoS flow; the expected QoS adaptation pattern is derived from a trained AI model; see paragraphs [0141], [0148] – [0149] and Fig.4); and communicating, by the RIC, the assistance information to the BS (the RIC transmits P-QoS control report message with the expected QoS adaptation pattern for the QoS flow to the serving RAN node; see paragraph [0149] and Fig. 4).
Regarding claims 32 and 67; Pateromichelakis discloses wherein the ID is a correlation ID associated with an application category being served over one or more DRBs (in a 5GS, QoS flows are mapped in the access network to DRBs; a DRB established between the UE and the gNB may support a QoS flow; a QoS flow ID corresponds to a flow type/an application category (e.g. GBR, non-GBR et al.); therefore, the QoS flow ID is associated with an application category being served over a DRB; see paragraphs [0005], [0063], [0096] – [0097] and Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 34; Pateromichelakis discloses wherein the UE report is based on data associated with the application and a plurality of UEs employing the application (the near-RT RIC may include a plurality of applications (xAPP); the P-QoS xAPP has subscribed to receive QoS parameters for specific UEs from gNB; the QoS parameters include QoS flow ID and QoS profiles; see paragraphs [0069] and [0129] – [130] and Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 36; Pateromichelakis discloses wherein the assistance information is based on a statistical or machine learning (ML) model processing a plurality of UE reports (the message sent to the gNB is based on AI/ML model; the gNB transmits UE reports periodically in order to allow AI function to collect enough data for enhancing the AI/ML mode; see paragraphs [0104], [0112], [0130] and [0149]).
Regarding claim 69; Pateromichelakis discloses wherein the application traffic is based on one application employed by a plurality of UEs (the near-RT RIC may include a plurality of applications (xAPP); the P-QoS xAPP has subscribed to receive QoS parameters for specific UEs from gNB; see paragraphs [0069] and [0129] – [130]).
Regarding claim 70; Pateromichelakis discloses the apparatus of claim 64, wherein the RIC includes a near-real time RIC and a non-real time RIC (the RIC includes a near-RT RIC and non-RT-RIC; see Fig. 4) and the ML model is trained by the non-real time RIC (a trained AI/ML model is sent to P-QoS xAPP by the non-RT RIC; see paragraph [0138] and Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 72; Pateromichelakis discloses the apparatus of claim 64, wherein the RIC collects information from a plurality of UE reports associated with the application over a period of time (the gNB may provide radio parameters periodically to support the P-QoS xAPP on-line analytics; the radio parameters may include measurements and parameters associated with UEs; see paragraphs [0130] – [0131] and Fig. 4), and the assistance information is based on the information collected over a period of time (the P-QoS xAPP interacts with the corresponding database to request and fetch the data required to perform AI enabled QoS policy decision, taking into account of the UE route; the P-QoS xAPP translates the trained AI model to an expected QoS adaptation pattern for the respective QoS flow and sends the information/message to the gNB; see paragraphs [0130], [0139] – [0142] and Fig. 4).
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.
Claims 29 and 65 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pateromichelakis; in view of Pateromichelakis2 et al. (US 2023/0246724 A1).
Regarding claim 29; Pateromichelakis discloses a gNB transmits a UE report to an RIC.
Pateromichelakis does not explicitly disclose the gNB monitors traffic pattern for UL/DL on the DRB associated with the UE.
Pateromichelakis2 discloses the apparatus of claim 28, further comprising: monitoring, by the BS, a traffic pattern for an uplink (UL) on the DRB associated with the UE (the event monitored include UL total PRB usage and distribution of usage and DRB related measurements; see paragraph [0116]); and monitoring, by the BS, a traffic pattern for a downlink (DL) on the DRB associated with the UE (the event monitored include DL total PRB usage and distribution of usage and DRB related measurements; see paragraph [0116]), wherein the UE report is based on data associated with the application acquired during the monitoring of the UL and the monitoring of the DL (IM xAPP receives RAN monitoring events, UE monitoring events, and/or measurements periodically; see paragraph [0116]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Pateromichelakis and Pateromichelakis2 to monitor traffic pattern for UL/DL on the DRB associated with the UE in order to improve resource utilization efficiency (see paragraph [0071] of Pateromichelakis2).
Regarding claim 65; Pateromichelakis discloses a gNB transmits a UE report to an RIC.
Pateromichelakis does not explicitly disclose the gNB monitors traffic pattern for UL/DL on the DRB associated with the UE.
Pateromichelakis2 discloses wherein the UE report is based on data associated with the application acquired during a monitoring of an uplink (UL) on a data radio bearer (DRB) associated with the UE and the monitoring of a downlink (DL) on the DRB associated with the UE (the event monitored include UL total PRB usage and distribution of usage and DRB related measurements; the event monitored include DL total PRB usage and distribution of usage and DRB related measurements; IM xAPP receives RAN monitoring events, UE monitoring events, and/or measurements periodically; see paragraph [0116]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Pateromichelakis and Pateromichelakis2 to monitor traffic pattern for UL/DL on the DRB associated with the UE in order to improve resource utilization efficiency (see paragraph [0071] of Pateromichelakis2).
Claims 30 and 71 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pateromichelakis; in view of Diachina et al. (US 2023/0422098 A1).
Regarding claims 30 and 71; Pateromichelakis discloses an RIC transmits the assistance information to a gNB.
Pateromichelakis does not explicitly disclose the assistance information includes TSCAI.
Diachina discloses wherein the assistance information includes Time Sensitive Communication Assistance Information (TSCAI) (a gNB receives, from a network node, information indicating a burst end time (BET) for a burst of data traffic within a traffic flow; a BET is in TSCAI; see paragraphs [0001], [0153] and Fig. 15).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Pateromichelakis and Diachina to include TSCAI in the assistance information in order to schedule radio resource more efficiently (see paragraph [0003] of Diachina).
Claims 31 and 66 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pateromichelakis; in view of Hong (US 2023/0082017 A1).
Regarding claims 31 and 66; Pateromichelakis discloses a UE report includes a correlation ID.
Pateromichelakis does not explicitly disclose the ID is received by the BS from a SMF.
Hong discloses wherein the ID is a Correlation ID received by the BS from a session management function (SMF) (the SMF may transmit QoS Flow ID to the base station; see paragraphs [0160] and [0165]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Pateromichelakis and Hong to receive the correlation ID from an SMF to increase efficiency of use of radio resources (see paragraph [0003] of Hong).
Claims 33 and 68 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pateromichelakis; in view of Hong; and in further view of Raghuram et al. (US 20200045762 A1).
Regarding claims 33 and 68; the combination of Pateromichelakis and Hong discloses receiving a correlation ID from an SMF.
The combination of Pateromichelakis and Hong does not explicitly disclose the correlation ID is derived based on TFT.
Raghuram discloses wherein the Correlation ID is derived by the SMF based on the Traffic Flow Templates employed to map the service flows to the radio bearers (the DRB is used to carry data associated with an EPS bearer wherein the specific data flow may be identified by a traffic flow template with a given quality of service; see paragraph [0057]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Pateromichelakis, Hong and Raghuram to derive the correlation ID based on the TFT in order to use DRB assignment as an input for providing a technology indicator (see paragraph [0057] of Raghuram).
Claim 35 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pateromichelakis; in view of Dhammawat et al. (US 2022/0141703 A1).
Regarding claim 35; Pateromichelakis discloses a gNB transmits a UE report to a RIC.
Pateromichelakis does not explicitly disclose associating a unique ID with each application running on the UE.
Dhammawat discloses the apparatus of claim 28, wherein the UE report is based on data associated with the UE implementing a plurality of applications and each of the plurality of applications is associated with a unique ID (a plurality of applications for UEs are operating in a mobile network; a dedicated QoS flow ID is created based on application identified and traffic for an application for a particular UE; see paragraph [0075]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Pateromichelakis and Dhammawat to associate a unique ID with each application running on the UE in order to optimize use of QoS resources (see paragraph [0023] of Dhammawat).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NING LI whose telephone number is (571)270-0624. The examiner can normally be reached Monday, Tuesday, Thursday 8:30am - 5:00pm.
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, Jeffrey Rutkowski can be reached at (571) 270-1215. 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.
/N.L/Examiner, Art Unit 2415
/MANSOUR OVEISSI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2415