Detail Action
This office action is a response to an amendment submitted on 04/27/2026.
Claims 1- 7 and 11- 23 are pending for examination.
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 .
Drawings
The drawings were received on 01/31/2024. These drawings are acceptable for examination proceedings.
Response to Amendment
Claims 1- 3, 7, 17- 19 and 23 6 have been amended.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 04/27/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments are summarized a following;
Applicant argued that Prior Arts does not teach or suggest that at least in part, “providing, to the target node, (a) association information, (b) reference identifier… indicating a relationship between QoE configuration identifier and the reference identifier”. [See, Remarks Pg. 2-4].
In response to applicant’s argument, the examiner respectfully disagrees with the current above arguments.
In response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, Applicant’s arguments focus on whether the Prior Arts disclosed the exact claim language in isolation, rather than whether the claimed subject matter as a whole would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art. The rejection properly relies on the combined Prior Arts ZTE and Eklof, where source node provide providing, to the target node, (b) a reference identifier and (c) a QoE configuration identifier to identify a QoE configuration within the plurality of QoE configurations [ZTE: Pg. 4 teaches information including QoE Reference ID and MCE are also necessary to be convey from source RAN node to the target RAN node. And in order to support multiple QoE function, a QoE configuration list should be supported in QoE information. Proposal 3: In order to support multiple QoE function, a QoE configuration list should be supported in QoE information which provide from source RAN node to target RAN node. The QoE configuration includes : 1: List of UE Application layer measurement configuration, QoE Reference ID], and association information [Eklof: Par. 85; For handover preparation from E-UTRA to NR, the source RAT issues a handover preparation request message to the target RAT passing a transparent RRC container with necessary information to prepare the handover at the target side].
Therefore, applicant’s arguments are not persuasive.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention. In these claims 1 and 17, the claims recites “association information” that indicates a relationship between the QoE configuration identifier and the reference identifier, and further requires that the source node provide such association information to the target node. However, the specification, does not reasonably disclosed sufficient mechanism by which the source node transmit such information. The specification and claim 5 of the application generally describes association information includes a common RRC identifier mapped to the QoE configuration identifier and the reference identifier”. This disclosure, at most, suggest that a common RRC identifier/ association information may be used as a linkage between identifiers. The claims appear to recite the result of mapping of identifiers in accordance with the association information; it does not disclose that the source node actually sends a separate association information/ common RRC identifier during handover to target node. Thus, the claim recites a result of mapping based on association information without adequate support for the full scope of the written description of, and fails to enable, the claimed ‘association information’.
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) 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 non-obviousness.
Claims 1-7, 11-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZTE et al. “Measurement Collection and Continuity in Intra-System Intra-RAT Mobility”, hereinafter “ZTE”; and in further view of Eklof et al. (US 20230116324 A1), hereinafter “Eklof”.
Regarding claim 1, ZTE teaches A method for managing a quality of experience (QoE) reporting of QoE measurement to a QoE node for a user equipment (UE) according to any one of a plurality of QoE configurations [ZTE: Fig. 1; Pg. 2 teaches of QoE node send QoE information are conveyed from the source node to the target node], which is implemented in a source node in a radio access network (RAN), the method comprising [ZTE: Section 1 teaches support for QoE measurement collection in RAT system]:
determining to perform a handover of the UE from the source node to a target node in the RAN [ZTE: Fig. 1; Pg. 2 teaches of sending message Handover Request to target nodes]; and
providing, to the target node, (b) a reference identifier and (c) a QoE configuration identifier to identify a QoE configuration within the plurality of QoE configurations [ZTE: Fig. 1; Pg. 2-3 teaches of supported QoE information including reference ID are provided by source node ZTE: Pg. 4 teaches information including QoE Reference ID and MCE are also necessary to be convey from source RAN node to the target RAN node. And in order to support multiple QoE function, a QoE configuration list should be supported in QoE information. Proposal 3: In order to support multiple QoE function, a QoE configuration list should be supported in QoE information which provide from source RAN node to target RAN node. The QoE configuration includes : 1: List of UE Application layer measurement configuration, QoE Reference ID],
PNG
media_image1.png
408
634
media_image1.png
Greyscale
However, ZTE does not teach providing (a) association information , the reference identifier being mapped to the QoE configuration identifier in accordance with the association information indicating a relationship between the QoE configuration identifier and the reference identifier.
Nevertheless, Eklof, in the similar filed of endeavor, teaches the reference identifier being mapped to the QoE configuration identifier in accordance with association information indicating a relationship between the QoE configuration identifier and the reference identifier [Eklof: Fig. 6; Par. 132 and 134 teaches of mapping between source ID to target ID; Par. 85; For handover preparation from E-UTRA to NR, the source RAT issues a handover preparation request message to the target RAT passing a transparent RRC container with necessary information to prepare the handover at the target side].
PNG
media_image2.png
474
694
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill at the time the invention was made to utilize the teachings of Eklof for mapping between QoE measurements. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to utilize the teachings of Eklof in the ZTE system in order to provide perform handover for UE [Eklof: Par. 27].
Regarding claim 2, the combined ZTE in view of Eklof teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 1. ZTE in view of Eklof further teaches transmitting, from the source node to the target node, a message related to the handover and including the association information, the reference identifier and the QoE configuration identifier [ZTE: Pg. 1].
Regarding claim 3, the combined ZTE in view of Eklof teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 1. ZTE in view of Eklof further teaches transmitting, from the source node to the QoE node, a message related to the handover and including the association information, the reference identifier and the QoE configuration identifier, the message being transmitted to cause the QoE node to forward the reference identifier and the QoE configuration identifier to the target node [Eklof: Fig. 6; Par. 153 teaches of asking request for handover including QMC]
Regarding claim 4, the combined ZTE in view of Eklof teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 1. ZTE in view of Eklof further teaches receiving, from the QoE node, the reference identifier and the QoE configuration identifier [Eklof: Fig. 6];
receiving, from the QoE node, a second reference identifier [Eklof: Fig. 6; Par. 144 teaches of QMC includes identifiers of one or more service types associated with RATs]; and
releasing the QoE configuration if the second reference identifier matches the first reference identifier [Eklof: Fig. 6; Par. 132 teaches of mapping IDs and reporting the recorded ID].
Regarding claim 5, the combined ZTE in view of Eklof teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 1. ZTE in view of Eklof further teaches wherein the association information includes a common RRC identifier mapped to the QoE configuration identifier and the reference identifier [Eklof: Fig. 6].
Regarding claim 6, the combined ZTE in view of Eklof teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 1. ZTE in view of Eklof further teaches receiving, from the QoE node, the reference identifier and the QoE configuration identifier [ZTE: Pg. 3 teaches gNB sends notification including the recording information includi8ng QoE reference and session ID]; and
setting up or modifying the QoE configuration if the source node receives a second reference identifier that matches the first reference identifier [ZTE: Pg. 3 teaches gNB sends notification including the recording information includi8ng QoE reference and session ID for post processing purposes].
Regarding claim 7, the combined ZTE in view of Eklof teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 1. ZTE in view of Eklof further teaches receiving, from the UE, one or more QoE reports [Eklof: Par. 134 teaches of sending consecutive reports of QoE]; and
transmitting, to the QoE node, the one or more QoE reports in response to: (i) receiving the one or more QoE reports or (ii) receiving an indication from the QoE node [Eklof: Par. 132 to 135 teaches of QoE measurements reports are sent].
Regarding claim 11, ZTE teaches A method for managing a quality of experience (QoE) reporting, which is implemented in a source node in a radio access network (RAN), the method comprising [ZTE: Section 1 teaches support for QoE measurement collection in RAT system]:
facilitating the QoE reporting of QoE measurements to a QoE node for a user equipment (UE) according to any one among a plurality of QoE configurations [ZTE: Fig. 1; Pg. 2 teaches of QoE node send QoE information are conveyed from the source node to the target node];
determining to perform a handover of the UE from the source node to a target node in the RAN [ZTE: Fig. 1; Pg. 2 teaches of sending message Handover Request to target nodes; Pg. 2-3 teaches of supported QoE information including reference ID are provided by source node],
PNG
media_image1.png
408
634
media_image1.png
Greyscale
However, ZTE does not teach transmitting a message related to the handover to the target node in the RAN and a pause status for the reporting.
Nevertheless, Eklof, in the similar filed of endeavor, teaches transmitting a message related to the handover to the target node in the RAN and a pause status for the reporting [Eklof: Fig. 6; Par. 132- 134 teaches of mapping between source ID to target ID and performing handover based on the report].
PNG
media_image2.png
474
694
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill at the time the invention was made to utilize the teachings of Eklof for mapping between QoE measurements. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to utilize the teachings of Eklof in the ZTE system in order to provide perform handover for UE [Eklof: Par. 27].
Regarding claim 12, the combined ZTE in view of Eklof teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 11. ZTE in view of Eklof further teaches performing the handover responsive to determining to perform the handover [Eklof: Par. 132-135 teaches of performing handover process];
receiving, prior to performing the handover, a command to pause the reporting [Eklof: Par. 134 further teaches of performing pausing QoE measurements];
wherein transmitting the message related to the handover and the pause status includes transmitting, to the target node, the message related to the handover including an indication that the reporting is paused [Eklof: Par. 136 further teaches of upon handover and resuming the paused, QoE measurements reporting returns].
Regarding claim 13, the combined ZTE in view of Eklof teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 11. ZTE in view of Eklof further teaches performing the handover responsive to determining to perform the handover [Eklof: Par. 132-135 teaches of performing handover process];
initiating, prior to performing the handover, a pause in the reporting [Eklof: Par. 134 further teaches of performing pausing QoE measurements];
wherein transmitting the message related to the handover and the pause status includes: transmitting, to the target node, a handover request message including an indication that the reporting is paused Eklof: Par. 136 further teaches of upon handover and resuming the paused, QoE measurements reporting returns].
Regarding claim 14, the combined ZTE in view of Eklof teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 11. ZTE in view of Eklof further teaches performing the handover responsive to determining to perform the handover [Eklof: Par. 132-135 teaches of performing handover process];
receiving, prior to performing the handover, a command to pause the reporting [Eklof: Par. 134 further teaches of performing pausing QoE measurements;
determining to resume the reporting in response to determining to perform the handover [Eklof: Par. 136 further teaches of upon handover and resuming the paused, QoE measurements reporting returns].
Regarding claim 15, the combined ZTE in view of Eklof teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 11. ZTE in view of Eklof further teaches performing the handover responsive to determining to perform the handover;
receiving, prior to performing the handover, a command to pause the reporting [Eklof: Par. 132-135 teaches of performing handover process];
wherein transmitting the message related to the handover and the pause status includes: transmitting, to the target node, a handover request message including an indication that the reporting is paused Eklof: Par. 134 further teaches of performing pausing QoE measurements;
receiving, from the target node, a handover request acknowledgement message including a request to resume the reporting Eklof: Par. 134 further teaches of performing pausing QoE measurements; and
transmitting a message including an indication that the reporting is resumed in response to receiving the handover request acknowledgement message [Eklof: Par. 140].
Regarding claim 16, the combined ZTE in view of Eklof teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 11. ZTE in view of Eklof further teaches receiving, prior to performing the handover, a first command to pause the reporting [Eklof: Par. 132-135 teaches of performing handover process];
receiving, subsequently to the first command, a second command to resume the reporting [Eklof: Par. 136 further teaches of upon handover and resuming the paused, QoE measurements reporting returns]; and
transmitting a message including an indication that the reporting is resumed in response to the second command [Eklof: Par. 140].
Regarding claim 17, ZTE teaches An apparatus, operating as a source node of a radio access network (RAN) and configured for managing a quality of experience (QoE) reporting [ZTE: Fig. 1; Pg. 2 teaches of QoE node send QoE information are conveyed from the source node to the target node], of QoE measurements to a QoE node for user equipment (UE), according to any one amount a plurality of QoE configurations, the apparatus comprising, processing hardware configured to [ZTE: Section 1 teaches support for QoE measurement collection in RAT system; Section 1 teaches support for QoE measurement collection in RAT system; Fig. 1; Pg. 2 teaches of QoE node send QoE information are conveyed from the source node to the target node];
determine to perform a handover of the UE from the source node to a target node in the RAN [ZTE: Fig. 1; Pg. 2 teaches of sending message Handover Request to target nodes]; and
provide, to the target node, a reference identifier and a QoE configuration identifier to identify a QoE configuration within the plurality of QoE configurations [ZTE: Fig. 1; Pg. 2-3 teaches of supported QoE information including reference ID are provided by source node; ZTE: Fig. 1; Pg. 2-3 teaches of supported QoE information including reference ID are provided by source node ZTE: Pg. 4 teaches information including QoE Reference ID and MCE are also necessary to be convey from source RAN node to the target RAN node. And in order to support multiple QoE function, a QoE configuration list should be supported in QoE information. Proposal 3: In order to support multiple QoE function, a QoE configuration list should be supported in QoE information which provide from source RAN node to target RAN node. The QoE configuration includes : 1: List of UE Application layer measurement configuration, QoE Reference ID],
PNG
media_image1.png
408
634
media_image1.png
Greyscale
However, ZTE does not teach providing (a) association information , the reference identifier being mapped to the QoE configuration identifier in accordance with the association information indicating a relationship between the QoE configuration identifier and the reference identifier.
Nevertheless, Eklof, in the similar filed of endeavor, teaches the reference identifier being mapped to the QoE configuration identifier in accordance with association information indicating a relationship between the QoE configuration identifier and the reference identifier [Eklof: Fig. 6; Par. 132 and 134 teaches of mapping between source ID to target ID; Par. 85; For handover preparation from E-UTRA to NR, the source RAT issues a handover preparation request message to the target RAT passing a transparent RRC container with necessary information to prepare the handover at the target side].
PNG
media_image2.png
474
694
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill at the time the invention was made to utilize the teachings of Eklof for mapping between QoE measurements. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to utilize the teachings of Eklof in the ZTE system in order to provide perform handover for UE [Eklof: Par. 27].
Regarding claim 18, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth for claim 2.
Regarding claim 19, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth for claim 3.
Regarding claim 20, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth for claim 4.
Regarding claim 21, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth for claim 5.
Regarding claim 22, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth for claim 6.
Regarding claim 23, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth for claim 7.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record (see attached PTO-892) and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
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 KYAW Z SOE whose telephone number is (571)270-0304. The examiner can normally be reached 9am-5pm.
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, Charles C Jiang can be reached at 5712707191. 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.
/KYAW Z SOE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2412
Prosecution Insights