DETAILED ACTION
Response to Remark
This communication is considered fully responsive to the amendment filed on 11/10/25.
Independent claims have been amended.
Claims 2, 7, 12, and 17 have been canceled.
New claims 21-24 have been added.
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 of this title, 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, 3-6, 8-11, 13, 16, 18, and 21-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al. (US 2021/0274529, “Chen”) in view of Shi (US 2023/0090232, “Shi”).
Regarding claim 1, Chen discloses a communication method, wherein the method is applied to an access network device or a chip in the access network device (See 5 Fig.1, (R)AN Node; See 5 Fig.7, gNB), and the method comprises:
- receiving configuration information of a first quality of service (QoS) flow from a first core network device (See 1 Fig.7, gNB as an access network receives ‘PDU Mod. Request [QoS parameters, NAS message]’ from AMF as a first core network device), wherein the configuration information of the first QoS flow comprises QoS parameters of the first QoS flow (See Fig.2 and ¶.4, in order to support such diverse QoS requirements, each data packet is classified based on associated QoS parameters and associated with an appropriate data radio bearer (DRB) that meets the QoS requirements for that type of traffic; See steps 1 & 2 Fig.7 and ¶.5, QoS parameter and QFI (QoS Flow Identifier)),
- receiving a first data packet in the first QoS flow from a second core network device (See 7 Fig.7, gNB receives PDU data packet from UPF as a second core network device via PDU data tunnel according to QFI; See ¶.4, in order to support such diverse QoS requirements (possibly within the same UE), user-plane traffic (each data packet) is classified based on associated QoS parameters and associated with an appropriate data radio bearer (DRB) that meets the QoS requirements for that type of traffic; See ¶.8, communicating user plane data, i.e. each data packet, on the DRB associated with that QFI (in step 7); See 5 Fig.8, PDU data tunnel between gNB and UPF; See ¶.4, UPF performs the classification of downlink (DL) user plane traffic based on appropriate QoS rules. The applicable QoS rules may be either explicitly provided to the UE (e.g. during session establishment or modification), pre-configured in the UE, or implicitly derived by the UE by applying Reflective QoS); and
- performing downlink scheduling on the first data packet based on a QoS parameter corresponding to a type of the first data packet, wherein the QoS parameter corresponding to the type of the first data packet is comprised in the QoS parameters of the first QoS flow (See 7 Fig.7, gNB sends downlink user plane data over DRB (QFI) to UE; See ¶.4, in order to support such diverse QoS requirements, user-plane traffic (each data packet) is classified based on associated QoS parameters and associated with an appropriate data radio bearer (DRB) that meets the QoS requirements for that type of traffic. Specifically, the so-called user plane function (UPF) performs the classification of downlink (DL) user-plane traffic based on appropriate QoS rules. The applicable QoS rules may be either explicitly provided to the UE (e.g. during session establishment or modification), pre-configured in the UE, or implicitly derived by the UE by applying Reflective QoS. Further details of the packets to QoS flow mapping may be found in 3GPP Technical Specification (TS) 23.501 v15.2.0, the contents of which are incorporated herein by reference; See further Fig.7-9 and ¶.8, DRB mapping scheduling for downlink to the UE).
Chen discloses the method of receiving the configuration information of the first QoS flow comprises QoS parameters of the first QoS flow (See 1 Fig.7) and “user-plane traffic (each data packet) is classified based on associated QoS parameters and associated with an appropriate data radio bearer (DRB) that meets the QoS requirements for that type of traffic” (Chen, See ¶.4),
but does not explicitly disclose what Shi discloses,
- the first QoS flow supports a plurality of types of data packets, and the QoS parameters of the first QoS flow comprise QoS parameters respectively corresponding to different types of the plurality of types of data packets (Shi, See ¶.40, distinguish service data flows through information (such as time information) related to QoS types of the packets, which can distinguish packets in a service data flow at a finer level, so as to provide different QoS guarantees for packets according to the information (such as time information) related to QoS types of the packets. In this way, for data of high importance or requiring better QoS guarantee, a higher QoS guarantee can be provided; See ¶.45, The SMF transmits, to a UPF entity, the packet filter that contains the information related to the QoS type of the service data packet, and a QoS flow identity (QFI) of the determined QoS flow for transmitting the packet. When downlink data arrives at the UPF entity, the UPF entity can distinguish different data according to the packet filter that includes the information related to the QoS type of the service data packet, and then transmits the data through different QoS flows to the base station; See Fig.3 and ¶.57, in FIG. 3, since packet 1 and packet 4 have a same QoS type (such as a QoS guarantee in I-frame level), both packet 1 and packet 4 are transmitted in QoS flow 1 to the base station. Since packet 2 and packet 5 have a same QoS type (such as a QoS guarantee in P-frame level), both packet 2 and packet 5 are transmitted in QoS flow 2 to the base station. Since packet 3 and packet 6 have a same QoS type (such as a QoS guarantee in B-frame level), both packet 3 and packet 6 are transmitted in QoS flow 3 to the base station. The base station can control according to the QFI and the corresponding transmission quality control parameter received from the SMF entity, for example, guarantee levels for QoS flows 1, 2, and 3 may be controlled to be QoS flow 1>QoS flow 2>QoS flow 3; See ¶.28, the AMF entity 103 is also responsible for forwarding messages related to session management between the UE 101 and SMF entity 104; Examiner’s Note: Applicant’s specification defines in ¶.[0139] that “different type of data packets are video data packets mapped to a same QoS flow that may include different types of data packets, for example, a data packet corresponding to an I frame, a data packet corresponding to a P frame, and a data packet corresponding to a B frame”).”
Chen discloses the method of receiving NG-U DL packet (new QFI) from UPF (See 1 Fig.8), but does not explicitly disclose newly added claim limitations “receiving, by the access network device or the chip in the access network device, first indication information from the second core network device, wherein the first indication information indicates the type of the first data packet.”
However, Shi discloses,
- receiving, by the access network device or the chip in the access network device, first indication information from the second core network device, wherein the first indication information indicates the type of the first data packet (Shi, See Fig.4-5, BS receives QoS type information from SMF shown below:
PNG
media_image1.png
384
674
media_image1.png
Greyscale
See ¶.4, the packet filter comprises information related to at least one QoS type of the at least one packet; and distinguish different types of packets according to the packet filter, and transmit the different types of packets through corresponding QoS flows to a second network device; See ¶.45, the SMF transmits, to a UPF entity, the packet filter that contains the information related to the QoS type of the service data packet, and a QoS flow identity (QFI) of the determined QoS flow for transmitting the packet. When downlink data arrives at the UPF entity, the UPF entity can distinguish different data according to the packet filter that includes the information related to the QoS type of the service data packet, and then transmits the data through different QoS flows to the base station; See ¶.57, the packet filter, which is included in the transmission-quality-control policy transmitted from the PCF entity to the SMF entity in step S202 of the method 200 for wireless communication in implementations of the disclosure, includes time information {arriving at t1, period P}, {arriving at t2, period P}, and {arriving at t3, period P}. The time information here is a specific form of the information related to the QoS type of the service data packet; See ¶.71, the SMF further transmits to the base station information related to the QoS type of the service data packet and the second transmission-quality-control parameter (or a list of combination thereof). The base station can distinguish different service data packets (such as I frame, P frame, B frame) in a same QoS flow according to the information related to the QoS type of the service data packet, and performs differentiated transmission-quality control according to corresponding second transmission-quality-control parameters; See ¶.80, the transmission quality control parameter may include one or more of: a service type, a QCI (such 5QI), a priority, a bit error rate (BER), a transmission latency, a bit rate requirement, a key data indication, a priority transmission indicator, or a transmission failure tolerance time; See further ¶.89 and ¶.158).”
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to apply “the first QoS flow supports a plurality of types of data packets, and the QoS parameters of the first QoS flow comprise QoS parameters respectively corresponding to different types of the plurality of types of data packets” and “receiving, by the access network device or the chip in the access network device, first indication information from the second core network device, wherein the first indication information indicates the type of the first data packet” as taught by Shi into the system of Chen, so that it provides a way for a base station as an access network device to be able to control according to the QFI and the corresponding quality control parameter received from the SMF entity (Shi, See ¶.57) and to be able to distinguish different service data packets in a same QoS flow according to the information related to the QoS type of the service data packet (Shi, See ¶.71).
Regarding claim 3, Chen does not explicitly disclose what Shi discloses “the first data packet and the first indication information are carried in a second data packet from the second core network device, and the first indication information is carried in a header of the second data packet (Shi, See ¶.103, as can be seen from FIG. 6, packet 1 is an I-frame packet, packet 2 is a P-frame packet, and packet 3 is a B-frame packet, and these three packets will be transmitted in a same QoS flow, which is obviously different from the case of FIG. 3, for satisfying different requirements. In FIG. 6, assume that packets 1, 2, and 3 have a same IP header).” Therefore, this claim is rejected with the similar reasons and motivation set forth in the rejection of claim 1.
Regarding claim 4, Chen discloses “mapping, based on a correspondence between the type of the first data packet and a logical channel, the first data packet to the logical channel corresponding to the type of the first data packet (See ¶.6, a QoS Flow to DRB mapping rule (hereinafter: ‘DRB mapping’) is used for determining the DRB on which data packets for a particular QoS Flow shall be carried. In case of Reflective DRB mapping, the UE monitors the DRB mapping applied by the network in the downlink direction and, for each QFI, the UE determines the applicable DRB mapping autonomously (i.e. which QFI is mapped to which DRB); See 7 Fig.7, PDU data tunnel (CFI)).”
Regarding claim 5, Chen does not explicitly disclose what Shi discloses “first information, wherein the first information indicates whether a first-type data packet is allowed to be discarded; or second information, wherein the second information indicates a quantity of first-type data packets that are allowed to be discarded within a preset time (Shi, See ¶.57, for data flows in FIG. 3, the packet filter, which is included in the transmission quality control policy transmitted from the PCF entity to the SMF entity in step S202 of the method for wireless communication in implementations of the disclosure, includes time information {arriving at t1, period P}, {arriving at t2, period P}, and {arriving at t3, period P}. The time information here is a specific form of the information related to the QoS type of the service data packet in some steps in the flowchart of the method 200 for wireless communication illustrated in FIG. 2 in implementations of the disclosure. The information related to the QoS type of the service data packet may also be in other forms, as long as different QoS types may be distinguished with the form. According to the time information in the filter, three kinds of packets may be distinguished, and packets of the same QoS type may be transmitted through the same QoS flow as needed. For example, in FIG. 3, since packet 1 and packet 4 have a same QoS type (such as a QoS guarantee in I-frame level), both packet 1 and packet 4 are transmitted in QoS flow 1 to the base station. Since packet 2 and packet 5 have a same QoS type (such as a QoS guarantee in P-frame level), both packet 2 and packet 5 are transmitted in QoS flow 2 to the base station. Since packet 3 and packet 6 have a same QoS type (such as a QoS guarantee in B-frame level), both packet 3 and packet 6 are transmitted in QoS flow 3 to the base station. The base station can control according to the QFI and the corresponding transmission-quality-control parameter received from the SMF entity, for example, guarantee levels for QoS flows 1, 2, and 3 may be controlled to be QoS flow 1>QoS flow 2>QoS flow 3; See ¶.82, for example, the time information includes one or more of a packet transmitting time, a packet arriving time, a packet duration, a packet end time, or a packet transmitting period, etc.; Examiner’s Note: the time information includes a packet duration, a packet end time, and a transmission failure tolerance time, so if the time is expired, it is not necessary to keep the packet, i.e. discarding).”
Regarding claim 6, it is an apparatus claim corresponding to the method claim 1, except the limitation “a receiver and a processor (See Fig.5 and ¶.26)” and is therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of the claim.
Regarding claims 8-10, they are claims corresponding to claims 3-5, respectively and are therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of the claims.
Regarding claim 11, it is an apparatus claim corresponding to the claims 1 and 6, except the following limitations:
- a transmitter, configured to send, to a distributed unit (DU) (See Fig.11, gNB-DU; See ¶.74, recently, it has been proposed that the functionality of a gNB (referred to herein as a ‘distributed’ gNB or distributed base station), configuration information of a data radio bearer (DRB} corresponding to the first QoS flow, wherein the configuration information of the DRB comprises the QoS parameters respectively corresponding to the plurality of types of data packets (Chen, See 2 Fig.7, gNB decides to set up new DRB for this new flow (QFI) after receiving QoS parameters from AMF; See ¶.4, user plane traffic (each data packet) is classified based on associated QoS parameters and associated with an appropriate data radio bearer (DRB) that meets the QoS requirements for that type of traffic; See ¶.6, a QoS Flow to DRB mapping rule (hereinafter: ‘DRB mapping’) is used for determining the DRB on which data packets for a particular QoS Flow shall be carried. In case of Reflective DRB mapping, the UE monitors the DRB mapping applied by the network in the downlink direction and, for each QFI, the UE determines the applicable DRB mapping autonomously (i.e. which QFI is mapped to which DRB). Thus, when the UE has uplink data to send which is associated with a particular QFI, the UE knows which DRB to use for that QFI.”
As rejected in claim 1, Chen discloses “send the first data packet to the DU (See 7 Fig.7, gNB receives PDU data packet from UPF as a second core network device via PDU data tunnel according to QFI; See ¶.74, recently, it has been proposed that the functionality of a gNB (referred to herein as a ‘distributed’ gNB or distributed base station), but does not explicitly disclose what Shi discloses,
- second indication information to the DU, wherein the second indication information indicates a type of the first data packet (Shi, See S404 Fig.4, SMF sends QoS type information to BS; Examiner’s Note: As rejection in clam 1, Shi discloses the QoS parameters respectively corresponding to the plurality of types of data packets) and is therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of the claims 1 & 6.
Regarding claim 13, Chen discloses “the transmitter is configured to send a third data packet to the DU, wherein the third data packet comprises the first data packet and the second indication information, and the second indication information is carried in a header of the third data packet (Shi, See ¶.103, as can be seen from FIG. 6, packet 1 is an I-frame packet, packet 2 is a P-frame packet, and packet 3 is a B-frame packet, and these three packets will be transmitted in a same QoS flow, which is obviously different from the case of FIG. 3, for satisfying different requirements. In FIG. 6, assume that packets 1, 2, and 3 have a same IP header).” Therefore, this claim is rejected with the similar reasons and motivation set forth in the rejection of claim 11.
Regarding claim 16, it is an apparatus claim corresponding to the claim 11 and is therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of the claim.
Regarding claim 18, it is a claim corresponding to the claim 13 and is therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of the claim.
Regarding claim 21, Chen discloses “wherein the access network device is a base station (Chen, See Fig.7-8, gNB; Shi, See Fig.4, ‘BS’).
Regarding claims 22-24, they are claims corresponding to claims 21, 21, & 21, respectively and are therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of the claims.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 14, 15, 19, and 20 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed have been considered. But, in view of the applicant’s amendment to the claims, examiner has clarified and totally remapped the rejection to the argued claim limitations, using the prior art of record in the current prosecution of the claims.
At pages 8-10, with respect to claim 1, applicant’s key argument is that any combination of Chen and Shi fail to disclose, “receiving, by the access network device or the chip in the access network device, first indication information from the second core network device, wherein the first indication information indicates the type of the first data packet”
In reply, the limitations “receiving, by the access network device or the chip in the access network device, first indication information from the second core network device, wherein the first indication information indicates the type of the first data packet” explicitly read on:
[Fig.4-5] of Shi discloses “BS receives QoS type information from SMF shown below:
PNG
media_image1.png
384
674
media_image1.png
Greyscale
[¶.0004] of Shi discloses “the packet filter comprises information related to at least one QoS type of the at least one packet; and distinguish different types of packets according to the packet filter, and transmit the different types of packets through corresponding QoS flows to a second network device.
¶.[0045] of Shi discloses “the SMF transmits, to a UPF entity, the packet filter that contains the information related to the QoS type of the service data packet, and a QoS flow identity (QFI) of the determined QoS flow for transmitting the packet. When downlink data arrives at the UPF entity, the UPF entity can distinguish different data according to the packet filter that includes the information related to the QoS type of the service data packet, and then transmits the data through different QoS flows to the base station.”
See ¶.[0071] of Shi discloses “the SMF further transmits to the base station information related to the QoS type of the service data packet and the second transmission-quality-control parameter (or a list of combination thereof). The base station can distinguish different service data packets (such as I frame, P frame, B frame) in a same QoS flow according to the information related to the QoS type of the service data packet, and performs differentiated transmission-quality control according to corresponding second transmission-quality-control parameters.” [emphasis added].
Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art applies the method of “receiving, by the access network device or the chip in the access network device, first indication information from the second core network device, wherein the first indication information indicates the type of the first data packet” as taught by Shi into the system of Chen in order for the base station (BS) to be able to distinguish different service data packets in a same QoS flow according to the information related to the QoS type of the service data packet (Shi, See Fig.4-5 and ¶.71). Therefore, the examiner respectfully disagrees.
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 date of this final action.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jung H Park whose telephone number is 571-272-8565. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 7:00 AM-3:00 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.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Derrick Ferris can be reached on 571-272-3123. 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.
/JUNG H PARK/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2411
Prosecution Insights