DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 11/28/2025 have been considered but are moot because the new grounds of rejection.
Pervious Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 05/21/2024 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues “At most, Ericsson describes the communication for exchanging TEIDs and forwarding traffic between the MN and SN at steps 1, 2, 8, 9, and 11-16 in FIG. 4, without any insinuation at sending a configuration information to a UE to add another node to continue transmission of the QoS flow. As such, the Ericsson reference fails to disclose “sending, by the first network element to a user equipment (UE), a configuration message to add the second network element to continue transmission of the QoS flow”.”
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. It is true that Ericsson discloses exchanging of TEID for forwarding traffic, but it is for handing off the QoS flow to a second tunnel. Ericsson, in fig. 4, clearly discloses that a UE performs a random access procedure to connect and continue the transmission of packet to SN after receiving a RRC configuration message; while the MN and SN set up a tunnel to handoff the flow with a different path to the UPF.
Applicant argues “As such, the Ericsson reference fails to disclose “receiving, by the first network element from the UE, a completion message indicating synchronization with the second network element for offloading the QoS flow”.”
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. The UE sends a RRC configuration complete message is sent to for indicating synchronization. It is conventional in the art that a random access is performed so as to allow connection synchronization with a different node, in this case SN. Hence step 6 in fig. 4, shows a random access procedure with SN.
Therefore, all the claimed and argued limitations have been met.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 6-8, 11-15, 17 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ERICSSON: "Establishing a second NG-U tunnel for a PDU Session", 3GPP DRAFT; 3-182737, 3RD GENERATION PARTNERSHIP PROJECT (3GPP), MOBILE COMPETENCE CENTRE; 650, ROUTE DES LUCIOLES; F-06921 SOPHIA-ANTIPOLIS CEDEX; FRANCE, vol. RAN WG3, no. Busan, South Korea; 20180521-20180525 20 May 2018 (2018-05-20), XP051445239 herein Ericsson in view of US 20170303287 A1 herein Yu in view of US 20200029389 A1 herein Yilmaz in view of US 20190174377 A1 herein Nokia.
Claim 1, Ericsson discloses a method of configuring quality of service (QoS) flow, comprising:
receiving, by a first network element from a core network, an uplink interface address on the core network for a protocol data unit (PDU) session (Figure 4: 13, uplink address sent by the AMF to the MN for the UPF);
sending, by a first network element to a second network element, a request message identifying an uplink interface address on a core network upon which to offload a QoS flow from the first network element (pg. 3: 1-10; MN, i.e. first network element, provides an uplink (UL) tunnel endpoint identifier (TEID); Fig. 4, clearly discloses that a UE performs a random access procedure to connect to SN, i.e. second network element, and continue the transmission of packet to SN after receiving a RRC configuration message; while the MN and SN set up a tunnel to handoff the flow with a different path to the UPF);
receiving, by the first network element from [[the]] a second network element, a response message identifying a downlink interface address allocated by the second network element for the offloading the QoS flow (pg. 3: 1-15, MN receives a downlink (DL) TEID from the SN);
sending, by the first network element to a user equipment (UE), responsive to the response message, a configuration message to continue transmission of the QoS flow by offloading the QoS flow from the first network element to the second network element (Fig. 4: step 3, RRC Connection Reconfiguration; Fig. 4: continue the transmission of packet to SN after receiving a RRC configuration message the MN and SN set up a tunnel to handoff the flow with a different path to the UPF);
and receiving, by the first network element from the UE, a completion message indicating synchronization with the second network element for offloading the QoS flow (Fig. 4: step 3, RRC Connection Reconfiguration Complete).
Ericsson may not explicitly disclose the configuration message to instruct the UE to establish a radio data bearer (DRB) with the second network element.
Yu discloses the configuration message to instruct the UE to establish a radio data bearer (DRB) with the second network element (0095). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ericsson to include establishment of DRBs to handle flows as taught by Yu so as to adjust system requirement to varying QoS parameters (0095).
Ericsson may not explicitly disclose a completion message responsive to synchronization with the second network element; offload a first QoS flow from the first network element to the second network element, while a second QoS flow remains mapped to the first network element; receiving, by the first network element from the UE, an uplink end marker responsive to the transmission of the first QoS flow on the DRB: and sending, by the first network element to the second network element, responsive to receiving the uplink end marker, an indication message to indicate to the second network element to start uploading data packets of the first QoS flow to the core network identified by the uplink interface address.
Yilmaz discloses a completion message responsive to synchronization with the second network element (0103-0105, The source MN triggers the UE to perform handover and apply the new configuration. The UE synchronizes to the target MN and replies with MN RRC reconfiguration complete message); offload a first QoS flow from the first network element to the second network element, while a second QoS flow remains mapped to the first network element (0015-0050, Figs. 4and 5, show SgNB provides forwarding address to the MeNB and split bearer is performed; the Figs. 4 and 5 and corresponding disclosure show forwarding (offload) of particular flow/bearer while other flows remained map to the original node, thus flow forwarding to a different node (offloading) is controlled per berer/flow). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ericsson to include data forwarding as taught by Yilmaz so as to provide seamless mobility (0006).
Ericsson in view of Yilmaz may not explicitly disclose receiving, by the first network element from the UE, an uplink end marker responsive to the transmission of the first QoS flow on the DRB: and sending, by the first network element to the second network element, responsive to receiving the uplink end marker, an indication message to indicate to the second network element to start uploading data packets of the first QoS flow to the core network identified by the uplink interface address.
Nokia discloses receiving, by the first network element from the UE, an uplink end marker responsive to the transmission of the first QoS flow on the DRB (0026-0027, uplink end marker messages for the first QoS flow); and sending, by the first network element to the second network element, responsive to receiving the uplink end marker, an indication message to indicate to the second network element to start uploading data packets of the first QoS flow to the core network identified by the uplink interface address (0027-0028, mapping the two radio bearers and discarding the markers, forwarding path to the core).Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ericsson to include data forwarding to identified core network as taught by Nokia so as to provide lossless mobility across LTE and 5g (0045).
Claim 2, Ericsson discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising sending, by the first network element to the core network, a second request message identifying the downlink interface address for a split protocol data unit (PDU) session (Fig. 4: step 9).
Claim 3, Ericsson discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising establishing, by the first network element, a tunnel on an interface to exchange data packets of the QoS flow to be offloaded via the second network element (Fig. 4: 9-12, NGAP path update procedure).
Claim 6, Ericsson discloses of claim 1 wherein the uplink interface address comprises at least one of: an uplink interface address applied for a PDU session or an uplink interface address when the PDU session is created, and wherein the downlink interface address comprises an interface address between the core network and an access network (pg. 3: 1-10, UL TEID for NG-U by the SN a forwarding address for UL NG-U data).
Claim 7, as analyzed with respect to the limitations as discussed in claim 1.
Claim 8, Ericsson discloses the method of claim 7, further comprising continuing, by the UE prior to accessing the second network element, transmission of the data packets of the QoS flow via the first network element (pg. 4: last paragraph).
Claim 11, as analyzed with respect to the limitations as discussed in claim 20.
Claim 12, as analyzed with respect to the limitations as discussed in claim 1. Ericsson discloses first network element (pg. 2: MN), comprising: one or more processors coupled with memory (Since MN is a computing device, thus a processor and a memory).
Claim 13, as analyzed with respect to the limitations as discussed in claim 2.
Claim 14, as analyzed with respect to the limitations as discussed in claim 3.
Claim 17, as analyzed with respect to the limitations as discussed in claim 1.
Claim 20, Ericsson discloses the user equipment of claim 17, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to convert, responsive to the configuration message, the QoS flow from a protocol data unit (PDU) session to [[a]] the DRB established on the second network element to continue transmission. (Fig. 4: 6).
Claim(s) 5, 9, 16 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ericsson in view of Yu in view of Yilmaz in view of US 20200154499 A1 herein Futaki.
Claim 5, Ericsson discloses the method of claim 1. Ericsson may not explicitly disclose wherein the configuration message is further configured to instruct the UE to access a packet data convergence protocol (PDCP) of the second network element corresponding to the DRB to store data packets of the QoS flow.
Futaki discloses wherein the configuration message is further configured to instruct the UE to access a packet data convergence protocol (PDCP) of the second network element corresponding to the DRB to store data packets of the QoS flow (0089). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ericsson to include PDCP configuration as taught by Futaki so as to simplify UE implementation (0017).
Claim 9, as analyzed with respect to the limitations as discussed in claim 5.
Claim 16, as analyzed with respect to the limitations as discussed in claim 5.
Claim 18, as analyzed with respect to the limitations as discussed in claim 5.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 20180317137 A1 - Apparatuses, methods, and systems are disclosed for indicating data status to a target base unit. One apparatus includes a transceiver that communicates with a remote unit and a processor. The processor determines to handover the remote unit to a target base unit. The processor forwards data for the remote unit to the target base unit and transmits the forwarded data to the remote unit. The processor also sends a status message to the target base unit, the status message indicating that forwarded data was successfully transmitted to the remote unit.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Mehmood B. Khan whose telephone number is (571)272-9277. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30 am-6:30 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, Nishant Divecha can be reached on (571) 270-3125. 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.
/Mehmood B. Khan/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2468
Prosecution Insights