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) 1-2, 4-7, 9-12, 14-17 and 19-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Addressing Shrivastava, the reference has been changed to rely on WO2022098142 with a public disclosure date 102(a)(1) outside of the grace period date. Additionally the newly recited secondary reference Centonza discloses the newly amended claims as well as QoE report configuration and availability indication. Further given the most reasonable broadest interpretation for identifiers, the service type has been interpreted as a type of identifier, for example the VR in Krishnan for its unique metrics versus the other service type. To build on this, the identifiers are not an inventive concept as it is also disclosed in Centonza, paragraphs [0320-0321], “identifiers associated with the one or more QoE measurement reports, identifiers of applications associated with the one or more QoE measurement reports”.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 4-6, 9-11, 14-16, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KRISHNAN et al. (US 20250203396 A1, hereinafter Krishnan) in view of Centonza et al. (US 20230231779 A1, hereinafter Centonza).
Regarding claims 1, 6, 11, 16 Krishnan discloses:
receiving, from a base station, while the UE is in a radio resource control (RRC) idle state, (Paragraph [0072], “The controller/processor 375 provides RRC layer functionality associated with broadcasting of system information (e.g., MIB, SIBs), RRC connection control (e.g., RRC connection paging, RRC connection establishment, RRC connection modification, and RRC connection release), inter radio access technology (RAT) mobility, and measurement configuration for UE measurement reporting;” The UE receives info through SIBs (RRC idle mode). Also means base station is transmitting the SIBs to the UE)
information on an application layer measurement configuration associated with a multicast and broadcast service (MBS) broadcast session, wherein the application layer measurement configuration includes a quality of experience (QoE) measurement configuration; (Paragraph [0082], “A UE may collect (e.g., measure, calculate, and/or determine) QoE metrics for one or more cells serving the UE. The metrics may evaluate how a service facilitated by the UE is performing based on wireless communication with the cell. Examples of services include augmented reality (AR) services, mixed reality (MR) services, and multicast broadcast services (MBS).” And paragraph [0117], “the network node 802 outputs (e.g., transmits or communicates) a QoE configuration 816 that is received by the UE 804. The UE 804 collects QoE measurements, at 818, based on the QoE configuration 816.” The UE receives information on the app layer including all the configuration required for the report.)
performing a QoE measurement for the MBS broadcast session based on the QoE measurement configuration; (Paragraph [0117], “the UE 804 may measure QoE information, calculate QoE information, and/or determine QoE information based on the QoE configuration 816.”)
Krishnan does not disclose: transmitting, to the base station, information indicating that the UE has stored information on a result of the QoE measurement; receiving, from the base station, while the UE is in an RRC connected state, an RRC connection reconfiguration message including at least one application laver measurement configuration identifier for the NBS broadcast session;
QoE report configuration;
and transmitting, to the base station, a result of the QoE measurement for the MBS broadcast session indicated in the RRC connection reconfiguration message based on the QoE report configuration.
Centonza does disclose:
transmitting, to the base station, information indicating that the UE has stored information on a result of the QoE measurement; (Paragraph [0053], “receiving, from the UE, an availability indication for the one or more QoE measurement reports. In such embodiments, the request is sent in response to the availability indication.”)
receiving, from the base station, while the UE is in an RRC connected state, an RRC connection reconfiguration message including at least one application laver measurement configuration identifier for the … session; (Paragraph [0154], “To initiate QoE measurements, the serving eNB sends to a UE in RRC_CONNECTED state an RRCConnectionReconfiguration message that includes a QoE configuration file, e.g., a measConfgAppLayer IE within an OtherConfg IE.” And paragraph [0178], “The message includes a service type (e.g., streaming), an area scope, a measurement configuration file for the QoE measurements to be performed, and a QoE reference identifier.” And paragraph [0179], “the eNB sends an RRCConnectionReconfiguration message to the AS (e.g., RRC layer) of the UE. The eNB includes the service type, the area scope (e.g., one or more cells, tracking areas, etc.), the measurement configuration file, and the QoE reference.” Krishnan discloses several RRC controls in paragraph [0072] and that MBS is a service type in paragraph [0082] that would inherently use an RRCConnectionReconfiguration message such as the RRC connection modification, but this reference explicitly shows the message being utilized. Further under the broadest reasonable interpretation the QoE reference would be an identifier.)
QoE report configuration; and transmitting, to the base station, a result of the QoE measurement for the MBS broadcast session indicated in the RRC connection reconfiguration message based on the QoE report configuration.
(Paragraph [0170], “A UE capable of application layer measurement reporting in RRC_CONNECTED may initiate the procedure when configured with application layer measurement” and Paragraph [0266], “a RAN node may limit the size of a QoE measurement report provided by a UE based on information included in a QoE measurement report configuration. In some embodiments, the RAN node may configure the UE to send QoE measurement report(s) of a particular size, i.e., an actual or required QoE measurement report size.” As a part of the QoE configurations the BS as shown above is able make the UE transmit based on the report config.)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have combined the QoE configuration for MBS of Krishnan with the report configuration of Centonza for the QoE report. One would have been motivated to do this to avoid overly large single messages and increase the efficiency in radio resource usage.
Specifically regarding 11 Krishnan discloses:
The terminal comprising: a transceiver; and a controller coupled with the transceiver and configured to (Paragraph [0162], “The apparatus 1604 may be a UE, a component of a UE, or may implement UE functionality. In some aspects, the apparatus 1604 may include a cellular baseband processor 1624 (also referred to as a modem) coupled to one or more transceivers… The cellular baseband processor 1624/application processor 1606 may be a component of the UE 350 and may include the memory 360 and/or at least one of the TX processor 368, the RX processor 356, and the controller/processor 359.”)
Specifically regarding 16 Krishnan discloses
the base station comprising: a transceiver; and a controller coupled with the transceiver (Paragraph [0071], “the base station 310 includes a transmit processor (TX processor 316), a transmitter 318Tx, a receiver 318Rx, antennas 320, a receive processor (RX processor 370), a channel estimator 374, a controller/processor 375, and memory 376.”)
Regarding claims 4, 9, 14, and 19 Krishnan discloses:
wherein the QoE measurement is performed based on information indicating whether the QoE measurement is required or not for the MBS broadcast session. (Paragraph [0082], “Examples of services include augmented reality (AR) services, mixed reality (MR) services, and multicast broadcast services (MBS). For example, a UE executing a VR application may collect metrics associated with the execution of the VR application. The example metrics may indicate whether the VR application is experiencing jitter, buffering, lag, etc. The metrics may then be evaluated to provide a Quality of Experience (QoE) related to the VR application.” While the example is about VR, MBS is also a service included. This discloses requirements for performing QoE measurements when there might be lag or buffering.)
Regarding claims 5, 10, 15, and 20 Krishnan discloses:
wherein the result of the QoE measurement for the MBS broadcast session is transmitted to the base station while the terminal is in an RRC connected state. (Paragraph [0117], “The UE 804 transmits a QoE measurement report 820 to the network node 802 with the collected QoE measurements.” And paragraph [0082], “A UE may collect (e.g., measure, calculate, and/or determine) QoE metrics for one or more cells serving the UE. The metrics may evaluate how a service facilitated by the UE is performing based on wireless communication with the cell. Examples of services include augmented reality (AR) services, mixed reality (MR) services, and multicast broadcast services (MBS).” Discloses the transmission and reception of the QoE measurement result)
Krishnan does not explicitly disclose:
RRC connected state
Centonza discloses:
RRC connected state (Paragraph [0170], “A UE capable of application layer measurement reporting in RRC_CONNECTED may initiate the procedure when configured with application layer measurement”)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the measurement reporting of Krishnan with Centonza reporting while in RRC connected state. One would have been motivated to do this for reliability and efficiency of transmission.
Claims 2, 7, 12, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combined teachings Krishnan and Centonza in view of SHRIVASTAVA et al. (WO2022098142 A1, Hereinafter Shrivastava).
Regarding claims 2, 7, 12, and 17 Krishnan discloses:
wherein the information on the application layer measurement configuration is received from a core network, when the MBS broadcast session is setup or modified by the core network. (Paragraph [0117], “AMF 808 transmits an s-based QoE configuration 814 to the network node 802 along with the HSDN indication 809 and/or mobility indication 811.” And paragraph [0082], “A UE may collect (e.g., measure, calculate, and/or determine) QoE metrics for one or more cells serving the UE. The metrics may evaluate how a service facilitated by the UE is performing based on wireless communication with the cell. Examples of services include augmented reality (AR) services, mixed reality (MR) services, and multicast broadcast services (MBS)… The metrics may then be evaluated to provide a Quality of Experience” While the paragraph in 0082 uses VR as an example it discloses the metrics measured and evaluated are used to modify the session and can be applied to MBS.)
Krishnan and Centonza does not fully disclose:
wherein the information on the application layer measurement configuration is transmitted via a system information block 20 (SIB20) including a multicast control channel (MCCH) configuration, or wherein the information on the application layer measurement configuration is transmitted via an MCCH including an MBS configuration,
Shrivastava discloses:
wherein the information on the application layer measurement configuration is transmitted via a system information block 20 (SIB20) including a multicast control channel (MCCH) configuration, or wherein the information on the application layer measurement configuration is transmitted via an MCCH including an MBS configuration, (Paragraph [27], “The MBS configuration can be provided in a RRC signalling message, a System Information Block (SIB), the MBS Control Channel (MCCH), and a MAC Control Element (CE).” And paragraph [110], “In an embodiment, the UE 101 determines whether to remain in the RRC_CONNECTED state, while receiving MBS, based on service configuration. For instance, when there is a need for high reliability (as indicated by service type such as multicast), higher Quality of service (QoS) requirement, higher Quality of Experience (QoE) requirement” Shrivastava discloses that the MBS configuration is transmitted via MCCH and that the UE will stay connected based on the QoE.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Krishnan and Centonza in view of Shrivastava to incorporate MBS configuration transmission through MCCH. One would have been motivated to do this to efficiently let one transmission reach every UE.
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 NAM P CAO whose telephone number is (571)270-0614. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5.
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, Jae Y Lee can be reached at 5712703936. 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.
/NAM P. CAO/ Examiner, Art Unit 2479 /JAE Y LEE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2479