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 filed 11//2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that Li fails to disclose the exchange of application layer information specifically (Applicant’s Arguments and Remarks, page 9). The examiner agrees, but notes that this ignores the combination made.
That is, as discussed, infra, Liu already discloses receiving first information from a first radio access network device, operating in a first network, with a first user identity, wherein the first information comprises an application layer measurement configuration corresponding to the first user identity and sending, by the first radio access network device, second information to a second radio access network device, operating in a second network different from the first network, with a second user identity, wherein the second information indicates second related information of the application layer measurement. Therefore, Liu already discloses the exchange of the second information related to application layer measurement, just not the specific claimed path, as Liu discloses that the second information is sent by the first radio access network device on the backhaul between the first and second radio access network devices. Therefore, an issue becomes how could the second information related to application layer measurement/application layer QoS information be exchanged when no backhaul is present. The system of Li provides the answer by showing the non-application layer QoS information can be exchanged via transmission by a user equipment to a second radio access network device when no direct connection between the first and second radio access network device is present or allowed. Therefore, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that this same method of transmission could likewise apply application layer QoS information of Li. Therefore, Applicant’s Arguments have been considered and are not persuasive.
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.
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) 1-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu, et al. (US Pre Grant Publication No. 2022/0417780 A1; Note also identical disclosure in PCT/CN2020/076905) in view of Li, et al. (US Pre Grant Publication No. 2023/0262811; Note identical disclosure in PCT/CN2021/071872)
Regarding claim 1, Liu discloses a terminal device, comprising: at least one processor; and one or more memories including computer instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the terminal device to perform operations comprising (paragraph 0208)
receiving first information from a first radio access network device (fig. 3, element 306) with operating in a first network, with a first user identity, wherein the first information comprises an application layer measurement corresponding to the first user identity; and (Liu discloses that a UE operating in a dual connectivity between a LTE/eNB/master/first RAN device and a 5G/gNB/secondary/second RAN device receives from the master cell/node the QoS measurement configuration/application layer measurement/first information for the UE [paragraphs 0119-0121 – QoS/application layer measurement transmission to UE; paragraphs 0084, 0119-0121 – Dual connectivity base station may be LTE/eNB master and/or 5G/gNB secondary. The QoS measurement configuration/application layer measurement/first information relates to the experience of a first user/user identity [paragraph 0069] as does the forwarded second information/second related information of the application layer measurement to the 5G/gNB/secondary/second RAN [paragraphs 0106-0108 – same user/user identity is related to both the original and forwarded QoE measurement configuration]).
From the first radio access network device, sending second information to a second radio access network device (fig. 3, element 308), operating in a second network different from the first network, wherein the second information indicates second related information of the application layer measurement corresponding to the first user identity. (Liu further discloses that the LTE/eNB/master/first RAN device by further send the second information/second related information of the application layer measurement to the 5G/gNB/secondary/second RAN device. As discussed, supra, this relates to the first user/user identity [paragraphs 0084, 0119-0121].)
Liu fails to disclose the terminal device sending second information to a second radio access network device, operating in a second network different from the first network, with a second user identity, wherein the second information indicates second related information of the application layer measurement corresponding to the first user identity. In the same field of endeavor, Li discloses he terminal device sending second information to a second radio access network device, operating in a second network different from the first network, with a second user identity, wherein the second information indicates second related information of the application layer measurement corresponding to the first user identity.
That is, Liu discloses that the first and second radio access network device exchange application layer measurement configuration information related to the first network directly. However, in dual connectivity networks, such an exchange would be impossible as the first and second network device may be on completely separate radio access networks. Therefore, the issue becomes how can dual connectivity be integrated with the QoS/application layer measurement system of Liu. The system of Li provides an answer by showing that configuration information can be indirectly exchanged via the UE in these situations.
That is, the system of Li discloses a first and second network/radio access network device may exchange configuration information of the first network via the UE such that the UE receives the first network configuration from a first network (paragraphs 0086, 0087, 0103 and Fig. 9, paragraphs 0104-0109) and forwards the network configuration to a second network (paragraph 0087, 0103, 0109) the configuration may include QoS requirements (paragraphs 0123)) when there is not direct connection allowed or present between the first and second radio access network devices. Furthermore, the first and second radio network relate to a first and second user identity as each SIM relates to a separate ISMI (paragraphs 0048, 0052).
Therefore, since Li discloses indirect exchange of configuration information for dual active devices, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to combine the indirect exchange of Li with the system of Liu by exchanging the first/second information, which relates to the first network application layer measurement configuration and therefore are also relates to the SIM/ISMI/first user identity of the first RAN, indirectly via the UE by transmitting it via the first RAN device to the UE it as first information on the first RAN (and therefore also having it received at the UE via the first SIM/ISMI/first user identity of the first RAN) and then having the UE forward it as second information to the second RAN device using the second active connection (and therefore, by extension sending it using the second SIM/IMST/second user identity of the second RAN) where the second information relates to the, first network application layer measurement configuration and therefore the SIM/ISMI/first user identity of the first RAN. The motive to combine is to allow the use of dual connectivity to improve throughput while still allowing coordination and exchange of QoE information.
Regarding claim 2, Liu as modified by Li discloses the second related information comprises information configuring application layer measurement by the terminal device with the first user identity. (As discussed in the independent claim, supra, the first and second information are the same and both indicate the application layer measurement configuration for the first user identity on the first ran associated with the first SIM/IMSI).
Regarding claim 3, Liu as modified by Li discloses the first related information a first service type corresponding to the application layer measurement configuration and the second related information comprises at least one of information configuring, by the terminal device with the first user identity, application layer measurement corresponding to the first service type (As discussed in the independent claim, supra, the first and second information are the same and both indicate the application layer measurement configuration for the first user identity on the first ran associated with the first SIM/IMSI. Liu further discloses the measurement configuration includes the service type (paragraphs 0075].)
Regarding claim 4, Liu as modified by Li discloses the first related information indicates that the terminal device is allowed to configure, with the first user identity, application layer measurement corresponding to a first service type; and the second related information comprises information allowing the terminal device to configure, with the first user identity, application layer measurement corresponding to a first service type (As discussed in the independent claim, supra, the first and second information are the same and both indicate the application layer measurement configuration for the first user identity on the first ran associated with the first SIM/IMSI. Liu further discloses the measurement configuration includes the service type the UE will assign the measurement to (paragraphs 0075].)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5, 7-13 and 14-20 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claims 6 and 13, the prior art fails to teach, suggest or disclose sending, by the radio access network device, third information to a core network device, wherein the third information indicates fourth related information of the application layer measurement corresponding to the first user identity or the second user identity, and the second user identity corresponds to the core network device. That is, Liu fails to disclose that the fourth information/newly determined QoE information could be sent on to the core network. Although other art teaching sending modified QoE information to the core network exists, given the number and type of combinations already made (in particular the difficult modification with Li) it was deemed beyond the skill of a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to make this combination. Therefore, the prior art fails to teach, suggest or disclose all elements of claims 6 and 14.
Regarding claims 7-12 and 14-20, the claims depend from claims 6 and 13 and are allowable for at least the reasons stated with respect to those claims, supra.
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 CHRISTOPHER M CRUTCHFIELD whose telephone number is (571)270-3989. The examiner can normally be reached 9am-5pm M-F.
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, Faruk Hamza can be reached at (571) 272-7969. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER M CRUTCHFIELD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2466