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
1. Applicant’s arguments 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.
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.
2. Claims 1-3, 6-10, 11-13, and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lai et al. (US 20220240210 A1) in view of Li (US 20180295164 A1).
Claim 1 Lai teaches one or more non-transitory computer-readable media (FIG. 2, memory 212, ¶0020) comprising instructions that upon execution of the instructions by one or more processors (FIG. 2, processor 213, ¶0020) of a WebRTC signaling server, cause the WebRTC signaling server to:
receive, from a 5G media services (5GMS) application function (AF) (FIG. 4, step 422, ¶0028, from an access and mobility management function (AMF), ¶0028, wherein the AMF is for 5G services) via a interface between the WebRTC signaling server and the 5GMS AF, (FIG. 2, transceiver 214, ¶0020) one or more control plane parameters that are associated with a user equipment (UE) of a wireless cellular network. (¶0030, identifying parameters for control plane provisioning associated with UE 401)
However, Lai does not explicitly teach establish, by the WebRTC signaling server, a WebRTC signaling control session for the UE based on the one or more control-plane parameters, the WebRTC signaling control session comprising at least Session Description Protocol (SDP) negotiation and Interactive Connectivity Establishment (ICE) candidate exchange for network address translation (NAT) traversal.
From a related technology, Li teaches establish, by the WebRTC signaling server, a WebRTC signaling control session for the UE based on the one or more control-plane parameters, (FIG. 2, Application Server (AS), ¶0013, wherein the application establishes the media communication, i.e. the signaling control session) the WebRTC signaling control session comprising at least Session Description Protocol (SDP) negotiation (FIG. 9, ¶0209, wherein the signaling links comprise at least SDP information) and Interactive Connectivity Establishment (ICE) candidate exchange for network address translation (NAT) traversal. (FIG. 9, ¶0209 and ¶0002, and comprise ICE candidate information for exchange for NAT traversal)
It would be obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Lai to incorporate the teachings of Li in order to more effectively utilize network resources via the application of well-known technology that can improve system performance.
Claim 2 Lai in view of Li teaches Claim 1, and further teaches wherein the communication interface comprises the RTC-1 interface, (Li, WebRTC terminal) and wherein the instructions are further to cause the WebRTC signaling server to send or receive UE NAT-related information comprising ICE candidates associated with the UE's private and public addresses with a second WebRTC server via a second communication interface comprising a Real-Time Communication (RTC-2) interface between the WebRTC signaling server and the second WebRTC server. (Lai, FIG. 9, ¶0209 the signaling server communicates ICE and via the other RTC interfaces between the signaling and other server)
Claim 3 Lai in view of Li teaches Claim 2, and further teaches wherein the second communication interface is (Lai, FIG. 2, transceiver 214, ¶0020, Examiner interprets an RTC-2 interface as non-functional descriptive material) the RTC-2 interface between the WebRTC signaling server and the second WebRTC server, (Lai, FIG. 9, ¶0209, wherein the interfaces comprise RTC interfaces and are between the signaling and other WebRTC server) the RTC-2 interface being used to exchange ICE candidates and allocate relays for NAT traversal. (Examiner notes that “being used to” comprises an intended use statement, however the claims do not specifically claim the exchange of and allocate, however examiner notes that these are performed via generic data transmission functions)
Claim 6 Lai in view of Li teaches Claim 2, and further teaches wherein the second WebRTC server is deployed in a same mobile network operator (MNO) than the UE. (Lai, ¶0003, a public land mobile network with the user equipment and signaling server)
Claim 7 Lai in view of Li teaches Claim 2, and further teaches wherein the second WebRTC server is deployed in a different mobile network operator (MNO) than the UE. (Lai, ¶0004, wherein the user equipment may be in a stand-alone non-public network different from the signaling server)
Claim 8 Lai in view of Li teaches Claim 1, and further teaches wherein the first communication interface is an RTC-1 interface. (Lai, FIG. 2, transceiver 214, ¶0020, Examiner interprets an RTC-2 interface as non-functional descriptive material)
Claim 9 Lai in view of Li teaches Claim 1, and further teaches wherein the WebRTC signaling server is deployed in a same mobile network operator (MNO) than the UE. (Lai, ¶0003, a public land mobile network with the user equipment and signaling server)
Claim 10 Lai in view of Li teaches Claim 1, and further teaches wherein the WebRTC signaling server is deployed in a different mobile network operator (MNO) than the UE. (Lai, ¶0004, wherein the user equipment may be in a stand-alone non-public network different from the signaling server)
Lai
Claim 11-13 and 16-20 are taught by Lai in view of Li as described for Claims 1-3 and 6-10 respectively.
3. Claims 4-7 and 14-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lai et al. (US 20220240210 A1) in view of Li (US 20180295164 A1) and in further view of Stahl et al. (US 20160330252 A1).
Claim 4 Lai in view of Li teaches Claim 2, but does not explicitly teach wherein the second WebRTC server is a Session Traversal Utilities for NAT (STUN) server.
From a related technology, Stahl teaches wherein the second WebRTC server is a Session Traversal Utilities for NAT (STUN) server. (Stahl, ¶0086, wherein the WebRTC server is a STUN server)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Lai to incorporate well-known networking tools such as particular types of servers in order to more effectively utilize network resources.
Claim 5 Lai in view of Li teaches Claim 2, but does not explicitly teach wherein the second WebRTC server is a Traversal Using Relays around NAT (TURN) server.
From a related technology, Stahl teaches wherein the second WebRTC server is a Traversal Using Relays around NAT (TURN) server. (Stahl, ¶0086, wherein the WebRTC server is a TURN server)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Lai to incorporate well-known networking tools such as particular types of servers in order to more effectively utilize network resources.
Claim 14-15 are taught by Lai in view of LI and Stahl as described for Claims 4-5 respectively.
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 PALACA CADORNA whose telephone number is (571)270-0584. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10:00-7:00.
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, John Follansbee can be reached at (571) 272-3964. 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 P CADORNA/Examiner, Art Unit 2444
/JOHN A FOLLANSBEE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2444
Prosecution Insights