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 .
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7 and 15 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.
Regarding claims 7 and 15, none of the prior art of record disclose or render obvious the claimed limitations including “ transmitting, by the wireless communication device, to the AMF, during a periodic registration procedure, a message to confirm that the L4S protocol is to be maintained for the session; and receiving, by the wireless communication device, a second response to the message, the second response indicating that the L4S protocol is supported by the wireless communication node based on the registration area.” when considered as a whole along with other claimed limitations.
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 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 20claimed 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.
Claims 1-5, 8-13, and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Dao et al. (US 2020/0145876, hereinafter Dao) in view of Haddad (WO 2024/013545, hereinafter Haddad).
Regarding claim 1, Dao discloses a method comprising (para 0010):
transmitting, by a wireless communication device (104 of fig. 8), to an access management function (AMF) of a core network (308), a request for a session to be established with a wireless communication node (916 – Para 0148), and a registration area corresponding to the wireless communication node (para 0061; 0155; 0176; 0209; and 0219 -service area/availability area); and receiving, by the wireless communication device, via the AMF from a session management function (SMF) of the core network, a response to the request (para 0168; 0174; 0177-0178; 0194; depending on the request received, the SMF may respond to the AMF either by Nsmf_PDUSession_CreateSMContext Resonse (Cause, SM Context ID or N1 SM container (PDU Session Reject (Cause))) or by Nsmf_PDUSession_UpdateSMContext Response. If the SMF received the Nsmf_PDUSession_CreateSMContext Request, and the SMF is able to process the PDU Session establishment request, the SMF creates an SM context and responds to the AMF by providing an SM Context Identifier).
Dao does not explicitly disclose that the request indicates a low queuing latency, low loss, and scalable throughput (L4S) protocol is to be used for the session; and
the response indicates that the L4S protocol is supported by the wireless communication node according to the registration area.
In an analogous art, Haddad discloses that the request indicates a low queuing latency, low loss and scalable throughput (L4S) protocol is to be used for the session (para 0023; 0034; 0039; 0052; 0064; UE sends request message with QoS parameters including low latency, low loss scalable throughput; para 0034; 0039; 0046; 0055;0058; L4S capability); and the response indicates that the L4S protocol is supported by the wireless communication node according to the registration area (para 0043; 0049; 0055; 0061; 0153; 0072; 0080; 0082; 0086; 0092; 0154; in response to the request, network node enables the queue that is a L4S queue – it implies that the L4S is supported by the node. AMF implements a control plane function and it allows an end UE to register in an area of a cellular network). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Dao’s method/system by having Haddad’s disclosure in order to improve QoS by reducing latency and improving throughput.
Regarding claim 9, Dao discloses a wireless communication device (para 0036; UE), comprising: a transceiver (para 0036; transmitter & receiver); and one or more processors (para 0036-0037; processor) configured to perform the method steps of claim 1.
Regarding claim 17, Dao discloses a non-transitory computer readable medium storing instructions that, when executed by one or more processors (para 0013; non-transitory computer readable medium storing software instructions), cause the one or more processors to perform the method steps of claim 1.
Regarding claims 2, 10, and 18, Dao does not expclitly disclose wherein the SMF determines that the L4S protocol is supported by the wireless communication node, based on determining that each wireless communication node in the registration area support the L4S protocol.
In an analogous art, Haddad discloses wherein the SMF determines that the L4S protocol is supported by the wireless communication node (para 0043; 0047; 0049), based on determining that each wireless communication node in the registration area support the L4S protocol (para 0049; 0097; and 00164; if there are multiple nodes capable of establishing L4S session it implies that those nodes support L4S protocol). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Dao’s method/system by having Haddad’s disclosure in order to improve QoS by reducing latency and improving throughput.
Regarding claims 3, 11, and 19, Dao discloses wherein the SMF determines that each wireless communication node in the registration area support the L4S protocol by querying a network repository function (NPF) of the core network (para 0058 and 0060);
A Network Repository Function (NRF), provides network service discovery functionality).
Regarding claims 4, 12, and 20 Dao discloses wherein the request is sent at a first time instance (para 0023; 0108; 0134; the time when UE request for PDU session establishment) and the wireless communication node is a first wireless communication node (para 0036), the method further comprising: initiating, by the wireless communication device responsive to a mobility event at a second time instance to a second registration area, a mobility registration update procedure with the AMF (para 0155; 0159; 0160; 0176; 0209; 0216; mobility management – UE moves out of the area and send the request); and receiving, by the wireless communication device, via the AMF from the SMF, an indication indicating the service is not supported in the second registration area (para 0159-0160; 0167; 0174; request can be due to switching between 3GPP and non-3GPP while moving out of the area - rejecting service request if out of the area).
Dao does not explicitly disclose that the service is based on L4 protocol.
In an analogous art, Haddad discloses that the service is based on L4 protocol (para 0058; 0059; 3GPP network entities may be utilized to implement the dedicated L4S queues in a cellular network). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Dao’s method/system by having Haddad’s disclosure in order to improve QoS by reducing latency and improving throughput.
Regarding claims 5 and 13, Dao does not explicitly disclose performing congestion control using a congestion control protocol other than the L4S protocol.
In an analogous art, Haddad discloses performing congestion control using a congestion control protocol other than the L4S protocol (para 0045; 0046; IPV4/IPV6 provides classic congestion control). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Dao’s method/system by having Haddad’s disclosure in order to improve compatibility between different communication standards.
Regarding claims 8, and 16, Dao discloses wherein the response is received in a session accept message from the SMF (para 0178; 0198; session accept or reject message- response message).
Claims 6, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Dao/Haddad in view of Mihaly (WO 2019/037852, hereinafter Mihaly).
Regarding claims 6, and 14, Dao/Haddad does not explicitly disclose performing, by the wireless communication device, with a server, an L4S validation using an application procedure, to determine whether the L4S protocol is supported along an end-to-end network path between the wireless communication device and the server.
In an analogous art, Mihaly discloses performing, by the wireless communication device, with a server, an L4S validation using an application procedure, to determine whether the L4S protocol is supported along an end-to-end network path between the wireless communication device and the server (page 19; para 01; page 22; last para; end-to-end l4s).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Dao/Haddad’s method/system by having Mihaly’s disclosure in order to reduce delays in a communication system.
Conclusion
5. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMINA CHOUDHRY whose telephone number is (571)270-7102. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Thursday (7:30 a.m. to 5.00p.m.).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Yemane Mesfin can be reached on (571)272-3927. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/SAMINA F CHOUDHRY/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2462