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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 6/22/2026 has been entered.
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.
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) 1-5, 7-8, 10-13, 15-18, 28-31, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over 3GPP1 (23.503, ver. 16.7.0, Release 16, 2021-01) in view of 3GPP2 (NPL- 3GPP TR 23.700-60 V0.3.0 (2022-05), Study on XR (Extended Reality) and media services (Release 18)).
Regarding claim 1, 3GPP1 (23.503, ver. 16.7.0, Release 16, 2021-01) discloses an apparatus for wireless communication at a first network element configured as an AF network element, comprising: one or more memories; and one or more processors coupled to the one or more memories and configured to cause the first network element (3GPP1: Page 76-77, AF network element with at least one memory and one processor to carry out the functions indicated on Page 60 and 76, at least) to:
provide to a Policy Control Function (PCF) network element, one or more Alternative Service Requirements for QoS flows supporting data traffic of an application (3GPP1: Page 60, AF provides Alternative service/QoS requirements to the PCF; these contains one or more QoS reference parameters in a prioritized order (which indicates the preference of the QoS requirements with which the service can operate)),
wherein the one or more Alternative Service Requirements for QoS flows include one or more quality of service (QoS) reference parameters and a combination of a PDU Delay Budget (PDB) value, a PDU Error Rate (PER) value, and an uplink Guaranteed Flow Bit Rate (GFBR) value, and a downlink GFBR to which the application can adapt (3GPP1: Page 84, 89, Page 60, alternative QoS parameter sets includes is provided which is part of required QoS policy; QoS parameters in the alternative QoS include PDB, PER, and GFBR for uplink and downlink;); and
receive, from the PCF network element, a notification message indicating that a communication link between a core and a user equipment (UE) can no longer guarantee a GFBR for a QoS Flow (3GPP1: Pages 60, 84, 89, PCF sends a notification including a QoS notification that the minimum QoS Reference parameter is no longer guaranteed flow bitrate for the QoS flow; the flow being between the UE and the core).
3GPP1 remains silent regarding the QoS flows having PDU sets and the PDB, PER are PSDB and PSER; and that the link between congestion notification is for the link between the RAN and the UE.
However, 3GPP2 ( discloses the QoS flows having PDU sets and the PDB, PER are PSDB and PSER (3GPP2: Page 55-58, Sections 6.8.2, 6.8.3, PDB and SER are replaced by parameters PSDB, PSER, to which application layer adapts; the PDU session QoS flows are monitored for QoS and adjustment of QoS parameters occur on a PDU Set based granularity; 3GPP: Page 26, 6.1.2., AF provides an alternative QoS requirements for the PDU Flows; Page 51, the PDU flow comprises PDU sets); and that the link between congestion notification is for the link between the RAN and the UE (3GPP2: Pages 175-178, uplink and downlink congestion detected for the link between the gNB and UE).
A person of ordinary skill in the art working with the invention of 3GPP1 would have been motivated to use the teachings of 3GPP2 as it provides a way to improves granularity of QoS differentiation in the PDU session which improves QoE of the user and enables enhancements to efficient resource management (3GPP: Page 19 and Page 56) Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify invention of 3GPP1 with teachings of 3GPP2 in order to improve user experience and resolve a key issue in the 3GPP standards (see Pages 19 and 56).
Regarding claim 2, 3GPP1 modified by 3GPP2 discloses apparatus of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the first network element to adapt one or more parameters for PDU Set-based traffic based on the notification message from the PCF from the PCF network element, wherein the notification message is based on a condition that the PCF network element cannot support a default QoS (3GPP1: Page 60, when the PCF determines that a QoS parameter set related QoS targets are not being met, the AF adapts to the change of QoS according to the Alternative QoS parameter set).
Regarding claim 3, LIU modified by 3GPP discloses apparatus of claim 1, wherein different Alternative Service Requirements of the one or more Alternative Service Requirements for PDU Sets include different combinations of PSDB, PSER, and GFBR values to which the application can adapt (3GPP1: Page 60, page 57, Alternative Service Requirements (in form of alternative QoS parameter sets) include one or more different parameter sets; 3GPP2: Page 55-58, Sections 6.8.2, 6.8.3, PDB and SER are replaced by parameters PSDB, PSER, to which application layer adapts; the PDU session QoS flows are monitored for QoS and adjustment of QoS parameters occur on a PDU Set based granularity).
Regarding claim 4, 3GPP1 modified by 3GPP2 discloses apparatus of claim 3, wherein the different combinations of PSDB, PSER, uplink GFBR and downlink GFBR values are in a prioritized order in each of the Alternative Service Requirements (3GPP1: Page 60, prioritized order of Alternative QoS parameter sets in form of Alternative Service Requirements; 3GPP2: Page 56-58, 6.8.2.1, the PDB, PER are replaced by PSDB, PSER values).
Regarding claim 5, 3GPP1 modified by 3GPP2 discloses apparatus of claim 1, wherein, the one or more processors are further configured to cause the first network element to:
determining first PSDB, first PSER, first uplink GFBR and first downlink GFBR values for PDU Sets based on a first QoS reference parameters related information based on a first QoS reference parameter, wherein the notification message includes an identification of the first QoS reference parameter of the one or more QoS reference parameters corresponding to a first alternative QoS parameters Set of a plurality of Alternative QoS parameters Sets; (3GPP1: Page 60, the notification message includes QoS reference parameter corresponding to the alternative QoS parameter set; the AF determines adapted QoS parameters based on the received Alternative Service requirements and the corresponding QoS parameter set which, according to Page 84 includes PDB, PER, and uplink and downlink GFBR; 3GPP2: Page 56-58, 6.8.2.1, the PDB, PER are replaced by PSDB, PSER values);
3GPP1 modified by 3GPP2 remains silent regarding update codec settings for PDU Set based traffic based on the determined QoS parameter set.
However, an embodiment 3GPP2 discloses updating codec settings for PDU Set based traffic based on the determined QoS parameter set (3GPP: Page 166-168, 6.43.2-6.43.3, and Pages 166-172, receiving at the AF (first network element from the UPF/PCF) a notification that GFBR is no longer guaranteed for the PDU set; a new rate is determined and based on the new rate, the codec is changed).
A person of ordinary skill in the art working with the invention of 3GPP1 modified by 3GPP2 would have been motivated to use the teachings of embodiment of Information Exposure to AF as it provides a solution to a Key Issue # 3 of 5GS information exposure for XR/media Enhancement including how to expose the 5GS information for application codec/rate adaption (Page 19). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify invention of 3GPP with teachings of the embodiment of Information Exposure of AF of 3GPP1 modified by 3GPP2 in order to improve AF exposure and rate/codec adaption issue in interaction between application and 5GS which is needed to reduce latency, reduce congestion and ensure desired experience for users (Page 19).
Regarding claim 7, 3GPP1 discloses apparatus for wireless communication at a first network element, comprising: one or more memories; and one or more processors coupled to the one or more memories and configured to cause the first network element configured as a Policy Control Function (PCF) (3GPP1: Page 62, PCF network element with at least one memory and one processor to carry out the functions indicated on Page 62 and 60, at least) to:
obtain, from an AF network element, a Quality of Service (QoS) profile for a QoS Flow transporting Protocol Data Units (PDUs) and an Alternative Service Requirement of a plurality of Alternative Service Requirements for PDU Sets supporting data traffic of an application, wherein each Alternative Service Requirement of the plurality of Alternative Service Requirement for PDUs include one or more QoS reference parameters and a combination of a PDU Delay Budget (PDB) value, a PDU Error Rate (PER) value, an uplink Guaranteed Flow Bit Rate (GFBR) value, and a downlink GFBR value to which the application can adapt (3GPP1: Page 60, the PCF receives QoS reference parameter as part of a QoS profile from AF and generates PCC Rules from it; PCF also receives Alternative Service Requirement; 3GPP1: Page 60, AF provides Alternative service/QoS requirements to the PCF; these contains one or more QoS reference parameters in a prioritized order (which indicates the preference of the QoS requirements with which the service can operate));
provide, to a SMF network element, Policy and Charging Control (PCC) rules based on a plurality of Alternative QoS parameter sets derived from the one or more QoS reference parameters of the Alternative Service Requirements for PDU (3GPP1: Page 60, the first parameter including the QoS reference and corresponding QoS parameters are used to determine PCC rules and provided to SMF);
receive, from the SMF network element, an indication that a communication link between a core network element and a user equipment (UE) can no longer guarantee a current GFBR for a QoS Flow for PDUs (3GPP1: Page 57, the SMF sends a notification indicating that the QoS target including GFBR can no longer be guaranteed for the link between the UE and the RAN; the notification indicates a QoS which in turn indicates the QoS parameter set not being fulfilled), wherein the indication includes a reference to first AQP of a plurality of Alternative QoS Profiles that identifies a first PDB value, a first PER value, and a first uplink and first downlink GFBR values to which the application can adapt (3GPP1: Page 73, the SMF provides a reference to AQP (Alternative QoS Profile) to PCF; Page 60, to this AQP, AF can be adapted to this AQP); and
send a notification message to the AF network element that the communication link between the core element and the UE can no longer guarantee the GFBR for the QoS Flow transporting PDUs, wherein the notification includes an identification of one of the QoS reference parameters of the Alternative Service Requirements for PDUs that can be supported (3GPP1: Pages 60, 84, 89, PCF sends a notification including a QoS notification that the minimum QoS Reference parameter is no longer guaranteed flow bitrate for the QoS flow; the flow being between the UE and the core; Page 60, the notification message includes QoS reference parameter corresponding to the alternative QoS parameter set).
3GPP1 remains silent regarding the QoS flows having PDU sets and the PDB, PER are PSDB and PSER; and that the link between congestion notification is for the link between the RAN and the UE.
However, 3GPP2 ( discloses the QoS flows having PDU sets and the PDB, PER are PSDB and PSER (3GPP2: Page 55-58, Sections 6.8.2, 6.8.3, PDB and SER are replaced by parameters PSDB, PSER, to which application layer adapts; the PDU session QoS flows are monitored for QoS and adjustment of QoS parameters occur on a PDU Set based granularity; 3GPP: Page 26, 6.1.2., AF provides an alternative QoS requirements for the PDU Flows; Page 51, the PDU flow comprises PDU sets); and that the link between congestion notification is for the link between the RAN and the UE (3GPP2: Pages 175-178, uplink and downlink congestion detected for the link between the gNB and UE).
A person of ordinary skill in the art working with the invention of 3GPP1 would have been motivated to use the teachings of 3GPP2 as it provides a way to improves granularity of QoS differentiation in the PDU session which improves QoE of the user and enables enhancements to efficient resource management (3GPP: Page 19 and Page 56) Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify invention of 3GPP1 with teachings of 3GPP2 in order to improve user experience and resolve a key issue in the 3GPP standards (see Pages 19 and 56).
Regarding claim 8, 3GPP1 modified by 3GPP2 apparatus of claim 7, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the first network element to:
determine that the communication link between the RAN element and the UE can guarantee again the QoS profile for the QoS Flow for PDU Sets; and provide an indication that the communication link between the RAN element and the UE can guarantee the QoS profile for the QoS Flow for PDU Sets (3GPP1: Page 57, PCF determines and provides a notification that QoS targets can again be fulfilled for link between the UE and network; 3GPP2: 3GPP2: Pages 175-178, uplink and downlink congestion detected for the link between the gNB and UE).
Regarding claim 10, 3GPP1 discloses an apparatus for wireless communication at a first network element configured as a Session Management Function (SMF) network element, comprising: one or more memories; and one or more processors coupled to the one or more memories and configured to cause the first network element to:
obtain, from PCF, Policy and Charging Control (PCC) rules for data traffic supporting an application that is based on QoS requirements for PDU and a plurality of Alternative QoS parameter sets including a PDU Delay Budget (PDB) value and a PDU Error Rate (PER) value (3GPP1: Page 60, the first parameter including the QoS reference and corresponding QoS parameters are used to determine PCC rules and provided to SMF; 3GPP1: Page 73, the SMF provides a reference to AQP (Alternative QoS Profile) to PCF; Page 60, to this AQP, AF can be adapted to this AQP); 3GPP1: Page 57, the SMF sends a notification indicating that the QoS target including GFBR can no longer be guaranteed for the link between the UE and the RAN; the notification indicates a QoS which in turn indicates the QoS parameter set not being fulfilled);
provide, to a RAN element, a QoS profile for a QoS Flow for PDU Sets and a first Alternative QoS Profile of a plurality of Alternative QoS Profiles corresponding to the plurality of Alternative QoS parameter sets (3GPP1: page 72, SMF notifies the RAN with the QoS profiles to achieve appropriate treatment in order to enforce policy; the policy includes alternative QoS profile (AQPs));
establish a QoS Flow for transporting PDU for data traffic supporting the application with the RAN network element, based on the QoS profiled for the QoS flow (3GPP1: Page 38, ¶71-72, the QoS flow is established by SMF between UE and RAN );
receive from the RAN network element an indication that a communication link with a user equipment (UE) can no longer guarantee a Guaranteed Flow Bit Rate (GFBR) for the QoS Flow transporting PDU, wherein the indication includes a reference to the first Alternative QoS Profile of the plurality of Alternative QoS Profiles that identifies a first PDU Delay Budget (PSDB) value, a first PDU Set Error Rate (PSER) value, and a first uplink GFBR value and a first downlink GFBR value that the second network element can support and to which the application can adapt (3GPP1: Pages 81, 87, 88, 84 a notification of congestion is sent from the RAN at the SMF (then sent to PCF) that the GFBR is no longer supported; this notification indicates at least a reference of the QoS unable to be supported; the QoS set includes PDB, PER and GFBR; the alternative QoS polices/profiles with a reference identifier; uplink and downlink traffic being managed by QoS); and
send a notification message to the PCF network element that the communication link between the core and the UE can no longer guarantee the GFBR for the QoS Flow for PDU, wherein the notification includes a reference to a first Alternative QoS parameter set of the plurality of Alternative QoS parameter sets associated with the first AQP that the core network element can support (3GPP1: Pages 60, 84, 89, PCF sends a notification including a QoS notification that the minimum QoS Reference parameter is no longer guaranteed flow bitrate for the QoS flow; the flow being between the UE and the core; 3GPP1: Pages 60, 84, 89, PCF sends a notification including a QoS notification that the minimum QoS Reference parameter is no longer guaranteed flow bitrate for the QoS flow; the flow being between the UE and the core; Page 48, the notification message includes QoS reference parameter, referenced by RAN, corresponding to the alternative QoS parameter set).
3GPP1 remains silent regarding the QoS flows having PDU sets and the PDB, PER are PSDB and PSER; and that the link between congestion notification is for the link between the RAN and the UE.
However, 3GPP2 ( discloses the QoS flows having PDU sets and the PDB, PER are PSDB and PSER (3GPP2: Page 55-58, Sections 6.8.2, 6.8.3, PDB and SER are replaced by parameters PSDB, PSER, to which application layer adapts; the PDU session QoS flows are monitored for QoS and adjustment of QoS parameters occur on a PDU Set based granularity; 3GPP: Page 26, 6.1.2., AF provides an alternative QoS requirements for the PDU Flows; Page 51, the PDU flow comprises PDU sets); and that the link between congestion notification is for the link between the RAN and the UE (3GPP2: Pages 175-178, uplink and downlink congestion detected for the link between the gNB and UE).
A person of ordinary skill in the art working with the invention of 3GPP1 would have been motivated to use the teachings of 3GPP2 as it provides a way to improves granularity of QoS differentiation in the PDU session which improves QoE of the user and enables enhancements to efficient resource management (3GPP: Page 19 and Page 56) Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify invention of 3GPP1 with teachings of 3GPP2 in order to improve user experience and resolve a key issue in the 3GPP standards (see Pages 19 and 56).
Regarding claim 11, 3GPP1 modified by 3GPP2 discloses apparatus of claim 10, wherein different ones of the plurality of plurality of Alternative QoS Profiles for PDU Sets include different combinations of PSDB, PSER, and GFBR (3GPP1: Page 60, prioritized order of Alternative QoS parameter sets in form of Alternative Service Requirements; 3GPP2: Page 56-58, 6.8.2.1, the PDB, PER are replaced by PSDB, PSER values).
Regarding claim 12, 3GPP1 modified by 3GPP2 apparatus of claim 10, wherein different ones of the plurality of plurality of Alternative QoS Profiles for PDU Sets include different combinations of PSDB, PSER, uplink and downlink GFBR, and a maximum data burst volume (MDBV) (3GPP1: Page 84, 89, Page 60, alternative QoS parameter sets includes is provided which is part of required QoS policy; QoS parameters in the alternative QoS include PDB, PER, and GFBR for uplink and downlink; Page 75, maximum burst volume).
Regarding claim 13, 3GPP1 modified by 3GPP2 discloses apparatus of claim 10, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the first network element to:
receive from the RAN network element an indication that the communication link with the UE can guarantee the GFBR for PDU Sets session for application data traffic being communicated between the RAN network element and the UE (3GPP1: pages 81, and 48, the RAN sends notification that GFBR is guaranteed again); and
send a second notification message to the PCF network element that the communication link with the UE can guarantee again the GFBR for the QoS Flow for PDU Sets in a PDU session for application data traffic being communicated between the RAN network element and the UE (3GPP1: pages 81, and 48, the RAN sends notification that GFBR is guaranteed again).
Regarding claim 15, 3GPP1 discloses an apparatus for wireless communication at a first network element, comprising:
one or more memories; and one or more processors coupled to the one or more memories and configured to cause the first network element configured as RAN element to:
obtain from a PCF network element, a plurality of AQPs for PDUs/flows (3GPP1: Page 60, the first parameter including the QoS reference and corresponding QoS parameters are used to determine PCC rules and provided to SMF; 3GPP1: Page 73, the SMF provides a reference to AQP (Alternative QoS Profile) to PCF; Page 60, to this AQP, AF can be adapted to this AQP); 3GPP1: Page 57, the SMF sends a notification indicating that the QoS target including GFBR can no longer be guaranteed for the link between the UE and the RAN; the notification indicates a QoS which in turn indicates the QoS parameter set not being fulfilled3GPP1: page 72, SMF notifies the RAN with the QoS profiles to achieve appropriate treatment in order to enforce policy; the policy includes alternative QoS profile (AQPs));
determine that a communication link between the network and a user equipment (UE) can no longer guarantee a quality of service (QoS) profile for a current QoS Flow PDU Sets ; determine that at least one of the Alternative QoS Profiles for PDU Sets can be supported by checking whether a Guaranteed Flow Bit Rate (GFBR) value, PDU Delay Budget (PDB) value, and a PDU Error Rate (PER) value can be supported by the first network element (3GPP1: Pages 81, 87, 88, 84 a notification of congestion is sent from the RAN at the SMF (then sent to PCF) that the GFBR is no longer supported; this notification indicates at least a reference of the QoS unable to be supported; the QoS set includes PDB, PER and GFBR; the alternative QoS polices/profiles with a reference identifier; uplink and downlink traffic being managed by QoS); and
send a notification message to the SMF network element, the notification message comprising, an indication that the communication link with the UE can no longer guarantee the QoS profile for the current QoS Flow PDU Sets, wherein the indication includes a reference parameter for one of a plurality of Alternative QoS Profiles that includes a PDB value, a PER value, and a uplink GFBR value and downlink GFBR value to which an application can add adapt (3GPP1: Pages 81, 87, 88, 84, 48, a notification of congestion is sent from the RAN at the SMF (then sent to PCF) that the GFBR is no longer supported; this notification indicates at least a reference of the QoS unable to be supported; the QoS set includes PDB, PER and GFBR; the alternative QoS polices/profiles with a reference identifier; uplink and downlink traffic being managed by QoS).
3GPP1 remains silent regarding obtaining, from a second network element, Alternative quality of service (QoS) Profiles (AQPs) for Protocol Data Unit (PDU); the QoS flows having PDU sets and the PDB, PER are PSDB and PSER.
However, 3GPP2 discloses obtaining, from a second network element, Alternative quality of service (QoS) Profiles (AQPs) for Protocol Data Unit (PDU) (3GPP2: Page 191, Fig. 6.52.3.1, Page 45, SMF provides QoS profiles including the alternative QoS profiles); the QoS flows having PDU sets and the PDB, PER are PSDB and PSER (3GPP2: Page 55-58, Sections 6.8.2, 6.8.3, PDB and SER are replaced by parameters PSDB, PSER, to which application layer adapts; the PDU session QoS flows are monitored for QoS and adjustment of QoS parameters occur on a PDU Set based granularity)
A person of ordinary skill in the art working with the invention of LIU would have been motivated to use the teachings of 3GPP as it provides a way to improves granularity of QoS differentiation in the PDU session which improves QoE of the user and enables enhancements to efficient resource management (3GPP: Page 19 and Page 56) Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify invention of LIU with teachings of 3GPP in order to improve user experience and resolve a key issue in the 3GPP standards (see Pages 19 and 56).
Regarding claim 16, 3GPP1 modified by 3GPP2 discloses apparatus of claim 15, wherein different AQPs of the plurality of Alternative QoS Profiles for PDU Sets include different combinations of PSDB, PSER, and GFBR values (3GPP1: Page 84, 89, Page 60, alternative QoS parameter sets includes is provided which is part of required QoS policy; QoS parameters in the alternative QoS include PDB, PER, and GFBR for uplink and downlink; Page 75, maximum burst volum).
Regarding claim 17, 3GPP1 modified by 3GPP2 discloses apparatus of claim 15, wherein different ones of the Alternative QoS Profiles for PDU Sets include different combinations of PSDB, PSER, GFBR, and a maximum data burst volume (MDBV) values (3GPP1: Page 84, 89, Page 60, alternative QoS parameter sets includes is provided which is part of required QoS policy; QoS parameters in the alternative QoS include PDB, PER, and GFBR for uplink and downlink; Page 75, maximum burst volume).
Regarding claim 18, 3GPP1 modified by 3GPP2 discloses apparatus of claim 15, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the first network element to: determine that the communication link with the UE can guarantee the QoS profile for the QoS Flow transporting PDU Sets; and provide to the SMF network element an indication that the communication link with the UE can guarantee the QoS profile for the QoS Flow transporting PDU Sets (3GPP1: pages 81, and 48, the RAN sends notification that GFBR is guaranteed again; this notification is to SMF).
Regarding claim 28, 3GPP1 discloses apparatus for wireless communication at a first network element configured as a Policy Control Function (PCF) network element, comprising: one or more memories; and one or more processors coupled to the one or more memories and configured to cause the first network element to:
obtain, from an Application Function (AF) network element, a Quality of Service (QoS) profile for a QoS Flow for Protocol Data Unit (PDU) Sets and an Alternative Service Requirement of a plurality of Alternative Service Requirements for PDU Sets supporting data traffic of an application, wherein each Alternative Service Requirement of the plurality of Alternative Service Requirements for PDU Sets include one or more QoS reference parameters and a combination of a PDU Set Delay Budget (PSDB) value, a PDU Set Error Rate (PSER) value, an uplink Guaranteed Flow Bit Rate (GFBR) value, and a downlink GFBR value to which the application can adapt (3GPP1: Page 60, the PCF receives QoS reference parameter as part of a QoS profile from AF and generates PCC Rules from it; PCF also receives Alternative Service Requirement; 3GPP1: Page 60, AF provides Alternative service/QoS requirements to the PCF; these contains one or more QoS reference parameters in a prioritized order (which indicates the preference of the QoS requirements with which the service can operate));
provide, to a Session Management Function (SMF) network element, Policy and Charging Control (PCC) rules based on a plurality of Alternative QoS parameter sets corresponding to the one or more QoS reference parameters of the plurality of Alternative Service Requirements for PDU Sets (3GPP1: Page 60, the first parameter including the QoS reference and corresponding QoS parameters are used to determine PCC rules and provided to SMF);
receive, from the SMF network element, an indication that a communication link between a Radio Access Network (RAN) element and a user equipment (UE) can no longer guarantee a GFBR for a QoS Flow for PDUs (3GPP1: Page 57, the SMF sends a notification indicating that the QoS target including GFBR can no longer be guaranteed for the link between the UE and the RAN; the notification indicates a QoS which in turn indicates the QoS parameter set not being fulfilled), wherein the indication includes a reference to a first Alternative QoS Profile of a plurality of Alternative QoS Profiles that identifies a first PDB value, a first PER value, a first uplink GFBR value, and a first downlink GFBR value to which the application can adapt (3GPP1: Page 73, the SMF provides a reference to AQP (Alternative QoS Profile) to PCF; Page 60, to this AQP, AF can be adapted to this AQP);
determine that the communication link between the network and the UE can guarantee again the QoS profile for the QoS Flow for PDU; and send a notification message to the AF network element that the communication link between the network element and the UE can guarantee the GFBR for the QoS Flow for PDU (3GPP1: Pages 60, 84, 89, PCF sends a notification including a QoS notification that the minimum QoS Reference parameter is no longer guaranteed flow bitrate for the QoS flow; the flow being between the UE and the core; Page 60, the notification message includes QoS reference parameter corresponding to the alternative QoS parameter set).
3GPP1 remains silent regarding the QoS flows having PDU sets and the PDB, PER are PSDB and PSER; and that the link between congestion notification is for the link between the RAN and the UE.
However, 3GPP2 ( discloses the QoS flows having PDU sets and the PDB, PER are PSDB and PSER (3GPP2: Page 55-58, Sections 6.8.2, 6.8.3, PDB and SER are replaced by parameters PSDB, PSER, to which application layer adapts; the PDU session QoS flows are monitored for QoS and adjustment of QoS parameters occur on a PDU Set based granularity; 3GPP: Page 26, 6.1.2., AF provides an alternative QoS requirements for the PDU Flows; Page 51, the PDU flow comprises PDU sets); and that the link between congestion notification is for the link between the RAN and the UE (3GPP2: Pages 175-178, uplink and downlink congestion detected for the link between the gNB and UE).
A person of ordinary skill in the art working with the invention of 3GPP1 would have been motivated to use the teachings of 3GPP2 as it provides a way to improves granularity of QoS differentiation in the PDU session which improves QoE of the user and enables enhancements to efficient resource management (3GPP: Page 19 and Page 56) Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify invention of 3GPP1 with teachings of 3GPP2 in order to improve user experience and resolve a key issue in the 3GPP standards (see Pages 19 and 56).
Regarding claim 29, 3GPP1 modified by 3GPP2 discloses apparatus of claim 28, wherein different Alternative Service Requirements of the plurality of Alternative Service Requirements for PDU Sets include different combinations of PSDB, PSER, uplink GFBR, and downlink GFBR values to which the application can adapt (3GPP1: Pages 81, 87, 88, 84 a notification of congestion is sent from the RAN at the SMF (then sent to PCF) that the GFBR is no longer supported; this notification indicates at least a reference of the QoS unable to be supported; the QoS set includes PDB, PER and GFBR; the alternative QoS polices/profiles with a reference identifier; uplink and downlink traffic being managed by QoS).
Regarding claim 30, 3GPP1 discloses apparatus for wireless communication at a first network element configured as a Session Management Function (SMF) network element, comprising:
one or more memories; and
one or more processors coupled to the one or more memories and configured to cause the first network element to:
obtain, from a Policy Control Function (PCF) network element, Policy and Charging Control (PCC) rules for data traffic supporting an application that is based on quality of service (QoS) requirements for PDU Sets and a plurality of Alternative QoS parameter sets including a PDU Delay Budget (PDB) value and a PDU Error Rate (PER) value (3GPP1: Page 60, the PCF receives QoS reference parameter as part of a QoS profile from AF and generates PCC Rules from it; PCF also receives Alternative Service Requirement; 3GPP1: Page 60, AF provides Alternative service/QoS requirements to the PCF; these contains one or more QoS reference parameters in a prioritized order (which indicates the preference of the QoS requirements with which the service can operate));
provide, to a Radio Access Network (RAN) element, a QoS profile for a QoS Flow for PDU Sets and a first Alternative QoS Profile of a plurality of Alternative QoS Profiles corresponding to the plurality of Alternative QoS parameter sets (3GPP1: Page 60, the first parameter including the QoS reference and corresponding QoS parameters are used to determine PCC rules and provided to SMF; 3GPP1: page 72, SMF notifies the RAN with the QoS profiles to achieve appropriate treatment in order to enforce policy; the policy includes alternative QoS profile (AQPs));
establish the QoS Flow for PDU Sets for data traffic supporting the application with the RAN element based on the QoS profile for the QoS Flow for PDU Sets (3GPP1: Page 38, ¶71-72, the QoS flow is established by SMF between UE and RAN);
receive, from the RAN element, an indication that a communication link between the RAN element and a user equipment (UE) can guarantee a Guaranteed Flow Bit Rate (GFBR) for PDU Sets session for application data traffic; and send a notification message to the PCF network element that the communication link between the network element and the UE can guarantee again the GFBR for the QoS Flow for PDUs in a PDU session for the application data traffic (3GPP1: Pages 81, 87, 88, 84 a notification of congestion is sent from the RAN at the SMF (then sent to PCF) that the GFBR is no longer supported; this notification indicates at least a reference of the QoS unable to be supported; the QoS set includes PDB, PER and GFBR; the alternative QoS polices/profiles with a reference identifier; uplink and downlink traffic being managed by QoS).
However, 3GPP2 ( discloses the QoS flows having PDU sets and the PDB, PER are PSDB and PSER (3GPP2: Page 55-58, Sections 6.8.2, 6.8.3, PDB and SER are replaced by parameters PSDB, PSER, to which application layer adapts; the PDU session QoS flows are monitored for QoS and adjustment of QoS parameters occur on a PDU Set based granularity; 3GPP: Page 26, 6.1.2., AF provides an alternative QoS requirements for the PDU Flows; Page 51, the PDU flow comprises PDU sets); and that the link between congestion notification is for the link between the RAN and the UE (3GPP2: Pages 175-178, uplink and downlink congestion detected for the link between the gNB and UE).
A person of ordinary skill in the art working with the invention of 3GPP1 would have been motivated to use the teachings of 3GPP2 as it provides a way to improves granularity of QoS differentiation in the PDU session which improves QoE of the user and enables enhancements to efficient resource management (3GPP: Page 19 and Page 56) Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify invention of 3GPP1 with teachings of 3GPP2 in order to improve user experience and resolve a key issue in the 3GPP standards (see Pages 19 and 56).
Regarding claim 31, 3GPP1 modified by 3GPP2 discloses apparatus of claim 30, wherein different Alternative QoS Profiles of the plurality of Alternative QoS Profiles for PDU Sets include different combinations of PSDB, PSER, uplink GFBR, and downlink GFBR values (3GPP1: Pages 81, 87, 88, 84 a notification of congestion is sent from the RAN at the SMF (then sent to PCF) that the GFBR is no longer supported; this notification indicates at least a reference of the QoS unable to be supported; the QoS set includes PDB, PER and GFBR; the alternative QoS polices/profiles with a reference identifier; uplink and downlink traffic being managed by QoS).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/22/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicants argue,
“
…..
PNG
media_image1.png
820
682
media_image1.png
Greyscale
…
PNG
media_image2.png
766
702
media_image2.png
Greyscale
”
Examiner respectfully disagrees with the above arguments. Applicants take a position that LIU does not teach, the inventions of claim 1, and 7. Examiner respectfully submits that LIU is no longer relied upon to teach the above claims.
Regarding claim 1, 3GPP1 (23.503, ver. 16.7.0, Release 16, 2021-01) discloses an apparatus for wireless communication at a first network element configured as an AF network element, comprising: one or more memories; and one or more processors coupled to the one or more memories and configured to cause the first network element (3GPP1: Page 76-77, AF network element with at least one memory and one processor to carry out the functions indicated on Page 60 and 76, at least) to:
provide to a Policy Control Function (PCF) network element, one or more Alternative Service Requirements for QoS flows supporting data traffic of an application (3GPP1: Page 60, AF provides Alternative service/QoS requirements to the PCF; these contains one or more QoS reference parameters in a prioritized order (which indicates the preference of the QoS requirements with which the service can operate)),
wherein the one or more Alternative Service Requirements for QoS flows include one or more quality of service (QoS) reference parameters and a combination of a PDU Delay Budget (PDB) value, a PDU Error Rate (PER) value, and an uplink Guaranteed Flow Bit Rate (GFBR) value, and a downlink GFBR to which the application can adapt (3GPP1: Page 84, 89, Page 60, alternative QoS parameter sets includes is provided which is part of required QoS policy; QoS parameters in the alternative QoS include PDB, PER, and GFBR for uplink and downlink;); and
receive, from the PCF network element, a notification message indicating that a communication link between a core and a user equipment (UE) can no longer guarantee a GFBR for a QoS Flow (3GPP1: Pages 60, 84, 89, PCF sends a notification including a QoS notification that the minimum QoS Reference parameter is no longer guaranteed flow bitrate for the QoS flow; the flow being between the UE and the core).
3GPP1 remains silent regarding the QoS flows having PDU sets and the PDB, PER are PSDB and PSER; and that the link between congestion notification is for the link between the RAN and the UE.
However, 3GPP2 ( discloses the QoS flows having PDU sets and the PDB, PER are PSDB and PSER (3GPP2: Page 55-58, Sections 6.8.2, 6.8.3, PDB and SER are replaced by parameters PSDB, PSER, to which application layer adapts; the PDU session QoS flows are monitored for QoS and adjustment of QoS parameters occur on a PDU Set based granularity; 3GPP: Page 26, 6.1.2., AF provides an alternative QoS requirements for the PDU Flows; Page 51, the PDU flow comprises PDU sets); and that the link between congestion notification is for the link between the RAN and the UE (3GPP2: Pages 175-178, uplink and downlink congestion detected for the link between the gNB and UE).
A person of ordinary skill in the art working with the invention of 3GPP1 would have been motivated to use the teachings of 3GPP2 as it provides a way to improves granularity of QoS differentiation in the PDU session which improves QoE of the user and enables enhancements to efficient resource management (3GPP: Page 19 and Page 56) Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify invention of 3GPP1 with teachings of 3GPP2 in order to improve user experience and resolve a key issue in the 3GPP standards (see Pages 19 and 56).
In response to applicant's argument that the examiner's conclusion of obviousness is based upon improper hindsight reasoning, it must be recognized that any judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, and does not include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971).
Claims 10, 15 and 20 are similarly argued, instead from the perspective of RAN.
All remaining arguments are based on the arguments above and are fully addressed as above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OMER S MIAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7524. The examiner can normally be reached M,T,W,Th: 10a-7p, Fri, 9a-12p.
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, Huy D Vu can be reached at 571-272-3155. 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.
OMER S. MIAN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2461
/OMER S MIAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2461
Prosecution Insights