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 .
Claim Objections
Objections withdrawn in view of amendments.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "the indication" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claims are read as best understood by the examiner for purpose of examination.
Furthermore, in Claim 6, lines 6-7, the language states, “…a RAN and the UE longer supports…” This language is confusing. It might be intended to recite “no longer”. however, it is unclear and the claim remains indefinite due to this language. Claims are read as best understood by the examiner for purpose of examination.
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) 1-20, 22-24, 26-27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LIU et al (US 2025/0227001) in view of 3GPP (NPL- 3GPP TR 23.700-60 V0.3.0 (2022-05), Study on XR (Extended Reality) and media services (Release 18)).
Regarding claim 1, LIU (US 2025/0227001) 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 (LIU: Fig. 11, ¶319-321, processor coupled with memories and configured to cause the element of Fig. 11 to perform functions of Application Function (AF) of Fig. Fig. 4-Fig. 5) to:
provide to a second network element, one or more Alternative Service Requirements for QoS flows supporting data traffic of an application (LIU: Fig. 4, ¶158-159, ¶153, ¶47-48, required alternative QoS parameters (ASR for session/QoS flow) is sent to PCF (second network element) from the AF (first network element))),
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 (LIU: ¶23, ¶46, ¶53, ¶3, ¶158-159, ¶148, alternative QoS is provided which is part of required QoS policy; QoS parameters in the alternative QoS include PDB, PER, and GFBR; ¶56, this alternative QoS profile is used i.e. the QoS parameters are adjusted at the application layer, (¶178, uplink and downlink traffic making the GFBR being uplink and downlink GFBR) ); and
receive, from the second network element, a notification message including information related to one or more parameters for QoS flow traffic (LIU: Fig. 4, Fig. 5, ¶171, ¶173, the notification is sent to AF which is related to the QoS update/alternative QoS for the QoS flow of QFI (qos flow indicator)).
LIU remains silent regarding the QoS flows having PDU sets and the PDB, PER are PSDB and PSER.
However, 3GPP discloses the QoS flows having PDU sets and the PDB, PER are PSDB and PSER (3GPP: 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).
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 2, LIU modified by 3GPP 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 information from the second network element, wherein the information related to the one or more parameters for PDU Set-based traffic is based on a condition that the second network element cannot support a default QoS (LIU: Fig. 4, ¶159, ¶171-172, ¶3, ¶177, ¶60, the AF (first network element) receives a notification when the QoS between the UE and RAN (see Fig. 5) is not supported; ¶340-341 this is determined at PCF (second network element); 3GPP: Page 55-58, PSDB, PSER are part of the 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 (LIU: ¶178, Table of ¶178, where multiple sets include different combinations of the Alternative QoS i.e. alternative service requirements for QoS flows to which the application layer adapts to; (¶178, uplink and downlink traffic making the GFBR being uplink and downlink GFBR); 3GPP: 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, LIU modified by 3GPP discloses apparatus of claim 1, 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 (LIU: ¶178, Table of ¶178, where multiple sets include different combinations of the Alternative QoS i.e. alternative service requirements for QoS flows to which the application layer adapts to; each of the Alternative QoS requirement has an associated priority; ¶3, this includes PDB, PER and GFBR; (¶178, uplink and downlink traffic making the GFBR being uplink and downlink GFBR); 3GPP: Page 56-58, 6.8.2.1, the PDB, PER are replaced by PSDB, PSER values).
Regarding claim 5, LIU modified by 3GPP discloses apparatus of claim 2, wherein to adapt one or more parameters for PDU Set-based traffic based on information received in response from the second network element, the one or more processors are further configured to cause the first network element to:
receive from the second network element an indication that a communication link between a third network element and a user equipment (UE) can no longer guarantee a GFBR for a QoS Flow for PDU Sets, wherein the indication includes an identification of the first QoS reference parameter of the one or more the one or more QoS reference parameters corresponding to a first Alternative QoS Parameters Set of a plurality of Alternative QoS Parameters Sets (LIU: ¶3, ¶171-172, ¶183, ¶48, ¶38, the notification is sent indicating that the GFBR is no longer 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; 3GPP: Page 55-58, the PDU Sets are used instead of QoS flows to manage QoS requirements; QoS reference to PSDB with GFBR value and PSER);
determining first QoS related information based on the first QoS reference parameter (LIU: ¶98, QoS includes QoS reference, the reference QoS (at one of the parameters including delay budget/bit rate etc);
LIU modified by 3GPP remains silent regarding PSDB, PSER, and GFBR values for PDU Sets based on the identified QoS reference parameter; determine update codec settings for PDU Set based traffic based on the determined PSDB, PSER, and GFBR values.
However, an embodiment of 3GPP discloses apparatus to determine PSDB, PSER, and GFBR values for PDU Sets based on the identified QoS reference parameter based on the identified QoS parameter information (Page 59, QoS policy (PCC Rule) includes QoS reference used to map and determine PSDB with GFBR value and PSER Page 169-172, Page 13, at least one QoS parameter information (e.g. rate information) is indicated to the AF in a QoS Notification based on which the AF determines the QoS parameters based on which the codec is adjusted); and update codec settings for PDU Set based traffic based on the determined QoS parameter (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 LIU modified by 3GPP 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 LIU modified by 3GPP 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 6, LIU modified by 3GPP discloses apparatus of claim 5, wherein: the second network element is a core network element (LIU: Fig. 4, ¶3, PCF is the second network element which is a core network element); and
the indication that the communication link between the third network element and the UE can no longer guarantee the GFBR for the QoS Flow for PDU Sets is from the core network element as an indication that the communication link between a Radio Access Network (RAN) element and the UE no longer supports the GFBR for the QoS Flow transporting PDU Sets (LIU: ¶3, ¶171-172, ¶183, the notification is sent indicating that the GFBR is no longer guaranteed for the link between the UE and the RAN; 3GPP: Page 55-58, Sections 6.8.2, 6.8.3, the PDU session QoS flows are monitored for QoS and adjustment of QoS parameters occur on a PDU Set based granularity instead of QoS flow being the finest granularity).
Regarding claim 7, 3GPP 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) (LIU: Fig. 11, 308-309, processor coupled with memories and configured to cause the element of Fig. 10 to perform functions of (PCF) of Fig. Fig. 4-Fig. 5) 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 (LIU: ¶23, ¶46, ¶53, ¶3, ¶158-159, ¶148, alternative QoS, provided to and obtained at a PCF (first network element) from AF (see Fig. 4), is part of required QoS policy; QoS parameters in the alternative QoS include PDB, PER, and GFBR (which, according ¶178, uplink and downlink GFBR); ¶56, this alternative QoS profile is used i.e. the QoS parameters are adjusted at the application layer);
provide 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 (LIU: ¶34, ¶47, ¶141, ¶131-133, the first parameter including the QoS reference and corresponding QoS parameters are used to determine PCC rules );
receive an indication that a communication link between a second network element and a user equipment (UE) can no longer guarantee a current GFBR for a QoS Flow for PDUs (LIU: Fig. 5, ¶3, ¶171-172, ¶183, ¶48, ¶38, the notification is received indicating that the GFBR is no longer 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 (LIU: ¶124-126, ¶141, the QoS reference (included in the parameter) also indicates multiple QoS parameters sets including PSD, PER and GFBR; ¶178, Table of ¶178, where multiple sets include different combinations of the Alternative QoS i.e. alternative service requirements for QoS flows to which the application layer adapts to); and
provide a notification that the communication link between the second 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 (LIU: ¶133-134, ¶125, ¶184, alternative QoS is selected and used that fulfils QoS requirements; the updated policy is transmitted which includes QoS policy which includes reference to Alternative QoSs (see Table ¶178)).
LIU remains silent regarding the QoS flows having PDU sets and the PDB, PER are PSDB and PSER.
However, 3GPP discloses the QoS flows having PDU sets and the PDB, PER are PSDB and PSER (3GPP: 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 8, LIU modified by 3GPP discloses the 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 with the UE can guarantee again the QoS profile for the QoS Flow for PDU Sets; and
provide an indication that the communication link with the UE can guarantee the QoS profile for the QoS Flow for PDU Sets (LIU: ¶133-134, ¶125, ¶184, Fig. 5, alternative QoS is selected and used that fulfils QoS requirements; the updated policy is transmitted which includes QoS policy which includes reference to Alternative QoSs (see Table ¶178); 3GPP: Page 55-58, Sections 6.8.2, 6.8.3, PDU session QoS flows are monitored for QoS and adjustment of QoS parameters occur on a PDU Set based granularity).
Regarding claim 9, LIU modified by 3GPP discloses apparatus of claim 7, wherein:
the PCC rules are provided to a Session Management Function (SMF) network element (LIU: Fig. 5, ¶184, PCC rules are provided to the SMF);
the indication that the communication link between the second network element and the UE can no longer guarantee the GFBR for a QoS Flow for PDU Sets is received from the SMF network element (LIU: ¶183, ¶3, the SMF ends the notification that GFBR is no longer supported/met by the link between the RAN and the UE; 3GPP: Page 55-58, Sections 6.8.2, 6.8.3, PDU Sets); and
the notification that the communication link between the second network element and the UE can no longer guarantee the GFBR for the QoS Flow for PDU Sets is provided to the AF network element (LIU: ¶183, ¶3, ¶170-172, Fig. 4, Fig. 5, the SMF ends the notification that GFBR is no longer supported/met by the link between the RAN and the UE to the PCF which sends a notification to the AF; 3GPP: Page 55-58, Sections 6.8.2, 6.8.3, PDU Sets).
Regarding claim 10, LIU 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 (LIU: ¶297, Fig. 10, processor coupled with memories and configured to cause the element of Fig. 10 to perform functions of (SMF) of Fig. Fig. 4-Fig. 5) to:
obtain 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 (LIU: ¶23, ¶46, ¶53, ¶131-133, alternative QoSs, obtained from PCF at the SMF (first network element), is part of required QoS policy; ¶3, QoS parameters in the alternative QoS include PDB, PER, and GFBR);
provide, to a second network 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 (LIU: Fig. 6, ¶138-139, ¶141, ¶159, ¶60, ¶254-255, ¶3, a notification is provided about the selected alternative QoS to the SMF which then in turn, provides to the PCF (second element); the reference QoS (at one of the parameters including delay budget/bit rate etc) of the alternative QoS policies/profiles includes one of a combination of the PDB, PER and GFBR);
establish a QoS Flow for transporting PDU for data traffic supporting the application with a second network element, based on the QoS profiled for the QoS flow (LIU: ¶127, ¶3, ¶181, ¶189, Fig. 6, a connection between the UE and RAN is established with the management of the SMF (session Management Function) where the RAN uses a suitable QoS profile provided to it via and by the SMF);
receive from the second 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 (LIU: ¶127, ¶3, ¶181, ¶189, ¶186, ¶165, Fig. 6, ¶60-62, 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; ¶178, the alternative QoS polices/profiles with a reference identifier; uplink and downlink traffic being managed by QoS); and
provide a notification that the communication link with 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 second network element can support (LIU: ¶127, ¶3, ¶181, ¶189, ¶186, Fig. 6, ¶60-62, a notification of congestion is sent from the RAN at the SMF (then provided to PCF) that the GFBR is no longer supported; also the notification includes supported QoS parameter set).
LIU remains silent regarding the QoS flows being of PDU sets and the PDB, PER are PSDB and PSER.
However, 3GPP discloses the QoS flows having PDU sets and the PDB, PER are PSDB and PSER (3GPP: 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 11, LIU modified by 3GPP 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 (LIU: ¶178, Table of ¶178, where multiple sets include different combinations of the Alternative QoS i.e. alternative service requirements for QoS flows to which the application layer adapts to; 3GPP: Page 55-58, Sections 6.8.2, 6.8.3, PDB and SER are replaced by parameters PSDB, PSER).
Regarding claim 12, LIU modified by 3GPP 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, GFBR, and a maximum data burst volume (MDBV) (LIU: Table of ¶178, and ¶3, ¶208, the parameters include PDB, PER, GFBR values, and MDBV; 3GPP: Page 55-58, Sections 6.8.2, 6.8.3, PDB and SER are replaced by parameters PSDB, PSER).
Regarding claim 13, LIU modified by 3GPP discloses apparatus of claim 10, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the first network element to:
receive from the second 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 second network element and the UE (LIU: ¶139, ¶60, an indication that the link between the UE and the second network element (RAN) is able to fulfil the QoS by using the suitable alternative QoS); and
provide a notification 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 second network element and the UE (LIU: Fig. 6, ¶139, ¶60, ¶254-255, a notification is provided about the selected alternative QoS to the SMF).
Regarding claim 14, LIU modified by 3GPP discloses apparatus apparatus of claim 13, wherein: (LIU: ¶297, Fig. 10, processor coupled with memories and configured to cause the element of Fig. 10 to perform functions of (SMF) of Fig. Fig. 4-Fig. 5);
The PCC rules for data traffic supporting the application are received from a Policy Control Function (PCF) network element; the second network element is a Radio Access Network element (LIU: ¶34, ¶47, ¶141, ¶131-133, the first parameter including the QoS reference and corresponding QoS parameters are used to determine PCC rules; these rules received at the SMF);
the notification that the communication link with the UE can no longer guarantee the GFBR for the QoS Flow PDU Sets is transmitted to the PCF network element (LIU: ¶127, ¶3, ¶181, ¶189, ¶186, Fig. 6, ¶60-62, a notification of congestion is sent from the RAN at the SMF (then sent to PCF from SMF) that the GFBR is no longer supported;); and the notification that the communication link with the UE can guarantee again the GFBR for the QoS Flow PDU Sets in a PDU session for application data traffic being communicated between the second network element and the UE is transmitted to the PCF network element (LIU: Fig. 6, ¶139, ¶60, ¶254-255, a notification is provided about the selected alternative QoS to the SMF and in turn to the PCF; 3GPP: Page 55-58, the PDU Sets are used instead of QoS flows ).
Regarding claim 15, LIU 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 (LIU: ¶302, Fig. 10, processor coupled with memories and configured to cause the element of Fig. 10 to perform functions of RAN of Fig. Fig. 5-Fig. 6) to:
determine that a communication link with a user equipment (UE) can no longer guarantee a quality of service (QoS) profile for a current QoS Flow PDU Sets (LIU: ¶127, ¶3, ¶181, ¶189, ¶186, Fig. 6, ¶60-62, a notification of congestion is sent from the RAN at the SMF (then sent to PCF from SMF) that the GFBR is no longer supported; this is upon determination at the RAN (first network element));
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 (LIU: ¶124-128, Fig. 5, the RAN node selects a suitable and supportable QoS policy including the GFBR, PDB and PER for the QoS flow being communicated between the UE and RAN; ¶178, Alternative QoS policies with a corresponding QFI); and
provide to the second network element 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 (LIU: Fig. 6, ¶138-139, ¶141, ¶159, ¶60, ¶254-255, ¶3, a notification is provided about the selected alternative QoS to the SMF and in turn to the PCF; the reference QoS (at one of the parameters including delay budget/bit rate etc) of the alternative QoS policies/profiles includes one of a combination of the PDB, PER and GFBR).
LIU 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, 3GPP discloses obtaining, from a second network element, Alternative quality of service (QoS) Profiles (AQPs) for Protocol Data Unit (PDU) (3GPP: 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 (3GPP: 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, LIU modified by 3GPP 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 (LIU: ¶178, Table of ¶178, where multiple sets include different combinations of the Alternative QoS i.e. alternative service requirements for QoS flows to which the application layer adapts to; 3GPP: Page 55-58, Sections 6.8.2, 6.8.3, PDB and SER are replaced by parameters PSDB, PSER).
Regarding claim 17, LIU modified by 3GPP 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 (LIU: Table of ¶178, and ¶3, ¶208, the parameters include PDB, PER, GFBR values, and MDBV; 3GPP: Page 55-58, Sections 6.8.2, 6.8.3, PDB and SER are replaced by parameters PSDB, PSER).
Regarding claim 18, LIU modified by 3GPP 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 (LIU: ¶139, ¶60, ¶62, an determination that the link between the UE and the second network element (RAN) is able to fulfil the QoS by using the suitable alternative QoS); and provide to the second network element an indication that the communication link with the UE can guarantee the QoS profile for the QoS Flow transporting PDU Sets (LIU: Fig. 6, ¶139, ¶60, ¶62, ¶254-255, a notification is provided about the selected alternative QoS profile to the SMF).
Regarding claim 19, LIU modified by 3GPP apparatus of claim 15, wherein: and the second network element is a core network element (LIU ¶254, base station/RAN is the first element; ¶255, SMF/Core network element is the second element).
Regarding claim 20, LIU discloses apparatus for wireless communication at a first network element, comprising:
one or more memories; and one or more processors couple to the memory and configured to cause the first network element (LIU: ¶297, Fig. 10, processor coupled with memories and configured to cause the element of Fig. 10 to perform functions of (SMF) of Fig. Fig. 4-Fig. 5) to:
receive an indication of a change in a bit rate or frame rate of a data flow between a second network element and a user equipment (UE) (LIU: ¶3, ¶171-172, ¶183, ¶48, ¶38, the notification is sent indicating that the GFBR is no longer 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);
establish one or more Quality of Service (QoS) parameters with a third network element to support the change in a bit rate or frame rate of the data flow in response to receiving the indication (LIU: ¶23, ¶46, ¶53, ¶131-133, alternative QoSs, obtained from PCF (third network element) at the SMF (first network element), is part of required QoS policy; ¶3, QoS parameters in the alternative QoS include PDB, PER, and GFBR); and
provide to the second network element a configuration message that configures one or more UE communication parameters to implement the established QoS parameters (LIU: ¶133-134, ¶125, ¶184, alternative QoS is selected and used that fulfils QoS requirements; the updated policy is transmitted to the RAN, which includes QoS policy which includes reference to Alternative QoSs (see Table ¶178)).
LIU remains silent regarding providing being to the UE.
However, 3GPP discloses providing being to the UE (3GPP: Fig. 6.14.1-1 and Page 81, the UE is configured with the QoS parameters /communication parameters which were based on PCF/SMF)
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 22, LIU modified by 3GPP discloses apparatus of claim 20, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to establish the plurality of Alternative QoS Profiles with the third network element as part of establishing the data flow to the UE, wherein each of the Alternative QoS Profiles is associated with a reference parameter and supports a particular bit rate or frame rate for a communication link between the first network element and the UE suitable for supporting the data flow (LIU: ¶60-63, ¶141, ¶178, the polices in the alternative QoS policy list are associated with corresponding GBR and has a reference QoS ).
Regarding claim 23, LIU modified by 3GPP discloses apparatus of claim 20, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to provide to the third network element a request for a reestablishment or update of the QoS parameters (LIU: ¶127, ¶3, ¶181, ¶189, ¶186, Fig. 6, ¶60-62, a notification of congestion is sent from the SMF (to PCF) that the GFBR is no longer supported requesting an updated)
Regarding claim 24, LIU 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 core network element (LIU: ¶297, Fig. 10, processor coupled with memories and configured to cause the element of Fig. 10 to perform functions of (SMF/first network element which is a core network element) of Fig. Fig. 4-Fig. 5) to:
obtain an indication of a change in a bit rate or frame rate of a data flow (LIU: ¶127, ¶139, ¶3, ¶180, ¶182, ¶189-190, ¶165, Fig. 6, ¶60-62, the notification is received indicating that the GFBR is no longer 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 ( equivalent to a change in a guaranteed bit rate));
provide to a second network element a reference parameter of an Alternative QoS Profile of a plurality of Alternative QoS profile that are associated with the second network element for a QoS flow supporting the data flow (LIU: Fig. 6, ¶138-139, ¶141, ¶159, ¶192, ¶60, ¶254-255, ¶3, a notification is provided about the selected alternative QoS to the SMF and in turn to the PCF (second element); the reference QoS (at one of the parameters including delay budget/bit rate etc) of the alternative QoS policies/profiles includes one of a combination of the PDB, PER and GFBR) and
establish one or more Quality of Service (QoS) parameters with a second network element based on the reference parameter to implement the change in the bit rate or frame rate (LIU: ¶34, ¶47, ¶184-186, ¶131-133, the first parameter including the QoS reference and corresponding QoS parameters are used to determine/establish PCC rules for changed bit rate/GBR with an RAN (second network element); the second element being PCF and the first element being SMF).
LIU remains silent regarding the QoS flows having PDU sets and the PDB, PER are PSDB and PSER.
However, 3GPP discloses the QoS flows having PDU sets and the PDB, PER are PSDB and PSER (3GPP: 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).
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 26, LIU modified by 3GPP discloses apparatus of claim 24, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to establish the plurality of Alternative QoS Profiles with the second network element based on the data flow to a user equipment (UE), wherein each AQP of the plurality Alternative QoS Profiles is associated with an identifier and supports a particular bit rate or frame rate for a communication link between the second network element and the UE supporting the data flow (LIU: ¶60, ¶125, ¶178, the Alternative QoS policy is associated with an identifier and a bit rate; this is for a link between the UE and the NG-RAN (second network element) node ).
Regarding claim 27, LIU modified by 3GPP discloses apparatus of claim 24, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the first network element to: receive from the second network element a request for a reestablishment or update of the one or more QoS parameters; and adjust the bit rate or frame rate for the data flow related to the request for reestablishment or update of the one or more QoS parameters (LIU: ¶127, ¶3, ¶181, ¶189, ¶186, Fig. 6, ¶60-62, a notification of congestion is sent from the RAN node to SMF (in turn to PCF-first network element) that the GFBR is no longer supported requesting an updated; ¶184, the PCF updates the PCC rule based on the PCF which in turn updates/adjust the bit rate for the data flow).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 2/18/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicants argue,
“
PNG
media_image1.png
434
976
media_image1.png
Greyscale
”
Examiner respectfully disagrees with the above arguments. Applicants take a position that LIU does not teach, as acknowledged by the Office Action, the PDUs being PDU sets. LIU, discloses that a QoS flow carrying a data flow.
[0130] Provided below is a method for adjusting a QoS performed by a first entity. The method may include: adjusting, by the first entity, a QoS of a QoS flow based on PCC rules sent directly or indirectly by a first network function.
[0071] In an embodiment, the second policy includes one or more of: a multi-modality flow network policy, a multi-flow packet network policy, a flow network policy, an association network policy or a coordination network policy, information for indicating a flow association relationship, a time delay, a time delay difference, a rate, a maximum data burst volume, an alternative quality of service (QOS), or a jitter requirement.
Examiner relies on 3GPP to teach the QoS flow being supported by PDU set (3GPP: 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).
In this solution the application layer has the capabilities to provide new information describing characteristics of a 'PDU-Set'. The characteristics are encoded in a generic, media-type-agnostic manner. This to relieve the 5GS from the burden of having media knowledge of applications that are not under 3GPP control. (3GPP Page 55)
The concept of a PDU-Set enables enhancements to efficient resource management in 5GS, e.g. in NG-RAN. (3GPP Page 56)
The above provides reasonable motivation for the “open ended study” to be used by a person of ordinary skill in the art.
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).
Applicants argue,
“
PNG
media_image2.png
1130
990
media_image2.png
Greyscale
”
Examiner respectfully disagrees with the above arguments. Applicants take a first position that LIU modified by 3GPP does not disclose, “…one or more Alternative Service Requirements for PDU Sets supporting data traffic of an application,” and “the one or more 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 Bitrate (GFBR) value and a downlink GFBR value to which the application can adapt…”
Examiner respectfully submits as an initial note that “Alternative Service Requirement” is another name given to Alternative QoS profile that includes a set of parameters to be met by a QoS flow of a PDU session.
[0003] A policy control function (PCF) issues policy and charging control (PCC) rules in the case that a session of a user equipment (UE) is established. When a next generation radio access network (NG-RAN) determines that a guaranteed flow bit rate (GFBR), a packet delay budget (PDB), or a packet error rate (PER) cannot be satisfied, the NG-RAN may send a “GFBR can no longer be guaranteed” notification to a session management function (SMF). Before sending the notification, the NG-RAN may check whether the GFBR, the PDB, and the PER, which are currently satisfied, can be matched with a certain alternative quality of service (QOS) profile in a list of alternative QoS profiles based on the priority of the alternative QoS profiles. If an alternative QoS profile is matched, the NG-RAN may carry a reference to the matched alternative QoS profile in the notification that is sent to the SMF (only the first matched alternative QoS profile, i.e., the alternative QoS profile with the highest priority, is sent).
When an Alternative QoS profile or more than one Alternative QoS profiles are sent by, e.g, AF in Fig. 4 is a list according to ¶178 of LIU and the corresponding table. LIU discloses that SMF and eventually PCF is notified of the alternative QoS which includes the list.
[0165] The PCF determines whether the request is authorized or not. Upon an authorized request, the PCF uses the parameter (i.e., a related QFI, an alternative QoS) provided by the AF through the NEF to cover the original QoS parameter and return a response to the NEF.
…
[0171] The PCF triggers a notification to the NEF in the case that an event is satisfied, e.g., successful or failed establishment of a transmission resource corresponding to a QoS update.
[0172] 8. The NEF notifies the AF of a correlation event of the PCF.
In another example, the PCF notifies an updated QoS profile.
[0184] 4. The PCF updates the QoS profile based on the PCC rules and information provided by the AF and sends an updated QoS profile to the SMF.
Further, the adaptation or adjustment (see ¶59 of LIU) is performed based on the updated QoS
[0177] In specific, it may additionally introduce a table indicating the relationship between a plurality of flows. The QFIs in the table are flows in one same packet. When the QoS is adjusted for one flow, it is required for the PCF to determine how adjust the QoS of said flow (increases/decreases/maintains) by comprehensively considering a current QoS of all the flows in the packet, and an AF requirement and/or the current state of the network, thereby making a modification to change the QoS of the flow.
This is based on a QoS reference parameter e.g. alternative QoS and QoS reference parameter in the QoS profiles and therefore, a person of ordinary skill in the art would reasonably interpret this as “one or more Alternative Service Requirements for PDU Sets supporting data traffic of an application”
Further, LIU discloses in ¶3 and ¶178 that parameters include
[0003] A policy control function (PCF) issues policy and charging control (PCC) rules in the case that a session of a user equipment (UE) is established. When a next generation radio access network (NG-RAN) determines that a guaranteed flow bit rate (GFBR), a packet delay budget (PDB), or a packet error rate (PER) cannot be satisfied, the NG-RAN may send a “GFBR can no longer be guaranteed” notification to a session management function (SMF). Before sending the notification, the NG-RAN may check whether the GFBR, the PDB, and the PER, which are currently satisfied, can be matched with a certain alternative quality of service (QOS) profile in a list of alternative QoS profiles based on the priority of the alternative QoS profiles. If an alternative QoS profile is matched, the NG-RAN may carry a reference to the matched alternative QoS profile in the notification that is sent to the SMF (only the first matched alternative QoS profile, i.e., the alternative QoS profile with the highest priority, is sent).
[0178] The serial numbers of QFIs in the table represent a current state of a parameter (including a bandwidth, an uplink and a downlink, a delay, etc.) for a QFI. The alternative QoS represents a list of available QOS adjusting policies for the QoS flow when a plurality of associated QFIs are in the current state, where each number represents a set of QoS parameters and the priority level thereof. The alternative QoS may be increased/decreased/maintained.
All the parameters are for uplink and downlink traffic and includes GFBR, PDB and PER.
A person of ordinary skill in the art would reasonably interpret the above as teaching “the one or more Alternative Service Requirements for a QoS flow of an application an include one or more 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”
Examiner relies on 3GPP to teach the QoS flows having PDU sets and the PDB, PER are PSDB and PSER (3GPP: 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).
In this solution the application layer has the capabilities to provide new information describing characteristics of a 'PDU-Set'. The characteristics are encoded in a generic, media-type-agnostic manner. This to relieve the 5GS from the burden of having media knowledge of applications that are not under 3GPP control. (3GPP Page 55)
The concept of a PDU-Set enables enhancements to efficient resource management in 5GS, e.g. in NG-RAN. (3GPP Page 56)
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).
Applicants argue,
“
PNG
media_image3.png
706
970
media_image3.png
Greyscale
”
Examiner respectfully disagrees with the above arguments. Applicants take a first position that LIU does not disclose, “…receive an indication that a communication link between a second network element and a UE can no longer guarantee a GFBR for a QoS Flow for PDU Sets, wherein the indication includes a reference to a first alternative QoS profile…”
Examiner submits that LIU expressly discloses this feature. LIU, in Fig. 5, where the PCF receives a “congestion notification”, which is received by the SMF and is also an indication according to ¶3, that UE can no longer guarantee a GFBR for a QoS flow for PDU sets.
[0003] A policy control function (PCF) issues policy and charging control (PCC) rules in the case that a session of a user equipment (UE) is established. When a next generation radio access network (NG-RAN) determines that a guaranteed flow bit rate (GFBR), a packet delay budget (PDB), or a packet error rate (PER) cannot be satisfied, the NG-RAN may send a “GFBR can no longer be guaranteed” notification to a session management function (SMF). Before sending the notification, the NG-RAN may check whether the GFBR, the PDB, and the PER, which are currently satisfied, can be matched with a certain alternative quality of service (QOS) profile in a list of alternative QoS profiles based on the priority of the alternative QoS profiles. If an alternative QoS profile is matched, the NG-RAN may carry a reference to the matched alternative QoS profile in the notification that is sent to the SMF (only the first matched alternative QoS profile, i.e., the alternative QoS profile with the highest priority, is sent).
Further LIU discloses in ¶193, that PCF is able to correlate the congestion notification with a corresponding QoS update which implies the indication includes at least an implicit reference for the PCF to perform the QoS policy update.
[0190] At S2, the RAN sends the AMF a congestion notification for notifying that the first service flow cannot be satisfied and that the first service flow has been released.
[0193] At S5, the PCF performs a policy adjustment based on the first service flow and information provided by the AF. The PCF releases all or part of the flows correlated to the first service flow, upgrades or downgrades the QoSs of the first service flow and other flows correlated to the first service flow, to generate a new policy updated.
[0178] The serial numbers of QFIs in the table represent a current state of a parameter (including a bandwidth, an uplink and a downlink, a delay, etc.) for a QFI. The alternative QoS represents a list of available QOS adjusting policies for the QoS flow when a plurality of associated QFIs are in the current state, where each number represents a set of QoS parameters and the priority level thereof. The alternative QoS may be increased/decreased/maintained.
Further, LIU discloses the QoS profile includes “…a guaranteed flow bit rate (GFBR), a packet delay budget (PDB), or a packet error rate (PER)” (¶3)
Examiner relies on 3GPP to teach the QoS flows having PDU sets and the PDB, PER are PSDB and PSER (3GPP: 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).
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).
The claim remains silent regarding how the indication information is formatted in a message. Absent such specifics of the indication, a person of ordinary skill in the art would reasonably interpret the above teachings of LIU modified by 3GPP as teaching, “…receive an indication that a communication link between a second network element and a user equipment (UE) can no longer guarantee a GFBR for a QoS Flow for PDU Sets, wherein the indication includes a reference to a first Alternative QoS Profile of a plurality of Alternative QoS Profiles that identifies a first PSDB value, a first PSER value, a first uplink GFBR value, and a first downlink GFBR value to which the application can adapt…”
Applicants argue,
“
PNG
media_image4.png
668
980
media_image4.png
Greyscale
…
PNG
media_image5.png
664
966
media_image5.png
Greyscale
”
Examiner respectfully disagrees with the above arguments. Applicants take a first position that LIU does not disclose, “…receive from the second 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 for PDU Sets, wherein the indication includes a reference to the first Alternative QoS Profile of the plurality of Alternative QoS Profiles that identifies a first PSDB value, a first PSER value, 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…”
Examiner submits that LIU expressly discloses this feature. LIU, in Fig. 5, where the SMF receives a “congestion notification”, which is received by the SMF and is also an indication according to ¶3, that UE can no longer guarantee a GFBR for a QoS flow for PDU sets.
[0003] A policy control function (PCF) issues policy and charging control (PCC) rules in the case that a session of a user equipment (UE) is established. When a next generation radio access network (NG-RAN) determines that a guaranteed flow bit rate (GFBR), a packet delay budget (PDB), or a packet error rate (PER) cannot be satisfied, the NG-RAN may send a “GFBR can no longer be guaranteed” notification to a session management function (SMF). Before sending the notification, the NG-RAN may check whether the GFBR, the PDB, and the PER, which are currently satisfied, can be matched with a certain alternative quality of service (QOS) profile in a list of alternative QoS profiles based on the priority of the alternative QoS profiles. If an alternative QoS profile is matched, the NG-RAN may carry a reference to the matched alternative QoS profile in the notification that is sent to the SMF (only the first matched alternative QoS profile, i.e., the alternative QoS profile with the highest priority, is sent).
Further LIU discloses in ¶184, that SMF is able to receive the congestion notification with a corresponding QoS update which implies the indication includes at least an implicit reference for the SMF to perform the QoS policy update which is directly in response to the congestion notificaiton.
[0184] 4. The PCF updates the QoS profile based on the PCC rules and information provided by the AF and sends an updated QoS profile to the SMF.
[0178] The serial numbers of QFIs in the table represent a current state of a parameter (including a bandwidth, an uplink and a downlink, a delay, etc.) for a QFI. The alternative QoS represents a list of available QOS adjusting policies for the QoS flow when a plurality of associated QFIs are in the current state, where each number represents a set of QoS parameters and the priority level thereof. The alternative QoS may be increased/decreased/maintained.
Further, LIU discloses the QoS profile includes “…a guaranteed flow bit rate (GFBR), a packet delay budget (PDB), or a packet error rate (PER)” (¶3)
Examiner relies on 3GPP to teach the QoS flows having PDU sets and the PDB, PER are PSDB and PSER (3GPP: 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).
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).
The claim remains silent regarding how the indication information is formatted in a message. Absent such specifics of the indication, a person of ordinary skill in the art would reasonably interpret the above teachings of LIU modified by 3GPP as teaching, “…receive from the second 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 for PDU Sets, wherein the indication includes a reference to the first Alternative QoS Profile of the plurality of Alternative QoS Profiles that identifies a first PSDB value, a first PSER value, 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…”
Claims 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
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 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