Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/453,466

DATA TRANSMISSION METHOD AND APPARATUS

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Aug 22, 2023
Examiner
WOLDEMARIAM, AYELE F
Art Unit
2447
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.
OA Round
2 (Final)
59%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 6m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 59% of resolved cases
59%
Career Allow Rate
169 granted / 285 resolved
+1.3% vs TC avg
Strong +57% interview lift
Without
With
+56.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 6m
Avg Prosecution
36 currently pending
Career history
321
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
7.6%
-32.4% vs TC avg
§103
71.9%
+31.9% vs TC avg
§102
3.4%
-36.6% vs TC avg
§112
9.5%
-30.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 285 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . DETAILED ACTION The amendment filed 12/11/2025 has been entered. Claims 1-20 are pending. Claims 1, 9, and 14 are independent. No claim is added, cancelled, or amended. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 12/11/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. In that remark, the applicant agued in substance: That: Wang does not disclose or suggest “wherein the congestion control parameter information is useable to indicate that a data amount of a first service sent by a data sending network element to a second user plane function network element for the first time after a user plane function network element that is configured to serve the first service in the data sending network element is switched from a first user plane function network element to the second user plane function network element” In response to the applicant’s argument Wang in [0044] teaches a QoS profile contains QoS parameters that define the QoS for a user plane connection, such as a QoS ID (e.g., 5QI), an Allocation and Retention Priority (ARP), Guaranteed Flow Bit Rate (GFBR) and Maximum Flow Bit Rate (MFBR) for UL and DL traffic for a Guaranteed Bit Rate (GBR) flow, a Reflective QoS Attribute (RQA) for a non-GBR flow, notification control, etc. The QoS ID references QoS characteristics that describe the packet forwarding treatment for a QoS flow between a mobile device and a MEC server, such as resource type (GBR, delay critical GBR, or Non-GBR), priority level, packet delay budget, packet error rate, and averaging window, [0041], conditions that trigger policy manager 210 to acquire a QoS policy for mobile device 140. If mobile device 140 is handed over from another RAN/MEC server, then policy manager 210 may make a determination to acquire an updated QoS policy and in [0046], QoS selector 212 monitors for a triggering event that triggers selection of a QoS profile for a MEC service (step 502). A handover of a MEC service from another MEC server/RAN, a change or modification of the MEC service, etc. Therefore, Wang clearly teaches that the a QoS profile contains QoS parameters that define the QoS for a user plane connection (corresponds to congestion control parameter information) can be acquired and used based on a triggering event such as a handover of mobile device from another RAN/MEC server server/RAN (corresponds to data sending network element is switched from a first user plane function network element to the second user plane function network element) for a user plane. Whenever the handover of a service from one MEC to other MEC occurs, the user plane function also changed from one to another and also the handover of the service is also performed for the first time since a new user plane connection is established from the another MEC server. In addition, the applicant argued that the office did not consider the claim as whole. In response to the applicant’s argument the claim as whole were considered when preparing the obviousness 103 rejection. Therefore, all the presented claim limitations were considered and rejected. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (US 20210076250) hereinafter Wang in view of FILIPPOU et al. (US 20220353732) hereinafter FILIPPOU. Regarding claim 1, Wang teaches a data transmission method, wherein the method comprises (i.e. connection between two endpoints for transporting traffic, [0034], Figs. 3 and 5, Fig. 2 MEC Server 124 comprising policy manager 210, and QoS selector 212): receiving third information (queries core network 110 for the QoS policy) from a session management network element (i.e. Responsive to a determination to acquire a QoS policy for mobile device 140, policy manager 210 queries core network 110 for the QoS policy for mobile device 140 (step 306). A QoS policy is a set of information determined by core network 110 which allows MEC server 124 to select a QoS profile for a user plane connection established for a MEC service, [0042]) and a MEC QoS Management Function (MQMF) 746 is implemented at SMF 716 configured to manage the MEC QoS policy for UE 732. MQMF 746 may update or modify the MEC QoS policy based on a UE profile from UDM 712 and local provisioning, [0053]-[0054]) wherein the third information comprises first transmission information of data packet transmission between an access network element and a terminal device (i.e. FIG. 4 illustrates a QoS policy 220 [...] QoS policy 220 also includes a plurality of QoS profile options 401-404 [...] selection criteria 410 may include [...] a MEC service type, network conditions (e.g., MEC server load, RAN usage, etc.), any device information that can be detected by RAN 120 such as UE battery level, etc. The QoS profile ID 411 is mapped to, points to, or is used to indicate a particular QoS profile" determining congestion control parameter information (QoS profile) based on the third information, [0043]); determining congestion control parameter information based on the third information (i.e. A QoS policy is a set of information determined by core network 110 which allows MEC server 124 to select a QoS profile for a user plane connection established for a MEC service, [0042] and In response to detecting a triggering event, QoS selector 212 selects a QoS profile for a user plane connection established for the MEC service between mobile device 140 and an edge application 126-128 from QoS profile options 401-404 in QoS policy 220 (step 504), [0047]), wherein the congestion control parameter information is useable to indicate that a data amount of a first service sent by a data sending network element to a second user plane function network element for the first time (i.e. A QoS profile contains QoS parameters that define the QoS for a user plane connection, such as a QoS ID (e.g., 5QI), an Allocation and Retention Priority (ARP), Guaranteed Flow Bit Rate (GFBR) and Maximum Flow Bit Rate (MFBR) for UL and DL traffic for a Guaranteed Bit Rate (GBR) flow, a Reflective QoS Attribute (RQA) for a non-GBR flow, notification control, etc. The QoS ID references QoS characteristics that describe the packet forwarding treatment for a QoS flow between a mobile device and a MEC server, such as resource type (GBR, delay critical GBR, or Non-GBR), priority level, packet delay budget, packet error rate, and averaging window, [0044]) after a user plane function network element that is configured to serve the first service in the data sending network element is switched from a first user plane function network element to the second user plane function network element (i.e. conditions that trigger policy manager 210 to acquire a QoS policy for mobile device 140. If mobile device 140 is handed over from another RAN/MEC server, then policy manager 210 may make a determination to acquire an updated QoS policy, [0041] and QoS selector 212 monitors for a triggering event that triggers selection of a QoS profile for a MEC service (step 502). A handover of a MEC service from another MEC server/RAN, a change or modification of the MEC service, etc., [0046]); and sending the congestion control parameter information to the data sending network element (i.e. QoS selector 212 then provides a QoS profile ID 411 (e.g., a QoS Flow ID (QFI)), that is mapped to the selected QoS profile, to base station 122 to enforce the selected QoS profile on the user plane connection (step 506). QoS selector 212 may optionally send a notification to mobile device 140 indicating the QoS profile ID (or the QoS profile itself) (step 508) through base station 122, [0048]). However, Wang does not explicitly disclose the third information comprises first transmission delay information. However, FILIPPOU teaches the third information comprises first transmission delay information (i.e. collects information regarding the bottleneck's bandwidth and the minimum delay for each UE, [0116] and when quantifying the QoS, including packet loss rates, bit rates, throughput, transmission delay, availability, reliability, jitter, signal strength and/or quality measurements, and/or other measurements, [0407]). Based on Wang in view of FILIPPOU, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teaching of FILIPPOU to the system of Wang in order to improve network efficiency and reducing network congestion, and increasing throughput, [0115]). Regarding claim 2, Wang teaches the data sending network element is the terminal device (i.e. acquires a QoS policy from the core network for a mobile device, [0005]), and the data amount of the first service sent by the data sending network element to the second user plane function network element for the first time comprises: a data amount of the first service sent by the terminal device by the second user plane function network element to a second edge application server corresponding to the second user plane function network element for the first time (i.e. a core network of the mobile network for a QoS policy for the mobile device that indicates a plurality of QoS profile options for the mobile device, to receive the QoS policy from the core network, [0006], and QoS selector 212 then provides a QoS profile ID 411 (e.g., a QoS Flow ID (QFI)), that is mapped to the selected QoS profile, to base station 122 to enforce the selected QoS profile on the user plane connection (step 506). QoS selector 212 may optionally send a notification to mobile device 140 indicating the QoS profile ID (or the QoS profile itself) (step 508) through base station 122, [0048]). Regarding claim 3, Wang teaches the sending the congestion control parameter information to the data sending network element comprises: sending the congestion control parameter information to the terminal device by a first edge application server corresponding to the first user plane function network element (i.e. QoS selector 212 may optionally send a notification to mobile device 140 indicating the QoS profile ID (or the QoS profile itself) (step 508) through base station 122, [0048]). Regarding claim 4, Wang teaches the third information further comprises: an uplink guaranteed flow bit rate (GFBR) of the first service; or the uplink GFBR of the first service and second transmission delay information of data packet transmission between the access network element and the second user plane function network element (i.e. A QoS profile contains QoS parameters that define the QoS for a user plane connection, such as a QoS ID (e.g., 5QI), an Allocation and Retention Priority (ARP), Guaranteed Flow Bit Rate (GFBR) and Maximum Flow Bit Rate (MFBR) for UL and DL traffic for a Guaranteed Bit Rate (GBR) flow, [0044]). Regarding claim 5, Wang teaches the data sending network element is a second edge application server corresponding to the second user plane function network element (i.e. MEC server 740 then enforces the selected QoS profile by providing the QFI that is mapped to the selected QoS profile to a base station in (R)AN 730. MEC server 740 may optionally send the QoS profile ID (or the QoS profile itself) to UE 732, [0057]), and the data amount of the first service sent by the data sending network element to the second user plane function network element for the first time comprises: a data amount of the first service sent by the second edge application server to the terminal device by the second user plane function network element for the first time QoS selector 212 may optionally send a notification to mobile device 140 indicating the QoS profile ID (or the QoS profile itself) (step 508) through base station 122, [0048]). Regarding claim 6, Wang teaches the sending the congestion control parameter information to the data sending network element comprises: sending the congestion control parameter information to the second edge application server by a first edge application server corresponding to the first user plane function network element; or sending the congestion control parameter information to the second edge application server by a second edge enabler server corresponding to the second edge application server (i.e. MQMF 746 provides the MEC QoS policy to MEC server 740/(R)AN 730 in the scenarios such as when UE 732 attaches to (R)AN 730 for MEC services, upon PDU session establishment, at QoS flow establishment or modification, [0054] and A QoS profile contains QoS parameters that define the QoS for a user plane connection, such as a QoS ID (e.g., 5QI), an Allocation and Retention Priority (ARP), Guaranteed Flow Bit Rate (GFBR) and Maximum Flow Bit Rate (MFBR) for UL and DL traffic for a Guaranteed Bit Rate (GBR) flow, [0044]). Regarding claim 7, Wang teaches wherein the third information further comprises: a downlink guaranteed flow bit rate (GFBR) of the first service; or the downlink GFBR of the first service and second transmission delay information of data packet transmission between the access network element and the second user plane function network element (i.e. A QoS profile contains QoS parameters that define the QoS for a user plane connection, such as a QoS ID (e.g., 5QI), an Allocation and Retention Priority (ARP), Guaranteed Flow Bit Rate (GFBR) and Maximum Flow Bit Rate (MFBR) for UL and DL traffic for a Guaranteed Bit Rate (GBR) flow, [0044]). Regarding claim 13, Wang teaches the receiving the congestion control parameter information sent by a from the first edge enabler server corresponding to the first edge application server comprises: receiving, by an edge enabler client in the terminal device, the congestion control parameter information sent by from the first edge enabler server (i.e. MQMF 746 provides the MEC QoS policy to MEC server 740/(R)AN 730 in the scenarios such as when UE 732 attaches to (R)AN 730 for MEC services, upon PDU session establishment, at QoS flow establishment or modification, [0054]), and sending the congestion control parameter information to an application client in the terminal device (i.e. QoS selector 212 sends a notification to mobile device 140 indicating the QoS profile options 401-404 (step 602). In response to the notification, mobile device 140 may interact with its end user to select one of the QoS profile options 401-404. QoS selector 212 receives a response from mobile device 140 selecting one of the QoS profile options, [0049]). Regarding claims 8-12 and 14-20, the limitations of claims 8-12 and 14-20 are similar to the limitations of claims 1-7. Wang further teaches a computing device, comprising: a memory; a processor device coupled to the memory (i.e. an element may be implemented as instructions executable by a processor or a computer to perform the functions of the element. The instructions may be stored on storage devices that are readable by the processor, [0062]); a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium that includes computer-executable instructions (i.e. A non-transitory computer readable medium embodying programmed instructions, [0017]). Therefore, the limitations of claims 8-12 and 14-20 are rejected in the analysis of claims 1-7 above, and the claims are rejected on that basis. Conclusion THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 AYELE F WOLDEMARIAM whose telephone number is (571)270-5196. The examiner can normally be reached M_F 8:30AM-5:00PM. 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, Joon H Hwang can be reached at 571-272-4036. 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. /AW. AYELE F. WOLDEMARIAM Examiner Art Unit 2447 2/11/2026 /SURAJ M JOSHI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2447
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 22, 2023
Application Filed
Sep 05, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 03, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Dec 11, 2025
Response Filed
Feb 12, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12602269
MULTIPLE NOTIFICATION USER INTERFACE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12556531
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR MERGING GRAPHICAL USER INTERFACES OF SEPARATE COMPUTING APPLICATIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12547817
SYSTEMS, METHODS, AND MEDIA FOR CORRELATING INFORMATION CORRESPONDING TO MULTIPLE RELATED FRAMES ON A WEB PAGE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12531757
DELIVERY SERVER AND DELIVERY METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 20, 2026
Patent 12500859
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR FACILITATING COMMUNICATION WITH SERVICE PROVIDERS
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 16, 2025
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
59%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+56.6%)
3y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 285 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month