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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 08/02/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-12 and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 recites a series of actions in the form of “facilitating” various actions of a RAN node: “facilitating, by a radio access network node, receiving… a local storage capability indication…”; “facilitating, by the radio access network node, receiving a stable information indication…”; “facilitating, by the radio access network node, transmitting…a stable information storage indication…”; “facilitating, by the radio access network node, receiving a stable information request indication…”; and “facilitating, by the radio access network node, transmitting… a stable information retrieval indication…”. Claims 4-5 recite the “facilitating” limitations of claim 1. Similarly, claim 6 recites “facilitating, by the radio access network node, transmitting… a local storage flush indication…”, with claims 7-9 also reciting this flush indication being “facilitated”. Further, claim 12 recites “based on determining that the analyzed second channel condition metric satisfies the channel condition criterion being facilitated by the radio access network node…”, and further recites the transmission of a storage flush indication being “facilitated” by the radio access network node. Still further, claim 17 recites “radio access network node facilitates an extended reality (“XR”) service”. Still further, claim 18 recites computer instructions that “facilitate performance of operations”, with those operations then listed in each of claims 18-20.
Turning to the specification for guidance, paragraph [0059] explains: “The term ‘facilitate’ as used herein is in the context of a system, device or component ‘facilitating’ one or more actions or operations…In this regard, a computing device or component can facilitate an operation by playing any part in accomplishing the operation." Clearly, Applicant envisions the term "facilitate" as having extraordinary breadth. Essentially, when read in light of the specification, each of the limitations listed above is directed to a genus encompassing all acts that could contribute to accomplishing its respective operation.
However, the specification provides little detail as to specific acts beyond the RAN simply performing the operations itself. For example, paragraph [0059] merely describes "facilitating" generally, and paragraphs [0002-0030] largely repeat the claim language, but nowhere does the specification describe sufficient species to provide written description support for genera comprised of "playing any part in accomplishing" the various operations. Therefore, Applicant has not demonstrated possession of various "facilitating" steps, and the claims lack sufficient written description in the specification. See MPEP 2161.01(I), which provides that "generic claim language in the original disclosure does not satisfy the written description requirement if it fails to support the scope of the genus claimed."
Any claim not specifically addressed above is rejected for inheriting the deficiencies of a parent claim.
Allowable Subject Matter
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claims 1-12 and 17-20 would be allowable if re-written to overcome the 35 U.S.C 112(a) rejections above.
Claims 13-16 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: the prior art of record fails to explicitly (or expressly) anticipate or render obvious each limitation as recited in independent claims 1, 13, and 18.
Regarding claims 1, 13, and 18, the closest prior art Parvataneni et al. (US 20210152998 A1), hereinafter Parvataneni, teaches “receiving, by a radio access network node, from a user equipment, a local storage capability indication indicative of a local storage capacity corresponding to a local storage associated with the user equipment; receiving by the radio access network node, a stable information indication indicative of stable information corresponding to the user equipment; analyzing, by the radio access network node with respect to the local storage capacity, the stable information to result in analyzed stable information;… receiving, by the radio access network node, a stable information request indication indicative that the stable information is to be delivered to the user equipment;”
Parvataneni does not teach “…based on the analyzed stable information being determined to be capable of being stored on the local storage, facilitating, by the radio access network node, transmitting, to the user equipment, a stable information storage indication indicative to the user equipment to store the stable information to the local storage;… transmitting, by the radio access network node, to the user equipment, a stable information retrieval indication indicative to the user equipment to retrieve the stable information from the local storage.”
None of the prior art teach or fairly suggest the above-mentioned limitations in combination with the other limitation of Claim(s) 1, 13, and 18. Although the other limitations are used in the art, none of the prior art of record teach or provide motivation to combine to reach a similar result.
Claims [2-12], [14-17], and [19-20] include the above-described allowable subject matter for being dependent on independent Claims [1], [13], and [18] respectively.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Benjamin T. Ranew whose telephone number is (571)272-2746. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM EST. 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, Ayman Abaza can be reached at (571) 270-0422. 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.
/BENJAMIN T. RANEW/Examiner, Art Unit 2465
/AYMAN A ABAZA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2465
Prosecution Insights