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 .
This is responsive to Application 18/500,527 filed 11/02/2023 in which claims 1-20 are presented for examination.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-9 and 11-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Bader et al (US 2024/0064554 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Bader teaches a control entity (Bader: Fig. 1:26; analytics system) for controlling a communication service of a mobile communication network, the control entity comprising:
a first communication interface configured to obtain a group quality of service (QoS) treatment requirement for group QoS treatment of a traffic group comprising one or more communication services in the mobile communication network (Bader: Fig. 1; [0017], [0038], POF 30 receives traffic classes QoE targets/QoS treatment requirement from SoC 32);
a processor configured to generate one or more QoS flow groups and a corresponding group QoS treatment policy for each QoS flow group based on the obtained group QoS treatment requirement and the traffic group, wherein each QoS flow group comprises at least one of the one or more communication services (Bader: Fig. 1; [0038], [0076], POF 30 generates 5QIs for the traffic classes; [0003]-[0008] 5QIs indicate QoS behavior/policies for QoS flows); and
a second communication interface configured to provide QoS group information to one or more network entities in the mobile communication network, the QoS group information comprising a QoS flow group identifier and the group QoS treatment policy for a corresponding QoS flow group (Bader: Fig. 1; [0038], [0076], POF 30 generates 5Qis and forwards them to CN 14/network entity).
Regarding claim 13, Bader teaches a network entity (Bader: Fig. 1:14; CN) for assuring a quality of service (QoS) of a traffic group comprising one or more communication services of one or more user equipments (UEs) in a mobile communication network, the network entity comprising:
a communication interface configured to receive QoS group information, the QoS group information comprising a QoS flow group identifier and a group QoS treatment policy for a corresponding QoS flow group comprising one or more communication services of the mobile communication network (Bader: Fig. 1; [0017], [0038], POF 30 receives traffic classes QoE targets/QoS treatment requirement from SoC 32; [0038], [0076], CN 14 receives the 5Qis from the POF 30); and
a processor configured to process a communication service of the mobile communication network that is assigned to the QoS flow group based on the group QoS treatment policy and a QoS profile of a QoS flow assigned to the communication service (Bader: Fig. 1; [0038]-[0039]; [0076]; PCF 18 of the CN enforces the QoS in the 5QIs).
Regarding claim 20, Bader teaches a method for controlling a communication service of a mobile communication network, the method comprising:
obtaining a group quality of service (QoS) treatment requirement for group QoS treatment of a traffic group comprising one or more communication services in the mobile communication network (Bader: Fig. 1; [0017], [0038], POF 30 receives traffic classes QoE targets/QoS treatment requirement from SoC 32);
generating one or more QoS flow groups and a corresponding group QoS treatment policy for each QoS flow group based on the obtained group QoS treatment requirement and the traffic group, wherein each QoS flow group comprises at least one of the one or more communication services (Bader: Fig. 1; [0038], [0076], POF 30 generates 5QIs for the traffic classes; [0003]-[0008] 5QIs indicate QoS behavior/policies for QoS flows); and
providing QoS group information to one or more network entities in the mobile communication network, the QoS group information comprising a QoS flow group identifier and the group QoS treatment policy for the corresponding QoS flow group (Bader: Fig. 1; [0038], [0076], POF 30 generates 5Qis and forwards them to CN 14/network entity).
Regarding claims 2 and 14; Bader teaches wherein the processor is further configured to assign a corresponding QoS flow group identifier to the one or more QoS flow groups (Bader: Fig. 1; [0038], [0076], POF 30 generates 5QIs/identifiers for the traffic classes).
Regarding claim 3; Bader teaches wherein the group QoS treatment requirement is obtained directly from an application layer or from the application layer by way of a network entity, wherein the network entity comprises one or more of an application function, a network exposure function, or a unified data repository (Bader: Fig. 1; POF 18 receives the QoE targets from SoC/application layer and AF/application layer).
Regarding claim 4; Bader teaches wherein the group QoS treatment requirement is obtained together with a traffic group identifier of the traffic group directly from the application layer or from the application layer by way of the network entity, wherein the traffic group identifier is configured to identify the traffic group (Bader: Fig. 1; [0038], [0076], POF 30 generates 5QIs for the traffic classes/traffic groups; POF 18 receives the QoE targets from SoC/application layer and AF/application layer).
Regarding claim 5; Bader teaches wherein a traffic group identifier of the traffic group is obtained directly from the application layer or from the application layer by way of the network entity, the group QoS treatment requirement is obtained from a database, and the traffic group identifier is configured to identify the traffic group (Bader: Fig. 1; [0038], [0076], POF 30 generates 5QIs for the traffic classes/traffic groups; POF 18 receives the QoE targets from SoC/application layer and AF/application layer).
Regarding claims 6 and 15; Bader teaches wherein one or more of the group QoS treatment policy or the group QoS treatment requirement comprises at least one of: a percentage of communication services of the one or more communication services in at least one of the QoS flow group or the traffic group of which the QoS needs to be fulfilled, a percentage of communication services of the one or more communication services in at least one of the QoS flow group or the traffic group of which the QoS does not need to be fulfilled, a percentage of communication services in at least one of the QoS flow group or the traffic group to be treated as a whole for group resource management, a parameter controlling a fair chance of at least one of QoS fulfillment or group resource management for each communication service within one or more of the QoS flow group and/or the or the traffic group; an indication of an allowed communication latency threshold with respect to a number of control cycles, and cycles, or a parameter for aligning an arrival time (Bader: Fig. 1; [0017], highest priority traffic/percentage QoE target must be met).
Regarding claims 7 and 16; Bader teaches wherein a policy for the group resource management comprises at least one of: a combined admission control during QoS Flow establishment handover, or a combined smart resource scheduling at a radio access network (Bader: Fig. 1; [0088], [0100]).
Regarding claims 8 and 17; Bader teaches wherein one or more of the group QoS treatment policy or the group QoS treatment requirement further comprises information dedicated for the group QoS treatment, and the information dedicated for the group QoS treatment comprises at least one of: a validating condition of the group QoS treatment comprising a minimum group size, a temporal validity condition, or a spatial validity condition, or
a group QoS treatment pattern comprising an execution of group QoS treatment periodically or in a flow life time (Bader: [0037], QoS policy being applied periodically or continuously).
Regarding claim 9; Bader teaches wherein the second communication interface is configured to provide the QoS group information together with a QoS profile per QoS flow to the one or more network entities based on at least one of a session management procedure or a policy association procedure (Bader: Fig. 1; [0038], [0076], POF 30 generates 5Qis and forwards them to CN 14/network entity).
Regarding claim 11; Bader teaches wherein the control entity is implemented in at least one of: a network function entity of the mobile communication n network of the mobile communication network, a policy control function entity, or a network exposure function entity of the mobile communication network or a user device (Bader: Fig. 1, [0036], Analytics System 26/network function entity).
Regarding claim 12; Bader teaches wherein the control entity is implemented in the user device, and the second communication interface is configured to provide the QoS group information together with a QoS profile per QoS flow to a radio access network entity of the mobile communication network by way of radio resource control signaling (Bader: The limitation has no patentable weight as Examiner select the network function entity alternative of claim 11).
Regarding claim 18; Bader teaches wherein the processor is further configured to perform at least one of one or more of: assign resources, perform smart scheduling, perform an admission control or perform QoS assurance of the mobile communication network to the communication service based on the group QoS treatment policy and the QoS profile of a QoS flow assigned to the communication service (Bader: Fig. 1; [0088], [0100]).
Regarding claim 19; Bader teaches one or more of a radio access network entity or a core network entity of the mobile communication network. network (Bader: Fig. 1).
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 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bader et al (US 2024/0064554 A1) in view of Nie et al (US 2020/0267085 A1).
Regarding claim 10, Bader does not explicitly disclose wherein the second communication interface is configured to provide the QoS group information together with a QoS profile per QoS flow to the one or more network entities based on a session management procedure by way of an access mobility management function entity.
Nie teaches wherein the second communication interface is configured to provide the QoS group information together with a QoS profile per QoS flow to the one or more network entities based on a session management procedure by way of an access mobility management function entity (Nie: [0220]-[0021] QoS rules sent to RAN via AMF).
It would have been obvious to a person having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Bader wherein the second communication interface is configured to provide the QoS group information together with a QoS profile per QoS flow to the one or more network entities based on a session management procedure by way of an access mobility management function entity as disclose to provide a system for QoS flow processing based on rules (Abstract).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KODZOVI ACOLATSE whose telephone number is (571)270-1999. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 10 am to 6pm.
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, Avellino Joseph can be reached at (571) 272-3905. 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.
/KODZOVI ACOLATSE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2478