DETAILED ACTION
Applicant’s Amendment filed on December 24, 2025 has been reviewed.
Claims 1, 3-15 and 17-20 are amended in the amendment.
Claims 1-20 have been examined.
Claim Interpretation
As per claim 1, the broadest reasonable interpretation of a method (or process) claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met (as explained in MPEP § 2111.04, subsection II).
In the instant case, with respect to claim 1, at least in part, recites “…wherein the determined QoE bottleneck factor is one of an unbalance of distribution of traffic coming into a radio access network (RAN), an overflow of traffic coming into the RAN, or underflow of traffic coming into the RAN,” the broadest reasonable interpretation of claim 1 requires one of “…an unbalance of distribution of traffic coming into a radio access network (RAN),” OR “an overflow of traffic coming into the RAN” OR “underflow of traffic coming into the RAN”.
For examination purposes, based on the broadest reasonable interpretation described above, the Examiner elects “…wherein the determined QoE bottleneck factor is an overflow of traffic coming into the RAN ….” Therefore, the Examiner is not required to address/examine any limitations (i.e., wherein the determined QoE bottleneck factor is one of an unbalance of distribution of traffic coming into a radio access network (RAN), or underflow of traffic coming into the RAN,) or dependent claims (i.e., claims 8 and 10) that depend from the non-elected limitations (i.e., wherein the determined QoE bottleneck factor is one of an unbalance of distribution of traffic coming into a radio access network (RAN), or underflow of traffic coming into the RAN,) because these limitations and dependent claims do not provide any patentable weight to the claimed invention. However, for examination and compact prosecution purposes, the Examiner will also provide an additional rejection for all of the required claims limitations/elements and the optional claim limitations/elections as indicated above.
If the Applicant believes, for any reason, that personal communication will expedite prosecution of this application, the Applicant is invited to schedule an interview with the Examiner using the number provided below.
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al. (US 2025/0062973 A1), hereinafter referred to as Zhang, in view of Sivaraj et al. (US 2021/0377804 A1), hereinafter referred to as Sivaraj, and further in view of Khirallah et al. (US 2020/0280871 A1), hereinafter referred to as Khirallah.
With respect to claim 1, Zhang teaches A centralized unit (CU) (centralized unit (CU), para. 0038) for controlling quality of experience (QoE) in a wireless communication system which supports dual connectivity (for radio access network (RAN) visible quality of experience (QoE) measurement in dual connectivity architecture, para. 0040), the CU comprising:
a transceiver (transceiver, para. 0097); and
at least one processor connected to the transceiver (processor, para. 0097), wherein the at least one processor is configured to:
transmit, to a distributed unit (DU), a message forto be used for determination of QoE bottleneck (the first network node determine cell group information and signaling radio bearer (SRB) information, to be used for reporting at least one QoE measurement to be utilized by an entity other than the RAN; the first network node send the SRB information to the second network node via a defined message or an Xn application protocol (XnAP) message; the cell group information may indicate whether a master cell group (MCG) or a secondary cell group (SCG) is to be used for reporting the at least one QoE measurement to be utilized by the RAN or an entity other than the RAN; the SCG information indicate a type of SCG to be used for reporting the at least one QoE measurement to be utilized by the RAN or an entity other than the RAN, para. 0012),
receive, from the DU, a message including the additional information to be used for determination of QoE bottleneck (the UE AS layer send the collected data (e.g., QoE reports) to the RAN node; after the RAN node receives the QoE reports, the RAN node transfer/send the received QoE reports to a measurement collection entity (MCE); the MCE can be an entity which collects QoE measurement reports and performs analysis for optimization; the QoE reports can be transparent/invisible to the RAN node, which means the RAN node may not read and/or utilize the contents in the QoE reports, para. 0037),
determine a QoE bottleneck factor based on the received additional information and a policy related to determination of the QoE bottleneck factor (the MN generate a RAN visible configuration based on its own requirement and/or the received RAN visible QoE related configuration information from the SN; the RAN visible configuration include configuration for multiple RAN visible QoE measurements, para. 0043; the first network node may send a message to the second network node via an XnAP message, to indicate or request termination of the (process of acquiring/performing the) at least one QoE measurement; the first network node receive a confirmation or acknowledgement message regarding the termination from the second network node, the first network node comprise a secondary node (SN); and the second network node comprise a master node (MN), para. 0090), and
perform QoE control based on the determined QoE bottleneck factor (the first network node may send a message to the second network node via an XnAP message, to indicate or request termination of the (process of acquiring/performing the) at least one QoE measurement. The first network node may receive a confirmation or acknowledgement message regarding the termination from the second network node. In certain embodiments, the first network node may comprise a secondary node (SN); and the second network node may comprise a master node (MN), para. 0090).
Zhang does not explicitly teach
wherein the determined QoE bottleneck factor is one of an unbalance of distribution of traffic coming into a radio access network (RAN), an overflow of traffic coming into the RAN, or underflow of traffic coming into the RAN
However, Sivaraj teaches
wherein the determined QoE bottleneck factor is one of an unbalance of distribution of traffic coming into a radio access network (RAN), an overflow of traffic coming into the RAN (The xAPP can decide on the optimal traffic split across time, which avoids buffer overflows or heavy queuing due to congestion in the RAN; this is because buffer management is critical to QoE of an eMBB traffic, since larger queues in the buffers increase RAN latency and adversely impact RAN throughput; thus, at time t+20, the DC xAPP can instruct the RAN to change the traffic split ratio such that 100% of PDCP traffic goes over the LTE eNB, while nothing goes over the NR gNB; at time t+30, the DC xAPP can again change the traffic split such that 40% of PDCP traffic goes over LTE, and the remaining 60% goes over the NR interface, para. 0131) in order to improve coverage, enhanced signaling efficiency; reduced latency compared to LTE as taught by Sivaraj (para. 0035), or underflow of traffic coming into the RAN
Therefore, based on Zhang in view of Sivaraj, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teaching of Sivaraj to the CU of Zhang in order to improve coverage, enhanced signaling efficiency; reduced latency compared to LTE as taught by Sivaraj (para. 0035).
Zhang in view of Sivaraj does not explicitly teach
transmit, to a distributed unit (DU), a request message for information to be used for determination of QoE bottleneck;
However, Khirallah teaches
transmit, to a distributed unit (DU), a request message for information to be used for determination of QoE bottleneck (the QoE/QoS reporting module 46 is responsible for performing the reporting of QoE information such as a QoE degradation flag (if such a flag is used) and/or other QoE information (e.g. QoE measurement results); the reporting done periodically, event triggered, or performed at the request, para. 0083) in order to improve the perceived QoE at the UE as taught by Khirallah (para. 0138);
Therefore, based on Zhang in view of Sivaraj, and further in view of Khirallah, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teaching of Khirallah to the CU of Zhang in view of Sivaraj in order to improve the perceived QoE at the UE as taught by Khirallah (para. 0138).
With respect to claim 2, Zhang teaches The CU of claim 1, wherein the CU or the DU is associated with a master node (MN) or a secondary node (SN) (In a dual connectivity (DC), the UE can be connected to two RAN nodes. One of the RAN nodes may act as a master node (MN), and another one of the RAN nodes may act as a secondary node (SN), para. 0039).
With respect to claim 3, Zhang teaches The CU of claim 1,
wherein the message for information to be used for determination of QoE bottleneck specifies at least one additional information for determination of QoE bottleneck (the first network node determine cell group information and signaling radio bearer (SRB) information, to be used for reporting at least one QoE measurement to be utilized by an entity other than the RAN. The first network node may send the SRB information to the second network node via a defined message or an Xn application protocol (XnAP) message; the cell group information indicate whether a master cell group (MCG) or a secondary cell group (SCG) is to be used for reporting the at least one QoE measurement to be utilized by the RAN or an entity other than the RAN. The SCG information indicate a type of SCG to be used for reporting the at least one QoE measurement to be utilized by the RAN or an entity other than the RAN, para. 0012), and
wherein the at least one processor is configured to:
receive a message including the specified at least one additional information to be used for determination of QoE bottleneck, from the DU, in response to the message for information to be used for determination of QoE bottleneck (the UE AS layer send the collected data (e.g., QoE reports) to the RAN node. After the RAN node receives the QoE reports, the RAN node may transfer/send the received QoE reports to a measurement collection entity (MCE). The MCE can be an entity which collects QoE measurement reports and performs analysis for optimization. The QoE reports can be transparent/invisible to the RAN node, which means the RAN node may not read and/or utilize the contents in the QoE reports, para. 0037).
Further, Khirallah teaches
the request message for information to be used for determination of QoE bottleneck (the QoE/QoS reporting module 46 is responsible for performing the reporting of QoE information such as a QoE degradation flag (if such a flag is used) and/or other QoE information (e.g. QoE measurement results); the reporting done periodically, event triggered, or performed at the request, para. 0083) in order to improve the perceived QoE at the UE as taught by Khirallah (para. 0138);
Therefore, based on Zhang in view of Sivaraj, and further in view of Khirallah, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teaching of Khirallah to the CU of Zhang in view of Sivaraj in order to improve the perceived QoE at the UE as taught by Khirallah (para. 0138).
With respect to claim 4, Zhang teaches The CU of claim 1,
wherein the message including the specified at least one additional information to be used for determination of QoE bottleneck indicates to activate or deactivate at least one additional information to be used for determination of QoE bottleneck (the first network node generate a deactivate configuration to terminate the at least one QoE measurement, the deactivate configuration comprising at least one of: an identifier (id) of at least one QoE measurement to be utilized by an entity other than the RAN, an id of the at least one QoE measurement utilized by the RAN, or an indication of a service type of the at least one QoE measurement; the first network node send the deactivate configuration to the wireless communication device via a radio resource control (RRC) message, para. 0010), and
wherein, in case that the request message for the additional information to be used for determination of QoE bottleneck indicates to activate the at least one additional information to be used for determination of QoE bottleneck, the at least one processor is configured to:
periodically receive, from the DU, a message including the activated at least one additional information to be used for determination of QoE bottleneck.
Further, Khirallah teaches
the request message for information to be used for determination of QoE bottleneck (the QoE/QoS reporting module 46 is responsible for performing the reporting of QoE information such as a QoE degradation flag (if such a flag is used) and/or other QoE information (e.g. QoE measurement results); the reporting done periodically, event triggered, or performed at the request, para. 0083) in order to improve the perceived QoE at the UE as taught by Khirallah (para. 0138);
Therefore, based on Zhang in view of Sivaraj, and further in view of Khirallah, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teaching of Khirallah to the CU of Zhang in view of Sivaraj in order to improve the perceived QoE at the UE as taught by Khirallah (para. 0138).
With respect to claim 5, Zhang teaches The CU of claim 1,
wherein the policy related to determination of the is received from a core network (the MN generate a RAN visible configuration based on its own requirement and/or the received RAN visible QoE related configuration information from the SN; the RAN visible configuration include configuration for multiple RAN visible QoE measurements, para. 0043); and
wherein the at least one processor is further configured to:
determine the QoE bottleneck factor, based on the received policy related to determination of the QoE bottleneck factor and the received information for determination of QoE bottleneck (the RAN visible configuration include configuration for multiple RAN visible QoE measurements; one QoE values to be determined from the at least one QoE metrics, an indication of an event to trigger the at least one QoE measurement, para. 0043).
With respect to claim 6, Zhang in view of Sivaraj, and further in view of Khirallah teaches The CU of claim 1 as described above,
Further, Sivaraj teaches wherein the information for determination of QoE bottleneck comprises at least one of:
radio link control (RLC) buffer occupancy (BO) (initial traffic split can include, e.g., a 50% traffic split for the EN-DC UE at an initial time t with eNB and gNB buffer occupancy at 30% and 60% respectively; the traffic split function in the EN-DC xAPP uses RLDT to predict buffer occupancy class label for the eNB and gNB into the near-future, para. 0132) in order to improve coverage, enhanced signaling efficiency; reduced latency compared to LTE as taught by Sivaraj (para. 0035),
transport block size (TBS),
scheduling probability (SP), or
queueing delay.
Therefore, based on Zhang in view of Sivaraj, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teaching of Sivaraj to the unit of Zhang in order to improve coverage, enhanced signaling efficiency; reduced latency compared to LTE as taught by Sivaraj (para. 0035).
With respect to claim 7, Zhang in view of Sivaraj, and further in view of Khirallah teaches The CU of claim 1 as described above,
Further, Khirallah teaches
wherein the at least one processor is further configured to:
receive a policy related to QoE evaluation (he UE 3 only report the QoE information (and/or any QoS measurement results) when the QoE has degraded beyond acceptable limits for one or more QoS flows 9 (e.g. (3) and (4)). If the UE 3 is also aware of the QoS performance, the UE 3 may only report the QoE information and/or QoS measurement results when either the QoE or the QoS have degraded beyond acceptable limits for one or more QoS flows, para. 0066),
receive QoE measurement information from a user equipment (UE) (the QoE information provided comprises a report of the results of QoE measurements. Such measurement results may, for example, be reported for every QoS flow 9 (of a given PDU session) that has experienced QoE degradation, in association with that QoS flow's QFI and/or may be reported (where the UE 3 monitors for QoS degradation) for every QoS flow 9 (of a given PDU session) that has experienced QoS degradation, para. 0070),
evaluate QoE based on the received policy related to QoE evaluation and the received QoE measurement information (he UE 3 only report the QoE information (and/or any QoS measurement results) when the QoE has degraded beyond acceptable limits for one or more QoS flows 9 (e.g. (3) and (4)). If the UE 3 is also aware of the QoS performance, the UE 3 may only report the QoE information and/or QoS measurement results when either the QoE or the QoS have degraded beyond acceptable limits for one or more QoS flows, para. 0066),
wherein, trequest message for information to be used for determination of QoE bottleneck is transmitted when QoE degradation is detected based on the policy related to QoE evaluation and the received QoE measurement information (the UE 3 only report the QoE information (and/or any QoS measurement results) when the QoE has degraded beyond acceptable limits for one or more QoS flows 9 (e.g. (3) and (4)). If the UE 3 is also aware of the QoS performance, the UE 3 may only report the QoE information and/or QoS measurement results when either the QoE or the QoS have degraded beyond acceptable limits for one or more QoS flows, para. 0066) in order to improve the perceived QoE at the UE as taught by Khirallah (para. 0138).
Therefore, based on Zhang in view of Sivaraj, and further in view of Khirallah, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teaching of Khirallah to the CU of Zhang in view of Sivaraj in order to improve the perceived QoE at the UE as taught by Khirallah (para. 0138).
With respect to claim 8, Zhang in view of Sivaraj, and further in view of Khirallah teaches The CU of claim 1 as described above,
Further, Sivaraj teaches wherein the at least one processor is further configured to, in case that the determined QoE bottleneck factor is the unbalance of distribution of traffic coming into the RAN, adjust a packet data convergence protocol (PDCP) split ratio of the CU, and transmit, to the DU, data according to the adjusted PDCP split ratio (The xAPP can decide on the optimal traffic split across time, which avoids buffer overflows or heavy queuing due to congestion in the RAN. This is because buffer management is critical to QoE of an eMBB traffic, since larger queues in the buffers increase RAN latency and adversely impact RAN throughput Thus, at time t+20, the DC xAPP can instruct the RAN to change the traffic split ratio such that 100% of PDCP traffic goes over the LTE eNB, while nothing goes over the NR gNB; at time t+30, the DC xAPP can again change the traffic split such that 40% of PDCP traffic goes over LTE, and the remaining 60% goes over the NR interface, para. 0131) in order to improve coverage, enhanced signaling efficiency; reduced latency compared to LTE as taught by Sivaraj (para. 0035).
Therefore, based on Zhang in view of Sivaraj, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teaching of Sivaraj to the unit of Zhang in order to improve coverage, enhanced signaling efficiency; reduced latency compared to LTE as taught by Sivaraj (para. 0035).
With respect to claim 9, Zhang in view of Sivaraj, and further in view of Khirallah teaches The CU of claim 1 as described above,
Further, Sivaraj teaches wherein the at least one processor is further configured to, in case that the determined QoE bottleneck factor is the overflow of traffic coming into the RAN, transmit, to the core network, a message for reducing quality of service (QoS) and transmit, to the DU, information about reduced QoS through a protocol data unit (PDU) session modification procedure to reduce traffic coming into the RAN (The xAPP can decide on the optimal traffic split across time, which avoids buffer overflows or heavy queuing due to congestion in the RAN. This is because buffer management is critical to QoE of an eMBB traffic, since larger queues in the buffers increase RAN latency and adversely impact RAN throughput Thus, at time t+20, the DC xAPP can instruct the RAN to change the traffic split ratio such that 100% of PDCP traffic goes over the LTE eNB, while nothing goes over the NR gNB; at time t+30, the DC xAPP can again change the traffic split such that 40% of PDCP traffic goes over LTE, and the remaining 60% goes over the NR interface, para. 0131) in order to improve coverage, enhanced signaling efficiency; reduced latency compared to LTE as taught by Sivaraj (para. 0035).
Therefore, based on Zhang in view of Sivaraj, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teaching of Sivaraj to the unit of Zhang in order to improve coverage, enhanced signaling efficiency; reduced latency compared to LTE as taught by Sivaraj (para. 0035).
With respect to claim 10, Zhang in view of Sivaraj, and further in view of Khirallah teaches The CU of claim 1 as described above,
Further, Sivaraj teaches wherein the at least one processor is further configured to in case that the determined QoE bottleneck factor is the underflow of traffic coming into the RAN, transmit, to the core network, a message for increasing QoS and transmit, to the DU, information about increased QoS through a PDU session modification procedure to increase traffic coming into the RAN (The xAPP can decide on the optimal traffic split across time, which avoids buffer overflows or heavy queuing due to congestion in the RAN. This is because buffer management is critical to QoE of an eMBB traffic, since larger queues in the buffers increase RAN latency and adversely impact RAN throughput Thus, at time t+20, the DC xAPP can instruct the RAN to change the traffic split ratio such that 100% of PDCP traffic goes over the LTE eNB, while nothing goes over the NR gNB; at time t+30, the DC xAPP can again change the traffic split such that 40% of PDCP traffic goes over LTE, and the remaining 60% goes over the NR interface, para. 0131) in order to improve coverage, enhanced signaling efficiency; reduced latency compared to LTE as taught by Sivaraj (para. 0035).
Therefore, based on Zhang in view of Sivaraj, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teaching of Sivaraj to the unit of Zhang in order to improve coverage, enhanced signaling efficiency; reduced latency compared to LTE as taught by Sivaraj (para. 0035).
With respect to claim 11, Zhang teaches A method of operating a centralized unit (CU) (centralized unit (CU), para. 0038) for controlling quality of experience (QoE) in a wireless communication system which supports dual connectivity (for radio access network (RAN) visible quality of experience (QoE) measurement in dual connectivity architecture, para. 0040), the method comprising:
transmitting, to a distributed unit (DU), a message forto be used for determination of QoE bottleneck (the first network node determine cell group information and signaling radio bearer (SRB) information, to be used for reporting at least one QoE measurement to be utilized by an entity other than the RAN; the first network node send the SRB information to the second network node via a defined message or an Xn application protocol (XnAP) message; the cell group information indicate whether a master cell group (MCG) or a secondary cell group (SCG) is to be used for reporting the at least one QoE measurement to be utilized by the RAN or an entity other than the RAN; the SCG information indicate a type of SCG to be used for reporting the at least one QoE measurement to be utilized by the RAN or an entity other than the RAN, para. 0012);
receiving, from the DU, a message including the additional information to be used for determination of QoE bottleneck (the UE AS layer send the collected data (e.g., QoE reports) to the RAN node; after the RAN node receives the QoE reports, the RAN node transfer/send the received QoE reports to a measurement collection entity (MCE). The MCE can be an entity which collects QoE measurement reports and performs analysis for optimization; the QoE reports can be transparent/invisible to the RAN node, which means the RAN node may not read and/or utilize the contents in the QoE reports, para. 0037);
determining a QoE bottleneck factor based on the received additional information and a policy related to determination of the QoE bottleneck factor (the first network node send a message to the second network node via an XnAP message, to indicate or request termination of the (process of acquiring/performing the) at least one QoE measurement; the first network node receive a confirmation or acknowledgement message regarding the termination from the second network node. In certain embodiments, the first network node may comprise a secondary node (SN); and the second network node may comprise a master node (MN), para. 0090); and
performing QoE control based on the determined QoE bottleneck factor (the first network node send a message to the second network node via an XnAP message, to indicate or request termination of the (process of acquiring/performing the) at least one QoE measurement; the first network node receive a confirmation or acknowledgement message regarding the termination from the second network node, the first network node comprise a secondary node (SN); and the second network node may comprise a master node (MN), para. 0090).
Zhang does not explicitly teach
wherein the determined QoE bottleneck factor is one of an unbalance of distribution of traffic coming into a radio access network (RAN), an overflow of traffic coming into the RAN, or underflow of traffic coming into the RAN
However, Sivaraj teaches
wherein the determined QoE bottleneck factor is one of an unbalance of distribution of traffic coming into a radio access network (RAN), an overflow of traffic coming into the RAN (The xAPP can decide on the optimal traffic split across time, which avoids buffer overflows or heavy queuing due to congestion in the RAN; this is because buffer management is critical to QoE of an eMBB traffic, since larger queues in the buffers increase RAN latency and adversely impact RAN throughput; thus, at time t+20, the DC xAPP can instruct the RAN to change the traffic split ratio such that 100% of PDCP traffic goes over the LTE eNB, while nothing goes over the NR gNB; at time t+30, the DC xAPP can again change the traffic split such that 40% of PDCP traffic goes over LTE, and the remaining 60% goes over the NR interface, para. 0131) in order to improve coverage, enhanced signaling efficiency; reduced latency compared to LTE as taught by Sivaraj (para. 0035), or underflow of traffic coming into the RAN
Therefore, based on Zhang in view of Sivaraj, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teaching of Sivaraj to the method of Zhang in order to improve coverage, enhanced signaling efficiency; reduced latency compared to LTE as taught by Sivaraj (para. 0035).
Zhang in view of Sivaraj does not explicitly teach
transmit, to a distributed unit (DU), a request message for information to be used for determination of QoE bottleneck;
However, Khirallah teaches
transmit, to a distributed unit (DU), a request message for information to be used for determination of QoE bottleneck (the QoE/QoS reporting module 46 is responsible for performing the reporting of QoE information such as a QoE degradation flag (if such a flag is used) and/or other QoE information (e.g. QoE measurement results); the reporting done periodically, event triggered, or performed at the request, para. 0083) in order to improve the perceived QoE at the UE as taught by Khirallah (para. 0138);
Therefore, based on Zhang in view of Sivaraj, and further in view of Khirallah, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teaching of Khirallah to the method of Zhang in view of Sivaraj in order to improve the perceived QoE at the UE as taught by Khirallah (para. 0138).
With respect to claim 12, Zhang teaches The method of claim 11,
wherein the message for information to be used for determination of QoE bottleneck specifies at least one additional information for determination of QoE bottleneck (the first network node may determine cell group information and signaling radio bearer (SRB) information, to be used for reporting at least one QoE measurement to be utilized by an entity other than the RAN. The first network node may send the SRB information to the second network node via a defined message or an Xn application protocol (XnAP) message. The cell group information may indicate whether a master cell group (MCG) or a secondary cell group (SCG) is to be used for reporting the at least one QoE measurement to be utilized by the RAN or an entity other than the RAN. The SCG information may indicate a type of SCG to be used for reporting the at least one QoE measurement to be utilized by the RAN or an entity other than the RAN, para. 0012), and
wherein the receiving of the message including the additional information to be used for determination of QoE bottleneck comprises:
receiving a message including the specified at least one additional information to be used for determination of QoE bottleneck, from the DU, in response to the message for information to be used for determination of QoE bottleneck (the UE AS layer send the collected data (e.g., QoE reports) to the RAN node. After the RAN node receives the QoE reports, the RAN node may transfer/send the received QoE reports to a measurement collection entity (MCE). The MCE can be an entity which collects QoE measurement reports and performs analysis for optimization. The QoE reports can be transparent/invisible to the RAN node, which means the RAN node may not read and/or utilize the contents in the QoE reports, para. 0037).
Further, Khirallah teaches
the request message for information to be used for determination of QoE bottleneck (the QoE/QoS reporting module 46 is responsible for performing the reporting of QoE information such as a QoE degradation flag (if such a flag is used) and/or other QoE information (e.g. QoE measurement results); the reporting done periodically, event triggered, or performed at the request, para. 0083) in order to improve the perceived QoE at the UE as taught by Khirallah (para. 0138);
Therefore, based on Zhang in view of Sivaraj, and further in view of Khirallah, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teaching of Khirallah to the method of Zhang in view of Sivaraj in order to improve the perceived QoE at the UE as taught by Khirallah (para. 0138).
With respect to claim 13, Zhang teaches The method of claim 11,
wherein the message including the specified at least one additional information to be used for determination of QoE bottleneck indicates to activate or deactivate at least one additional information to be used for determination of QoE bottleneck (the first network node may generate a deactivate configuration to terminate the at least one QoE measurement, the deactivate configuration comprising at least one of: an identifier (id) of at least one QoE measurement to be utilized by an entity other than the RAN, an id of the at least one QoE measurement utilized by the RAN, or an indication of a service type of the at least one QoE measurement. The first network node may send the deactivate configuration to the wireless communication device via a radio resource control (RRC) message, para. 0010),
wherein, in case that the request message for the additional information to be used for determination of QoE bottleneck indicates to activate the at least one additional information to be used for determination of QoE bottleneck, and
wherein the receiving of the message including the additional information to be used for determination of QoE bottleneck comprises:
periodically receiving, from the DU, a message including the activated at least one additional information to be used for determination of QoE bottleneck.
Further, Khirallah teaches
the request message for information to be used for determination of QoE bottleneck (the QoE/QoS reporting module 46 is responsible for performing the reporting of QoE information such as a QoE degradation flag (if such a flag is used) and/or other QoE information (e.g. QoE measurement results); the reporting done periodically, event triggered, or performed at the request, para. 0083) in order to improve the perceived QoE at the UE as taught by Khirallah (para. 0138);
Therefore, based on Zhang in view of Sivaraj, and further in view of Khirallah, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teaching of Khirallah to the method of Zhang in view of Sivaraj in order to improve the perceived QoE at the UE as taught by Khirallah (para. 0138).
With respect to claim 14, Zhang teaches The method of claim 11,
wherein the policy related to determination of the is received from a core network (the MN generate a RAN visible configuration based on its own requirement and/or the received RAN visible QoE related configuration information from the SN; the RAN visible configuration include configuration for multiple RAN visible QoE measurements, para. 0043).
wherein the method further comprises:
determining the QoE bottleneck factor, based on the received policy related to determination of the QoE bottleneck factor and the received information for determination of QoE bottleneck (the RAN visible configuration include configuration for multiple RAN visible QoE measurements; one QoE values to be determined from the at least one QoE metrics, an indication of an event to trigger the at least one QoE measurement, para. 0043).
With respect to claim 15, Zhang teaches A distributed unit (DU) (centralized unit (CU), para. 0038) for controlling quality of experience (QoE) in a wireless communication system which supports dual connectivity (for radio access network (RAN) visible quality of experience (QoE) measurement in dual connectivity architecture, para. 0040), the DU comprising:
a transceiver (transceiver, para. 0097); and
at least one processor connected to the transceiver (processor, para. 0097), wherein the at least one processor is configured to:
receive, from a centralized unit (CU), a message forto be used for determination of QoE bottleneck (the first network node may determine cell group information and signaling radio bearer (SRB) information, to be used for reporting at least one QoE measurement to be utilized by an entity other than the RAN. The first network node may send the SRB information to the second network node via a defined message or an Xn application protocol (XnAP) message. The cell group information may indicate whether a master cell group (MCG) or a secondary cell group (SCG) is to be used for reporting the at least one QoE measurement to be utilized by the RAN or an entity other than the RAN. The SCG information may indicate a type of SCG to be used for reporting the at least one QoE measurement to be utilized by the RAN or an entity other than the RAN, para. 0012),
transmit, to the CU, a message including the additional information to be used for determination of QoE bottleneck, wherein the additional information for determination of QoE bottleneck is used to determine a QoE bottleneck factor, (the first network node determine cell group information and signaling radio bearer (SRB) information, to be used for reporting at least one QoE measurement to be utilized by an entity other than the RAN; the first network node send the SRB information to the second network node via a defined message or an Xn application protocol (XnAP) message; the cell group information indicate whether a master cell group (MCG) or a secondary cell group (SCG) is to be used for reporting the at least one QoE measurement to be utilized by the RAN or an entity other than the RAN; the SCG information indicate a type of SCG to be used for reporting the at least one QoE measurement to be utilized by the RAN or an entity other than the RAN, para. 0012), and
receive, from the CU, information about data or changed quality of service (QoS) as a result of performing QoE control based on the QoE bottleneck factor (the UE AS layer send the collected data (e.g., QoE reports) to the RAN node; after the RAN node receives the QoE reports, the RAN node transfer/send the received QoE reports to a measurement collection entity (MCE); the MCE can be an entity which collects QoE measurement reports and performs analysis for optimization; the QoE reports can be transparent/invisible to the RAN node, which means the RAN node may not read and/or utilize the contents in the QoE reports, para. 0037).
Zhang does not explicitly teach
the determined QoE bottleneck factor is one of an unbalance of distribution of traffic coming into a radio access network (RAN), an overflow of traffic coming into the RAN, or underflow of traffic coming into the RAN
However, Sivaraj teaches
the determined QoE bottleneck factor is one of an unbalance of distribution of traffic coming into a radio access network (RAN), an overflow of traffic coming into the RAN (The xAPP can decide on the optimal traffic split across time, which avoids buffer overflows or heavy queuing due to congestion in the RAN; this is because buffer management is critical to QoE of an eMBB traffic, since larger queues in the buffers increase RAN latency and adversely impact RAN throughput; thus, at time t+20, the DC xAPP can instruct the RAN to change the traffic split ratio such that 100% of PDCP traffic goes over the LTE eNB, while nothing goes over the NR gNB; at time t+30, the DC xAPP can again change the traffic split such that 40% of PDCP traffic goes over LTE, and the remaining 60% goes over the NR interface, para. 0131) in order to improve coverage, enhanced signaling efficiency; reduced latency compared to LTE as taught by Sivaraj (para. 0035), or underflow of traffic coming into the RAN
Therefore, based on Zhang in view of Sivaraj, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teaching of Sivaraj to the DU of Zhang in order to improve coverage, enhanced signaling efficiency; reduced latency compared to LTE as taught by Sivaraj (para. 0035).
Zhang in view of Sivaraj does not explicitly teach
receive, from a centralized unit (CU), a request message for information to be used for determination of QoE bottleneck;
However, Khirallah teaches
receive, from a centralized unit (CU), a request message for information to be used for determination of QoE bottleneck (the QoE/QoS reporting module 46 is responsible for performing the reporting of QoE information such as a QoE degradation flag (if such a flag is used) and/or other QoE information (e.g. QoE measurement results); the reporting done periodically, event triggered, or performed at the request, para. 0083) in order to improve the perceived QoE at the UE as taught by Khirallah (para. 0138);
Therefore, based on Zhang in view of Sivaraj, and further in view of Khirallah, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teaching of Khirallah to the DU of Zhang in view of Sivaraj in order to improve the perceived QoE at the UE as taught by Khirallah (para. 0138).
With respect to claim 16, Zhang teaches The DU of claim 15, wherein the CU or the DU is associated with a master node (MN) or a secondary node (SN) (In a dual connectivity (DC), the UE can be connected to two RAN nodes. One of the RAN nodes may act as a master node (MN), and another one of the RAN nodes may act as a secondary node (SN), para. 0039).
With respect to claim 17, Zhang teaches The DU of claim 15,
wherein the message for information to be used for determination of QoE bottleneck specifies at least one additional information for determination of QoE bottleneck (the first network node may determine cell group information and signaling radio bearer (SRB) information, to be used for reporting at least one QoE measurement to be utilized by an entity other than the RAN. The first network node may send the SRB information to the second network node via a defined message or an Xn application protocol (XnAP) message; the cell group information indicate whether a master cell group (MCG) or a secondary cell group (SCG) is to be used for reporting the at least one QoE measurement to be utilized by the RAN or an entity other than the RAN; the SCG information indicate a type of SCG to be used for reporting the at least one QoE measurement to be utilized by the RAN or an entity other than the RAN, para. 0012), and
wherein the at least one processor is configured to:
transmit a message including the specified at least one additional information to be used for determination of QoE bottleneck, from the DU, in response to the message for information to be used for determination of QoE bottleneck (the UE AS layer send the collected data (e.g., QoE reports) to the RAN node; after the RAN node receives the QoE reports, the RAN node transfer/send the received QoE reports to a measurement collection entity (MCE); the MCE can be an entity which collects QoE measurement reports and performs analysis for optimization; the QoE reports can be transparent/invisible to the RAN node, which means the RAN node may not read and/or utilize the contents in the QoE reports, para. 0037).
Further, Khirallah teaches
the request message for information to be used for determination of QoE bottleneck (the QoE/QoS reporting module 46 is responsible for performing the reporting of QoE information such as a QoE degradation flag (if such a flag is used) and/or other QoE information (e.g. QoE measurement results); the reporting done periodically, event triggered, or performed at the request, para. 0083) in order to improve the perceived QoE at the UE as taught by Khirallah (para. 0138);
Therefore, based on Zhang in view of Sivaraj, and further in view of Khirallah, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teaching of Khirallah to the DU of Zhang in view of Sivaraj in order to improve the perceived QoE at the UE as taught by Khirallah (para. 0138).
With respect to claim 18, Zhang teaches The DU of claim 15,
wherein the message including the specified at least one additional information to be used for determination of QoE bottleneck indicates to activate or deactivate at least one additional information to be used for determination of QoE bottleneck (the first network node generate a deactivate configuration to terminate the at least one QoE measurement, the deactivate configuration comprising at least one of: an identifier (id) of at least one QoE measurement to be utilized by an entity other than the RAN, an id of the at least one QoE measurement utilized by the RAN, or an indication of a service type of the at least one QoE measurement; the first network node send the deactivate configuration to the wireless communication device via a radio resource control (RRC) message, para. 0010), and
wherein, in case that the request message for the additional information to be used for determination of QoE bottleneck indicates to activate the at least one additional information to be used for determination of QoE bottleneck, the at least one processor is configured to:
periodically receive, from the DU, a message including the activated at least one additional information to be used for determination of QoE bottleneck.
Further, Khirallah teaches
the request message for information to be used for determination of QoE bottleneck (the QoE/QoS reporting module 46 is responsible for performing the reporting of QoE information such as a QoE degradation flag (if such a flag is used) and/or other QoE information (e.g. QoE measurement results); the reporting done periodically, event triggered, or performed at the request, para. 0083) in order to improve the perceived QoE at the UE as taught by Khirallah (para. 0138);
Therefore, based on Zhang in view of Sivaraj, and further in view of Khirallah, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teaching of Khirallah to the DU of Zhang in view of Sivaraj in order to improve the perceived QoE at the UE as taught by Khirallah (para. 0138).
With respect to claim 19, Zhang in view of Sivaraj, and further in view of Khirallah teaches The DU of claim 15 as described above,
Further, Sivaraj teaches wherein the information for determination of QoE bottleneck comprises at least one of:
radio link control (RLC) buffer occupancy (BO) (initial traffic split can include, e.g., a 50% traffic split for the EN-DC UE at an initial time t with eNB and gNB buffer occupancy at 30% and 60% respectively. The traffic split function in the EN-DC xAPP uses RLDT to predict buffer occupancy class label for the eNB and gNB into the near-future, para. 0132) in order to improve coverage, enhanced signaling efficiency; reduced latency compared to LTE as taught by Sivaraj (para. 0035),
transport block size (TBS),
scheduling probability (SP), or
queueing delay.
Therefore, based on Zhang in view of Sivaraj, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teaching of Sivaraj to the DU of Zhang in order to improve coverage, enhanced signaling efficiency; reduced latency compared to LTE as taught by Sivaraj (para. 0035).
With respect to claim 20, Zhang teaches A method of operating a distributed unit (DU) (centralized unit (CU), para. 0038) for controlling quality of experience (QoE) in a wireless communication system which supports dual connectivity (for radio access network (RAN) visible quality of experience (QoE) measurement in dual connectivity architecture, para. 0040), the method comprising:
receiving, from a centralized unit (CU), a message forto be used for determination of QoE bottleneck (the first network node determine cell group information and signaling radio bearer (SRB) information, to be used for reporting at least one QoE measurement to be utilized by an entity other than the RAN; the first network node send the SRB information to the second network node via a defined message or an Xn application protocol (XnAP) message; the cell group information indicate whether a master cell group (MCG) or a secondary cell group (SCG) is to be used for reporting the at least one QoE measurement to be utilized by the RAN or an entity other than the RAN; the SCG information may indicate a type of SCG to be used for reporting the at least one QoE measurement to be utilized by the RAN or an entity other than the RAN, para. 0012);
transmitting, to the CU, a message including the additional information to be used for determination of QoE bottleneck, wherein the information for determination of QoE bottleneck is used to determine a QoE bottleneck factor (the first network node may determine cell group information and signaling radio bearer (SRB) information, to be used for reporting at least one QoE measurement to be utilized by an entity other than the RAN. The first network node may send the SRB information to the second network node via a defined message or an Xn application protocol (XnAP) message. The cell group information may indicate whether a master cell group (MCG) or a secondary cell group (SCG) is to be used for reporting the at least one QoE measurement to be utilized by the RAN or an entity other than the RAN. The SCG information may indicate a type of SCG to be used for reporting the at least one QoE measurement to be utilized by the RAN or an entity other than the RAN, para. 0012), and
receiving, from the CU, information about data or changed quality of service (QoS) as a result of performing QoE control based on the QoE bottleneck factor (the UE AS layer send the collected data (e.g., QoE reports) to the RAN node. After the RAN node receives the QoE reports, the RAN node may transfer/send the received QoE reports to a measurement collection entity (MCE). The MCE can be an entity which collects QoE measurement reports and performs analysis for optimization. The QoE reports can be transparent/invisible to the RAN node, which means the RAN node may not read and/or utilize the contents in the QoE reports, para. 0037).
Zhang does not explicitly teach
the determined QoE bottleneck factor is one of an unbalance of distribution of traffic coming into a radio access network (RAN), an overflow of traffic coming into the RAN, or underflow of traffic coming into the RAN
However, Sivaraj teaches
the determined QoE bottleneck factor is one of an unbalance of distribution of traffic coming into a radio access network (RAN), an overflow of traffic coming into the RAN (The xAPP can decide on the optimal traffic split across time, which avoids buffer overflows or heavy queuing due to congestion in the RAN; this is because buffer management is critical to QoE of an eMBB traffic, since larger queues in the buffers increase RAN latency and adversely impact RAN throughput; thus, at time t+20, the DC xAPP can instruct the RAN to change the traffic split ratio such that 100% of PDCP traffic goes over the LTE eNB, while nothing goes over the NR gNB; at time t+30, the DC xAPP can again change the traffic split such that 40% of PDCP traffic goes over LTE, and the remaining 60% goes over the NR interface, para. 0131) in order to improve coverage, enhanced signaling efficiency; reduced latency compared to LTE as taught by Sivaraj (para. 0035), or underflow of traffic coming into the RAN
Therefore, based on Zhang in view of Sivaraj, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teaching of Sivaraj to the DU of Zhang in order to improve coverage, enhanced signaling efficiency; reduced latency compared to LTE as taught by Sivaraj (para. 0035).
Zhang in view of Sivaraj does not explicitly teach
receiving, from a centralized unit (CU), a request message for information to be used for determination of QoE bottleneck;
However, Khirallah teaches
receiving, from a centralized unit (CU), a request message for information to be used for determination of QoE bottleneck (the QoE/QoS reporting module 46 is responsible for performing the reporting of QoE information such as a QoE degradation flag (if such a flag is used) and/or other QoE information (e.g. QoE measurement results); the reporting done periodically, event triggered, or performed at the request, para. 0083) in order to improve the perceived QoE at the UE as taught by Khirallah (para. 0138);
Therefore, based on Zhang in view of Sivaraj, and further in view of Khirallah, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teaching of Khirallah to the DU of Zhang in view of Sivaraj in order to improve the perceived QoE at the UE as taught by Khirallah (para. 0138).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to any of the references being used in the current rejection.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HAO HONG NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-2666. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 8AM-4:30PM EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, JOON H. HWANG can be reached on 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/H.H.N/Examiner, Art Unit 2447
April 30, 2026
/JOON H HWANG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2447
Prosecution Insights