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 non-final rejection is in response to the application filled 12/5/2023. Claims 1,3-4,7-10,14-15,17-21,23,25,27-32,36 and 38-42 are pending. Claims 2,5-6,11-13,16,22,24,26,33-35, and 37 are canceled. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on April 11,2025 and June 26,2025 are 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 § 103 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claim 1, 8, 25, and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over as Landgen et al, US 20110065427 A1, in view of Ranki et al, US 20140051461 A1, and in further view of Ong et al, US 20180278523 A1. Regarding claim 1, Landgen does disclose a method of establishing a call between a wireless terminal and a server (Fig. 8 [0059] [0060] The femtocell gateway 111 in response to the original invite, notifying the femtocell access point 103 to contact the enterprise gateway server 105 for call handling. The femtocell access point 103, after being redirected, sends the invite to the enterprise gateway server 105 to set up the call and the enterprise gateway server 105 ) , the wireless terminal associated with a secondary base station of a multi-cell network, via network address translation-based packet forwarding by a primary base station of the multi-cell network (Fig. 8 , The femtocell gateway 111 shown in a first network 110. The Examiner interprets 110 and 101 to correspond to multi-cell network) , the method comprising: receiving, at the primary base station of the multi-cell network (Fig. 8 , The femtocell gateway 111 shown in a first network 110. The Examiner interprets 110 and 101 to correspond to multi-cell network) , a request to establish a call between the secondary base station of the multi-cell network and the server (Fig. 8 [0059] [0060] The femtocell gateway 111 in response to the original invite, notifying the femtocell access point 103 to contact the enterprise gateway server 105 for call handling. The femtocell access point 103, after being redirected, sends the invite to the enterprise gateway server 105 to set up the call and the enterprise gateway server 105 ) , Landgren does not explicitly disclose the set of forwarding rules instructing the primary base station to forward packets of the call received from the server to the secondary base station and to forward packets of the call. However, Ranki discloses the set of forwarding rules instructing the primary base station ([0140] The first base station 30, as well as any other base station that serves to route packets, routes packets by detecting a destination address in a packet header, deciding on a route using predefined rules that are stored in the base station and passing the packet externally via its transmitter/receiver interface 49. The Examiner interprets the route using predefined rules to correspond to forwarding rules ) to forward packets of the call received from the server to the secondary base station and to forward packets of the call received from the secondary base station to the server ( [0139] The first base station 30 to receive wireless packets from the second base station, convert protocol as necessary and transmit packets on the first wired link 59 to the server 48. The first base station 30 also is operable to receive packets from the server 48 via the first wired link 59 and to forward them as wireless packets via the second wireless link 62 to the second base station 41. ) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Landgen with the set of forwarding rules instructing the primary base station to forward packets of the call received from the server to the secondary base station and to forward packets of the call as taught by Ranki . The motivation for doing so would be to refrain from re-broadcasting if it is determined that a message with that identifier already has been broadcast by that base station. This will prevent looping of messages throughout the system 37. ( Ranki , [0147]) The combination of Landgen and Ranki does not explicitly disclose adding a set of forwarding rules to a network address translation table of the primary base station. However, Ong does disclose adding a set of forwarding rules to a network address translation table of the primary base station (Fig. 3a, 310, 312, [0042]-[0043] [0050-0051] For data packets 50 destined for the external network 102 (i.e., the Internet) from the local network 104, the packet forwarding rules 320 the network routing device (NRD) 200 performs source NAT on the data packet 50 by mapping the source IP address from a private source IP address subnet to a public source IP address subnet . The Examiner interprets the NRD to correspond to the primary base station. The packet forwarding process 310 executing on the data processing hardware 224 of the primary Wi-Fi module 220 includes a decision algorithm configured to determine routing information 312 for the received data packet 50 based on the corresponding IP address information 52 . Additionally or alternatively, the packet forwarding process 310 may determine routing information 312 indicating whether to allow or reject the data packet 50 based on firewall rules and/or whether the IP address information 52 requires NAT, ) , It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Landgen and Ranki with adding a set of forwarding rules to a network address translation table of the primary base station as taught by Ong. The motivation for doing so would be to provide the necessary processing power to achieve high bitrates. (Ong, [0032]) Regarding claims 8 and 30, Landgen does disclose the method/(system as cited in claim 30) wherein one or more outbound packets flows from the primary base station to the server and/or secondary base station are disabled after said receiving a request to establish a call between the secondary base station and the server (Fig. 8 [0059] [0060] The femtocell gateway 111 in response to the original invite, notifying the femtocell access point 103 to contact the enterprise gateway server 105 for call handling. The femtocell gateway 105 may then either release itself from the call, or maintain the call status until it should receive subsequent dis connection information from the enterprise gateway server 105 or a handout procedure occurs. The femtocell access point 103, after being redirected, sends the invite to the enterprise gateway server 105 to set up the call and the enterprise gateway server 105 )). Regarding claim 25, Landgen does disclose a system for establishing a call in a multi-cell network between a wireless terminal and a server via network address translation-based packet forwarding, the network including a plurality of base stations to provide communication with one or more wireless terminals (Fig. 8 [0059] [0060] The femtocell gateway 111 in response to the original invite, notifying the femtocell access point 103 to contact the enterprise gateway server 105 for call handling. The femtocell access point 103, after being redirected, sends the invite to the enterprise gateway server 105 to set up the call and the enterprise gateway server 105 ) , the system comprising: wherein the primary base station comprises one or more processors in communication with a memory, the memory comprising instructions executable by said one or more processors to perform ( [0077]FIG. 20 a memory 2010 and a processor 2020 may be discrete components of the network entity 2000 that are used to execute an application or set of operations. ) : receiving, at the primary base station of the multi-cell system (Fig. 8 , The femtocell gateway 111 shown in a first network 110. The Examiner interprets 110 and 101 to correspond to multi-cell network) , a request to establish a call between the secondary base station of the multi-cell network and the server (Fig. 8 [0059] [0060] The femtocell gateway 111 in response to the original invite, notifying the femtocell access point 103 to contact the enterprise gateway server 105 for call handling. The femtocell access point 103, after being redirected, sends the invite to the enterprise gateway server 105 to set up the call and the enterprise gateway server 105 ) ; Landgren does not explicitly disclose a primary base station of the plurality of base stations,a secondary base station of the plurality of base stations in communication with the primary base station,a wireless terminal, of said one or more wireless terminals, associated with the secondary base station, the set of forwarding rules instructing the primary base station to forward packets of the call received from the server to the secondary base station and to forward packets of the call. However, Ranki discloses a primary base station of the plurality of base stations,a secondary base station of the plurality of base stations in communication with the primary base station,a wireless terminal, of said one or more wireless terminals, associated with the secondary base station ( [0139] The first base station 30 to receive wireless packets from the second base station, convert protocol as necessary and transmit packets on the first wired link 59 to the server 48. The first base station 30 also is operable to receive packets from the server 48 via the first wired link 59 and to forward them as wireless packets via the second wireless link 62 to the second base station 41. ) , the set of forwarding rules instructing the primary base station ([0140] The first base station 30, as well as any other base station that serves to route packets, routes packets by detecting a destination address in a packet header, deciding on a route using predefined rules that are stored in the base station and passing the packet externally via its transmitter/receiver interface 49. The Examiner interprets the route using predefined rules to correspond to forwarding rules ) to forward packets of the call received from the server to the secondary base station and to forward packets of the call received from the secondary base station to the server ( [0139] The first base station 30 to receive wireless packets from the second base station, convert protocol as necessary and transmit packets on the first wired link 59 to the server 48. The first base station 30 also is operable to receive packets from the server 48 via the first wired link 59 and to forward them as wireless packets via the second wireless link 62 to the second base station 41. ) , It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Landgren with a primary base station of the plurality of base stations,a secondary base station of the plurality of base stations in communication with the primary base station,a wireless terminal, of said one or more wireless terminals, associated with the secondary base station, the set of forwarding rules instructing the primary base station to forward packets of the call received from the server to the secondary base station and to forward packets of the call as taught by Ranki . The motivation for doing so would be to refrain from re-broadcasting if it is determined that a message with that identifier already has been broadcast by that base station. This will prevent looping of messages throughout the system 37. ( Ranki , [0147]) The combination of Landgen and Ranki does not explicitly disclose a primary base station of the plurality of base stations,a secondary base station of the plurality of base stations in communication with the primary base station,a wireless terminal, of said one or more wireless terminals, associated with the secondary base station, adding a set of forwarding rules to a network address translation table of the primary base station. However, Ong does disclose adding a set of forwarding rules to a network address translation table of the primary base station (Fig. 3a, 310, 312, [0042]-[0043] [0050-0051] For data packets 50 destined for the external network 102 (i.e., the Internet) from the local network 104, the packet forwarding rules 320 the network routing device (NRD) 200 performs source NAT on the data packet 50 by mapping the source IP address from a private source IP address subnet to a public source IP address subnet . The Examiner interprets the NRD to correspond to the primary base station. The packet forwarding process 310 executing on the data processing hardware 224 of the primary Wi-Fi module 220 includes a decision algorithm configured to determine routing information 312 for the received data packet 50 based on the corresponding IP address information 52 . Additionally or alternatively, the packet forwarding process 310 may determine routing information 312 indicating whether to allow or reject the data packet 50 based on firewall rules and/or whether the IP address information 52 requires NAT, ) , It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Landgen and Ranki with adding a set of forwarding rules to a network address translation table of the primary base station as taught by Ong. The motivation for doing so would be to provide the necessary processing power to achieve high bitrates. (Ong, [0032]) Claims 7 and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over as Landgen et al, US 20110065427 A1, in view of Ranki et al, US 20140051461, in view of Ong et al, US 20180278523 A1, and in further view of Barchi et al, US 20110071992 A1. Regarding claim 7, Landgen , Ranki , and Ong do not explicitly disclose the method further comprising: determining whether the call has been terminated; and based on said determining whether the call has been terminated, deleting the set of forwarding rules. However, Barchi does disclose the method further comprising: determining whether the call has been terminated; and based on said determining whether the call has been terminated, deleting the set of forwarding rules( [0019][0023] [0024] Thus, when the directory access server 205 receives a call from a client computer 203, the directory access server 205 then retrieves, adds, modifies, or deletes information in the directory 209 based upon the operation requested in the call. That is, the transaction monitor 211 and the rule validator 213 cooperate to ensure that the attributes of each call seeking to add, modify or delete information from the directory 209 comply with attribute rules determined by the directory provider. If the attributes of a call comply with the rules specified by the directory provider, then the directory attribute rule enforcer 201 forward s the call to the directory access server 205 for action. If, however, the attributes of a call do not comply with the rules specified by the directory provider, then the directory attribute rule enforcer 201 does not relay the call to the directory access server 205. The directory attribute rule enforcer 201 may instead return an error message to the client computer 203 that submitted the call. The error message may, for example, simply indicate that the call does not comply with the rules governing the directory 209. ). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Landgen , Ranki , and Ong with the method further comprising: determining whether the call has been terminated; and based on said determining whether the call has been terminated, deleting the set of forwarding rules as taught by Barchi . The motivation for doing so would be to modify information in or delete information from a directory that violate predetermined rules for controlling the directory's content. ( Barchi , [0007]) Regarding claim 29, Landgen discloses the system wherein the memory further comprises instructions executable by said one or more processors to perform( [0077]FIG. 20 a memory 2010 and a processor 2020 may be discrete components of the network entity 2000 that are used to execute an application or set of operations. ): Landgen , Ranki , and Ong does not explicitly disclose determining whether the call has been terminated; and based on said determining whether the call has been terminated, deleting the set of forwarding rules. However, Barchi does disclose determining whether the call has been terminated; and based on said determining whether the call has been terminated, deleting the set of forwarding rules( [0019][0023] Thus, when the directory access server 205 receives a call from a client computer 203, the directory access server 205 then retrieves, adds, modifies, or deletes information in the directory 209 based upon the operation requested in the call. That is, the transaction monitor 211 and the rule validator 213 cooperate to ensure that the attributes of each call seeking to add, modify or delete information from the directory 209 comply with attribute rules determined by the directory provider. ). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Landgen , Ranki , and Ong with the method further comprising: determining whether the call has been terminated; and based on said determining whether the call has been terminated, deleting the set of forwarding rules as taught by Barchi . The motivation for doing so would be to modify information in or delete information from a directory that violate predetermined rules for controlling the directory's content. ( Barchi , [0007]) Claims 3, 20, 27, and 40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over as Landgen et al, US 20110065427 A1, in view of Ranki et al, US 20140051461, in view of Ong et al, US 20180278523 A1, and in further view of Rajahalme et al, US 20170091258 A1. Regarding claims 3 and 27, Landgen and Ranki do not explicitly disclose the method/(system as cited in claim 27) wherein said adding of the set of forwarding rules to the network address translation table However, Ong does disclose the method/(system as cited in claim 27) wherein said adding of the set of forwarding rules to the network address translation table (Fig. 3a, 310, 312, [0042]-[0043] [0050-0051] For data packets 50 destined for the external network 102 (i.e., the Internet) from the local network 104, the packet forwarding rules 320 the network routing device (NRD) 200 performs source NAT on the data packet 50 by mapping the source IP address from a private source IP address subnet to a public source IP address subnet . The Examiner interprets the NRD to correspond to the primary base station. The packet forwarding process 310 executing on the data processing hardware 224 of the primary Wi-Fi module 220 includes a decision algorithm configured to determine routing information 312 for the received data packet 50 based on the corresponding IP address information 52 . Additionally or alternatively, the packet forwarding process 310 may determine routing information 312 indicating whether to allow or reject the data packet 50 based on firewall rules and/or whether the IP address information 52 requires NAT, ) , It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Landgen and Ranki with the method/(system as cited in claim 27) wherein said adding of the set of forwarding rules to the network address translation table as taught by Ong. The motivation for doing so would be to provide the necessary processing power to achieve high bitrates. (Ong, [0032]) Landgen , Ranki , and Ong does not explicitly disclose adding is performed by a kernel of an operating system running on one or more processors of the primary base station. However, Rajahalme does disclose adding is performed by a kernel of an operating system running on one or more processors of the primary base station( [0031] [0035] The MFE database daemon 167 of some embodiments communicates with the network controller 180 in order to configure certain aspects of the MFE (e.g., of the MFE daemon 165 and/or the kernel module 120) other than the installation of flow entries. In some embodiments, the bridge 150 manages a set of rules (e.g., flow entries) that specify operations for processing and forwarding packets. The bridge 150 communicates with the MFE daemon 165 in order to process and forward packets that the bridge 150 receives. In the example of FIG. 1, the bridge 150 includes a packet processor 155, a classifier 157, and an action processor 159. These datapath cache flow entries are installed by the classifier 157, in some embodiments, based on processing of a packet through the set of flow tables 175 by the MFE daemon 165. ). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Landgen , Ranki , and Ong with is performed by a kernel of an operating system running on one or more processors of the primary base station as taught by Rajahalme . The motivation for doing so would be to modify an existing rule. ( Rajahalme , [0020]) Regarding claim 20, Landgen , Ranki , and Ong do not explicitly disclose the method further comprising:after said adding of the set of forwarding rules, deleting each packet flow between the primary base station and the server and the primary base station and the secondary base station tracked by a kernel connection tracker. However, Rajahalme does disclose the method further comprising:after said adding of the set of forwarding rules, deleting each packet flow between the primary base station and the server and the primary base station and the secondary base station tracked by a kernel connection tracker( [0031] [0035] [0048] The MFE database daemon 167 of some embodiments communicates with the network controller 180 in order to configure certain aspects of the MFE (e.g., of the MFE daemon 165 and/or the kernel module 120) other than the installation of flow entries. In some embodiments, the bridge 150 manages a set of rules (e.g., flow entries) that specify operations for processing and forwarding packets. The bridge 150 communicates with the MFE daemon 165 in order to process and forward packets that the bridge 150 receives. In the example of FIG. 1, the bridge 150 includes a packet processor 155, a classifier 157, and an action processor 159. These datapath cache flow entries are installed by the classifier 157, in some embodiments, based on processing of a packet through the set of flow tables 175 by the MFE daemon 165. Then, when a flow entry is delet ed, modified, or added, the change is made into one of the tables considered as a “staging area”. ). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Landgen , Ranki , and Ong with the method further comprising:after said adding of the set of forwarding rules, deleting each packet flow between the primary base station and the server and the primary base station and the secondary base station tracked by a kernel connection tracker as taught by Rajahalme . The motivation for doing so would be to modify an existing rule. ( Rajahalme , [0020]) Regarding claim 40, Landgen , Ranki , and Ong do not explicitly disclose the system wherein the memory further comprises instructions executable by said one or more processors to perform:after said adding of the set of forwarding rules, deleting each packet flow between the primary base station and the server and the primary base station and the secondary base station tracked by a kernel connection tracker. However, Rajahalme does disclose the system wherein the memory further comprises instructions executable by said one or more processors to perform:after said adding of the set of forwarding rules, deleting each packet flow between the primary base station and the server and the primary base station and the secondary base station tracked by a kernel connection tracker( [0031] [0035] [0048] The MFE database daemon 167 of some embodiments communicates with the network controller 180 in order to configure certain aspects of the MFE (e.g., of the MFE daemon 165 and/or the kernel module 120) other than the installation of flow entries. In some embodiments, the bridge 150 manages a set of rules (e.g., flow entries) that specify operations for processing and forwarding packets. The bridge 150 communicates with the MFE daemon 165 in order to process and forward packets that the bridge 150 receives. In the example of FIG. 1, the bridge 150 includes a packet processor 155, a classifier 157, and an action processor 159. These datapath cache flow entries are installed by the classifier 157, in some embodiments, based on processing of a packet through the set of flow tables 175 by the MFE daemon 165. Then, when a flow entry is delet ed, modified, or added, the change is made into one of the tables considered as a “staging area”. ). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Landgen , Ranki , and Ong with the method further comprising:after said adding of the set of forwarding rules, deleting each packet flow between the primary base station and the server and the primary base station and the secondary base station tracked by a kernel connection tracker as taught by Rajahalme . The motivation for doing so would be to modify an existing rule. ( Rajahalme , [0020]) Claims 4 and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over as Landgen et al, US 20110065427 A1, in view of Ranki et al, US 20140051461, in view of Ong et al, US 20180278523 A1, in view of Nigam et al, US 20230370417 A1, and in further view of Cartmell et al, US 20140341109 A1. Regarding claims 4 and 28, Landgen , Ranki , and Ong do not explicitly disclose the method/(system as cited in claim 28) wherein said adding of the set of forwarding rules comprises: adding a first rule to change a destination address of the packets to an address of the secondary base station for packets inbound to the primary base station from the server; adding a second rule to change a source address of the packets to an address of the primary base station for packets outbound from the primary base station to the secondary base station However, Nigam does disclose the method/(system as cited in claim 28) wherein said adding of the set of forwarding rules comprises: adding a first rule to change a destination address of the packets to an address of the secondary base station for packets inbound to the primary base station from the server ([0025] The network device of some embodiments uses the address translation rul e, e.g., a destination NAT (DNAT), to change IP addresses of packets sent between the first and second endpoints.. ); adding a second rule to change a source address of the packets to an address of the primary base station for packets outbound from the primary base station to the secondary base station( [0026] the network device is one of multiple network devices that each chang e IP addresses and/or port addresses of packets sent between the first and second endpoints and displaying the route also includes displaying an identifier of each of the multiple network devices ); It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Landgen , Ranki , and Ong with the method/(system as cited in claim 28) wherein said adding of the set of forwarding rules comprises: adding a first rule to change a destination address of the packets to an address of the secondary base station for packets inbound to the primary base station from the server; adding a second rule to change a source address of the packets to an address of the primary base station for packets outbound from the primary base station to the secondary base station as taught by Nigam. The motivation for doing so would be to determine which DNAT rule to use in determining an indirect route. (Nigam, [0057]) The combination of Landgen , Ranki , Ong and Nigam do not explicitly disclose adding a third rule to change a destination address of the packets to an address of the server for packets inbound from the secondary base station to the primary base station; and adding a fourth rule to change a source address of the packets to an address of the primary base station for packets outbound from the primary base station to the server. However, Cartmell does disclose adding a third rule to change a destination address of the packets to an address of the server for packets inbound from the secondary base station to the primary base station ( [0387] For a message sent from the HNB 6305 to the MCN 6330 , the BWM server 6310 may change the source IP address to the MCN 6330 provided IP address. For a message sent from the MCN 6330 to the HNB 6305 , the BWM server 6310 may change the destination IP address to the local IP address of the HNB 6305 . [0392] destination address es of packets that may be routed between a WTRU and a BWM server, either through a Wi-Fi or cellular connection, and between the BWM server and the application ); and adding a fourth rule to change a source address of the packets to an address of the primary base station for packets outbound from the primary base station to the server( [0387] For a message sent from the HNB 6305 to the MCN 6330 , the BWM server 6310 may change the source IP address to the MCN 6330 provided IP address. For a message sent from the MCN 6330 to the HNB 6305 , the BWM server 6310 may change the destination IP address to the local IP address of the HNB 6305 . ). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Landgen , Ranki , Ong and Nigam with adding a third rule to change a destination address of the packets to an address of the server for packets inbound from the secondary base station to the primary base station; and adding a fourth rule to change a source address of the packets to an address of the primary base station for packets outbound from the primary base station to the server as taught by Cartmell . The motivation for doing so would be to provide flexibility (by mapping data packets appropriately and adaptively onto each RAT depending upon various characteristics such as security, data rates, QoS, cost, robustness, and channel quality, among others). ( Cartmell , [0266]) Claim 9 and 31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over as Landgen et al, US 20110065427 A1, in view of Ranki et al, US 20140051461, in view of Ong et al, US 20180278523 A1, and in further view of Cartmell et al, US 20140341109 A1. Regarding claim 9, Landgen , Ranki , and Ong do not explicitly disclose the method further comprising:generating an entry for the call in a call table, wherein the entry includes an indication of whether the set of forwarding rules is enabled for the call, a destination address of the server, and a destination address of the secondary base station for the call. However, Cartmell does disclose the method further comprising:generating an entry for the call in a call table, wherein the entry includes an indication of whether the set of forwarding rules is enabled for the call, a destination address of the server, and a destination address of the secondary base station for the call ([0277] [0607][0666] [0668] An example of store, carry and forward may include a stationary device that may use the CGW to hold data until the CGW can forward the data to its destination. At 11042 a packet may be received from a mobile core network addressed to a device where the packet may include or have a cellular (e.g. a 3G) IP destination address . At 11044, when the device may not be reachable over a Wireless Fidelity (Wi-Fi) network, the packet may be transmitted via a cellular network. For each UE and the default entry, under ISRP, there may also be four ForFlowBased entries, each one defining the routing rules for FTP, SIP, HTTP video and Other IP Flows. In each of these ForFlowBased entries, the RulePriority field may be used. For the rules in the policy, RulePriority may be set to 1, except for the "Other" policy, which may use a higher numbered RulePriority the SOAP Server in the CGW may send the UE a getPolicyResponse message that may include the matching IFOM policy as determined at 9..). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Landgen , Ranki , and Ong with the method further comprising:generating an entry for the call in a call table, wherein the entry includes an indication of whether the set of forwarding rules is enabled for the call, a destination address of the server, and a destination address of the secondary base station for the call as taught by Cartmell . The motivation for doing so would be to provide flexibility (by mapping data packets appropriately and adaptively onto each RAT depending upon various characteristics such as security, data rates, QoS, cost, robustness, and channel quality, among others). ( Cartmell , [0266]) Regarding claim 31, Landgen does disclose the system wherein the memory further comprises instructions executable by said one or more processors to perform( [0077]FIG. 20 a memory 2010 and a processor 2020 may be discrete components of the network entity 2000 that are used to execute an application or set of operations. ): The combination of Landgen , Ranki , and Ong do not explicitly disclose generating an entry for the call in a call table, wherein the entry includes an indication of whether the set of forwarding rules is enabled for the call, a destination address of the server, and a destination address of the secondary base station for the call. However, Cartmell does disclose generating an entry for the call in a call table, wherein the entry includes an indication of whether the set of forwarding rules is enabled for the call, a destination address of the server, and a destination address of the secondary base station for the call ([0277][0580] [0666] [0668] An example of store, carry and forward may include a stationary device that may use the CGW to hold data until the CGW can forward the data to its destination. In an example embodiment, a policy/rules that may be used for segregation may include one or more of the following parameters: a UE ID; a segregation enable /disable indicator or indication. For each UE and the default entry , under ISRP, there may also be four ForFlowBased entries, each one defining the routing rules for FTP, SIP, HTTP video and Other IP Flows. In each of these ForFlowBased entries, the RulePriority field may be used. For the rules in the policy, RulePriority may be set to 1, except for the "Other" policy, which may use a higher numbered RulePriority the SOAP Server in the CGW may send the UE a getPolicyResponse message that may include the matching IFOM policy as determined at 9.. ). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Landgen , Ranki , and Ong with the method further comprising:generating an entry for the call in a call table, wherein the entry includes an indication of whether the set of forwarding rules is enabled for the call, a destination address of the server, and a destination address of the secondary base station for the call as taught by Cartmell . The motivation for doing so would be to provide flexibility (by mapping data packets appropriately and adaptively onto each RAT depending upon various characteristics such as security, data rates, QoS, cost, robustness, and channel quality, among others). ( Cartmell , [0266]) Claims 10 and 32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over as Landgen et al, US 20110065427 A1, in view of Ranki et al, US 20140051461, in view of Ong et al, US 20180278523 A1, in view of Cartmell et al, US 20140341109 A1, and in further view of Nishiyama et al, US 20110161786 A1. Regarding claim 10, Landgen , Ranki , Ong, and Cartmell do not explicitly disclose the method further comprising: determining whether the call has terminated; and based on said determining whether the call has ended, deleting the entry for the call in the call table. However, Nishiyama does disclose the method further comprising: determining whether the call has terminated; and based on said determining whether the call has ended, deleting the entry for the call in the call table( [0059] When the call between the IP telephone terminal T12 and the IP telephone terminal T18 ends, the exchange server BT updates the call state of the IP telephone terminal T12 of the IP terminal call state data table 141 from "engaged in a call" to "idle", and deletes the port number . The examiner interprets the port number as entry. ). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Landgen , Ranki , Ong, and Cartmell with the method further comprising: determining whether the call has terminated; and based on said determining whether the call has ended, deleting the entry for the call in the call table as taught by Jefferson. The motivation for doing so would be to improve the reliability in judgment of the packet error reception while suppressing the IP telephone terminals T11-T1i at a low cast. (Nishiyama, [0072]) Regarding claim 32, Landgen does disclose the system wherein the memory further comprises instructions executable by said one or more processors to perform( [0077]FIG. 20 a memory 2010 and a processor 2020 may be discrete components of the network entity 2000 that are used to execute an application or set of operations. ): The combination of Landgen , Ranki , Ong, and Cartmell do not explicitly disclose determining whether the call has terminated; and based on said determining whether the call has ended, deleting the entry for the call in the call table. However, Nishiyama does disclose determining whether the call has terminated; and based on said determining whether the call has ended, deleting the entry for the call in the call table ([0207][0228] The task of determining whether the caller is on the participant list for the conference, at step 1644, may be done by determining the caller ID/ SIP unique resource identifier. Also from the home state of displaying the call list 1710, the user may click on a "remove call" tab or menu selection, which will manually delete the identified call entry from the calling list at state 1720. ). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Landgen , Ranki , Ong, and Cartmell with determining whether the call has terminated; and based on said determining whether the call has ended, deleting the entry for the call in the call table as taught by Nishiyama. The motivation for doing so would be to improve the reliability in judgment of the packet error reception while suppressing the IP telephone terminals T11-T1i at a low cast. (Nishiyama, [0072]) Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over as Landgen et al, US 20110065427 A1, in view of Ranki et al, US 20140051461, in view of Ong et al, US 20180278523 A1, and in further view of Jackson et al, US 20090293123 A1. Regarding claim 14, Landgen , Ranki , and Ong do not explicitly disclose the method further comprising:determining whether to update or delete the set of forwarding rules based on one or more SIP signaling events. However, Jackson does disclose the method further comprising:determining whether to update or delete the set of forwarding rules based on one or more SIP signaling events ([0051] the DoS attack mitigator 155 authenticates the DoS header and, if authentic, updates its local database 610 of DoS attack mitigation rules and/or filters, and then forwards the SIP 5XX response message to the intervening border element 140, 141, 150, 152 without removing the DoS header and the DoS authentication header. All subsequent DoS attack mitigators 155 receiving the SIP 5XX message 260 apply the updated DoS attack mitigation rules and/or filters to subsequent SIP INVITE messages . ). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Landgen , Ranki , and Ong with the method further comprising:determining whether to update or delete the set of forwarding rules based on one or more SIP signaling events as taught by Jefferson. The motivation for doing so would be reduc e the allowed aggregate data rate for the communication path(s) between each of the border elements 140, 141, 150 and 152 and the IMS core 115. (Jackson, [0053]) Claims 15,17,18,36,38, and 39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over as Landgen et al, US 20110065427 A1, in view of Ranki et al, US 20140051461, in view of Ong et al, US 20180278523 A1, and in further view of Alexander et al, US 20160277587 A1. Regarding claim 15, Landgen , Ranki , and Ong do not explicitly disclose the method of any one further comprising: determining whether one or more endpoints have changed; and based on said determining whether one or more endpoints have changed, deleting the set of forwarding rules and adding a new set forwarding rules to the network address translation table. However, Alexander does disclose the method of any one further comprising: determining whether one or more endpoints have changed; and based on said determining whether one or more endpoints have changed, deleting the set of forwarding rules and adding a new set forwarding rules to the network address translation table ([0099][0106][0125][0129] NAT traversal handles issues stemming from network address translation at the on-premise route/firewall. Thus, once the devices have been created and configured, it is very easy and quick to change/ delete the configuration graph and create new route and functionalities/rules. If at 320 method 300 determines that a communication session (i.e., a connection) has been established between the session initiating endpoint of the caller and the terminal device to which the call was assigned or changed, then the method 300 terminates at 324. In an embodiment, the updated call flow indicator is generated by appending/adding a new destination identifier to the destination identifier used in the preceding leg of the communication session (e.g., the initial destination identifier). The method proceeds to 412 and a terminal device associated with the destination address specified in the forwarding/transfer request is selected.). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Landgen , Ranki , and Ong with the method further comprising: receiving a call hold indication; deleting the set of forwarding rules based on said receiving a call hold indication; receiving a call resume indication; and adding a new set of forwarding rules to the network address translation table based on said receiving a call resume indication as taught by Alexander. The motivation for doing so would be to reduce the number of times the database must be read. (Alexander, [0055]) Regarding claim 17, Landgen , Ranki , Ong and do not explicitly disclose the method further comprising: receiving a call hold indication; deleting the set of forwarding rules based on said receiving a call hold indication; receiving a call resume indication; and adding a new set of forwarding rules to the network address translation table based on said receiving a call resume indication. However, Alexander does disclose the method further comprising: receiving a call hold indication; deleting the set of forwarding rules based on said receiving a call hold indication; receiving a call resume indication( [0083] [0086][0099] [0106] [0127] CCXML absolves the programmer from dealing with direct protocol level programming and provides a flexible and rapid mechanism for call control, i.e. establishing, joining, un-joining, conferencing, holding, un-holding, transferring, tearing down calls, etc. From 402, method 400 proceeds to 404, where it is determined whether a call forward/transfer request has been received from the parent device. If, at 406, it is determined that the call has not been terminated, the method 400 returns/resumes to 402 and continues monitoring for events. NAT traversal handles issues stemming from network address translation at the on-premise route/firewall. Thus, once the devices have been created and configured, it is very easy and quick to change/ delete the configuration graph and create new route and functionalities/rules.); and adding a new set of forwarding rules to the network address translation table based on said receiving a call resume indication([0099][0106][0129] NAT traversal handles issues stemming from network address translation at the on-premise route/firewall. Thus, once the devices have been created and configured, it is very easy and quick to change/ delete the configuration graph and create new route and functionalities/rules. In an embodiment, the updated call flow indicator is generated by appending/adding a new destination identifier to the destination identifier used in the preceding leg of the communication session (e.g., the initial destination identifier). The method proceeds to 412 and a terminal device associated with the destination address specified in the forwarding/transfer request is selected.). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Landgen , Ranki , and Ong with the method further comprising: receiving a call hold indication; deleting the set of forwarding rules based on said receiving a call hold indication; receiving a call resume indication; and adding a new set of forwarding rules to the network address translation table based on said receiving a call resume indication as taught by Alexander. The motivation for doing so would be to reduce the number of times the database must be read. (Alexander, [0055]) Regarding claim 18, Landgen , Ranki , and Ong do not explicitly disclose the method further comprising: determining, prior to said deleting the set of forwarding rules, with said deleting the set of forwarding rules,whether the call hold indication was received from the secondary base station; and proceeding, upon determining that the call hold indication was received from the secondary base station. However, Alexander does disclose the method further comprising: determining, prior to said deleting the set of forwarding rules, with said deleting the set of forwarding rules,whether the call hold indication was received from the secondary base station; and proceeding, upon determining that the call hold indication was received from the secondary base station( [0083] [0086] [0099] [0106] CCXML absolves the pro