DETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to communications filed 5 February 2026.
Claims 1-20 are subject to examination.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 1 April 2026. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1, 7, 10-11, 17 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Svennebring et al. (US-20220345931-A1) hereinafter Svennebring in view of Shaw et al. (US-7933205-B1) hereinafter Shaw.
Regarding claim 1, Svennebring discloses:
A user equipment (UE) ([0181] endpoints 810 include UEs 811) comprising:
a transceiver configured to receive and transmit traffic over a link with a wireless network ([0224] platform 1000 may be suitable for use as … endpoints 810 [0248] communication circuitry 1009 also includes RF circuitry 1011 and 1012 to enable communication with wireless networks … include a receive signal path … include a transmit signal path, see [FIG. 10]); and
a processor operably coupled to the transceiver ([0225] processor circuitry 1002 [0244] interconnect 1006 couples the processor circuitry 1002 to the communication circuitry 1009, see [FIG. 10]), the processor configured to:
classify the traffic into at least one of real time (RT) traffic or non-real-time (NRT) traffic ([0158-0159] processing link performance elevation (LPE) requests … performed by one or more network devices (e.g., with processing circuitry, interface circuitry, memory, storage, antennas, etc.; i.e. UE as above), see [0070] traffic classifications [0071] Class of Service (CoS) bits [0072] Differentiated Services Code Points (DSCP) (i.e. real time or non-real-time, see [0069] real-time gaming use cases (i.e. wherein non-real-time gaming use cases would not be classified as real-time gaming, etc.));
generate a link deterioration prediction ([0024] LPE service … used in conjunction with link performance prediction (LPP) technology … dynamically predict the quality of any given radio access network (RAN) link, see [0327] network degradation control … identifying instances of poor performance and troubleshooting (i.e. deterioration by degraded network));
select, based on the link deterioration prediction and the traffic class ([0070] traffic classifications (i.e. as above) [0024] link performance prediction (LPP, i.e. as above)), a quality of experience (QoE) maintenance action ([0330] LPP notifications may also be used by network operators and service providers to improve … QoE … adjust traffic routes, mode of operation, and/or other parameters to optimize … QoE (i.e. maintenance actions)); and
perform the QoE maintenance action ([0330] LPP notifications may also be used by network operators and service providers to improve … QoE … adjust traffic routes, mode of operation, and/or other parameters to optimize … QoE (i.e. maintenance actions), see [0064] configuration of the network and/or network traffic can be adjusted (i.e. performed) to achieve the requisite QoS parameters, see also [0313] media streaming parameters relating to content buffering, resolution and/or compression may be adjusted to ensure that media playback continues without stalling even while the client device 1210 has little or no coverage (i.e. no stalling playback is a quality of experience)), wherein:
the traffic is classified as NRT traffic ([0158-0159] processing link performance elevation (LPE) requests … performed by one or more network devices (e.g., with processing circuitry, interface circuitry, memory, storage, antennas, etc.; i.e. UE), see [0070] traffic classifications [0071] Class of Service (CoS) bits [0072] Differentiated Services Code Points (DSCP) (i.e. real time or non-real-time, see [0069] real-time gaming use cases (i.e. wherein non-real-time gaming use cases would not be classified as real-time gaming, etc.)),
Svennebring does not explicitly disclose:
the method further comprises determining a sub-class of the NRT traffic as a frequent interaction traffic or non-frequent interaction traffic, and
the selected QoE maintenance action is different for the frequent interaction traffic than for the non-frequent interaction traffic.
However, Shaw discloses:
the method further comprises determining a sub-class of the NRT traffic as a frequent interaction traffic or non-frequent interaction traffic ([5:5-20] separates real-time and non-real time traffic into further subcategories … non real-time interactive (i.e. frequent interaction traffic) or non real-time non-interactive (i.e. non-frequent interaction traffic), see [TABLE 1] e.g. interactive … transactional services, instant messaging, voice messaging … background … SMS, file download, FTP), and
the selected QoE maintenance action is different for the frequent interaction traffic than for the non-frequent interaction traffic ([FIG. 3B] e.g. fewer dedicated resources for non real-time non interactive than non real-time interactive, see [5:62-18] performance requirement may include a quality of service (QoS) requirement that must be met in order to provide the service (i.e., a certain number of resources must be made available), see also [7:7-38] assigning appropriate network resources automatically … the guarantee of service delivery in meeting real-time performance requirements, the end user experience (i.e. QoE) for the service delivery become consistent and satisfactory).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Svennebring in view of Shaw to have the method further comprising determining a sub-class of the NRT traffic as a frequent or non-frequent interaction traffic to select the QoE maintenance action, which is different for the frequent and non-frequent interaction traffic. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so to ensure that the process for assigning appropriate network resources automatically provisions resources in proportion with the real-time performance levels represented by the classification of the service and make the end user experience for the service delivery become consistent and satisfactory, and enable hierarchical categorization of top level performance categories by further dividing the top level performance categories into subcategories (Shaw, [4:3-16] [5:62-18] [7:7-38]).
Regarding claim 7, Svennebring-Shaw disclose:
The UE of Claim 1, set forth above, wherein:
Svennebring discloses:
the traffic is classified as RT traffic ([0158-0159] processing link performance elevation (LPE) requests … performed by one or more network devices (e.g., with processing circuitry, interface circuitry, memory, storage, antennas, etc.; i.e. UE), see [0070] traffic classifications [0071] Class of Service (CoS) bits [0072] Differentiated Services Code Points (DSCP) (i.e. real time or non-real-time, see [0069] real-time gaming use cases (i.e. wherein non-real-time gaming use cases would not be classified as real-time gaming, etc.)); and
to select the QoE maintenance action ([0330] LPP notifications may also be used by network operators and service providers to improve … QoE … adjust traffic routes, mode of operation, and/or other parameters to optimize … QoE (i.e. maintenance actions), see [0064] configuration of the network and/or network traffic can be adjusted (i.e. performed) to achieve the requisite QoS parameters, see also [0313] media streaming parameters relating to content buffering, resolution and/or compression may be adjusted to ensure that media playback continues without stalling even while the client device 1210 has little or no coverage (i.e. no stalling playback is a quality of experience)), the processor is further configured to:
measure a plurality of available bands ([0050] parameters/metrics that can be tuned and/or negotiated [0051] bandwidth/throughput, see [0194] channel BWs … 1.4, 3, 5, 10, 16, or 20 MHz) and a plurality of available radio access technologies (RATs) ([0287] differentiating traffic between various rats (i.e. requires to know the available RATs)); and
at least one of:
switch to a robust band;
switch to a different RAT ([0287] differentiating traffic between various RATs); and
switch from 5G standalone (SA) to 5G non-standalone (NSA).
Regarding claim 10, Svennebring-Shaw disclose:
The UE of Claim 1, set forth above, wherein:
Svennebring discloses:
to classify the traffic, the processor is further configured to generate a future traffic prediction ([0309] predict future link performance for client devices … include or indicate a time … type of prediction … predicted value … expected deviation … and/or a probability … among other types of information [0323] predicted future behavior(s) and/or load(s)); and
the processor is further configured to, if the future traffic prediction is real time (RT) ([0309] predict future link performance for client devices … include or indicate a time … type of prediction … predicted value … expected deviation … and/or a probability … among other types of information [0323] predicted future behavior(s) and/or load(s) [0158-0159] processing link performance elevation (LPE) requests … performed by one or more network devices (e.g., with processing circuitry, interface circuitry, memory, storage, antennas, etc.; i.e. UE), see [0070] traffic classifications [0071] Class of Service (CoS) bits [0072] Differentiated Services Code Points (DSCP) (i.e. real time or non-real-time, see [0069] real-time gaming use cases (i.e. wherein non-real-time gaming use cases would not be classified as real-time gaming, etc.)), switch to at least one of a robust band and a different RAT ([0287] differentiating traffic between various RATs).
Regarding claims 11, 17 and 20, they do not further define nor teach over the limitations of claims 1, 7 and 10, therefore, claims 11, 17 and 20 are rejected for at least the same reasons set forth above as in claims 1, 7 and 10.
Claim(s) 2-4, 9, 12-14 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Svennebring et al. (US-20220345931-A1) hereinafter Svennebring in view of Shaw et al. (US-7933205-B1) hereinafter Shaw further in view of Xiong et al. (US-20240073756-A1) hereinafter Xiong.
Regarding claim 2, Svennebring-Shaw disclose:
The UE of claim 1, wherein the processor, set forth above, is further configured to:
Svennebring discloses:
receive physical (PHY) layer information related to the link with the wireless network ([0189] measuring various signals … signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), signal-to-noise and interference ratio (SINR) {note: specification defines in [0062] “… PHY layer information 404 (e.g., signal quality metrics such as reference signal received power (RSRP) … (SINR)});
receive sensor information from at least one sensor comprised by the UE ([0181] UEs 811 … sensors … capable of capturing and/or recording data associated with an event);
Svennebring does not explicitly disclose:
determine whether the PHY layer information indicates that a change in at least one signal quality metric exceeds a first threshold; and
determine whether the sensor information indicates that a change in at least one of a location or orientation of the UE exceeds a second threshold,
wherein the classification of the traffic, the generation of the link deterioration prediction, and the selection of the QoE maintenance action are performed based on an indication of exceeding the first threshold or an indication of exceeding the second threshold.
However, Xiong discloses:
determine whether the PHY layer information indicates that a change in at least one signal quality metric exceeds a first threshold ([0188] signal-to-noise ratio of a transmission channel being less than a signal-to-noise ratio threshold); and
determine whether the sensor information indicates that a change in at least one of a location or orientation of the UE exceeds a second threshold ([0072] in response to overlapping coverage of different cells, the probability of occurrence of ping-pong behavior handover is greater than the probability threshold, see [0253] sensor component … change in position of the terminal (i.e. threshold of overlapping cells)),
wherein the classification of the traffic, the generation of the link deterioration prediction, and the selection of the QoE maintenance action are performed ([0080] determined whether to ignore the handover command of cell handover according to the predicted value of the mobility and service characteristic parameter of the terminal after the terminal is handed over to the target cell determined by using the machine learning algorithm, see [0062-0063] predict a parameter value … average traffics of different types of services are different … high-definition video [0065] QoE requirements of different types of services are different [0079] determined to ignore the handover command of cell handover) based on an indication of exceeding the first threshold ([0188] signal-to-noise ratio of a transmission channel being less than a signal-to-noise ratio threshold) or an indication of exceeding the second threshold ([0072] in response to overlapping coverage of different cells, the probability of occurrence of ping-pong behavior handover is greater than the probability threshold, see [0253] sensor component … change in position of the terminal (i.e. threshold of overlapping cells)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Svennebring in view of Xiong to have determined whether the PHY layer information or sensor information exceeds signal quality or location/orientation thresholds such as to perform classification of the traffic, link deterioration prediction, and selection of QoE maintenance action. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so to determine to ignore the handover command of a cell handover (Xiong, [0080]).
Regarding claim 3, Svennebring-Shaw disclose:
The UE of claim 1, wherein the processor, set forth above, is further configured to:
Svennebring-Shaw do not explicitly disclose:
determine a handoff (HO) probability;
determine an outage probability;
determine whether the HO probability exceeds a first threshold; and
determine whether the outage probability exceeds a second threshold,
wherein the link deterioration prediction is generated based on the HO probability exceeding the first threshold or the outage probability exceeding the second threshold.
However, Xiong discloses:
determine a handoff (HO) probability ([0066] probability of occurrence of ping-pong handover);
determine an outage probability ([0066] probability of wireless communication interruption (i.e. wireless outage));
determine whether the HO probability exceeds a first threshold ([0072] probability of occurrence of ping-pong handover is greater than the probability threshold); and
determine whether the outage probability exceeds a second threshold ([0071] probability of wireless communication interruption is greater than a probability threshold),
wherein the link deterioration prediction is generated ([0080] determined whether to ignore the handover command of cell handover according to the predicted value of the mobility and service characteristic parameter of the terminal after the terminal is handed over to the target cell determined by using the machine learning algorithm, see [0062-0063] predict a parameter value … average traffics of different types of services are different … high-definition video [0065] QoE requirements of different types of services are different [0079] determined to ignore the handover command of cell handover) based on the HO probability exceeding the first threshold ([0072] probability of occurrence of ping-pong handover is greater than the probability threshold) or the outage probability exceeding the second threshold ([0071] probability of wireless communication interruption is greater than a probability threshold).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Svennebring-Shaw in view of Xiong to have determined a HO probability or outage probability exceeding a threshold to generate a link deterioration prediction. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so to determine to ignore the handover command of a cell handover (Xiong, [0080]).
Regarding claim 4, Svennebring-Shaw disclose:
The UE of Claim 1, wherein the processor, set forth above, is further configured to:
Svennebring-Shaw do not explicitly disclose:
determine a handoff (HO) probability;
determine an outage probability; and
determine a relationship between the HO probability and the outage probability,
wherein the link deterioration prediction is generated based on the relationship between the HO probability and the outage probability.
However, Xiong discloses:
determine a handoff (HO) probability ([0066] probability of occurrence of ping-pong handover);
determine an outage probability ([0066] probability of wireless communication interruption (i.e. wireless outage)); and
determine a relationship between the HO probability and the outage probability ([0067] communication performance characteristic parameter includes one or more of … probability of wireless communication interruption, a probability of occurrence of ping-pong handover (i.e. relationship if the probabilities defines a communication performance characteristic parameter)),
wherein the link deterioration prediction is generated ([0080] determined whether to ignore the handover command of cell handover according to the predicted value of the mobility and service characteristic parameter of the terminal after the terminal is handed over to the target cell determined by using the machine learning algorithm, see [0062-0063] predict a parameter value … average traffics of different types of services are different … high-definition video [0065] QoE requirements of different types of services are different [0079] determined to ignore the handover command of cell handover) based on the relationship between the HO probability and the outage probability ([0067] communication performance characteristic parameter includes one or more of … probability of wireless communication interruption, a probability of occurrence of ping-pong handover (i.e. relationship if the probabilities defines a communication performance characteristic parameter)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Svennebring-Shaw in view of Xiong to have determined a HO probability relationship with an outage probability to generate a link deterioration prediction. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so to determine to ignore the handover command of a cell handover (Xiong, [0080]).
Regarding claim 9, Svennebring-Shaw disclose:
The UE of Claim 7, wherein the processor, set forth above, is further configured to:
Svennebring-Shaw do not explicitly disclose:
determine a handoff (HO) probability;
determine an outage probability; and
determine a relationship between the HO probability and the outage probability,
wherein at least one of switching to the robust band and switching to the different RAT is based on the relationship between the HO probability and the outage probability.
However, Xiong discloses:
determine a handoff (HO) probability ([0066] probability of occurrence of ping-pong handover);
determine an outage probability ([0066] probability of wireless communication interruption (i.e. wireless outage)); and
determine a relationship between the HO probability and the outage probability ([0067] communication performance characteristic parameter includes one or more of … probability of wireless communication interruption, a probability of occurrence of ping-pong handover (i.e. relationship if the probabilities defines a communication performance characteristic parameter)),
wherein at least one of switching to the robust band and switching to the different RAT is based on the relationship between the HO probability and the outage probability ([0067] communication performance characteristic parameter includes one or more of … probability of wireless communication interruption, a probability of occurrence of ping-pong handover (i.e. relationship if the probabilities defines a communication performance characteristic parameter) [0083] determine whether to ignore the handover command, see [0079] determined not to ignore the handover command of cell handover [0056] source base station sends a cell handover request to a target base station, see also [FIG. 1] e.g. different base stations 120).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Svennebring-Shaw in view of Xiong to have determined a relationship between the HO probability and outage probability to switch to the different RAT based on the relationship (Xiong, [0056] [0079]).
Regarding claims 12-14 and 19, they do not further define nor teach over the limitations of claims 2-4 and 9, therefore, claims 12-14 and 19 are rejected for at least the same reasons set forth above as in claims 2-4 and 9.
Claim(s) 5 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Svennebring et al. (US-20220345931-A1) hereinafter Svennebring in view of Shaw et al. (US-7933205-B1) hereinafter Shaw further in view of Liang et al. (US-20180176325-A1) hereinafter Liang.
Regarding claim 5, Svennebring-Shaw disclose:
The UE of claim 1, set forth above, wherein:
Svennebring does not explicitly disclose:
the sub-class of the NRT traffic is determined as the non-frequent interaction traffic, and
the selected QoE maintenance action comprises content pre-fetching.
However, Shaw discloses:
the sub-class of the NRT traffic is determined as the non-frequent interaction traffic ([5:5-20] separates real-time and non-real time traffic into further subcategories … non real-time interactive (i.e. frequent interaction traffic) or non real-time non-interactive (i.e. non-frequent interaction traffic), see [TABLE 1] e.g. interactive … transactional services, instant messaging, voice messaging … background … SMS, file download, FTP),
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Svennebring in view of Shaw to have the method further comprising determining a sub-class of the NRT traffic as a frequent or non-frequent interaction traffic. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so to ensure that the process for assigning appropriate network resources automatically provisions resources in proportion with the real-time performance levels represented by the classification of the service and make the end user experience for the service delivery become consistent and satisfactory, and enable hierarchical categorization of top level performance categories by further dividing the top level performance categories into subcategories (Shaw, [4:3-16] [5:62-18] [7:7-38]).
Svennebring-Shaw do not explicitly disclose:
the selected QoE maintenance action comprises content pre-fetching.
However, Liang discloses:
the selected QoE maintenance action comprises content pre-fetching ([0041] data may be pre-fetched to reduce data traffic requirements during high demand periods or at network locations that lack capacity (i.e. less data traffic is demanded as above; but location that lacks capacity)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Svennebring-Shaw in view of Liang to have the selected QoE maintenance action comprise content pre-fetching. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so to pre-fetch data to reduce data traffic requirements during high demand periods or at network locations that lack capacity (Liang, [0041]).
Regarding claim 15, it does not further define nor teach over the limitations of claim 5, therefore, claim 15 is rejected for at least the same reasons set forth above as in claim 5.
Claim(s) 6 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Svennebring et al. (US-20220345931-A1) hereinafter Svennebring in view of Shaw et al. (US-7933205-B1) hereinafter Shaw further in view of Alloum et al. (US-20240250780-A1) hereinafter Alloum.
Regarding claim 6, Svennebring-Shaw disclose:
The UE of claim 1, set forth above, wherein:
Svennebring discloses:
the link deterioration prediction is poor link quality ([0024] LPE service … used in conjunction with link performance prediction (LPP) technology … dynamically predict the quality of any given radio access network (RAN) link, see [0327] network degradation control … identifying instances of poor performance and troubleshooting (i.e. deterioration by degraded network, e.g. degraded network is poor link quality)); and
based on the link deterioration prediction being poor link quality ([0327] poor performance, as above),
Svennebring does not explicitly disclose:
the selected QoE maintenance action comprises refraining from performing hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) retransmissions.
However, Alloum discloses:
the selected QoE maintenance action comprises refraining from performing hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) retransmissions ([0124] refrain from transmitting any HARQ feedback signaling).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Svennebring in view of Alloum to have the selected QoE maintenance action comprise from refraining from performing HARQ retransmissions. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so to transmit RLC status reports, wherein the quantity of RLC segments of the threshold may depend on an outer code design and determined from other upper layer metrics such as QoE (Alloum, [0124] [0127]).
Regarding claim 16, it does not further define nor teach over the limitations of claim 6, therefore, claim 16 is rejected for at least the same reasons set forth above as in claim 6.
Claim(s) 8 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Svennebring et al. (US-20220345931-A1) hereinafter Svennebring in view of Shaw et al. (US-7933205-B1) hereinafter Shaw further in view of Fryer et al. (US-11589088-B2) hereinafter Fryer.
Regarding claim 8, Svennebring-Shaw disclose:
The UE of Claim 7, wherein the processor, set forth above, is further configured to:
Svennebring-Shaw do not explicitly disclose:
determine that network-UE (NW-UE) cooperation for QoE maintenance is not implemented;
determine, based on NW-UE cooperation for QoE maintenance not being implemented, whether band-selection is accessible; and
if band-selection is not accessible:
generate a manipulated measurement report based on the measuring; and
share the manipulated measurement report with the wireless network.
However Fryer discloses:
determine that network-UE (NW-UE) cooperation for QoE maintenance is not implemented ([6:49-7:2] communicate the network quality of service information in other ways as well, either singly or in cooperation with one another (i.e. server and client, e.g. client-network));
determine, based on NW-UE cooperation for QoE maintenance not being implemented ([6:49-7:2] communicate the network quality of service information in other ways as well, e.g. singly), whether band-selection is accessible ([6:46-7:2] if the network QoS indicates particularly low throughput … low latency and high throughput … select MPEG-4 … VC-1 (i.e. not accessible as based on throughput)); and
if band-selection is not accessible ([6:46-7:2] if the network QoS indicates particularly low throughput … low latency and high throughput … select MPEG-4 … VC-1 (i.e. not accessible as based on throughput)):
generate a manipulated measurement report based on the measuring ([7:3-10] report current network conditions to the server (e.g., so server can gauge or detect network QoS information)); and
share the manipulated measurement report with the wireless network ([7:3-10] report … to the server (e.g., current network conditions, such as latency, throughput, etc. as in [6:46-7:2]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Svennebring-Shaw in view of Fryer to have determined that NW-UE cooperation is not being implemented and generate a manipulated measurement report to be shared if band-selection is not accessible. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so to have a server gauge or detect network QoS in other ways as a replacement or as a supplement to the QoS burp (Fryer, [7:3-10]).
Regarding claim 18, it does not further define nor teach over the limitations of claim 8, therefore, claim 18 is rejected for at least the same reasons set forth above as in claim 8.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Jadallah et al. (US-9398347-B2) SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR MEASURING QUALITY OF EXPERIENCE FOR MEDIA STREAMING;
Ma et al. (US-9807644-B2) HIERARCHICAL TRAFFIC DIFFERENTIATION TO HANDLE CONGESTION AND/OR MANAGE USER QUALITY OF EXPERIENCE;
Dunne et al. (US-9313251-B2) SHARING A CONFIGURATION STATE OF A CLIENT DEVICE THAT MEETS A THRESHOLD LEVEL OF QOE;
Halepovic et al. (US-10757220-B2) ESTIMATING VIDEO QUALITY OF EXPERIENCE METRICS FROM ENCRYPTED NETWORK TRAFFIC;
Tomkins et al. (US-10862771-B2) ADAPTIVE SYTEMS AND METHODS ENHANCING SERVICE QUALITY OF EXPERIENCE;
Cui et al. (US-20230120629-A1) METHODS, SYSTEMS, AND DEVICES FOR ORCHESTRATING ALLOCATION OF NETWORK RESOURCES UTILIZING QUALITY OF EXPERIENCE (QOE) METRICS OF A SERVICE;
Carofiglio et al. (US-12273406-B2) USER-DEFINED QUALITY OF EXPERIENCE (QOE) PRIORITIZATIONS;
Mermoud et al. (US-20240406095-A1) PROACTIVE BYPASS SELECTION BASED ON ROOT CAUSE ANALYSIS OF TRACEROUTES.
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Alex Tran whose telephone number is (571)272-8173. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10AM-6PM ET.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kamal Divecha can be reached at (571)272-5863. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Alex Tran/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2453
Prosecution Insights