DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
2. Claims 1-20 are pending wherein claims 1, 10, and 17 are in independent form.
Response to Arguments
3. Applicant's arguments filed on 03/16/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The reasons set forth below.
4. On page 8 of the remarks, applicant argues, “Hoffner is describing threshold-based monitoring followed by a signaling/reporting action. Hoffner does not disclose communicating congestion level information concurrent with a communication of packets from the node, as recited. To the contrary, Hoffner discloses a separate reporting framework in which congestion information is sent when a monitored level is reached. See Hoffner [0056]-[0058]. The present claim requires more than the mere existence of packet communication in a system that is also experiencing congestion. Instead, the claim requires "concurrent with a communication of packets from the node, communicating congestion level information for the cell to a component of a wireless communications network”.
In response, examiner respectfully disagrees because:
Claim recites to communicate congestion level information concurrent with packet communications. Communications of packet from the node is considered as serving user equipments to perform communications with the base station/access network. While serving the user equipments (concurrent with a communication of packets), the base station sends the congestion level information to PCRF through MME (Fig. 5-6). Claim recites concurrent with communications from the node, the congestion level information is sent. Claim does not recite that the congestion level information is sent concurrent with the downlink packet communications from the node or concurrent with any specific packet communication to another device/node. Without defining any specific packet communication, the claimed generalized communication of packets is considered as serving the user equipments to communicate packets from the base station/access network. Therefore Hoffner disclose that concurrent with a communication of packets from the node (Access network/base station serving a number of users, Fig. 1, Par 0014-0015; base station communicating packets with the core network, Fig. 5; base station measuring resource utilization level indicates resource occupancy for packets/data communication, congestion level measurement indicates ongoing packet/data communication, Par 0054-0056), communicating congestion level information for the cell to a component (PCRF/PCF, Fig. 5) of a wireless communications network node (eNodeB/gNodeB providing congestion level indication), the congestion level information indicating that a congestion level of the cell is above a predetermined threshold (congestion level 1 indication exceeds not congested threshold; congestion level 2 indication exceeds congestion level 1 threshold) (Fig. 5-6, Par 0055-0056, Par 0064, Par 0068-0069, Par 0073-0074).
Moreover, signals (such as 550, 560, message with action report = RAN_Load_Monitoring) containing the congestion level information are also a communication of packets from the base station (Fig. 5-6, Par 0055-0056, Par 0063-0064, Par 0068-0070). Claim does not recite that the communication of packets is different than communicating the congestion level information. Therefore, Hoffner discloses that concurrent with a communication of packets from the node (signals such as 550, 560; message with action report=RAN_Load_Monitoring), communicating congestion level information for the cell (congestion level 1 indication, congestion level 2 indication) to a component of a wireless communications network (Fig. 5-6, Par 0055-0056, Par 0064, Par 0068-0069, Par 0073-0074).
5. On page 9 of the remarks, applicant argues, “Hoffner distinguishes among users based on user profile, entitlement, or service plan, not based on device type. Hoffner explains that a profile associated with a UE may indicate that the UE "is a public safety or emergency services user" or "has purchased a plan to receive higher priority in the case of network congestion." Hoffner [0054]; see also Hoffner TT[0061]-[0063], [0070]-[0074]. Hoffner further explains that "when the network is congested at level 2, the data service for user 1 and user 2 may be prioritized," where user 1 is a public safety user and user 2 is a user who purchased a gold plan. Hoffner [0070]. Thus, Hoffner's distinctions are based on priority status and subscriber profile, not on device type.”
In response, examiner respectfully disagrees because:
Claim recites a first device type and a second device type but does not provide any specific definition of the device type. Claim does not define that the device type is associated with a capability of the device or any specific characteristic/feature/limitation of the device. Therefore, device type is considered as a device associated with a service type. The device associated with public safety service is considered as a first type of device, the device associated with the basic service type/plan is considered as the second device type.
Therefore, in view of above reasons, examiner maintains the rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
6. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
7. Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hoffner et al (US 20210112436, hereinafter referred to as Hoffner).
Re claim 17, Hoffner teaches a method for modifying quality of service (QoS) flow for devices having particular device types based on cell congestion (modifying QoS for higher priority/public safety user, gold plan user during congestion, Par 0059, Par 0070, Par 0074, Fig. 5-6), the method comprising:
(i) determining that a congestion level of a cell associated with a node exceeds a predetermined threshold (congestion level 1 exceeds not congested threshold; congestion level 2 exceeds congestion level 1 threshold) (Fig. 5-6, Par 0010, Par 0054-0056, Par 0063-0064, Par 0068-0069, Par 0073-0074), wherein the cell is providing communication to at least a first device having a first device type (public safety user, gold plan user) and a second device having a second device type (basic plan users/other users except the public safety user and gold plan user) (Par 0010, Par 0058-0059, Par 0062-0063, Par 0065, Par 0069-0070, Par 0073-0074);
(ii) concurrent with a communication of packets from the node (Access network/base station serving a number of users, Fig. 1, Par 0014-0015; base station communicating packets with the core network, Fig. 5; base station measuring resource utilization level indicates resource occupancy for packets/data communication, congestion level measurement indicates ongoing packet/data communication, Par 0054-0056), communicating congestion level information for the cell to a component (PCRF/PCF, Fig. 5) of a wireless communications network node (eNodeB/gNodeB providing congestion level indication), the congestion level information indicating that a congestion level of the cell is above a predetermined threshold (congestion level 1 indication exceeds not congested threshold; congestion level 2 indication exceeds congestion level 1 threshold) (Fig. 5-6, Par 0055-0056, Par 0064, Par 0068-0069, Par 0073-0074),
(iii) based on the indication that the congestion level of the cell exceeds the predetermined threshold (congestion level 1 indication exceeds not congested threshold; congestion level 2 indication exceeds congestion level 1 threshold; Par 0054-0056), receiving communications from the component of the wireless communications network (receiving modified QoS from the PCRF/PCF) in accordance with a modified quality of service (QoS) flow for the first device having the first device type (modifying QoS for high priority public safety user, gold plan user, Par 0010, Par 0058-0059, Par 0062-0063, Par 0065, Par 0069-0070, Par 0073-0074) but not for the second device having the second device type (for congestion level 1, no users except the public safety users QoS are modified; for congestion level 2, QoS of basic plan users/other users except the public safety user and gold plan user is not modified, Par 0058-0059, Par 0062-0063, Par 0070, Par 0073-0074).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
8. 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.
9. Claims 1-2, 4, 10, 14, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hoffner et al (US 20210112436, hereinafter referred to as Hoffner) in view of Jeong et al (US 20140204754, hereinafter referred to as Jeong).
Re claim 1, Hoffner teaches a system (Fig. 5-6) for modifying quality of service (QoS) flow for devices having particular device types based on cell congestion (modifying QoS for higher priority/public safety user, gold plan user during congestion, Par 0059, Par 0070, Par 0074), the system comprising:
(i) one or more processors (420, Fig. 4) (Par 0047-0048); and
(ii) one or more computer-readable media storing computer-usable instructions (memory 430, Fig. 4) (Par 0047, Par 0049) that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to:
(iii) receive congestion level information associated with a node (congestion level indication from the eNodeB/gNodeB, Par 0055-0056, Par 0064, Par 0068-0069, Par 0073-0074) indication that a congestion level of a cell associated with the node exceeds a predetermined threshold (congestion level 1 indication exceeds not congested threshold; congestion level 2 indication exceeds congestion level 1 threshold) (Fig. 5-6, Par 0010, Par 0054-0056, Par 0063-0064, Par 0068-0069, Par 0073-0074 --- Hoffner discloses to send congestion level indication but does not explicitly disclose to include the congestion level indication in a header of a packet); and
(iv) based on the congestion level information (congestion level 1, congestion level 2 indication from the eNodeB/gNodeB), modify a quality of service (QoS) flow for devices of a first device type (modifying QoS for high priority public safety user, gold plan user, Par 0010, Par 0058-0059, Par 0062-0063, Par 0065, Par 0069-0070, Par 0073-0074) but not for devices of a second device type (for congestion level 1, no users except the public safety users QoS are modified; for congestion level 2, QoS of basic plan users/other users except the public safety user and gold plan user is not modified, Par 0058-0059, Par 0062-0063, Par 0070, Par 0073-0074).
Hoffner teaches to send congestion level indication but does not explicitly disclose to include the congestion level information in a header of a packet.
Jeong teaches to include the congestion level information in a header of a packet (Fig. 2, Par 0019, Par 0057-0059).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hoffner by including the feature to include the congestion level information in a header of a packet, as taught by Jeong for the purpose of efficiently providing congestion state information of a RAN node by reducing signaling load in the network, as taught by Jeong (Par 0054-0055).
Re claim 2, Hoffner does not explicitly disclose that the congestion level information comprises a percentage of congestion of the cell.
Jeong teaches that the congestion level information comprises a percentage of congestion of the cell (level of congestion is expressed as percentage information, Par 0057).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hoffner by including the feature that the congestion level information comprises a percentage of congestion of the cell, as taught by Jeong for the purpose of efficiently providing congestion state information of a RAN node by reducing signaling load in the network, as taught by Jeong (Par 0054-0055).
Re claim 4, Hoffner teaches that the congestion level is at least one of throughput or load (load monitoring/reporting indicating congestion level) (Par 0054-0056, Par 0068-0069).
Re claim 10, Hoffner teaches a method for modifying quality of service (QoS) flow for devices having particular device types based on cell congestion (modifying QoS for higher priority/public safety user, gold plan user during congestion, Par 0059, Par 0070, Par 0074, Fig. 5-6), the method comprising:
(i) determining that a congestion level of a cell associated with a node exceeds a predetermined threshold (congestion level 1 exceeds not congested threshold; congestion level 2 exceeds congestion level 1 threshold) (Fig. 5-6, Par 0010, Par 0054-0056, Par 0063-0064, Par 0068-0069, Par 0073-0074), wherein the cell is providing communication to at least a first device having a first device type (public safety user, gold plan user) and a second device having a second device type (basic plan users/other users except the public safety user and gold plan user) (Par 0010, Par 0058-0059, Par 0062-0063, Par 0065, Par 0069-0070, Par 0073-0074);
(ii) include an indication that the congestion level of the cell exceeds the predetermined threshold (congestion level 1 indication exceeds not congested threshold; congestion level 2 indication exceeds congestion level 1 threshold) (Fig. 5-6, Par 0054-0056, Par 0063-0064, Par 0068-0069, Par 0073-0074); and (iii) based on the indication that the congestion level of the cell exceeds the predetermined threshold (congestion level 1 indication, congestion level 2 indication), modifying a quality of service (QoS) flow for devices having the first device type (modifying QoS for high priority public safety user, gold plan user, Par 0010, Par 0058-0059, Par 0062-0063, Par 0065, Par 0069-0070, Par 0073-0074) but not for devices having the second device type (for congestion level 1, no users except the public safety users QoS are modified; for congestion level 2, QoS of basic plan users/other users except the public safety user and gold plan user is not modified, Par 0058-0059, Par 0062-0063, Par 0070, Par 0073-0074).
Hoffner teaches to send an indication that congestion level exceeds a threshold but does not explicitly disclose to provide the congestion level indication in a modified header.
Hoffner does not disclose the feature that (iv) prior to transmitting a packet to a component of a wireless communications network, modifying a header associated with the packet to include an indication that the congestion level of the cell exceeds the predetermined threshold.
Re component (iv), Jeong teaches that
(iv) prior to transmitting a packet to a component of a wireless communications network prior to transmitting (prior to transmitting user data packet to the core network/P-GW, Fig. 2, Par 0055, Par 0057), modifying a header associated with the packet (modifying a header of the user data packet) to include an indication that the congestion level of the cell exceeds the predetermined threshold (including congestion state information in the header of a user data packet) (Fig. 2, Par 0019, Par 0057-0062).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hoffner by including the step that (iv) prior to transmitting a packet to a component of a wireless communications network, modifying a header associated with the packet to include an indication that the congestion level of the cell exceeds the predetermined threshold, as taught by Jeong for the purpose of efficiently providing congestion state information of a RAN node by reducing signaling load in the network, as taught by Jeong (Par 0054-0055).
Re claim 14, Hoffner teaches that the component (MME/AMF, SGW/PGW/UPF, PCRF/PCF) is part of a core network of the wireless communications network (Fig. 5, Par 0054-0058).
Re claim 18, Hoffner does not explicitly disclose that the congestion level information is communicated to the component of the wireless communications network by modifying a header associated with the packet to include an indication that the congestion level of the cell exceeds the predetermined threshold.
Jeong teaches that the congestion level information is communicated to the component of the wireless communications network by modifying a header associated with the packet (modifying a header of the user data packet) to include an indication that the congestion level of the cell exceeds the predetermined threshold (including congestion state information in the header of a user data packet) (Fig. 2, Par 0019, Par 0057-0062).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hoffner by including the step that the congestion level information is communicated to the component of the wireless communications network by modifying a header associated with the packet to include an indication that the congestion level of the cell exceeds the predetermined threshold, as taught by Jeong for the purpose of efficiently providing congestion state information of a RAN node by reducing signaling load in the network, as taught by Jeong (Par 0054-0055).
10. Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hoffner and Jeong as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Toncelli (US 20170005933, hereinafter referred to as Toncelli).
Re claim 3, Hoffner does not explicitly disclose that the congestion level information comprises a 0 or a 1, indicating congestion or no congestion.
Toncelli teaches that the congestion level information comprises a 0 or a 1, indicating congestion or no congestion (Fig. 9, Par 0079).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hoffner by including the feature that the congestion level information comprises a 0 or a 1, indicating congestion or no congestion, as taught by Toncelli for the purpose of efficiently handling congestion in a wireless network, as taught by Toncelli (Par 0001, Par 0005-0007).
11. Claims 5-6, 11-12, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hoffner and Jeong as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Ke et al (US 20250203449, hereinafter referred to as Ke).
Re claims 5, 11, Hoffner does not explicitly disclose that the congestion level corresponds to congestion in the uplink or downlink.
Ke teaches that the congestion level corresponds to congestion in the uplink or downlink (downlink congestion, uplink congestion, Fig. 9a-b) (Par 0639-0645).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hoffner by including the feature that the congestion level corresponds to congestion in the uplink or downlink, as taught by Ke for the purpose of monitoring per DRB congestion to provide per QoS flow congestion reporting, as taught by Ke (Par 0048-0052).
Re claims 6, 12, 19, Hoffner does not explicitly disclose that the QoS flow comprises a downlink speed of data sent from a component of a wireless communications network to the node.
Ke teaches that the QoS flow comprises a downlink speed of data sent from a component of a wireless communications network to the node (downlink congestion at the RAN node occurs when the data reception rate from the core network (N3 interface) is greater than data sending rate) (Fig. 2, Fig. 9a-b, Par 0069-0073, Par 0480, Par 0483, Par 0638-0642).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hoffner by including the feature that the QoS flow comprises a downlink speed of data sent from a component of a wireless communications network to the node, as taught by Ke for the purpose of monitoring per DRB congestion to provide per QoS flow congestion reporting, as taught by Ke (Par 0048-0052).
12. Claims 7, 13, 15, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hoffner and Jeong as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Kathuria et al (US 20170127218 A1, hereinafter referred to as Kathuria).
Re claims 7, 13, 20, Hoffner does not explicitly disclose that the first device type is fixed wireless access.
Kathuria teaches that the first device type is fixed wireless access (MTC device) (Par 0027-0028, Par 0059).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hoffner by including the feature that the first device type is fixed wireless access, as taught by Kathuria for the purpose of managing machine-type communication to avoid degradation of mobile network performance, as taught by Kathuria (Par 0004-0006).
Re claim 15, Hoffner does not explicitly disclose to throttle fulfillment of a data request from the devices having the first device type.
Kathuria teaches to throttle fulfillment of a data request from the devices having the first device type (reducing trigger delivery rate) (Par 0007-0008, Par 0027-0028, Par 0050, Par 0059).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hoffner by including the step to throttle fulfillment of a data request from the devices having the first device type, as taught by Kathuria for the purpose of managing machine-type communication to avoid degradation of mobile network performance, as taught by Kathuria (Par 0004-0006).
13. Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hoffner and Jeong as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Frydman et al (US 20160345196, hereinafter referred to as Frydman).
Re claim 8, Hoffner does not explicitly disclose to delay the communication of acknowledgement (ACK) messages to the node.
Frydman teaches to delay the communication of acknowledgement (ACK) messages to the node (Par 0029-0030).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hoffner by including the feature to delay the communication of acknowledgement (ACK) messages to the node, as taught by Frydman for the purpose of reducing cell congestion levels in mobile networks, as taught by Frydman (Par 0001).
14. Claims 9 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hoffner and Jeong as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Cuny (US 20030179720, hereinafter referred to as Cuny).
Re claim 9, Hoffner does not explicitly disclose to queue the communication of ACK messages to the node.
Cuny teaches to queue the communication of ACK messages to the node (Abstract, Par 0031-0034).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hoffner by including the feature to queue the communication of ACK messages to the node, as taught by Cuny for the purpose of controlling data packet transmission rate to reduce packet congestion in wireless packet switched networks, as taught by Cuny (Par 0001, Par 0017).
Re claim 16, Hoffner does not explicitly disclose that throttling comprises queuing TCP uplink ACK messages.
Cuny teaches that throttling comprises queuing TCP uplink ACK messages (Abstract, Par 0031-0034).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hoffner by including the step that throttling comprises queuing TCP uplink ACK messages, as taught by Cuny for the purpose of controlling data packet transmission rate to reduce packet congestion in wireless packet switched networks, as taught by Cuny (Par 0001, Par 0017).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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.
In re
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HARUN UR R CHOWDHURY whose telephone number is (571)270-3895. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9AM-5PM.
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, Kwang B Yao can be reached at 5712723182. 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.
/HARUN CHOWDHURY/ Examiner, Art Unit 2473
/HARUN/HARUN CHOWDHURY/
Prosecution Insights