DETAILED ACTION
This communication is in response to applicant’s response filed under 37 C.F.R. §1.111 in response to a non-final office action. Claims 1, 2, 6, 15-26, 35-36, 39, and 44 have been amended. Claims 1-26, 35-36, 39, and 44 are subject to examination
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims 1-22, 23-26, and 44 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.
Applicant's arguments with respect to claims 35-36 and 39 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive for the following reasons:
Applicant’s Argument (Claims 35-36 and 39):
The Applicant argues in substance that Cheng and Huawei do not disclose "receiv[ing], from another network entity, a request for a user equipment (UE) context, the UE context including a quality of experience (QoE) context of the UE, the QoE context indicating one or more QoE configurations for the UE.”
Examiner’s Response:
The examiner respectfully disagrees. Cheng in view of Huawei teaches “receiv[ing], from another network entity, a request for a user equipment (UE) context, the UE context including a quality of experience (QoE) context of the UE, the QoE context indicating one or more QoE configurations for the UE”. For example, Cheng [0190] teaches “transmitting, from the second master node to the first master node, a Retrieve UE Context Request message,” which can be directly mapped to “receiv[ing], from another network entity, a request for a user equipment (UE) context”. Huawei pg. 6 teaches “QoE measurement configuration for a UE can be fetched from the node hosting the UE Context” and “the UE Application layer measurement configuration IE includes the QoE configuration parameters within ... the Retrieve UE context Response message”, which can be mapped directly to “the UE context including a quality of experience (QoE) context of the UE, the QoE context indicating one or more QoE configurations for the UE”. By this rationale, Cheng in view of Huawei teaches the amended limitations.
Regarding all other arguments presented by the applicant, the arguments are substantially the same as those which have already been addressed above and in the interest of brevity, the examiner directs the applicant to those responses above. As a result of the amendments to the claims, the Examiner has reformatted the rejection. See updated rejection below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 6-11, 14, and 44 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Hu et al. (US 2023/0308925 A1, hereinafter “Hu”).
Regarding Claim 1, Hu teaches a user equipment (UE) for wireless communication, comprising: one or more memories (Hu: the terminal 1100 includes a processor, a memory, see paragraph [0344]); and
one or more processors, coupled to the one or more memories, configured to: receive, from a first network entity prior to entering an inactive state, one or more quality of experience (QoE) configurations associated with an application layer of the UE, the one or more QoE configurations identifying one or more QoE measurements corresponding to one or more service types indicated by the one or more QoE configurations (Hu: S701: A base station #1 sends first application layer measurement configuration information to UE. Before S701, the base station #1 can obtain QoE measurement configuration information from a CN, an OAM, or an EM, so that the base station #1 obtains the first application layer measurement configuration information ... The base station #1 sends a service type corresponding to the first application layer measurement configuration information to the UE ... S703: A network side notifies the UE to enter an RRC_INACTIVE state, see paragraphs [0237]-[0239] and Fig. 7); and
perform, based at least in part on transitioning from the inactive state to a connected state with a second network entity, at least one operation for the one or more QoE configurations (Hu: S705: The base station #2 sends an RRC resume message ... to the UE. The RRC resume message indicates whether the UE retains the first application layer measurement configuration, that is, whether to continue previous QoE measurement, see paragraphs [0252]-[0253] and Fig. 7).
Regarding Claim 6, Hu teaches the UE of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: receive, from the second network entity, a message that includes an indication relating to QoE, wherein the message including the indication indicates that the second network entity supports QoE operations (Hu: S705: The base station #2 sends an RRC resume message ... to the UE. The RRC resume message indicates whether the UE retains the first application layer measurement configuration, that is, whether to continue previous QoE measurement, see paragraphs [0252]-[0253]).
Regarding Claim 7, Hu teaches the UE of claim 6, wherein the indication indicates that the UE is to resume measurement and reporting for all QoE configurations, and wherein the at least one operation performed by the UE includes resuming measurement and reporting for the one or more QoE configurations (Hu: The application layer measurement configuration information is used for the UE to measure and report an application layer indicator, see paragraph [0154]; The RRC resume message indicates whether the UE retains the first application layer measurement configuration, that is, whether to continue previous QoE measurement ... S706: The UE receives the RRC resume message, and the AS of the UE continues to retain ... the first application layer measurement configuration, see paragraphs [0253]-[0259]).
Regarding Claim 8, Hu teaches the UE of claim 6, wherein the indication indicates at least one QoE configuration, of the one or more QoE configurations, that is to be released, and wherein the at least one operation performed by the UE includes releasing the at least one QoE configuration and resuming measurement and reporting for any other QoE configurations of the one or more QoE configurations (Hu: The RRC resume message indicates whether the UE retains the first application layer measurement configuration, that is, whether to continue previous QoE measurement ... S706: The UE receives the RRC resume message, and the AS of the UE continues to retain or release the first application layer measurement configuration, see paragraphs [0253]-[0259]). *Examiner’s Note: because there is only one QoE configuration, Hu does not need to teach “resuming measurement and reporting for any other QoE configurations of the one or more QoE configurations” because there are not “any other QoE configurations”.
Regarding Claim 9, Hu teaches the UE of claim 6, wherein the indication indicates at least one QoE configuration, of the one or more QoE configurations, for which measurement and reporting is to be resumed, and wherein the at least one operation performed by the UE includes resuming measurement and reporting for the at least one QoE configuration and releasing any other QoE configurations of the one or more QoE configurations (Hu: The RRC resume message indicates whether the UE retains the first application layer measurement configuration, that is, whether to continue previous QoE measurement ... S706: The UE receives the RRC resume message, and the AS of the UE continues to retain or release the first application layer measurement configuration, see paragraphs [0253]-[0259]). *Examiner’s Note: because there is only one QoE configuration, Hu does not need to teach “releasing measurement and reporting for any other QoE configurations of the one or more QoE configurations” because there are not “any other QoE configurations”.
Regarding Claim 10, Hu teaches the UE of claim 6, wherein the indication indicates at least one QoE configuration, of the one or more QoE configurations, for which measurement and reporting is to be resumed, and wherein the at least one operation performed by the UE includes resuming measurement and reporting for the at least one QoE configuration and suspending any other QoE configurations of the one or more QoE configurations (Hu: The RRC resume message indicates whether the UE retains the first application layer measurement configuration, that is, whether to continue previous QoE measurement ... S706: The UE receives the RRC resume message, and the AS of the UE continues to retain or release the first application layer measurement configuration, see paragraphs [0253]-[0259]). *Examiner’s Note: because there is only one QoE configuration, Hu does not need to teach “suspending measurement and reporting for any other QoE configurations of the one or more QoE configurations” because there are not “any other QoE configurations”.
Regarding Claim 11, Hu teaches the UE of claim 6, wherein the indication indicates one or more new QoE configurations, and wherein the at least one operation performed by the UE includes releasing the one or more QoE configurations and applying the one or more new QoE configurations (Hu: The AS of the UE determines, based on the RRC resume message, that is, the first message, sent by the base station #2, whether to retain the first application layer measurement configuration, see paragraph [0260]; The first message includes second application layer measurement configuration information ... When the second application layer measurement configuration information is new application layer measurement configuration information, the AS of the terminal forwards the received second application layer measurement configuration information to the upper layer of the AS of the terminal ... when the second application layer measurement configuration information is new application layer measurement configuration information ... the terminal can determine to not retain the previously received first application layer measurement configuration information, see paragraph [0219]).
Regarding Claim 14, Hu teaches the UE of claim 6, wherein the indication indicates at least one QoE configuration, of the one or more QoE configurations, for which the UE is to resume reporting, and wherein the at least one operation performed by the UE includes resuming measurement for the one or more QoE configurations, resuming reporting for the at least one QoE configuration, and pausing reporting for any other QoE configurations of the one or more QoE configurations (Hu: The application layer measurement configuration information is used for the UE to measure and report an application layer indicator, see paragraph [0154]; The RRC resume message indicates whether the UE retains the first application layer measurement configuration, that is, whether to continue previous QoE measurement ... S706: The UE receives the RRC resume message, and the AS of the UE continues to retain or release the first application layer measurement configuration, see paragraphs [0253]-[0259]). *Examiner’s Note: because there is only one QoE configuration, Hu does not need to teach “pausing reporting for any other QoE configurations of the one or more QoE configurations” because there are not “any other QoE configurations”.
Regarding Claim 44, the limitations of claim 44 are substantially the same as the limitations of claim 1, and therefore claim 44 is rejected for the same reasons.
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.
Claims 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hu in view of Ericsson (3GPP R3-210529).
Regarding Claim 2, Hu teaches the UE of claim 1, but does not explicitly teach, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: receive, from the second network entity, a message that does not include an indication relating to QoE, wherein the message not including the indication indicates that the second network entity does not support QoE operations.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Ericsson teaches, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: receive, from the second network entity, a message that does not include an indication relating to QoE, wherein the message not including the indication indicates that the second network entity does not support QoE operations. (Ericsson: In inter-RAT and/or inter-system mobility, it is possible that the target RAT does not support the QoE measurement signaling and configurations. If the target RAT does not support the source RAT configurations (including QoE configuration) the UE may receive a FullConfig from target RAT, see pg. 7 Observations 5-6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Hu to include the features as taught by Ericsson above in order to enable measuring the impact of mobility in NR (Ericsson: see pg. 8 sec. 6.6).
Regarding Claim 3, Hu-Ericsson teaches the UE of claim 2, wherein the at least one operation performed by the UE includes releasing the one or more QoE configurations (Hu: S706: The UE receives the RRC resume message, and the AS of the UE continues to retain or release the first application layer measurement configuration, see paragraph [0259]).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hu-Ericsson in view of Mildh et al. (US 2020/0120742 A1, hereinafter “Mildh”).
Regarding Claim 4, Hu-Ericsson teaches the UE of claim 2, but does not explicitly teach, wherein the at least one operation performed by the UE includes suspending the one or more QoE configurations.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Mildh teaches the at least one operation performed by the UE includes suspending the one or more QoE configurations (Mildh: In another case, all measurements related to reporting upon entering RRC_CONNECTED state are suspended, see paragraph [0076]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Hu-Ericsson to include the features as taught by Mildh above in order to simplify UE re-configuration (Mildh: see paragraph [0017]).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hu-Ericsson in view of 3GPP (TR 38.890 V1.0.0).
Regarding Claim 5, Hu-Ericsson teaches the UE of claim 2, wherein the at least one operation performed by the UE includes resuming measurement for the one or more QoE configurations (Hu: The RRC resume message indicates whether the UE retains the first application layer measurement configuration, that is, whether to continue previous QoE measurement, see paragraph [0253]).
Hu-Ericsson does not explicitly teach pausing reporting for the one or more QoE configurations.
However, in the same field of endeavor, 3GPP teaches pausing reporting for the one or more QoE configurations (3GPP: RRC signaling is used by the gNB to indicate the UE to pause or resume the QoE reporting, see pg. 10 sec. 6.4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Hu-Ericsson to include the features as taught by 3GPP above in order to prevent RAN overload (3GPP: see pg. 10 sec. 6.5).
Claims 12-13 and 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hu in view of 3GPP.
Regarding Claim 12, Hu teaches the UE of claim 6, wherein the at least one operation performed by the UE includes resuming measurement for the one or more QoE configurations (Hu: The RRC resume message indicates whether the UE retains the first application layer measurement configuration, that is, whether to continue previous QoE measurement, see paragraph [0253]).
Hu does not explicitly teach wherein the indication indicates that the UE is to pause reporting for all QoE configurations, and wherein the at least one operation performed by the UE includes pausing reporting for the one or more QoE configurations.
However, in the same field of endeavor, 3GPP teaches, wherein the indication indicates that the UE is to pause reporting for all QoE configurations, and wherein the at least one operation performed by the UE includes pausing reporting for the one or more QoE configurations (3GPP: RRC signaling is used by the gNB to indicate the UE to pause or resume the QoE reporting, see pg. 10 sec. 6.4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Hu to include the features as taught by 3GPP above in order to prevent RAN overload (3GPP: see pg. 10 sec. 6.5).
Regarding Claim 13, Hu teaches the UE of claim 6, wherein the at least one operation performed by the UE includes resuming measurement for the one or more QoE configurations (Hu: The RRC resume message indicates whether the UE retains the first application layer measurement configuration, that is, whether to continue previous QoE measurement, see paragraph [0253]).
Hu does not explicitly teach, wherein the indication indicates at least one QoE configuration, of the one or more QoE configurations, for which the UE is to pause reporting, and wherein the at least one operation performed by the UE includes pausing reporting for the at least one QoE configuration configurations, and resuming reporting for any other QoE configurations of the one or more QoE configurations.
However, in the same field of endeavor, 3GPP teaches the indication indicates at least one QoE configuration, of the one or more QoE configurations, for which the UE is to pause reporting, and wherein the at least one operation performed by the UE includes pausing reporting for the at least one QoE configuration configurations, and resuming reporting for any other QoE configurations of the one or more QoE configurations (3GPP: RRC signaling is used by the gNB to indicate the UE to pause or resume the QoE reporting, see pg. 10 sec. 6.4). *Examiner’s Note: because there is only one QoE configuration, Hu-3GPP does not need to teach “resuming reporting for any other QoE configurations of the one or more QoE configurations” because there are not “any other QoE configurations”.
The rationale and motivation for adding the teaching of 3GPP are the same as the rationale and motivation for claim 12.
Regarding Claim 15, Hu teaches the UE of claim 6, wherein the indication indicates that the UE is to resume measurement and reporting for at least one QoE configuration of the one or more QoE configurations (Hu: The application layer measurement configuration information is used for the UE to measure and report an application layer indicator, see paragraph [0154]; The RRC resume message indicates whether the UE retains the first application layer measurement configuration, that is, whether to continue previous QoE measurement, see paragraph [0253]).
Hu does not explicitly teach, wherein a signaling radio bearer for QoE reporting is not configured for the UE by the second network entity, and wherein the at least one operation performed by the UE includes pausing reporting for the at least one QoE configuration and releasing a signaling radio bearer configuration for QoE reporting of the UE.
However, in the same field of endeavor, 3GPP teaches, wherein a signaling radio bearer for QoE reporting is not configured for the UE by the second network entity (3GPP: UE AS layer sends the QoE report to NG-RAN node via a separate SRB (separate from current SRBs) in NR, see pg. 7 sec. 6.1.1), and wherein the at least one operation performed by the UE includes pausing reporting for the at least one QoE configuration (3GPP: RRC signaling is used by the gNB to indicate the UE to pause or resume the QoE reporting, see pg. 10 sec. 6.5) and releasing a signaling radio bearer configuration for QoE reporting of the UE (3GPP: RAN may need to release an ongoing ... QoE reporting configuration, see pg. 10 sec. 6.4).
The rationale and motivation for adding the teaching of 3GPP are the same as the rationale and motivation for claim 12.
Regarding Claim 16, Hu teaches the UE of claim 6, wherein the indication indicates that the UE is to resume measurement and reporting for at least one QoE configuration of the one or more QoE configurations (Hu: The application layer measurement configuration information is used for the UE to measure and report an application layer indicator, see paragraph [0154]; The RRC resume message indicates whether the UE retains the first application layer measurement configuration, that is, whether to continue previous QoE measurement, see paragraph [0253]).
Hu does not explicitly teach wherein a signaling radio bearer configuration for QoE reporting of the UE is released or suspended by the second network entity, and wherein the at least one operation performed by the UE includes pausing reporting for the at least one QoE configuration and releasing or suspending the signaling radio bearer configuration for QoE reporting of the UE.
However, in the same field of endeavor, 3GPP teaches, wherein a signaling radio bearer configuration for QoE reporting of the UE is released by the second network entity (3GPP: UE AS layer sends the QoE report to NG-RAN node via a separate SRB, see pg. 7 sec. 6.1.1; RAN may need to release an ongoing ... QoE reporting configuration, see pg. 10 sec. 6.4), and wherein the at least one operation performed by the UE includes pausing reporting for the at least one QoE configuration (3GPP: RRC signaling is used by the gNB to indicate the UE to pause or resume the QoE reporting, see pg. 10 sec. 6.5) and releasing the signaling radio bearer configuration for QoE reporting of the UE (RAN may need to release an ongoing ... QoE reporting configuration, see pg. 10 sec. 6.4).
The rationale and motivation for adding the teaching of 3GPP are the same as the rationale and motivation for claim 12.
Regarding Claim 17, Hu teaches the UE of claim 1, wherein the at least one operation performed by the UE includes releasing or suspending at least one QoE configuration, of the one or more QoE configurations (Hu: S706: The UE receives the RRC resume message, and the AS of the UE continues to retain or release the first application layer measurement configuration, see paragraph [0259]).
Hu does not explicitly teach based at least in part on a determination that the at least one QoE configuration is not supported by a radio access technology used by the second network entity.
However, in the same field of endeavor, 3GPP teaches, based at least in part on a determination that the at least one QoE configuration is not supported by a radio access technology used by the second network entity (3GPP: RAN may need to release an ongoing QoE measurement configuration or QoE reporting configuration, e.g. if handing over to a network that does not support this, see pg. 10 sec. 6.4).
The rationale and motivation for adding the teaching of 3GPP are the same as the rationale and motivation for claim 12.
Regarding Claim 18, Hu teaches the UE of claim 1, wherein the at least one operation performed by the UE includes resuming measurement for the one or more QoE configurations (Hu: S706: The UE receives the RRC resume message, and the AS of the UE continues to retain or release the first application layer measurement configuration, see paragraph [0259]).
Hu does not explicitly teach the at least one operation performed by the UE includes pausing reporting for at least one QoE configuration, of the one or more QoE configurations (3GPP: RRC signaling is used by the gNB to indicate the UE to pause or resume the QoE reporting, see pg. 10 sec. 6.5), based at least in part on a determination that the at least one QoE configuration is not supported by a radio access technology used by the second network entity (3GPP: RAN may need to release an ongoing QoE measurement configuration or QoE reporting configuration, e.g. if handing over to a network that does not support this, see pg. 10 sec. 6.4).
The rationale and motivation for adding the teaching of 3GPP are the same as the rationale and motivation for claim 12.
Claims 19, 22-23, and 25-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hu in view of Cheng et al. (WO 2020/147163 A1, hereinafter “Cheng”).
Regarding Claim 19, Hu teaches the UE of claim 1, but does not explicitly teach, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: receive, from the second network entity, a system information message that indicates whether the second network entity supports QoE operations.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Cheng teaches, the one or more processors are further configured to: receive, from the second network entity, a system information message that indicates whether the second network entity supports QoE operations (Cheng: The measurement configuration may be provided, for example, in ... a system information broadcast (SIB) message, see paragraph [0089]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Hu to include the features as taught by Cheng above in order to improve performance of a UE (Cheng: see paragraph [0083]).
Regarding Claim 22, Hu-Cheng teaches the UE of claim 19, wherein the at least one operation performed by the UE includes resuming measurement and reporting for the one or more QoE configurations, based at least in part on a message indicating that the second base station supports QoE operations (Hu: S705: The base station #2 sends an RRC resume message ... to the UE. The RRC resume message indicates whether the UE retains the first application layer measurement configuration, that is, whether to continue previous QoE measurement ... S706: The UE receives the RRC resume message, and the AS of the UE continues to retain or release the first application layer measurement configuration, see paragraphs [0252]-[0259]).
Cheng further teaches wherein the message is a system information message (Cheng: The measurement configuration may be provided, for example, in ... a system information broadcast (SIB) message, see paragraph [0089]).
The rationale and motivation for adding the teaching of Cheng are the same as the rationale and motivation for claim 19.
Regarding Claim 23, Hu teaches a network entity for wireless communication, comprising: one or more memories (Hu: The apparatus may further include one or more memories, where the memory is configured to be coupled to the processor, and the memory stores necessary program instructions and/or data of a base station, see paragraph [0090]); and
one or more processors, coupled to the one or more memories, configured to: receive, from another network entity that supports one or more quality of experience (QoE) configurations of a user equipment (UE), one or more QoE configurations, wherein the one or more QoE configurations identify one or more QoE measurements corresponding to one or more service types indicated by the one or more QoE configurations (Hu: In addition to the application layer measurement configuration information, the information received by the base station from the CN or the OAM or the EM may further include other QoE measurement information, for example, ... a QoE measurement service type, see paragraph [0148]); and
transmit, to the UE based at least in part on the UE transitioning from an inactive state to a connected state with the network entity, a message for resuming a connection of the UE with the network entity (Hu: S704: The UE initiates an RRC resume process on a base station #2 ... S705: The base station #2 sends an RRC resume message (RRC Resume message) to the UE, see paragraphs [0250]-[0252]).
Hu does not explicitly teach to receive a UE context of the UE.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Cheng teaches to receive a UE context of the UE (Cheng: method 1200 further comprises ... receiving, at the second master node from the first master node, a Retrieve UE Context Response message including a measurement configuration for the secondary node, see paragraph [0190]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Hu to include the features as taught by Cheng above in order to improve performance of a UE (Cheng: see paragraph [0083]).
Regarding Claim 25, Hu-Cheng teaches the network entity of claim 23, wherein the message includes an indication relating to measurement, wherein the message including the indication indicates that the network entity supports QoE operations (Hu: S705: The base station #2 sends an RRC resume message (RRC Resume message) to the UE. The RRC resume message indicates whether the UE retains the first application layer measurement configuration, that is, whether to continue previous QoE measurement, see paragraphs [0252]-[0253]).
Regarding Claim 26, Hu-Cheng teaches the network entity of claim 25, wherein the indication indicates at least one measurement configuration, of the one or more measurement configurations, for which the UE is to resume reporting (Hu: The RRC resume message indicates whether the UE retains the first application layer measurement configuration, that is, whether to continue previous QoE measurement, see paragraph [0253]; The application layer measurement configuration information is used for the UE to measure and report an application layer indicator, see paragraph [0154]).
Claims 20 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hu-Cheng in view of 3GPP.
Regarding Claim 20, Hu-Cheng teaches the UE of claim 19, wherein the at least one operation performed by the UE includes releasing or suspending the one or more QoE configurations (Hu: S706: The UE receives the RRC resume message, and the AS of the UE continues to retain or release the first application layer measurement configuration, see paragraph [0259]).
Cheng further teaches communicating network entity support for QoE operations via system information message (Cheng: The measurement configuration may be provided, for example, in ... a system information broadcast (SIB) message, see paragraph [0089]).
The rationale and motivation for adding the teaching of Cheng are the same as the rationale and motivation for claim 19.
Hu-Cheng does not explicitly teach, based at least in part on that the second network entity does not support QoE operations.
However, in the same field of endeavor, 3GPP teaches, based at least in part on that the second network entity does not support QoE operations (3GPP: RAN may need to release an ongoing QoE measurement configuration ... e.g. if handing over to a network that does not support this, see pg. 10 sec. 6.4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Hu to include the features as taught by 3GPP above in order to prevent RAN overload (3GPP: see pg. 10 sec. 6.5).
Regarding Claim 21, Hu-Cheng teaches the UE of claim 19, wherein the at least one operation performed by the UE includes resuming measurement for the one or more QoE configurations (Hu: S706: The UE receives the RRC resume message, and the AS of the UE continues to retain or release the first application layer measurement configuration, see paragraph [0259]).
Cheng further teaches communicating network entity support for QoE operations via system information message (Cheng: The measurement configuration may be provided, for example, in ... a system information broadcast (SIB) message, see paragraph [0089]).
The rationale and motivation for adding the teaching of Cheng are the same as the rationale and motivation for claim 19.
Hu-Cheng does not explicitly teach, pausing reporting for the one or more QoE configurations based at least in part on that the second network entity does not support QoE operations.
However, in the same field of endeavor, 3GPP teaches, pausing reporting for the one or more QoE configurations based at least in part on that the second network entity does not support QoE operations (3GPP: RAN may need to release an ongoing ... QoE reporting configuration, e.g. if handing over to a network that does not support this, see pg. 10 sec. 6.4; RRC signaling is used by the gNB to indicate the UE to pause or resume the QoE reporting, see pg. 10 sec. 6.5).
The rationale and motivation for adding the teaching of 3GPP are the same as the rationale and motivation for claim 20.
Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hu-Cheng in view of Ericsson.
Regarding Claim 24, Hu-Cheng teaches the network entity of claim 23, but does not explicitly teach, wherein the message does not include an indication relating to QoE, wherein the message not including the indication indicates that the network entity does not support QoE operations
However, in the same field of endeavor, Ericsson teaches, wherein the message does not include an indication relating to QoE, wherein the message not including the indication indicates that the network entity does not support QoE operations (Ericsson: In inter-RAT and/or inter-system mobility, it is possible that the target RAT does not support the QoE measurement signaling and configurations. If the target RAT does not support the source RAT configurations (including QoE configuration) the UE may receive a FullConfig from target RAT, see pg. 7 Observations 5-6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Hu-Cheng to include the features as taught by Ericsson above in order to enable measuring the impact of mobility in NR (Ericsson: see pg. 8 sec. 6.6).
Claims 35-36 and 39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheng in view of Huawei (3GPP R3-212519).
Regarding Claim 35, Cheng teaches a network entity for wireless communication, comprising: one or more memories (Cheng: Fig. 4, Base Station 110 has memory 442); and
one or more processors, coupled to the one or more memories (Cheng: Fig. 4, Base Station 110 has memory 442 coupled to processor 440), configured to: receive, from another network entity, a request for a user equipment (UE) context (Cheng: method 1200 further comprises transmitting, from the second master node to the first master node, a Retrieve UE Context Request message, see paragraph [0190]); and
transmit, to the other network entity, the UE context (Cheng: method 1200 further comprises ... receiving, at the second master node from the first master node, a Retrieve UE Context Response message including a measurement configuration for the secondary node, see paragraph [0190]).
Cheng does not explicitly teach, the UE context including a quality of experience (QoE) context of the UE, the QoE context indicating one or more QoE configurations for the UE.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Huawei teaches, the UE context including a quality of experience (QoE) context of the UE, the QoE context indicating one or more QoE configurations for the UE (Huawei: QoE measurement configuration for a UE can be fetched from the node hosting the UE Context, see section 6.6; the UE Application layer measurement configuration IE ... includes the QoE configuration parameters within the Trace Activation IE in ... the Retrieve UE context Response message, see pg. 6 proposal 7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Cheng to include the features as taught by Huawei above in order to support propagation of QoE measurement configuration during handover (Huawei: see pg. 6 par. 2).
Regarding Claim 36, Cheng-Huawei teaches the base station of claim 35, wherein: the UE context including the QoE context is transmitted regardless of whether the other base station supports QoE operations in accordance with the QoE context of the UE (Cheng: method 1200 further comprises ... receiving, at the second master node from the first master node, a Retrieve UE Context Response message including a measurement configuration for the secondary node, see paragraph [0190]; Huawei: If the Trace Activation IE is included in the RETRIEVE UE CONTEXT RESPONSE message which includes … the UE Application layer measurement configuration IE, the target NG-RAN node shall, if supported, initiate the requested trace session and QoE Measurement Collection function, see pg. 12).
The rationale and motivation for adding the teaching of Huawei are the same as the rationale and motivation for claim 35.
Regarding Claim 39, Cheng teaches a network entity for wireless communication, comprising: one or more memories (Cheng: Fig. 4, Base Station 110 has memory 442); and
one or more processors, coupled to the one or more memories (Cheng: Fig. 4, Base Station 110 has memory 442 coupled to processor 440), configured to: transmit, to another network entity, a request for a user equipment (UE) context (Cheng: method 1200 further comprises transmitting, from the second master node to the first master node, a Retrieve UE Context Request message, see paragraph [0190]); and
receive, from the other network entity, the UE context (Cheng: method 1200 further comprises ... receiving, at the second master node from the first master node, a Retrieve UE Context Response message including a measurement configuration for the secondary node, see paragraph [0190]).
Cheng does not explicitly teach, the UE context including a quality of experience (QoE) context of the UE, the QoE context indicating one or more QoE configurations for the UE.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Huawei teaches, the UE context including a quality of experience (QoE) context of the UE, the QoE context indicating one or more QoE configurations for the UE (Huawei: Introduce the UE Application layer measurement configuration IE which includes the QoE configuration parameters within the Trace Activation IE in the ... the Retrieve UE context Response message, see pg. 6 proposal 7).
The rationale and motivation for adding the teaching of Ericsson are the same as the rationale and motivation for claim 35.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any 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 PHILLIP J EGAN KEARNS whose telephone number is 571-272-4869. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 10-6 EST.
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, NOEL BEHARRY can be reached at 571-270-5630. 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.
/P.K./Examiner, Art Unit 2416
/NOEL R BEHARRY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2416