DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDSs), submitted on 14 December 2023 and 27 February 2026, were filed after the mailing date of the patent application on 14 December 2023. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings, received on 14 December 2023, are acceptable for examination.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Objections
Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities: Said claim recites “the same common ID” and “the common ID”. Here, both recitations do not comply with antecedent basis. In order to improve claim clarity, Examiner respectfully suggests amending to “an identical common ID” and “the identical common ID” respectively. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities: Said claim recites “its own”. Here, while the recitation is clearly referring to “the network”, Examiner respectfully suggests amending “its own management scheme” to “the management scheme of the network”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: Said claim recites a contingent limitation. Examiner reminds Applicant that "[the] broadest reasonable interpretation of a method (or process) claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met", See MPEP 2111.04 and See Ex Parte Schulhauser, Appeal No. 2015-007421 (Jan. 31, 2016). Here, the contingent limitation, (i.e. “in case a communication control model concerning communication control between a communication device and a network that provides communication service to the communication device can be managed by the communication device and the network under different management schemes”) is not a condition that is required to occur, therefore the entire limitation is not required to occur. Given that the limitation is not required to occur, said limitation does not possess patentable weight. Examiner has, in the interest of compact prosecution, treated the limitation. In order to improve claim clarity, Examiner respectfully suggests amending to “in [[case]] response to a communication control model concerning communication control between a communication device and a network that provides communication service to the communication device [[can]] being be managed by the communication device and the network under different management schemes”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 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 1-3 and 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Zhang et al. (US 20260032466 A1 using the PCT Filing Date of 12 January 2023 corresponding to PCT/CN2023/071894; hereinafter referred to as “Zhang”).
Regarding Claim 1, Zhang discloses a communication control apparatus comprising at least one processor (¶213-214 & Fig. 9, Zhang discloses a network node, such as a base station (BS), comprising processor 906) that performs:
in case a communication control model concerning communication control between a communication device and a network that provides communication service to the communication device can be managed by the communication device and the network under different management schemes, causing an ID associator to associate a communication-device- side ID of the communication control model managed by the communication device and a network-side ID of the communication control model managed by the network (¶178-179 & Fig. 6 (612) & ¶183-187, Zhang discloses that reception, by the BS, of a first set of artificial intelligence (AI) models available at the UE that causes the BS to associate the set of AI models at the UE to AI models at the BS/network that have been kept, deleted, finetuned, updated, or default in response to both the UE and the BS managing the use of the AI model for communication between the UE and the BS. ¶182, Zhang discloses that each AI model has a corresponding Model ID or model index. Examiner correlates a "Model ID or model index" corresponding to an AI model at the UE to the communication-device-side ID. Examiner correlates a "Model ID or model index" corresponding to the AI Model at the BS to the network-side ID); and
causing an identifying information provider to provide identifying information from at least one of the communication device and the network to the other of the communication device (¶183-194 & Fig. 6 (613), Zhang discloses sending, by the BS to the UE, a second set of artificial intelligence (AI) models where the second set of AI models may be AI models, determined by the BS, to be kept, deleted, finetuned, updated, or fallback. Examiner correlates the BS and the network corresponding to the BS to "an identifying information provider") and the network to identify the correct communication control model in accordance with the association between the communication-device-side ID and the network-side ID (¶183-194 & Fig. 6 (613), Zhang discloses that the BS and the network corresponding to the BS identifies the AI model at the BS based upon the association between the "Model ID or model index" corresponding to the AI model at the UE and the "Model ID or model index" corresponding to the AI model at the BS).
Regarding Claim 2, Zhang discloses the communication control apparatus according to claim 1.
Zhang further discloses wherein the identifying information provider provides the identifying information from the network to the communication device to identify the communication-device-side ID (¶183-194 & Fig. 6 (613), Zhang discloses that the BS/network provides by sending, to the UE, a second set of artificial intelligence (AI) models where the second set of AI models may be AI models, determined by the BS, to be kept, deleted, finetuned, updated, or fallback. Examiner correlates the BS and the network corresponding to the BS to "an identifying information provider").
Regarding Claim 3, Zhang discloses the communication control apparatus according to claim 1.
Zhang further discloses wherein the communication-device-side ID and the network-side ID are different from each other (¶183-194 & Fig. 6 (613), Zhang discloses that the first set of AI models may be different from the second set of artificial intelligence (AI) models), and wherein the identifying information provider provides a second ID used by the other of the communication device and the network, which is associated with a first ID used by the one of the communication device and the network, from the one to the other as the identifying information (¶183-194 & Fig. 6 (613), Zhang discloses that the BS/network can provide by sending, to the UE, at least two "Model ID or model index" corresponding to an ML model of the second set of artificial intelligence (AI) models where the AI model of the second set of AI models may be an AI model that is finetuned or updated from an AI model from the first set of AI models at the UE. Here, an updated AI model of the first set of AI models would have the same “Model ID or model index” as the original AI model at the UE).
Regarding Claim 9, Zhang discloses the communication control apparatus according to claim 1.
Zhang further discloses wherein the at least one processor performs, causing a checker to check whether the communication device and the network manage the communication control model under different management schemes (¶179-180 & ¶182-183 & Fig. 6 (612 & 613), Zhang discloses communication, between the UE and the BS/network, to determine a first set of AI models at the UE and a second set of AI models at the BS. Here, the AI model at the UE may be the same or different than the AI model at the BS. Examiner correlated the use of different AI models at the UE and the BS as “the communication model under different management schemes”), and wherein the identifying information provider provides the identifying information from at least one of the communication device and the network to the other, in case it has been confirmed that the communication device and the network manage the communication control model under different management schemes (¶179-180 & ¶182-183 & Fig. 6 (612 & 613), Zhang discloses sending, by the BS/network to the UE, at least one AI model from the second set of AI models at the BS where the second set of AI models may be a default AI model, an updated AI model, a finetuned AI model, or a fallback AI model. Here, an AI model at the UE being different than the AI model at the BS is correlated to “under different management schemes”).
Regarding Claim 10, Claim 10 is rejected on the same basis as Claim 1.
Regarding Claim 11, Zhang discloses a computer-readable medium storing a communication control program causing at least one processer (¶213-216 & Fig. 9, Zhang discloses a computer-readable medium storing computer-executable instructions to cause the processor to implement a method) to perform:
in case a communication control model concerning communication control between a communication device and a network that provides communication service to the communication device can be managed by the communication device and the network under different management schemes, associating a communication-device-side ID of the communication control model managed by the communication device and a network-side ID of the communication control model managed by the network (¶178-179 & Fig. 6 (612) & ¶183-187, Zhang discloses that reception, by the BS, of a first set of artificial intelligence (AI) models available at the UE that causes the BS to associate the set of AI models at the UE to AI models at the BS/network that have been kept, deleted, finetuned, updated, or default in response to both the UE and the BS managing the use of the AI model for communication between the UE and the BS. ¶182, Zhang discloses that each AI model has a corresponding Model ID or model index. Examiner correlates a "Model ID or model index" corresponding to an AI model at the UE to the communication-device-side ID. Examiner correlates a "Model ID or model index" corresponding to the AI Model at the BS to the network-side ID); and
providing identifying information from at least one of the communication device and the network to the other of the communication device (¶183-194 & Fig. 6 (613), Zhang discloses sending, by the BS to the UE, a second set of artificial intelligence (AI) models where the second set of AI models may be AI models, determined by the BS, to be kept, deleted, finetuned, updated, or fallback. Examiner correlates the BS and the network corresponding to the BS to "an identifying information provider") and the network to identify the correct communication control model in accordance with the association between the communication-device-side ID and the network-side ID (¶183-194 & Fig. 6 (613), Zhang discloses that the BS and the network corresponding to the BS identifies the AI model at the BS based upon the association between the "Model ID or model index" corresponding to the AI model at the UE and the "Model ID or model index" corresponding to the AI model at the BS).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-8 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Internet Communications
Applicant is encouraged to submit a written authorization for Internet communications (PTO/SB/439, http://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/sb0439.pdf) in the instant patent application to authorize the examiner to communicate with the applicant via email. The authorization will allow the examiner to better practice compact prosecution. The written authorization can be submitted via one of the following methods only: (1) Central Fax which can be found in the Conclusion section of this Office action; (2) regular postal mail; (3) EFS WEB; or (4) the service window on the Alexandria campus. EFS web is the recommended way to submit the form since this allows the form to be entered into the file wrapper within the same day (system dependent). Written authorization submitted via other methods, such as direct fax to the examiner or email, will not be accepted. See MPEP § 502.03.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIC NOWLIN whose telephone number is (313)446-6544. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 12:00PM-10:00PM.
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, Michael Thier can be reached at (571) 272-2832. 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.
/ERIC NOWLIN/Examiner, Art Unit 2474