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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment filled on 04/09/2026 has been entered.
Claims 1, 10, 19 and 28.are amended.
Claims 2, 11 and 29 are cancelled.
Claims 1, 3-10, 12-18 and 28 are pending
Response to Arguments
Applicant arguments filed on 04/09/2026 have been fully considered and but are moot in view of the new ground of rejection(s)
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1,6-7,9-10,13,16,18-19,28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee to (US20100260125) in view of Tsui to (US 5841390A1)
Regarding claims 1,19, Lee teaches a method performed by a transmitting node for handling communication between a control node and a device controlled by the control node, the control node and the device being configured for wired communication, ([0060],[0061], fig.4, an interworking structure between wireline and wireless IMS networks, .. e IMS networks include S-Call State Control Functions (S-CSCFs) 435 and 445, Home Subscriber Servers (HSSs) 425 and 455 for providing subscriber information, Proxy (P)-CSCFs 430 and 450 disposed at a contact point to the subscriber, policy servers 420 and 460 for generating and sending policy decision information to IP edges 415 and 465, and the IP edges 415 and 465)
receiving one or more packets in a first format from the control node or the device over a wired connection;([ 0089] A call setup attempt process of the wireline terminal, [0091] When the call setup is attempted from the wireline network to the wireless)
processing the one or more packets into a second format for communication over a wireless connection, the processing comprising using a transmission process for processing the one or more packets into the second format([0039] discloses conducting a call setup in an IP Multimedia Subsystem (IMS) network includes a communication interface for communicating with other nodes; and a wired/wireless interworker for setting a call between a first terminal of a first IMS network and a second terminal of a second IMS network through the communication interface, determining whether a protocol conversion is needed between the first terminal and the second terminal in the call setup, and performing the protocol conversion when the protocol conversion is needed) and
transmitting the one or more packets in the second format over the wireless connection towards the device or the control node([0095] The FMCF 515, which receives the 200 Ok response from the wireless terminal 520 in reply to the response of the INVITE request, converts the 200 Ok response to the 180 Ringing response and forwards the converted response)
Lee does not explicitly teach selecting a transmission process from a plurality of transmission processes by the transmitting node
However, Tsui teaches selecting a transmission process from a plurality of transmission processes by the transmitting node; (col.10, lines 16-65 discloses (42) Microcontroller A18 is programmed to encode output data in one of a plurality of formats, or in a combination of formats. The control input selecting the appropriate data transmission format is provided by the format select switch A20. The output of the format select switch A20 is coupled to input ports of the microcontroller A18, for interrogation by the microcontroller A18. The resulting control input status provided by the format select switch A20 selects the appropriate encoding processes in the microcontroller A18 for generating an output signal corresponding to the selected data transmission format)
Therefore; it would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to enable the system of Lee include selecting a transmission process from a plurality of transmission processes by the transmitting node, as suggested by Tsui. This modification would benefit to reduce communication error.
Regarding claim 6, Lee teaches wherein the transmission process used for processing the one or more packets is preconfigured to be used at the transmitting node([0124] discloses the FMCF 1035 relays the signaling between the originating terminal 1030 and the receiving terminal 1040. Since the originating terminal 1030 has the option tag, the FMCF 1035 recognizes that the originating terminal 1030 operates in the precondition mode).
Regarding claim 7, Lee teaches wherein processing the one or more packets comprises tagging the one or more packets with an indication indicating the transmission process used for processing the one or more packets ([0084] When the option tag includes the precondition item, it can be regarded that the originating terminal is using the wireless network. In case where the originating terminal is a wireless terminal in the non-precondition mode or a wireline terminal, there is no option tag including the related information).
Regarding claim 9, Lee teaches, wherein the transmitting node is a standalone node between a radio access node and the control node, or the device; or a unit collocated with the radio access node, or the control node or the device([0060],[0061], fig.4, an interworking structure between wireline and wireless IMS networks, .. e IMS networks include S-Call State Control Functions (S-CSCFs) 435 and 445, Home Subscriber Servers (HSSs) 425 and 455 for providing subscriber information, Proxy (P)-CSCFs 430 and 450 disposed at a contact point to the subscriber, policy servers 420 and 460 for generating and sending policy decision information to IP edges 415 and 465, and the IP edges 415 and 465).
Regarding claims 10,28, Lee teaches a method performed by a receiving node for handling communication between a control node and a device controlled by the control node, the control node and the device being configured for wired communication, ([0060],[0061], fig.4, an interworking structure between wireline and wireless IMS networks, .. e IMS networks include S-Call State Control Functions (S-CSCFs) 435 and 445, Home Subscriber Servers (HSSs) 425 and 455 for providing subscriber information, Proxy (P)-CSCFs 430 and 450 disposed at a contact point to the subscriber, policy servers 420 and 460 for generating and sending policy decision information to IP edges 415 and 465, and the IP edges 415 and 465)
receiving one or more packets in a second format transmitted over a wireless connection from a transmitting node ( [0083] To provide the wired/wireless interworking function, the FMCF primarily checks whether the originating network is wired or wireless by examining the option tag of the INVITE request) the transmitting node being connected by wire to the control node or the device,([ 0089] A call setup from the wireline terminal) processing the one or more packets into a first format for communication over a wired connection, ([0039] discloses conducting a call setup in an IP Multimedia Subsystem (IMS) network includes a communication interface for communicating with other nodes; and a wired/wireless interworker for setting a call between a first terminal of a first IMS network and a second terminal of a second IMS network through the communication interface, determining whether a protocol conversion is needed between the first terminal and the second terminal in the call setup, and performing the protocol conversion when the protocol conversion is needed) the processing comprising using a reception process for processing the one or more packets into the first format; ( [0083] To provide the wired/wireless interworking function, the FMCF primarily checks whether the originating network is wired or wireless by examining the option tag of the INVITE request) and transmitting the one or more packets in the first format over the wired connection towards the device or the control node([0095] The FMCF 515, which receives the 200 Ok response from the wireless terminal 520 in reply to the response of the INVITE request, converts the 200 Ok response to the 180 Ringing response and forwards the converted response)
Lee does not explicitly teach selecting a reception process from a plurality of reception processes configured at the receiving node
However, Tsui teaches selecting a reception process from a plurality of reception processes configured at the receiving node: (col.10, lines 16-65 discloses (42) Microcontroller A18 is programmed to encode output data in one of a plurality of formats, or in a combination of formats. The control input selecting the appropriate data transmission format is provided by the format select switch A20. The output of the format select switch A20 is coupled to input ports of the microcontroller A18, for interrogation by the microcontroller A18. The resulting control input status provided by the format select switch A20 selects the appropriate encoding processes in the microcontroller A18 for generating an output signal corresponding to the selected data transmission format)
Therefore; it would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to enable the system of Lee include selecting a reception process from a plurality of reception processes configured at the receiving node, as suggested by Tsui. This modification would benefit to reduce communication error.
Regarding claim 13, Lee teaches, wherein selecting the reception process is based on an indication tagged to the received one or more packets([0084] When the option tag includes the precondition item, it can be regarded that the originating terminal is using the wireless network. In case where the originating terminal is a wireless terminal in the non-precondition mode or a wireline terminal, there is no option tag including the related information).
Regarding claim 16, Lee teaches wherein the reception process used for processing the one or more packets is preconfigured to be used at the receiving node([0124] discloses the FMCF 1035 relays the signaling between the originating terminal 1030 and the receiving terminal 1040. Since the originating terminal 1030 has the option tag, the FMCF 1035 recognizes that the originating terminal 1030 operates in the precondition mode).
Regarding claim 18, Lee teaches wherein the receiving node is a standalone node between a radio access node and the control node, or the device; or a unit collocated with the radio access node, or the control node or the device([0060],[0061], fig.4, an interworking structure between wireline and wireless IMS networks, .. e IMS networks include S-Call State Control Functions (S-CSCFs) 435 and 445, Home Subscriber Servers (HSSs) 425 and 455 for providing subscriber information, Proxy (P)-CSCFs 430 and 450 disposed at a contact point to the subscriber, policy servers 420 and 460 for generating and sending policy decision information to IP edges 415 and 465, and the IP edges 415 and 465).
Claim(s) 3-5,8,12,14-15,17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of Tsui to (US 5841390A1) and further in view of Sachs to (US20200259896)
Regarding claims 3,12 Lee does not explicitly teach wherein the one or more packets belong to a flow of packets, and comprise a flow identity identifying the flow, and wherein the transmission process used for processing the one or more packets is selected based on the flow identity
However, Sachs teaches wherein the one or more packets belong to a flow of packets, and comprise a flow identity identifying the flow, and wherein the transmission process used for processing the one or more packets is selected based on the flow identity([1347] An identifier for the data stream may be established to enable it to be distinguished from other data streams. In embodiments where data packets are transmitted by the wireless device as part of a PDU session or QoS flow, the identifier may be unique within the PDU session or QoS flow (and therefore in such embodiments an identifier value may be re-used for different data flows outside the PDU session or QoS flow))
Therefore; it would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to enable the system of Lee include wherein the one or more packets belong to a flow of packets, and comprise a flow identity identifying the flow, and wherein the transmission process used for processing the one or more packets is selected based on the flow identity, as suggested by Sachs. This modification would benefit to reduce communication error.
Regarding claims 4,14 the combination of Lee and Tsui and Sachs teaches wherein selecting the transmission process comprises dynamically selecting respective transmission processes for different flows of packets between the control node and the device(Sachs, [01262] discloses the AMF can translate the gNB response—which is based on per QoS flow mapping—to a traffic flow/TSN stream level of granularity and provides a response in this format to the UE) .
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Lee and Tsui and Sachs teaches wherein the transmission process used for processing the one or more packets is selected from a preconfigured table comprising one or more indications associating transmission processes with different flow identities([1637] A typical example is installing a new surveillance system (either residential or commercial). Each device is preconfigured with its functionality, but typically requires specific configuration which may vary based on situation, context and/or intended usage, such as location (e.g. the living room) and communication (e.g. how to contact the communications hub of the IoT system)).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Lee and Tsui and Sachs teaches wherein the transmission process used for processing the one or more packets comprises one or more of the following: compressing the one or more packets, encrypting the one or more packets, and/or adding a number of repetitive transmissions of the one or more packets(Sachs,[1681] Encryption and communication keys/parameters may further be sent in either direction.[2107 discloses The indicator may be derived from the (representation of the) data. For example, the indicator may be a compressed version of the data, a hash-function of the data, a checksum of the data, a data fingerprint, a cryptographic hash-function of the data).
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Lee and Tsui and Sachs teaches wherein the reception process is selected from a preconfigured table associating reception processes with different flow identities or indications tagged to the one or more packets(Sachs,[1637] A typical example is installing a new surveillance system (either residential or commercial). Each device is preconfigured with its functionality, but typically requires specific configuration which may vary based on situation, context and/or intended usage, such as location (e.g. the living room) and communication (e.g. how to contact the communications hub of the IoT system)).
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Lee and Tsui and Sachs teaches wherein the reception process used for processing the one or more packets comprises one or more of the following: decompressing the one or more packets, decrypting the one or more packets, or receiving number of repetitive transmissions of the one or more packets and/or time adjusting the one or more packets(Sachs,[1681] Encryption and communication keys/parameters may further be sent in either direction.[2107 discloses The indicator may be derived from the (representation of the) data. For example, the indicator may be a compressed version of the data, a hash-function of the data, a checksum of the data, a data fingerprint, a cryptographic hash-function of the data).
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 ZEWDU A BEYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7157. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-6:00.
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, Huy D Vu can be reached at 571-272-3155. 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.
/ZEWDU A BEYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2461
Prosecution Insights