DETAILED OFFICE 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 .
This action is responsive to the communication received March 14th, 2024. Claims 1-10 have been entered and are presented from examination.
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 non-obviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1, 6, 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Poikselka et al. (US 2016/0337908) in view of Jang et al. (US 2019/0037457).
Regarding claims 1, 10, Poikselka et al. discloses a method comprising: detecting, for a first mobile device, a handover from a first radio access network to a second radio access network (paragraph 0183 [the UE may receive a Handover Command via the source RAT (e.g. EUTRAN). The UE then moves to the target RAT (GERAN/UTRAN)]) during a Real-Time Text (RTT) session between the first mobile device and a second device (see Figure 1 and paragraph 0008 [receiving information for handover of a user equipment from a first connection to a second connection, said information comprising information of a real-time text component of a call in progress in said first connection]).
Poikselka et al. does not explicitly disclose estimating a sequence number associated with the second radio access network in response to the handover; and continuing the RTT session on the second radio access network based on the estimated sequence number.
However, Jang et al. discloses estimating a sequence number associated with the second radio access network in response to the handover; and continuing the RTT session on the second radio access network based on the estimated sequence number (see Figure 2 and 15 and paragraphs 0005, 0013, 0054, 0056 [The eNB A sends the UE 140 a HO command message, at step S220, to instruct to switch its serving cell to the cell B 120 and sends, at step S230, the eNB B 130 a sequence number (SN) status transfer message carrying the information about downlink (DL)/uplink (UL) data for data forwarding to the eNB B 130; the UE resumes data communication via the cell B 120; wherein the estimated sequence number status information is information related to a sequence number of a data packet predicted to be transmitted from the base station controlling the source cell to the terminal before receiving the handover complete message; The estimated NS status (N) indicates the NS status of a PDCP SDU that is estimated to be transmitted from the eNB A 110 to the UE 140 until the time point of receiving the HO complete message; The eNB B 130 starts transmitting data to the UE 140 after receiving the HO complete message or transmitting the UE context release message, from the PDCP SDU with the SN (N+δ) at the eNB A 110 rather than the PDCP SDU with the earliest SN at the eNB B]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to recognize the estimated SN could be used when starting real-time text after the handover. The motivation for this is to keep the messages in order.
Regarding claim 6, the references as combined above disclose all the recited subject matter in claim 1.
However, Poikselka et al. further discloses wherein the first radio access network is one of a cellular network or a wireless local area network (WLAN) (paragraph 0085 [The macro-eNBs 105, 106 transmit and receive data over the entire coverage of the cells 100 and 110 respectively]) and the second radio access network the other of a cellular network or a WLAN (paragraph 0085 [The pico eNB can also be used to provide cell coverage in “gaps” or “shadows” where there is no coverage within the existing cells 100, 110 and/or may serve “hot spots”. In some embodiments, the smaller area node can be a femto or Home eNB which can provide coverage for a relatively small area such as the home. Some environments may have both pico and femto cells]).
Regarding claim 9, the references as combined above disclose all the recited subject matter in claim 1.
However, Jang et al. further discloses wherein continuing the RTT session on the second radio access network based on the estimated sequence number comprises inserting the estimated sequence number in an RTT packet transmitted over the second radio access network (paragraph 0056 [The eNB B 130 starts transmitting data to the UE 140 after receiving the HO complete message or transmitting the UE context release message, from the PDCP SDU with the SN (N+δ) at the eNB A 110 rather than the PDCP SDU with the earliest SN at the eNB B. Here, δ is a predetermined integer constant. That is, δ may be set to 0 and a negative number.]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to recognize the estimated SN could be used when starting real-time text after the handover. The motivation for this is to keep the messages in order.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-5, 7-8 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art of record does disclose or make obvious:
wherein estimating the sequence number associated with the second radio access network after the handover comprises: monitoring, by the first mobile device, one or more control protocol reports received from the second device via the first radio access network; and based on one control protocol report of the one or more control protocol reports, acquiring a latest sequence number from the control protocol report (Claim 2),
Claims 3-5 are objected to since the claims depend on objected claim 2, and
wherein an application processor of the first mobile device performs the estimating of the sequence number associated with the second radio access network after the handover and continues the RTT session on the second radio access network based on the estimated sequence number (Claim 7), and
wherein a cellular processor of the first mobile device performs the estimating of the sequence number associated with the second radio access network after the handover and continues the RTT session on the second radio access network based on the estimated sequence number (Claim 8).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER T WYLLIE whose telephone number is (571)270-3937. The examiner can normally be reached 4pm-11:30pm. 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, Ayman Abaza can be reached at (571)270-0422. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER T WYLLIE/Examiner, Art Unit 2465