DETAILED ACTION
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive (too long). A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. It is suggested to be shortened to “Controlling a transmission Resource Using a Communication Pattern (CP) Parameter”.
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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 1-8 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Each of independent claims 1 and 5 recites acronym ‘CP’. For clarity, it is suggested to fully describe an acronym when reciting for the first time in the claim. Dependent claims 2-4 and 6-8 are also objected since they are dependent upon objected independent claims 1 and 5 as set forth above.
Appropriate correction is required.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-10 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-6 of U.S. Patent No. 11,425,596 (hereinafter referred to as ‘596). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims are obvious variants and/or subsets of each other.
Regarding claim 1, ‘596 describes a method for a mobility management entity (MME), comprising:
receiving a CP parameter relating to uplink data or a CP parameter relating to downlink data from a service capability exposure function (SCEF) node via a home subscriber server (HSS) (claim 1); and
holding the CP parameter relating to the uplink data or the CP parameter relating to the downlink data (fig. 15 & claim 1, control device as MME comprises memory 1203 to hold and transfer/provide the CP information to the base station).
Regarding claim 2, ‘596 describes:
transmitting, to a base station, the CP parameter relating to the uplink data or the CP parameter relating to the downlink data (claim 1).
Regarding claims 3, ‘596 describes:
providing, for control of a transfer resource, the base station with the CP parameter relating to the uplink data or the CP parameter relating to the downlink data (claim 1, control device as MME receiving communication pattern (CP) from SCEF which is then provided to base station (transfer resource)).
Regarding claim 4, ‘596 describes:
wherein the base station is an evolved Node B (eNB) (para. 6 or 42, base station being eNodeB (eNB)) (claim 2).
Regarding claim 5, ‘596 describes a mobility management entity (MME), comprising:
at least one memory storing instructions, and
at least one processor configured to execute the instructions to:
receive a CP parameter relating to uplink data or a CP parameter relating to downlink data from a service capability exposure function (SCEF) node via a home subscriber server (HSS) (claim 3); and
holding the CP parameter relating to the uplink data or the CP parameter relating to the downlink data (fig. 15 & claim 3, control device as MME comprises memory 1203 to hold and transfer/provide the CP information to the base station).
Regarding claim 6, ‘596 describes:
the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to
transmit, to a base station, the CP parameter relating to the uplink data or the CP parameter relating to the downlink data (‘596, claim 3).
Regarding claim 7, ‘596 describes:
the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to provide, for control of a transfer resource, the base station with the CP parameter relating to the uplink data or the CP parameter relating to the downlink data (claim 3, control device as MME MME receives communication pattern (CP) from SCEF which is then provided to base station (transfer resource)).
Regarding claim 8, ‘596 describes:
wherein the base station is an evolved Node B (eNB) (para. 6 or 42, base station being eNodeB (eNB)) (claim 4).
Regarding claim 9, ‘596 describes a method for a base station, comprising:
receiving a CP parameter relating to uplink data or a CP parameter relating to downlink data from a mobility management entity (MME) (claim 5); and
using, for control of a transfer resource, the CP parameter relating to the uplink data or the CP parameter relating to the downlink data (claim 5).
Regarding claim 10, ‘596 describes:
wherein the base station is an evolved Node B (eNB) (para. 6 or 42, base station being eNodeB (eNB)) (claim 6).
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)(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.
Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by
Iwai (US 2018/0070268).
Regarding claims 1 and 5, Iwai describes a method for a mobility management entity (MME)/MME (para. 5-6), comprising:
[at least one memory storing instructions, and at least one processor configured to execute the instructions to] (para. 12, implementation using computer = having memory storing instructions & 1+ processors to execute instructions):
receiving a CP parameter relating to uplink data or a CP parameter relating to downlink data from a service capability exposure function (SCEF) node via a home subscriber server (HSS); and holding the CP parameter relating to the uplink data or the CP parameter relating to the downlink data (fig. 2 or 6 & para. 5-6, network entity 2 as MME receives communication pattern (CP) from SCEF & hold the CP in order to provide the CP information to base station. Such CP information is regarding data traffic of UE which is inherently uplink and/or downlink. See also para. 54).
Regarding claims 2 and 6, Iwai describes:
transmitting, to a base station, the CP parameter relating to the uplink data or the CP parameter relating to the downlink data (fig. 2 or 6 & para. 5-6, MME receives communication pattern (CP) from SCEF which is then provided to base station).
Regarding claims 3 and 7, Iwai describes:
providing, for control of a transfer resource, the base station with the CP parameter relating to the uplink data or the CP parameter relating to the downlink data (fig. 2 or 6 & para. 5-6, MME receives communication pattern (CP) from SCEF which is then provided to base station (transfer resource). Such CP information is regarding data traffic of UE which is inherently uplink and/or downlink. See also para. 54).
Regarding claims 4 and 8, Iwai describes:
wherein the base station is an evolved Node B (eNB) (para. 6 or 42, base station being eNodeB (eNB)).
Regarding claim 9, Iwai describes a method for a base station, comprising:
receiving a CP parameter relating to uplink data or a CP parameter relating to downlink data from a mobility management entity (MME) (fig. 2 or 6 & para. 5-6, base station receives communication pattern (CP) from SCEF via MME); and
using, for control of a transfer resource, the CP parameter relating to the uplink data or the CP parameter relating to the downlink data (para. 6, base station uses CP and its derived informat to reduce transitions of connection states in communicating with the UE (control of a transfer resource)).
Regarding claim 10, Iwai describes:
wherein the base station is an evolved Node B (eNB) (para. 6 or 42, base station being eNodeB (eNB)) (para. 6 or 42, base station being eNodeB (eNB)).
It should be noted that most or all above claims may be alternatively be rejected by Velev (US 2022/0240075):
Velev describes SCEF selecting a CP parameter, then second communication 414 to the HSS 404 comprising sending an update CP parameter request, HSS 404 then provide 422 CP parameters to the MME 402 (para. 57-58), the access and MMF determines how to configure the remote unit, a base station, or a combination thereof, based on the first set of parameters (para. 6), and the RAN 704, after receiving SMF assisted RAN information from the SMF 708 (parameters such as communication duration, expected UE activity behavior, etc), may use these parameters to configure/re-configure 734 the radio connection with UE (para. 114).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Zou (US 2024/0284241) describing data burst volume indication from CN node to RAN node (fig. 5), Zhang (US 2024/0172033) describing bit rate limitation & control from a network via relay device (fig. 2b), Ronneke (US 20170048746) describing regulating user UL data traffic to App server 120 (fig. 3), Pateromichelakis (US 20230345292) describing determination of expected QoS adaptation pattern at a mobile edge computing entity (title), and Xu (US 20220312163) and Tao (US 20220141648 ) and Kweon (US 2022/0104045) and Zeng (US 2022/0086604) and Merino Vazquez (US 20210385672) each describing event monitoring request passed from SCEF to HSS & then to MME (fig. 1 or 2).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WARNER WONG whose telephone number is (571)272-8197. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7am - 3:30pm.
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, Ian Moore can be reached at 571-272-3085. 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.
WARNER WONG
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2469
/WARNER WONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2469
Prosecution Insights