DETAILED ACTION
This Office action is responsive to Applicant’s remarks submitted July 7, 2026. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Claims 1-12 and 21-28 are currently pending.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I (claims 1-12) in the reply filed on July 7, 2026 is acknowledged.
Drawings
3. Figures 1, 2, and 11 should be designated by a legend such as --Prior Art-- because only that which is old is illustrated (see, e.g., U.S. Publication Nos. 2023/0015378, 2023/0136589; note the respective drawings). See MPEP § 608.02(g). Corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The replacement sheet(s) should be labeled “Replacement Sheet” in the page header (as per 37 CFR 1.84(c)) so as not to obstruct any portion of the drawing figures. If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 & 103
4. 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 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.
5. 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.
6. 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.
7. 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.
8. 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.
9. Claims 1, 3, 5, 11, 12, 21, 23, 25, and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as anticipated by U.S. Publication No. 2025/0203347 A1 (hereinafter “Wu`347”) or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Wu`347, in view of any one of: the non-patent literature document titled Study on XR (Extended Reality) and Media Services (hereinafter “3GPP_23700”)1; or U.S. Publication No. 2024/0276566 A1 (hereinafter “Liu”); or U.S. Publication No. 2025/0175883 A1 (hereinafter “Cogalan”)2.
Regarding claims 1, 21, and 28: Wu`347 teaches a first network entity, comprising: one or more memories storing processor-executable code; and one or more processors coupled with the one or more memories and individually or collectively operable to execute the code to cause the first network entity to:
send, via a first interface between the first network entity and a second network entity, a first message indicating a capability of the first network entity to support one or more multi-modal services associated with two or more data traffic flows, the one or more multi-modal services being associated with one or more user equipments (UEs), wherein the one or more multi-modal services support applications enabling input from a plurality of sources (see, e.g., figures 8, 9; also [0006]-[0010], [0047]-[0051], [0060]-[0064], [0085]-[0090], [0109]-[0119]; note signaling options between a first and second network entity, including transmissions including capability indications regarding multi-modal services for UEs);
receive, via the first interface, a second message indicating a configuration of at least one multi-modal service of the one or more multi-modal services that is associated with at least one data traffic flow of the two or more data traffic flows, the configuration of the at least one multi-modal service comprising a multi-modal service identifier associated with the at least one multi-modal service (see, e.g., figures 8, 9; also [0006]-[0010], [0047]-[0051], [0060]-[0064], [0085]-[0090], [0109]-[0119]; note signaling options between a first and second network entity, including transmissions including configuring and/or parameter responses); and
communicate, with the one or more UEs, in accordance with the one or more multi-modal services (see, e.g., figures 8, 9; also [0003], [0004], [0084], [0100]; multi-modal services are provided to UEs).
Wu`347 does not explicitly state including a “multi-modal service identifier.” To the extent this feature is not inherent to Wu`347 (see, e.g., [0100]; group identifier is used to associate UE with a service or multi-modal group), it is nevertheless taught in 3GPP_23700 (see, e.g., p. 36; note multi-modal service provider ID; see also pp. 36-38, 128-129, 155-159, 260; note overlapping teachings with respect to capability negotiation and multi-modal signaling). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to incorporate features from the system of 3GPP_23700, such as the identifier and/or signaling functionality, within the system of Wu`347, in order to distinguish services.
Alternatively to 3GPP_23700, the said feature is taught by Liu (see, e.g., [0006]-[0009], [0048]-[0053]; note multimodal service identifier; see also figure 11, [0066]-[0070]; note overlapping teachings with respect to multi-modal signaling). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to incorporate features from the system of Liu, such as the identifier and/or signaling functionality, within the system of Wu`347, in order to distinguish services.
As another alternative to 3GPP_23700, the said feature is taught by Cogalan (see, e.g., [0092]-[0101]; note multi-modal service ID; see also figures 4, 5, and 7; note overlapping teachings with respect to multi-modal signaling). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to incorporate features from the system of Cogalan, such as the identifier and/or signaling functionality, within the system of Wu`347, in order to distinguish services.
The rationale set forth above regarding the network entity of claim 1 is applicable to the method and medium of claims 21 and 28, respectively.
Regarding claims 3 and 23: Wu`347 modified by one of 3GPP_23700, Liu, or Cogalan further teaches wherein, to send the first message, the one or more processors are individually or collectively operable to execute the code to cause the first network entity to: output a configuration update message via the first interface between the first network entity and the second network entity, the configuration update message comprising an indication of the capability of the first network entity to support the one or more multi-modal services, wherein the configuration update message comprises the first message (see, e.g., Wu`347 figures 8, 9; also [0051], [0069]; 3GPP_23700 pp. 135, 142; Liu [0074], [0085]; and/or Cogalan [0113], [0122]; note updating functionality). The motivation for modification set forth above regarding claim 1 is applicable to claim 3.
The rationale set forth above regarding the network entity of claim 3 is applicable to the method of claim 23.
Regarding claims 5 and 25: Wu`347 modified by one of 3GPP_23700, Liu, or Cogalan further teaches wherein the one or more processors are individually or collectively further operable to execute the code to cause the first network entity to: receive, from the second network entity via the first interface, a first session resource request message, wherein, to send sending the first messages comprises the one or more processors are individually or collectively operable to execute the code to cause the first network entity to: send, to the second network entity via the first interface, a first session resource response message in response to the first session resource request message, the first session resource response message comprising an indication of the capability of the first network entity to support the one or more multi-modal services, wherein the first session resource response message comprises the first message (see, e.g., Wu`347 [0055]-[0065]; 3GPP_23700 pp. 142, 147; Liu [0171]-[0176]; and/or Cogalan [0146]; note session resource establishment functionality). The motivation for modification set forth above regarding claim 1 is applicable to claim 5.
The rationale set forth above regarding the network entity of claim 5 is applicable to the method of claim 25.
Regarding claim 11: Wu`347 modified by one of 3GPP_23700, Liu, or Cogalan further teaches wherein the second message comprises a packet data unit (PDU) session resource setup request message, a PDU session resource modify request message, a handover request message, a path switch request acknowledgment message, a retrieve UE context response message, a secondary node additional request message a secondary node modification request message, a secondary node modification required message, a bearer context setup request message, a bearer context modification request message, or any combination thereof (see the rationale(s) for rejection set forth regarding claims 2-7).
Regarding claim 12: Wu`347 modified by one of 3GPP_23700, Liu, or Cogalan further teaches wherein the one or more processors are individually or collectively further operable to execute the code to cause the first network entity to: send a third message comprising an indication that one or more parameters associated with the configuration of the at least one multi-modal service are not applied for the one or more multi-modal services, wherein the indication is based at least in part on the one or more parameters being incompatible with the capability of the first network entity (see, e.g., Wu`347 [0110]-[0114]; 3GPP_23700 36-38, 128-129, 155-159, 260; note overlapping teachings with respect to capability negotiation and multi-modal signaling; Liu [0074], [0085]; and/or Cogalan [0113], [0122]; note configuration signaling and/or capability negotiation and multi-modal signaling). The motivation for modification set forth above regarding claim 1 is applicable to claim 12.
10. Claims 2, 6, 11, 22, 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu`347, alternatively in view of one of 3GPP_23700, Liu, or Cogalan, and in further view of U.S. Publication No. 2025/0097828 A1 (hereinafter “Li”).
Regarding claims 2 and 22: Wu`347 modified by one of 3GPP_23700, Liu, or Cogalan further teaches wherein, to send the first message, the one or more processors are individually or collectively operable to execute the code to cause the first network entity to: send a setup request message via the first interface between the first network entity and the second network entity, the setup request message comprising an indication of the capability of the first network entity to support the one or more multi-modal services, wherein the setup request message comprises the first message (see, e.g., Wu`347 figures 8, 9; also [0006]-[0010], [0047]-[0051], [0060]-[0064], [0085]-[0090], [0109]-[0119]; 3GPP_23700 pp. 66, 69, 80, 106, 135; Liu figure 11; and/or Cogalan figures 4, 5, and 7). The motivation for modification set forth above regarding claim 1 is applicable to claim 2.
Wu`347 modified by one of 3GPP_23700, Liu, or Cogalan does not explicitly state the term “setup request message.” To the extent this feature is not inherent to Wu`347 modified by one of 3GPP_23700, Liu, or Cogalan (by virtue of the request messaging discussed therein serving to setup and/or configure), this feature is nevertheless taught by Li (see, e.g. [0196]-[0199]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to incorporate features from the system of Li, such as the signaling functionality, within the system of Wu`347 alternatively modified by one of 3GPP_23700, Liu, or Cogalan, in order to facilitate session or service initiation.
The rationale set forth above regarding the network entity of claim 2 is applicable to the method of claim 22.
Regarding claims 6 and 26: Wu`347 modified by one of 3GPP_23700, Liu, or Cogalan further teaches wherein the one or more processors are individually or collectively further operable to execute the code to cause the first network entity to: receive, from the second network entity via the first interface, a first UE context request message, wherein, to send sending the first messages comprises the one or more processors are individually or collectively operable to execute the code to cause the first network entity to: send, to the second network entity via the first interface, a first UE context response message in response to the first UE context request message, the first UE context response message comprising an indication of the capability of the first network entity to support the one or more multi-modal services, wherein the first UE context response message comprises the first message (see, e.g., Wu`347 [0109], [0138], [0155]-[0156]; 3GPP_23700 pp. 252). The motivation for modification set forth above regarding claim 1 is applicable to claim 6.
Wu`347 modified by one of 3GPP_23700, Liu, or Cogalan does not explicitly state the term “setup request message.” To the extent this feature is not inherent to Wu`347 modified by one of 3GPP_23700, Liu, or Cogalan, this feature is nevertheless taught by Li (see, e.g. [0280]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to incorporate features from the system of Li, such as the signaling functionality, within the system of Wu`347 alternatively modified by one of 3GPP_23700, Liu, or Cogalan, in order to facilitate session or service initiation.
The rationale set forth above regarding the network entity of claim 6 is applicable to the method of claim 26.
Regarding claim 11: Wu`347 modified by one of 3GPP_23700, Liu, or Cogalan further teaches wherein the second message comprises a packet data unit (PDU) session resource setup request message, a PDU session resource modify request message, a handover request message, a path switch request acknowledgment message, a retrieve UE context response message, a secondary node additional request message a secondary node modification request message, a secondary node modification required message, a bearer context setup request message, a bearer context modification request message, or any combination thereof (see the rationale(s) for rejection set forth regarding claims 2-7).
11. Claims 4, 11, and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu`347, alternatively in view of one of 3GPP_23700, Liu, or Cogalan, and in further view of either U.S. Publication No. 2025/0212289 A1 (hereinafter “Hong”) or U.S. Publication No. 2019/0373520A1 (hereinafter “Sillanpaa”).
Regarding claims 4 and 24: Wu`347 modified by one of 3GPP_23700, Liu, or Cogalan substantially teaches the network entity of claim 1, but does not explicitly state wherein, to send the first message, the one or more processors are individually or collectively operable to execute the code to cause the first network entity to: send, via the first interface between the first network entity and the second network entity, a path switch request message that comprises an indication of the capability of the first network entity to support the one or more multi-modal services, wherein the path switch request message comprises the first message. However, this feature is taught by Hong (see, e.g., [0127], [0176], [0184]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to incorporate features from the system of Hong, such as the signaling functionality, within the system of Wu`347 alternatively modified by one of 3GPP_23700, Liu, or Cogalan, in order to facilitate handover.
Alternatively, the said feature is taught by Sillanpaa (see, e.g., [0048], [0117]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to incorporate features from the system of Sillanpaa, such as the signaling functionality, within the system of Wu`347 alternatively modified by one of 3GPP_23700, Liu, or Cogalan, in order to facilitate handover.
The rationale set forth above regarding the network entity of claim 4 is applicable to the method of claim 24.
Regarding claim 11: Wu`347 modified by one of 3GPP_23700, Liu, or Cogalan further teaches wherein the second message comprises a packet data unit (PDU) session resource setup request message, a PDU session resource modify request message, a handover request message, a path switch request acknowledgment message, a retrieve UE context response message, a secondary node additional request message a secondary node modification request message, a secondary node modification required message, a bearer context setup request message, a bearer context modification request message, or any combination thereof (see the rationale(s) for rejection set forth regarding claims 2-7).
12. Claims 7, 11, and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu`347, alternatively in view of one of 3GPP_23700, Liu, or Cogalan, and in further view of U.S. Publication No. 2025/0176061 A1 (hereinafter “Wu`061”).
Regarding claims 7 and 27: Wu`347 modified by one of 3GPP_23700, Liu, or Cogalan substantially teaches the network entity of claim 1, but does not explicitly state wherein the one or more processors are individually or collectively further operable to execute the code to cause the first network entity to: receive, from the second network entity via the first interface, a first bearer context request message, wherein, to send sending the first messages comprises the one or more processors are individually or collectively operable to execute the code to cause the first network entity to: send, to the second network entity via the first interface, a first bearer context response message in response to the first bearer context request message, the first bearer context response message comprising an indication of the capability of the first network entity to support the one or more multi-modal services, wherein the first bearer context response message comprises the first message. However, this feature is taught by Wu`061 (see, e.g., [0112], [0118]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to incorporate features from the system of Wu`061, such as the signaling functionality, within the system of Wu`347 alternatively modified by one of 3GPP_23700, Liu, or Cogalan, in order to initialize bearer context(s).
The rationale set forth above regarding the network entity of claim 7 is applicable to the method of claim 27.
Regarding claim 11: Wu`347 modified by one of 3GPP_23700, Liu, or Cogalan further teaches wherein the second message comprises a packet data unit (PDU) session resource setup request message, a PDU session resource modify request message, a handover request message, a path switch request acknowledgment message, a retrieve UE context response message, a secondary node additional request message a secondary node modification request message, a secondary node modification required message, a bearer context setup request message, a bearer context modification request message, or any combination thereof (see the rationale(s) for rejection set forth regarding claims 2-7).
13. Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu`347, alternatively in view of one of 3GPP_23700, Liu, or Cogalan, and in further view of either U.S. Publication No. 2024/0163786 A1 (hereinafter “Thubert”) or WO Publication No. 2020/033636 A1 (hereinafter “Han”).
Regarding claim 8: Wu`347 modified by one of 3GPP_23700, Liu, or Cogalan substantially teaches the network entity of claim 1, but does not explicitly state wherein, to send the first message, the one or more processors are individually or collectively operable to execute the code to cause the first network entity to: send, via the first message, a first indication of a maximum quantity of intra-UE multi-modal services that the first network entity is capable of supporting, a second indication of a maximum quantity of inter-UE multi-modal services that the first network entity is capable of supporting, a third indication of a maximum quantity of data traffic flows that the first network entity is capable of supporting for a respective multi-modal service, a fourth indication of a maximum quantity of data traffic flows that the first network entity is capable of supporting for the one or more multi-modal services, or a combination thereof. However, at least one of these features is taught by Thubert (see, e.g., [0026], [0033]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to incorporate features from the system of Thubert, such as the indication functionality, within the system of Wu`347 alternatively modified by one of 3GPP_23700, Liu, or Cogalan, in order to correlate application information.
Alternatively to Thubert, the said feature is taught by Han (see, e.g., [0028]-[0030]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to incorporate features from the system of Han, such as the indication functionality, within the system of Wu`347 alternatively modified by one of 3GPP_23700, Liu, or Cogalan, in order to correlate application information.
14. Claims 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu`347, alternatively in view of one of 3GPP_23700, Liu, or Cogalan, and in further view of U.S. Publication No. 2025/0088894 A1 (hereinafter “Esswie”).
Regarding claim 9: Wu`347 modified by one of 3GPP_23700, Liu, or Cogalan substantially teaches the network entity of claim 1, but does not explicitly state wherein, to receive the second message, the one or more processors are individually or collectively operable to execute the code to cause the first network entity to: receive, via the first interface, two or more data traffic flow configuration messages indicating information associated with a respective data traffic flow of the two or more data traffic flows, the configuration of the at least one multi-modal service being associated with the two or more data traffic flow configuration messages, wherein the two or more data traffic flow configuration messages and the configuration of the at least one multi-modal service are outputted separately. However, these features are taught by Esswie (see, e.g., [0067]-[0068], [0137]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to incorporate features from the system of Esswie, such as the signaling functionality, within the system of Wu`347 alternatively modified by one of 3GPP_23700, Liu, or Cogalan, in order to optimize resource utilization.
Regarding claim 10: Wu`347 modified by one of 3GPP_23700, Liu, or Cogalan substantially teaches the network entity of claim 1, but does not explicitly state wherein, to receive the second message, the one or more processors are individually or collectively operable to execute the code to cause the first network entity to: receive, via the first interface, two or more traffic flow configuration messages indicating information associated with a respective traffic flow of the two or more data traffic flows, the two or more traffic flow configuration messages comprising the configuration of the at least one multi-modal service, wherein the two or more traffic flow configuration messages are associated with the multi-modal service identifier that is associated with the at least one multi- modal service. However, these features are taught by Esswie (see, e.g., [0067]-[0068], [0137]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to incorporate features from the system of Esswie, such as the signaling functionality, within the system of Wu`347 alternatively modified by one of 3GPP_23700, Liu, or Cogalan, in order to optimize resource utilization.
Relevant Art
15. The following prior art not relied upon in this Office action is considered pertinent to Applicant's disclosure: See form PTO-892.
Conclusion
16. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICHOLAS SLOMS whose telephone number is (571)270-7520. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9AM-5PM 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, Ayaz Sheikh can be reached at (571)272-3795. 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.
/NICHOLAS SLOMS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2476
1 3GPP_23700 was cited in Applicant’s Information Disclosure Statement submitted July 28, 2025 (Non-Patent Literature Documents, cite no. 1).
2 The three alternative secondary references are provided in an effort to promote compact prosecution and to account for the breadth of the claimed invention and/or functionalities discussed in Applicant’s disclosure.
Prosecution Insights