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 .
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.
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.
(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 1-10, 13-17 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (2) as being anticipated by Faronius et al. (US 2016/0277951).
Regarding claim 1, Faronius discloses a method, comprising: determining, by a system comprising at least one processor (figs. 1, 3 and 6; note: BS; para. 187), a silent-insertion-descriptor frame duration (fig. 2B; fig. 4) associated with a communication session associated with a device (fig. 1, UE; fig. 2A-4; note: communication with a base station; para. 149; note: VoIP bearer) based on a determination of a number of consecutive time slots without an uplink voice-related data packet (fig. 4, step 415 and paras. 131 and 158; note: count of non-VoIP frames; paras. 26 (5th sentence) and 31 (3rd sentence); note: a slot as a 20 time period for sending a speech frame) or a silent-insertion-descriptor frame packet being received from the device during the communication session (fig. 2B and paras. 18 and 172; note: predetermined SID frame spacing or interleaving; fig. 4, steps 416-418 and fig. 5; paras. 165 and 181; note: SID frame resetting a counter and a timer); and initiating, by the system, bypassing of at least one uplink grant time slot for the communication session for a defined time period that is determined based on the silent-insertion-descriptor frame duration (fig. 4, steps 410, 416 and 420; fig. 5; paras. 57-59, 165, 168 and 207-208; note: the time period, from step 420 until the next speech frame is received and process 400A is restarted, is based on (triggered by or determined by) the adjustable counter and timer which is based on the slots without a voice packet and/or the SID frame; note: a UL grant every 20 ms is paused in the timeline 520).
Regarding claim 2, Faronius discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the uplink voice-related data packet or the silent-insertion-descriptor frame packet comprises a voice-related protocol data unit (paras. 14-15, 29-33, 131 and 133-134; note: VoLTE and VoIP, and a MAC PDU where the VoLTE or VoIP carries speech and SID frames - para. 181).
Regarding claim 3, Faronius discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the at least one uplink grant time slot is associated with a periodic uplink grant or a configured grant (figs. 3 and 5; para. 174; note: periodic and configured periodicity according to timer and counter thresholds of figs. 4).
Regarding claim 4, Faronius discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving, by the system, the uplink voice-related data packet from the device during a first uplink grant time slot of the communication session (fig. 5, timeline 530, first of item 532; fig. 2, items 212; paras. 154 and 181, fig. 4, step 414C; note: an SID is a VoIP packet); and receiving, by the system, the silent-insertion-descriptor frame packet from the device during a second uplink grant time slot of the communication session, wherein no uplink voice-related data packet and no silent-insertion-descriptor frame packet is received from the device for the number of consecutive time slots between the receiving of the uplink voice-related data packet and the receiving of the silent-insertion-descriptor frame packet (fig. 5, timeline 530, second of item 532; fig. 2, items 212 and 214A).
Regarding claim 5, Faronius discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising: monitoring, by the system, data packets received from the device during the communication session (figs. 3-5); in response to receiving a data packet in a time slot from the device, determining, by the system, that the data packet is not the uplink voice-related data packet and not the silent-insertion-descriptor frame packet (step 414A and para. 151); and determining, by the system, whether no uplink voice-related data packet and no silent-insertion-descriptor frame packet has been received from the device for at least a threshold number of consecutive time slots relating to a silent period (steps 415-416; paras. 158-162 and 164-165).
Regarding claim 6, Faronius discloses the method of claim 5, further comprising: determining that the threshold number of consecutive time slots relating to the silent period has not been satisfied based on determining that the number of consecutive time slots without the uplink voice-related data packet or the silent-insertion-descriptor frame packet being received from the device during the communication session does not satisfy the threshold number of consecutive time slots relating to the silent period (step 416; para. 163), and in response to determining that the threshold number of consecutive time slots has not been satisfied, determining, by the system, that the silent period has not commenced (paras. 159, 161 and 163); or determining that the threshold number of consecutive time slots relating to the silent period has been satisfied based on determining that no uplink voice-related data packet and no silent-insertion-descriptor frame packet has been received from the device for at least the threshold number of consecutive time slots (step 416; paras. 159 and 161-162), and in response to determining that the threshold number of consecutive time slots relating to the silent period has been satisfied, determining, by the system, that the silent period has commenced (paras. 164-165).
Regarding claim 7, Faronius discloses the method of claim 6, wherein the determining of the silent-insertion-descriptor frame duration comprises: in response to determining that the silent period has commenced, determining the silent-insertion-descriptor frame duration associated with the communication session associated with the device based on the determination of the number of consecutive time slots without the uplink voice-related data packet or the silent-insertion-descriptor frame packet being received from the device during the silent period of the communication session (step 420; fig. 5, timeline 550A; para. 181; note: a SID frame as a VoIP packet ends the silent period - para. 165; note: the duration is determined by the SID frame period, periodicity or spacing - paras. 18 and 172).
Regarding claim 8, Faronius discloses the method of claim 1, wherein at least the one uplink grant time slot is at least one periodic uplink grant time slot relating to periodic uplink grants associated with the communication session (fig. 3, fig. 4, step 410, and fig. 5, item 520); and wherein the method further comprises: determining, by the system, that a silent period has commenced based on the number of consecutive time slots without the uplink voice-related data packet or the silent-insertion-descriptor frame packet being received from the device being determined to satisfy a threshold number of consecutive time slots relating to the silent period (step 420; paras. 159, 161-162 and 164-165); and in response to determining that the silent period has commenced, determining, by the system, a defined number of time slots for which at least the one periodic uplink grant time slot is to be bypassed as a function of the silent-insertion-descriptor frame duration (figs. 4-5; paras. 164-165 and 181; paras. 18 and 172; note: defined 20, 60 or 160 ms between SID frames as standardized where a SID frame ends the silent period), the threshold number of consecutive time slots relating to the silent period (figs. 4-5 and paras. 161-162), and a periodic uplink grant period of the periodic uplink grants associated with the communication session (step 400A and paras. 165 and 181; note: SID frame to restart the flow diagram of fig. 4; note: periodic grants based on fig. 4), wherein the initiating of the bypassing comprises initiating bypassing of one or more periodic uplink grant time slots during the defined number of time slots (figs. 3-5; para. 18, 165, 172 and 181), and wherein at least the one periodic uplink grant time slot comprises the one or more periodic uplink grant time slots (figs. 3-5).
Regarding claim 9, Faronius discloses the method of claim 8, further comprising: to facilitate the bypassing, controlling, by the system, communication of the periodic uplink grants to not communicate any of the periodic uplink grants to the device during the defined number of time slots (figs. 3-5; para. 18, 165, 172 and 181; note: once a silent period is determined, no grants are transmitted for a determined duration until a SID or speech frame is received).
Regarding claim 10, Faronius discloses the method of claim 1, wherein at least the one uplink grant time slot is at least one configured grant time slot relating to a configured grant associated with the communication session (figs. 3-5), and wherein the method further comprises: determining, by the system, that a silent period has commenced based on the number of consecutive time slots without the uplink voice-related data packet or the silent-insertion-descriptor frame packet being received from the device being determined to satisfy a threshold number of consecutive time slots relating to the silent period (step 420); and in response to determining that the silent period has commenced, determining, by the system, a defined number of configured grant time slots to be bypassed as a function of the silent-insertion-descriptor frame duration (paras. 18, 165, 172 and 181; note: SID frame received after a defined number of slots as standardized), the threshold number of consecutive time slots relating to the silent period (step 416; paras. 161-162), and a configured grant periodicity of the configured grant associated with the communication session (figs. 3-5 and paras. 16, 18 and ; note: a grant periodicity is 20 ms based on generated speech frames), wherein the initiating of the bypassing comprises initiating bypassing of the defined number of configured grant time slots during the silent period, and wherein at least the one configured grant time slot comprises the defined number of configured grant time slots (figs. 3-5; paras. 18, 165, 172 and 181; note: once a silent period is determined, no grants are transmitted until a SID or speech frame is received).
Regarding claim 13, these limitations are rejected on the same ground as claim 1. In addition, Faronius discloses a system (fig. 6; paras. 187, 191, 198-200, 206 and 209), comprising: at least one memory that stores computer executable components; and at least one processor that executes computer executable components stored in the at least one memory, and the functionality of claim 1 describes wherein the computer executable components comprise: a frame duration detector that determines a silent-insertion-descriptor frame duration associated with a communication session associated with a user equipment based on a determination of a number of consecutive slots determined not to comprise an uplink voice-related data packet or a silent-insertion-descriptor frame packet from the user equipment during the communication session; and a slot bypasser controller that controls bypassing of at least one uplink grant slot for the communication session for a defined amount of time that is determined based on the silent-insertion-descriptor frame duration.
Regarding claim 14, these limitations are rejected on the same ground as claim 2.
Regarding claim 15, these limitations are rejected on the same ground as claim 8. In addition, the functionality of claim 8 describes wherein the computer executable components further comprise: a silent period detector that determines a silent period has been initiated based on the number of consecutive slots without the uplink voice-related data packet or the silent-insertion-descriptor frame packet being received from the user equipment being determined to satisfy a threshold number of consecutive slots indicative of the silent period, wherein, in response to the silent period detector determining that the silent period has been initiated, the slot bypasser controller determines a defined number of slots for which at least the one periodic uplink grant slot is to be bypassed based on the silent-insertion-descriptor frame duration, the threshold number of consecutive slots indicative of the silent period, or a periodic uplink grant period of the periodic uplink grants associated with the communication session, wherein the slot bypasser controller controls bypassing of one or more periodic uplink grant slots during the defined number of slots, and wherein at least the one periodic uplink grant slot comprises the one or more periodic uplink grant slots.
Regarding claim 16, these limitations are rejected on the same ground as claim 9.
Regarding claim 17, these limitations are rejected on the same ground as claim 10. In addition, the functionality of claim 10 describes wherein the computer executable components further comprise: a silent period detector that determines a silent period has been initiated based on the number of consecutive slots without the uplink voice-related data packet or the silent-insertion-descriptor frame packet being received from the user equipment being determined to satisfy a threshold number of consecutive slots relating to the silent period, wherein, in response to the silent period detector determining that the silent period has been initiated, the slot bypasser controller determines a defined number of configured grant slots to be bypassed as a function of the silent-insertion-descriptor frame duration, the threshold number of consecutive slots relating to the silent period, or a configured grant periodicity of the configured grant associated with the communication session, wherein the slot bypasser controller controls bypassing of the defined number of configured grant slots during the silent period, and wherein at least the one configured grant slot comprises the defined number of configured grant slots.
Regarding claim 19, these limitations are rejected on the same ground as claim 1. In addition, Faronius discloses a non-transitory machine-readable medium (fig. 6; paras. 187, 191, 198-200, 206 and 209), comprising executable instructions that, when executed by at least one processor, facilitate performance of operations of the method of claim 1 (note: omission of a grant is bypassing a grant).
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.
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 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Faronius in view of Smith et al. (US 2008/0037496).
Faronius discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the device is a first device (fig. 1), wherein the communication session is a first communication session (fig. 3), wherein at least the one uplink grant time slot is one or more time slots that are bypassed and not utilized by the device during the first communication session (figs. 3-5; paras. 164-165) but fails to disclose wherein the method further comprises: allocating the one or more time slots and resources associated with the one or more time slots to a second device associated with a second communication session. Smith discloses allocating unused resources (para. 89, especially the last sentence; para. 52, last three sentences; figs. 11 and 14). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have allocating the one or more time slots and resources associated with the one or more time slots to a second device associated with a second communication session in the invention of Faronius. The motivation to have the modification and/or well-known benefits of the modification include, but are not limited to, utilizing resources that would otherwise be wasted as is known in the art (Smith, para. 89; MPEP 2143(I)(A)(B)(C)(D) - note: e.g., applying known techniques having predictable results).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11, 18 and 20 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Kevin Harper whose telephone number is 571-272-3166. The examiner can normally be reached weekdays from 11:00 AM to 7:00 PM ET.
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, Yemane Mesfin, can be reached at 571-272-3927. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. For non-official communications, the examiner’s e-mail address is kevin.harper@uspto.gov (MPEP 502.03 – A copy of all received emails relating to an application including proposed amendments and excluding scheduling information for interviews will be placed informally into the application file).
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.
/Kevin C. Harper/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2462
Prosecution Insights