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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 02/13/2024 and 07/18/2024 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148
USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 1-3, 6, 10-12, 15, 19-21, 24, 25-27 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Qiao et al. (US 20240381180 A1) hereinafter Qiao in view of Xu et al. (US 20240172084 A1) hereinafter Xu.
Regarding claim 1,
Qiao teaches a user equipment (UE) for wireless communication (UE [0005]; element 100 of Fig. 3), comprising: a memory (storage [0005]; element 326 of Fig. 2); and one or more processors, coupled to the memory (processor [0005]; element 318 of Fig. 2), configured to: receive, from a network device, a UE route selection policy (URSP) rule that indicates a preference for a multi-access protocol data unit (PDU) session and preferred types of access links for the multi-access PDU session (receiving, from 5GC, URSP rule comprising one or more route selection descriptors and type preference [0245]-[0246] and [0268]; Figs. 15 and 17); and establish the multi-access PDU session using the preferred types of access links indicated by the URSP rule (initiating MA-PDU sessions based on the URSP rule [0245]-[0246], [0268] and [0304]; Figs. 15 and 17).
Qiao does not explicitly teach receiving a preferred quantity of access channel links, and establishing the session using the preferred quantity of access links.
Xu teaches receiving a preferred quantity of access channel links (URSP policy indicating a quantity of paths for transmission [0345]-[0346]), and establishing the session using the preferred quantity of access links (establishing a data flow through the set of paths [0334]-[0335] and [0371]) .
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Xu to the teachings of Qiao. One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would enhance data throughput (Xu [0004]).
Regarding claim 2,
Qiao and Xu teach all the features of claim 1, as outlined above.
Qiao further teaches URSP rule includes a route selection descriptor component (URSP consisting at least one route selection descriptor [0268]) and the preferred types of access links for the multi-access PDU session (URSP rule comprising one or more route selection descriptors and type preference [0245]-[0246] and [0268]; Figs. 15 and 17).
Qiao does not explicitly teach indication of the preferred quantity of access links for the session.
Xu teaches indication of the preferred quantity of access links for the session (URSP policy indicating a quantity of paths for transmission [0345]-[0346]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Xu to the teachings of Qiao. One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would enhance data throughput (Xu [0004]).
Note: Including the quantity and type of access links in a component of the URSP called a route selection descriptor is a design choice that is obvious to one having ordinary level of skill in the art since the prior art already teaches/suggests the inclusion of such information in the URSP, as outlined above.
Regarding claim 3,
Qiao and Xu teach all the features of claim 2, as outlined above.
Qiao further teaches route selection descriptor component includes an indication of a multi-access access type option of a plurality of multi-access access type options that are associated with different types of access links (URSP consisting a PDU session type policy used for matching an application a PDU session type of a plurality of session types, such as offloading to non-3GPP access [0246]).
Qiao does not explicitly teach the plurality of access type options are associated with different quantities of access links for the session.
Xu teaches the plurality of access type options are associated with different quantities of access links for the session (URSP policy indicating a quantity of paths for transmission [0345]-[0346]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Xu to the teachings of Qiao. One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would enhance data throughput (Xu [0004]).
Regarding claim 6,
Qiao and Xu teach all the features of claim 1, as outlined above.
Qiao further teaches the one or more processors are further configured to:transmit, to a base station, a registration request, wherein the one or more processors, to receive the URSP rule, are configured to receive the URSP rule based at least in part on transmitting the registration request (receiving, from 5GC, URSP rule based on transmitting a registration request [0245]-[0246] and [0301]; Figs. 16 and 17).
Claims [10-12 and 15] “network device”, claims [19-21 and 24] “UE method” and claims [25-27 and 30] “network device method” are rejected under the same reasoning as claims [1-3 and 6] “UE”.
Claims 4-5, 13-14, 22-23 and 28-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Qiao and Xu in view of further view of Xu et al. (US 20210105697 A1) hereinafter Xu_97 in further view of Yang et al. (US 20240187473 A1) hereinafter Yang.
Regarding claim 4,
Qiao and Xu teach all the features of claim 3, as outlined above.
Qiao and Xu do not explicitly teach the plurality of multi-access access type options includes a first multi-access access type option associated with two 3GPP access links, a second multi-access access type option associated with two non-3GPP access links, a third multi-access access type option associated with three 3GPP access links, a fourth multi-access access type option associated with two 3GPP access links and one non-3GPP access link, a fifth multi-access access type option associated with one 3GPP access link and two non-3GPP access links, and a sixth multi-access access type option associated with three non-3GPP access links.
Xu_97 teaches the plurality of multi-access access type options includes a first multi-access access type option associated with two 3GPP access links (redundant transmission paths using the same 3GPP preferred access type according to the policy rules [0045]-[0046] and [0049]; tables 1-3), a second multi-access access type option associated with two non-3GPP access links (redundant transmission paths using the same non-3GPP preferred access type according to the policy rules [0045]-[0046] and [0049]; tables 1-3), a third multi-access access type option associated with three 3GPP access links (plurality of redundant transmission paths using the same 3GPP preferred access type according to the policy rules [0045]-[0046] and [0049]; tables 1-3) and a sixth multi-access access type option associated with three non-3GPP access links (plurality of redundant transmission paths using the same non-3GPP preferred access type according to the policy rules [0045]-[0046] and [0049]; tables 1-3).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Xu_97 to the teachings of Qiao and Xu. One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would enhance data transmission reliability (Xu_97 [0004]).
Qiao and Xu and Xu_97 do not explicitly teach a fourth multi-access access type option associated with two 3GPP access links and one non-3GPP access link, a fifth multi-access access type option associated with one 3GPP access link and two non-3GPP access links.
YANG teaches a fourth multi-access access type option associated with two 3GPP access links and one non-3GPP access link (MA PDU type including at least two channels, where the at least two channels include at least one 3GPP channel and at least one non-3GPP channel [0006]), a fifth multi-access access type option associated with one 3GPP access link and two non-3GPP access links (MA PDU type including at least two channels, where the at least two channels include at least one 3GPP channel and at least one non-3GPP channel [0006]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Yang to the teachings of Qiao and Xu and Xu_97. One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would enhance service continuity (Yang [0003]).
Regarding claim 5,
Qiao and Xu and Xu_97 and Yang teach all the features of claim 3, as outlined above.
Qiao further teaches the plurality of multi-access access type options further includes a seventh multi-access access type option associated with one 3GPP access link and one non-3GPP access link (simultaneously using one 3GPP access network and one non-3GPP access network [0298]).
Claims [13-14] “network device”, claims [22-23] “UE method” and claims [28-29] “network device method” are rejected under the same reasoning as claims [4-5] “UE”.
Claims 7-9 and 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Qiao and Xu in further view Xu_97.
Regarding claim 7,
Qiao and Xu teach all the features of claim 1, as outlined above.
Qiao and Xu do not explicitly teach the preferred types of access links for the multi-access PDU session include multiple 3GPP access links.
Xu_97 teaches the preferred types of access links for the multi-access PDU session include multiple 3GPP access links (plurality of redundant transmission paths using the same 3GPP preferred access type according to the policy rules [0045]-[0046] and [0049]; tables 1-3).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Xu_97 to the teachings of Qiao and Xu. One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would enhance data transmission reliability (Xu_97 [0004]).
Regarding claim 8,
Qiao and Xu teach all the features of claim 1, as outlined above.
Qiao and Xu do not explicitly teach the preferred types of access links for the multi-access PDU session include multiple non-3GPP access links.
Xu_97 teaches the preferred types of access links for the multi-access PDU session include multiple non-3GPP access links (plurality of redundant transmission paths using the same non-3GPP preferred access type according to the policy rules [0045]-[0046] and [0049]; tables 1-3).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Xu_97 to the teachings of Qiao and Xu. One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would enhance data transmission reliability (Xu_97 [0004]).
Regarding claim 9,
Qiao and Xu teach all the features of claim 1, as outlined above.
Qiao and Xu do not explicitly teach the preferred quantity of access links for the multi-access PDU session include more than two access links.
Xu_97 teaches the preferred quantity of access links for the multi-access PDU session include more than two access links (plurality of redundant transmission paths using the same access type according to the policy rules [0045]-[0046] and [0049]; tables 1-3).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Xu_97 to the teachings of Qiao and Xu. One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would enhance data transmission reliability (Xu_97 [0004]).
Claims [16-18] “network device” are rejected under the same reasoning as claims [7-9] “UE”.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABDUL AZIZ SANTARISI whose telephone number is (703)756-4586. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 AM - 5:00 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, Ayman Abaza can be reached on (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.
/ABDUL AZIZ SANTARISI/Examiner, Art Unit 2465
/AYMAN A ABAZA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2465