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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
Claims 1 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nasielski et al. (US 2016/0066261, "Nasielski" hereinafter) in view of Senarath et al. (US 2018/0220276, “Senarath” hereinafter) and Xiao et al. (US 2023/0292338, “Xiao” hereinafter).
Regarding claim 1, Nasielski teaches a communication device (Figs. 13 and 14) comprising:
a communication circuit ([0132]) that performs communication between a network device (1302 in Fig. 13) and a terminal (1308 or 1330 in Fig. 13); and
a processor (1316 in Fig. 13) that specifies a charge system for the communication ([0134]; “ … generate the cost information in response to receiving the query and also send the cost information associated with the network. The cost information also includes at least one or more of cost information for a high-level application or cost information for a location where service charging may occur”) based on a parameter ([0134]; also see claims 12, 14, 15, and 48-51),
wherein the communication circuit notifies the terminal of the specified charge system device (1316 in Fig. 13; [0134], “… send the cost information …”).
Nasielski does not specifically disclose (1) the parameter is related to communication priority, and (2) the communication priority indicator is included in downlink control information (DCI).
With respect to item (1), charge specified by communication priority is common and well-known. This is mentioned in many prior art references. Some are listed in the pertinent art in the Conclusion section of this Office Action. Senarath teaches that charge may be specified with respect to communication priority (Paragraph [0202]). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to set the charge system based on communication so as to provide the user flexibility to control communication cost, and it is also desirable to develop charging methods and systems which are appropriate to the capabilities and services of next generation mobile networks (Paragraph [0006]).
With respect to item (2), sending communication priority indicator by DCI is also common and well known. This is mentioned in many prior art references. Some are listed in the pertinent art in the Conclusion section of this Office Action. Xiao teaches priority information is included in the DCI (see at least Abstract and Paragraph [0035]). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to set the charge system based on communication to provide communication priority indicator in the DCI to improve system performance (Paragraph [0004]).
Regarding claim 5, this claim is related to a method claim that includes the steps performing the functions recited in claim 1. It is rejected for the same reason applied to claim 1 above.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nasielski et al. (US 2016/0066261, "Nasielski" hereinafter) in view of Senarath et al. (US 2018/0220276, “Senarath” hereinafter) and Xiao et al. (US 2023/0292338, “Xiao” hereinafter) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Tusda (US 2014/0194093).
Nasielski in view of Senarath and Xiao teaches the claimed limitations as explained in the rejection of claim 1 above but does not specifically mention the charge system is set based on at least any one of a communication history between the network device and the terminal, and selection of a user of the terminal. Tusda teaches that the charge system is set based on a communication history (Paragraph [0095]). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to set the charge system based on the communication history so as to effectively use wireless communication resources ( [0007] in Tusda).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nasielski et al. (US 2016/0066261, "Nasielski" hereinafter) in view of Senarath et al. (US 2018/0220276, “Senarath” hereinafter) and Xiao et al. (US 2023/0292338, “Xiao” hereinafter) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yarkosky et al. (US 7,206,593, “Yarkosky).
Regarding claim 4, Nasielski in view of Senarath and Xiao teaches the claimed limitations as explained in the rejection of claim 1 above but does not specifically mention the charge system is set based on at least any one of a communication history between the network device and the terminal, and selection of a user of the terminal. However, A user being able to select the charge system is well-known. Yarkosky teaches the charge system is set based on selection of a user of the terminal (col. 1, lines 14-18). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to set the charge system based on the user selection so as to provide the user flexibility to control communication cost.
Claims 1, 4 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Akira et al. (JP 2005341314, listed in IDS filed 3/22/2024, "Akira" hereinafter) in view of Senarath et al. (US 2018/0220276, “Senarath” hereinafter) and Xiao et al. (US 2023/0292338, “Xiao” hereinafter).
Regarding claim 1, Akira teaches a communication device comprising:
a communication circuit that performs communication between a network device and a terminal (Paragraph [0021]; “A charging control device 5 that controls a charging rate related to communication of the mobile unit 1 in each communication area 2 and notifies the base station 3 via the mobile communication network 4, and a charging rate related to communication of the mobile unit 1 in each communication area A charging rate database (DB) 6 that stores information and notifies the charging control device 5 as necessary is provided. The charging control device 5 notifies the charging rate applied to the communication in the communication area 2 covered by each base station 3 to the base station 3 based on the information registered in the charging rate DB 6. The accounting rate DB 6 may be installed in the accounting control device 5 or may be installed separately from the accounting control device 5.”); and
a processor that specifies a charge system for the communication , (Paragraph [0021]; “A charging control device 5 that controls a charging rate related to communication of the mobile unit 1 in each communication area 2 and notifies the base station 3 via the mobile communication network 4, and a charging rate related to communication of the mobile unit 1 in each communication area A charging rate database (DB) 6 that stores information and notifies the charging control device 5 as necessary is provided.”; Claim 7, “… In a charging rate control method for charging the mobile unit using a control device and a charging rate database that accumulates information related to the charging rate and passes it to the charging control device …”) based on a parameter (Paragraph [0010], “… The charging rate database stores a charging plan selected by a user who owns the mobile unit at a predetermined time …”; [0025], “… a charging rate is assigned to each base station 3 .., i.e. location); [0029], “… matching these pieces of information, the mobile unit 1 can know the billing rate applied to communication at the current location”; [0036], “FIG. 10 is a diagram showing user information and area information stored in the discount DB.” ).
Wherein the communication circuit notifies the terminal of an information element related to a specified charge system (Paragraph [0022], “… The mobile unit 1 is charged according to the charge by the device 5. The base station 3 notified of the charging rate from the charging control apparatus 5 notifies the charging rate to the subordinate communication area 2 using the notification information. The broadcast information here is information that is always notified to the communication area 2 that the base station 3 covers for mobile communication control. The mobile 1 can receive these pieces of information before actually starting communication…”; also see claim 7, “… A billing rate notifying step for notifying information related to the billing rate controlled in the billing control device together with broadcast information to be reported from the base station to the mobile unit …”).
Akira does not specifically disclose (1) the parameter is related to communication priority, and (2) the communication priority indicator is included in downlink control information (DCI).
With respect to item (1), charge specified by communication priority is common and well-known. This is mentioned in many prior art references. Some are listed in the pertinent art in the Conclusion section of this Office Action. Senarath teaches that charge may be specified with respect to communication priority (Paragraph [0202]). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to set the charge system based on communication so as to provide the user flexibility to control communication cost, and it is also desirable to develop charging methods and systems which are appropriate to the capabilities and services of next generation mobile networks (Paragraph [0006]).
With respect to item (2), sending communication priority indicator by DCI is also common and well known. This is mentioned in many prior art references. Some are listed in the pertinent art in the Conclusion section of this Office Action. Xiao teaches priority information is included in the DCI (see at least Abstract and Paragraph [0035]). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to set the charge system based on communication so as to provide communication priority indicator in the DCI to improve system performance (Paragraph [0004]).
Regarding claim 4, Akira teaches that the charge system is set based on at least any one of a communication history between the network device and the terminal, and selection of a user of the terminal . (Paragraph [0010], “… The charging rate database stores a charging plan selected by a user who owns the mobile unit at a predetermined time …”; [0035] “… First, the user selects a discount plan for charging when using or updating the service …” ).
Regarding claim 5, this claim is related to a method claim that includes the steps performing the functions recited in claim 1. It is rejected for the same reason applied to claim 1 above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Katayama et al. (US 2021/0235470) teaches communication cost is set by communication priority ([0049]).
De Vivero et al. (US 2021/0067415) teaches communication cost varies with communication link priority ([0083]).
Roggendorf et al. (US Patent No. 10,701,654) teaches communication cost may be determined by priority (col. 2, lines 53-57).
Wong et al. (US 2023/0336314) discloses DCI providing an indication of communication priority ([0100]).
Awad et al. (US 2024/0056263) discloses the priority may be indicated by the DCI ([0112]).
Yamamoto et al. (US Patent No. 12,022,467) discloses priority requirements are indicated by the DCI (claim 15).
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Chieh M Fan whose telephone number is (571)272-3042. The examiner can normally be reached 6:30-3:00 M-F.
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.
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.
/CHIEH M FAN/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2632
Prosecution Insights