DETAILED ACTION
This communication is responsive to applicant’s response filed under 37 C.F.R §1.111 in response to a non-final office action. Claim(s) 1-5, 7-11, and 15-19 have been amended; No Claims have been canceled; No Claim(s) have been added. Claim(s) 1-20 are subject to examination.
Acknowledgement is made to the applicant’s amendment to claims 3 and 17 to obviate the previous 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection to claims 3 and 17. The previous 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection to claims 3 and 17 is/are hereby withdrawn.
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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/25/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s Arguments:
The applicant argues in substance that QI does not teach the limitations of amended claim 1. QI does not clearly define the causal relationship between the elements, especially in that the “selecting” of a configuration is based on “determining” that an MBS session requires uplink resources. Rather, the cited portions of QI merely teaches establishing uplink in response to the determination of a deliver mode.
Examiner’s Response:
The examiner respectfully disagrees. QI FIG. 5 shows that the base station (consisting of the DU and CU), makes a determination that uplink MBS receiving status report/feedback configuration is to be configured for the UE. QI para 102 describes that selecting the uplink MBS receiving status report/feedback configuration requires dynamically selecting parameters on how each of the UEs should provide feedback of the MBS session reception. In order to select this configuration of parameters, it is inherent that the base station would first have to determine that it needs to/is required to generate uplink MBS receiving status report/feedback configuration for this MBS session. The base station cannot generate a message without decided that it needs to generate a message, wherein this “need” can be interpreted as a requirement under broadest reasonable interpretation. The examiner recommends including language which would suggest if there is a specific method in which the base station is to determine that uplink resources are required. Furthermore, the examiner recommends including language to define how an uplink configuration is selected, such as by dynamically selecting specific parameters for the uplink configuration (as seen in specifications filed 04/18/2024 para 109).
For the sake of prosecution, the response has been reformatted in the rejection below.
Regarding all other arguments presented by the applicant, the arguments are substantially the same as those which have already been addressed above and in the interest of brevity; the examiner directs the applicant to those response above.
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)(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.
Claim(s) 1, 9, and 12-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by QI et al. (US 20230262734 A1) (see 892 03/26/2026), hereby referred to as QI.
Claim 1:
QI teaches a method performed by a base station for configuring a multicast radio bearer (MRB) for a multicast and/or broadcast services (MBS) session, the method comprising: determining, by the base station, that the MBS session requires uplink resources (QI: : FIG. 5 item 3 (“MBS radio resource configuration and or MBS receive status report/feedback configuration”) and para 102 (“…the CU receives the lower level configurations from the response message from the DU…generate an MBS receiving status report/feedback configuration to the UE…CU may dynamically configure how the UEs should provide feedback of the MBS session reception, including…the form, the content, the timing, and the triggering condition of the feedback.”) the base station would first have to determine that it needs to/is required to generate uplink MBS receiving status report/feedback configuration for this MBS session. The base station cannot generate a message without decided that it needs to generate a message); based at least on the determining, selecting, by the base station, a configuration for the MRB, the configuration including configuration parameters for a user equipment (UE) to receive the MBS session, the configuration parameters including an uplink configuration parameter (QI: FIG. 5 item 3 (“MBS radio resource configuration and or MBS receive status report/feedback configuration”), para 97 (“…enable the DU to perform the resource allocation…”), para 102 (“…the CU receives the lower level configurations from the response message from the DU…generate an MBS receiving status report/feedback configuration to the UE…CU may dynamically configure how the UEs should provide feedback of the MBS session reception, including…the form, the content, the timing, and the triggering condition of the feedback.”) wherein selecting the uplink MBS receiving status report/feedback configuration requires dynamically selecting parameters on how each of the UEs should provide feedback of the MBS session reception); and transmitting, by the base station, the selected configuration to the UE (QI: FIG. 5 item 3 (“MBS radio resource configuration and or MBS receive status report/feedback configuration”).
Claim 9:
QI teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving, by the base station, a message from a core network (CN) requesting that the base station configure resources for the MBS session (QI: para 30 (“To establish an MBS session, the core network sends the session management related contents to the access network…”) and para 34 (“After receiving the MBS session context information from the core network…”) wherein core network initiates/requests MBS session), wherein the determining that the MBS session requires uplink resources is based on the message (QI: para 34 (“After receiving the MBS session context information from the core network, the access network further allocates various communication resources…to receive various status reports from the UEs if needed.”) wherein configuring uplink resources is based on CN’s request).
Claim 12:
QI teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the selecting includes selecting the MRB configuration that includes a particular configuration parameter (QI: para 102 (“…the CU may dynamically configure how the UEs should provide feedback of the MBS session reception…the form, the content, the timing, and the triggering condition…”) wherein selecting a MRB configuration includes specific configuration parameters).
Claim 13:
QI teaches the method of claim 12, wherein the particular configuration parameter includes an uplink configuration parameter (QI: para 102 (“…the CU may dynamically configure how the UEs should provide feedback of the MBS session reception…the form, the content, the timing, and the triggering condition…”) wherein selecting a MRB configuration includes specific configuration parameters).
Claim 14:
QI teaches the method of claim 12, wherein: the selecting includes selecting a logical channel configuration of a logical channel associated with the MRB (QI: para 249 (“DU response: configuration information of first RLC bearer…which further includes associated Logical Channel Identity LCID1…”)).
Claim 15:
QI teaches an apparatus operating as a base station, configured to configure a multicast radio bearer (MRB) for a multicast and/or broadcast services (MBS) session (QI: FIG. 1 item 120 the base station), the apparatus comprising: a transceiver; and processing hardware (QI: FIG. 1 item 120 wherein the base station requires transceiver and processing hardware to perform the method).
For further limitations, see rejection for claim 1 above.
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.
Claim(s) 2-8, 10-11, and 16-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over QI in view of ZHANG et al. (US 20160338038 A1) (see 892 03/26/2026), hereby referred to as ZHANG.
Claim 2:
QI teaches the method of claim 1, but does not disclose wherein the determining that the MBS session requires uplink resources includes: determining that the MBS session requires the uplink resources based on quality of service (QoS) parameters associated with the MBS session.
ZHANG, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the determining that the MBS session requires uplink resources includes: determining that the MBS session requires the uplink resources based on quality of service (QoS) parameters associated with the MBS session (ZHANG: para 369 (“…request message received by the receiving unit 201 may be QoS of the bearer, where the QoS includes downlink QoS, or uplink QoS, or downlink QoS and uplink QoS…the uplink QoS includes…AMBR…”) and para 370 (“If the QoS received by the receiving unit 201 includes uplink QoS and downlink QoS, the determining unit 204 determines that the direction of the first configuration is bidirectional…”) wherein a configuration with uplink resources is required when uplink QoS parameters are identified).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified the MBR and the MBS session of QI with the bearer configuration for a session of ZHANG, the combination hereby referred to as QI-ZHANG, for the benefit of proper configuration of a bearer and improved configuration efficiency (ZHANG: para 4).
Claim 3:
QI-ZHANG teaches the method of claim 2, wherein the determining that the MBS session requires uplink resources includes: determining that the MBS session requires the uplink resources based on a QoS flow identifier (ID) included in the QoS parameters (QI: para 418 (“…signaling further carries QoS parameters corresponding to the MRB…including QoS Flow Identifier (QFI).”) wherein QoS parameters include QoS flow ID) and (ZHANG: para 369 (“…request message received by the receiving unit 201 may be QoS of the bearer, where the QoS includes downlink QoS, or uplink QoS, or downlink QoS and uplink QoS…the uplink QoS includes…AMBR…”) and para 370 (“If the QoS received by the receiving unit 201 includes uplink QoS and downlink QoS, the determining unit 204 determines that the direction of the first configuration is bidirectional…”) wherein a configuration with uplink resources is required when uplink QoS parameters are identified).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified the QFI of QI with the QoS parameter of ZHANG for the benefit of proper configuration of a bearer and improved configuration efficiency (ZHANG: para 4).
Claim 4:
QI-ZHANG teaches the method of claim 2, wherein the determining that the MBS session requires uplink resources includes: determining that the MRB or the MBS session requires the uplink resources based on which parameters are included in the QoS parameters (ZHANG: para 369 (“…request message received by the receiving unit 201 may be QoS of the bearer, where the QoS includes downlink QoS, or uplink QoS, or downlink QoS and uplink QoS…the uplink QoS includes…AMBR…”) and para 370 (“If the QoS received by the receiving unit 201 includes uplink QoS and downlink QoS, the determining unit 204 determines that the direction of the first configuration is bidirectional…”) wherein a configuration with uplink resources is required when uplink QoS parameters are included).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified the MBR and the MBS session of QI with the bearer configuration for a session of ZHANG for the benefit of proper configuration of a bearer and improved configuration efficiency (ZHANG: para 4).
Claim 5:
QI teaches the method of claim 2, wherein the determining that the MBS session requires uplink resources includes: determining that the MBS session requires the uplink resources (QI: : FIG. 5 item 3 (“MBS radio resource configuration and or MBS receive status report/feedback configuration”) and para 102 (“…the CU receives the lower level configurations from the response message from the DU…generate an MBS receiving status report/feedback configuration to the UE…CU may dynamically configure how the UEs should provide feedback of the MBS session reception, including…the form, the content, the timing, and the triggering condition of the feedback.”) the base station would first have to determine that it needs to/is required to generate uplink MBS receiving status report/feedback configuration for this MBS session. The base station cannot generate a message without decided that it needs to generate a message), but does not explicitly disclose in response to identifying that the QoS parameters include a QoS parameter for uplink.
ZHANG, in the same field of endeavor, teaches determining that the session requires the uplink resources in response to identifying that the QoS parameters include a QoS parameter for uplink (ZHANG: para 369 (“…request message received by the receiving unit 201 may be QoS of the bearer, where the QoS includes downlink QoS, or uplink QoS, or downlink QoS and uplink QoS…the uplink QoS includes…AMBR…”) and para 370 (“If the QoS received by the receiving unit 201 includes uplink QoS and downlink QoS, the determining unit 204 determines that the direction of the first configuration is bidirectional…”) wherein a configuration with uplink resources is required when uplink QoS parameters are identified).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified the MBR and the MBS session of QI with the bearer configuration for a session of ZHANG for the benefit of proper configuration of a bearer and improved configuration efficiency (ZHANG: para 4).
Claim 6:
QI-ZHANG teaches the method of claim 5, wherein the QoS parameter for uplink includes a UE aggregate maximum bit rate for uplink (ZHANG: para 369 (“…request message received by the receiving unit 201 may be QoS of the bearer, where the QoS includes downlink QoS, or uplink QoS, or downlink QoS and uplink QoS…the uplink QoS includes…AMBR…”)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified the MBR and the MBS session of QI with the bearer configuration for a session of ZHANG for the benefit of proper configuration of a bearer and improved configuration efficiency (ZHANG: para 4).
Claim 7:
QI-ZHANG teaches the method of claim 2, further comprising: receiving, by the base station, the QoS parameters in a message from a core network (CN) requesting that the base station configure resources for the MBS session (QI: para 30-31 (“To establish an MBS session, the core network sends the session management related contents to the access network…such as: The Quality of Service (QoS) information…”)).
Claim 8:
QI-ZHANG teaches the method of claim 2, wherein the determining that the MBS session requires uplink resources includes: determining that the MBS session requires the uplink resources based on the QoS parameters preconfigured at the base station (ZHANG: para 369 (“…request message received by the receiving unit 201 may be QoS of the bearer, where the QoS includes downlink QoS, or uplink QoS, or downlink QoS and uplink QoS…the uplink QoS includes…AMBR…”) and para 370 (“If the QoS received by the receiving unit 201 includes uplink QoS and downlink QoS, the determining unit 204 determines that the direction of the first configuration is bidirectional…”) wherein a configuration with uplink resources is required when uplink QoS parameters are preconfigured).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified the MBR and the MBS session of QI with the bearer configuration for a session of ZHANG for the benefit of proper configuration of a bearer and improved configuration efficiency (ZHANG: para 4).
Claim 10:
QI teaches the method of claim 9, wherein the determining that the MBS session requires uplink resources includes: determining that the MBS session requires the uplink resources based on identifying an indication that the MBS session requires the uplink resources (QI: para 34 (“After receiving the MBS session context information from the core network, the access network further allocates various communication resources…to receive various status reports from the UEs if needed.”) wherein MBS session context information indicates allocating communication resources for any needed uplink status reports).
However, QI does not explicitly disclose that the message includes the indication.
ZHANG, in the same field of endeavor, teaches that the message includes the indication (ZHANG: para 370 (“If the QoS received by the receiving unit 201 includes uplink QoS and downlink QoS, the determining unit 204 determines that the direction of the first configuration is bidirectional…”) wherein the configuration request message includes an indication/QoS parameters for uplink).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified the MBR and the MBS session of QI with the bearer configuration for a session of ZHANG, the combination hereby referred to as QI-ZHANG, for the benefit of proper configuration of a bearer and improved configuration efficiency (ZHANG: para 4).
Claim 11:
QI teaches the method of claim 9, wherein the determining that the MBS session requires uplink resources includes: determining that the MBS session requires the uplink resources (QI: : FIG. 5 item 3 (“MBS radio resource configuration and or MBS receive status report/feedback configuration”) and para 102 (“…the CU receives the lower level configurations from the response message from the DU…generate an MBS receiving status report/feedback configuration to the UE…CU may dynamically configure how the UEs should provide feedback of the MBS session reception, including…the form, the content, the timing, and the triggering condition of the feedback.”) the base station would first have to determine that it needs to/is required to generate uplink MBS receiving status report/feedback configuration for this MBS session. The base station cannot generate a message without decided that it needs to generate a message).
However, QI does not explicitly disclose based on identifying that the message does not include an indication that the MBS session requires only downlink resources.
ZHANG, in the same field of endeavor, teaches based on identifying that the message does not include an indication that the MBS session requires only downlink resources (ZHANG: para 370 (“If the QoS received by the receiving unit 201 includes uplink QoS and downlink QoS, the determining unit 204 determines that the direction of the first configuration is bidirectional…”) wherein the configuration request message includes an indication/QoS parameters for uplink and downlink, not just downlink).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified the MBR and the MBS session of QI with the bearer configuration for a session of ZHANG, the combination hereby referred to as QI-ZHANG, for the benefit of proper configuration of a bearer and improved configuration efficiency (ZHANG: para 4).
Claim 16:
QI teaches the apparatus of claim 15. For further limitations, see rejection for claim 2 above.
Claim 17:
QI-ZHANG teaches the apparatus of claim 16. For further limitations, see rejection for claim 3 above.
Claim 18:
QI-ZHANG teaches the apparatus of claim 16. For further limitations, see rejection for claim 4 above.
Claim 19:
QI-ZHANG teaches the apparatus of claim 16. For further limitations, see rejection for claim 5 above.
Claim 20:
QI-ZHANG teaches the apparatus of claim 19. For further limitations, see rejection for claim 6 above.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 ANGELIE T NGO whose telephone number is (571)272-0180. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Thur: 8am - 5pm; 2nd Fri: 8am - 3pm.
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, Noel Beharry can be reached at (571) 270-5630. 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.
/A.T.N./Examiner, Art Unit 2416
/NOEL R BEHARRY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2416
Prosecution Insights