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 (IDSs) submitted on 12/31/2024, 05/01/2025, 07/15/2025, and 08/07/2025 were filed after the mailing date of the present application on 04/19/2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: "at a device" should be "from a device," . Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 5 and 16 objected to because of the following informalities: the first occurrence of "the device" should be "a device" to avoid indefiniteness for lack of antecedent. Appropriate correction is required.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 5 and 16 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over Claims 1 and 12 of copending Application No. 18/045637 (reference Application’637). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the corresponding claims in the reference Application '637 are species and/or obvious variants of the claims in the present application.
Claim 5, dependent from Claim 1, is illustrated below side by side with Claim 1 of Application ‘637 whereby the only substantive difference is italicized. The likeness also applies to Claim 16, dependent from Claim 12, when set side by side with Claim 12 of Application ‘637.
Application ‘007
Application ‘637
1
A first apparatus, comprising: at least one processor; and at least one memory including computer program code; wherein the at least one memory and the computer program code are configured to, with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus device to:
1
A first apparatus, comprising: at least one processor; and at least one memory comprising instructions stored therein that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the first apparatus to perform at least:
receive, [[at]] from a device, a radio resource control (RRC) configuration indicating:
a first identity generated in RRC layer and a quality of experience (QoE) configuration of a service;
receiving, by the first apparatus, from a device, a radio resource control (RRC), configuration indicating:
a first identity generated by the device in RRC layer and a quality of experience (OoE) configuration of a service;
determine a second identity for the QoE configuration based at least in part on the first identity indicated in the RRC configuration;
determining, by the first apparatus, a second identity for the QoE configuration based at least in part on the first identity indicated in the RRC configuration;
transmit, to a second apparatus, the QoE configuration with the second identity; and
transmitting, by the first apparatus, to a second apparatus, the QoE configuration with the second identity;
receive, from the second apparatus, a QoE report of the service with the second identity.
receiving, by the first apparatus, from the second apparatus, a QoE report of the service with the second identity
5 (1)
The first apparatus of claim 1 . . .
determine the device to which the QoE report is forwarded based on the second identity; and
determining, by the first apparatus, the device to which the OoE report is forwarded based on the second identity; and
transmit the QoE report with the first identity to the device.
transmitting, by the first apparatus, to the device, the OoE report with the first identity.
For same reasons, Claims 2-4, 6-9, 11, 13-15, 17, and 19-21 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over Claims 2-4, 6-9, 11, 13-15, 17, and 18-20, respectively, of copending Application No. 18/045637 (reference Application ‘637).
In addition, Claims 1 and 12 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over Claims 1 and 12 of reference Application ‘637. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because Claims 1 and 12 of Application '637 are species of Claims 1 and 12, respectively, of the present application.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
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.
Claims 1, 3-8, 10-12, 14-19, 21-22, and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Hu, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 2023/0379743 (hereinafter Hu).
Regarding Claim 1, Hu teaches a first apparatus, comprising: at least one processor; and at least one memory including computer program code; wherein the at least one memory and the computer program code are configured to, with the at least one processor (“FIG. 13 is a schematic structural diagram of a terminal device 2000 according to embodiments of this application . . . the terminal device 2000 includes a processor 2010 and a transceiver 2020. Optionally, the terminal device 2000 further includes a memory 2030, where the processor 2010, the transceiver 2002, and the memory 2030 may communicate with each other with an internal connection path, to transmit a control signal or a data signal. The memory 2030 is configured to store a computer program. The processor 2010 is configured to call and run the computer program from the memory 2030, to control the transceiver 2020 to send and receive a signal” – See [¶0510] and Fig. 13), cause the apparatus device to:
receive, at a device, a radio resource control (RRC) configuration indicating: a first identity generated in RRC layer and a quality of experience (QoE) configuration of a service (“a RAN obtains QoE measurement configuration information from an OAM or an EM” and “the QoE measurement configuration information may be carried with an information element (IE), where the IE includes a container, and the container includes the application layer measurement configuration information” – See [¶0156], i.e., QoE container ID or the QoE reference ID is the first identity);
determine a second identity for the QoE configuration based at least in part on the first identity indicated in the RRC configuration (“the terminal device is connected to the first radio access network device with a first user identity” or “the connection between the terminal device and the first radio access network device may be described as a connection that provides a service for the first user identity,” therefore, “terminal device receives the first information with a first user identity, where the first information includes first related information of application layer measurement corresponding to the first user identity” – See [¶0211], i.e., the user identity is the second identity determined by the terminal for the QoE configuration based at least in part on the first identity carried, e.g., by the QoE IE indicated in the RRC configuration; furthermore, ”the upper layer of the AS learns, according to the service type corresponding to the application layer measurement configuration, the SIM corresponding to the application layer measurement configuration” – See [¶0347], i.e., the SIM/second identity is determined, at least in part, based on the to the application layer measurement configuration; in addition, “RAN2 sends second application layer measurement configuration to the AS of the terminal device” whereby “the second application layer measurement configuration is corresponding to the second user identity, and the terminal device is connected to the RAN2 with the second user identity” – See [¶¶0237-38] and Fig. 5; wherein “’a terminal device configures application layer measurement with a first identity’ means that a terminal device performs an application layer measurement configuration for a subscriber identity module [SIM] corresponding to the first identity” – See [¶0011], i.e., the second identity is based at least in part on the first identity);
transmit, to a second apparatus, the QoE configuration with the second identity (“The upper layer of the AS performs, based on the first application layer measurement configuration, an application layer measurement of the service corresponding to the first user identity” – See [¶0240], whereby “an upper layer of the AS may be an application layer, or a layer between the AS and an application layer” – See [¶0236] and Fig. 5, i.e., the upper layer is the second apparatus); and
receive, from the second apparatus, a QoE report of the service with the second identity (“The upper layer of the AS performs, based on the first application layer measurement configuration, an application layer measurement of the service corresponding to the first user identity” – See [¶0241]; then “the upper layer of the AS of the UE sends the application layer measurement results to the AS of the UE, and the upper layer of the AS of the UE indicates a service type corresponding to the QoE measurement result”– See [¶0187]).
Therefore, Claim 1 is anticipated by Hu.
Regarding Amended Claim 3, dependent from Amended Claim 1, Hu further teaches the first apparatus of claim 1, at least one memory and the computer program codes are configured to, with the at least one processor, further cause the first apparatus to determine the second identity for the QoE configuration by: determining the second identity based on the first identity and other identity information (when a “terminal device receives the first information with a first user identity, where the first information includes first related information of application layer measurement corresponding to the first user identity” and “sends second information to a second radio access network device” whereby “the terminal device directly sends the content indicated by the first information to a second radio access network device without processing or determining the first information” – See [¶¶0211-15], this can be done by “sending by the terminal device identification information corresponding to a target cell to a first radio access network device, where the target cell is a cell that is managed by a second radio access network device and that serves the terminal device” – See [¶0223], i.e., the terminal sends first measurement information, containing first identity, and a target cell identity, as other identity, to determine the second user identity corresponding to the second access network, which is a second identity because it is a user identity associated with an application layer measurement).
Therefore, Claim 3 is anticipated by Hu.
Regarding Amended Claim 4, Hu further teaches the first apparatus of claim 1, wherein the instructions stored in the at least one memory when executed by the at least one processor, further cause the first apparatus to perform: storing, by the first apparatus, mapping between the second identity and the device (“’a terminal device configures application layer measurement with a first identity’ means that a terminal device performs an application layer measurement configuration for a subscriber identity module corresponding to the first identity” – See [¶0011], and “the connection between the terminal device and the first radio access network device may be described as a connection that provides a service for the first user identity” – See [¶0211], i.e., the mapping between the second identity and the network device is stored at the AS layer of the first apparatus; furthermore, there is an inherent correspondence between the AS and the SIM/second identity as further explained in Regarding Claim 5, infra).
Therefore, Amended Claim 4 is anticipated by Hu.
Regarding Claim 5, dependent from Claim 1, Hu further teaches the first apparatus of claim 1, wherein the at least one memory and the computer program codes are configured to, with the at least one processor, further cause the first apparatus (“The ASs corresponding to the SIM1 and the SIM2 share one entity or module, and there is no interaction between the two SIMS, and the SIM2 may learn the configuration status of application layer measurement of the SIM1 through internal processing” – See [¶0331], i.e., this is the first apparatus) to:
determine the device to which the QoE report is forwarded based on the second identity (“application layer measurement configurations corresponding to a plurality of user identities is independent of each other in an upper layer of an AS of a terminal device” – See [¶0244], while each access stratum, AS, corresponds to a SIM/RAN pair, e.g., “the access stratum corresponding to the SIM2,” i.e., one user identity, and “the access stratum of the SIM1,” i.e., another user identity – See [¶0316]; furthermore, “[t]he upper layer of the AS knows the SIM corresponding to the service type of each application service, so that the upper layer of the AS learns, according to the service type corresponding to the application layer measurement configuration, the SIM corresponding to the application layer measurement configuration, and can also determine which SIM the measurement result corresponds to after the measurement ends” – See [¶0347], i.e., when the upper layer returns a QoE measurement report, it is forwarded to a RAN corresponding to the user identity with/for which the report was generated, i.e., based on the second identity); and
transmit the QoE report with the first identity to the device (“The AS of the UE sends the application layer measurement result and the corresponding service type to the RAN. For example, the information is carried in a sent uplink RRC message. For example, the application layer measurement result is sent to the RAN in a form of a container” – See [¶0190], e.g., identified with the container ID of the application measurement configuration IE; e.g.,”[t]he upper layer of an access stratum of the terminal device sends QoE measurement information about the SIM1 to an access stratum corresponding to the SIM1 in the terminal device” and “[t]he QoE measurement information includes indication information” – See [¶¶0380-81], and “the QoE measurement information includes a QoE measurement result” – See [¶0423] then “[t]he AS corresponding to the SIM1 of the terminal device sends QoE measurement information of the SIM1 to the RAN1, and the measurement information includes indication information” – See [¶0385], e.g., the QoE container IE identifier, whereby, furthermore, “the radio access network device transmitting the QoE measurement configuration to UE and the radio access network device of the UE reporting the QoE measurement information may be different radio access network devices” – See [¶0431]; i.e., the QoE report is transmitted with the first identity and is agnostic to the second identity; “in addition to reporting an application layer measurement result invisible to the RAN, an upper layer of the AS of the UE may further report a measurement result visible to the RAN” – See [¶0188], i.e., at least the results invisible to the RAN should be identified with a first identity so they can be forwarded to the CN or OAM requesting them).
Therefore, Claim 5 is anticipated by Hu.
Regarding Claim 6, dependent from Claim 1, Hu further teaches the first apparatus of claim 1, wherein the first identity comprises one of: a RRC identifier, a measurement application layer identifier associated by the RRC layer, or a container identifier (“the QoE measurement configuration information may be carried with an information element (IE), where the IE includes a container, and the container includes the application layer measurement configuration information” – See [¶0156], whereby the IE is the container identifier or contains a container identifier).
Therefore, Claim 6 is anticipated by Hu.
Regarding Claim 7, dependent from Claim 1, Hu further teaches the first apparatus of claim 1, wherein the first apparatus is at a terminal device, the second apparatus is at the terminal device, and the device is a network device (“the terminal device is connected to the first radio access network device with a first user identity” – See [¶0211] and “[t]he upper layer of the AS performs, based on the first application layer measurement configuration, an application layer measurement of the service corresponding to the first user identity” – See [¶0240], whereby “an upper layer of the AS may be an application layer, or a layer between the AS and an application layer” – See [¶0236] and Fig. 5).
Therefore, Amended Claim 7 is anticipated by Hu.
Regarding Claim 8, Hu further teaches a second apparatus, comprising: at least one processor; and at least one memory including computer program code; wherein the at least one memory and the computer program code are configured to, with the at least one processor (“the communication apparatus 1000 may correspond to the upper layer of the access stratum of the terminal device in the foregoing method embodiment, for example, may be an application layer of the terminal device or a chip configured at the application layer of the terminal device” – See [¶0488], e.g., “when the communication apparatus 1000 corresponds to the upper layer of the access stratum of the terminal device in the method 900, the transceiver module 1100 is configured to perform steps S902 and S905. The processing module 1200 is configured to perform steps S903 and S906” – See [¶0493] and Fig. 9), cause the second apparatus to:
receive, from a first apparatus, a quality of experience (QoE) configuration of a service with a second identity (“The upper layer of the AS performs, based on the first application layer measurement configuration, an application layer measurement of the service corresponding to the first user identity” – See [¶0240], e.g., “[t]he AS corresponding to the SIM1 of the terminal device sends application layer measurement configuration information to an upper layer of the AS” – See [¶0342] and Fig. 9, “the application layer measurement configuration sent by the AS carries indication information indicating that the application layer measurement configuration is corresponding to the SIM1” – See [¶0344]);
generate a QoE report of the service based on the QoE configuration (“the QoE measurement information includes a QoE measurement result” – See [¶0423]); and
transmit, to the first apparatus, the QoE report with the second identity (“the upper layer of the AS of the UE sends the application layer measurement results to the AS of the UE, and the upper layer of the AS of the UE indicates a service type corresponding to the QoE measurement result”– See [¶0187], e.g., “[a]n upper layer of an access stratum of the terminal device sends QoE measurement information about the SIM1 to an access stratum corresponding to the SIM1 in the terminal device” – See [¶0380] and Fig. 10)
Therefore, Claim 8 is anticipated by Hu.
Regarding Claims 10-11, dependent from Claim 8, Hu further teaches the second apparatus of claim 8, wherein the first identity is limited as in Claim 6 and the identity of the apparatus is limited as recited in Claim 7. Because each of Claims 6-8 is anticipated by Hu, each of Claims 10-11 is anticipated by Hu.
Regarding Claim 12, it merely recites the method disclosed in Claim 1 and executed by the same first apparatus. Because each step in the method is executed by the apparatus of Claim 1, anticipated by Hu, Claim 12 is anticipated by Hu.
Regarding Claims 14-18, dependent from Claim 12, each claim language merely recites the same limitations as in Claims 3-7, only applied to the method executed by the first apparatus of Claim 1, anticipated by Hu, disclosing the apparatus and the same performed method. Because each of the Claims 3-7, and 12 is anticipated by Hu, Claims 14-18 are anticipated by Hu.
Regarding Claim 19, the claim language merely recites the steps executed by the second apparatus in Claim 8, anticipated by Hu. Therefore Claim 19 is anticipated by Hu.
Regarding Claim 21, dependent from Claim 19, Claim 3 already discloses that the limitation second identity is determined based on the first identity and other identity information, such as cell identity, as explained in Regarding Claim 3, supra. Because each of Claims 3 and 19 is anticipated by Hu, Claim 21 is also anticipated by Hu.
Regarding Claim 22, dependent from Claim 19, Claims 7 and 18 already disclose the limitation the first apparatus is at a terminal device and the second apparatus is at the terminal device. Because each of Claims 7, 18, and 19 is anticipated by Hu, Claim 22 is also anticipated by Hu.
Regarding Claim 25, Hu teaches a non-transitory computer readable medium comprising program instructions for causing an apparatus to perform (“The processor is configured to perform the communication method in any of the foregoing method embodiments” – See [¶0525], wherein a “storage medium is located in the memory, and a processor reads information in the memory and completes the steps in the foregoing methods in combination with hardware of the processor” – See [¶0256] and “the memory in this embodiment of this application may be a volatile memory or a nonvolatile memory, or may include a volatile memory and a nonvolatile memory” – See [¶0527]) the method of claim 12, anticipated by Hu. Therefore, Claim 25 is anticipated by Hu.
In sum, Claims 1, 3-8, 10-12, 14-19, 21-22, and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as anticipated by Hu.
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 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.
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.
Claims 2 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hu as applied to Claims 1 and 12 above, and further in view of Liu, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2024/0107358 (hereinafter Liu).
Regarding Claim 2, dependent from Claim 1, anticipated by Hu, at the first apparatus in Hu, i.e., “[t]he AS of the UE herein may be an RRC layer,” – See [¶0178], “the RAN may also trigger, by itself, the configuration of the application layer measurement configuration information for the UE” – See [¶0175]. In this case, it is expected that the configuration of the application layer measurement configuration information for the UE is different from “the QoE measurement configuration information may be carried with an information element (IE), where the IE includes a container, and the container includes the application layer measurement configuration information” – See [¶0156], as in the case when the configuration of the application layer measurement configuration information for the UE is received by the RAN from the CN or OAM. Therefore, in this case, the RRC layer at the UE would directly associate the configuration of the application layer measurement configuration information for the UE with the SIM/second identity through which the measurement request is received, i.e., the first identity is the second identity.
However, Hu does not explicitly teach that the first apparatus is configured wherein the at least one memory and the computer program codes are configured to, with the at least one processor, further cause the first apparatus to determine the second identity for the QoE configuration by: determining the first identity to be the second identity.
Liu also teaches method and apparatus for QoE measurement configuration and reporting based on RRC signaling between a RAN and a UE (a “base station sends the service type (ServiceType) and the QMC configuration file to a terminal device through Radio Resource Control (RRC) reconfiguration signaling (RRCReconfiguration signaling)” and “[t]he QMC configuration file contains a QoE reference identity (QoE Reference ID)” – See [¶0058], wherein “for the setting of RRCReconfiguration, reference may be made to the following description: measConfigAppLayer-r15” including “measConfigAppLayerContainer-r15” and “serviceType-r15” – See [¶0059], further described as “where the measurement configuration information is, for example, RRC connection reconfiguration (RRCConnectionReconfiguration) signaling” – See [¶0083], and wherein “the first identity information may be a QoE reference identity . . . used to determine a core network device (that is, the QoE collection entity)” – See [¶0082]). Liu teaches a RRC ID as a second identity (“the measurement configuration information may include second identity information, a service type and a QMC configuration file” – See [¶0084]; “The measurement configuration information includes the second identity information (RRC level ID), a service type and a QMC configuration file” – See [¶0104], whereby “the second identity information is determined according to the first identity information” – See [¶0082]).
Liu further teaches the first apparatus to determine the second identity for the QoE configuration by: determining the first identity to be the second identity (“sending, by the terminal device, the QoE measurement report and the second identity information to the first access network device” – See [¶0092] and “the terminal device transmits the second identity information in plaintext to the first access network device” so “the first access network device may determine the first identity information based on the second identity information, and then determine the QoE collection entity” – see [¶0094], i.e., between the UE and the network device, the QoE measurement configuration and reporting is identified with the second identity in place of the first identity, otherwise said, the UE determines the first identity to be the second identity).
Thus, Hu and Liu each teaches method and apparatus for QoE measurement configuration and reporting based on RRC signaling between a RAN and a UE, wherein the QoE measurement configuration information is identified by a first identity and a second identity. A person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have understood that the RRC ID as a second identity in Liu could substitute in for the second identity in Hu because both identities uniquely identify a QoE measurement configuration information container and a service type configured for measurement and reporting to the UE through RRC signaling. Furthermore, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have been able to carry out the substitution through techniques known in the art. Finally, the substitution achieves the predictable result of providing flexibility in associating a RAN with the first apparatus, as taught in Liu when compared with the SIM based association, as taught in Hu.
Therefore, Claim 2 is obvious over Hu in view of Liu.
Regarding Claim 13, dependent from Claim 12, anticipated by Hu, the claim language merely repeats the limitation to the first apparatus as recited in Claim 2. Because Claim 2 is obvious over Hu in view of Liu, Claim 13 is also obvious over Hu in view of Liu.
In sum, Claims 2 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Hu in view of Liu.
Claims 9 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hu as applied to Claim 8 and 19 above, and further in view of Liu et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20240224347 (hereinafter Liu2).
Regarding Claim 9, dependent from Claim 8, anticipated by Hu, the upper layer of the terminal in Hu stores the application layer measurement configuration corresponding to each SIM/second identity – See, e.g., Fig. 9 and [¶0347] (“The upper layer of the AS knows the SIM corresponding to the service type of each application service, so that the upper layer of the AS learns, according to the service type corresponding to the application layer measurement configuration, the SIM corresponding to the application layer measurement configuration, and can also determine which SIM the measurement result corresponds to after the measurement ends”).
However, Hu does not further teach the second apparatus of claim 8, wherein the at least one memory and the computer program codes are configured to, with the at least one processor, further cause the second apparatus to: associate the second identity and an identity of the second apparatus.
Liu2 also teaches a QoE measurement configuration method and apparatus (“the first base station 110a may transmit, and an RRC layer of the UE 120 may receive, an RRC message (e.g., an RRC reconfiguration message) including the QoE configuration . . . the RRC message includes one or more other items of information associated with the QoE configuration, such as a service type associated with the QoE configuration, an RRC level identifier (ID) associated with the QoE configuration, or a QoE reference associated with the QoE configuration, among other examples” – See [¶0188]) whereby “the RRC layer of the UE 120 provides a command to an application layer of the UE 120 . . . the command may include the QoE configuration and one or more of the other items of information associated with the QoE configuration (e.g., the service type, the RRC level ID, the QoE reference, or the like)” –See [¶0189] and Figs. 11 and 14, wherein the “application layer” is the second apparatus and the “RRC layer” is the first apparatus, and wherein the second identity is, for example, the RRC level ID, and “the RRC level ID associated with the QoE configuration was provided to the application layer” – See [¶0191]).
Liu2 further teaches that the second apparatus associates the second identity and an identity of the second apparatus (“the application layer of the UE 120 may provide, to the RRC layer of the UE 120, a session start or stop indication based at least in part on initiating the QoE session associated with the QoE configuration,” e.g., associated with the RRC level ID, supra – See [¶0191], whereby “the session start or stop indication being provided from the application layer . . . includes at least one of . . . a session identifier associated with the ongoing QoE session” – See [¶0165] and Fig. 7, whereby the QoE session identifier is an identity of the second apparatus and it is associated with the RRC ID of the QoE measurement configuration, as a second identity); and
store a mapping between the second identity and the identity of the second apparatus (the “ongoing session information [identity of second apparatus] is an application layer concept and is agnostic at the network level” where “only a QoE configuration identifier or service type associated with the QoE configuration is visible” – See [¶0096] and “the session start or stop indication includes the RRC level identifier, based at least in part on the RRC level identifier being received at the application layer” – See [¶0103] so, the application layer must have stored a mapping between the second identity, the RRC ID, and the session ID)
Thus, Hu and Liu2 each teaches a relationship between a network device and a terminal based on a QoE configuration generated at RRC level whereby a second identity is used at the first apparatus and at the second apparatus and the second apparatus is aware of the association between a QoE measurement configuration and the second identity. A person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have understood that the store of the mapping between the second identity and the session identity at the second apparatus in Liu2 could be combined with the stored of the mapping between the second identity and the QoE application layer measurement configuration in Hu because both mappings use the QoE application layer measurement configuration as a basis. Furthermore, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have been able to carry out the combination through techniques known in the art. Finally, the combination achieves the predictable result of allowing “the network to determine whether or not to release the QoE configuration in, for example, a scenario in which the UE moves out of an area associated with the QoE configuration (e.g., outside of a service area scope of the QoE configuration),” as taught by Liu2 – See [¶0095]
Therefore, Claim 9 is obvious over Hu in view of Liu2.
Regarding Claim 20, dependent from Claim 19, anticipated by Hu, it merely repeats the steps executed by the second apparatus in Claim 9, with no other limitations. Because Claim 9 is obvious over Hu in view of Liu2, Claim 20 is obvious over Hu in view of Liu2.
In sum, Claims 9 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Hu in view of Liu2.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Liu et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20240172027 teaches a quality of experience (QoE) configuration message that includes an access stratum identifier, wherein the access stratum identifier is a shortened version of an application-level identifier associated with one or more QoE configurations;
Kim , U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20220264373, method and apparatus for QoE reporting in a wireless communication system showing the RRC layer and the application layer of the wireless device, and associating the measurement results with specific QoE configuration;
Johansson et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0279385, techniques for application level QoE measurements reporting;
3GPP TSG-RAN WG1 Meeting #115, Title: "Feature summary for 8.14.2.1", Source: Ericsson, August, 2021, and included contributions;
3GPP TSG-RAN WG2 Meeting #116-e, R2-2110607, Title: “RAN visible QoE,” Source: Huawei, published October 22, 2021, disclosing updates to the QoE application layer measurement configuration IE.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LUCIA GHEORGHE GRADINARIU whose telephone number is (571)272-1377. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00am - 5:00pm 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, Joseph AVELLINO can be reached at (571)272-3905. 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.
/L.G.G./Examiner, Art Unit 2478
/JOSEPH E AVELLINO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2478