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 with respect to claim(s) 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al (us 2020/0358689) (hereinafter Lee) in view of Han et al (us 11,805,022) (hereinafter Han) and further in view of De La Torre Alonso et al (us 2024/0147272) (hereinafter Alonso).
As regarding claim 1, Lee discloses at least one memory and at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory and configured to cause the apparatus to receive a subscription request from a second network device, wherein the subscription request corresponds to a request for a subscription to (see Lee 0322-0325, memory and processor); determine at least one device application having session performance analytics to be performed (see Lee 0101-0103, determine if triggering a collection of new data collection is needed based on input request parameters (Lee 00130-132) is needed); request performance data for an application session from the at least one device application (see Lee 0134-0148, NWDAF obtains/retrieves data from various sources perform data collection for the UE/s); receive the performance data for the application session (see Lee 0134-0148, NWDAF obtains/retrieves data from various sources perform data collection for the UE/s) and send application data analytics to the second network device (see Lee 0103, also see Lee figure.3, NWDAF send analytic information request response to the consumer).
Lee is silent in regard to the concept of transmit a subscription response corresponding to the subscription request.
Han teaches the concept of transmit a subscription response corresponding to the subscription request (see Han col.21, lines 48-53, col.24, lines 34-41, send a subscription response/acknowledgment to the consumer).
It would have been obvious to one with an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Han to Lee because they're analogous art. A person would have been motivated to modify Lee with Han’s teaching for the purpose of allowing the consumer to know that the request is feasible according to the standard (see Han col.21, lines 38-53).
The combination of Lee-Han is silent in regard to the concept of the subscription request comprising an analytics event identifier (ID), an analytics type of event, and a target ID.
Alonso teaches the concept of the subscription request comprising an analytics event identifier (ID), an analytics type of event, and a target ID (see Alonso 0010, establish event subscription request which comprise event ID, event type and endpoint ID, paragraph 0047 further discloses type and origin of analytic data to be collected…).
It would have been obvious to one with an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Alonso to Lee-Han because they're analogous art. A person would have been motivated to modify Lee-Han with Alonso’s teaching for the purpose of improving and enhancing the subscription request by providing specific description when make the subscription request.
As regarding claim 2, Lee-Han-Alonso discloses an application enablement unit (see Lee 0059-0071, NWDAF has various different functions see Han col.13, lines 14-60, NWDAF comprising various sub function (i.e. application enablement unit) for data analytic, collection, storing or other functions). For the purpose of providing flexibility by providing various different functions and roles.
As regarding claim 3, Lee-Han-Alonso discloses the second network device comprises an application analytics consumer (see Lee 0103-0107, service consumer).
As regarding claim 4, Lee-Han-Alonso discloses the application session is for at least one user equipment (UE) to UE session (see Lee 0215,0233, PDU user session/s).
As regarding claim 5, Lee-Han-Alonso discloses the at least one device application comprises an application data analytics enabler client (ADAEC) (see Lee 0013-0019, collecting data and filtering based on various parameters, such as application ID, UE ID etc…).
As regarding claim 6, Lee-Han-Alonso discloses the performance data for the application session comprises user equipment (UE) to UE session performance analytics (see Lee 0215,0233, analytic data for multiple UEs or UE session).
As regarding claim 7, Lee-Han-Alonso discloses the request for the performance data comprises a configuration of a reporting requirement (see Lee 0113-0125, input parameters from the consumer includes the subscription request).
As regarding claim 8, Lee-Han-Alonso discloses the performance data comprises application layer measurements, analytics for the application session, or a combination thereof (see Lee 0113-0125, input parameters from the consumer includes the subscription request, Application ID, area of interest (see Lee 0113-0120), and various other parameter in 0113-0125 to collect data for UE session).
As regarding claim 9, Lee-Han-Alonso discloses determine the application data analytics for the application session based on the performance data (see Lee 0135-0152, NWDAF obtains data for computation of data analytic based on the provided request parameters).
As regarding claim 10, Lee-Han-Alonso discloses the subscription request comprises an analytics event identifier (ID), a target vertical application layer (VAL) user equipment (UE) ID, a VAL session ID, a VAL server ID, a VAL application ID, a time validity, an area, a confidence level, permissions, subscriptions, whether offline analytics are needed, whether online analytics are needed, an exposure level, analytics constraints, or a combination thereof (see Lee 0113-0132, request parameters such as analytic IDs, UEs, etc….).
As regarding claim 11, Lee-Han-Alonso discloses the request for performance data comprises a request for analytics, reporting analytics, a metric required, thresholds per analytics event identifier (ID), a mapping to local data collection event IDs for an analytic ID, or a combination thereof (see Lee 0167-0180, 0193-0220, event ID, filters, etc…).
As regarding claim 12, Lee-Han-Alonso discloses the performance data comprises local user equipment (UE) data, data for a plurality of UEs, or a combination thereof (see Lee 0167-0180, UE, UE group or any UE).
As regarding claims 13-20, the limitations of claims 13-20 are similar to limitations of rejected claims 1-12 above, therefore rejected for the same rationale.
Conclusion
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 DUYEN MY DOAN whose telephone number is (571)272-4226. The examiner can normally be reached (571)272-4226.
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, Tonia Dollinger can be reached at (571)272-4170. 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.
/DUYEN M DOAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2459
Prosecution Insights