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 § 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, 3-7, 10-12 & 14-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a2 as being anticipated by He et al. US 2025/0062972 A1.
Claims 1 and 12:
He discloses a wireless communication method comprising: storing, by a wireless communication device, a measurement of Quality of Experience (QoE) as QoE buffered data (See fig. 5 step 414, store QoE measurement reports in a buffer); and sending, by the wireless communication device in at least one of an RRC_INACTIVE state or an RRC_IDLE state, to a wireless communication node, QoE buffer information in response to an RRC message from the wireless communication node (Figs. 5 & 6 disclose sending QoE status report in an RRC inactive/Idle state in response to an RRC message. See para 71, “In response to the RRC message, the UE 110 transitions from the RRC connected state to the RRC inactive state at an operation 418”. In message 420 where the UE sends QoE buffer report, the UE is still in RRC inactive/Idle state); and sending, by the wireless communication device to the wireless communication node, a first message including the QoE buffered data stored while the wireless communication device is in the RRC_INACTIVE stat or the RRC_IDLE state (See figs. 5 & 6 steps 418/432 and 518/530, QoE buffer status report/QoE Measurement report stored while being in Inactive/Idle state. Also see para 22, “a buffer status report associated with a buffer for storing one or more QoE measurement reports”).
With regards to claim 12, at least one processor and a transceiver (See fig. 8, processor and transceiver).
Claims 10 and 11:
He discloses a wireless communication node, comprising: at least one processor (See fig. 8, processor) configured to: receive, via a receiver a from a wireless communication device in at least one of an RRC_INACTIVE state or an RRC_IDLE state, Quality of Experience (QoE) buffer information in response to an RRC message from the wireless communication node; and (Figs. 5 & 6 disclose sending QoE status report in an RRC inactive/Idle state in response to an RRC message. See para 71, “In response to the RRC message, the UE 110 transitions from the RRC connected state to the RRC inactive state at an operation 418”. In message 420 where the UE sends QoE buffer report, the UE is still in RRC inactive/Idle state) receiving, by the wireless communication node from the wireless communication device a first message including QoE buffered data, wherein the QoE buffered data is stored by the wireless communication device while in the RRC_INACTIVE state or the RRC_IDLE state (See figs. 5 & 6 steps 418/432 and 518/530, QoE buffer status report/QoE Measurement report stored while being in Inactive/Idle state. Also see para 22, “a buffer status report associated with a buffer for storing one or more QoE measurement reports”).
Claims 3 and 14:
He discloses receiving, by the wireless communication device from the wireless communication node, a second message, causing the wireless communication device to switch from an RRC_CONNECTED state to the RRC_INACTIVE state or the RRC_IDLE state (See para 71 and fig. 5, “the UE 110 transitions from the RRC connected state to the RRC inactive state at an operation 418”); receiving, by the wireless communication device, a third message indicating that the wireless communication device can trigger the measurement of QoE in any of the RRC_CONNECTED state, the RRC_INACTIVE state, or the RRC_IDLE state (See fig. 5 step 410, QoE measurement in one of the 3 RRC states); and after switching into the RRC_INACTIVE state or the RRC_IDLE state, continuing, by the wireless communication device, storing the measurement of QoE as the QoE buffered data (See fig. 5 step 414, store QoE measurement reports in a buffer even after step 418 and eventually transmitting at 432).
Claim 4:
He discloses receiving, by the wireless communication device from the wireless communication node, a second message, causing the wireless communication device to switch from the RRC_CONNECTED state to the RRC_INACTIVE state or the RRC_IDLE state (See para 71 and fig. 5 step 418, “In response to the RRC message, the UE 110 transitions from the RRC connected state to the RRC inactive state at an operation 418”); receiving, by the wireless communication device, a fourth message indicating that the wireless communication device can only trigger the measurement of QoE in the RRC_INACTIVE state or the RRC_IDLE state (See fig. 5 step 410, QoE measurement is stored in a buffer before connection resumption); and after switching into the RRC_INACTIVE state or the RRC_IDLE state, storing, by the wireless communication device, the measurement of QoE as the QoE buffered data (See fig. 5 step 410, QoE measurement is stored in a buffer before connection resumption).
Claim 15:
He discloses that the at least one processor is configured to: receive, via the transceiver from the wireless communication node, a second message, causing the wireless communication device to switch from the RRC_CONNECTED state to the RRC INACTIVE state or the RRC IDLE state (See para 71 and fig. 5 step 418, “In response to the RRC message, the UE 110 transitions from the RRC connected state to the RRC inactive state at an operation 418”); receive, via the transceiver, a fourth message indicating that the wireless communication device can only trigger the measurement of QoE in the RRC_INACTIVE state or the RRCIDLE state (See fig. 5 step 410, QoE measurement is stored in a buffer before connection resumption); and after switching into the RRC_INACTIVE state or the RRC_IDLE state, store the measurement of QoE as the QoE buffered data (See fig. 5 step 410, QoE measurement is stored in a buffer before connection resumption).
Claims 5 and 16:
He discloses receiving, by the wireless communication device from the wireless communication node, a second message, causing the wireless communication device to switch from an RRC_CONNECTED state to the RRC_INACTIVE state or the RRC_IDLE state (See para 71 and fig. 5, “the UE 110 transitions from the RRC connected state to the RRC inactive state at an operation 418”; after receiving msg 416); receiving, by the wireless communication device from the wireless communication node, a fifth message, causing the wireless communication device to switch back into the RRC_CONNECTED state (See para 69, “QoE measurement collection and reporting continuity is achieved when the UE 110 performs a connection resume procedure to recover from the RRC inactive state to the RRC connected state”. Also see para 75).; and in response to receiving the fifth message, sending, by the wireless communication device to the wireless communication node, a sixth message including QoE buffer information (See fig. 5 step 420/432, sending QoE report).
Claims 6 and 17:
He discloses that the QoE buffer information of the sixth message includes at least one of: a 1-bit indicator indicating that a buffer of the wireless communication device is not empty; QoE session information; a number of QoE reports; a QoE report size for one QoE session; data on other QoE parameters related data; or a size of the buffer (See para 52, “the QoE buffer status report may include at least one of size of buffered QoE data (i.e., one or more QoE measurement reports) in the buffer, left space in the buffer, left time before overflow of the buffer, and initial time for the buffer to store the QoE measurement reports”. Also see fig. 5 step 432, includes QoE measurement report).
Claims 7 and 18:
He discloses that following sending the sixth message, switching, by the wireless communication device, itself to the RRC_CONNECTED state (See para 69, “QoE measurement collection and reporting continuity is achieved when the UE 110 performs a connection resume procedure to recover from the RRC inactive state to the RRC connected state”. Also see para 75); and receiving, by the wireless communication device from the wireless communication node a seventh message including QoE requirement information (See para 41, “The network operator or the service provider may configure QoE measurements based on services, applications and/or use cases provided to the end users”. Also see para 47, QoE configuration).
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) 8 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over He et al. in view of Lunardi et al. US 2024/0089819 A1
Claims 8 and 19:
He doesn’t explicitly disclose that the QoE requirement information includes at least one of: an APP layer identifier (ID); QoE buffer information; or a QoE reference ID.
Lunardi discloses that the QoE requirement information includes at least one of: an APP layer identifier (ID); QoE buffer information; or a QoE reference ID (See para 332, “a list of QoE reference ID(s) associated to the configured QoE measurements”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of He with the teachings of Lunardi to improve the method disclosed by He by including the feature of QoE reference ID. The motivation to combine would have been to efficiently indicate what metrics need measurement.
Claim(s) 9 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over He et al. in view of Lunardi et al. and Velve et al. US 2021/0153070 A1.
Claims 9 and 20:
He discloses receiving the seventh message (See para 41, “The network operator or the service provider may configure QoE measurements based on services, applications and/or use cases provided to the end users”. Also see para 47, QoE configuration).
He in view of Lunardi doesn’t disclose in response to receiving the seventh message, sending, by the wireless communication device to the wireless communication node, an eighth message including acknowledgement information.
Velve discloses in response to receiving the seventh message, sending, by the wireless communication device to the wireless communication node, an eighth message including acknowledgement information (See para 177, “explicit signaling from the UE 205 to the SMF 220 may optionally be needed to acknowledge whether the QoS monitoring is successfully configured (or accepted) in the UE 205 (see signaling 425)”).
He's QoE configuration can be modified to require an ACK from the UE for the configuration as disclosed by Velve wherein it requires an ACK for QoS configuration.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of He in view of Lunardi with the teachings of Velve to improve the method disclosed by He in view of Lunardi by including the feature of acknowledgement. The motivation to combine would have been to confirm that the configuration has been received and is being implemented.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/30/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With regards to claim 1 and its corresponding claims, on pages 3-4 of the applicant’s arguments the applicant argues “However, the cited passages do not disclose, nevermind teach or suggest, a wireless communication device which sends QoE buffer information, where the wireless communication device is in at least one of an RRCINACTIVE state or an RRC IDLE state as recited in amended claim 1… Even if, in arguendo, the Office were to construe such signaling as being while the UE is in an RRC_IDLE state (which Applicant does not agree with or acquiesce to), such signaling is not sent by the UE "in response to an RRC message from the wireless communication node" as recited in amended claim 1”.
The examiner respectfully disagrees. Figs. 5 & 6 disclose sending QoE in an RRC inactive/Idle state in response to an RRC message. See para 71, “In response to the RRC message, the UE 110 transitions from the RRC connected state to the RRC inactive state at an operation 418”. In message 420 where the UE sends QoE buffer report, the UE is still in RRC inactive/Idle state.
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 HASHIM S BHATTI whose telephone number is (571)270-7748. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9:00am-5:30pm.
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, Khaled Kassim can be reached at 571-270-3770. 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.
HASHIM S. BHATTI
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2472
/HASHIM S BHATTI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2475
Prosecution Insights