DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to applicant’s amendment filed on 13 August 2026. Claims 1-4, 7-11, and 14-18 are now pending in the present application and claims 5-6, 12-13, and 19-20 are canceled. This office action is made Final.
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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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) 1-4, 7-11, and 14-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being by Liu et al. (hereinafter Liu) (US 2019/0320362 A1).
Regarding claims 1, 8, and 15, Liu discloses a parameter configuration method comprising: receiving, by a first communication node (e.g., UE 406) from a second communication node (e.g., NB 408), a frame format of a packet data unit (PDU) session, wherein the frame format of the PDU session comprises application data unit (ADU) identification information { (see pg. 7, [0064, 0068-0069]; pg. 8, [0077]; pg. 6, [0059]; Figs. 1-2 & 6), where the system provides QFI },
wherein the ADU identification information comprises at least one of: an application data unit sequence number, an application data unit end mark, or a packet total number in one application data unit { (see pg. 7, [0070]; Figs. 1-2 & 6), where the system provides packets and tags a sequence number to each packet };
wherein the application data unit end mark indicates whether a corresponding application packet is a last application packet { (see pg. 8, [0075]; Figs. 1-2 & 6), where the system provides the packer number to reorder/remap the sequence order of packets and has indication of end marker }.
Regarding claims 2, 9, and 16, Liu discloses the method of claim 1, wherein application packets with different priorities are mapped to a same quality of service (QoS) flow { (see pg. 7, [0064, 0069]; Figs. 1-2 & 6) }.
Regarding claims 3, 10, and 17, Liu discloses the method of claim 2, wherein a priority indicates an importance of a corresponding application packet in the same QoS flow { (see pg. 7, [0064, 0069]; Figs. 1-2 & 6) }.
Regarding claims 4, 11, and 18, Liu discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the ADU identification information indicates at least two levels of application data units { (see pg. 7, [0069]; Figs. 1-2 & 6) }.
Regarding claims 7 and 14, Liu discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the first communication node comprises a base station with at least a next generation (NG) protocol interface { (see pg. 7, [0064, 0069]; Figs. 1-2 & 6) }.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to claims 1-4, 7-11, and 14-18 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection necessitated by the amended language, new limitations, and/or new claims.
In response to applicant’s arguments, the Examiner respectfully disagrees as the applied reference(s) provide more than adequate support and to further clarify (see the above claims for relevant citations and comments in this section).
Regarding applicant’s argument of claim 1 on pg. 7, 3rd par., “…does not disclose… wherein the ADU identification information comprises at least one of: an application data unit sequence number, an application data unit end mark, or a packet total number in one application data unit…”, the Examiner respectfully disagrees. Applicant has failed to interpret and appreciate the teachings of well-known prior art Liu that clearly discloses the claimed feature(s) as would be clearly recognized by one of ordinary skill in the art.
As a note, applicant admits the following:
Admission #1: Applicant admits “…Liu…shows that end marker is included…[0075]…Fig. 7, an end marker, a QFI, and data are included…” (see pg. 7, 2nd full par.).
In particular, Liu discloses the language as related to the claimed feature(s)
wherein the ADU identification information comprises at least one of: an application data unit sequence number, an application data unit end mark, or a packet total number in one application data unit { (see pg. 7, [0070, 0071]; Figs. 1-2 & 6), where the system provides packets and tags a sequence number to each packet, and the system provides the packer number to reorder/remap the sequence order of packets and has indication of end marker (see pg. 8, [0074-0075]; abstract; Fig. 7) }.
Therefore, as addressed above, the applied reference more than adequately meets the claim limitations.
Regarding applicant’s argument(s) of claims 2-4, 7-11, and 14-18, the claims are addressed for the same reasons as set forth above and as applied above in each claim rejection.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kang et al. (US 2024/0349162 A1) discloses technique for quality of service indication and compliance of application data units.
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 WILLIE J DANIEL JR whose telephone number is (571)272-7907. The examiner can normally be reached on 9 - 6.
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, Gary Mui can be reached on 571-270-1420. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/WILLIE J DANIEL JR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2465
WJD,Jr
05 October 2026
Prosecution Insights