DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
2. This Office Action is in response to the application filed on 08/24/2026. Claims 1 and through 20 are presently pending and are presented for examination.
3. 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 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.
Response to Arguments
4. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 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.
Double Patenting
5. 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.
Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a
terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with
37 CFR 3.73(b).
Claims 1, 10, 15, and 20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. [12,075,286 B2-hereafter refer as Wang] in view of Wang et al. (US 2010/0074189 A1-herafter Wang-189).
Claims 1, 10, 15, and 20 of the instant application
Claim 1 of Wang
receiving a notification message transmitted by an application function (AF) entity to obtain a total latency tolerance of uplink (UL) transmission and downlink (DL) transmission of a target service and priorities of the UL transmission and DL transmission
receiving a notification message transmitted by an application function (AF) entity to obtain a total latency tolerance of uplink (UL) transmission and downlink (DL) transmission of a target service and a dynamic division of the UL transmission and DL transmission
generating a transmission latency indication message for the target service according to the total latency tolerance and the priorities of the UL transmission and DL transmission, the transmission latency indication message comprising quality of service (QoS) flow indication information of the UL transmission of the target service corresponding to an UL latency tolerance and QoS flow indication information of the DL transmission of the target service corresponding to a DL latency tolerance, the UL latency tolerance and the DL latency tolerance being determined according to the total latency tolerance and the priorities of the UL transmission and DL transmission
generating a transmission latency indication message for the target service according to the total latency tolerance and the dynamic division of the UL transmission and DL transmission, the transmission latency indication message comprising quality of service (QoS) flow indication information of the UL transmission of the target service corresponding to an UL latency tolerance and QoS flow indication information of the DL transmission of the target service corresponding to a DL latency tolerance, the UL latency tolerance and the DL latency tolerance being determined according to the total latency tolerance and the dynamic division of the UL transmission and DL transmission
providing the transmission latency indication message to a radio access network (RAN) entity to have the RAN entity configured to monitor a transmission latency of the target service according to the transmission latency indication message
providing the transmission latency indication message to a radio access network (RAN) entity to have the RAN entity configured to monitor a transmission latency of the target service according to the transmission latency indication message
The above table shows beside replacing the “and the dynamic division of the UL transmission and DL transmission” with the “and the priorities of the UL transmission and DL transmission” the remaining limitation are substantially the same.
However, Wang-189 teaches the priorities of the UL transmission and DL transmission (claim 7 “method of assigning priorities to individual users within the set of delay sensitive users by selecting an uplink or a downlink user that has a least amount of time remaining before transmission is to occur, and assigning a highest priority to a group of users that comprise the selected user and all users, if any, having a higher priority than the selected user in either an uplink or a downlink priority list from which the user was selected, and continuing until all users and groups of delay sensitive users are assigned”).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to substitute the “the dynamic division of the UL transmission and DL transmission” of Wang with and the priorities of the UL transmission and DL transmission” of Wang-189 in order to assign DL/UP priorities according to delay sensitive users.
Claim 2 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 2 of U.S. Patent No. [12,075,286 B2-hereafter Wang], because the claims at issue are identical.
Claim 3 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 3 of U.S. Patent No. [12,075,286 B2-hereafter Wang], because the claims at issue are identical.
Claim 4 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 4 of U.S. Patent No. [12,075,286 B2-hereafter Wang], because the claims at issue are identical.
Claim 5 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 5 of U.S. Patent No. [12,075,286 B2-hereafter Wang], because the claims at issue are identical.
Claim 6 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 6 of U.S. Patent No. [12,075,286 B2-hereafter Wang], because the claims at issue are identical.
Claim 7 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 7 of U.S. Patent No. [12,075,286 B2-hereafter Wang], because the claims at issue are identical.
Claim 8 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 8 of U.S. Patent No. [12,075,286 B2-hereafter Wang], because the claims at issue are identical.
Claim 9 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 9 of U.S. Patent No. [12,075,286 B2-hereafter Wang], because the claims at issue are identical.
Claim 11 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 11 of U.S. Patent No. [12,075,286 B2-hereafter Wang], because the claims at issue are identical.
Claim 12 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 12 of U.S. Patent No. [12,075,286 B2-hereafter Wang], because the claims at issue are identical.
Claim 13 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 13 of U.S. Patent No. [12,075,286 B2-hereafter Wang], because the claims at issue are identical.
Claim 14 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 14 of U.S. Patent No. [12,075,286 B2-hereafter Wang], because the claims at issue are identical.
Claim 16 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 16 of U.S. Patent No. [12,075,286 B2-hereafter Wang], because the claims at issue are identical.
Claim 17 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 17 of U.S. Patent No. [12,075,286 B2-hereafter Wang], because the claims at issue are identical.
Claim 18 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 18 of U.S. Patent No. [12,075,286 B2-hereafter Wang], because the claims at issue are identical.
Claim 19 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 19 of U.S. Patent No. [12,075,286 B2-hereafter Wang], because the claims at issue are identical.
Claim 20 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 20 of U.S. Patent No. [12,075,286 B2-hereafter Wang], because the claims at issue are identical.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
6. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1, 15, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 15, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, because they recite the limitation “… single direction information …” which is not disclosed in the specification and therefore the limitation is considered a new matter.
Claims 2-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, because their dependency from claim 1.
Claims 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, because their dependency from claim 15.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
7. 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, 10, 15, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Liu et al. (US 2022/0007235 A1) in view of Wang et al. (US 2010/0074189 A1) and further in view of Lenovo et al. (US 2021/0153048).
For claim 1 Liu teaches a communication method, comprising:
receiving a notification message transmitted by an application function (AF) entity to obtain a total latency tolerance of uplink (UL) transmission and downlink (DL) transmission of a target service and single direction information of both the UL transmission and DL transmission (Fig. 3 “determining total latency target (tolerance)", Fig. 4 "Determining the uplink or downlink total latency target according to Quality of Service (QoS) requirement", and paragraph 96 “the report may be sent periodically or in response to receiving a polling message or when the intermediate device determines that an achieved/achievable uplink or downlink latency of the intermediate device is below a corresponding sub latency target by more than a first offset or is above the corresponding sub latency target by more than a second offset”);
generating a transmission latency indication message for the target service according to the total latency tolerance and the priorities of the UL transmission and DL transmission, the transmission latency indication message comprising quality of service (QoS) flow indication information of the UL transmission of the target service corresponding to an UL latency tolerance and QoS flow indication information of the DL transmission of the target service corresponding to a DL latency tolerance, the UL latency tolerance and the DL latency tolerance being determined according to the total latency tolerance and the priorities of the UL transmission and DL transmission (paragraph 53 “The uplink or downlink route total latency target may be predefined or configured or updated. For example, the uplink or downlink route total latency target may be predefined according to the QoS requirement or certain communication standard such as 3GPP specification”, 54 “a measurement report indicates the UL/DL latency”, Fig. 4, "Determining the uplink or downlink total latency target according to Quality of Service (QoS) requirement", and paragraph 59 "At block 402, the first device may determine the uplink or downlink total latency target according to QoS requirement. For example, the QoS requirement may comprise the uplink or downlink total latency requirement, then the first device may determine the uplink or downlink total latency target according to the uplink or downlink total latency requirement", paragraph 61 “obtain a report related to the UL or DL latency” , and paragraph 96 “the report may be sent periodically or in response to receiving a polling message or when the intermediate device determines that an achieved/achievable uplink or downlink latency of the intermediate device is below a corresponding sub latency target by more than a first offset or is above the corresponding sub latency target by more than a second offset”); and
providing the transmission latency indication message to a radio access network (RAN) entity to have the RAN entity configured to monitor a transmission latency of the target service according to the transmission latency indication message (paragraph 3 “an access point is also referred to as Integrated Access and Backhaul (IAB) IAB node paragraph 86 “Upon the reception of (achieved/achievable) uplink/downlink transmission delay report of a hop from at least one IAB-N, the delay manager can reconfigure the uplink/downlink transmission delay budget for the relevant nodes”, and paragraph 40 “a terminal device may represent a machine or other device (RAN) that performs monitoring and/or measurements, and transmits the results of such monitoring and/or measurements to another terminal device and/or network equipment…a UE may represent a vehicle or other equipment that is capable of monitoring and/or reporting on its operational status or other functions associated with its operation”, and paragraph 161 “a measurement procedure may be provided for the purpose of monitoring data rate, latency and other factors on which the one or more embodiments improve”-the underlined is interpreted as intended use and not for examination).
Liu does not explicitly teach priorities of the UL transmission and DL transmission.
However, Wang teaches the delay factor is an important criterion in order to measure the required QoS for delay sensitive traffic. For both the UL and the DL the delay requirements may be the same, although for other fac tors this may not be true (Wang: paragraph 43). In addition, Wang teaches an apparatus that comprises means for establishing a first priority list for a first set of users that are retransmission users, for establishing a second priority list for a second set of users that are delay sensitive users, and for establishing a third priority list for a third set of users that are neither retransmission users or delay sensitive users. The apparatus further comprises means for creating from the first, second and third priority lists a combined priority list that comprises both uplink users and downlink users ordered by priority (Wang: paragraph 48). In addition, Wang teaches Fig. 7 shows an example of a second embodiment of a combined priority list for delay sensitive users, where there is determined a most delay urgent user, and where highest priority is assigned to a user set which includes the
identified most delay urgent user and those users with higher priority in the same direction (UL or DL) (Wang: paragraph 57). In addition, Wang teaches for both the UL and DL the delay requirement may be the same, although for other factors this may not be true (Wang: paragraph 43). In addition, Wang teaches FIG. 7, which also pertains to the delay sensitive UEs 10, may be characterized as being "most urgent user" driven. That is, among all the UL and DL users the RRM SF 12E of FIG. 2 determines the most delay urgent user, and then gives the first priority to the user set which includes this user and the users with higher priority in the same direction (UL or DL) (Wang: paragraph 79). In addition, Wang teaches giving priority to UL and DL for QoS users (Wang: paragraph 80).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to apply the teachings Wang to the latency budget method of Liu in order to configure the budget-based latency to cater to delay urgent user (Wang: paragraph 79).
Liu in view of Wang are silent single direction information.
However, Lenovo teaches Methods, apparatuses, and systems are disclosed
for monitoring QoS parameters in uplink and downlink (both UL and DL direction) on the user plane path between a UE and a UPP. Data packets (e.g., containing user data) on the user plane are marked and the UPP monitors one or more QoS parameters using the marked data packets (Lenovo: paragraph 39). In addition, Lenovo teaches while in some instances a QoS parameters for the downlink and for the uplink may be the same, measuring the QoS parameters in the downlink does not automatically
mean that the actual uplink QoS parameters are the same. To support low latency GBR, independent measurements of uplink QoS parameters and downlink QoS parameters is
performed on the user plane path. However, where the system 100 is implemented in such way that fulfillment of QoS parameters in one transmission direction (e.g. down
link) would guarantee the fulfillment of QoS parameters in the other transmission direction ( e.g. uplink), then the mobile core network 140 (e.g., SMF 143) may set up the QoS monitoring in a single direction only (e.g. in downlink only) (Lenovo: paragraph 50). In addition, Lenovo teaches monitoring QoS parameters on UL and DL wherein the QoS parameters include packet delay budget (PDB), delay jitter, packet error rate (PER), and the like (Wang: paragraph 57).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to apply the teachings Velev to the combined latency budget method of Wang and Liu in order to low latency GBR QoS support (Wang: paragraph 50).
For claim 2 Liu in view of Wang further in view of Velev teaches the communication method, wherein generating the transmission latency indication message for the target service (as discussed in claim 1) comprises:
generating the transmission latency indication message comprising the QoS flow indication information of the UL transmission of the target service, the QoS flow indication information of the UL transmission of the target service comprising one piece of QoS flow indication information corresponding to all UL data of the target service (Wang: paragraph 48 “service with certain QoS requirement (such as latency and packet loss requirement), the link between the UE and the donor IAB-N is
required to meet the QoS requirement”).
For claim 3 Liu in view of Wang further in view of Velev teaches the communication method, wherein generating the transmission latency indication message for the target service comprises:
generating information for indicating the total latency tolerance according to the total latency tolerance (Liu: paragraph 112 "obtaining a report to the uplink/downlink latency");
allocating QoS flow indication information respectively to the UL transmission and the DL transmission of the target service according to the priorities (Liu: paragraph 117 "determine the uplink or downlink total latency target according to Quality of Service (QoS) requirement" and Wang: paragraph 48 “the apparatus further comprises means for creating from the first, second and third priority lists a combined priority list that comprises both uplink users and downlink users ordered by priority”); and
generating the transmission latency indication message according to the information for indicating the total latency tolerance and the QoS flow indication information respectively allocated to the UL transmission and the DL transmission of the target service (Liu: paragraph 114 "the latency measurement report may comprise at least one of an uplink transmission latency, a downlink transmission latency and a
processing latency").
For claim 4 Liu in view of Wang further in view of Velev teaches the communication method, wherein generating the transmission latency indication message for the target service further comprises:
generating the QoS flow indication information of the UL transmission according to the UL latency tolerance (Liu: paragraph 117 "determine the uplink or downlink
total latency target according to Quality of Service (QoS) requirement"); and
generating the QoS flow indication information of the DL transmission according to the DL latency tolerance (Liu: paragraph 117 "determine the uplink or downlink
total latency target according to Quality of Service (QoS) requirement").
For claim 5 Liu in view of Wang further in view of Velev teaches the communication method, wherein generating the transmission latency indication message for the target service comprises:
generating the transmission latency indication message comprising the QoS flow indication information of the UL transmission of the target service, the QoS flow indication information of the UL transmission of the target service (Liu: paragraph
12 "obtaining a report to the uplink/downlink latency") comprising
at least two pieces of QoS flow indication information respectively corresponding to different types of UL data of the target service (Liu: paragraph 64 “different QoS requirements”).
For claim 6 Liu in view of Wang further in view of Velev teaches the communication method, wherein generating the transmission latency indication message for the target service comprises:
generating the transmission latency indication message comprising the QoS flow indication information of the DL transmission of the target service, the QoS flow indication information of the DL transmission of the target service comprising at least two pieces of QoS flow indication information respectively corresponding to different types of DL data of the target service (Liu: paragraph 64 “different QoS requirements”).
For claim 7 Liu in view of Wang further in view of Velev teaches the communication method, wherein obtaining the total latency tolerance of UL transmission and DL transmission of the target service comprises at least one of:
obtaining, by a policy control function (PCF) entity, the total latency tolerance from the AF entity (Liu: paragraph 48 "QoS requirement for a service
(application function) is a latency and packet loss requirement"); or
For claim 8 Liu in view of Wang further in view of Velev teaches the communication method, further comprising: monitoring the transmission latency of the target service according to the transmission latency indication message by the RAN entity (Liu: paragraph 161
Monitoring latency and other factors" and as discussed in claim 1).
For claim 9 Liu in view of Wang further in view of Velev teaches the communication method according to claim 8, wherein monitoring the transmission latency of the target service according to the transmission latency indication message comprises at least one of:
monitoring an UL transmission latency of the target service according to the UL latency tolerance when the QoS flow indication information of the UL transmission comprises the UL latency tolerance (Liu: paragraph 53 "The uplink or downlink
route total latency target may be predefined or configured or updated. For example,
the uplink or downlink route total latency target may be predefined according to the QoS
requirement or certain communication standard such as 3GPP specification"); or
For claim 10 Liu in view of Wang further in view of Velev teaches a communication method, applicable to a radio access network (RAN) entity (as discussed in claim 1), the method comprising:
obtaining a transmission latency indication message generated by a core network (CN) entity for a target service according to a total latency tolerance of uplink (UL) transmission and downlink (DL) transmission of the target service and priorities of the UL transmission and DL transmission of the target service received from an application function (AF) entity, the priorities comprising a priority of the UL transmission of the target service and a priority of the DL transmission of the target service (Wang: paragraph 80 “both UL priority and DL priority for QoS”) the transmission latency indication message comprising quality of service (QoS) flow indication information of the UL transmission of the target service corresponding to an UL latency tolerance and QoS flow indication information of the DL transmission of the target service corresponding to a DL latency tolerance, the UL latency tolerance and the DL latency tolerance being determined according to the total latency tolerance and the priorities of the UL transmission and DL transmission (Wang: paragraph 79 “most urgent user is based on higher priority in the same direction (UL or DL)”, pargraph 80 “best effort QoS” and as discussed in claim 1); and
monitoring a transmission latency of the target service according to the transmission latency indication message (as discussed in claim 1).
For claim 11 Liu in view of Wang further in view of Velev teaches the communication method according to claim 10, wherein monitoring the transmission latency of the target service according to the transmission latency indication message comprises at least one of:
monitoring a total latency of the UL transmission and the DL transmission of the target service according to the total latency tolerance when the transmission latency indication message further comprises information for indicating the total latency tolerance (as discussed in claim 1);
monitoring an UL transmission latency of the target service according to the UL latency tolerance when the QoS flow indication information of the UL transmission comprises the UL latency tolerance (Liu: Fig. 4 "Determining the uplink or downlink
total latency target according to Quality of Service (QoS) requirement”); or
monitoring a DL transmission latency of the target service according to the DL latency tolerance when the QoS flow indication information of the DL transmission comprises the DL latency tolerance (Liu: Fig. 4 "Determining the uplink or downlink
total latency target according to Quality of Service (QoS) requirement”).
For claim 12 Liu in view of Wang further in view of Velev teaches the communication method according to claim 10, wherein the QoS flow indication information of the UL transmission comprises QoS flow indication information respectively corresponding to different types of UL data of the target service, and the QoS flow indication information of the DL transmission comprises QoS flow indication information respectively corresponding to different types of DL data of the target service (Liu: paragraph 40 "monitoring and measurement of machine-type communication (MTC) data and narrow band internet of things (NB-loT) data" and paragraphs 72-73 "the uplink or downlink total latency target, the one or more sub latency targets and the uplink or downlink latency are related to a type of service or a logical channel or a logical channel group or a radio bearer"); and
wherein monitoring the transmission latency of the target service according to the transmission latency indication message comprises: monitoring, according to the transmission latency indication message, a transmission latency of first type UL data of the target service and a transmission latency of second type DL data of the target service (Liu: paragraph 40 "monitoring and measurement of machine-type communication (MTC) data and narrow band internet of things (NB-loT) data" and paragraphs 72-73 "the uplink or downlink total latency target, the one or more sub latency targets and the uplink or downlink latency are related to a type of service or a logical channel or a logical channel group or a radio bearer").
For claim 13 Liu in view of Wang further in view of Velev teaches the communication method according to claim 12, wherein monitoring, according to the transmission latency indication message, the transmission latency of the first type UL data of the target service and the transmission latency of the second type DL data of the target service (as discussed in claim 12) comprises:
monitoring, according to the transmission latency indication message, the transmission latency of the first type UL data of game manipulation data of a cloud gaming service and the transmission latency of the second type DL data of multimedia data obtained by rendering a game scene of the cloud gaming service (Liu: paragraph 39 "gamming terminal", paragraph 152 "cloud implemented server", paragraph 72 "latency related to the type of service", and paragraphs 108-109 "any type of service").
For claim 14 Liu in view of Wang further in view of Velev teaches the communication method, wherein monitoring the transmission latency of the target service according to the transmission latency indication message comprises at least one of:
monitoring a transmission latency of the target service between user equipment (UE) and the RAN entity according to the transmission latency indication message (Liu: paragraph 4 "a service with certain QoS requirement (such as latency and packet
loss requirement), the link between the UE and the donor IAB-N is required to meet the QoS requirement" and paragraph 161 "monitoring function"); or
For claim 15 Liu in view of Wang further in view of Velev teaches a core network entity (Liu:
paragraph 151 and Fig. 12 "core network"), comprising:
a receiver, configured to receive a notification message transmitted by an application function (AF) entity to obtain a total latency tolerance of uplink (UL) transmission and downlink (DL) transmission of a target service and single direction priority information of the target service (as discussed in claim 1);
a processor in communication with the receiver, configured to generate a transmission latency indication message for the target service according to the total latency tolerance and the priorities of the UL transmission and DL transmission, the transmission latency indication message comprising quality of service (QoS) flow indication information of the UL transmission of the target service corresponding to a UL latency tolerance and QoS flow indication information of the DL transmission of the target service corresponding to a DL latency tolerance, the UL latency tolerance and the DL latency tolerance being determined according to the total latency tolerance and the priorities of the UL transmission and DL transmission (as discussed in claim 1); and
a transmitter in communication with a radio access network (RAN) entity, configured to provide the transmission latency indication message to the RAN entity, so as to have the RAN entity configured to monitor a transmission latency of the target service according to the transmission latency indication message (as discussed in claim 1 and the underlined portion is the intended use which has no patentability weight).
For claim 16 Liu in view of Wang further in view of Velev teaches the core network entity, wherein the receiver is configured to obtain the total latency tolerance of the UL transmission and the DL transmission of the target service (as discussed in claim 1) by at least one of:
obtaining, by a policy control function (PCF) entity, the total latency tolerance from the AF entity (Liu: paragraph 45 “delay manager” and paragraph 78 “a delay manager (could be modelled as a functionality of route manager, or in the donor IAB-N) can further split the uplink/downlink transmission delay budget between intermediate hops along the route”); or
For claim 17 Liu in view of Wang further in view of Velev teaches the core network entity, wherein the processor is configured to generate the transmission latency indication message for the target service according to the total latency tolerance by:
generating information for indicating the total latency tolerance according to the total latency tolerance (Liu: paragraph 68 "OAM generate and transmit it report
and as discussed in claim 1);
allocating QoS flow indication information respectively to the UL transmission and the DL transmission of the target service (as discussed in claim 1); and
generating the transmission latency indication message according to the information for indicating the total latency tolerance and the QoS flow indication information respectively allocated to the UL transmission and the DL transmission of the target service (Liu: paragraph 68 "OAM generate and transmit it report” and as discussed in claim 1).
For claim 18 Liu in view of Wang further in view of Velev teaches the core network entity, wherein the processor is configured to generate the transmission latency indication message for the target service according to the total latency tolerance (Liu: paragraph 68 "OAM generate and transmit it report and as discussed in claim 1) by:
generating the QoS flow indication information of the UL transmission according to the UL latency tolerance (Liu: paragraph 68 "OAM generate and transmit it report and as discussed in claim 1); and
generating the QoS flow indication information of the DL transmission according to the DL latency tolerance (Liu: paragraph 68 "OAM generate and transmit it report and as discussed in claim 1).
For claim 19 Liu in view of Wang further in view of Velev teaches the core network entity, wherein the processor is configured to generate the transmission latency indication message for the target service according to the total latency tolerance (Liu: paragraph 68 "OAM generate and transmit it report and as discussed in claim 1) by:
generating the transmission latency indication message comprising the QoS flow indication information of the UL transmission of the target service, the QoS flow indication information of the UL transmission of the target service comprising at least one of:
one piece of QoS flow indication information corresponding to all UL data of the target service (Liu: paragraph 68 "OAM generate and transmit it report and as discussed in claim 1); or
at least two pieces of QoS flow indication information respectively corresponding to different types of UL data of the target service (Liu: paragraph 68 "OAM generate and transmit it report and as discussed in claim 1).
For claim 20 Liu in view of Wang further in view of Velev teaches an electronic device (Liu: Fig. 8 “an apparatus”), comprising:
one or more processors (Liu: Fig. 8 “processor 811”); and
a memory, configured to store one or more programs, the one or more programs, when executed by the one or more processors (Liu: Fig. 8 “Memory 812 include the program 814”), causing the one or more processors to perform the method of claim 1 (as discussed in claim 1).
Conclusion
9. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: PANIGRAHI et al. (US 2019/0320445 A1).
10. 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.
11. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to David M OVEISSI whose telephone number is (571)270-3127. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8Am-5PM.
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, Jeffrey Rutkowski can be reached at (571) 270 - 1215. 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.
/MANSOUR OVEISSI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2415
Prosecution Insights