DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in reply communication filed on 07/17/2024.
Claims 1-21 are pending.
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 § 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 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) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 1, 3-4, 8, 10-11, 15, and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 unpatentable over Zhang et al. (US 2021/0345212) in view of KANAMARLAPUDI et al. (US 2024/0259860).
Regarding claim 1, Zhang discloses an apparatus [see Fig. 1, ¶ 28-30; Mobile station 103] comprising:
at least one memory configured to store computer-readable program code [see Fig. 1, ¶ 29; Memory 161]; and
at least one processing circuitry [see Fig. 1, ¶ 29; Processor 162] configured to access the at least one memory, and
execute the computer-readable program code to cause the apparatus to at least:
receive, at a layer of a radio protocol stack, a first uplink unit of data from a higher layer of the radio protocol stack [see Fig. 1, 10, ¶¶ 30, 49; (step 1001), receives a packet data convergence protocol (PDCP) service data unit (SDU)/(first uplink unit of data) from upper layers for uplink (UL) packet transmission (also see Fig. 4B, steps 451)], the first uplink unit of data in a set of one or more first uplink units of data [see Fig. 1, ¶ 30; wherein the PDCP SDU in a set of one or more PDCP SDU (implicitly)],
the set marked with information including an importance value associated with the set that identifies a relative importance of the set compared to other sets [see Fig. 1, 10, ¶¶ 30, 49; (step 1002), wherein the PDCP SDU associates a COUNT value corresponding to TX_NEXT (also see Fig. 4B, steps 452-456)];
construct a second uplink unit of data from the first uplink unit of data [see Fig. 1, 10, ¶¶ 30, 49; (step 1004), construct to performs header compression with a robust header compression (ROHC) profile (also see Fig. 4B, steps 452-456)]; and
make a determination to submit the second uplink unit of data to a lower layer of the radio protocol stack, or buffer the second uplink unit of data, based on the importance value associated with the set, and a threshold importance value [see Fig. 1, 10, ¶¶ 30, 49; (step 1006), submits a resulting PDCP data packet data unit (PDU) to lower layers of the UE protocol stack associated with the gNB (also see Fig. 4B, steps 464), based on the performs integrity protection and ciphering a UE protocol stack entity associated with the gNB using a security key and configuration for the gNB].
Although, Zhang discloses the set marked with information including PDCP SDU associates a COUNT value corresponding to TX_NEXT, but does not explicitly disclose the set marked with information including an importance value associated with the set that identifies a relative importance of the set compared to other sets “within a quality of service flow”.
However, KANAMARLAPUDI discloses the set marked with information including an importance value associated with the set that identifies a relative importance of the set compared to other sets within a quality of service flow [see Fig. 3, ¶ 82; the SDAP sublayer 316 provides a mapping between a 5G core (5GC) quality of service (QoS) flow and a data radio bearer and performs QoS flow ID marking in both downlink and uplink packets];
make a determination to submit the second uplink unit of data to a lower layer of the radio protocol stack, or buffer the second uplink unit of data, based on the importance value associated with the set, and a threshold importance value [see ¶ 82; transfer of upper layer data packets to lower layers using PDCP protocol data units (PDUs); see ¶ 37, each PDU session include one or more data flows (e.g., Internet Protocol (IP), Ethernet and/or unstructured data flows), each having a respective QoS associated therewith, each data flow may referred to a QoS flow that characterized by a QoS profile; see ¶¶ 98-99, wherein the QoS profile include both the importance value associated with the set, and a threshold importance value (priority level for the allocation and retention of data radio bearers-- (ARP))]
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to provide “the set marked with information including an importance value associated with the set that identifies a relative importance of the set compared to other sets within a quality of service flow” as taught by KANAMARLAPUDI in the system of Zhang, so that it would to provide improvements in PDCP packet handling may advance wireless communication technologies not only to meet the growing demand for mobile access, but to advance and enhance the user experience with mobile communications [see KANAMARLAPUDI; ¶ 3].
Regarding claim 3, the combined system of Zhang and KANAMARLAPUDI discloses the apparatus of claim 1.
KANAMARLAPUDI further discloses wherein when the importance value associated with the set does not satisfy the threshold importance value, the determination is to buffer the second uplink unit of data, and the at least one processing circuitry is configured to execute the computer-readable program code to cause the apparatus to further at least: store the second uplink unit of data in a transmission buffer [see ¶ 37; If the received PDCP Data PDU with COUNT value=RCVD COUNT is not discarded before, the receiving PDCP entity of the source gNB, at step 511, shall store the resulting PDCP SDU in the reception buffer].
Regarding claim 4, the combined system of Zhang and KANAMARLAPUDI discloses the apparatus of claim 3.
Zhang further discloses wherein the at least one processing circuitry is configured to execute the computer-readable program code to cause the apparatus to further at least:
start a discard timer when the first uplink unit of data is received at the layer [¶ 31; the PDCP layer supports the functions of timer based SDU discard]; and
after the second uplink unit of data is stored, discard, from the transmission buffer, the second uplink unit of data not submitted to the lower layer, when the discard timer expires [¶ 37; If the received PDCP Data PDU with COUNT value=RCVD COUNT is not discarded before, the receiving PDCP entity of the source gNB, at step 511, store the resulting PDCP SDU in the reception buffer].
Regarding claims 8, 10, and 11, the claims recite a method to perform the function of apparatus recited as in claims 1, 3, and 4 respectively; therefore, claims 8, 10, and 11 are rejected along the same rationale that rejected in claims 1, 3, and 4 respectively.
Regarding claims 15, 17, and 18, the claims recite a computer-readable storage medium that is non-transitory and has computer-readable program code stored therein that, in response to execution by at least one processing circuitry to perform the functions of apparatus recited as in claims 1, 3, and 4 respectively; therefore, claims 15, 17, and 18 are rejected along the same rationale that rejected in claims 1, 3, and 4 respectively.
Claims 2, 9, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 unpatentable over Zhang et al. (US 2021/0345212) in view of KANAMARLAPUDI et al. (US 2024/0259860), and further in view of ZHENG et al. (US 2023/0269026).
Regarding claim 2, the combined system of Zhang and KANAMARLAPUDI discloses the apparatus of claim 1.
Zhang does not explicitly disclose wherein the at least one processing circuitry is configured to execute the computer-readable program code to cause the apparatus to further at least: receive, at the layer of the radio protocol stack, control data that includes the threshold importance value, and wherein the determination to submit or buffer the second uplink unit of data is made based on the threshold importance value, as included in the control data.
However, KANAMARLAPUDI discloses
receive, at the layer of the radio protocol stack, control data that includes the threshold importance value [see ¶ 105; using a control message from the NE, to map a first QoS flow to a first DRB (e.g., 514a), wherein each of the QoS flows include the QoS profile that includes the threshold importance value (see ¶ 99)].
The combined system of Zhang and KANAMARLAPUDI does not explicitly disclose wherein the determination to submit or buffer the second uplink unit of data is made based on the threshold importance value, as included in the control data.
However, ZHENG discloses receive, at the layer of the radio protocol stack, control data that includes the threshold importance value [¶ 327; transmitting PDCP entity 210 may monitor for and receive the status report from PDCP status PDU 285];
wherein the determination to submit or buffer the second uplink unit of data is made based on the threshold importance value, as included in the control data [¶ 327; retransmission buffer 290 implemented at the PDCP layer of the transmitting device may determine that the status report for a previously transmitted encoded PDCP PDU comprises a negative acknowledgment for the encoded PDCP PDU].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to provide “wherein the determination to submit or buffer the second uplink unit of data is made based on the threshold importance value, as included in the control data” as taught by ZHENG in the combined system of Zhang and KANAMARLAPUDI, so that it would to simultaneously supporting communication for multiple communication devices [see ZHENG; ¶ 3].
Regarding claim 9, the claim recites the method of claim 8 to perform the functions of the apparatus recited as in claim 2; therefore, claim 9 is rejected along the same rationale that rejected in claim 2.
Regarding claim 16, the claim recites the computer-readable storage medium of claim 15 to perform the functions of the apparatus recited as in claim 2; therefore, claim 16 is rejected along the same rationale that rejected in claim 2.
Claims 6, 13, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 unpatentable over Zhang et al. (US 2021/0345212) in view of KANAMARLAPUDI et al. (US 2024/0259860), and further in view of KADIRI et al. (US 2023/0308221).
Regarding claim 6, the combined system of Zhang and KANAMARLAPUDI discloses the apparatus of claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose wherein the importance value associated with the set does not satisfy the threshold importance value, and wherein the at least one processing circuitry is configured to execute the computer-readable program code to cause the apparatus to further start a transmit-prohibit timer when the first uplink unit of data is received at the layer, and the determination is to buffer the second uplink unit of data until the transmit-prohibit timer expires.
However, KADIRI discloses wherein the importance value associated with the set does not satisfy the threshold importance value [see ¶ 124; the polling bit is inserted in response to a number of PDCP data PDUs sent without polling reaching a configured threshold, such as a threshold configured by RRC signaling], and wherein the at least one processing circuitry is configured to execute the computer-readable program code to cause the apparatus to further start a transmit-prohibit timer when the first uplink unit of data is received at the layer, and the determination is to buffer the second uplink unit of data until the transmit-prohibit timer expires [see ¶ 125; the prohibit timer starts or restarts when one PDCP data PDU arrives at an empty PDCP Rx buffer or a PDCP status PDU is sent; that is, the PDCP status PDU may be sent only when the prohibit timer is expired].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to provide “wherein the importance value associated with the set does not satisfy the threshold importance value, and wherein the at least one processing circuitry is configured to execute the computer-readable program code to cause the apparatus to further start a transmit-prohibit timer when the first uplink unit of data is received at the layer, and the determination is to buffer the second uplink unit of data until the transmit-prohibit timer expires” as taught by KADIRI in the combined system of Zhang and KANAMARLAPUDI, so that it would to allow for lower network traffic latencies, and provide better communication efficiencies [see KADIRI; ¶ 2].
Regarding claim 13, the claim recites the method of claim 8 to perform the functions of the apparatus recited as in claim 6; therefore, claim 13 is rejected along the same rationale that rejected in claim 6.
Regarding claim 20, the claim recites the computer-readable storage medium of claim 15 to perform the functions of the apparatus recited as in claim 6; therefore, claim 20 is rejected along the same rationale that rejected in claim 6.
Claims 7, 14, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 unpatentable over Zhang et al. (US 2021/0345212) in view of KANAMARLAPUDI et al. (US 2024/0259860), and further in view of You et al. (US 2023/0114120).
Regarding claim 7, the combined system of Zhang and KANAMARLAPUDI discloses the apparatus of claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose wherein when the importance value associated with the set does not satisfy the threshold importance value, the determination is to buffer the second uplink unit of data, and the at least one processing circuitry is configured to execute the computer-readable program code to cause the apparatus to further at least: transmit a buffer status report that includes information on an amount of data available for transmission, and the amount of data excludes the second uplink unit of data.
However, You discloses wherein when the importance value associated with the set does not satisfy the threshold importance value [see ¶ 147; wherein when the assistance information may not include (6) second information, where the second information indicates a second PDU session corresponding to uplink data that is expected to arrive (see ¶ 143)], the determination is to buffer the second uplink unit of data, and the at least one processing circuitry is configured to execute the computer-readable program code to cause the apparatus to further at least: transmit a buffer status report that includes information on an amount of data available for transmission, and the amount of data excludes the second uplink unit of data [see ¶ 158; send a buffer status report to the first access network device, where the buffer status report indicates the remaining uplink data amount of the first PDU session].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to provide “wherein when the importance value associated with the set does not satisfy the threshold importance value, the determination is to buffer the second uplink unit of data, and the at least one processing circuitry is configured to execute the computer-readable program code to cause the apparatus to further at least: transmit a buffer status report that includes information on an amount of data available for transmission, and the amount of data excludes the second uplink unit of data” as taught by You in the combined system of Zhang and KANAMARLAPUDI, so that it would to provide a power saving effect that is the same as that in an idle state [see You; ¶ 4].
Regarding claim 14, the claim recites the method of claim 8 to perform the functions of the apparatus recited as in claim 7; therefore, claim 14 is rejected along the same rationale that rejected in claim 7.
Regarding claim 21, the claim recites the computer-readable storage medium of claim 15 to perform the functions of the apparatus recited as in claim 7; therefore, claim 21 is rejected along the same rationale that rejected in claim 7.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5, 12, and 19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
In additional to references cited that are used for rejection as set forth above, XU et al. (US 2022/0337337) is also considered as relevant prior arts for rejection of in claims 1, 8, and 15 (see Fig. 5, 9, ¶¶ 71-73, 120).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHONG LA whose telephone number is (571) 272-2588. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday from 7:30 A.M. to 4:00 P.M. (EST).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, IAN MOORE can be reached on 571-272-3085. 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.
/PHONG LA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2469
Prosecution Insights