CTNF 18/795,984 CTNF 90708 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Claims status 2. This office action is a response to an application filed on August 06, 2026 in which claims 1-20 are pending for examination. Drawings 3. The Examiner contends that the drawings submitted on August 06, 2026 are acceptable for examination proceedings. Information Disclosure Statement 4. The Examiner has considered the reference(s) listed on the Information Disclosure Statements submitted on August 06, 2026. Claim Objection (minor informality) 5. Regarding claim 6 , the claim recites the term "… should be. … " which is not a positively cited claim language. The term may raise a question as to the limiting effect of the language in a claim. Language that suggests or makes optional/intended use (for example, “so that”; “thereby”; “capable of”; “adapted to”; “able to”; “enable to”; “can be”; “may be”; “ should be ”; “….able”; “combinable”; “configurable”) but does not require steps to be performed or does not limit a claim to a particular structure does not limit the scope of a claim or claim limitation(s). Such clauses may render parts of the claims optional. [Note: the limitation recites after “should be” clause is not given patentable weight because it is optional for the positively processing steps. The term may raise a question as to the limiting effect of the language in a claim. A similar alternative term is “configured to” or a positive action verb to perform the function without any unnecessary ambiguity]. Appropriate correction is requested. For the purpose of examinations, the examiner will interpret the claims as best understood. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 6. 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 of this title, 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. 07-21-aia AIA 7. Claim s 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 13, 14, 17, 16, 17 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GUPTA et al. (US 2013/0083783 A1), hereinafter “Gupta” in view of HAN et al. (US 2018/0376488 A1), hereinafter “Han” . Regarding claim 1 , Gupta discloses a device (Figs. 5, 6a-6b) , comprising: a processing system including a processor; and a memory that stores executable instructions that, when executed by the processing system (paragraph [0181], computing device may include a processor, a storage medium readable by the processor (including volatile and non-volatile memory and/or storage elements)) , facilitate performance of operations, the operations comprising: detecting a condition of user equipment or a communication network (paragraphs [0042], [0060], [0111], high level of traffic or interference/congestion conditions exist in WWAN radio access network) ; sending a first message to the user equipment indicating the condition (Figs. 5, 6a, paragraph [0117], once UE receives the RRC_WLAN_Configuration Request message) , wherein the user equipment activates another channel responsive to the first message (Figs. 5, 6a, paragraph [0117], the UE can power on the WLAN radio at the UE if it has not already been powered on) ; receiving a second message (Figs. 5, 6a, paragraphs [0120], [0121], [0122], eNodeB can send an RRC_WLAN_Configuration Acknowledgement (Ack) to the UE; the Ack can contain one access point, or an ordered list of access points, with which the UE can be associated) that a communication link has been established on the another channel (Figs. 5, 6a, paragraphs [0120], [0121], [0122], establish WLAN connection with target eNB WLAN AP) ; and diverting a portion of traffic with the user equipment from the communication network to the another channel (Figs. 5, 6a, paragraphs [0075], [0080], [0126], if the WiFi link quality and overall QoS is acceptable, and based on other considerations, the eNodeB can send out the RRC_WLAN_Enable_Offload Request to the UE; the message can include a flowID map) . Assuming Arguendo that Gupta does not explicitly disclose or strongly suggest: “diverting a portion of traffic with the user equipment from the communication network to the another channel”, Han from the same or similar field of endeavor discloses diverting a portion of traffic with the user equipment (Fig. 4, S412, paragraphs [0108], [0113], [0159], WT sends an accept response for the LWA aggregation request to the base station, where the accept response carries at least one of initial flow control information of the terminal) from the communication network to the another channel (Fig. 4, paragraphs [0108], [0113], [0159], the base station sends a PDCP data packet of the terminal to the WT according to at least one of the initial flow control information of the terminal, the traffic recommended by the WT, and the rate recommended by the WT) . Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide “diverting a portion of traffic with the user equipment from the communication network to the another channel” as taught by Han, in the system of Gupta, so that it would provide data transmission method relates to Packet Data Convergence Protocol reordering status in the field of communications to reduce a data packet loss (Han, paragraph [0005]) . Regarding claim 2 , Gupta discloses the condition comprises network congestion (paragraphs [0042], [0060], high level of traffic or interference/congestion conditions exist in WWAN radio access network) . Regarding claim 4 , Gupta in view of Han disclose the device according to claim 1. Han further discloses the another channel comprises Wi-Fi (paragraph [0054], for example, the PDCP splitting system is a Long Term Evolution (LTE) and WiFi aggregation (LWA) system) . Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide “the another channel comprises Wi-Fi” as taught by Han, in the system of Gupta, so that it would provide data transmission method relates to Packet Data Convergence Protocol reordering status in the field of communications to reduce a data packet loss (Han, paragraph [0005]) . Regarding claim 6 , Gupta in view of Han disclose the device according to claim 1. Han further discloses the operations further comprise determining a size of the portion of the traffic that should be diverted (paragraphs [0108], [0113], [0159], flow control information of the terminal). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide “the operations further comprise determining a size of the portion of the traffic that should be diverted” as taught by Han, in the system of Gupta, so that it would provide data transmission method relates to Packet Data Convergence Protocol reordering status in the field of communications to reduce a data packet loss (Han, paragraph [0005]) . Regarding claim 7 , Gupta in view of Han disclose the device according to claim 6. Han further discloses the operations further comprise adjusting the size of the portion (paragraphs [0082]-[0083], [0089], the second network element instructs the first network element to send a decreasing quantity of PDCP data packets or stop sending a PDCP data packet to the second network element). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide “the operations further comprise adjusting the size of the portion” as taught by Han, in the system of Gupta, so that it would provide data transmission method relates to Packet Data Convergence Protocol reordering status in the field of communications to reduce a data packet loss (Han, paragraph [0005]) . Regarding claim 8 , Gupta discloses the operations further comprise detecting a change in the condition and responsive to the detecting, handing over the portion back to the communications network (paragraphs [0125], [0156], if it is determined that the WiFi connection cannot provide the desired QoS, then the packets can be redirected over the WWAN PCell connection) . Regarding claim 10 , Gupta discloses the operations further comprise the change comprises the user equipment is moving out of a coverage area of the another channel (paragraphs [0125], [0156], if it is determined that the WiFi connection cannot provide the desired QoS, then the packets can be redirected over the WWAN PCell connection) . Regarding claim 12 , the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 1. Regarding claim 13 , the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 2. Regarding claim 14 , the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 8. Regarding claim 15 , the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 10. Regarding claim 16 , the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claims 8 and 10. Regarding claim 17 , the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 4. Regarding claim 20 , the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 1 . 07-21-aia AIA 8. Claim s 3, 5 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GUPTA et al. (US 2013/0083783 A1), hereinafter “Gupta” in view of HAN et al. (US 2018/0376488 A1), hereinafter “Han” in view of HUANG et al. (US 2026/0075518 A1), hereinafter “Huang” . Regarding claim 3 , Gupta in view of Han disclose the device according to claim 1. While Gupta in view of Han implicitly refer to “the condition comprises the user equipment reaching a coverage area of the another channel” , Huang from the same or similar field of endeavor explicitly discloses the condition comprises the user equipment reaching a coverage area of the another channel (paragraphs [0039], [0074], [0080], when the user moves into or out of a coverage area without interrupting an end-to-end TCP connection) . Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide “the condition comprises the user equipment reaching a coverage area of the another channel” as taught by Huang, in the combined system of Gupta and Han, so that it would provide power consumption of a device, a low power communication technology implementing link transmission of a related device is not determined in a case that the low power communication technology (Huang, paragraph [0003]). Regarding claim 5 , Gupta in view of Han disclose the device according to claim 1. While Gupta in view of Han implicitly refer to “the another channel comprises a peer-to-peer link” , Huang from the same or similar field of endeavor explicitly discloses the another channel comprises a peer-to-peer link (paragraphs [0060]-[0063], [0304]-[0305], the link includes at least one of: cellular link, a sidelink, a Wi-Fi link, a non-terrestrial network link, an internet of things link, or a short-range communication link). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide “the another channel comprises a peer-to-peer link” as taught by Huang, in the combined system of Gupta and Han, so that it would provide power consumption of a device, a low power communication technology implementing link transmission of a related device is not determined in a case that the low power communication technology (Huang, paragraph [0003]). Regarding claim 18 , the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 5 . 07-21-aia AIA 9. Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GUPTA et al. (US 2013/0083783 A1), hereinafter “Gupta” in view of HAN et al. (US 2018/0376488 A1), hereinafter “Han” in view of Singh et al. (US 2018/0352477 A1), hereinafter “Singh” . Regarding claim 9 , Gupta in view of Han disclose the device according to claim 8. While Gupta in view of Han implicitly refer to “the change comprises congestion has been alleviated” , Singh from the same or similar field of endeavor explicitly discloses the change comprises congestion has been alleviated (paragraph [0026], depending on the dynamic link quality across various radio links) . Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide “the change comprises congestion has been alleviated” as taught by Singh, in the combined system of Gupta and Han, so that it would provide techniques to maximize, or at least to increase, network utility in networks which utilize for multiple radio access technology aggregation (Singh, paragraph [0003]) . 07-21-aia AIA 10. Claim s 11 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GUPTA et al. (US 2013/0083783 A1), hereinafter “Gupta” in view of HAN et al. (US 2018/0376488 A1), hereinafter “Han” in view of Cui et al. (US 2021/0329722 A1), hereinafter “Cui” . Regarding claim 11 , Gupta in view of Han disclose the device according to claim 1. While Gupta in view of Han implicitly refer to “the processing system comprises a plurality of processors operating in a distributed computing environment” , Cui from the same or similar field of endeavor explicitly discloses the processing system comprises a plurality of processors operating in a distributed computing environment (paragraphs [0077]-[0079], a processing circuit includes one or more processors as well as other application specific circuits; in a distributed computing environment, program modules can be located in both local and remote memory storage devices) . Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide “the processing system comprises a plurality of processors operating in a distributed computing environment” as taught by Cui, in the combined system of Gupta and Han, so that it would provide reliability, stability, and coverage associated with the networks relate to multi-network connectivity with a dynamic node selection (Cui, paragraph [0003]) . Regarding claim 19 , the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 11. Conclusion 11. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SITHU KO whose telephone number is 571-272-8647. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Friday 8:30am-5:00pmEST. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Edan Orgad can be reached on 571-272-7884. 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. /SITHU KO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2414 Application/Control Number: 18/795,984 Page 2 Art Unit: 2414 Application/Control Number: 18/795,984 Page 3 Art Unit: 2414 Application/Control Number: 18/795,984 Page 4 Art Unit: 2414 Application/Control Number: 18/795,984 Page 5 Art Unit: 2414 Application/Control Number: 18/795,984 Page 6 Art Unit: 2414 Application/Control Number: 18/795,984 Page 7 Art Unit: 2414 Application/Control Number: 18/795,984 Page 8 Art Unit: 2414 Application/Control Number: 18/795,984 Page 9 Art Unit: 2414 Application/Control Number: 18/795,984 Page 10 Art Unit: 2414 Application/Control Number: 18/795,984 Page 11 Art Unit: 2414 Application/Control Number: 18/795,984 Page 12 Art Unit: 2414
Prosecution Insights