DETAILED ACTION
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
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 1-3, 5 and 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kolan (US 2021/0320955) in view of Kolan (US 2023/0254267), hereinafter referred to as Kolan ‘267.
Regarding claim 1, Kolan describes a method performed by at least one processor, the method comprising:
provisioning, between a 5th generation media streaming (5GMS) application provider and a 5GMS application function (5GMS AF), a content publishing configuration for streaming in a 5GMS network (fig. 5-6 & para. 88, 5GMS application provider 516 sets up (configures) a signal media function 518 (5GMS AF) for downlink media services). Note, this architectural drawing fig. 3-4 of instant application),
wherein the content publishing configuration comprises a media entry point associated with a 5GMS application server (AS) for the streaming (fig. 6 & para. 88, the downlink media distribution configuration is for setting up a edge (entry point) 5GMSd AS (EAS) 620. See also para. 124 “entry point”);
wherein the content publishing configuration comprises a publishing configuration parameter that specifies one or more protocols for the uplink streaming between a 5GMS client and the 5GMS AS (para. 88, setup/configuration for downlink media distribution is between the 5GMSd AS and the UE 402, where parameters for distribution comprises “distribution_format” field to indicate a format [= protocol] of distribution, para. 142), and
wherein the content publishing configuration comprises a content preparation parameter that indicates a content preparation process performed by the 5GMS AS for egest of the content received from the 5GMS client to the 5GMS application provider (fig. 6 & para. 88, the setup/configuration of communication between the UE (5GMS client) and the 5G MSd Application provider determines the functionality of the edge media application function to process remaining (egest) content in the workflow, claim 6).
Kolan describes the configuration and the streaming is for downlink, hence fails to further explicitly describe:
configuration and the streaming is for uplink.
Kolan ‘267 also describes network comprising UE, 5GMSd AF, 5GMSd AS and 5GMSd Application provider for media streaming (fig. 4-5), further describing:
configuration and the streaming is for uplink (para. 156, the provisioning (configuration) can be applied to downlink or uplink media streaming sessions).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to specify that the setup/provisioning for downlink streaming in Kolan being applicable for uplink streaming as in Kolan ‘267.
The motivation for combining the teachings is that this enables QoS provisioning and policy management aspects have to be correctly undertaken to meet end-to-end service experience (Kolan ‘267 para. 3).
Regarding claim 2, Kolan and Kolan ‘267 combined describe:
wherein the content preparation parameter specifies a content preparation template ID that identifies a content preparation template for the content preparation process (Kolan ‘267 para. 145 & 156-157, ApplicationSessionContext information comprises template ID which specifies the policy template to use for the application session)
Regarding claim 3, Kolan and Kolan ‘267 combined describe:
wherein the publishing configuration parameter further specifies a server associated with the 5GMS application provider that transmits content streamed to the 5GMS AS (Kolan para. 93-94, core network 404 informs (specifies via configuration parameter) the external media application function 720 (server) in the external application provider network 704 to ingest content into the edge media server (edge MSd AS).
Regarding claim 5, Kolan and Kolan ‘267 combined describe:
wherein the 5GMS client selects one protocol from the one protocol for the uplink protocol (Kolan para. 88, setup/configuration for downlink media distribution is between the 5GMSd AS and the UE 402, where parameters for distribution comprises “distribution_format” field to indicate (select) a format [= protocol] of distribution, para. 142).
Regarding claim 7, Kolan and Kolan ‘267 combined describe:
wherein the content publishing configuration includes one or more dynamic policies, wherein the 5GMS client invokes one of the one or more dynamic policies to set up the uplink streaming on a network slice (Kolan ‘267 para. 96-97, UE 606 uses NSSP for its slice policy management to send dynamic policy requests, for enabling uplink stream with uplink SliceInfo (fig. 6-9 & para. 147’s table 3).
Regarding claim 8, Kolan describes that media content is ingested (cached) from the external service provider network 704 into the edge media application function 620 (5G edge MSd AS) as part of downlink media distribution to UE (fig. 6 & para. 88 & 94).
Kolan ‘267 describes that the policy/implementation is applicable to both downlink and uplink (para. 156). Thus, Kolan and Kolan ‘267 combined equivalently defines a cache at the 5GMS AS for caching the uplink content streamed from the 5GMS client to the 5GMS AS).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kolan in view of Kolan ‘267 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kolan (US 2025/0024315), hereinafter referred to as Kolan ‘315.
Regarding claim 6, Kolan and Kolan ‘267 combined fail to further explicitly describe:
wherein the 5GMS application provider is configured to transmit a command to the 5GMS AF to update the content publishing configuration.
Kolan ‘315 also describes media services streaming in network comprising UE, 5GMSd AF, 5GMSd AS and 5GMSd Application Provider (fig. 6), further comprising:
wherein the 5GMS application provider is configured to transmit a command to the 5GMS AF to update the content publishing configuration (para. 205’s table 10, UP app updates the Application Function (5GMSd AF) via 5GMSd Application Provider about the newly added stream for the media (content publishing configuration)).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to specify that the 5GMS application provider of Kolan and Kolan ‘267 to transmit command to 5GMS AF for updating the content publishing configuration as in Kolan ‘315.
The motivation for combining the teachings is that this yields an improved methods and apparatus for configuring and deploying media processing in the network (Kolan ‘315 para. 43).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4 and 9-12 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.
Regarding claim 4, the prior art fails to further explicitly describe:
wherein the publishing configuration parameter further specifies whether one of (i) a pull based content egest is used for egesting content from the 5GMS AS to the 5GMS application provider and (ii) a push based content egest is used for egesting content from the 5GMS AS to the 5GMS application provider.
The closest prior art, Kolan describing remaining (egest of) content of the workflow be processed by the edge media AF (claim 6), in combination with Kolan ‘267, fail to render the above additional features as a whole obvious.
Regarding claim 9, the prior art fails to further explicitly describe:
wherein the cache parameter comprises a filter parameter that specifies a pattern, wherein the content from the 5GMS client that matches the pattern is stored in the cache.
Regarding claim 10, the prior art fails to further explicitly describe:
wherein the cache parameter comprises a no-cache parameter that indicates that the content from the 5GMS client that matches the pattern is not stored in the cache.
Regarding claim 11, the prior art fails to further explicitly describe:
wherein the cache parameter comprises one or more caching directives applied to an interface between the 5GMS application provider and the 5GMS AS.
For claims 9-11, the closest prior art, Andrews (US 2005/0076115) describing varying a cache policy comprising use of cache parameters (para. 9) or Martin (US 6,247,017) describing server-client communication with maintaining of a local cache of variables (col. 8 lines 11-15), in combination with Kolan and Kolan ‘267, fail to render any of the above additional features as a whole obvious.
Regarding claim 12, the prior art fails to further explicitly describe:
wherein the cache parameter comprises a duration parameter that specifies a minimum period in which content is stored in the cache.
The closest prior art, Wu (CN 117425029) describing a frame maximum cache time variable for storing the video frame array of all video frames received in the frame maximum cache time, in combination with Kolan and Kolan ‘267, fail to render the above additional features as a whole obvious.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Sodagar (US 2022/0322306) describing the defining of egest configuration & protocols in 5G uplink streaming (title), Sodagar (US 2022/0322323) describing configuration of 5G application servers in connected uplink streaming (title), Hall (US 2021/0136177) describing edge computing platform capability discovery (fig. 2, 7-8), You (US 2021/0004273) describing network based media processing (NBMP) (title & fig. 1), Oyman (US 2013/0290493) describing cross-layer optimized adaptive HTTP streaming (fig. 1), Iyer (US 2020/0228880) describing on-demand generation & personalization of video content from server to edge node to mobile devices (title & fig. 10), and Harville (US 2005000502) describing method for managing a streaming media service (fig. 2).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WARNER WONG whose telephone number is (571)272-8197. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7am - 3:30pm.
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, Ian Moore can be reached at 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 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.
WARNER WONG
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2469
/WARNER WONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2469
Prosecution Insights