CTNF 18/802,969 CTNF 84539 Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status Claims 1-20 are pending in this application. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Response to Arguments 07-38-02 Applicant’s arguments, filed 02/07/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-20 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Zhang in view of Jo and in view of Munguia. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1-3, 5-16 and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang (US 2021/0058818) and in view of Jo (US 2024/0364799) and in view of Munguia (US 2024/0362465) . Re Claim 1, Zhang discloses a user equipment (UE), comprising: one or more memories storing processor-executable code ([0096], instructions stored in memory); and one or more processors coupled with the one or more memories and individually or collectively operable to execute the code to cause the UE to ([0096], processor coupled with memory configured to execute instructions stored in the memory): concatenate the plurality of service data units to generate a concatenated service data unit ([0029], concatenate multiple service data units); based at least in part on a radio condition, a traffic type associated with the plurality of service data units, an internal condition associated with the UE, a network configuration comprising a range threshold or a performance threshold or both, or any combination thereof ([0032], only SDUs belonging to the same DRB should be concatenated); and transmit the uplink transmission comprising the concatenated service data unit ([0031]-[0033], Concatenation of multiple SDUs. transmitting data that includes header compress of SDU). Zhang does not disclose receive at a packet data convergence protocol layer of the UE, a plurality of service data units for an uplink transmission. According to one of ordinary skill in the art, Jo discloses receive, at a packet data convergence protocol layer of the UE, a plurality of service data units for an uplink transmission ([0004], UE in a wireless communication system receiving a first and second Packet Data Convergence Protocol (PDCP) service data unit (SDU) from an upper layer. [0115], transmit data units, a UE have uplink resources available to the UE.); concatenate the plurality of service data units to generate a concatenated service data unit ([0189], perform SDU concatenation for generating the PDCP PDU which includes the two PDCP SDUs.); based at least in part on a radio condition, a traffic type associated with the plurality of service data units, an internal condition associated with the UE, a network configuration comprising a range threshold or a performance threshold or both, or any combination thereof ([0189]-[0199], in order to concatenate, it is configured with a concatenation timer based on the total size of the received PDCP SDUs. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the date the current invention was effectively filed to have modified the teachings of Zhang’s concatenation with Jo’s concatenation which includes concatenation PDCP and learning models. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to incorporate the teachings with one another in order to create a more efficient system by training the concatenation process. While Zhang and Jo describe most of the invention, they do not disclose, however Munguia discloses a policy generated by a machine learning model ([0093], [0226], [0237], [0241], [0243], generated metadata based on AI-based rules that define conditions to trigger automation actions. The rules maybe grouped into policies and defined at different hierarchical levels. Automatically create rule using generative AI based on specific case use documentation.) It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the date the current invention was effectively filed to have modified the teachings of Zhang’s and Jo’s concatenation with Munguia’s AI services to create rules and policies to defines the manner in which the different services are concatenated or connected and also specifies what each service node is supposed to do. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to incorporate the teachings with one another in order to apply a ML-generated communication policies/parameters to concatenation operations in order to segment/concatenate according to radio resources and rules controlling multiplexing/prioritization (Pelletier US 2019/0116582, [0234]). Re Claim 2, Zhang discloses transmit, to a server hosting the machine learning model or to a network entity, a target concatenated service data unit size for the plurality of service data units, a target concatenation timer for the plurality of service data units, a plurality of logs associated with a plurality of concatenated service data unit sizes, a plurality of statistics associated with a plurality of concatenated service data unit sizes, a latency associated with concatenation buffering, one or more performance parameters, or any combination thereof ([0059], UE sends TTC Conn reconfiguration complete message with the same control parameters used for all DRBs and QoS flows). Re Claim 3, Zhang discloses wherein the one or more performance parameters comprise at least one of a quantity of grants missed due to concatenation, an excess latency associated with concatenation, a throughput associated with concatenation, a channel occupancy time associated with concatenation, or any combination thereof ([0058], a Maximum Concatenation Delay (the maximum latency the UE will hold a UL (or DL) packet for concatenation). Re Claim 5, Zhang discloses , wherein, to transmit the uplink transmission, the one or more processors are individually or collectively further operable to execute the code to cause the UE to: transmit a protocol data unit comprising the concatenated service data unit, one or more concatenation headers and one or more packet data convergence protocol headers ([0238], transmitting the PDCP PDU [0177], PDU includes packet comprising PDCP header, SDAP header. [0280], concatenated data to the PDCP layer). Re Claim 6, Zhang discloses wherein the one or more processors are individually or collectively further operable to execute the code to cause the UE to: receive a control message comprising a set of configuration parameters associated with the concatenation policy (Zhang [0057]-[0062] configuring concatenation on the control call flow. between UE and gNB. Control parameters are used for the QoS flows). Re Claim 7, Zhang discloses wherein the set of configuration parameters comprises a minimum time to hold service data units in a concatenation buffer, a maximum time to hold service data units in the concatenation buffer, a minimum size of concatenated service data units supported by the UE, a maximum size of concatenated service data units supported by the UE, an indication of whether a use of the machine learning model is allowed, one or more quality of service flows associated with the machine learning model, or any combination thereof ([0058], a Maximum Concatenation Delay (the maximum latency time the UE will hold a UL (or DL) packet for concatenation). Re Claim 8, Zhang discloses wherein the one or more processors are individually or collectively further operable to execute the code to cause the UE to: receive a control message indicating a threshold quantity of missed grants, a target segmentation rate, a target throughput value, a target latency value, or any combination thereof, wherein the concatenation policy is based at least in part on the control message ([0058], a Maximum Concatenation Delay (the maximum latency the UE will hold a UL (or DL) packet for concatenation). In addition, Munguia discloses wherein the UE provides one or more values indicated in the control message as inputs to the machine learning model, and where, the machine learning model ([0093], [0157], [0226], [0237], [0241], [0243], generated metadata based on AI-based rules that define conditions to trigger automation actions. The rules maybe grouped into policies and defined at different hierarchical levels. Automatically create rule using generative AI based on specific case use documentation. AI services are included in the workflow for services namely concatenation of all services descriptors.) Re Claim 9, Zhang discloses wherein the concatenation policy comprises a concatenated service data unit size for the plurality of service data units or a concatenation timer for the plurality of service data units, or both ([0058], a Maximum Concatenation Delay (the maximum latency the UE will hold a UL (or DL) packet for concatenation). Re Claim 10, Zhang discloses wherein the concatenation policy is configured for each bearer, each quality of service flow, each reordering domain, each traffic categorization, or any combination thereof ([0058]-[0059], QoS flows includes parameters). Re Claim 11, one of ordinary level of skill in the art would have been compelled to make the proposed modification to Zhang for the same reasons identified in the rejection of claim 1. In addition, Jo discloses wherein the radio condition comprises a frequency of grant allocation, a transport block size, a hybrid automatic repeat request success rate, or any combination thereof (jo [0109] radio resource block size). Re Claim 12, Zhang discloses wherein the traffic type associated with the plurality of service data units comprises a latency sensitive traffic ([0058], a Maximum Concatenation Delay (the maximum latency the UE will hold a UL (or DL) packet for concatenation). Re Claim 13, Zhang discloses wherein the internal condition associated with the UE comprises a processing capability, a power of the UE, a throughput at the UE, or any combination thereof ([0113], PMC control power-source selection when the device is in a UE). Re claims 14-16 and 18-20, they are similar to claims 1-3 and 5-13 and are rejected for the same reasons above . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 4 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang in view of Jo and in view of Kim (US 2022/0150693) . Re Claims 4 and 17, Zhang and Jo do not disclose, however Kim discloses transmit a message indicating one or more of a capability of the UE to concatenate traffic with a threshold quantity of concatenation streams, a model accuracy, a throughput with concatenation supported at the UE, or any combination thereof ([0222]-[0223], base station instructs the UE with a RRC message which includes a threshold value to be concatenated when the data concatenation function is configured for downlink or uplink.). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the date the current invention was effectively filed to have modified the teachings of Zhang and Jo’s concatenation with Kim’s concatenation which includes a threshold value. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to incorporate the teachings with one another in order to create a more efficient system by having a threshold value when the data concatenation function is configured for downlink or uplink. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HO T SHIU whose telephone number is (571)270-3810. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri (9:00am - 5:00pm). 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, Nicholas Taylor can be reached at 571-272-3089. 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. /HO T SHIU/Examiner, Art Unit 2443 HO T. SHIU Examiner Art Unit 2443 /NICHOLAS R TAYLOR/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2443 Application/Control Number: 18/802,969 Page 2 Art Unit: 2443 Application/Control Number: 18/802,969 Page 3 Art Unit: 2443 Application/Control Number: 18/802,969 Page 4 Art Unit: 2443
Prosecution Insights