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 § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3, 9, 11-13, 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Graf et al. (US 2004/0101125-IDS), hereinafter Graf.
Regarding claim 1, Graf discloses: (1) capability negotiation in a telecommunication network, see 0001. For example, a calling party initiates a call, e.g., by taking his telephone off-hook, the originating signaling point Node A-fig.1 (terminal device) determines, on the basis of the source information and/or the capabilities of the signaling points and its home network, see 0088 (network-side device); (2) capability negotiation includes: voice ciphering and data encryption, speech codec capabilities between signaling transfer points located in different telecommunication networks, negotiate the use of security algorithms: one of VSELP, PSI-CELP, or .mu.-law coding (processing capability information), etc., see 0012. In other words, the "processing capability information" in Graf corresponds to codec preferences (e.g., VSELP, PSI-CELP, µ-law coding) or security algorithms; (3) compressed speech data between a mobile terminal (not shown) and a Mobile Switching Centre (MSC), see 0132-0133 and claim 21 (equivalent to wherein the communicating with the network-side device includes processing a plurality of associated service data packets).
Regarding claim 2, in Conventional Public Switched Telephone Networks (PSTN) digitally encode speech data for transmission using Pulse Code Modulation (PCM). On the other hand, digital mobile telephone networks make use of more advanced coding techniques such as CELP and Adaptive Multi-Rate (AMR) coding, which achieve higher compression ratios than can be achieved with PCM (second processing capability information). In many mobile networks, coding and decoding of speech is carried out at the mobile terminals themselves. Providing that a call is made between two mobile terminals both registered with the same network it may be possible to transmit encoded speech data from end to end, see 0130.
Regarding claim 3, Graf discloses if a call is made between two mobile terminals both registered with the same network it may be possible (enabling) to transmit encoded speech data from end to end, see 0130.
Regarding claim 9, the digital mobile telephone networks make use of more advanced coding techniques such as CELP and Adaptive Multi-Rate (AMR) coding, which achieve higher compression ratios than can be achieved with PCM, see 0130 (second processing capability information) is considered as capability parameter to negotiate the first processing capability information.
Regarding claim 11, this claim has similar limitations as those of claim 1. Therefore, it is rejected under Graf for the same reasons as set forth in the rejection of claim 1. The terminal device of Graf should include at least a memory configured to store computer program code, and at least one processor configured to read the program code and operate as instructed by the program code.
Regarding claim 12, this claim has similar limitations as those of claim 2. Therefore, it is rejected under Graf for the same reasons as set forth in the rejection of claim 2.
Regarding claim 13, this claim has similar limitations as those of claim 3. Therefore, it is rejected under Graf for the same reasons as set forth in the rejection of claim 3.
Regarding claim 19, this claim has similar limitations as those of claim 9. Therefore, it is rejected under Graf for the same reasons as set forth in the rejection of claim 9.
Regarding claim 20, this claim has similar limitations as those of claim 1. Therefore, it is rejected under Graf for the same reasons as set forth in the rejection of claim 1.
Allowable subject matter
Claims 4-8, 10, 14 and 15-18 are rejected based on its dependency, would be allowable if rewritten or amended to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Wu et al. (US 2021/0219128 A1); Cariou et al. (US 2018/0054794) are cited, and considered pertinent to the instant specification.
6. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DUC C HO whose telephone number is (571)272-3147. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8am-4pm.
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, Gary Mui can be reached on 571-270-1420 (Gary.mui@uspto.gov). 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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.
/DUC C HO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2465
Prosecution Insights