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 .
DETAILED OFFICE ACTION
This action is responsive to the communication received August 29th, 2024. Claims 1-18 have been entered and are presented for examination.
Application 18/818,922 claims benefit of Chinese Applications 202311117473.5 08/31/2023 202311420218.8 10/30/2023.
Claim Objections
Claim 18 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 18 recites the apparatus of claim 9, but should be the apparatus of claim 10. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, 9-11, 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by 102 Cheng et al. (US 2018/0213463).
Regarding claims 1, 10, Cheng et al. discloses a call data transmission method (see Abstract and paragraph 0003 [Cellular telephones use radio waves to enable an operator to make phone calls to another party from many locations worldwide; performing traffic steering between the first access network and the second access network according to the current status of the communications apparatus when the current status does not meet the predetermined condition.]), comprising: establishing, by a processor of an apparatus, a first connection and a second connection with a second apparatus (see Abstract and paragraph 0003 [calls to another party; performing traffic steering between the first access network and the second access network]), wherein the first connection is a third generation partnership project (3GPP) connection (see Figure 4 [LTE Connection]) and the second connection is a Wi-Fi connection (see Figure 4 [WLAN Connection]), or the first connection is a Wi-Fi connection and the second connection is a 3GPP connection; performing, by the processor, a voice call or a video call with the second apparatus through the first connection (see Figure 4 [IMS via LTE]); determining, by the processor, whether the first connection meets a quality condition (paragraph 0061 [when both the LTE and Wi-Fi qualities have satisfied]); and transmitting, by the processor, data packets of the voice call or the video call to the second apparatus through the first connection and the second connection in an event that the first connection meets the quality condition (paragraph 0050, 0061 [even when both the LTE and Wi-Fi qualities have satisfied the quality thresholds obtained from the network device and the aggregation service should be activated based on the ANDSF rule]).
Regarding claims 2, 11, Cheng et al. discloses all the recited subject matter in claims 1, 10 and further suggests wherein the quality condition comprises at least one of that a quality of the first connection is lower than a threshold (paragraph 0050, 0067 [the current data traffic exceeds the upper limit of data packet size that can be smoothly processed by the communications apparatus, the processor may report very bad LTE or Wi-Fi quality to the network device, so as to lead the network device not to activate or disable the aggregation service; suggesting when the data traffic is below the upper limit, the aggregation service is activated; an upper limit of the amount of radio interference]), and a latency of the first connection is longer than a second threshold.
Regarding claims 9, 18, Cheng et al. discloses all the recited subject matter in claims 1, 10 and further discloses stopping, by the processor, transmitting the data packets of the voice call or the video call to the second apparatus through the second connection in an event that the first connection does not meet the quality condition; and performing, by the processor, the voice call or the video call with the second apparatus only through the first connection (paragraph 0057 [when the amount of radio interference due to multi-RAT (such as the cellular and non-cellular) communications exceeds the upper limit, the processor may determine to steer the traffic to only one of the cellular or non-cellular access network]).
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.
The factual inquiries 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 3-5, 7-8, 12-14, 16-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheng et al. (US 2018/0213463) in view of Bharrat et al. (US 2018/0248909).
Regarding claims 3, 12, Cheng et al. discloses all the recited subject matter in claims 1, 10, but does not explicitly disclose transmitting, by the processor, an internet protocol (IP) information and a port number information of the apparatus to a call exchange server through the Wi-Fi connection.
However, Bharrat et al. discloses transmitting, by the processor, an internet protocol (IP) information and a port number information of the apparatus to a call exchange server through the Wi-Fi connection (see Figure 1, 4, and paragraphs 0036, 0039 [the user equipment device is also configured to have a plurality of Internet Protocol (IP) address/port number pairs, e.g., logical IP address/port pairs, for use in exchanging signaling information, e.g., SIP signaling messages for establishing media sessions, and media, e.g., Real-time Protocol Packets of a media session; The switch device is also configured to have a plurality of Internet Protocol (IP) address/port number pairs, e.g., logical IP address/port pairs, for use in exchanging signaling information, e.g., SIP signaling messages for establishing media sessions, and media, e.g., Secure Real-time Protocol Packets of a media session]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to recognize SIP messages have IP addresses and port information that are sent to other endpoint via the switch which exchanges the signaling information. The motivation for this is to process to the SIP session.
Regarding claims 4, 13, Cheng et al. discloses all the recited subject matter in claims 1, 10 and further discloses wherein in an event that the first connection is the 3GPP connection and the second connection is the Wi-Fi connection (see Figure 4 [LTE Connection and WLAN Connection]), the method further comprises: receiving, by the processor, first response data packets associated with the voice call or the video call from the second apparatus through the 3GPP connection (paragraph 0019,0003 [The cellular radio transceiver 110 may receive wireless radio frequency signals from an air interface via the corresponding antenna module, transmit wireless radio frequency signals to the air interface via the corresponding antenna module and perform RF signal processing. For example, the cellular radio transceiver 110 may convert the received signals into intermediate frequency (IF) or baseband signals to be processed, or receive the IF or baseband signals from the modem 120 and convert the received signals into wireless radio frequency signals to be transmitted to a cellular network device; phone calls to another party from many locations worldwide]); and receiving, by the processor, second response data packets associated with the voice call or the video call from the second apparatus (paragraph 0025, 0003 [The WLAN radio transceiver 170 may receive wireless radio frequency signals from an air interface via the corresponding antenna module, transmit wireless radio frequency signals to the air interface via the corresponding antenna module and perform RF signal processing; phone calls to another party from many locations worldwide]).
Cheng et al. does not explicitly disclose receiving, by the processor, second response data packets associated with the voice call or the video call from the second apparatus through a call exchange server.
However, Bharrat et al. discloses disclose receiving, by the processor, second response data packets associated with the voice call or the video call from the second apparatus through a call exchange server (see Figure 1, 4, and paragraphs 0036, 0039,0045 [media stream is a Secure Real-time Transport Protocol (SRTP) stream in which the media is for a VOIP call which will be referred to as a SRTP call; the user equipment device is also configured to have a plurality of Internet Protocol (IP) address/port number pairs, e.g., logical IP address/port pairs, for use in exchanging signaling information, e.g., SIP signaling messages for establishing media sessions, and media, e.g., Real-time Protocol Packets of a media session; The switch device is also configured to have a plurality of Internet Protocol (IP) address/port number pairs, e.g., logical IP address/port pairs, for use in exchanging signaling information, e.g., SIP signaling messages for establishing media sessions, and media, e.g., Secure Real-time Protocol Packets of a media session]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to recognize the exemplary secure media stream is a Secure Real-time Transport Protocol (SRTP) stream in which the media is for a VOIP call which will be referred to as a SRTP call is sent to the endpoint via the switch which exchanges the signaling information. The motivation for this is to process to the SIP session.
Regarding claims 5, 14, the references as combined above disclose all the recited subject matter in claims 4, 13.
However, Cheng et al. further suggests merging, by the processor, the first response data packets and the second response packets; and playing, by the processor, merged data packets to perform the voice call or the video call (see Figure 4 [both E-UTRAN and WLAN streams are received at the UE which decodes and plays the audio]).
Regarding claims 7, 16, the references as combined above disclose all the recited subject matter in claim 4, 13.
Bharrat et al. further discloses wherein the second response data packets are encoded based on a security real-time transport protocol (SRTP) (see Figure 1, 4, and paragraphs 0036, 0039,0045 [media stream is a Secure Real-time Transport Protocol (SRTP) stream in which the media is for a VOIP call which will be referred to as a SRTP call; the user equipment device is also configured to have a plurality of Internet Protocol (IP) address/port number pairs, e.g., logical IP address/port pairs, for use in exchanging signaling information, e.g., SIP signaling messages for establishing media sessions, and media, e.g., Real-time Protocol Packets of a media session; The switch device is also configured to have a plurality of Internet Protocol (IP) address/port number pairs, e.g., logical IP address/port pairs, for use in exchanging signaling information, e.g., SIP signaling messages for establishing media sessions, and media, e.g., Secure Real-time Protocol Packets of a media session]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to recognize the exemplary secure media stream is a Secure Real-time Transport Protocol (SRTP) stream in which the media is for a VOIP call which will be referred to as a SRTP call is sent to the endpoint via the switch which exchanges the signaling information. The motivation for this is to process to the SIP session.
Regarding claims 8, 17, the references as combined above disclose all the recited subject matter in claims 7, 16.
Cheng et al. further discloses decoding, by the processor, the second response packets (paragraph 0032 [signal decoding])[to convert SRTP data packets into real-time transport protocol (RTP) data packets (MPEP 2111.04 [Claim scope is not limited by claim language that suggests or makes optional but does not require steps to be performed])].
Claim(s) 6, 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheng et al. (US 2018/0213463) in view of Bharrat et al. (US 2018/0248909) as applied to claims 5, 14 above, and further in view of Turner et al. (US 2026/0189979)
Regarding claims 6, 15, the reference as combined above disclose all the recited subject matter in claims 5, 14, but do not explicitly disclose comparing, by the processor, the first response data packets to the second response data packets; and removing, by the processor, redundancy data packets between the first response data packets and the second response data packets.
However, Turner et al. suggests comparing, by the processor, the first response data packets to the second response data packets; and removing, by the processor, redundancy data packets between the first response data packets and the second response data packets (paragraph 0022 [the device receiving the duplicated message may execute various implementations of a deduplication protocol. In some embodiments, the device may delete one or more of the duplicate messages. Deduplication may be implemented to remove redundant data (e.g., duplicate messages), maintain a manageable data volume in the local storage of the computing device, and comply with memory management requirements.]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to recognize reception of duplicate responses could result in deletion of one response based on the reception quality in order to maintain a manageable data volume in the local storage of the computing device.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER T WYLLIE whose telephone number is (571)270-3937. The examiner can normally be reached 4pm-11:30pm.
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, Ayman Abaza can be reached at (571)270-0422. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER T WYLLIE/Examiner, Art Unit 2465
Prosecution Insights