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 .
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because they recite a readable storage medium which does not preclude transitory subject matter such as signals.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1, 3, 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 1 and 15 recites the limitation "the delay guarantee…" in lines 13 and 16 respectively. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 3 recites the limitation "the RAN network element…" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
If there are any further antecedent basis issues overlooked by the Examiner, correction by the Applicant will be appreciated.
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)(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) 1-3, 5-7, 12-13, 15-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 1029(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yavuz et al. US 20190288953.
Regarding claim 1, A QoS control method, comprising: obtaining, by a first communication device, first information (UE-1 and UE-2 measure an RTP packet round-trip delay, using RTCP reports, para. 0061); and performing, by the first communication device, a first operation according to the first information, wherein the first information comprises at least one of the following: delay monitoring configuration information; or first QoS configuration information (round-trip delay, para. 0061); the performing a first operation comprises at least one of the following: determining a first round trip delay budget as one of the following: a value of twice a delay budget of a data tunnel, a first round trip delay budget in the first QoS configuration information, and a sum of a first uplink delay budget and a first downlink delay budget (if the measured RTP packet round-trip delay is above a threshold or target, UE determines an air interface delay message to eNB needs to be sent indicating an adjustment to the currently established packet delay budget for its local wireless connection, para. 0061-0063); performing a delay monitoring operation (UE sending an air interface message including adjustment information that is a packet delay budget recommendation to the eNB, para. 0067); or performing the delay guarantee according to the delay monitoring result and/or the first QoS configuration information, wherein the first QoS configuration information comprises at least one of the following: the delay budget of the data tunnel; or second indication information, the second indication information being used to indicate one of the following: the first round trip delay budget being a value of twice the delay budget of the data tunnel, and the first round trip delay budget being the sum of the first uplink delay budget and the first downlink delay budget, wherein the first round trip delay budget is a round trip delay budget between a terminal and an anchor gateway; the first uplink delay budget is an uplink delay budget from the terminal to the anchor gateway; the first downlink delay budget is a downlink delay budget from the anchor gateway to the terminal.
Regarding claim 2, The method according to claim 1, wherein the delay monitoring configuration information comprises: a delay required to be measured, comprising at least one of the following: a first uplink delay or a first downlink delay, wherein the first uplink delay is an uplink delay from the terminal to the anchor gateway, and the first downlink delay is a downlink delay from the anchor gateway to the terminal (controlling an end-to-end packet trip delay such as RTP round trip packet delay of a packet flow established between the wireless communication and gNB, para. 0062, 0082).
Regarding claim 3, The method according to claim 2, wherein the delay required to be measured is one of the following: a delay that the RAN network element is responsible for calculating, and a delay that is calculated by the anchor gateway and transmitted from the anchor gateway to the RAN network element (a RTP media flow is established between UEs and respective eNBs and they interact to adjust their RAN packet delay such as a QCI packet delay based on a quality of their respective wireless connection so that an end-to-end packet trip delay target for the RTP flow can be more easily met, para. 0060).
Regarding claim 5, The method according to claim 1, wherein the delay monitoring operation comprises at least one of the following: an uplink delay monitoring operation, comprising a monitoring operation for a first uplink delay; or a downlink delay monitoring operation, comprising a monitoring operation for a first downlink delay, wherein the first uplink delay is an uplink delay from the terminal to the anchor gateway, the first downlink delay is a downlink delay from the anchor gateway to the terminal (controlling an end-to-end packet trip delay such as RTP round trip packet delay of a packet flow established between the wireless communication and gNB, para. 0062, 0082, if the measured RTP packet round-trip delay is above a threshold or target, UE determines an air interface delay message to eNB needs to be sent indicating an adjustment to the currently established packet delay budget for its local wireless connection, para. 0061-0063).
Regarding claim 6, The method according to claim 1, wherein the performing a delay monitoring operation, and/or, the performing delay guarantee according to a delay monitoring result and/or the first QoS configuration information comprises: performing the delay monitoring operation in a case that a first condition is satisfied, and/or, performing the delay guarantee according to the delay monitoring result and/or the first QoS configuration information, wherein the first condition comprises at least one of the following: a first uplink delay exceeding one of the following: the delay budget of the data tunnel, 1/2 the first round trip delay budget, and the first uplink delay budget; or a first downlink delay exceeding one of the following: the delay budget of the data tunnel, 1/2 the first round trip delay budget, and the first downlink delay budget (if the measured RTP packet round-trip delay is above a threshold or target, UE determines an air interface delay message to eNB needs to be sent indicating an adjustment to the currently established packet delay budget for its local wireless connection, para. 0061-0063, the UE sends an air interface message including adjustment information that is a packet delay budget recommendation to the eNB, para. 0067).
Regarding claim 7, The method according to claim 6, wherein the first condition further comprises: a sum of the first uplink delay and the first downlink delay not exceeding the first round trip delay budget (if the UE measures a delay of 40 ms below the service requirements of the round-trip delay and the packet delay budget of the established QCI is 80 ms, it may signal the value 1.5 to the eNB, para. 0073).
Claims 12-13, 15-20 are rejected under the same rationale.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
Claim(s) 4, 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yavuz et al. in view of Chiang et al. US 20210021646.
Regarding claim 4, The method according to claim 1, Yavuz discloses the first QoS configuration information and/or delay monitoring configuration information but expressly disclose an uplink and an downlink data tunnel. Chiang discloses a dedicated tunnel can be UE-initiated or network-initiated where in a UE-initiated scenario, the UE requests various features of the dedicated tunnel such as packet delay budget, which are associated with the dedicated tunnel and in the case of a network-initiated dedicated tunnel, the network may assign the packet delay budget feature of the dedicated tunnel based on the type of services requested by the UE, para. 0015. Chiang discloses a network intelligently allocates network resources to different types of data traffic and can adjust allocations of network resources para. 0015. Before the filing of the invention it would have been obvious to modify Yavuz to include Chiang’s UE and network tunnels. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so to enforce a particular QoS level associated with a type of data traffic by establishing a dedicated tunnel and delivering the data traffic via the dedicated tunnel, para. 0013.
Claim 14 is rejected under the same rationale.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-11 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Sahin et al. US 20260089552 discloses UE that receives one or more packets of a downlink packet set from a network node and identifies a remaining delay budget and a remaining packet error budget for remaining packets of the downlink packet set based on performance requirements.
Pan et al. US 20250184813 discloses receiving a round-trip latency requirement of a service and when a sum of a current data transmission latency of the uplink quality of service flow and a current data transmission latency of the downlink quality of service flow do not satisfy a round-trip latency requirement of the service, the access network element determines a target data packet delay budget of the uplink quality of service flow and a target data packet delay budget of the downlink quality of service flow which will satisfy the round-trip latency requirement.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MELANIE JAGANNATHAN whose telephone number is (571)272-3163. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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, Marcus Smith can be reached at 571-270-1096. 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.
/MELANIE JAGANNATHAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2468
Prosecution Insights