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 .
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.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/25/2024, 10/28/2025, 1/19/2026 and 5/19/2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it should be in narrative form, should not repeat information given in the title and should avoid using phrases which can be implied. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because the unlabeled rectangular box(es) shown in the drawings should be provided with descriptive text labels. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-20 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claims 1, 8 and 14 are not clear because claims 1 and 8 do not define that any packet is sent or received from a UE and claim 14 is silent about the features that the network node from which the UE receives the packets is composed by a CU and DU, rendering the subject matter for which protection is sought unclear. Furthermore, claim 1 defining the CU corresponding to the DU of claim 8 is silent about the ADU based flow control information of claim 8, rendering the subject matter for which protection is sought unclear. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim 13 is 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.
The term “non-critical” in claim 13 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “non-critical” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is unclear what criteria or threshold determines when a packet goes from being critical to non-critical.
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)(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 1-14 and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by EP 4 061 051 (hereinafter Fan).
Regarding claim 1, Fan discloses a central unit (CU) of a network node, comprising: at least one memory; and at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory and configured to cause the CU ([0061]: details CU node) to: receive application data unit (ADU) information related to a plurality of application data units (ADUs) from a core network ([0065]); determine data radio bearer (DRB) and ADU association information related to one or more of the plurality of ADUs that are associated with one or more data radio bearers (DRBs) (FIG. 2b; [0071]) to a distributed unit (DU) of the network node over a CU-DU interface; and transmit the DRB and ADU association information and an ADU information related to the one or more DRBs to the DU over the CU-DU interface ([0067]).
Regarding claim 2, Fan discloses wherein the at least one processor is further configured to cause the CU to transmit the DRB and ADU association information to the DU via an F1 application protocol (F1-AP) signaling ([0067]-[0068]: details F1-U interface).
Regarding claim 3, Fan discloses wherein the at least one processor is further configured to cause the CU to transmit the ADU information related to the one or more DRBs to the DU in a user plane protocol of a packet data convergence protocol (PDCP) protocol data unit (PDU) ([0067]-[0068]: details PDCP PDU).
Regarding claim 4, Fan discloses wherein the at least one processor is further configured to cause the CU to: receive ADU based flow control information from the DU ([0071] and [0123]).
Regarding claim 5, Fan discloses wherein the at least one processor is further configured to cause the CU to: transmit a DRB identification to the DU; and receive the ADU based flow control information from the DU via a DRB corresponding to the DRB identification ([0071] and [0123]).
Regarding claim 6, Fan discloses wherein the at least one processor is further configured to cause the CU to: transmit an ADU discard indication to the DU according to the ADU information related to the one or more DRBs ([0071] and [0123]).
Regarding claim 7, Fan discloses wherein the DRB and ADU association information indicates that at least one packet to be transmitted via the one or more DRBs corresponds to a same ADU or at least one packet of an ADU corresponds to one or more DRBs ([0071] and [0123]).
Regarding claim 8, Fan discloses a distributed unit (DU) of a network node, comprising: at least one memory; and at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory and configured to cause the DU ([0063]) to: receive data radio bearer (DRB) and application data unit (ADU) ([0065]) association information and an ADU information from a central unit (CU) over a CU-DU interface ([0067]), wherein the DRB and ADU association information relates to one or more of a plurality of ADUs that are associated with one or more data radio bearers (DRBs) to the CU of the network node over the CU-DU interface, and the ADU information relates to the one or more DRBs to the CU ([0071]); determine ADU based flow control information according to the ADU information related to the one or more DRBs and the DRB and ADU association information; and transmit the ADU based flow control information to the CU ([0068]-[0071]).
Regarding claim 9, Fan discloses wherein the at least one processor is further configured to cause the DU to receive the DRB and ADU association information from the CU via an F1 application protocol (F1-AP) signaling ([0067]-[0068]).
Regarding claim 10, Fan discloses wherein the at least one processor is further configured to cause the DU to receive the ADU information related to the one or more DRBs from the CU in a user plane protocol of a packet data convergence protocol (PDCP) protocol data unit (PDU) ([0067]-[0068]).
Regarding claim 11, Fan discloses wherein the at least one processor is further configured to cause the DU to: receive a DRB identification from the CU; and transmit the ADU based flow control information to the CU via a DRB corresponding to the DRB identification ([0071] and [0123]).
Regarding claim 12, Fan discloses wherein the at least one processor is further configured to cause the DU to: receive an ADU discard indication from the CU; and discard at least one packet related to the one or more ADUs according to the ADU discard indication ([0071] and [0123]).
Regarding claim 13, Fan discloses wherein the ADU discard indication is included in a F1 user plane (F1-U) protocol, and includes at least one of: one or more ADUs to be discarded; or an indication of non-critical packets to be discarded, which indicates at least one non-critical packet of the ADU to be discarded ([0071] and [0123]).
Regarding claim 14 and 18, Fan discloses a user equipment (UE), comprising: at least one memory; and at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory and configured to cause the UE to: receive a packet of a data radio bearer (DRB) from a network node ([0131] and FIG. 4c); and obtain application data unit (ADU) information from a header of an existing layer of the packet of the DRB or from an ADU layer of the packet of the DRB ([0151];[0148]), or obtain the ADU information from a header of packet data convergence protocol (PDCP) packet data unit (PDU) of the network packet before processing the PDCP PDU ([0151]).
Regarding claim 16 and 20, Fan discloses wherein the existing layer comprises a layer 2 layer of the packet ([0151]: because this limitation is claimed in the alternative it has no patentable weight).
Regarding claim 17, Fan discloses wherein the ADU layer comprises a layer 2 layer ([0151]: because this limitation is claimed in the alternative it has no patentable weight).
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 15 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fan in view of WO 2021/142773 (hereinafter Qualcomm).
Regarding claim 15 and 19, Fan does not explicitly teach wherein the ADU information includes at least one of: an ADU sequence number; a packet sequence number of a packet of an ADU; an indication of last packet of a packet of an ADU; or an indication of importance of a packet of an ADU.
However, Qualcomm teaches wherein the ADU information includes at least one of: an ADU sequence number; a packet sequence number of a packet of an ADU; an indication of last packet of a packet of an ADU; or an indication of importance of a packet of an ADU ([0067]: details sequence number of the ADU).
Therefore, it would have been obvious at to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Fan to incorporate the teachings of Qualcomm and include wherein the ADU information includes at least one of: an ADU sequence number; a packet sequence number of a packet of an ADU; an indication of last packet of a packet of an ADU; or an indication of importance of a packet of an ADU of Qualcomm with Fan. Doing so would decrease power consumption (Qualcomm, paragraph [0069]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Fiorani (US 12,395,885) details QoS flow management over E1.
Chen (US 11,991,694) details communication system.
Byun (US 2023/0053835) details Multicast transmission with separation of CP and UP in a wireless communication system.
Xie (US 2021/0400522) details data mapping in a wireless communication.
Komatsu (US 2020/0389819) details flow control.
Cho (US 2020/0037197) details transmitting UL packet based on QoS framework.
Han (US 2019/0357076) details QoS flow processing.
Dai (US 2019/0297634) details communication.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jasper Kwoh whose telephone number is (408)918-7644. The examiner can normally be reached Tuesday through Friday, 10am to 4pm Pacific.
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, Jeffrey Rutkowski can be reached at (571) 270-1215. 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.
/JASPER KWOH/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2415
Prosecution Insights