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 .
1. This is in response to communication filed on 6/02/26 in which claims 1-20 are pending.
Response to Arguments
2. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
3. 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.
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.
4. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Publication No. 2020/0259896 to Sachs et al in view of U.S. Publication No. 2022/0191746 to Cai.
a. As per claim 1, Sachs et al teaches an apparatus for implementing a session management function (SMF) (See paragraph [01241 and 1436]), comprising: at least one memory (See paragraph [0655 and 1284]); and at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory (See paragraph [1284]) and configured to cause the apparatus to: construct, for a specific user equipment (UE) (See paragraph [0013, 1276, 1369]) or Protocol Data Unit (PDU) session (See paragraph [1347]), stream information and PDU set integrated packet handling information (See paragraph [1255]), for a service wherein the stream information includes at least one stream indicator each indicating a stream associated with XR traffic (See paragraph [0717and 1347] and Table 2 ( Augmented Reality) , An identifier for the data stream may be established to enable it to be distinguished from other data streams), and the PDU set integrated packet handling information includes a respective indication for PDU set integrated packet handling associated with each stream indicator (See paragraph [1347], the identifier may be unique within the PDU session); and transmita UE can communicate data packets to a device and/or application on an external network (e.g., the Internet) by sending them via a serving gNB to a user plane function (UPF)). However, Sachs et al fails to teach wherein the service is an Extended Reality (XR) service.
Cai teaches wherein the service is an augmented Reality application (See paragraph [0038 and 0048]).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the teaching of Cai in the claimed invention of Sachs et al in order to eliminate unwanted latency from an application session utilizing extended reality service.
b. As per claim 7, Sachs et al teaches a network node comprising: (See paragraph [1284]) and configured to cause the network node to: receive, from a session management function (SMF) (See paragraph [1255, 1299, 2349 and 2385]) for a specific user equipment (UE) and Protocol Data Unit (PDU) session (See paragraph [1255, 1299. 2349 and 2385]), stream information and an associated PDU set integrated packet handling information for a service, wherein the stream information includes at least one stream indicator each indicating a stream associated with XR traffic (See paragraph [0717, 1347], An identifier for the data stream may be established to enable it to be distinguished from other data streams), and the PDU set integrated packet handling information includes a respective an indication for PDU set integrated packet handling associated with each stream indicator (See paragraph [1347], the identifier may be unique within the PDU session); and handle each stream indicated by the at least one stream indicator included contained in the stream information according to the indication for PDU set integrated packet handling associated with the stream indicator indicating the stream (See paragraph [1322 and 1329], An identifier might be added to data packets inside of PDU sessions or QoS Flows to differentiate multiple TSN/Ethernet streams within the same session or flow (thus the identifier is for a particular TSN/Ethernet stream). For example, the identifier may be used instead of the Ethernet header fields removed statically for transmission; an 8-bit header might be sufficient to separate TSN streams inside sessions or flows). However, Sachs et al fails to teach wherein the service is an Extended Reality (XR) service.
Cai teaches wherein the service is an augmented Reality application (See paragraph [0038 and 0048]).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the teaching of Cai in the claimed invention of Sachs et al in order to eliminate unwanted latency from an application session utilizing extended reality service.
c. As per claim 12, Sachs et al teaches a method performed by a session management function (SMF) (See paragraph [1241 and 2192]) , the method comprising: constructing, for a specific user equipment (UE) or Protocol Data Unit (PDU) session, stream information and PDU set integrated packet handling information for service, (See paragraph [1255, 1299. 2349 and 2385]), wherein the stream information includes at least one stream indicator each indicating a stream associated with XR traffic (See paragraph [0717and 1347] and Table 2 ( Augmented Reality) , An identifier for the data stream may be established to enable it to be distinguished from other data streams), and the PDU set integrated packet handling information includes a respective an indication for PDU set integrated packet handling associated with each stream indicator (See paragraph [1347], the identifier may be unique within the PDU session); and transmitting the constructed stream information and PDU set integrated packet handling information to a User Plane Function (UPF) or Radio Access Network (RAN) node (See paragraph [1241], a UE can communicate data packets to a device and/or application on an external network (e.g., the Internet) by sending them via a serving gNB to a user plane function (UPF)). However, Sachs et al fails to teach wherein the service is an Extended Reality (XR) service.
Cai teaches wherein the service is an augmented Reality application (See paragraph [0038 and 0048]).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the teaching of Cai in the claimed invention of Sachs et al in order to eliminate unwanted latency from an application session utilizing extended reality service.
d. As per claim 17, Sachs et al teaches a method performed by a network node, comprising: receiving, from a session management function (SMF) (See paragraph [1241 and 2192]), for a specific user equipment (UE) and Protocol Data Unit (PDU) session , stream information and an associated PDU set integrated packet handling information for a service, (See paragraph [1255, 1299, 2349 and 2385]), wherein the stream information includes at least one stream indicator each indicating a stream associated with XR traffic (See paragraph [0717and 1347] and Table 2 ( Augmented Reality) , An identifier for the data stream may be established to enable it to be distinguished from other data streams), and the PDU set integrated packet handling information includes a respective indication for PDU set integrated packet handling associated with each stream indicator (See paragraph [1347], the identifier may be unique within the PDU session); and handling each stream indicated by the at least one stream indicator included in the stream information according to the indication for PDU set integrated packet handling associated with the at least one stream indicator indicating the stream (See paragraph [1322 and 1329], An identifier might be added to data packets inside of PDU sessions or QoS Flows to differentiate multiple TSN/Ethernet streams within the same session or flow (thus the identifier is for a particular TSN/Ethernet stream). For example, the identifier may be used instead of the Ethernet header fields removed statically for transmission; an 8-bit header might be sufficient to separate TSN streams inside sessions or flows). However, Sachs et al fails to teach wherein the service is an Extended Reality (XR) service.
Cai teaches wherein the service is an augmented Reality application (See paragraph [0038 and 0048]).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the teaching of Cai in the claimed invention of Sachs et al in order to eliminate unwanted latency from an application session utilizing extended reality service.
e. As per claims 2 and 13, Sachs et al teaches the claimed invention as described above. Furthermore, Sachs et al teaches wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the apparatus to construct the stream information and the associated PDU set integrated packet handling information based on pre-configuration (See paragraph (See paragraph [1338]) wherein the stream information includes at least one of a 5G Quality of Service Identifier (5QI), slice/service type (SST) or Single Network Slice Selection Assistance Information (S-NSSAI), a Data Network Name (DNN), or an application identifier (appId) (See paragraph [1266 and 1272], identifiers of one or more quality-of-service (QoS) flows associated with the data stream).
f. As per claims 3, 14 and 20, Sachs et al teaches the claimed invention as described above. Furthermore, Sachs et al teaches wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the apparatus to construct the stream information and the associated PDU set integrated packet handling information based on Policy and Charging Control (PCC) rules provided by a Policy Control Function (PCF) (See paragraph [2257]), wherein the stream information includes at least one of a Quality of Service Flow ID (QFI), a stream ID, a frame type, an importance value, or a service data flow filter (See paragraph [1933, 1941 and 1981], Mapping of QoS Flow ID (QFI) selected by UE to TSN stream QoS).
g. As per claims 4, 11 and 15, Sachs et al teaches the claimed invention as described above. Furthermore, Sachs et al teaches wherein if the indication for PDU set integrated packet handling is true, the associated PDU set integrated packet handling information further includes at least one of a discard indication for dependency, a discard timer, or a discard type (See paragraph [1076 and 1336], Packets that have to be retransmitted or buffered because of a context unawareness lead to packet latencies that are most likely unacceptable. It would be better to either discard the packet or reuse an old (or as introduced in this disclosure, statically configured) context instead).
h. As per claim 5, Sachs et al teaches the claimed invention as described above. Furthermore, Sachs et al teaches wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the apparatus to transmit the constructed stream information including at least one of a Quality of Service Flow ID (QFI), an application identifier (appId),a service data flow filter, a frame type, or an importance value, and the associated PDU set integrated packet handling information to the UPF (See paragraph [1319-1323]).
i. As per claims 6 and 16, Sachs et al teaches the claimed invention as described above. Furthermore, Sachs et al teaches wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the apparatus transmit the constructed stream information including at least one of a Quality of Service Flow ID (QFI}, a stream ID, a frame type, or an importance value, and the associated PDU set integrated packet handling information to the RAN node (See paragraph [1266]).
j. As per claims 8 and 18, Sachs et al teaches the claimed invention as described above. Furthermore, Sachs et al teaches wherein the network node is a user plane function (UPF) or a Radio Access Network (RAN) node (See paragraph [0773, 1241]).
k. As per claims 9 and 19, Sachs et al teaches the claimed invention as described above. Furthermore, Sachs et al teaches wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the network node to provide a downstream node with discard PDU set information associated with a PDU set if the PDU set is not received completely (See paragraph [ (See paragraph [0722 and 1336]).
l. As per claims 10 and 20, Sachs et al teaches the claimed invention as described above. Furthermore, Sachs et al teaches wherein the stream information includes at least one of a5G Quality of Service Identifier (5QI), a slice/service type (SST) or Single Network Slice Selection Assistance Information (S- NSSAI), a Data Network Name (DNN), an application identifier (appId), a QoS Flow ID (QFI), a stream ID,a frame type, an importance value, or a service data flow filter (See paragraph [1933 and 1941], QoS Flow IDs (QFIs).
Conclusion
4. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
5. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DJENANE BAYARD whose telephone number is (571)272-3878. The examiner can normally be reached 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, John Follansbee can be reached at (571)272-3964. 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.
/DJENANE M BAYARD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2444
Prosecution Insights