DETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to the pending claims, 1-20, received 18 September 2024. Accordingly, the detailed action of claims 1-20 is as follows:
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 09/10/2024, 01/23/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
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, 3-5, 10-14, 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Lohr et al (US 20250088895 A1, hereafter referred to as Lohr).
Regarding claim 1, Lohr teaches
a method comprising:
processing assistance information received from a network node (Lohr [0098-0102] teaches providing, by the core network, PDU Set QoS parameters and PDU Set information to the network element. Additionally, [0129-0130] teaches reporting PSI levels as part the UE assistance information), the assistance information including a protocol data unit set importance (PSI) attribute associated with a flow (Lohr [0102] teaches the PDU Set information includes the PSI. Additionally, [0129] teaches reporting PSI levels and distributions of PSI levels [0130]); and
generating a configuration for transmitting to a user equipment (UE), the configuration associated with a PSI-based discarding mechanism (Lohr [0129, 0134] teaches providing a configuration and enabling and disabling [0077] to the UE for PSI based discarding).
Regarding claim 3, Lohr teaches the limitations of claim 1, as rejected above.
Additionally, Lohr teaches the method wherein the PSI attribute includes a PSI-based discarding preference indicator (Lohr [0131 and 0133] teaches providing information to the NE about PSI levels that are important and which PSI levels are discardable such that the UE provides PSI levels which are unimportant and therefore can be discarded and PSI levels which are important and not to be discarded due to inter-dependency) and the method further comprises:
determining, based on the PSI-based discarding preference indicator, whether the PSI-based discarding is preferred for the flow (Lohr [0134] teaches providing configuration for important and unimportant PDU sets).
Regarding claim 4, Lohr teaches the limitations of claim 1, as rejected above.
Additionally, Lohr teaches the method wherein the PSI attribute includes a discardable PSI availability indicator (Lohr [0131] teaches providing information about PSI levels and information on which PSI levels are discardable) and the method further comprises: determining, based on the discardable PSI availability indicator, whether the flow is expected to include a PDU associated with a predetermined PSI (Lohr [0134] teaches providing configuration for important and unimportant PDU sets).
Regarding claim 5, Lohr teaches the limitations of claim 1, as rejected above.
Additionally, Lohr teaches the method wherein: the PSI attribute includes a maximum expected PSI indicator and the method further comprises determining, based on the maximum expected PSI indicator, a largest expected PSI level associated with a protocol data unit (PDU) of the flow; the PSI attribute includes a minimum expected PSI indicator and the method further comprises determining, based on the minimum expected PSI indicator, a smallest expected PSI level associated with a PDU of the flow; or the PSI attribute includes an expected PSI range indicator (Lohr [0129]) and the method further comprises determining, based on the expected PSI range indicator, an expected PSI range associated with one or more PDUs of the flow (Lohr [0129] teaches the NE configuring timer values or thresholds based on the reported range of PSI levels).
Regarding claim 10, Lohr teaches the limitations of claim 1, as rejected above.
Additionally, Lohr teaches the method wherein the PSI attribute includes a PSI identifiability indicator associated with a flow (Lohr [0133] teaches providing information on the usage of PSI levels for a certain DRB or LCH including information on the PSI level distribution) and the method further comprises: determining, based on the PSI identifiability indicator, whether the UE is able to determine a PSI level associated with the flow (Lohr [0133-0134] discloses the NE setting PSI thresholds or defining times based on the information).
Regarding claim 11, Lohr teaches the limitations of claim 10, as rejected above.
Additionally, Lohr teaches the method wherein:
the flow is a quality of service (QoS) flow (Lohr [0098-0102] teaches transmitting information to the NE including PDU set QoS parameters); and the network node is the UE (Lohr [0074, 0129 and 0133]).
Regarding claim 12, Lohr teaches the limitations of claim 1, as rejected above.
Additionally, Lohr teaches the method wherein the network node is a core network node (Lohr [0098] discloses the CN providing PDU Set QoS parameters to the NE) and the attribute of the PSI is a parameter of protocol data unit (PDU) set quality of service (QoS) parameters (Lohr [0098-0101]).
Regarding claim 13, Lohr teaches the limitations of claim 1, as rejected above.
Additionally, Lohr teaches the method wherein the network node is a core network node (Lohr [0098] discloses the CN providing PDU Set QoS parameters to the NE) and the attribute of the PSI is included in a time sensitive communications assistance information (TSCAI) or a time sensitive communications assistance container (TSCAC) (Lohr [0103]).
Regarding claim 14, Lohr teaches the limitations of claim 1, as rejected above.
Additionally, Lohr teaches the method wherein the network node is the UE (Lohr [0129]) and the assistance information is UE assistance information (UAI) (Lohr [0129]).
Regarding claim 15, Lohr teaches an apparatus comprising: processing circuitry (Lohr [Fig 4]) to: generate assistance information for transmitting to a base station (BS) (Lohr [0074, 0129, 0133]), the assistance information including a protocol data unit set importance (PSI) attribute associated with a flow (Lohr [0129, 0133]), wherein the flow is a traffic flow, a quality of service (QoS) flow, or a data radio bearer (DRB) (Lohr [0133] discloses DRB or LCH, QoS flow [0066,0098]); and
process a configuration received from the BS, the configuration associated with a PSI-based discarding mechanism (Lohr [0129, 0134] teaches providing a configuration and enabling and disabling [0077] to the UE for PSI based discarding); and
interface circuitry coupled with the processing circuitry to enable communication (Lohr [Fig 4]).
Regarding claim 16, Lohr teaches the limitations of claim 15, as rejected above.
Additionally, Lohr teaches the apparatus wherein the PSI attribute is: a PSI-based discarding allowance indicator; a PSI-based discarding preference indicator; a discardable PSI availability indicator; a maximum expected PSI indicator; a minimum expected PSI indicator; an expected PSI range indicator; a list of available PSI; a minimum discardable PSI indicator; a PSI distribution indicator; a real-time transport protocol (RTP) header extension usage indicator; or a PSI identifiability indicator associated with the flow (Lohr [0127-0133]).
Regarding claim 17, it does not teach or further limit over the limitations presented above with respect to claim 8.
Therefore, claim 17 is rejected for the same reasons set forth above regarding claim 8.
Regarding claim 18, Lohr teaches the limitations of claim 15, as rejected above.
Additionally, Lohr teaches the apparatus wherein the flow is a quality of service (QoS) flow (Lohr [0098-0102] teaches transmitting information to the NE including PDU set QoS parameters) and the PSI attribute includes a PSI identifiability indicator to indicate whether a user equipment is able to identify a PSI level for the QoS flow (Lohr [0133] teaches providing information on the usage of PSI levels for a certain DRB or LCH including information on the PSI level distribution whereby the NE sets PSI thresholds or defining times based on the information [0134]).
Regarding claims 19-20, they do not teach or further limit over the limitations presented above with respect to claims 15 and 18.
Therefore, claims 19-20 are rejected for the same reasons set forth above regarding claims 15 and 18.
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.
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 2 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lohr et al (US 20250088895 A1, hereafter referred to as Lohr) as rejected above regarding claim 1, further in view of Xu et al (US 20260136420 A1, hereafter referred to as Xu).
Regarding claim 2, Lohr teaches the limitations of claim 1, as rejected above.
However, Lohr does not explicitly teach the method
wherein the PSI attribute includes a PSI-based discarding allowance indicator and the method further comprises: determining, based on the PSI-based discarding allowance indicator, whether PSI-based discarding is allowed for the flow.
Xu, in an analogous art, teaches the method
wherein the PSI attribute includes a PSI-based discarding allowance indicator (Xu [0279] teaches an attribute as discardable allowed indicator) and the method further comprises: determining, based on the PSI-based discarding allowance indicator, whether PSI-based discarding is allowed for the flow (Xu [0246] teaches in order to handle PDUs in both UL and DL traffic parameters and information of the PDUs belonging to the PDU set are utilized, wherein the information includes the discardable allowed indicator [0279]).
It would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Lohr in view of Xu, in order to configure the PSI attribute included in the assistance information, as taught by Lohr, include a PSI-based discarding allowance indicator and the method further comprises: determining, based on the PSI-based discarding allowance indicator, whether PSI-based discarding is allowed for the flow, as taught by Xu.
KSR rationale B, simple substitution of one known element (attribute parameters as taught by Lohr) for another known element (attribute parameters including discardable allowed indicator as taught by Xu) in order to yield predictable results (use of the flow, QOS or PDU parameters to perform PSI discarding based on the parameters) supports the conclusion of obviousness.
Claim 6, 8 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lohr et al (US 20250088895 A1, hereafter referred to as Lohr) as rejected above regarding claim 1, further in view of Lee et al (US 20240334529 A1, hereafter referred to as Lee).
Regarding claim 6, Lohr teaches the limitations of claim 1, as rejected above.
However, Lohr does not explicitly teach the method
wherein the PSI attribute includes a list of available PSIs and the method further comprises: determining, based on the list of available PSIs, one or more expected PSI levels associated with one or more protocol data units (PDUs) of the flow.
Lee, in an analogous art, teaches the method wherein the PSI attribute includes a list of available PSIs (Lee [0167] teaches the UE reports information for the gNB to configure the packet discarding operation including a list of importance values (PSIs) [0168]) and the method further comprises:
determining, based on the list of available PSIs, one or more expected PSI levels associated with one or more protocol data units (PDUs) of the flow (Lee [0167] teaches the gNB configures the packet discarding operation of the UE according the UE assistance information including a list of importance values [0168]).
It would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Lohr in view of Lee, in order to configure the PSI attribute included in the assistance information, as taught by Lohr, include a list of available PSIs and the method further comprises: determining, based on the list of available PSIs, one or more expected PSI levels associated with one or more protocol data units (PDUs) of the flow, as taught by Lee.
KSR rationale B, simple substitution of one known element (attribute parameters as taught by Lohr) for another known element (attribute parameters including list of available PSIs as taught by Lee) in order to yield predictable results (use of the flow, QOS or PDU parameters to perform PSI discarding based on the parameters) supports the conclusion of obviousness.
Regarding claim 8, Lohr teaches the limitations of claim 1, as rejected above.
Additionally, Lohr teaches the method wherein the PSI attribute includes a PSI distribution indicator (Lohr [0131] teaches providing PSI percentages or information on a PSI level distribution [0133]) and the method further comprises:
determining, based on the PSI distribution indicator, distribution information of a PSI level associated with the flow (Lohr [0134] teaches providing a PSI-based discarding configuration based on UE Assistance information including information on a PSI level distribution [0133]), wherein the distribution information is associated with: a number of protocol data units (PDUs) of the flow having the PSI level (Lohr [0128] teaches the reported information includes an amount of data and PSI level of the data for which delay information is also reported); a number of PDU sets having the PSI level; or a data size associated with the flow having the PSI level.
However, Lohr does not explicitly teach wherein the distribution information is associated with: a number of PDU sets having the PSI level; or a data size associated with the flow having the PSI level.
Lee, in an analogous art, teaches wherein the distribution information is associated with: a number of PDU sets having the PSI level; or a data size associated with the flow having the PSI level (Lee [0169] teaches reporting an amount of data by PSI value or proportion of packets with each importance value).
It would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Lohr in view of Lee, in order to configure the PPSI distribution indicator included in the PSI attribute, as taught by Lohr, is information associated with: a number of PDU sets having the PSI level; or a data size associated with the flow having the PSI level, as taught by Lee.
KSR rationale B, simple substitution of one known element (PSI distribution indicator included in PSI attribute information, as taught by Lohr) for another known element (PSI distribution indicator included in PSI attribute information including a data size associated with the flow having the PSI level, as taught by Lee) in order to yield predictable results (use of the flow, QOS or PDU parameters to perform PSI discarding based on the parameters) supports the conclusion of obviousness.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 7, 9 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.
Lohr et al (US 20250113244 A1);
Lu et al (US 20260172167 A1);
Hong (US 20250024321 A1);
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHEAN TOKUTA whose telephone number is (571)272-5145. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH 630-430.
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, Brian Gillis can be reached at 5712727952. 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.
SHEAN TOKUTA
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2446
/SHEAN TOKUTA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2419
Prosecution Insights