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 statement (IDS) submitted on 10/18/2024, 04/09/2025 was filed. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
This office action is in response to the amendment filed 09/23/2024.
Claims 1-12, 39-46 are pending.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 9, 10, 11, 39, 40, 41, 44, 45, 46 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LEE et al. ( US 20250015929, hereinafter, LEE’s 929) in view of Stoica et al. ( US 20230198663, hereinafter, Stoica’s 663 ).
Regarding to the claim 1, LEE’s 929 teaches a method performed by a Semantic Measurement and Control Entity (SMCE), the method comprising:
receiving, from at least one of a transmitter (TX) user equipment (UE) (Transmitter, Encoder , Local Knowledge ) [see Figure 8 and Figure 9 ] or a receiver (RX) UE (Receiver, Decoder , Local Knowledge, ) [see Figure 8 and Figure 9] , semantic data corresponding to a semantic communications session ( Physical Channel session ) between the TX UE (Transmitter ) and the RX UE (Receiver ) ,
wherein the SMCE (the knowledge sharing ) ( a transmitter and a receiver share meaning-related background knowledge with each other through a neural network in semantic communication) is communicatively coupled to the TX UE and the RX UE [see Paragraphs 0147 & 0133 ]
( One of the main reasons such performance improvements is provided is that knowledge sharing between a source and a destination is used. This knowledge may be a language including logical rules and entities that allow a receiver to correct errors that occur at a symbolic level ) ;
determining, based at least on the received data, a semantic distortion (semantic distortion ) [see Paragraph 0138] corresponding to the semantic communications session
(when semantic distortion occurs due to noise during transmission of transmission data through a semantic encoder and a channel encoder, there is a problem in that retransmission using a method such as HARQ and incremental redundancy may not be performed. The HARQ is a technology that combines forward error correction (FEC) and automatic repeat request (ARQ), and the incremental redundancy is a technology that improves reliability by changing additional information in the form of FEC (e.g., redundancy version (RV) during retransmission. The HARQ is the most widely used error correction scheme in existing technical level communications and is used to recover data by transmitting only part of the transmission information) ;
Matching (semantic knowledge matching ) [see Paragraph 0186] , with at least one of the TX UE or the RX UE, semantic data corresponding to the semantic communications session
(According to some implementations of the present disclosure, a problem of interface matching of semantic communication may be resolved through a procedure for agreeing on semantic elements between the sender and the receiver. According to some implementations of the present disclosure, retransmission may be performed based on semantic correctness. According to some implementations of the present disclosure, a bandwidth may be saved when large-scale data is transmitted ).
However, LEE’s 929 does not explicitly teach synchronization.
Stoica’s 663, from the same or similar fields of endeavor, teaches synchronizing (synchronizing ) [see Paragraph 0091] , with at least one of the TX UE ( Video Source Encoder ) [see Figure 5 ] or the RX UE (Video Source decoder ) , semantic data (Video Codec Knowledge Base 502 ) corresponding to the semantic communications session (Semantic communications ) [see Figure 5 and Paragraph 0160 ].
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing data of the claimed invention to modify the system of LEE’s 929 in view of Stoica’s 663 because Stoica’s 663 suggests that according to some implementations of the present disclosure, a bandwidth may be saved when large-scale data is transmitted.
Regarding to the claim 2, LEE’s 929 and Stoica’s 663 teach the limitations of the claim 1 above.
However, LEE’s 929 does not explicitly teach measuring a communication quality between the TX UE and the RX UE, wherein the communication quality comprises at least one of an end-to-end communication quality, a perception quality, or a task quality; and determining a response based at least on the semantic distortion and the communication quality.
Stoica’s 663, from the same or similar fields of endeavor, teaches measuring a communication quality between the TX UE and the RX UE, wherein the communication quality comprises at least one of an end-to-end communication quality, a perception quality, or a task quality; and determining a response based at least on the semantic distortion and the communication quality (measuring a QoS between the TX UE and the RX UE, wherein the QoS comprises at least one of an end-to-end communication quality, a perception quality, or a task quality; and determining a response based at least on the semantic distortion and the QoS ) [see Paragraph 0160 ].
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing data of the claimed invention to modify the system of LEE’s 929 in view of Stoica’s 663 because Stoica’s 663 suggests that according to some implementations of the present disclosure, a bandwidth may be saved when large-scale data is transmitted.
Regarding to the claim 3, LEE’s 929 and Stoica’s 663 teach the limitations of the claim 2 above.
However, LEE’s 929 does not explicitly teach wherein the response comprises information causing an adjustment of one or more parameters corresponding to the semantic communications session.
Stoica’s 663, from the same or similar fields of endeavor, teaches wherein the response comprises information causing an adjustment of one or more parameters corresponding to the semantic communications session (wherein the response comprises information causing an adjustment of one or more parameters corresponding to the semantic communications session) [see Paragraphs 0135 & 0183].
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing data of the claimed invention to modify the system of LEE’s 929 in view of Stoica’s 663 because Stoica’s 663 suggests that according to some implementations of the present disclosure, a bandwidth may be saved when large-scale data is transmitted.
Regarding to the claim 4, LEE’s 929 and Stoica’s 663 teach the limitations of the claim 3 above.
However, LEE’s 929 does not explicitly teach wherein the adjustment is at a network layer or an application layer of at least one of: the TX UE, the RX UE, or a semantic control apparatus.
Stoica’s 663, from the same or similar fields of endeavor, teaches wherein the adjustment is at a network layer or an application layer of at least one of: the TX UE, the RX UE, or a semantic control apparatus (wherein the adjustment is at a network layer or an application layer of at least one of: the TX UE, the RX UE, or a semantic control apparatus ) [see Paragraph 0181 ].
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing data of the claimed invention to modify the system of LEE’s 929 in view of Stoica’s 663 because Stoica’s 663 suggests that according to some implementations of the present disclosure, a bandwidth may be saved when large-scale data is transmitted.
Regarding to the claim 5, LEE’s 929 and Stoica’s 663 teach the limitations of the claim 3 above.
However, LEE’s 929 does not explicitly teach wherein the one or more parameters comprise a time interval between signal transmissions for at least one of: Channel State Information (CSI), or Hybrid Automatic Repeat Request (HARQ).
Stoica’s 663, from the same or similar fields of endeavor, teaches wherein the one or more parameters comprise a time interval between signal transmissions for at least one of: Channel State Information (CSI), or Hybrid Automatic Repeat Request (HARQ) [see Paragraph 0160].
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing data of the claimed invention to modify the system of LEE’s 929 in view of Stoica’s 663 because Stoica’s 663 suggests that according to some implementations of the present disclosure, a bandwidth may be saved when large-scale data is transmitted.
Regarding to the claim 8, LEE’s 929 further teaches wherein determining the semantic distortion comprises: determining one or more states of a task corresponding to the semantic communications session; comparing the one or more states of the task with one or more reference stages; and determining a difference between the one or more states and the one or more reference stages (wherein determining the semantic distortion comprises: determining one or more states of a task corresponding to the semantic communications session; comparing the one or more states of the task with one or more reference stages; and determining a difference between the one or more states and the one or more reference stages) [see Paragraph 0162].
Regarding to the claim 9, LEE’s 929 further teaches wherein synchronizing the semantic data comprises: transmitting an update request to each of the TX UE and the RX UE; receiving TX semantic data from the TX UE and RX semantic data from the RX UE; determining that the TX semantic data and the RX semantic data are valid based at least on a semantic data model; updating the TX semantic data and the RX semantic data based at least on the semantic data model; and transmitting the updated TX semantic data to the TX UE, and transmitting the updated RX semantic data to the RX UE (transmitting an update request to each of the TX UE and the RX UE; receiving TX semantic data from the TX UE and RX semantic data from the RX UE; determining that the TX semantic data and the RX semantic data are valid based at least on a semantic data model; updating the TX semantic data and the RX semantic data based at least on the semantic data model; and transmitting the updated TX semantic data to the TX UE, and transmitting the updated RX semantic data to the RX UE ) [see Paragraph 0133].
Regarding to the claim 10, LEE’s 929 further teaches wherein at least a part of (i) the TX semantic data and (ii) the RX semantic data is received encrypted (wherein at least a part of (i) the TX semantic data and (ii) the RX semantic data is received encrypted) [see Figure 9 and Paragraphs 0137 & 0138].
Regarding to the claim 11, LEE’s 929 further teaches executing one or more semantic control plane tasks to manage the semantic communications session ( executing one or more semantic control plane tasks to manage the semantic communications session) [see Paragraphs 0137 & 0138 ].
Regarding to the claim 39, LEE’s 929 teaches an apparatus comprising one or more processors configured to perform operations comprising:
receiving, from at least one of a transmitter (TX) user equipment (UE) (Transmitter, Encoder , Local Knowledge ) [see Figure 8 and Figure 9 ] or a receiver (RX) UE (Receiver, Decoder , Local Knowledge, ) [see Figure 8 and Figure 9] , semantic data corresponding to a semantic communications session ( Physical Channel session ) between the TX UE (Transmitter ) and the RX UE (Receiver ) ,
wherein the SMCE (the knowledge sharing ) ( a transmitter and a receiver share meaning-related background knowledge with each other through a neural network in semantic communication) is communicatively coupled to the TX UE and the RX UE [see Paragraphs 0147 & 0133 ]
( One of the main reasons such performance improvements is provided is that knowledge sharing between a source and a destination is used. This knowledge may be a language including logical rules and entities that allow a receiver to correct errors that occur at a symbolic level ) ;
determining, based at least on the received data, a semantic distortion (semantic distortion ) [see Paragraph 0138] corresponding to the semantic communications session
(when semantic distortion occurs due to noise during transmission of transmission data through a semantic encoder and a channel encoder, there is a problem in that retransmission using a method such as HARQ and incremental redundancy may not be performed. The HARQ is a technology that combines forward error correction (FEC) and automatic repeat request (ARQ), and the incremental redundancy is a technology that improves reliability by changing additional information in the form of FEC (e.g., redundancy version (RV) during retransmission. The HARQ is the most widely used error correction scheme in existing technical level communications and is used to recover data by transmitting only part of the transmission information) ;
Matching (semantic knowledge matching ) [see Paragraph 0186] , with at least one of the TX UE or the RX UE, semantic data corresponding to the semantic communications session
(According to some implementations of the present disclosure, a problem of interface matching of semantic communication may be resolved through a procedure for agreeing on semantic elements between the sender and the receiver. According to some implementations of the present disclosure, retransmission may be performed based on semantic correctness. According to some implementations of the present disclosure, a bandwidth may be saved when large-scale data is transmitted ).
However, LEE’s 929 does not explicitly teach synchronization.
Stoica’s 663, from the same or similar fields of endeavor, teaches synchronizing (synchronizing ) [see Paragraph 0091] , with at least one of the TX UE ( Video Source Encoder ) [see Figure 5 ] or the RX UE (Video Source decoder ) , semantic data (Video Codec Knowledge Base 502 ) corresponding to the semantic communications session (Semantic communications ) [see Figure 5 and Paragraph 0160 ].
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing data of the claimed invention to modify the system of LEE’s 929 in view of Stoica’s 663 because Stoica’s 663 suggests that according to some implementations of the present disclosure, a bandwidth may be saved when large-scale data is transmitted.
Regarding to the claim 40, claim 40 is rejected the same limitations of the claim 2 above.
Regarding to the claim 41, LEE’s 929 and Stoica’s 663 teach the limitations of the claim 40 above.
However, LEE’s 929 does not explicitly teach wherein the response comprises information causing an adjustment of one or more parameters corresponding to the semantic communications session, and wherein the adjustment is at a network layer or an application layer of at least one of: the TX UE, the RX UE, or a semantic control apparatus, and wherein the one or more parameters comprise a time interval between signal transmissions for at least one of: Channel State Information (CSI), or Hybrid Automatic Repeat Request (HARQ).
Stoica’s 663, from the same or similar fields of endeavor, teaches wherein the response comprises information causing an adjustment of one or more parameters corresponding to the semantic communications session, and wherein the adjustment is at a network layer or an application layer of at least one of: the TX UE, the RX UE, or a semantic control apparatus, and wherein the one or more parameters comprise a time interval between signal transmissions for at least one of: Channel State Information (CSI), or Hybrid Automatic Repeat Request (HARQ) (wherein the response comprises information causing an adjustment of one or more parameters corresponding to the semantic communications session, and wherein the adjustment is at a network layer or an application layer of at least one of: the TX UE, the RX UE, or a semantic control apparatus, and wherein the one or more parameters comprise a time interval between signal transmissions for at least one of: Channel State Information (CSI), or Hybrid Automatic Repeat Request (HARQ) ) [see Paragraph 0160].
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing data of the claimed invention to modify the system of LEE’s 929 in view of Stoica’s 663 because Stoica’s 663 suggests that according to some implementations of the present disclosure, a bandwidth may be saved when large-scale data is transmitted.
Regarding to the claim 44, claim 44 is rejected the same limitations of the claim 8 above.
Regarding to the claim 45, claim 45 is rejected the same limitations of the claim 9 above.
Regarding to the claim 46, LEE’s 929 teaches a user equipment (UE) comprising one or more processors configured to perform operations comprising:
receiving, from at least one of a transmitter (TX) user equipment (UE) (Transmitter, Encoder , Local Knowledge ) [see Figure 8 and Figure 9 ] or a receiver (RX) UE (Receiver, Decoder , Local Knowledge, ) [see Figure 8 and Figure 9] , semantic data corresponding to a semantic communications session ( Physical Channel session ) between the TX UE (Transmitter ) and the RX UE (Receiver ) ,
wherein the SMCE (the knowledge sharing ) ( a transmitter and a receiver share meaning-related background knowledge with each other through a neural network in semantic communication) is communicatively coupled to the TX UE and the RX UE [see Paragraphs 0147 & 0133 ]
( One of the main reasons such performance improvements is provided is that knowledge sharing between a source and a destination is used. This knowledge may be a language including logical rules and entities that allow a receiver to correct errors that occur at a symbolic level ) ;
determining, based at least on the received data, a semantic distortion (semantic distortion ) [see Paragraph 0138] corresponding to the semantic communications session
(when semantic distortion occurs due to noise during transmission of transmission data through a semantic encoder and a channel encoder, there is a problem in that retransmission using a method such as HARQ and incremental redundancy may not be performed. The HARQ is a technology that combines forward error correction (FEC) and automatic repeat request (ARQ), and the incremental redundancy is a technology that improves reliability by changing additional information in the form of FEC (e.g., redundancy version (RV) during retransmission. The HARQ is the most widely used error correction scheme in existing technical level communications and is used to recover data by transmitting only part of the transmission information) ;
Matching (semantic knowledge matching ) [see Paragraph 0186] , with at least one of the TX UE or the RX UE, semantic data corresponding to the semantic communications session
(According to some implementations of the present disclosure, a problem of interface matching of semantic communication may be resolved through a procedure for agreeing on semantic elements between the sender and the receiver. According to some implementations of the present disclosure, retransmission may be performed based on semantic correctness. According to some implementations of the present disclosure, a bandwidth may be saved when large-scale data is transmitted ).
However, LEE’s 929 does not explicitly teach synchronization.
Stoica’s 663, from the same or similar fields of endeavor, teaches synchronizing (synchronizing ) [see Paragraph 0091] , with at least one of the TX UE ( Video Source Encoder ) [see Figure 5 ] or the RX UE (Video Source decoder ) , semantic data (Video Codec Knowledge Base 502 ) corresponding to the semantic communications session (Semantic communications ) [see Figure 5 and Paragraph 0160 ].
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing data of the claimed invention to modify the system of LEE’s 929 in view of Stoica’s 663 because Stoica’s 663 suggests that according to some implementations of the present disclosure, a bandwidth may be saved when large-scale data is transmitted.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LEE et al. ( US 20250015929, hereinafter, LEE’s 929) in view of Stoica et al. ( US 20230198663, hereinafter, Stoica’s 663 ), and further in view of JANGAM et al. ( US 20200136888, hereinafter, JANGAM’s 888).
Regarding to the claim 12, LEE’s 929 and Stoica’s 663 teach the limitations of the claim 11 above.
However, LEE’s 929 and Stoica’s 663 do not explicitly teach wherein the one or more semantic control plane tasks comprise one or more virtual network functions.
JANGAM’s 888, from the same or similar fields of endeavor, teaches wherein the one or more semantic control plane tasks comprise one or more virtual network functions (wherein the one or more semantic control plane tasks comprise one or more virtual network functions) [see Paragraph 0020 ].
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing data of the claimed invention to modify the combined system ( LEE’s 929 and Stoica’s 663), and further in view of JANGAM’s 888 because JANGAM’s 888 suggests that embodiments presented in this disclosure generally relate to software defined networking. More specifically, embodiments disclosed herein relate to use of semantic data modeling to improve policy management, configuration, and enforcement in software defined networks.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6, 7 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.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
The prior art fails to disclose determining a difference between the decoded TX response message and the RX response message.
Claims 42, 43 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.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
The prior art fails to disclose determining a difference between the decoded TX response message and the RX response message.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHUONG T HO whose telephone number is (571)272-3133. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30-4:00.
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, Charles C Jiang can be reached at 571-270-7191. 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.
/CHUONG T HO/Examiner, Art Unit 2412
Prosecution Insights