Detailed Action
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This Office action is in response to Applicant’s amendment submitted on April 28, 2026.
Claims 16-27 are pending in the application.
Response to Arguments/Remarks
Priority
The certified copies of the priority documents “10-2023-0130793” and “10-2024-0109152” have been retrieved on February 20, 2026. The certified copies are not in the English language. Applicant is required to file English translations of the certified copies.
Applicant cannot rely upon the certified copy of the foreign priority application to overcome this rejection because a translation of said application has not been made of record in accordance with 37 CFR 1.55. When an English language translation of a non-English language foreign application is required, the translation must be that of the certified copy (of the foreign application as filed) submitted together with a statement that the translation of the certified copy is accurate. See MPEP §§ 215 and 216.
If the certified copy is not in the English language and there is no translation, the examiner may reject the unpatentable claims and at the same time require an English translation (the translation must be that of the certified copy (of the foreign application as filed) that is submitted together with a statement that the translation of the certified copy is accurate) for the purpose of determining the applicant’s right to rely on the foreign filing date. See MPEP § 216.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, and 13 were rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liao US Patent Publication No. 2025/0310429 in view of Li et al. US Patent Publication No. 2025/0047609. Claims 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, and 13 have been cancelled. Accordingly, the rejections have been withdrawn.
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 16-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Methenni et al. US Patent Publication No. 2026/0040131 (“Methenni”).
Regarding claim 16, Methenni teaches a method performed by a policy control function (PCF) in a communication system, the method comprising:
receiving, from an application function (AF), individual quality of service (QoS) requirements and packet filters corresponding to multiplexed media flows (para. [0154] AF may include additional packet filter information (e.g., to help identify the different multiplexed flows). para. [0157] AF may include (e.g., for each multiplexed traffic) a QoS reference or QoS parameter(s). para. [0165] PCF may receive the AF request);
determining policy and charging control (PCC) rules after receiving the individual QoS requirements and the packet filters (para. [0173] PCF may use the received information from the request to generate PCC rules. para. [0178] PCC rule(s) may include QoS parameter(s) corresponding to the traffic identified by the service data flow information and the additional packet filter information.); and
transmitting, to a session management function (SMF), the PCC rules (para. [0187] PCF may send the PCC rules to the SMF),
wherein the multiplexed media flows are differentiated based on the packet filters (para. [0154] AF may include additional packet filter information (e.g., to help identify the different multiplexed flows)), and
wherein each of the PCC rules corresponds to each of the multiplexed media flows and includes a packet filter of a corresponding media flow (para. [0178] PCC rule(s) may include QoS parameter(s) corresponding to the traffic identified by the service data flow information and the additional packet filter information. para. [0117],[0176],[178] additional packet filter included in the PCC rule. para. [0199] SMF may use the PCC rules to determine forwarding action rules (i.e., FARs) for the (e.g., each) packet rule for the traffic flow(s) of interest.).
Regarding claim 19, Methenni teaches a method performed by a session management function (SMF) in a communication system, the method comprising:
receiving, from a policy control function (PCF), policy and charging control (PCC) rules for multiplexed media flows (para. [0187] PCF may send the PCC rules to the SMF),
wherein the multiplexed media flows are differentiated based on the packet filters, and wherein each of the PCC rules corresponds to each of the multiplexed media flows and includes a packet filter of a corresponding media flow (para. [0154] AF may include additional packet filter information (e.g., to help identify the different multiplexed flows). para. [0157] AF may include (e.g., for each multiplexed traffic) a QoS reference or QoS parameter(s). para. [0165] [0165] At 3, the PCF may receive the AF request. para. [0178] PCC rule(s) may include QoS parameter(s) corresponding to the traffic identified by the service data flow information and the additional packet filter information.); and
transmitting, to a user plane function (UPF), the packet filter of the corresponding media flow among the multiplexed media flows (para. [0115] additional packet filter may be used to differentiate a media flow. SMF may include the additional packet filter and legacy packet filter in the N4 rules that are sent to the UPF. para. [0188] SMF may use the received PCC rules to generate N4 rules for the UPF,. para. [0223] SMF may send the N4 rules to the UPF).
Regarding claim 22, Methenni teaches a network entity corresponding to policy control function (PCF) in a communication system, the network entity comprising: at least one transceiver; at least one processor coupled with the at least one transceiver and configured to:
receive, from an application function (AF), individual quality of service (QoS) requirements and packet filters corresponding to multiplexed media flows (para. [0154] AF may include additional packet filter information (e.g., to help identify the different multiplexed flows). para. [0157] AF may include (e.g., for each multiplexed traffic) a QoS reference or QoS parameter(s). para. [0165] [0165] At 3, the PCF may receive the AF request),
determine policy and charging control (PCC) rules after receiving the individual QoS requirements and the packet filters (para. [0173] PCF may use the received information from the request to generate PCC rules. para. [0178] PCC rule(s) may include QoS parameter(s) corresponding to the traffic identified by the service data flow information and the additional packet filter information.), and
transmit, to a session management function (SMF), the PCC rules, wherein the multiplexed media flows are differentiated based on the packet filters (para. [0187] PCF may send the PCC rules to the SMF), and
wherein each of the PCC rules corresponds to each of the multiplexed media flows and includes a packet filter of a corresponding media flow (para. [0178] PCC rule(s) may include QoS parameter(s) corresponding to the traffic identified by the service data flow information and the additional packet filter information. para. [0117],[0176],[178] additional packet filter included in the PCC rule. para. [0199] SMF may use the PCC rules to determine forwarding action rules (i.e., FARs) for the (e.g., each) packet rule for the traffic flow(s) of interest.).
Regarding claim 25, Methenni teaches a network entity corresponding to session management function (SMF) in a communication system, the network entity comprising:
at least one transceiver; at least one processor coupled with the at least one transceiver and configured to:
receive, from a policy control function (PCF), policy and charging control (PCC) rules for multiplexed media flows (para. [0187] PCF may send the PCC rules to the SMF),
wherein the multiplexed media flows are differentiated based on the packet filters, and wherein each of the PCC rules corresponds to each of the multiplexed media flows and includes a packet filter of a corresponding media flow (para. [0154] AF may include additional packet filter information (e.g., to help identify the different multiplexed flows). para. [0157] AF may include (e.g., for each multiplexed traffic) a QoS reference or QoS parameter(s). para. [0173] PCF may use the received information from the request to generate PCC rules. para. [0178] PCC rule(s) may include QoS parameter(s) corresponding to the traffic identified by the service data flow information and the additional packet filter information); and
transmit, to a user plane function (UPF), the packet filter of the corresponding media flow among the multiplexed media flows (para. [0115] additional packet filter may be used to differentiate a media flow. SMF may include the additional packet filter and legacy packet filter in the N4 rules that are sent to the UPF. para. [0188] SMF may use the received PCC rules to generate N4 rules for the UPF,. para. [0223] SMF may send the N4 rules to the UPF).
Regarding claim 17, Methenni teaches the method of claim 16, wherein each of the packet filters includes at least one of a synchronization source (SSRC), a payload type (PT) or a media identification (MID) (para. [0076] media streams and media flows may be used interchangeably. para. [0116] additional packet filter may be used to differentiate a media flow. para. [0138] additional packet filter may include a stream ID type and a PDU set importance field type).
Regarding claim 18, Methenni teaches the method of claim 16, wherein each of the individual QoS requirements corresponds to each of the multiplexed media flows (para. [0167] first set of QoS parameters may be related to a flow (e.g., each individual flow, for example, an RTP stream) that is multiplexed. para. [0178] PCC rule(s) may include the authorized 5QI or QoS parameters for a (e.g., each) service data flow. para. [0180] PCC rule may include the 5QI value or QoS parameters for the multiplexed traffic flow. para. [0182] if the resources for the differentiated traffic flows were established or reserved (e.g., different QoS parameters).
Regarding claim 20, Methenni teaches the method of claim 19, wherein each of the packet filters includes at least one of a synchronization source (SSRC), a payload type (PT) or a media identification (MID) (para. [0116] additional packet filter may be used to differentiate a media flow. para. [0138] additional packet filter may include a stream ID type and a PDU set importance field type).
Regarding claim 21, Methenni teaches the method of claim 19, wherein the packet filters are transmitted in a packet detection rule (PDR) (para. [0194] PDR may include the packet filter information in the packet detection information field).
Regarding claim 23, Methenni teaches the network entity of claim 22, wherein each of the packet filters includes at least one of a synchronization source (SSRC), a payload type (PT) or a media identification (MID) (para. [0116] additional packet filter may be used to differentiate a media flow. para. [0138] additional packet filter may include a stream ID type and a PDU set importance field type).
Regarding claim 24, Methenni teaches the network entity of claim 22, wherein each of the individual QoS requirements corresponds to each of the multiplexed media flows (para. [0167] first set of QoS parameters may be related to a flow (e.g., each individual flow, for example, an RTP stream) that is multiplexed. para. [0178] PCC rule(s) may include the authorized 5QI or QoS parameters for a (e.g., each) service data flow. para. [0180] PCC rule may include the 5QI value or QoS parameters for the multiplexed traffic flow. para. [0182] if the resources for the differentiated traffic flows were established or reserved (e.g., different QoS parameters).
Regarding claim 26, Methenni teaches the network entity of claim 25, wherein each of the packet filters includes at least one of a synchronization source (SSRC), a payload type (PT) or a media identification (MID) (para. [0116] additional packet filter may be used to differentiate a media flow. para. [0138] additional packet filter may include a stream ID type and a PDU set importance field type).
Regarding claim 27, Methenni teaches the network entity of claim 25, wherein the packet filters are transmitted in a packet detection rule (PDR) (para. [0194] PDR may include the packet filter information in the packet detection information field).
Conclusion
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Joshua Joo whose telephone number is 571 272-3966. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 7am-3pm EST.
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, Oscar Louie can be reached on 571 270-1684. 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.
/JOSHUA JOO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2445
Prosecution Insights