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 .
This is a first office action in response to the instant application for letters patent filed on 26 September 2024. Claims 1-20 are presented for examination.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 02/03/2025 was filed before the mailing date of the first office action on the merits. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that use the word “means” or “step” but are nonetheless not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph because the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure, materials, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “means for receiving, means for distributing, means for updating, and means for sending”, in claims 1, 2, and 6.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are not being interpreted to cover only the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant intends to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to remove the structure, materials, or acts that performs the claimed function; or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) does/do not recite sufficient structure, materials, or acts to perform the claimed function.
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.
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(s) 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu Pub Number US 20210014734 A1 in view of Yi Pub Number 20260006108 A1.
As per claim 1, Liu teaches an apparatus for a communication network (see fig 1-3), the apparatus comprising: means for receiving (fig 1, transceiver) at least one of (a) Access Traffic Steering, Switching, Splitting (ATSSS) rules for distributing traffic for transmission to at least two nodes configured for access (see fig 1, par 0007-0008, ATSSS rule), the at least two nodes comprising at least one node configured for non-Third Generation Partnership Project (non-3GPP) access, wherein the ATSSS rules are received from a session management function (SMF) (see par 0029 and 0032, the status of the network is associated with a connection over a plurality of different network accesses. The connection is a protocol data unit (PDU) session, and the different network accesses include third generation partnership project (3GPP) access and a non-3GPP access. The ATSSS rule is configured at a session management function (SMF) of the network node 20. The network node further includes an ATSSS control functionality entity in the SMF configured to determine to perform the ATSSS operation. The SMF is configured to configure an ATSSS rule and operation command to the UE 10 or a user plane function (UPF) of the network node 20), and information provided by a user plane function (UPF) (see par 0032, user plane function of the network 20), or (b) protocol data units (PDUs) received via the at least one node configured for non- 3GPP access (see par 0032, the connection is a protocol data unit (PDU) session, and the different network accesses include a third generation partnership project (3GPP) access and a non-3GPP access); and means for distributing traffic for transmission to the at least two nodes based on the at least one of the ATSSS rules (see fig 4, par 0054, It determines which path may be used for an incoming packet given traffic distribution based on the ATSSS rules and the state of the network).
Liu does not teach that ATSSS rules are based on information used for Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) and ECN information (see Yi, fig 2 and 5, ECN flagged and tagged; par 0094, when ATSSS is established for 3GPP access and non-3GPP access with L4S enabled, a multi-access PDU (MA-PDU) session of the ATSSS may be enabled with L4S on the NG-RAN and the non-3GPP access network when both the NG-RAN and the non-3GPP access network support ECN marking, that is, when traffic splitting or a steering mode are utilized). It would be obvious to a skill artisan at the effective time of the invention as claimed to incorporate (ECN) Explicit Congestion Notification into Liu system to reduce packet loss, minimize retransmission, and decreases latency in the network.
As per claim 2, Liu-Yi teaches the apparatus as claimed in claim 1, further comprising: means for updating Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) information in downlink PDUs, wherein the ECN information in the downlink PDUs indicates uplink congestion at one or more of the at least two nodes, and is based on one or more of: (a) the ECN information received via the at least one node configured for non-3GPP access, or (b) the traffic distribution performed by the apparatus, wherein the downlink PDUs comprising the updated ECN information indicating the uplink congestion are transmitted toward an application host (see Yi par 0094 and 0164).
As per claim 3, Liu-Yi teaches the apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein at least one of (a) the distributing of the traffic, or (b) the updating of the ECN information is further based on one or more local conditions comprising at least one of local congestion, network interface availability, signal loss conditions, or user preferences (see Yi, par 0094 and 0164, disable feature).
As per claim 4, Liu-Yi teaches the apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein the at least one of (a) the distributing of the traffic, or (b) the updating of the ECN information is further based on ECN information received via at least another node of the at least two nodes (see Yi fig 2 and 5, par 0094 and 0164).
As per claim 5, Liu-Yi teaches the apparatus as claimed in claim 4, wherein the at least one of (a) the distributing of the traffic, or (b) the updating of the ECN information is further based on combining the ECN information received via the at least two nodes (see Yi fig 2 and 5 and par 0094 and 0164).
As per claim 6, Liu-Yi teaches the apparatus as claimed in claim 1, further comprising: means for sending, in a request for at least one of establishment or modification of a multi-access (MA) (PDU) session for transmission via the at least two nodes, an indication that ATSSS and Low Latency, Low Loss and Scalable Throughput (L4S) are enabled for at least the node configured for non-3GPP access (see Yi, par 0164, where ATSSS is enabled, a wireless device (UE) is enabled to establish a first PDU session through the 3GPP access network (e.g., NG-RAN 704(1)), and a second PDU session through a non-3GPP access network (e.g. non-3GPP GW 704(2)), where the first sessions and second PDU session are part of a MA-PDU session).
As per claim 7, Liu teaches an apparatus for a communication network, the apparatus comprising: a user plane function (UPF) for a communication network configured to perform (see Liu par 0061 and 0068): receiving protocol data units (PDUs) via at least two nodes configured for access, wherein the at least two nodes comprise the node configured for non-3GPP access (see Liu par 0032 and 0039).
Liu does not discloses based on at least the received congestion information for L4S, updating Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) information in the PDUs; and transmitting the PDUs comprising the updated ECN information toward a host; receiving congestion information for Low Latency, Low Loss and Scalable Throughput (L4S), via a node configured for non-Third Generation Partnership Project (non-3GPP) access. However, Yi teaches those features (see Yi, fig 2 and 5, par 0094 and 0164). See claim 1 reasoning.
As per claim 8, Liu-Yi teaches the apparatus as claimed in claim 7, wherein the congestion information for L4S comprises a percentage of packets the apparatus is directed to use for L4S (see Yi, fig 2 and 5, par 0094-0096).
As per claim 9, Liu-Yi teaches the apparatus as claimed in claim 7, wherein the updating of the ECN information is further based on congestion information for L4S received via at least another node of the at least two nodes (see Yi fig 2 and 5, Par 0094-0096).
As per claim 10, Liu-Yi teaches the apparatus as claimed in claim 9, wherein the updating of the ECN information 30comprises combining the congestion information for L4S received via the at least two nodes to determine the updated ECN information (see YI, fig 2 and 5, par 0094-0095).
As per claim 11, Liu-Yi teaches the apparatus as claimed in claim 7, wherein the UPF is further configured to perform: updating Access Traffic Steering, Switching, and Splitting (ATSSS) rule information (see Liu par 0029, 0030, and 0033) based on at least the received congestion information for L4S received via the non-3GPP access node (see Yi, fig 2 and 5, par 0094); and providing the updated ATSSS rule information toward a user equipment (UE) (see Liu par 0029, 0030, and 0033).
As per claim 12, Liu-Yi teaches the apparatus as claimed in claim 7, wherein at least one of the updating of the ECN information or the updating of the ATSSS rule information is further based on at least one rule or at least one setting provided by a session management function (SMF) (see Liu par 0032-0033 and 0036 in regard to ATSSS update).
As per claim 13, Liu-Yi teaches all the features of this claim as discussed in claim 7 above. Furthermore, Liu-Yi teaches and adjusting traffic distribution of downlink protocol data units (PDUs) between at least two nodes configured for access, wherein the at least two nodes comprise the node configured for non-3GPP access (see Liu par 0067, PDU session establishment/modification; par 0052, and 0039).
In regard to “based on at least the congestion information for L4S”, (see Yi par 0094-0096).
As per claim 14, Liu-Yi teaches the apparatus as claimed in claim 13, wherein the UPF is further configured to perform: based on at least the received congestion information for L4S, and the adjustment of the traffic distribution, updating Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) information in the downlink PDUs, wherein the downlink PDUs comprising the updated ECN information are transmitted via at least one of the two nodes (see Yi, par 0094 and 0164).
As per claim 15, Liu-Yi teaches the apparatus as claimed in any of claims 13, wherein the congestion information for L4S comprises a percentage of packets the apparatus is directed to use for L4S (see Yi par 0094-0096).
As per claim 16, Liu-Yi teaches the apparatus as claimed in claim 14, wherein the updating of the ECN information is further based on congestion information for L4S received via at least another node of the at least two nodes (see Yi par 0094-0096).
As per claim 17, Liu-Yi teaches the apparatus as claimed in 16, wherein the updating of the ECN information comprises combining the congestion information for L4S received via the at least two nodes to determine the updated ECN information (see Yi par 0094).
As per claim 18, Liu-Yi teaches the as claimed in claim 14, wherein the updating of the ECN information is further based on at least one rule or at least one setting provided by a session management function (SMF) (see YI par 0110, SMF 510).
As per claims 19-20, they are method of the apparatus claims 1-2 discussed above. They contain the same limitations. Therefore, they are rejected under the same rationale.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FRANTZ B JEAN whose telephone number is (571)272-3937. The examiner can normally be reached 8-5 M-F.
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, Glenton B. Burgess can be reached at 5712723949. 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.
/FRANTZ B JEAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2454