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 . The instant First Office Action on the merits is in response to claims filed on 11/7/2024.
Claims 1-20 are pending. Claims 1 and 19 are the base independent claims.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted was filed before the mailing of a first Office action on the merits. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97(b). Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Rossbach et al (US 2026/0046680) in view of Oyman et al (US 2019/0045578), and further in view of Tooher et al (US 2023/0189055), Wang et al (US 20230224383), or Pateromichelakis et al (US 2026/0214055).
Regarding claim 1, Rossbach discloses a network element comprising circuitry, including any of a transceiver, processor, and memory (fig. 3; see base station 300), configured to:
send configuration information to a wireless transmit/receive unit (WTRU) (fig. 2; e.g. UE 110; also par 54; or par 82-83, e.g. various thresholds that may trigger feedback to the SDAP or RRC can be configured by the network), wherein the configuration information indicates to the WTRU to send reporting information to the network element about a buffering event related to a traffic flow (par 82; e.g. if the UE detects a particular event with respect to the received packets, e.g., a high buffer status for a given LCH, the UE can provide feedback to the higher layers (e.g., SDAP, RRC) that triggers a remapping of the QoS flow; hence the configuration by the network indicates a condition to trigger a feedback about a buffer status);
receive, from the WTRU, the reporting information indicating that (1) the buffering event related to the traffic flow has occurred at the WTRU (par 86; e.g. if the buffer size for the queue exceeds the threshold a high buffer status can be detected at the UE; …triggers an alarm or feedback message) and (2) the buffering event is associated with a buffering condition being satisfied at the WTRU (par 99; e.g. Some packets, e.g., control data, may be eligible to be remapped to a different DRB when certain conditions are met based on network configuration);
determine a corrective action associated with the traffic flow based on the reporting information to prevent the buffering condition from being satisfied (par 90-91, e.g. UE remapping packets from a first DRB to a second DRB based on buffer status; or par 96-98; e.g. the identification of the critical packets can be configured by the network or defined in specification. The network can further configure packet shifting and/or QoS flow remapping parameters for the UE… UE 601 shifting one or more packets from a first DRB to a second DRB based on a critical status); and
perform the corrective action associated with the traffic flow (par 94; e.g. the gNB 602 receives the packets (e.g., with the RDI bit), admits the packets based on gNB implementation and remaps the QFI 1 to DRB 2).
The reference does not explicitly disclose that the network element is interactive in determination of a corrective action based on a report (emphasis added).
It is understood by one skilled in the art, however, because Oyman discloses that the network element can interact and determine a corrective action based on a report under BRI. Oyman discloses in par 73, that UE2 620 requests 624 additional delay budget from eNB2 640 in order to perform additional re-transmissions to increase the reliability of its uplink (UL) transmissions. The second eNB 640 grants and acknowledges 626 this request 624. Hence, the eNB grants and acknowledges the request reads on the determination to prevent the poor buffering condition from recurring.
In view of the above, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of communication protocol configured for the electronic system of Oyman with the electronic system of Rossbach. One is motivated as such to define the signaling in RAN (Oyman, par 135).
Regarding claim 19, Rossbach discloses a method implemented in a network element (fig. 3; see base station 300), the method comprising:
sending configuration information to a wireless transmit/receive unit (WTRU) (fig. 2; e.g. UE 110; also par 54; or par 82-83, e.g. various thresholds that may trigger feedback to the SDAP or RRC can be configured by the network), wherein the configuration information indicates to the WTRU to send reporting information to the network element about a buffering event related to a traffic flow (par 82; e.g. if the UE detects a particular event with respect to the received packets, e.g., a high buffer status for a given LCH, the UE can provide feedback to the higher layers (e.g., SDAP, RRC) that triggers a remapping of the QoS flow; hence the configuration by the network indicates a condition to trigger a feedback about a buffer status);
receiving, from the WTRU, the reporting information indicating that (1) the buffering event related to the traffic flow has occurred at the WTRU (par 86; e.g. if the buffer size for the queue exceeds the threshold a high buffer status can be detected at the UE; …triggers an alarm or feedback message) and (2) the buffering event is associated with a buffering condition being satisfied at the WTRU (par 99; e.g. Some packets, e.g., control data, may be eligible to be remapped to a different DRB when certain conditions are met based on network configuration);
determining a corrective action associated with the traffic flow based on the reporting information to prevent the buffering condition from being satisfied (par 90-91, e.g. UE remapping packets from a first DRB to a second DRB based on buffer status; or par 96-98; e.g. the identification of the critical packets can be configured by the network or defined in specification. The network can further configure packet shifting and/or QoS flow remapping parameters for the UE… UE 601 shifting one or more packets from a first DRB to a second DRB based on a critical status); and
performing the corrective action associated with the traffic flow (par 94; e.g. the gNB 602 receives the packets (e.g., with the RDI bit), admits the packets based on gNB implementation and remaps the QFI 1 to DRB 2).
The reference does not explicitly disclose that the network element is interactive in determination of a corrective action based on a report (emphasis added).
It is understood by one skilled in the art, however, because Oyman discloses that the network element can interact and determine a corrective action based on a report under BRI. Oyman discloses in par 73, that UE2 620 requests 624 additional delay budget from eNB2 640 in order to perform additional re-transmissions to increase the reliability of its uplink (UL) transmissions. The second eNB 640 grants and acknowledges 626 this request 624. Hence, the eNB grants and acknowledges the request reads on the determination to prevent the poor buffering condition from recurring.
In view of the above, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of communication protocol configured for the electronic system of Oyman with the electronic system of Rossbach. One is motivated as such to define the signaling in RAN (Oyman, par 135).
Regarding claims 2 and 20, Rossbach discloses:
wherein the buffering condition is satisfied at the WTRU based on an amount of data buffered at the WTRU being higher than a first threshold (par 82; e.g. if the UE detects a particular event with respect to the received packets, e.g., a high buffer status for a given LCH, the UE can provide feedback to the higher layers (e.g., SDAP, RRC) that triggers a remapping of the QoS flow).
Regarding claim 3, the combination discloses the subject matter of claim 2, without:
wherein the buffering condition is satisfied at the WTRU based on the amount of data buffered at the WTRU being higher than the first threshold for more than an amount of time (emphasis added).
However, Tooher discloses:
In par 84, par 100, e.g. QoS remapping triggers/conditions may include, for example, at least…an amount of buffered data…a duration of time passing. Thus, it is obvious the condition is triggered when certain duration has passed.
In view of the above, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of communication protocol configured for the electronic system of Tooher with the electronic system of Rossbach and Oyman. One is motivated as such to avoid false alarm.
Regarding claim 4, Rossbach discloses:
wherein the configuration information indicates any of the first threshold and the amount of time (par 82-83, e.g. various thresholds that may trigger feedback to the SDAP or RRC can be configured by the network).
Regarding claim 5, the combination discloses the subject matter of claim 1, without:
wherein the buffering condition is satisfied at the WTRU based on an amount of data buffered at the WTRU being lower than a second threshold.
However, Tooher discloses:
In par 89, a WTRU may trigger a QoS remapping based on a condition occurring, for example, if the amount of buffered data is larger or smaller than a configured threshold.
In view of the above, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of communication protocol configured for the electronic system of Tooher with the electronic system of Rossbach and Oyman. One is motivated as such to report a lower buffer status (Rossbach, par 86).
Regarding claim 6, Tooher further discloses:
wherein the buffering condition is satisfied at the WTRU based on the amount of data buffered at the WTRU being lower than the second threshold for more than an amount of time (par 89, a WTRU may trigger a QoS remapping based on a condition occurring, for example, if the amount of buffered data is larger or smaller than a configured threshold).
Regarding claim 7, Rossbach discloses:
wherein the configuration information indicates any of the second threshold and the amount of time (par 82-83, e.g. various thresholds that may trigger feedback to the SDAP or RRC can be configured by the network).
Regarding claim 8, Rossbach discloses:
wherein the configuration information indicates an identifier of the traffic flow (par 51-52; e.g. QoS flow identifier (QFI)).
Regarding claim 9, Rossbach discloses:
wherein the configuration information indicates to send the reporting information based on the buffering condition being satisfied at the WTRU (par 86; e.g. if the buffer size for the queue exceeds the threshold a high buffer status can be detected at the UE; …triggers an alarm or feedback message).
Regarding claim 10, the combination discloses the subject matter of claim 1, without:
wherein the reporting information indicates a level of criticality.
However, Wang discloses:
In par 99, e.g. a finer granularity buffer status report may be supported to report critical data. In view of the above, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of communication protocol configured for the electronic system of Wang with the electronic system of Rossbach and Oyman. One is motivated as such to inform the BS distinguishing how much data is buffered which can help the BS to allocate physical resources (Wang, par 99).
Regarding claim 11, Rossbach discloses:
wherein the circuitry is configured to determine the corrective action associated with the traffic flow based on the level of criticality (par 97-98; e.g. the identification of the critical packets can be configured by the network or defined in specification. The network can further configure packet shifting and/or QoS flow remapping parameters for the UE… UE 601 shifting one or more packets from a first DRB to a second DRB based on a critical status).
Regarding claim 12, Rossbach discloses:
wherein the circuitry is configured to determine, based on the reporting information, whether the buffering event corresponds to a buffer over utilization or to a buffer underutilization at the WTRU (par 82; under BRI, high buffer status corresponds to over utilization and lower buffer status corresponds to underutilization).
Regarding claim 13, Oyman discloses:
wherein the circuitry is configured to determine the corrective action associated with the traffic flow including to determine the corrective action to be traffic influence via requesting a higher delay value to a network based on the buffer event corresponding to the buffer over utilization at the WTRU (par 42, 48; new RTCP feedback (FB) message type to carry available additional delay budget information; also see par 71-72; under BRI, high packet losses despite applying the highest possible jitter buffer reads on buffer over utilization because packet is discarded due to over utilization).
Regarding claim 14, Oyman discloses:
wherein the circuitry is configured to request the higher delay value to the network including to send a request to a network exposure function of the network indicating a packet delay budget value corresponding to the higher delay value (par 283; e.g. provide information to each other via NEF).
Regarding claim 15, Oyman discloses:
wherein the circuitry is configured to request the higher delay value to the network including to send a request to a policy control function of the network indicating a requested 5G system delay corresponding to the higher delay value (par 281; e.g. The PCF 1926 may provide policy rules to control plane function(s)).
Regarding claim 16, Rossbach discloses:
wherein the circuitry is configured to determine the corrective action associated with the traffic flow including to determine the corrective action to be traffic influence via data boost based on the buffer event corresponding to the buffer underutilization at the WTRU (par 92; e.g. UE 601 (e.g., SDAP) determines to remap the first QoS flow (QFI 1) from DRBl to DRB2. Before selecting the DRB2, the UE 601 can first determine that the buffer size for the second lower layer queue of DRB2 is within a predetermined threshold; hence boost the data in DRB2).
Regarding claim 17, Rossbach discloses:
wherein the circuitry is configured to perform a data boost including to mark packets of the traffic flow with an urgency identification to reduce a delay of the traffic flow (par 97-98; e.g. the identification of the critical packets can be configured by the network or defined in specification. The network can further configure packet shifting and/or QoS flow remapping parameters for the UE… UE 601 shifting one or more packets from a first DRB to a second DRB based on a critical status).
Regarding claim 18, the combination does not explicitly disclose:
comprising a service enabler architecture layer for data delivery server.
However, Pateromichelakis discloses:
In par 36, e.g. a network unit 104 may also be referred to as…a service enabler architecture layer.
In view of the above, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of communication protocol configured for the electronic system of Pateromichelakis with the electronic system of Rossbach and Oyman. One is motivated as such to allow QoS adaptation (Pateromichelakis, par 102).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YAOTANG WANG whose telephone number is (571)272-4023. The examiner can normally be reached 10:00-18:00 ET (M, W, TH & alternate 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, HADI ARMOUCHE can be reached at 571-270-3618. 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.
/YAOTANG WANG/SCE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2409
