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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because claim 19, recites “a computer program product comprising a computer readable medium with code stored thereupon", the examiner would like to point out the language "computer readable medium". At the time of the invention one of ordinary skill could interpret a “computer readable medium”, as a signal.
Signals being natural phenomenon, do not fit into one of the 4 statutory categories of invention, and therefore claim 19 is rejected for the recitation of a "computer readable medium" without the recitation, that said medium is “non-transitory” causes the claim to be rejected. The applicant can overcome the rejection by reciting that the medium is "non-transitory", thereby eliminating the possibility that one could interpret the aforesaid medium as a signal.
Claim 20, which depends from claim 19 is similarly rejected for its dependency on claim 19, and for failing to cure the deficiencies therein.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 6, 15, 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 6, 15, and 17 -18 recite, in part, “the time information and the time identification”. The office notes that claim 10 does not recite “a time identification” instead claim 10 recites, in part, “a time information identification of the time information”. The claims should be amended to reflect term used in claim 10 from which claims 17 and 18 depend.
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-5, 7, 10-14, 16, and 19, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Velev et al. (US 2021/0153070 A1).
Regarding claims 1, the disclosure of Velev teaches:
a wireless communication method for use in a wireless terminal (fig.1 depicts a wireless communication and a wireless terminal element 105), the method comprising:
performing, with a wireless network node (fig.1 depicts a wireless network node element 110), a data communication (fig.1 depicts uplink/downlink communications between the Remote-Unit and a Base-Unit, wherein the Remote-Unit is the wireless terminal, and the Base-Unit is the network node), wherein time information associated with the data communication (par.[0080] describes a time-stamp being appended to an uplink data communication, par.[0132 and 0135]) and a time information identification of the time information (par.[0179] teaches that a 1-bit flag is added to the header of the PDCP PDU as an identifier/identification of the time-information, wherein indication is a presence indicator and identifies the time-stamp) are included in a Packet Data Convergence Protocol (PDCP) packet data unit (PDU) of the data communication (par.[0135] which recites, in part, “the marked uplink packet includes a time-stamp, where the processor 505 further transmits the time-stamp in one of: a PDCP header and a SDAP header.”, par.[0167]).
Regarding claims 2 and 11, Velev discloses:
wherein the time information associated with the data communication and the time information identification of the time information are included in a PDCP PDU header of the PDCP PDU (par.[0135] describes the time-stamp being added to the header of the PDCP PDU, and par.[0179] describes the identification of time information/1-bit indicator is added to the header of the PDCP PDU).
Regarding claims 3 and 12, Velev discloses:
wherein the performing, with the wireless network node, the data communication comprises: receiving, from the wireless network node, the PDCP PDU (par.[0082] describes the time-stamp in a downlink packet).
Regarding claims 4 and 13, Velev discloses:
wherein the time information identification indicates that the time information is a time of packet transmitting from a PDCP entity, a time of packet arriving at an upper service access point (SAP) of a PDCP entity of the wireless network node, a time of packet arriving at a PDCP entity, a time of packet arrival at a 5G system (5GS) ingress, or a time of packet arrival at a user plane function (UPF) (par.[0206 – 0207] wherein the 1-bit indicator indicates a transmission time-stamp for calculating a delay).
Regarding claim 5, Velev discloses:
wherein the performing, with the wireless network node, the data communication comprises: transmitting, to the wireless network node, the PDCP PDU (par.[0080] wherein the UE transmits an uplink PDCP PDU with a time-stamp).
Regarding claims 7 and 16, Velev discloses:
a coordinated universal time (UTC) a global positioning system (GPS) time, an elapsed time from a start of a day, an elapsed time from a start of a second of a reference time, or an elapsed time from a start of a millisecond of a reference time, wherein a unit of milliseconds of the reference time is 20 milliseconds, and wherein a unit of time is one of a quarter of a microsecond, a microsecond, a nanosecond, or a multiple of nanoseconds (par.[0178] which describes the GPS time and absolute time).
Regarding claim 10, Velev discloses:
a wireless communication method for use in a wireless network node (fig.1 depicts a wireless communication and a network node 110), the method comprising:
performing, with a terminal (fig.1 depicts a wireless terminal element 105), a data communication (fig.1 depicts uplink/downlink communications between the Remote-Unit and a Base-Unit, wherein the Remote-Unit is the wireless terminal, and the Base-Unit is the network node), wherein time information associated with the data communication (par.[0080] describes a time-stamp being appended to an uplink data communication, par.[0132 and 0135]) and a time information identification of the time information (par.[0179] teaches that a 1-bit flag is added to the header of the PDCP PDU as an identifier/identification of the time-information, wherein indication is a presence indicator) are included in a Packet Data Convergence Protocol (PDCP) packet data unit (PDU) of the data communication (par.[0135] which recites, in part, “the marked uplink packet includes a time-stamp, where the processor 505 further transmits the time-stamp in one of: a PDCP header and a SDAP header.”, par.[0167]).
Regarding claim 14, Velev discloses:
wherein the performing, with the wireless network node, the data communication comprises: transmitting, to the wireless terminal, the PDCP PDU (par.[0082] wherein the UE can calculate the downlink delay based on the time-stamp in the packet).
Regarding claim 19, Velev discloses:
a computer program product (fig.3 and par.[0079] describes the processor executing the instructions stored in the memory) comprising a computer-readable program medium (fig.3 memory element 310) code stored thereupon (par.[0079] describes the code), the code, when executed by at least one processor (fig.3 as discussed above, the code is executed by the processor), causing the at least one processor to implement a wireless communication method comprising:
performing, a data communication (fig.1 depicts uplink/downlink communications between the Remote-Unit and a Base-Unit, wherein the Remote-Unit is the wireless terminal, and the Base-Unit is the network node), wherein time information associated with the data communication (par.[0080] describes a time-stamp being appended to an uplink data communication, par.[0132 and 0135]) and a time information identification of the time information (par.[0179] teaches that a 1-bit flag is added to the header of the PDCP PDU as an identifier/identification of the time-information, wherein indication is a presence indicator) are included in a Packet Data Convergence Protocol (PDCP) packet data unit (PDU) of the data communication (par.[0135] which recites, in part, “the marked uplink packet includes a time-stamp, where the processor 505 further transmits the time-stamp in one of: a PDCP header and a SDAP header.”, par.[0167]).
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.
Claim(s) 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Velev as applied to claims 1, 10, and 19, in view of Dao et al. (US 2020/0145876 A1).
Regarding claim 8, Velev discloses the independent claims, but may not disclose:
reporting, to the wireless network node or a core network, a packet delay information report capability.
In an analogous art, the disclosure of Dao teaches:
reporting, to the wireless network node or a core network, a packet delay information report capability (par.[0152] describes the UE sending capability for measuring packet delay).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant application to combine the teachings of Velev with the disclosure of Dao. The motivation/suggestion would have been to indicate to the network UE support or capability of certain network features, such that the network can utilize supported features with the UE.
Regarding claim 9, Dao discloses:
wherein the packet delay information report capability comprises at least one of a DL packet delay report capability or a time information support indication in a PDCP header (par.[0152] describes the capability reporting, and par.[0077] describes the time information, which the UE is capable of supporting being located in a header of PDU).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMAAL HENSON whose telephone number is (571)272-5339. The examiner can normally be reached M-Thu: 7:30 am - 6:30 pm.
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, Derrick Ferris can be reached at (571)272-3123. 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.
JAMAAL HENSON
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2411
/JAMAAL HENSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2411
Prosecution Insights