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 § 102
1. 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.
2. Claim(s) 1, 10, 11, 21, 22 and 27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Babaei (US PG Pub. No. 2024/0155409).
As per claim 1:
Babaei teaches an apparatus for wireless communications at a user equipment (UE) (see Figure 2A, UE 125), comprising:
one or more memories comprising instructions (see Figure 15, paragraph [0101], memory 1530 comprising code 1535);
and one or more processors (see Figure 15, processor 1540), individually or collectively, configured to execute the instructions (see paragraph [0104], processor 1540 for executing instructions stored in memory 1530) and cause the apparatus to:
transmit capability information indicating an ability of the UE to report quality of experience (QoE) measurements associated with the UE to a core network entity (see paragraph [0004], UE transmitting capability message comprising one or more capability information elements (IEs) associated with QoE. Paragraph [0011], also disclose the one or more capability information elements (IEs) indicates whether the UE is capable of an area-based QoE measurement and report or whether the UE is capable of determining an area for performing QoE measurement and reporting);
and transmit first QoE measurements associated with the UE to the core
network entity, in accordance with the capability information (see paragraph [0004], based on the one or more transmitted capability IEs, receiving by the UE from the BS, one or more RRC messages comprising first configuration parameters for QoE measurements and reporting. The UE transmits to the BS one or more QoE measurement reports based on the first configuration parameters).
As per claim 10:
Babaei teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors, individually or collectively, are configured to execute the instructions and cause the apparatus to receive a QoE measurement configuration to perform the QoE measurements associated with the core network entity (see paragraph [0004], based on the one or more transmitted capability IEs, receiving by the UE from the BS, one or more RRC messages comprising first configuration parameters for QoE measurements and reporting).
As per claim 11:
Babaei teaches an apparatus for wireless communications at a core network entity (see Figure 2A, gNB 115), comprising:
one or more memories comprising instructions (see Figure 15, paragraph [0101], memory 1530 comprising code 1535);
and one or more processors (see Figure 15, processor 1540), individually or collectively, configured to execute the instructions (see paragraph [0104], processor 1540 for executing instructions stored in memory 1530) and cause the apparatus to:
receive capability information of a user equipment (UE) indicating an ability of the UE to report quality of experience (QoE) measurements associated with the UE to the core network entity (see paragraph [0004], UE transmitting capability message comprising one or more capability information elements (IEs) associated with QoE. Paragraph [0011], also disclose the one or more capability information elements (IEs) indicates whether the UE is capable of an area-based QoE measurement and report or whether the UE is capable of determining an area for performing QoE measurement and reporting);
and receive first QoE measurements associated with the UE, in accordance
with the capability information of the UE (see paragraph [0004], based on the one or more transmitted capability IEs, receiving by the UE from the BS, one or more RRC messages comprising first configuration parameters for QoE measurements and reporting. The UE transmits to the BS one or more QoE measurement reports based on the first configuration parameters).
As per claim 21:
Babaei teaches the apparatus of claim 11, wherein the one or more processors, individually or collectively, are configured to execute the instructions and cause the apparatus to transmit a QoE measurement configuration to perform the QoE measurements associated with core network entity (see paragraph [0004], based on the one or more transmitted capability IEs, receiving by the UE from the BS, one or more RRC messages comprising first configuration parameters for QoE measurements and reporting).
As per claim 22:
Babaei teaches a method for wireless communications at a user equipment (UE) (see abstract), comprising:
transmitting capability information indicating an ability of the UE to report quality
of experience (QoE) measurements associated with the UE to a core network entity (see paragraph [0004], UE transmitting capability message comprising one or more capability information elements (IEs) associated with QoE. Paragraph [0011], also disclose the one or more capability information elements (IEs) indicates whether the UE is capable of an area-based QoE measurement and report or whether the UE is capable of determining an area for performing QoE measurement and reporting);
and transmitting first QoE measurements associated with the UE to the core network entity, in accordance with the capability information (see paragraph [0004], based on the one or more transmitted capability IEs, receiving by the UE from the BS, one or more RRC messages comprising first configuration parameters for QoE measurements and reporting. The UE transmits to the BS one or more QoE measurement reports based on the first configuration parameters).
As per claim 27:
Babaei teaches a method for wireless communications at a core network entity (see abstract), comprising:
receiving capability information of a user equipment (UE) indicating an ability of
the UE to report quality of experience (QoE) measurements associated with the UE to the
core network entity (see paragraph [0004], UE transmitting capability message comprising one or more capability information elements (IEs) associated with QoE. Paragraph [0011], also disclose the one or more capability information elements (IEs) indicates whether the UE is capable of an area-based QoE measurement and report or whether the UE is capable of determining an area for performing QoE measurement and reporting);
and receiving first QoE measurements associated with the UE, in accordance with the capability information of the UE (see paragraph [0004], based on the one or more transmitted capability IEs, receiving by the UE from the BS, one or more RRC messages comprising first configuration parameters for QoE measurements and reporting. The UE transmits to the BS one or more QoE measurement reports based on the first configuration parameters).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
3. 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.
4. Claim(s) 2-5, 13-16, 23-26, 29 and 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Babaei in view of Vangala (US PG Pub. No. 2024/0089183).
As per claim 2:
Babaei teaches the apparatus of claim 1 with the exception of:
wherein:
the capability information further indicates an ability of the UE to report that one
or more values of the first QoE measurements being below a threshold is caused by a
source other than a radio access network (RAN) node, and the threshold is defined by the UE or the RAN node.
Vangala teaches wherein:
the capability information further indicates an ability of the UE to report that one
or more values of the first QoE measurements being below a threshold is caused by a
source other than a radio access network (RAN) node, and the threshold is defined by the UE or the RAN node (see paragraph [0045], the UE 201 compares the expected QoE with one or more threshold values and determines to request QoE adjustment based on whether the expected QoE satisfies the one or more thresholds. As an example, the expected QoE satisfies the one or more threshold if the value is below a lower threshold value indicating that the expected QoE does not provide adequate user experience, please see paragraph [0046]. The UE is configured to request downgrading the QoE, please see paragraph [0046]. Also, paragraph [0048] disclose UE may implement a machine learning algorithm to dynamically change the upper or lower thresholds).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to implement the sending of QoE request (as disclosed in Vangala) into Babaei as a way of achieving a QoE within a certain desirable range (please see paragraph [0045] of Vangala). Therefore, having the ability to flexibly adjust the QoE ensures that the overall process is more observable to the user and allowing the service provider to provide a subscription model that fits the customer needs (please see paragraph [0028] of Vangala).
As per claim 3:
Babaei teaches the apparatus of claim 1 with the exception of:
wherein:
the capability information further indicates an ability of the UE to report one or
more problems associated with the core network entity that result in one or more values
of the first QoE measurements being below a threshold, and the threshold is defined by the UE or a radio access network (RAN) node.
Vangala teaches wherein:
the capability information further indicates an ability of the UE to report one or
more problems associated with the core network entity that result in one or more values
of the first QoE measurements being below a threshold, and the threshold is defined by the UE or a radio access network (RAN) node (see paragraph [0045], the UE 201 compares the expected QoE with one or more threshold values and determines to request QoE adjustment based on whether the expected QoE satisfies the one or more thresholds. As an example, the expected QoE satisfies the one or more threshold if the value is below a lower threshold value indicating that the expected QoE does not provide adequate user experience, please see paragraph [0046]. The UE is configured to request downgrading the QoE, please see paragraph [0046]. Also, paragraph [0048] disclose UE may implement a machine learning algorithm to dynamically change the upper or lower thresholds).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to implement the sending of QoE request (as disclosed in Vangala) into Babaei as a way of achieving a QoE within a certain desirable range (please see paragraph [0045] of Vangala). Therefore, having the ability to flexibly adjust the QoE ensures that the overall process is more observable to the user and allowing the service provider to provide a subscription model that fits the customer needs (please see paragraph [0028] of Vangala).
As per claim 4:
Babaei in view of Vangala teaches the apparatus of claim 3.
Babaei does not teach wherein the one or more problems are associated with at least one of:
a quality of service (QoS) policy associated with the UE,
a user plane function (UPF), a transport network bandwidth,
priority information associated with data routing,
priority information associated with data forwarding,
priority information associated with data discarding,
priority information associated with an uplink throughput,
priority information associated with a downlink throughput, or
a latency.
Vangala teaches wherein the one or more problems are associated with at least one of:
a quality of service (QoS) policy associated with the UE (paragraph [0036] disclose UE may negotiate with the other end device in a communications session to dynamically determine a mutually-acceptable QoE metrics),
a user plane function (UPF), a transport network bandwidth (Note: Limitation(s) is/are recited in alternate form and thus not addressed by the prior art(s) of record),
priority information associated with data routing (Note: Limitation(s) is/are recited in alternate form and thus not addressed by the prior art(s) of record),
priority information associated with data forwarding (Note: Limitation(s) is/are recited in alternate form and thus not addressed by the prior art(s) of record),
priority information associated with data discarding (Note: Limitation(s) is/are recited in alternate form and thus not addressed by the prior art(s) of record),
priority information associated with an uplink throughput (Note: Limitation(s) is/are recited in alternate form and thus not addressed by the prior art(s) of record),
priority information associated with a downlink throughput, or
a latency (Note: Limitation(s) is/are recited in alternate form and thus not addressed by the prior art(s) of record).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to implement the sending of QoE request (as disclosed in Vangala) into Babaei as a way of achieving a QoE within a certain desirable range (please see paragraph [0045] of Vangala). Therefore, having the ability to flexibly adjust the QoE ensures that the overall process is more observable to the user and allowing the service provider to provide a subscription model that fits the customer needs (please see paragraph [0028] of Vangala).
As per claim 5:
Babaei in view of Vangala teaches the apparatus of claim 3.
Babaei does not teach wherein: the one or more processors, individually or collectively, are configured to execute the instructions and cause the apparatus to transmit a first indication that the one or more values of the first QoE measurements are below the threshold due to the core network entity, and the threshold is defined by the UE or a radio access network (RAN) node.
Vangala teaches wherein: the one or more processors, individually or collectively, are configured to execute the instructions and cause the apparatus to transmit a first indication that the one or more values of the first QoE measurements are below the threshold due to the core network entity, and the threshold is defined by the UE or a radio access network (RAN) node (see paragraph [0047], when the expected QoE is lower than an upper threshold, the UE 201 may request downgrading the QoE. To request a QoE adjustment, the UE 201 may transmit one or more QoE metrics to the network via intermediate node 203, please see paragraph [0049]. Also, paragraph [0048] disclose UE may implement a machine learning algorithm to dynamically change the upper or lower thresholds).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to implement the sending of QoE request (as disclosed in Vangala) into Babaei as a way of achieving a QoE within a certain desirable range (please see paragraph [0045] of Vangala). Therefore, having the ability to flexibly adjust the QoE ensures that the overall process is more observable to the user and allowing the service provider to provide a subscription model that fits the customer needs (please see paragraph [0028] of Vangala).
Claim 13 is rejected in the same scope as claim 2.
Claim 14 is rejected in the same scope as claim 3.
Claim 15 is rejected in the same scope as claim 4.
Claim 16 is rejected in the same scope as claim 5.
Claim 23 is rejected in the same scope as claim 2.
Claim 24 is rejected in the same scope as claim 3.
Claim 25 is rejected in the same scope as claim 4.
Claim 26 is rejected in the same scope as claim 5.
Claim 29 is rejected in the same scope as claim 2.
Claim 30 is rejected in the same scope as claim 3.
5. Claims 6, 7, 17 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Babaei in view of Vangala and further in view of Dao (US PG Pub. No. 2015/0181465).
As per claim 6:
Babaei in view of Vangala teaches the apparatus of claim 5 with the exception of:
wherein the one or more processors, individually or collectively, are configured to execute the instructions and cause the apparatus to transmit a second indication of one or more actions to be performed by the core network entity based on the one or more values of the first QoE measurements being below the threshold.
Dao teaches wherein the one or more processors, individually or collectively, are configured to execute the instructions and cause the apparatus to transmit a second indication of one or more actions to be performed by the core network entity based on the one or more values of the first QoE measurements being below the threshold (see paragraph [0039], the QoE manager 118 is configured to provide a recommendation on resource allocation priority of flows. For example, if some flows report poor QoE, the QoE manager 118 could recommend adjusting a traffic engineering priority of these flows so that the traffic engineering optimizer 120 would assign more resources of one or more of the RNs 126 to help these users. When the resource utilization of radio nodes is lower than a threshold for a certain period, the radio node coordinator 124 can be activated to minimize the unused resources without causing outage to the current traffic flows).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to implement the adjustment of traffic engineering priority of the respective flows (as disclosed in Dao) into both Babaei and Vangala as a way of minimizing congestion and unused resources (please see paragraph [0036] of Dao).
As per claim 7:
Babaei in view of Vangala and further in view of Dao teaches the apparatus of claim 6.
The combination of Babaei and Vangala do not teach wherein the one or more actions comprise at least one of:
an update of quality of service (QoS) policy associated with the UE,
switching of a user plane function (UPF),
an update of transport network bandwidth,
an update of priority information associated with data routing,
an update of priority information associated with data forwarding,
an update of priority information associated with data discarding,
an update of priority information associated with an uplink throughput,
an update of priority information associated with a downlink throughput, or
an update of latency information.
Dao teaches wherein the one or more actions comprise at least one of:
an update of quality of service (QoS) policy associated with the UE (Note: Limitation(s) is/are recited in alternate form and thus not addressed by the prior art(s) of record),
switching of a user plane function (UPF) (Note: Limitation(s) is/are recited in alternate form and thus not addressed by the prior art(s) of record),
an update of transport network bandwidth (see paragraph [0037], the traffic engineering optimizer 120 is configured to select routes and corresponding bandwidth allocations for flows),
an update of priority information associated with data routing (see paragraph [0039], if some flows report poor QoE, the QoE manager 118 could recommend adjusting a traffic engineering priority of these flows so that the traffic engineering optimizer 120 would assign more resources of one or more of the RNs 126 to help the users. The RN 126 will make a decision with regard to forwarding packets to users, please see paragraph [0037]),
an update of priority information associated with data forwarding (see paragraph [0039], if some flows report poor QoE, the QoE manager 118 could recommend adjusting a traffic engineering priority of these flows so that the traffic engineering optimizer 120 would assign more resources of one or more of the RNs 126 to help the users. The RN 126 will make a decision with regard to forwarding packets to users, please see paragraph [0037]),
an update of priority information associated with data discarding (Note: Limitation(s) is/are recited in alternate form and thus not addressed by the prior art(s) of record),
an update of priority information associated with an uplink throughput (Note: Limitation(s) is/are recited in alternate form and thus not addressed by the prior art(s) of record),
an update of priority information associated with a downlink throughput (Note: Limitation(s) is/are recited in alternate form and thus not addressed by the prior art(s) of record), or
an update of latency information (Note: Limitation(s) is/are recited in alternate form and thus not addressed by the prior art(s) of record).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to implement the adjustment of traffic engineering priority of the respective flows (as disclosed in Dao) into both Babaei and Vangala as a way of minimizing congestion and unused resources (please see paragraph [0036] of Dao).
Claim 17 is rejected in the same scope as claim 6.
Claim 18 is rejected in the same scope as claim 7.
6. Claims 12 and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Babaei in view of Dao.
As per claim 12:
Babaei teaches the apparatus of claim 11 with the exception of:
wherein the one or more processors, individually or collectively, are configured to execute the instructions and cause the apparatus to:
determine that one or more values of the first QoE measurements are below a
threshold, wherein the threshold is defined by the UE or a radio access network (RAN)
node;
and perform one or more actions comprising at least one of:
an update of quality of service (QoS) policy associated with the UE,
switching of a user plane function (UPF),
an update of transport network bandwidth,
an update of priority information associated with data routing,
an update of priority information associated with data forwarding,
an update of priority information associated with data discarding,
an update of priority information associated with an uplink throughput,
an update of priority information associated with a downlink throughput,
or an update of latency information, in accordance with the determination.
Dao teaches wherein the one or more processors, individually or collectively, are configured to execute the instructions and cause the apparatus to:
determine that one or more values of the first QoE measurements are below a
threshold, wherein the threshold is defined by the UE or a radio access network (RAN)
node (see paragraph [0039], the QoE manager 118 is configured to provide a recommendation on resource allocation priority of flows. For example, if some flows report poor QoE, the QoE manager 118 could recommend adjusting a traffic engineering priority of these flows so that the traffic engineering optimizer 120 would assign more resources of one or more of the RNs 126 to help these users. When the resource utilization of radio nodes is lower than a threshold for a certain period, the radio node coordinator 124 can be activated to minimize the unused resources without causing outage to the current traffic flows);
wherein the one or more actions comprise at least one of:
an update of quality of service (QoS) policy associated with the UE (Note: Limitation(s) is/are recited in alternate form and thus not addressed by the prior art(s) of record),
switching of a user plane function (UPF) (Note: Limitation(s) is/are recited in alternate form and thus not addressed by the prior art(s) of record),
an update of transport network bandwidth (see paragraph [0037], the traffic engineering optimizer 120 is configured to select routes and corresponding bandwidth allocations for flows),
an update of priority information associated with data routing (see paragraph [0039], if some flows report poor QoE, the QoE manager 118 could recommend adjusting a traffic engineering priority of these flows so that the traffic engineering optimizer 120 would assign more resources of one or more of the RNs 126 to help the users. The RN 126 will make a decision with regard to forwarding packets to users, please see paragraph [0037]),
an update of priority information associated with data forwarding (see paragraph [0039], if some flows report poor QoE, the QoE manager 118 could recommend adjusting a traffic engineering priority of these flows so that the traffic engineering optimizer 120 would assign more resources of one or more of the RNs 126 to help the users. The RN 126 will make a decision with regard to forwarding packets to users, please see paragraph [0037]),
an update of priority information associated with data discarding (Note: Limitation(s) is/are recited in alternate form and thus not addressed by the prior art(s) of record),
an update of priority information associated with an uplink throughput (Note: Limitation(s) is/are recited in alternate form and thus not addressed by the prior art(s) of record),
an update of priority information associated with a downlink throughput (Note: Limitation(s) is/are recited in alternate form and thus not addressed by the prior art(s) of record), or
an update of latency information (Note: Limitation(s) is/are recited in alternate form and thus not addressed by the prior art(s) of record).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to implement the adjustment of traffic engineering priority of the respective flows (as disclosed in Dao) into Babaei as a way of minimizing congestion and unused resources (please see paragraph [0036] of Dao).
Claim 28 is rejected in the same scope as claim 12.
7. Claims 8, 9, 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Babaei in view of Bergstrom (US PG Pub. No. 2025/0240225).
As per claim 8:
Babaei teaches the apparatus of claim 1 with the exception of:
wherein the one or more processors, individually or collectively, are configured to execute the instructions and cause the apparatus to use a first signaling radio bearer (SRB) for transmission of the first QoE measurements associated with the UE to the core network entity.
Bergstrom teaches wherein the one or more processors, individually or collectively, are configured to execute the instructions and cause the apparatus to use a first signaling radio bearer (SRB) for transmission of the first QoE measurements associated with the UE to the core network entity (see paragraph [0133], the first radio network node 12 may configure the UE 110 or a group of UEs for QoE measurements for RAN in the same RRC message, i.e., using a common radio bearer, e.g., SRB1 and may configure the UE access stratum to use a first signaling radio bearer, e.g., SRB1 or SRB3, for sending QoE measurements for RAN and a second radio bearer, e.g., SRB4 for sending QOE measurements for application layer).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to implement the allocation of different radio bearers for different QoE measurements (as disclosed in Bergstrom) into Babaei as a way of sending the QoE indication based on criticality and also to avoid mixing content in one message instance (please see paragraph [0158] of Bergstrom).
As per claim 9:
Babaei in view of Bergstrom teaches the apparatus of claim 8.
Babaei does not teach wherein the one or more processors, individually or
collectively, are configured to execute the instructions and cause the apparatus to use a
second SRB for transmission of the first QoE measurements associated with the UE to
the core network entity, wherein the second SRB is different from the first SRB.
Bergstrom teaches wherein the one or more processors, individually or
collectively, are configured to execute the instructions and cause the apparatus to use a
second SRB for transmission of the first QoE measurements associated with the UE to
the core network entity, wherein the second SRB is different from the first SRB (see paragraph [0133], the first radio network node 12 may configure the UE 110 or a group of UEs for QoE measurements for RAN in the same RRC message, i.e., using a common radio bearer, e.g., SRB1 and may configure the UE access stratum to use a first signaling radio bearer, e.g., SRB1 or SRB3, for sending QoE measurements for RAN and a second radio bearer, e.g., SRB4 for sending QOE measurements for application layer).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to implement the allocation of different radio bearers for different QoE measurements (as disclosed in Bergstrom) into Babaei as a way of sending the QoE indication based on criticality and also to avoid mixing content in one message instance (please see paragraph [0158] of Bergstrom).
Claim 19 is rejected in the same scope as claim 8.
Claim 20 is rejected in the same scope as claim 9.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PRINCE AKWASI MENSAH whose telephone number is (571)270-7183. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00am-4:00pm.
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, MICHAEL THIER can be reached at 571-272-2832. 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.
PRINCE AKWASI. MENSAH
Examiner
Art Unit 2474
/PRINCE A MENSAH/Examiner, Art Unit 2474
/Michael Thier/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2474
Prosecution Insights