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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendments filed on July 29, 2026, have been entered. Claims 1-16 were previously cancelled. Claims 17, 27, and 32 have been amended. New claim 37 has been added. Claims 17-37 remain pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on July 29, 2026, in response to the Non-Final Office Action dated May 07, 2026, have been fully considered.
Applicant amended the Title of the invention. Therefore, the previous objection to the specification is withdrawn.
The amendments overcome the previous 35 U.S.C 112(b) rejections of independent claims. Therefore, the previous 35 U.S.C 112(b) rejections are withdrawn.
The amendments overcome the previous 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) rejections of independent claims. Therefore, the previous 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) rejections are withdrawn.
Applicant' s arguments with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) rejections have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Examiner’s Note about the Format of 35 U.S.C. 102/103 Rejections
Generally, limitations of a claim are reproduced identically and followed by examiner’s explanation with citation from prior art in Italic enclosed by a parenthesis, (), for each limitation. In examiner’s explanation, the mapping of the key elements of a limitation to the disclosed elements of prior art is shown by stating the disclosed element immediately followed by the claimed element inside a parenthesis. Specific quotation from prior art is delineated with quotation mark, ““. If primary art fails to teach a limitation or part of the limitation, the limitation or the part of the limitation is placed inside double square brackets, [[ ]], for better understandability, and appropriate secondary art(s) is/are applied later addressing the deficiency of the primary art.
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.
Claims 17, 19, 24, 27, 28, 29, 32, 34, and 37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gustafsson et al. (WIPO Document No. WO 2023234816 A1), hereinafter, Gustafsson, in view of Xu et al. (US PGPUB No. US 20250386240 A1), hereinafter, Xu.
Regarding claim 17:
Gustafsson teaches:
A method, comprising:
receiving, by a user plane function network element, a data packet at a receiving time point of the data packet (Fig. 2 shows a time-stamping node 14. Page 7, lines 11-13, discloses the time stamping node 14 is a UPF as sated “The time-stamping node 14 may be a UPF of the 3GPP network, e.g., an anchor UPF exposing the Internet Protocol (IP) address of the UE.”. Page 8, lines 26-28, discloses reception time point (receiving time point) of packet as stated “The DT may thus vary between packets. E.g., the DT is extended with an earlier time point of reception/obtaining of the packet compared with an expected time point.”);
obtaining, by the user plane function network element, a receiving time point of a data packet set to which the data packet belongs, [[wherein the receiving time point of the data packet set is a time point at which the user plane function network element receives a reference data packet in the data packet set, and wherein the reference data packet is one of: an earliest data packet in the data packet set: a data packet corresponding to a smallest sequence number or serial number in the data packet set; or a data packet carrying an identifier of the earliest data packet in the data packet set]] (page 8, lines 26-28, discloses expected time point (receiving time point) of packet as stated “The DT may thus vary between packets. E.g., the DT is extended with an earlier time point of reception/obtaining of the packet compared with an expected time point.”. Page 5, lines 31-32, discloses the packet can be belong to real-time time video streaming (data packet set) as stated “Embodiments herein may be very useful for real-time video streaming, where video encoders may take an unpredictable amount of time to encode a frame”);
determining, by the user plane function network element, delay budget information of the data packet based on the receiving time point of the data packet and the receiving time point of the data packet set to which the data packet belongs ( page 8, lines 24-29, discloses determining DT (delay budget information) based on the reception time point and expected time point as stated “The time-stamping node 14 therefore provides the indication of the DT to the packet. Each packet gets an indication of the DT. The DT may thus vary between packets. E.g., the DT is extended with an earlier time point of reception/obtaining of the packet compared with an expected time point. The time-stamping node 14 thus sets a delivery time, e.g. a delay budget and amend it to the packet in the various ways.”); and
adding, by the user plane function network element, the delay budget information of the data packet to the data packet (page 9, lines 3-4, discloses adding the DT to the packet as stated “Action 203. The time-stamping node 14 then transmits, e.g. sends, the packet with the DT towards an end-node in the communication network.”).
Gustafsson does not teach wherein the receiving time point of the data packet set is a time point at which the user plane function network element receives a reference data packet in the data packet set, and wherein the reference data packet is one of: an earliest data packet in the data packet set: a data packet corresponding to a smallest sequence number or serial number in the data packet set; or a data packet carrying an identifier of the earliest data packet in the data packet set.
Xu teaches wherein the receiving time point of the data packet set is a time point at which the user plane function network element receives a reference data packet in the data packet set, and wherein the reference data packet is one of: an earliest data packet in the data packet set: a data packet corresponding to a smallest sequence number or serial number in the data packet set; or a data packet carrying an identifier of the earliest data packet in the data packet set (paragraph 0077 discloses determining remaining delay budget for a PDU set. paragraph 0102 discloses arrival time a first PDU of a PDU set and arrival time of certain PDU of the PDU set as stated “In some embodiments, the first timing includes at least one of: [0182] (1) arriving timing at a AS layer of the UE of a first arrival PDU within the one or more PDU sets from the upper layer; or [0183] (2) arriving timing at the AS layer of a certain PDU within the one or more PDU sets from the upper layer; or [0184] (3) arriving timing at the AS layer of a last arrival PDU within the one or more PDU sets from the upper layer.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Gustafsson to incorporate the teaching of Xu about determining the remaining delay budget based on the arrival time of the first PDU and arrival time a certain PDU in a PDU set. One would be motivated to do that for efficient transmission scheduling of the PDU set (see paragraph 0070 of Xu).
As to claim 19, the rejection of claim 17 is incorporated. Gustafsson teaches all the limitations of claim 17 as shown above.
Gustafsson further teaches wherein the delay budget information of the data packet is an available transmission delay budget of the data packet; and wherein determining, by the user plane function network element, the delay budget information of the data packet based on the receiving time point of the data packet and the receiving time point of the data packet set to which the data packet belongs comprises: determining, by the user plane function network element, the available transmission delay budget of the data packet based on the receiving time point of the data packet, the receiving time point of the data packet set to which the data packet belongs, and a delay budget of the data packet set to which the data packet belongs (page 9, lines 25-27, and page 10, lines 1-9, disclose DT include remaining time budge for delivery as stated “Action 301. The time-stamping node 14 provides the indication of the DT to the packet, wherein the DT is related to an upper latency limit of the packet along a path between two end-nodes. The DT may be provided as the absolute time with a known reference. The indication of the DT may comprise an indication of a remaining time budget until a delivery. The indication of the DT may be provided as a part of a protocol. The indication of the DT may be provided in a field of the packet. The time-stamping node 14 may be an end-node out of the two end-nodes, and wherein the packet may be transmitted towards another end-node. The time-stamping node 14 may be a UE or a network node.”).
As to claim 24, the rejection of claim 17 is incorporated. Gustafsson in view of Xu teach all the limitations of claim 17 as shown above.
Gustafsson further teaches further comprising: determining, by the user plane function network element, a delay correction amount of the data packet set to which the data packet belongs based on the receiving time point of the data packet set to which the data packet belongs and a user plane function network element reference receiving time point of the data packet set to which the data packet belongs; and correcting, by the user plane function network element, the delay budget information of the data packet based on the delay correction amount (page 8, lines 33-35, and page 9, lines 1-2, disclose adapting transmission parameter based on the DT as stated “Action 202. The time-stamping node 14 may determine, e.g. adapts, one or more transmission parameters based on the DT. This is e.g. for utilizing up to the available link budget. Determining transmission parameters when used herein may mean improving coding, using more resources, resending, queueing methods, prioritizing other packets, batching packets for more efficient resource usage, use of a remaining latency, etc.”).
Regarding claim 27:
Gustafsson teaches:
A method, comprising:
receiving, by an access network device, a data packet from a user plane function network element (Fig. 2, step 203, discloses receiving, by an intermediate node 12 (access network device), a packet from time-stamping node 14 as stated page 9, lines 8-9, “Action 204. The intermediate node 12 receives the packet, comprising the indication of DT. The intermediate node 12 may be a UE or a network node.”. Page 7, lines 11-13, discloses the time stamping node 14 is a UPF as sated “The time-stamping node 14 may be a UPF of the 3GPP network, e.g., an anchor UPF exposing the Internet Protocol (IP) address of the UE.”.);
obtaining, by the access network device, delay budget information of the data packet (page 9, lines 9-13, discloses obtaining DT (delay budget information) as stated “The available link budget may need to be derived, therefore the intermediate node 12 may subtract the latency value from the indicated DT. The intermediate node 12 may decrement the DT by an amount of time that the packet was queued and/or processed in the intermediate node 12.”); and
sending, by the access network device, the data packet to a terminal device based on the delay budget information of the data packet (page 9, lines 14-17, discloses scheduling the packet based on the DT as stated “The intermediate node 12 determines the one or more transmission parameters based on the DT. Determining the one or more transmission parameters based on the DT may comprise increasing a scheduling weight of packets with decreasing available time until their expected delivery to the end-node”. Page 9, lines 21-22, discloses sending the packet as stated “Action 206. The intermediate node 12 transmits the packet with the DT towards the end-node in the communication network 1”); and
wherein the delay budget information of the data packet is carried in the data packet, the delay budget information of the data packet is determined based on a time point at which the user plane function network element receives the data packet and a time point at which the user plane function network element receives a data packet set comprising the data packet, and [[wherein the receiving time point of the data packet set is a time point at which the user plane function network element receives a reference data packet in the data packet set, and wherein the reference data packet is one of: an earliest data packet in the data packet set; a data packet corresponding to a smallest sequence number or serial number in the data packet set: or a data packet carrying an identifier of the earliest data packet in the data packet set]] ( page 8, lines 24-29, discloses determining delivery time (delay budget information) based on the reception time point and expected time point as stated “The time-stamping node 14 therefore provides the indication of the DT to the packet. Each packet gets an indication of the DT. The DT may thus vary between packets. E.g., the DT is extended with an earlier time point of reception/obtaining of the packet compared with an expected time point. The time-stamping node 14 thus sets a delivery time, e.g. a delay budget and amend it to the packet in the various ways.”. Page 5, lines 31-32, discloses the packet can be belong to real-time time video streaming (data packet set) as stated “Embodiments herein may be very useful for real-time video streaming, where video encoders may take an unpredictable amount of time to encode a frame”).
Gustafsson does not teach wherein the receiving time point of the data packet set is a time point at which the user plane function network element receives a reference data packet in the data packet set, and wherein the reference data packet is one of: an earliest data packet in the data packet set; a data packet corresponding to a smallest sequence number or serial number in the data packet set: or a data packet carrying an identifier of the earliest data packet in the data packet set.
Xu teaches wherein the receiving time point of the data packet set is a time point at which the user plane function network element receives a reference data packet in the data packet set, and wherein the reference data packet is one of: an earliest data packet in the data packet set; a data packet corresponding to a smallest sequence number or serial number in the data packet set: or a data packet carrying an identifier of the earliest data packet in the data packet set (paragraph 0077 discloses determining remaining delay budget for a PDU set. paragraph 0102 discloses arrival time a first PDU of a PDU set and arrival time of certain PDU of the PDU set as stated “In some embodiments, the first timing includes at least one of: [0182] (1) arriving timing at a AS layer of the UE of a first arrival PDU within the one or more PDU sets from the upper layer; or [0183] (2) arriving timing at the AS layer of a certain PDU within the one or more PDU sets from the upper layer; or [0184] (3) arriving timing at the AS layer of a last arrival PDU within the one or more PDU sets from the upper layer.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Gustafsson to incorporate the teaching of Xu about determining the remaining delay budget based on the arrival time of the first PDU and arrival time a certain PDU in a PDU set. One would be motivated to do that for efficient transmission scheduling of the PDU set (see paragraph 0070 of Xu).
As to claim 28, the rejection of claim 27 is incorporated. Gustafsson in view of Xu teach all the limitations of claim 27 as shown above.
Gustafsson further teaches wherein the delay budget information of the data packet is a delay offset of the data packet, and sending, by the access network device, the data packet to the terminal device based on the delay budget information of the data packet comprises: determining, by the access network device, an available transmission delay budget of the data packet based on the delay offset and a delay budget of the data packet set; and sending, by the access network device, the data packet to the terminal device based on the available transmission delay budget belongs (page 9, lines 25-27, and page 10, lines 1-9, disclose DT include remaining time budge for delivery as stated “Action 301. The time-stamping node 14 provides the indication of the DT to the packet, wherein the DT is related to an upper latency limit of the packet along a path between two end-nodes. The DT may be provided as the absolute time with a known reference. The indication of the DT may comprise an indication of a remaining time budget until a delivery. The indication of the DT may be provided as a part of a protocol. The indication of the DT may be provided in a field of the packet. The time-stamping node 14 may be an end-node out of the two end-nodes, and wherein the packet may be transmitted towards another end-node. The time-stamping node 14 may be a UE or a network node.”).
As to claim 29, the rejection of claim 27 is incorporated. Gustafsson in view of Xu teach all the limitations of claim 27 as shown above.
Gustafsson further teaches wherein the delay budget information of the data packet is an available transmission delay budget of the data packet (page 8, lines 12-13, discloses DT indicates the remaining time budget for delivery as stated, “The DT comprises an indication of a remaining time budget until a delivery.”).
Regarding claim 32:
Claim 32 is directed towards a communication apparatus performing the method of claim 17. Accordingly, it is rejected under similar rational.
Claim 34 is directed towards a communication apparatus performing the method of claim 19. Accordingly, it is rejected under similar rational.
Regarding claim 37:
Claim 37 is directed towards a communication apparatus performing the method of claim 27. Accordingly, it is rejected under similar rational.
Claims 18, 31, and 33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gustafsson in view of Xu and further in view of Ke et al. (US PGPUB No. US 20250119371 A1), hereinafter, Ke.
As to claim 18, the rejection of claim 17 is incorporated. Gustafsson in view of Xu teach all the limitations of claim 17 as shown above.
Gustafsson does not teach wherein the delay budget information of the data packet is a delay offset of the data packet, and the delay offset of the data packet indicates a difference between the receiving time point of the data packet and the receiving time point of the data packet set to which the data packet belongs.
Ke teaches teach wherein the delay budget information of the data packet is a delay offset of the data packet, and the delay offset of the data packet indicates a difference between the receiving time point of the data packet and the receiving time point of the data packet set to which the data packet belongs (paragraph 0818 discloses determining packet delay information based on the time difference as stated “based on T4−T32, determining a data packet set uplink delay T4−T32 between the terminal and the anchor gateway”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Gustafsson to incorporate the teaching of Ke about determining packet delay information based on the time difference. One would be motivated to do that to calculate uplink delay at the UPF (see paragraph 0808 of Ke).
As to claim 31, the rejection of claim 27 is incorporated. Gustafsson in view of Xu teach all the limitations of claim 27 as shown above.
Gustafsson does not teach wherein a data connection session for transmitting the data packet corresponds to a plurality of QoS flows, each of the plurality of QoS flows corresponds to a different delay budget, the delay budget information of the data packet is identification information of a target QoS flow, and the target QoS flow is one of the plurality of QoS flows; and wherein sending, by the access network device, the data packet to the terminal device based on the delay budget information of the data packet comprises: sending, by the access network device, the data packet to the terminal device based on a delay budget corresponding to the target QoS flow.
Ke teaches:
wherein a data connection session for transmitting the data packet corresponds to a plurality of QoS flows, each of the plurality of QoS flows corresponds to a different delay budget, the delay budget information of the data packet is identification information of a target QoS flow, and the target QoS flow is one of the plurality of QoS flows (paragraph3 0175 discloses plurality of data sets with different QoS. Paragraphs 0178-0180 discloses delay budget for different QoS identifiers); and
wherein sending, by the access network device, the data packet to the terminal device based on the delay budget information of the data packet comprises: sending, by the access network device, the data packet to the terminal device based on a delay budget corresponding to the target QoS flow (paragraph 0185 discloses packet delivery based on the delay budget of the target QoS).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Gustafsson to incorporate the teaching of Ke about plurality of data sets with different QoS and packet delivery based on the delay budget of the target QoS. One would be motivated to do that to maintain the differential treatment of packet sets based on the respective QoS (see paragraph 0176 of Ke).
Claim 33 is directed towards a communication apparatus performing the method of claim 18. Accordingly, it is rejected under similar rational.
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 KAMAL M HOSSAIN whose telephone number is (571)270-3070. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00-5:00 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, John Follansbee can be reached at (571)272-3964. 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.
October 9, 2026
/KAMAL M HOSSAIN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2444
