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 .
Claims 1-20 have been presented for examination and are rejected.
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 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.
Claims 1-2, 6, 8-9, 12, 16 and 18-19 are rejected Under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by Persson et al. (US 20110222406 hereinafter Persson).
With respect to claims 1, 11 and 20, Persson teaches a method, comprising:
transmitting, by a first endpoint via one or more intermediary network devices to a second endpoint, first traffic generated by the first endpoint for receipt by the second endpoint (Persson, see FIG. 1 and paragraphs [0029-0030] as the first UE 20 (i.e., equivalent to first endpoint) communicates with the second UE 30 (i.e., equivalent to second endpoint ), data packets are transmitted between the two UEs 20, 30 and in the base station 10 (i.e., equivalent to intermediary network devices));
receiving, by the first endpoint from a first intermediary network device of the one or more intermediary network devices, a packet generated by the first intermediary network device, the packet indicating congestion experienced by the first intermediary network device (Persson, see FIG. 1 and paragraphs [0031-0032] the base station 10 notifies the application about increased risks for congestion in the network, before congestion happens, by using the Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) on the IP layer to the receiving UE 20 (or to UE 30 if UE 30 is the receiving UE); and
transmitting, by the first endpoint via the one or more intermediary network devices to the second endpoint, second traffic generated by the first endpoint according to the packet received from the first intermediary network device (Persson, see paragraph [0110, 0112] the first communication device 10 starts marking packets with ECN flags and transmits the marked packets to the second wireless communication device 20).
With respect to claims 2 and 12, Persson teaches the method, wherein the first intermediary network device comprises at least one of an access point or a base station(Persson, see paragraph [0029] f a first communication device 10, such as a base station, an eNodeB, Radio Network Controller, RNC…).
With respect to claims 6 and 16, Persson teaches the method, further comprising:
generating, by the first endpoint, the second traffic according to the packet received from the first intermediary network device (Persson, see paragraph [0110, 0112] the first communication device 10 starts marking packets with ECN flags and transmits the marked packets to the second wireless communication device 20).
With respect to claims 8 and 18, Persson teaches the method, wherein the first endpoint comprises a user device or an application server (Persson, see FIG. 1, 2 and paragraph[0029] UEs 20, 30 first UE/MS, User Equipment/Mobile Station 20 and a second UE/MS 30).
With respect to claims 9 and 19, Persson teaches the method, wherein the one or more intermediary network devices comprise the first intermediary device and one or more second intermediary network devices, the one or more second intermediary network devices corresponding to at least one of an internet service provider (ISP) network or a cellular network (Persson, see FIG. 2 and paragraph [0032] signaling data in a cellular network carrying transparent and adaptive IP-based applications is shown. The application is executed between a first UE/MS User Equipment/Mobile Station 20 and a second UE/MS 30. The AQM function is implemented in the RAN, radio access network. The IP data is transmitted through the RAN and through the Packet Switched Core Network PS CN).
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 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 of this title, 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 3-4 and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Persson et al. (US 20110222406 hereinafter Persson) in view of Oran et al. (US 9270598 hereinafter Oran).
With respect to claims 3 and 13, Persson teaches the method, yet fails to explicitly disclose wherein the packet comprises an internet control message protocol (ICMP) packet generated by the first intermediary network device.
However, Oran discloses wherein the packet comprises an internet control message protocol (ICMP) packet generated by the first intermediary network device (Oran, see Col. 7, lines 58-63, whereas Internet Control Message Protocol (ICMP) source quench is sent from the network towards a sender of content, telling the sender to slow down, congestion NACK packets in embodiments of communication system 10 are sent in the opposite direction, from the network towards a requestor of content, asking to reduce the speed of the requests).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to combine the teaching of Persson with the teaching of Oran to provide the method for an Internet Control Message Protocol (ICMP) source quench message is proactive congestion control. When an intermediary network device experiences buffer overflow, it uses this message to signal the sending endpoint to throttle its transmission rate, preventing packet drops and network crashes.
With respect to claims 4 and 14, Persson-Oran teaches the method, wherein the ICMP packet comprises a source quench message generated by the first intermediary network device and transmitted to the first endpoint (Oran, see Col. 8, lines 9-14, whereas ICMP source quench is generated when router queues start to overflow; and ICMP source quench is incompatible with window-based congestion control protocols like transmission control protocol (TCP) as source quench goes to the sender but the receiver controls the window).
Claims 5 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Persson et al. (US 20110222406 hereinafter Persson) in view of Nádas et al. (US 20240056401 hereinafter Nádas).
With respect to claims 5 and 15, Persson teaches the method, yet fails to explicitly disclose wherein the first traffic and the second traffic comprise latency sensitive traffic, and wherein the first intermediary network device generates the packet according to a request for low latency, low loss, scalable throughput (L4S) generated by at least one of the first endpoint or the second endpoint.
However, Nádas discloses wherein the first traffic and the second traffic comprise latency sensitive traffic, and wherein the first intermediary network device generates the packet according to a request for low latency, low loss, scalable throughput (L4S) generated by at least one of the first endpoint or the second endpoint (Nádas, see FIG. 2 and paragraph [0032] an example packet 300, in accordance with particular embodiments of the present disclosure. The packet 300 may comprise a Low Latency, Low Loss, Scalable throughput (L4S) value 310, a Packet Value (PV) 320, and/or an Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) value 330).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to combine the teaching of Persson with the teaching of Nádas to provide the method for classifying specific traffic as latency-sensitive and utilizing L4S (Low Latency, Low Loss, Scalable throughput) eliminates network queuing delays and packet drops. It provides applications with precise, early congestion warnings, enabling smooth adaptation while maintaining high data speeds.
Claims 7 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Persson et al. (US 20110222406 hereinafter Persson) in view of Smith et al. (US 20200092756 hereinafter Smith).
With respect to claims 7 and 17, Persson-Oran teaches the method, yet fails to explicitly disclose wherein the first endpoint generates the second traffic by setting a codec rate for generation of the second traffic, which is different than a codec rate used for generating the first traffic.
However, Smith discloses wherein the first endpoint generates the second traffic by setting a codec rate for generation of the second traffic, which is different than a codec rate used for generating the first traffic (Smith, see paragraph [0032] the client device 420 selects a higher-resolution (e.g., lower compression) video streaming codec in response to detecting the transmission rate of video streaming traffic from the endpoint device 430 satisfies (e.g., exceeds) a first threshold).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to combine the teaching of Persson-Oran with the teaching of Smith to provide the method for changing the codec rate for generated traffic lets endpoints dynamically adapt to network bandwidth, optimize processing power, and support scalable video or audio streams without requiring central re-encoding. This rate modification offers several distinct advantages in real-time communication systems such as bandwidth optimization by lowering the codec rate for secondary traffic conserves network capacity during congestion and stream adaptability.
Claim10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Persson et al. (US 20110222406 hereinafter Persson) in view of Yavuz et al. (US 20190159071 hereinafter Yavuz).
With respect to claim 10, Persson teaches the method, yet fails to explicitly disclose wherein the first traffic and the second traffic comprise at least one of first and second uplink traffic or first and second downlink traffic.
However, Yavuz discloses wherein the first traffic and the second traffic comprise at least one of first and second uplink traffic or first and second downlink traffic (Yavuz, see paragraph [0020] a network node for recommending a data rate on an uplink or downlink communication channel between the network node and a wireless device in a wireless communications system is configured to receive, from the wireless device, a first information element that indicates a request for a recommended data rate by the wireless device on the uplink or downlink communication channel).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to combine the teaching of Persson with the teaching of Yavuz to provide the method for the first and second traffic, comprising any combination of uplink and downlink transmissions, enable dynamic resource optimization. Specifically, this provides several benefits, such as maximized spectral efficiency by allowing the network to dynamically switch resources between uplink and downlink, reduced latency for priority data, and improved end-user performance.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. This includes:
PG. Pub. US 20110267948 Method for communicating and managing congestion in wireless network e.g. long-term evolution (LTE) network, involves determining action to perform in response to congestion information of link on wireless network.
PG. Pub. US 20080298247 Adaptive vocoder source rate control method for wireless communication network, involves determining level of congestion in wireless communication network based on traffic conditions, and communicating congestion indication to vocoder.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIZABETH KASSA whose telephone number is (571)270-0567. The examiner can normally be reached Monday -Friday 9 AM -6 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, Ario Etienne can be reached on 517-272-4001. 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.
07/18/2026
/ELIZABETH KASSA/Examiner, Art Unit 2457
/ARIO ETIENNE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2457
Prosecution Insights