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 1-17 and 19 are pending per amendment.
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 1-17 and 19 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.
For claim 1, the limitation “transmitting…a second message for requesting input data for a model processing generated by the ML model” renders claim scope unclear. It is unclear what is meant by “model processing,” nor is it unambiguous how “model processing” is “generated by the ML model.” The phrasing may reasonably be interpreted in contradictory/conflicting ways: 1) the ML model generates the model processing, 2) the model processing is performed by the ML model, 3) the model processing generates the ML model, or 4) the input data is for a processing that is output by the ML model. Additionally, the claim thereafter recites “performing…the model processing,” creating ambiguity whether the model processing is generated by the ML model, performed by the first network, or both. As such, one of ordinary skill would not be reasonably apprised of bounds of the claim. Claims 17 and 19 are similarly rejected on same basis. Claims 2-16 are rejected based on their dependency.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Ren US 20240205668: “…a UE 115 may enable an enhanced machine learning application model determination by a base station 105 based on capability signaling sent from the UE 115 to the base station 105 that includes capability information supported by the UE 115 for the machine learning application model. For example, the UE 115 may indicate a support for an end-to-end multi-block machine learning application, a first UE capability for a backbone block of the multi-block machine learning application that makes up one or more front-end layers…”
Kumar US 20220377844: “…the core network 190 may include a model training initiator component 191 configured to receive a trigger to activate a machine learning (ML) model training based on at least one of an indication from an ML model repository or a protocol of the network entity; and transmit an ML model training request to activate the ML model training at one or more nodes. In certain aspects, the base station 180 may include a model training manager component 199 configured to receive an ML model training request initiated based on at least one of a first protocol of an ML model repository or a second protocol of a network entity; and transmit, based on the ML model training request, ML model training results indicative of a trained ML model.” (par. 0053).
Zhu US 20220360973: “…the UE ML capability 612(3) may be reported, at 614a, via the UE radio capability 612(1). For example, the UE radio capability 612(1) may indicate a supported list of functions that may be performed in association with a neural network, where the UE ML capability 612(3) may correspond to a separate capability. If the UE ML capability 612(3) is signaled within the UE radio capability 612(1), a delivery of the UE ML capability 612(3) may be similar a delivery of the UE radio capability 612(1).” (par. 0081).
Bai US 20220330012: “[0005] In an aspect of the disclosure, a method, a computer-readable medium, and an apparatus are provided. The apparatus may be a user equipment (UE). The apparatus may receive, from a base station, a query for at least one initial machine learning (ML) capability; and transmit, to the base station based on the query, an indication of the at least one initial ML capability.” (par. 0005).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CLAYTON R WILLIAMS whose telephone number is (571)270-3801. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10:00am - 6:00pm.
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, Nicholas Taylor can be reached at 571-272-3889. 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.
/CLAYTON R WILLIAMS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2443
Prosecution Insights