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 .
Status of Claims
This action is responsive to the application filed on May 5, 2025. The preliminary amendment, filed on July 22, 2025, amended claims 1, 4, 5, 7, 8, 11, and 13-16 and added new claims 17-20. Claims
1-20 are pending examination.
Drawings
The drawings filed on May 5, 2025 are accepted.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 2, 6, 8, 12, and 19 are objected to because of the following informalities:
“core network, CN [[(110)]],”, recited in line 1 of claim 1, should be replaced with “core network (CN)”.
“receiving protocol data unit, PDU, Set based quality-of-service, QoS, parameters”, recited in line 3 of claim 1, should be replaced with “receiving protocol data unit (PDU) Set based quality-of-service (QoS) parameters”.
“service data flow, SDF,”, recited in line 5 of claim 1, should be replaced with “service data flow (SDF)”.
“QoS flow identifier, QFI,”, recited in line 6 of claim 1, should be replaced with “QoS flow identifier (QFI)”.
“radio access network, RAN[[(105)]],”, recited in line 7 of claim 1, should be replaced with “radio access network (RAN)”
“user equipment, UE[[(102a,b)]],”, recited in line 8 of claim 1, should be replaced with “user equipment (UE)”.
“policy and charging control, PCC,”, recited in line 2 of claim 2, should be replaced with “policy and charging control (PCC)”.
“sub-QoS flow ID, XQFI,”, recited in line 3 of claims 6 and 19 , should be replaced with “sub-QoS flow ID (XQFI)”.
“user plane function, UPF,”, recited in line 3 of claim 8, should be replaced with “user plane function (UPF)”.
“extended reality, XR,”, recited in line 2 of claim 12, should be replaced with “extended reality (XR)”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it contains numerals in parenthesis referencing to steps of Figures. The objection can be overcome by removing the numerals with parenthesis.
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 § 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)(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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by CATT (an NPL with title “New Solution for KI#4/5: Sub-QoS Flow based QoS Architecture and Policy Control”), hereinafter, CATT.
Regarding claim 1:
CATT teaches:
A method in a core network, CN [[(110)]], of a wireless communication system, the method comprising:
receiving protocol data unit, PDU, Set based quality-of-service, QoS, parameters (Section 3.2, second paragraph, discloses receiving, by SMF, PCC rules (QoS parameters) as stated “The PCF will generates the PCC rules to the PCF to SMF, the PCC Rules include the main PCC rule for the XRM streams identified by the SDF detection (e.g. the IP packet filter set and Precedence) and also include additional sub PCC Rules associated with the main PCC rule for the SDF detection with additional different ID (e.g. the different combination of LID, TID and NAL Type, if available)”. Section 3.2, point 1, discloses the PCC rule for different PDU sets);
performing, using the PDU Set based QoS parameters, a binding of a QoS flow with multiple Sub-QoS flows to a service data flow, SDF, related to a certain media stream (Section 3.2, point 8 discloses binding QoS flow sub flows based on the PCC rules as stated “ The SMF performs the binding between the main PCC rules with a QoS Flow and also performs the binding between the sub PCC rules with a sub QoS Flow with the associated bounded QoS Flow.”. Section 2.1, points 1-3, discloses multiple sub QoS flows in a QoS flow of XRM video service stream as stated “1) The user plane traffic (e.g. a XRM video service stream) is composed of different type of PDU Sets.2) All the PDU Sets of a XRM user plane traffic is mapped to the same QoS Flow.3) The QoS Flow is composed with multiple sub QoS Flows, i.e. the different PDU Set can be mapped to different sub QoS Flow of the QoS Flow.” Also see Section 3.2, points 1-3);
generating a QoS profile associated with a QoS flow identifier, QFI, of the QoS flow for the media stream (Section 3.2, point 9, discloses generating PDR for QFI as stated “The SMF provides the XQFI (QFI and SQFI), PDR for XQFI and QER for XQFI in the N4 rules to the UPF to ask the UPF to enforce the QER for the QoS and sub QoS flows based on PDR.”. Section 2.1, points 4 and 6); and
transmitting the QoS profile to a radio access network, RAN[[(105)]], via which a user equipment, UE[[(102a,b)]], accesses the CN (Section 3.2, point 10, discloses transmitting the QoS profile to the RAN as stated “The SMF provides the XQFI and XQFI QoS profile in the QoS profile of the QoS Flow for the XRM to the RAN.”).
As to claim 2, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. CATT teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as shown above.
CATT further teaches wherein the receiving of the PDU Set based QoS parameters includes receiving policy and charging control, PCC, rules (Section 3.2, second paragraph, discloses PCC rules as stated “The PCF will generates the PCC rules to the PCF to SMF, the PCC Rules include the main PCC rule for the XRM streams identified by the SDF detection (e.g. the IP packet filter set and Precedence) and also include additional sub PCC Rules associated with the main PCC rule for the SDF detection with additional different ID (e.g. the different combination of LID, TID and NAL Type, if available).”).
As to claim 3, the rejection of claim 2 is incorporated. CATT teaches all the limitations of claim 2 as shown above.
CATT further teaches wherein the PCC rules include a PDU Set configuration (Section 3.2, point 1-6, discloses PCC rule includes PDU set configuration).
As to claim 4, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. CATT teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as shown above.
CATT further teaches wherein the performing of the binding includes: binding the SDF to multiple QoS flows for different respective PDU Set types (see Section 3.2, points-1-4).
As to claim 5, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. CATT teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as shown above.
CATT further teaches wherein the multiple Sub-QoS flows are for different respective PDU Set types (see Section 2.1, point 3, stating “The QoS Flow is composed with multiple sub QoS Flows, i.e. the different PDU Set can be mapped to different sub QoS Flow of the QoS Flow.”).
As to claim 6, the rejection of claim 5 is incorporated. CATT teaches all the limitations of claim 5 as shown above.
CATT further teaches further comprising: defining the multiple Sub-QoS flows during the binding of the SDF; and allocating a respective sub-QoS flow ID, XQFI, to each of the multiple Sub-QoS flows (see Section 2.1, point 4, stating “ Each Sub QoS Flow is identified with a XQFI which is composed with the QoS Flow ID (QFI) and a sub QoS Flow ID (SQFI), the XQFI (= QFI + SQFI) is unique per UE and the SQFI is unique per QoS Flow.”).
As to claim 7, the rejection of claim 5 is incorporated. CATT teaches all the limitations of claim 5 as shown above.
CATT further teaches wherein the different PDU Set types correspond to types of frames of a video stream (Section 3.3 discloses different frame types in video stream and different PDU sets).
As to claim 8, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. CATT teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as shown above.
CATT further teaches further comprising: configuring a user plane function, UPF, with a PDU Set marking rule (Section 3.2, point 9, discloses the SMF configures the UPF with rules. Section 2.1, point 16, discloses the SMF configures the UPF with marking as stated “UPF performs transport level packet marking in DL on per sub QoS Flow basis. The UPF uses the transport level packet marking value provided by the SMF.”) .
As to claim 9, the rejection of claim 8 is incorporated. CATT teaches all the limitations of claim 8 as shown above.
CATT further teaches wherein the configuring includes: configuring the UPF with a PS-importance configuration policy for determining a PS- important level based on an upper-layer packet header (see Section 2.1, point 13, stating “The SQFI value can be used as the priority/importance information.”. Section 2.1, point 5, discloses, XQFI, is in the GTP-U header as stated “5) The XQFI is used in the GTP-U header in the N3/N9 GTP-U traffic for the XRM PDU Sets.”).
As to claim 10, the rejection of claim 9 is incorporated. CATT teaches all the limitations of claim 9 as shown above.
CATT further teaches further comprising: transmitting the PS-importance configuration policy to the RAN (Section 3.2, point 10, discloses XQFI is provided to the RAN).
As to claim 11, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. CATT teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as shown above.
CATT further teaches wherein: the SDF includes only traffic of the certain media stream (Section 2.1, point 1, discloses traffic for a XRM video service stream as stated “The user plane traffic (e.g. a XRM video service stream) is composed of different type of PDU Sets.”. Also, Section 3.2 stating “The PCF will generates the PCC rules to the PCF to SMF, the PCC Rules include the main PCC rule for the XRM streams identified by the SDF detection (e.g. the IP packet filter set and Precedence) and also include additional sub PCC Rules associated with the main PCC rule for the SDF detection with additional different ID (e.g. the different combination of LID, TID and NAL Type, if available).”).
As to claim 12, the rejection of claim 11 is incorporated. CATT teaches all the limitations of claim 11 as shown above.
CATT further teaches wherein the media stream is one of voice, video, or extended reality, XR (Section 2.1, point 1, discloses traffic for a XRM video service stream).
As to claim 13, the rejection of claim 1is incorporated. CATT teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as shown above.
CATT further teaches wherein: the QoS profile is further associated with one or more QoS parameters for the certain media stream (see Section 3.2, points 9-10).
Regarding claim 15:
Claim 15 is directed towards a device performing the method of claim 1. Accordingly, it is rejected under similar rationale.
As to claim 16, the rejection of claim 15 is incorporated. CATT teaches all the limitations of claim 15 as shown above.
CATT further teaches wherein operations of the method are performed by a Session Management Function (SMF) (Section 3.2, points 7-10, are performed by the SMF).
As to claim 17, the rejection of claim 9 is incorporated. CATT teaches all the limitations of claim 9 as shown above.
CATT further teaches further comprising: defining the sub-QoS flows according to a PDU Set Type or PDU Set Importance level based on the upper-layer packet header (Section 2.1, point 4, discloses defining sub QoS flow with XQFI).
Claim 18 recites limitations similar to claim 5. Accordingly, it is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 19 recites limitations similar to claim 6. Accordingly, it is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 20 recites limitations similar to claims 9 and 17. Accordingly, it is rejected under similar rationale.
Conclusion
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 9:30-5:30 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.
June 24, 2026
/KAMAL M HOSSAIN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2444
Prosecution Insights