Application No. 15/788,722
`Reply to Office Action dated June 15, 2020
`
`REMARKS
`
`With this Amendment, claims 1-3, 11, and 13-24 are pending, of which claims 1
`
`and 11 are independent in form. Claims 4-10 and 12 were canceled previously. Claims 1-3 and
`
`11 are amended herein, claims 13-24 are added herein. The amendments herein do not add new
`
`matter to the present application. In view of the foregoing amendments and the following
`
`remarks, reconsideration and allowance of the present application are respectfully requested.
`
`Interview Summing;
`
`Applicant’s undersigned attorney thanks the Examiner for his time and
`
`consideration in conducting a telephonic interview on September 2, 2020. During the interview,
`
`the Examiner and Applicant’s undersigned attorney discussed the rejection of claim 1 set forth in
`
`the Office Action and proposed changes to claim 1. No agreement was reached regarding
`
`patentable subject matter. The claims are amended herein based on the discussion during the
`
`interview.
`
`Claim Objections
`
`Claim 11 is objected to because of the informalities. In view of the amendments
`
`to claim 11 herein, reconsideration and withdrawal of the objection to claim 11 is respectfully
`
`requested.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 US. C. § 103
`
`Claims 1-3 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over
`
`US Patent Application Publication No. 2014/0099966 by Hori (hereinafter “Hori”) in view of US
`
`Patent Application Publication No. 2014/0328323 by Zhang et al. (hereinafter “Zhang”). For at
`
`least the following reasons, Applicant respectfully submits claims 1-3 and 11, as amended
`
`herein, are patentable over Hori and Zhang.
`
`Prior to discussing why the claims are allowable, a brief description of exemplary
`
`embodiments is set forth below. It should be noted that the following is provided merely to
`
`assist the Off1ce’s understanding of the claimed subject matter and is not intended to limit the
`
`scope of the claims.
`
`10
`
`

`

`Application No. 15/788,722
`Reply to Office Action dated June 15, 2020
`
`The present application teaches an IP Multimedia Subsystem (IMS) node 310
`
`including a receiving unit 500, a transmitting unit 502, a storage unit 504, a determining unit
`
`506, a policy referring unit 508, and a signaling generating unit 510. Appln., 1] [0053]. The
`
`receiving unit 500 receives information indicating codecs and codec modes that terminals use for
`
`communication in a packet switch (PS) network, information indicating codecs and codec modes
`
`supported by a terminal that performs a handover to a circuit switched (CS) network, and
`
`information indicating codecs and codec modes supported by the CS network. Appln., fl [0054].
`
`The transmitting unit 502 transmits signaling, for example, a codec-mode change request for
`
`requesting change of a codec mode. Appln., fl [0056]. The determining unit 506 performs
`
`comparisons among a codec and a codec mode that a terminal that performs a handover uses for
`
`communication in the PS network, codecs and codec modes supported by the terminal, and
`
`codecs and codec modes supported by the CS network, when a handover of the terminal from the
`
`PS network to the CS network occurs. Appln., fl [005 8]. The determining unit 506 determines
`
`whether the codec and the codec mode need to be changed based on the comparisons and a
`
`policy referred to by the policy referring unit 508. Appln., fl [0058]. When the determining unit
`
`506 determines that the codec mode needs to be changed, the signaling generating unit 510
`
`generates signaling including a codec-mode change request and outputs the generated signaling
`
`to the transmitting unit 502. Appln., fl [0058].
`
`In addition, FIG. 6 of the present application shows an example in which a user
`
`equipment (UE) 100 is initially present in a PS network, performs, via the MS node 310, session
`
`setup with a UE 102 that is also present in the PS network, and determines a codec and a codec
`
`mode to be used for voice communication by using an Session Description Protocol (SDP) offer
`
`and an SDP answer, at ST601. Appln., 1] [0062]. At ST602, the MS node stores information of
`
`the SDP offer and the SDP answer exchanged between the terminals. Appln., fl [0063]. At
`
`ST603, the UE 100 performs a voice call with the UE 102 over the PS network. Appln.,
`
`fl [0065]. At ST604, when the UE 100 moves, an e-nodeB detects the movement and transmits a
`
`handover (HO) required message to a mobility management entity (MME). Appln., fl [0066]. At
`
`ST605, the MME transmits a PS-to-CS request message to a mobile switching center (MSC) /
`
`media gateway (MGW) 110. Appln., fl [0066]. At ST606, the MSC/MGW 110 compares a list
`
`11
`
`

`

`Application No. 15/788,722
`Reply to Office Action dated June 15, 2020
`
`of codecs supported by the UE 100 that is included in the PS-to-CS request message with the
`
`codecs and codec modes supported by a CS network. Appln., 1] [0067]. At ST607, the
`
`MSC/MGW 110 transmits information indicating matching codecs and codec modes to the IMS
`
`node 310. Appln., 1] [0067]. At ST608, the IMS node 310 determines a codec and a codec mode
`
`to be used in the CS network (1'.e., a codec and a codec mode to be used by the UE 100) and a
`
`codec and a codec mode to be used in the PS network (1'.e., a codec and a codec mode to be used
`
`by the UE 102). Appln., 1] [0069]. At ST609, the IMS node 310 then issues an instruction
`
`indicating the determined codec and codec mode to the MSC/MGW 110. Appln., 1] [0070]. At
`
`ST610, during transmission of an HO required message to the CS network side (a RNC/nodeB),
`
`the MSC/MGW 110 issues a notification for selecting the codec and the codec mode indicated
`
`by the instruction issued from the IMS node 310. Appln., 1] [0070]. At ST611, a data path in the
`
`CS network is prepared between the nodeB and the MSC/MGW 110, and when the preparation is
`
`finished, a command for performing a handover to the CS network is issued from the MIVIE to
`
`the UE 100 via the e-nodeB. Appln., 1] [0072]. At ST612, initiation of an IP Multimedia
`
`Subsystem (HVIS) session transfer is performed between the MSC/MGW 110 and the HVIS node
`
`310. Appln., 1] [0072]. At ST613, after the handover to the CS network, the UE 100 exchanges
`
`signaling with the MSC/MGW 110 via the RNC/nodeB. Appln., 1] [0073]. At ST614, a
`
`command for switching the communication path of call data of the UE 102 from the UE 100 to
`
`the MSC/MGW 110 is issued. Appln., 1] [0074]. At ST615, the IMS node 310 issues, to the UE
`
`102 in the PS network, a mode change request for requesting changing to the determined codec
`
`mode. Appln., 1] [0075].
`
`A common part may be a common upper-limit value, rather than a completely
`
`matching part. Appln., 1] [0086]. For example, when the SDP answer illustrated in FIG. 7 is
`
`compared with the verification result illustrated in FIG. 8, the upper limit of the EVS bit rates is
`
`13.2 kbps, and thus a notification for setting the upper limit of the bit rates to 13.2 kbps may be
`
`transmitted to the PS network side. Appln., 1] [0086]. The SDP answer illustrated in FIG. 7
`
`includes a bit rate range for the EVS codec indicated by a first value (1'.e., 9.6) and a second
`
`value (1'. e., 24.4), and the verification result illustrated in FIG. 8 includes a plurality of bit rate
`
`values for the EVS codec (1'.e., 13.2, 9.6, 8, 7.2, and 5.9). Appln., FIGS. 7 and 8. The common
`
`12
`
`

`

`Application No. 15/788,722
`Reply to Office Action dated June 15, 2020
`
`upper-limit value of 13.2 is different from the first value (i.e., 9.6) is different from the second
`
`value (1'. e., 24.4).
`
`Turning to the language of the claims, independent claim 1, as amended herein,
`
`recites as follows (with emphasis added):
`
`A communication node comprising:
`
`a determiner which, in operation, determines a codec and a codec mode to be
`used by a first terminal and a codec and a codec mode to be used by a
`second terminal, while the first terminal and the second terminal perform
`communication in a packet switched network, before the first terminal
`performs a handover from the packet switched network to a circuit
`switched network that is different from the packet switched network, the
`determiner determining the codec and codec mode to be used by the first
`terminal and the codec and codec mode to be used by the second terminal
`based on:
`
`and codec modes used for
`information indicating codecs
`communication in the packet switched network from which the
`handover is performed,
`
`information indicating codecs and codec modes supported by the first
`terminal, and
`
`information indicating codecs and codec modes supported by the
`circuit switched network to which the handover is performed
`
`included in each of the
`wherein, when (i) a common codec is
`information indicating codecs
`and codec modes used for
`communication in the packet switched network from which the
`handover is performed,
`the information indicating codecs and
`codec modes supported by the first terminal, and the information
`indicating codecs and codec modes supported by the circuit
`switched network to which the handover is performed, (ii) a range
`of bit rates indicated by a first bit rate value and a second bit rate
`value are included in the information indicating codecs and codec
`modes supported by the first terminal, and (iii) a plurality of bit
`rate values for the common codec is included in the information
`
`indicating codecs and codec modes supported by the circuit
`switched network to which the handover is performed:
`
`the determiner determines a common upper-limit value based
`on the first bit rate value and the second bit rate value
`
`included in the information indicating codecs and codec
`modes supported by the first terminal and the plurality of
`bit rate values included in the information indicating
`codecs and codec modes supported by the circuit switched
`network to which the handover is performed, the common
`
`13
`
`

`

`Application No. 15/788,722
`Reply to Office Action dated June 15, 2020
`
`upper-limit value being different from the first bit rate
`value and the second bit
`rate value included in the
`
`information indicating codecs and codec modes supported
`by the first terminal,
`
`the determiner determines that the codec to be used by the first
`terminal and the codec to be used by the second terminal is
`the common codec, and
`
`the determiner determines that the codec mode to be used by
`the first terminal and the codec mode to be used by the
`second terminal is the common upper-limit value; and
`
`in operation, generates first signaling before the first
`a generator which,
`terminal performs the handover from the packet switched network to the
`circuit switched network, wherein the first signaling indicates the codec
`and codec mode to be used by the first terminal determined by the
`determiner, and generates
`second signaling after
`the first
`terminal
`performs the handover from the packet switched network to the circuit
`switched network, wherein the second signaling requests the second
`terminal to communicate using the codec and codec mode to be used by
`the second terminal determined by the determiner.
`
`For at least the following reasons, Applicant respectfully Hori and Hurlla fail to
`
`teach the communication node recited in claim 1, as amended herein.
`
`The Office asserts that Horl' teaches the “determiner” recited in claim 1. Office
`
`Action, pp. 6-7. Applicant respectfully disagrees.
`
`In that regard, the Office asserts that FIGS. 7-9, and paragraphs [0077]-[0083],
`
`[0086]—[0089], and [0090]-[009l] of Horz' teach “information indicating codecs and codec modes
`
`used for communication in the first network from which the handover is performed”, recited in
`
`claim 1. Office Action, pp. 3-5. Applicant respectfully disagrees. Notably, FIGS. 7-9 of Horl'
`
`are silent regarding codec and codec modes used in a particular network, much less “information
`
`indicating codecs and codec modes used for communication in the packet switched network from
`
`which the handover is performed”, as recited in claim 1, as amended herein. FIG. 9 of Horz'
`
`shows messages that are exchanged during a codec negotiation. Hort, fl [0052]. Although Hori
`
`teaches that the messages shown in FIG. 9 include information regarding codecs used by a
`
`calling party and a receiving party, Horl' fails to teach that the messages shown in FIG. 9 include
`
`information regarding codec and codec modes used in a particular network, much less
`
`“information indicating codecs and codec modes used for communication in the packet switched
`
`14
`
`

`

`Application No. 15/788,722
`Reply to Office Action dated June 15, 2020
`
`network from which the handover is performed”, as recited in claim 1, as amended herein.
`
`Moreover, paragraphs [0077]—[0083], [0086]—[0089], and [0090]—[0091] ofHorl' fail to teach
`
`information regarding codec and codec modes used in a particular network, much less
`
`“information indicating codecs and codec modes used for communication in the packet switched
`
`network from which the handover is performed”, as recited in claim 1, as amended herein.
`
`Additionally, the Office asserts that FIGS. 7-10, and paragraphs [0077]—[0084],
`
`[0086]—[0089], [0090]—[0091], [0093]—[0096], and [0105]—[0108] ofHorl' teach “information
`
`indicating codecs and codec modes supported by the second network to which the handover is
`
`performed”, recited in claim 1. Office Action, pp. 5-6. Applicant respectfully disagrees.
`
`Notably, FIGS. 7-9 of Horl' are silent regarding codec and codec modes used in a particular
`
`network, much less “information indicating codecs and codec modes supported by the circuit
`
`switched network to which the handover is performed”, as recited in claim 1, as amended herein.
`
`FIG. 9 of Horl' shows messages that are exchanged during a codec negotiation. Hort, 11 [0052].
`
`Although Horl' teaches that the messages shown in FIG. 9 include information regarding codecs
`
`used by a calling party and a receiving party, Horl' fails to teach that the messages shown in
`
`FIG. 9 include “information indicating codecs and codec modes supported by the circuit
`
`switched network to which the handover is performed”, as recited in claim 1, as amended herein.
`
`FIG. 10 of Hori shows a sequence chart. Hort, 11 [0053]. Notably, Horl' fails to teach that
`
`information regarding codec and codec modes used in a particular network is exchanged in the
`
`sequence shown in FIG. 10, much less a “network to which the handover is performed”, as
`
`recited in claim 1, as amended herein. Moreover, paragraphs [0077]—[0084], [0086]—[0089],
`
`[0090]—[0091], [0093]—[0096], and [0105]—[0108] ofHorl' fail to teach “information indicating
`
`codecs and codec modes supported by the circuit switched network to which the handover is
`
`performed”, as recited in claim 1, as amended herein.
`
`In summary, Hori fails to teach the “determiner” recited in claim 1 because Horl'
`
`fails to teach making a determination based on “information indicating codecs and codec modes
`
`used for communication in the packet switched network from which the handover is performed”
`
`and “information indicating codecs and codec modes supported by the circuit switched network
`
`to which the handover is performed”. In addition, nothing has been found, or pointed to, in
`
`15
`
`

`

`Application No. 15/788,722
`Reply to Office Action dated June 15, 2020
`
`thmg that teaches the “determiner” recited in claim 1. Notably, thmg is silent regarding a
`
`“codec mode”. More particularly, thmg fails to teach determining a codec mode that is to be
`
`used based on “information indicating codecs and codec modes used for communication in the
`
`packet switched network from which the handover is performed” and “information indicating
`
`codecs and codec modes supported by the circuit switched network to which the handover is
`
`performed”, as recited in claim 1, as amended herein.
`
`Moreover, nothing has been found, or pointed to in Horz' and Zhang that is
`
`believed to teach “wherein, when (i) a common codec is included in each of the information
`
`indicating codecs and codec modes used for communication in the packet switched network from
`
`which the handover is performed, the information indicating codecs and codec modes supported
`
`by the first terminal, and the information indicating codecs and codec modes supported by the
`
`circuit switched network to which the handover is performed, (ii) a range of bit rates indicated by
`
`a first bit rate value and a second bit rate value are included in the information indicating codecs
`
`and codec modes supported by the first terminal, and (iii) a plurality of bit rate values for the
`
`common codec is included in the information indicating codecs and codec modes supported by
`
`the circuit switched network to which the handover is performed:
`
`the determiner determines a
`
`common upper-limit value based on the first bit rate value and the second bit rate value included
`
`in the information indicating codecs and codec modes supported by the first terminal and the
`
`plurality of bit rate values included in the information indicating codecs and codec modes
`
`supported by the circuit switched network to which the handover is performed, the common
`
`upper-limit value being different from the first bit rate value and the second bit rate value
`
`included in the information indicating codecs and codec modes supported by the first terminal,
`
`the determiner determines that the codec to be used by the first terminal and the codec to be used
`
`by the second terminal is the common codec, and the determiner determines that the codec mode
`
`to be used by the first terminal and the codec mode to be used by the second terminal is the
`
`common upper-limit value”, as recited in claim 1, as amended herein.
`
`For at least the reasons stated above, withdrawal of the rejection of claim 1 is
`
`respectfully requested.
`
`l6
`
`

`

`Application No. 15/788,722
`Reply to Office Action dated June 15, 2020
`
`Claims 2, 3, and 20-24 depend from claim 1 and are believed to be allowable for
`
`the same reasons as discussed above for claim 1, as well as for the specific limitations recited in
`
`those claims. Accordingly, withdrawal of the rejection of claims 2 and 3, and allowance of
`
`newly added claims 20-24, is respectfully requested.
`
`While the language and scope of independent claim 11 are not identical to the
`
`language and scope of claim 1, the allowability of claim 11 will be apparent in view of the above
`
`discussion of claim 1 and the cited references. Claims 13-19 depend from claim 11 and are
`
`believed to be allowable for the same reasons as discussed above for claim 11, as well as for the
`
`specific limitations recited in those claims. Accordingly, withdrawal of the rejection of claim 11,
`
`and allowance of newly added claims 13-19, is respectfully requested.
`
`Conclusion
`
`The present application is now believed to be in condition for allowance.
`
`Favorable consideration and a Notice of Allowance are earnestly solicited.
`
`The Director is authorized to charge any additional fees due by way of this
`
`Amendment, or credit any overpayment, to our Deposit Account No. 19-1090.
`
`If the Examiner notes any informalities in the claims, the Examiner is encouraged
`
`to contact the undersigned by telephone to expediently correct such informalities.
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`SEED Intellectual Property Law Group LLP
`
`/John Wakeley/
`John Wakeley
`Registration No. 60,418
`
`JJW:kh1
`
`701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 5400
`Seattle, Washington 98104-7092
`Phone: (206) 622-4900
`Fax:
`(206) 682-6031
`742585871
`
`17
`
`