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 Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 03/06/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Samsung and Zong, alone or in combination, fail to teach or suggest the amended limitations of claim 54, namely transmitting another subscription data comprising an identifier of the group data before transmitting the subscription data comprising the group data, and the group data comprising at least one of allowed session types, accessible data network, network slice information, and an application descriptor indicating an operating system and at least one application operating on the terminal device.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. The group data limitation comes from canceled claim 57. Claim 57 was rejected over the same references, and Applicant did not argue it then. Applicant does not argue it now either. The limitation is recited in the alternative, so one alternative is enough to meet it. Samsung discloses three of the four alternatives. The 5G VN group data includes a DNN, an S-NSSAI, and the allowed POU Session Types (Table 4.15.6.3b-1, DNN for the 5G VN group; S-NSSAI to the SG VN group's communication session; POU Session Types allowed for SG VN group's communication session). These are the accessible data network, the network slice information, and the allowed session types. The amended receiving step is also met.
Samsung's UDM serves both an AMF and an SMF (Section 4.15.6.2, step 7a, If the NF is AMF; Section 4.15.6.2, step 7b, If the NF is SMF). Applicant lists these limitations but does not explain how the cited passages fail to teach them. A general allegation that the claims define a patentable invention, without pointing out how the claim language distinguishes over the references, does not comply with 37 CFR 1.111(b), MPEP Section 714.02. The ordering limitation is addressed in the next argument. Therefore, the amendment does not overcome the rejection.
Applicant again argues that neither Zong nor Samsung specifies the order in which the data including the identifier of the group data should be sent with respect to the group data. Applicant made this same argument in the Reply to the Non-Final Office Action and in the Reply to the Final Office Action filed July 21, 2026.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees, and repeats that the order is taught. Samsung retrieves the group data by using the group identifier as the key (Table 5.2.12.2.1-1, Group Data, Data Key Internal Group Identifier or External Group Identifier). A node cannot look up data by a key it does not have. Samsung gives that key to the AMF in the access and mobility subscription data (Table 5.2.3.3.1-1, Internal Group ID-list, List of the subscribed internal group(s) that the UE belongs to). The identifier therefore reaches the AMF first. Zang also sends the group identifier from the UDM to the AMF (0136, the message 3 includes an internal group identifier; 0137, the message 3 may further include a group correlation identifier 1). The identifier is stored at the AMF (0143) and is later used as a lookup key (0195, the AMF queries information about a subscription based on the group correlation identifier 1). In the Reply to the Non-Final Office Action, Applicant supported this argument with Zang paragraph 0144. In the Reply to the Final Office Action, Applicant supported it with paragraph 0110 of the specification. Applicant now repeats the conclusion without either support. Applicant has also acknowledged, at page 7 of the Reply to the Final Office Action, that Zang discloses transmitting data that includes an identifier of the group data. Even if the order were not stated, this is a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103, not 35 U.S.C. 102. Both transmissions are disclosed. The only dispute is which one comes first. There are only two possible orders. Selecting an order of performing process steps is prima facie obvious absent a showing of new or unexpected results, MPEP Section 2144.04(IV)(C). Applicant has not shown any new or unexpected result. Statements of counsel cannot take the place of evidence, MPEP Section 2145(1). Therefore, the argument again does not overcome the rejection.
Applicant argues that the Advisory Action mailed August 14, 2026 incorrectly relies on Samsung's Table 5.2.12.2.1-1. Applicant argues that this table only defines the key for each subscription data, such as the Internal Group Identifier or External Group Identifier for the group data. Applicant argues that the table does not define what a message comprises, and that the position in the Advisory Action is therefore incorrect.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. The table was not cited to show what a message contains. It was cited to show how the group data is retrieved. Applicant agrees that the group data is keyed on the group identifier. That is the point. Data keyed on an identifier cannot be retrieved until the identifier is known. The order follows from the key, whichever message carries each item. What the transmissions contain is shown by other citations that Applicant does not address. The Internal Group ID-list is part of the data sent to the AMF (Table 5.2.3.3.1-1, Access and Mobility Subscription data, Internal Group ID-list). The group data is its own subscription data type (Table 5.2.3.3.1-2, Group Data, External Group Identifier, 5G VN group data). The UDM sorts the 5G VN parameters into AMF-Associated parameters and sends them to the AMF (Section 4.15.6.2, step 4, the UDM classifies the 5G VN configuration parameters into AMF-Associated and SMF-Associated parameters; Section 4.15.6.2, step 7a, Nudm_SDM_Notification (SUPI, AMF-Associated parameters, etc.)). Applicant addresses the key table apart from these citations. Nonobviousness cannot be shown by attacking teachings individually when the rejection relies on them together, MPEP Section 2145(IV). Further, the order is obvious even without the table, as explained in response to the prior argument. In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Therefore, the argument is not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Zong's internal group identifier corresponds to an event. Applicant argues that the procedure in Zong paragraphs 0133, 0136, and 0137 is a subscription for notification of an event, not a transfer of user subscription data. Applicant concludes that Zang fails to cure the deficiencies of Samsung.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. The argument misreads Zang. The internal group identifier identifies the user group, not the event (0127, the internal group identifier is used to identify the first user group). Zong uses the same internal group identifier for two different events. It does so because both events belong to the same group (0138, both the first event and the second event are events subscribed to for the first user group). The event has its own separate identifier. That identifier appears next to the internal group identifier in the very paragraph Applicant quotes (0136, an event identifier corresponding to the first event, an internal group identifier corresponding to the first event). Zong also transfers user subscription data from the UDM to the AMF (0184, the AMF 3 network element obtains subscription data of the first terminal from the UDM network element). Further, Zong is not relied upon for the group data. Samsung supplies the group data. Zong is relied upon for the UDM sending the group identifier to the AMF, and for the AMF storing and using that identifier (0136; 0137; 0143; 0195). That Zang does this within an event procedure does not defeat the combination. The reason to combine need not be the same as Applicant's reason, MPEP Section 2144(IV). Nor can Zang be attacked alone when the rejection relies on Samsung and Zang together, MPEP Section 2145(IV). In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Therefore, Zong is properly combined with Samsung.
Applicant again argues that claims 67 and 74 include features similar to those of claim 54 and are allowable for the same reasons.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees, and repeats that claims 67 and 74 recite the limitations of claim 54 in apparatus and computer-readable medium form. Applicant again gives no separate argument for these claims. The arguments for claim 54 are not persuasive for the reasons above. Claims 67 and 74 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), as set forth below. Therefore, the rejection of claims 67 and 74 is maintained.
Applicant again argues that claims 55-56, 60-65, 68-73, and 75-76 are allowable because they depend from claims 54, 67, and 74.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees, and repeats that the independent claims are not allowable for the reasons above. The Examiner also notes that claims 70-72 are canceled, so the range 68-73 in the remarks includes canceled claims. The pending dependent claims are 55-56, 60-65, 68-69, 73, and 75-76. Therefore, the dependent claims remain rejected.
Thus, all the claimed and argued limitations have been met.
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 67-69 and 73-76 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.
Claim 67 recites "wherein the method further comprises: before transmitting the subscription data comprising the group data, transmitting another subscription data comprising an identifier of the group data to the second network node." Claim 67 is directed to an apparatus. It does not recite a method. There is insufficient antecedent basis for "the method" in the claim, MPEP Section 2173.0S(e). It is unclear whether the limitation is a step of some method or a function the apparatus is configured to perform. For purposes of examination, the limitation is interpreted as a function the apparatus is configured to perform.
Claim 74 recites the same language. Claim 74 is directed to a non-transitory computer-readable medium. It does not recite a method either. There is insufficient antecedent basis for "the method" in the claim, MPEP Section 2173.05(e). For purposes of examination, the limitation is interpreted as a function the computer program codes cause the computer to perform.
Claims 68-69 and 73 depend from claim 67, and claims 75-76 depend from claim 74. These claims are rejected for the same reason.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 54-56, 60-65, 67-69, and 73-76 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SAMSUNG ET AL: "Provisioning of 5G LAN group configuration parameters", 3GPP DRAFT; S2-1906681 23.502 CR PROVISIOINING OF 5G LAN GROUP CONFIGURATION PARAMETERS - REV9, 3RD GENERATION PARTNERSHIP PROJECT (3GPP), MOBILE COMPETENCE CENTRE; 650, ROUTE DES LUCIOLES; F-06921, vol. SA WG2, no. Reno, USA; 20190513 - 20190517 17 May 2019, pages 1-13, XP051736432 herein Samsung in view of US 20200404481 A1 herein Zong.
Claim 54, Samsung discloses a method performed by a first network node (Section 4.15.6.2, UDM), the method comprising:
receiving, from a second network node implementing an access and mobility management function or a session management function, a request for subscription data for a terminal device (Section 4.15.6.2, step 0, NF subscribes to UDM notifications of information updates; Section 4.15.6.2, step 7a, If the NF is AMF);
transmitting, the subscription data, to the second network node, wherein the subscription data comprises group data of at least one group to which the terminal device belongs (Section 4.15.6.2, step 4, the UDM classifies the 5G VN configuration parameters into AMF-Associated and SMF-Associated parameters; Section 4.15.6.2, step 7a, the UDM performs Nudm_SDM_Notification (SUPI, AMF-Associated parameters, etc.) toward the AMF; Table 5.2.3.3.1-2, Group Data, 5G VN group data),
wherein the group data comprises at least one of the following:
allowed session types (Table 4.15.6.3b-1, POU Session Types allowed for 5G VN group's communication session);
accessible data network (Table 4.15.6.3b-1, DNN for the 5G VN group);
network slice information (Table 4.15.6.Jb-1, 5-NSSAI to the SG VN group's communication session); and
an application descriptor indicating an operating system and at least one application operating on the terminal device;
wherein the method further comprises: before transmitting the subscription data comprising the group data, transmitting another subscription data comprising an identifier of the group data (Table 5.2.3.3.1-1, Access and Mobility Subscription data, data needed for UE Registration and Mobility Management, includes the Internal Group ID-list, List of the subscribed internal group(s) that the UE belongs to; Table 5.2.12.2.1-1, Group Data, Data Key Internal Group Identifier or External Group Identifier, thus the group data is identified by the internal group identifier, therefore the internal group identifier is provided to the AMF before the group data); and
wherein the first network node is a unified data management (UDM) (Section 4.15.6.2, UDM).
Samsung may not explicitly disclose transmitting another subscription data comprising an identifier of the group data to the second network node.
Zong discloses transmitting another subscription data comprising an identifier of the group data to the second network node (0136, the UDM sends a message 3 to the AMF, the message 3 including an internal group identifier; 0137, the message 3 may further include a group correlation identifier 1; 0143, the AMF stores the internal group identifier and the group correlation identifier 1 as information about the subscription). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Samsung to include the UDM transmitting a message including the internal group identifier to the AMF, as taught by Zong, so as to allow a network to continue to perform effective event monitoring for a group member user when the group member user is migrated (0005).
Claim 55, Samsung in view of Zong discloses the method of claim 54.
Samsung discloses wherein the request comprises an indicator indicating a type of the subscription data, and the subscription data is obtained based on the indicator (Section 5.2.12.2.1, Data Set Identifier uniquely identifies the requested set of data within the UDR; Section 5.2.12.2.1, Data Subset Identifier uniquely identifies the data subset within each Data Set Identifier).
Claim 56, Samsung in view of Zang discloses the method of claim 55.
Samsung discloses wherein the request further comprises at least one of an identity of the terminal device (Table 5.2.3.3.1-3, Access and Mobility Subscription data, Data Key SUPI, thus the request identifies the terminal device) and an identity of a Public Land Mobile Network, PLMN, that the terminal device is currently visiting.
Claim 60, Samsung in view of Zang discloses the method of claim 54.
Samsung discloses further comprising: transmitting a query for the subscription data to a third network node based on the request (Section 4.15.6.2, step 3, UDM may read from UDR, by means of Nudr_DM_Query, corresponding subscriber information); and
receiving the subscription data from the third network node (Section 4.15.6.2, step 3, corresponding subscriber information read from the UDR).
Claim 61, Samsung in view of Zang discloses the method of claim 60.
Samsung discloses further comprising: transmitting an updated subscription data to the second network node based on a change of the group data (Section 4.15.6.2, step 4, in case 5G VN group parameters related with the connectivity service of group members has changed, the UDM updates the User subscription; Section 4.15.6.2, step 7, UDM notifies the subscribed Network Function of the updated subscriber data).
Claim 62, Samsung in view of Zang discloses the method of claim 61.
Samsung discloses wherein the request further comprises information which requires the updated subscription data upon the change of the group data (Section 4.15.6.2, step 0, NF subscribes to UDM notifications of information updates).
Claim 63, Samsung in view of Zong discloses the method of claim 61.
Samsung discloses further comprising: receiving the updated subscription data from the third network node (Section 4.15.6.2, step 4, UDR stores the provisioned data as part of the subscription data and responds with Nudr_DM_Create/Update/Delete Response message).
Claim 64, Samsung in view of Zang discloses the method of claim 54.
Samsung discloses wherein the at least one group comprise a 5G virtual network group (Section 4.15.6.3b, 5G VN group data).
Claim 65, Samsung in view of Zang discloses the method of claim 60.
Samsung discloses wherein the third network node is a unified data repository (Section 4.15.6.2, step 4, UDR stores the provisioned data as part of the subscription data).
Claim 67, as analyzed with respect to the limitations as discussed in claim 54.
Samsung discloses an apparatus in a first network node (Section 4.15.6.2, UDM), and comprising:
one or more processors (Section 4.15.6.2, step 4, the UDM resolves the GPSI to SUPI and classifies the received parameters into AMF-Associated and SMF-Associated parameters, thus a processor); and
one or more memories comprising computer program codes (Section 4.15.6.2, step 4, the UDM stores the SMF-Associated parameters under corresponding Session Management Subscription data type, thus a memory),
the one or more memories and the computer program codes configured to, with the one or more processors, cause the apparatus to (Section 4.15.6.2, step 7a, the UDM performs the Nudm_SDM_Notification service operation, thus program codes that cause the apparatus to perform the operations).
Claim 68, as analyzed with respect to the limitations as discussed in claim 55.
Claim 69, as analyzed with respect to the limitations as discussed in claim 56.
Claim 73, as analyzed with respect to the limitations as discussed in claim 60.
Claim 74, as analyzed with respect to the limitations as discussed in claim 54.
Samsung discloses a non-transitory computer-readable medium having computer program codes embodied thereon which, when executed on a computer, cause the computer to (Section 4.15.6.2, step 4, the UDM classifies the received parameters and stores the SMF-Associated parameters under corresponding Session Management Subscription data type, thus a non-transitory computer-readable medium having computer program codes).
Claim 75, as analyzed with respect to the limitations as discussed in claim 55.
Claim 76, as analyzed with respect to the limitations as discussed in claim 56.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 20200351980 A1 - An access and mobility management function (AMF) receives, from a first wireless device, a service request message requesting activation of a user plane connection of a PDU session for transmission of data packets to a wireless device group comprising one or more second wireless devices. The service request message comprises a multicast information associated with the wireless device group. A determination is made, based on the service request message, to activate a user plane connection of the wireless device group. A message requesting activation of the user plane connection of the wireless device group is sent to a Session Management Function (SMF).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Mehmood B. Khan whose telephone number is (571)272-9277. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30 am-6:30 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, Asad Nawaz can be reached on (571) 272-3988. 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.
/Mehmood B. Khan/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2468
Prosecution Insights