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 Remarks
This Office Action is considered to be fully responsive to the communications filed on 09/22/2025. Claims 1-20 are currently pending in this application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks pages 1-7, filed 09/22/2025, with respect to the rejections of claims 1-20 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered but are not persuasive. Applicant has amended independent claim 1 to specify that “the dynamic slice request includes an application identifier for the client application”, that “the traffic descriptor value is included in an access token”, and that “the updated URSP rules associate the traffic descriptor value with a network slice identifier”, where independent claims 11, and 18 are also amended in a similar way to include analogous subject matter. Applicant argues on page 2 of Remarks that Qiao does not describe “a registration request as a request for a traffic descriptor value” and “an application identifier for a client application”. However, Examiner disagrees with this opinion, as Qiao does teach these features, and a claim mapping has been provided below. Further, Applicant argues on pages 3-4 of Remarks that Madisetti is non-analogous art, stating that “Madisetti is not in the same field of endeavor as the Applicant’s field because linking smart contracts is unrelated to providing dynamic slicing for mobile networks”. Examiner disagrees with this opinion, as Madisetti is relevant to Applicant’s disclosure. In response to applicant's argument that Madisetti is non-analogous art, it has been held that a prior art reference must either be in the field of the inventor’s endeavor or, if not, then be reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the inventor was concerned, in order to be relied upon as a basis for rejection of the claimed invention. See In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 24 USPQ2d 1443 (Fed. Cir. 1992). In this case, Madisetti utilizes network slices in the context of a 5G core network for QoS management ([0293], and [0312]-[0317] Madisetti), where the instant application also relates to managing network slices in a 5G core network ([0024] instant Specification). Madisetti implements blockchain as a means of identifying the slices ([0083] Madisetti), which is related to how the instant application is attempting to use an access token associated with the slice identifiers. As such, Madisetti is indeed relevant to the disclosure of the instant application, as they are both in the same field of managing network slices. Additionally, Applicant argues on page 5 of Remarks that “Madisetti fails to describe or suggest that the traffic descriptor value is included in an access token that indicates the application identifier”. However, Applicant lacks sufficient support for this feature in the instant Specification, which renders this argument moot. For more details about this, please see the 35 U.S.C. 112 Claim Rejections section below. Further, Applicant argues on pages 5-6 of Remarks that “the rejection includes an improper combination of the teaching of Qiao and Madisetti”. Applicant is arguing that because Qiao is used to teach the “pushing” step, Madisetti cannot be used to teach the ”sending” step. However, Examiner disagrees with this opinion, as the two steps are not contingent upon each other. They are separate limitations, and Applicant even reinforces this in the claim language itself, where the “sending” is performed “separately from the pushing”. As far as Qiao goes, there is no requirement by the claim language such that the “pushing” must include a subsequent and separate “sending” step. For Madisetti, the claim language requires that the “sending” is performed “separately from the pushing”, and Applicant alleges that Madisetti does not teach the pushing feature. Without agreeing with this assertion, assuming arguendo, Madisetti still teaches the claim as it is written because the claim language merely requires that the “sending” is done “separately from the pushing”. In other words, using the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim language “separately from the pushing”, the claim limitation could be interpreted to mean that no pushing is required to be performed at all for the sending step to still occur. Additionally, the sending step in question has been amended in a way such that Applicant lacks sufficient support in the instant Specification. As such, for the sake of prosecution, this limitation is interpreted in light of the instant Specification and mapped accordingly. For more details about this, please see the 35 U.S.C. 112 and Claim Rejections section below. Applicant also argues on pages 6-7 of Remarks that Qiao and Madisetti do not teach the newly amended feature of “the traffic descriptor value includes a custom traffic descriptor value”. This argument is however moot, as Applicant does not have sufficient support for this feature in the instant Specification. As such, for the sake of prosecution, this limitation is interpreted in light of the instant Specification and mapped accordingly. For more details about this, please see the 35 U.S.C. 112 and Claim Rejections section below. For the reasons discussed above, claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103. For more details about any of the above mentioned, please see the Claim Rejections section below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1, 2, 9, 11, 15, 18, and 20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claims 1, 11, and 18: Independent claim 1 has been amended to recite “wherein the traffic descriptor value is included in an access token,” and “sending, based on the dynamic slice request and separately from the pushing, the access token including the traffic descriptor value to the client application”, where independent claims 11 and 18 are also amended in a similar way to include analogous subject matter. However, [0027], [0042], and [0073] of the instant Specification describes that the traffic descriptor value includes the access token (in the context of the generating step of the claims, which was one of the two steps amended in the way described above), not the other way around. Additionally, [0042] of the instant Specification describes that “the access token (e.g. including the traffic descriptor value)” is relayed to the modem. In other words, based on Applicant’s Specification, the access token may include the traffic descriptor value when it is being relayed to the modem (in contrast, there is no mention of the access token including the traffic descriptor value when they are being sent to the client application, or during the generating of the traffic descriptor value). However, in the context of the generating and the sending steps, the instant Specification lacks support for the amendment stating that the access token includes the traffic descriptor value. For the sake of compact prosecution, a claim mapping has been provided below interpreted in light of the instant Specification.
Regarding claims 2, and 15: Dependent claim 2 has been amended to recite “wherein the traffic descriptor value includes a custom traffic descriptor value for a URSP framework”, where dependent claim 15 is also amended in a similar way to include analogous subject matter. However, [0042] of the instant Specification describes that a traffic descriptor may be custom values. There is no mention of the traffic descriptor value including another custom traffic descriptor value. Examiner believes that Applicant means that the traffic descriptor value comprises a custom traffic descriptor value, not that the traffic descriptor value includes another custom traffic descriptor value. In light of this interpretation, for the sake of compact prosecution, a claim mapping has been provided below.
Regarding claim 9: Dependent claim 9 has been amended to recite “and wherein sending the access token including the traffic descriptor value is performed by another network device outside the core network”, which shares the same issues of lack of support for this feature as is described above. There is no mention in the instant Specification of the access token including the traffic descriptor value when they are being sent to the client application. Additionally, Applicant also does not have support for the sending being “performed by another network device outside the core network”. For the sake of compact prosecution, a claim mapping has been provided below interpreted in light of the instant Specification.
Regarding claim 20: Dependent claim 20 has been amended to recite “wherein the traffic descriptor value includes a custom traffic descriptor value, defined by a mobile network operator (MNO), for a URSP framework”. However, [0015] of the instant Specification describes that the OS and modem can use a MNO public key to validate the JWT token, but there is no mention of the MNO defining a custom traffic descriptor value. Additionally, [0042] of the instant Specification describes that a traffic descriptor may be custom values. There is no mention of the traffic descriptor value including another custom traffic descriptor value.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-3, 5-7, and 9-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Qiao et al (US 20190053147 A1), and further in view of Madisetti et al (US 20220166626 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Qiao teaches
A method, comprising ([Fig. 8A] and [0004] method of establishing dedicated network slices):
receiving, from a client application on a user equipment (UE) device, a dynamic slice request for a traffic descriptor value, wherein the dynamic slice request includes an application identifier for the client application, authorization credentials, and a quality of service (QoS) parameter for the client application ([0101] application in wireless device 100 (client application in a UE); [Fig. 8A] and [0093] wireless device 100 sends registration request (dynamic slice request) to (R)AN 105, which can involve access authorization based on profiles (authorization credentials included); [Fig. 7] and [0102]-[0103] packets are marked at the wireless device to indicate QoS flow parameters, which are provided along with a QoS Flow Identity QFI (application identifier for the client application) to the (R)AN in the establishment phase over N2 (sent from the wireless device during the registration, i.e. the slice request); [0118] a network slice selection policy NSSP is provisioned to the wireless device, which associates an application with a certain S-NSSAI (dynamic slice request for a traffic descriptor value));
generating the traffic descriptor value ([0118] a network slice selection policy NSSP is provisioned (generated) to the wireless device, which associates an application with a certain S-NSSAI (generating traffic descriptor value)),
pushing, in response to the dynamic slice request, updated UE Route Selection Policy (URSP) rules to a modem of the UE device, wherein the updated URSP rules associate the traffic descriptor value with a network slice identifier ([0092], [0130], and [Fig. 13] PCF can provide (create/update) policy information to the wireless device 100 (UE) via a message, where the policy information includes URSP; [0095] wireless device 100 can include a modem; [0093] initial registration procedure in Fig. 8A allows the wireless device to receive further services from the network (services are performed in response to the initial registration request and registration process; i.e. the services in Fig. 13 are performed in response to the registration of Fig. 8, thus the policy information message is sent in response to the initial registration request); [0118] the network slice selection policy NSSP includes the S-NSSAI (traffic descriptor value); [0092] URSP is grouped with network slice selection policy NSSP and network slice ID (traffic descriptor value associated with network slice identifier); [Fig. 13] and [0127]-[0128] the network slice ID is generated that includes QoS policy, which can indicate minimum required bandwidth for a network slice (associated with a network slice));
receiving, from the UE device, a protocol data unit (PDU) session establishment request that includes network slice selection information based on the traffic descriptor value ([0118] the wireless device (UE) requests establishment of a PDU session (sending PDU session establishment request) corresponding to the S-NSSAI (network slice selection information that is based on the traffic descriptor value)).
Qiao does not explicitly teach generating, in response to the dynamic slice request, the traffic descriptor value, wherein the traffic descriptor value is included in an access token, secured using a digital signature, that also indicates the application identifier and the QoS authorized for the client application;
sending, based on the dynamic slice request and separately from the pushing, the access token including the traffic descriptor value to the client application; and
It should be noted that as is discussed above, Applicant does not have sufficient support for the “the traffic descriptor value is included in an access token” of the “generating” limitation, and the “access token including the traffic descriptor value” feature of the “sending” limitation. For examination purposes, this feature is interpreted in light of the instant Specification where the traffic descriptor value includes the access token instead.
However, Madisetti does teach generating, in response to the dynamic slice request, the traffic descriptor value, wherein the traffic descriptor value is included in an access token, secured using a digital signature, that also indicates the application identifier and the QoS authorized for the client application; ([0172]-[0183] and [Fig. 35] messages (traffic descriptor value) are generated in response to the consumer/subscriber client having subscribed (in response to the dynamic slice request), where the message comprises a message signature (access token included in the traffic descriptor value messages) and a QoS level (indicates QoS authorized for the client application));
sending, based on the dynamic slice request and separately from the pushing, the access token including the traffic descriptor value to the client application ([0172]-[0183] and [Fig. 35] messages (traffic descriptor value) are generated in and delivered to the consumer/subscriber client in response to the client having subscribed (based on the dynamic slice request), where the messages include a message signature (access token)); and
Qiao and Madisetti are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention, as they are both in the same field of managing network slicing. It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Qiao to include the teachings of Madisetti where the messages include a message signature and a QoS level. The rationale behind this would be to improve the linking smart contracts in transactions on a blockchain network ([0002] Madisetti).
Regarding claim 2, Qiao modified by Madisetti teaches The method of claim 1, as is described above.
Qiao further teaches wherein the traffic descriptor value includes a custom traffic descriptor value for a URSP framework ([0092] the URSP (URSP framework) is grouped with network slice selection policy NSSP (designated traffic descriptor); [0118] the network slice selection policy NSSP includes the S-NSSAI (designated traffic descriptor including a custom traffic descriptor value)).
Regarding claim 3, Qiao modified by Madisetti teaches The method of claim 1, as is described above.
Qiao does not explicitly teach wherein the access token includes a Java Script Object Notation (JSON) formatted structure.
However, Madisetti does teach wherein the access token includes a Java Script Object Notation (JSON) formatted structure ([0172]-[0183] and [Fig. 35] messages (traffic descriptor value) include JSON data payload).
Qiao and Madisetti are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention, as they are both in the same field of managing network slicing. It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Qiao to include the teachings of Madisetti where the messages include JSON data payload. The rationale behind this would be to improve the linking smart contracts in transactions on a blockchain network ([0002] Madisetti).
Regarding claim 5, Qiao modified by Madisetti teaches The method of claim 1, as is described above.
Qiao further teaches wherein the traffic descriptor value is included in a designated traffic descriptor for a URSP framework ([0092] the URSP (URSP framework) is grouped with network slice selection policy NSSP (designated traffic descriptor); [0118] the network slice selection policy NSSP includes the S-NSSAI (traffic descriptor value is included in designated traffic descriptor)).
Regarding claim 6, Qiao modified by Madisetti teaches The method of claim 1, as is described above.
Qiao further teaches wherein the network slice identifier is associated with a network slice that is configured to support the authorized QoS ([0118] the network slice selection policy NSSP includes the S-NSSAI (traffic descriptor value); [0092] URSP is grouped with network slice selection policy NSSP and network slice ID (traffic descriptor value associated with network slice identifier); [Fig. 13] and [0127]-[0128] the network slice ID is generated that includes QoS policy, which can indicate minimum required bandwidth for a network slice (associated with a network slice)).
Regarding claim 7, Qiao modified by Madisetti teaches The method of claim 1, as is described above.
Qiao further teaches wherein the traffic descriptor value is communicable from an operating system (OS) of the UE device to the modem of the UE device ([0154] modules can be implemented with various software routines (operating system) that interface with physical hardware to be executed (operating system communicable with physical hardware elements); [0095] the device (UE) can include a modem (communicable with the modem) as one of its physical hardware elements).
Regarding claim 9, Qiao modified by Madisetti teaches The method of claim 1, as is described above.
Qiao further teaches wherein pushing the updated URSP rules is performed by a network device in a core network ([0092], [0130], and [Fig. 13] 5GC can provide (create/update) policy information to the wireless device 100 (UE) via a message from the PCF, where the policy information includes URSP; [0028] 5GC is 5G core network (pushing performed by network device in a core network)),
Qiao does not explicitly teach wherein sending the access token including the traffic descriptor value is performed by another network device outside the core network.
It should be noted that as is discussed above, Applicant does not have sufficient support for the “access token including the traffic descriptor value” feature of the “sending” limitation. For examination purposes, this feature is interpreted in light of the instant Specification where the traffic descriptor value includes the access token instead. Additionally, Applicant also does not have support for the sending being “performed by another network device outside the core network”. For examination purposes, this feature is also interpreted in light of the instant Specification where the sending can be performed by a device from either inside or outside of the core network.
However, Madisetti does teach wherein sending the access token including the traffic descriptor value is performed by another network device outside the core network ([0172]-[0183] and [Fig. 35]-[Fig. 36] messages (traffic descriptor value) are generated in and delivered to the consumer/subscriber client in response to the client having subscribed (based on the dynamic slice request), where the messages include a message signature (access token)).
Qiao and Madisetti are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention, as they are both in the same field of managing network slicing. It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Qiao to include the teachings of Madisetti where the sending of the traffic descriptor value includes the access token. The rationale behind this would be to improve the linking smart contracts in transactions on a blockchain network ([0002] Madisetti).
Regarding claim 10, Qiao modified by Madisetti teaches The method of claim 1, as is described above.
Qiao further teaches further comprising: authenticating, prior to the generating, the UE device and the client application based on the dynamic slice request ([Fig. 8A] and [0093] the initial registration procedure involves authentication of the wireless device (UE and client application)).
Regarding claim 11, Qiao teaches
A system comprising ([Fig. 4] system):
a network device including one or more processors configured to ([Fig. 4] and [0095]-[0096] processor can execute instructions):
receive, from a client application on a user equipment (UE) device, a dynamic slice request for a traffic descriptor value, wherein the dynamic slice request includes an application identifier for the client application, authorization credentials, and a quality of service (QoS) parameter for the client application ([0101] application in wireless device 100 (client application in a UE); [Fig. 8A] and [0093] wireless device 100 sends registration request (dynamic slice request) to (R)AN 105, which can involve access authorization based on profiles (authorization credentials included); [Fig. 7] and [0102]-[0103] packets are marked at the wireless device to indicate QoS flow parameters, which are provided along with a QoS Flow Identity QFI (application identifier for the client application) to the (R)AN in the establishment phase over N2 (sent from the wireless device during the registration, i.e. the slice request); [0118] a network slice selection policy NSSP is provisioned to the wireless device, which associates an application with a certain S-NSSAI (dynamic slice request for a traffic descriptor value));
generate the traffic descriptor value ([0118] a network slice selection policy NSSP is provisioned (generated) to the wireless device, which associates an application with a certain S-NSSAI (generating traffic descriptor value)),
send, via a push communication and in response to the dynamic slice request, updated UE Route Selection Policy (URSP) rules to a modem of the UE device, wherein the updated URSP rules associate the traffic descriptor value with a network slice identifier ([0092], [0130], and [Fig. 13] PCF can provide (create/update) policy information to the wireless device 100 (UE) via a message, where the policy information includes URSP; [0095] wireless device 100 can include a modem; [0093] initial registration procedure in Fig. 8A allows the wireless device to receive further services from the network (services are performed in response to the initial registration request and registration process; i.e. the services in Fig. 13 are performed in response to the registration of Fig. 8, thus the policy information message is sent in response to the initial registration request); [0118] the network slice selection policy NSSP includes the S-NSSAI (traffic descriptor value); [0092] URSP is grouped with network slice selection policy NSSP and network slice ID (traffic descriptor value associated with network slice identifier); [Fig. 13] and [0127]-[0128] the network slice ID is generated that includes QoS policy, which can indicate minimum required bandwidth for a network slice (associated with a network slice));
receive, from the UE device, a protocol data unit (PDU) session establishment request that includes network slice selection information based on the traffic descriptor value ([0118] the wireless device (UE) requests establishment of a PDU session (sending PDU session establishment request) corresponding to the S-NSSAI (network slice selection information that is based on the traffic descriptor value)).
Qiao does not explicitly teach generate, in response to the dynamic slice request, the traffic descriptor value, wherein the traffic descriptor value is included in an access token, secured using a digital signature, that also indicates the application identifier and the QoS authorized for the client application;
send, based on the dynamic slice request and separately from the push communication, the access token including the traffic descriptor value to the client application;
It should be noted that as is discussed above, Applicant does not have sufficient support for the “the traffic descriptor value is included in an access token” of the “generating” limitation, and the “access token including the traffic descriptor value” feature of the “sending” limitation. For examination purposes, this feature is interpreted in light of the instant Specification where the traffic descriptor value includes the access token instead.
However, Madisetti does teach generate, in response to the dynamic slice request, the traffic descriptor value, wherein the traffic descriptor value is included in an access token, secured using a digital signature, that also indicates the application identifier and the QoS authorized for the client application ([0172]-[0183] and [Fig. 35] messages (traffic descriptor value) are generated in response to the consumer/subscriber client having subscribed (in response to the dynamic slice request), where the message comprises a message signature (access token included in the traffic descriptor value messages) and a QoS level (indicates QoS authorized for the client application));
send, based on the dynamic slice request and separately from the push communication, the access token including the traffic descriptor value to the client application ([0172]-[0183] and [Fig. 35] messages (traffic descriptor value) are generated in and delivered to the consumer/subscriber client in response to the client having subscribed (based on the dynamic slice request), where the messages include a message signature (access token));
Qiao and Madisetti are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention, as they are both in the same field of managing network slicing. It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Qiao to include the teachings of Madisetti where the messages include a message signature and a QoS level. The rationale behind this would be to improve the linking smart contracts in transactions on a blockchain network ([0002] Madisetti).
Regarding claim 12, Qiao modified by Madisetti teaches The system of claim 11, as is described above.
Qiao further teaches wherein the updated URSP includes a network slice identifier corresponding to the authorized QoS ([0092] URSP is grouped with slice selection policy; [Fig. 13] and [0127]-[0128] the network slice ID is generated that includes QoS policy (corresponding to the QoS indication)).
Regarding claim 13, Qiao modified by Madisetti teaches The system of claim 11, as is described above.
Qiao does not explicitly teach the rest of the claim wherein the access token includes a Java Script Object Notation (JSON) formatted structure.
However, Madisetti does teach wherein the access token includes a Java Script Object Notation (JSON) formatted structure ([0172]-[0183] and [Fig. 35] messages (traffic descriptor value) include JSON data payload).
Qiao and Madisetti are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention, as they are both in the same field of managing network slicing. It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Qiao to include the teachings of Madisetti where the messages include JSON data payload. The rationale behind this would be to improve the linking smart contracts in transactions on a blockchain network ([0002] Madisetti).
Regarding claim 14, Qiao modified by Madisetti teaches The system of claim 11, as is described above.
Qiao further teaches wherein the updated URSP rules associate the traffic descriptor value with a network slice identifier, and wherein the network slice identifier is associated with a network slice that is configured to support the authorized QoS ([0118] the network slice selection policy NSSP includes the S-NSSAI (traffic descriptor value); [0092] URSP is grouped with network slice selection policy NSSP and network slice ID (traffic descriptor value associated with network slice identifier); [Fig. 13] and [0127]-[0128] the network slice ID is generated that includes QoS policy, which can indicate minimum required bandwidth for a network slice (associated with a network slice)).
Regarding claim 15, Qiao modified by Madisetti teaches The system of claim 11, as is described above.
Qiao further teaches wherein the traffic descriptor value includes a custom traffic descriptor value for a URSP framework ([0092] the URSP (URSP framework) is grouped with network slice selection policy NSSP (designated traffic descriptor); [0118] the network slice selection policy NSSP includes the S-NSSAI (designated traffic descriptor including a custom traffic descriptor value)).
Regarding claim 16, Qiao modified by Madisetti teaches The system of claim 11, as is described above.
Qiao further teaches wherein the traffic descriptor value is communicable from an operating system (OS) of the UE device to the modem of the UE device ([0154] modules can be implemented with various software routines (operating system) that interface with physical hardware to be executed (operating system communicable with physical hardware elements); [0095] the device (UE) can include a modem (communicable with the modem) as one of its physical hardware elements).
Regarding claim 17, Qiao modified by Madisetti teaches The system of claim 11, as is described above.
Qiao further teaches wherein the one or more processors are further configured to ([Fig. 4] and [0095]-[0096] processor can execute instructions):
receive, from an application service provider, service requirements for the client application to receive dynamic slicing service ([0126] HAF (application service provider) transmits message based on service requirements for network slicing).
Regarding claim 18, Qiao teaches
A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing instructions, executable by one or more processors, for ([Fig. 4] and [0095]-[0096] processor can execute instructions on computer-readable medium):
receiving, from a client application on a user equipment (UE) device, a dynamic slice request for a traffic descriptor value, wherein the dynamic slice request includes an application identifier for the client application, authorization credentials, and a quality of service (QoS) parameter for the client application ([0101] application in wireless device 100 (client application in a UE); [Fig. 8A] and [0093] wireless device 100 sends registration request (dynamic slice request) to (R)AN 105, which can involve access authorization based on profiles (authorization credentials included); [Fig. 7] and [0102]-[0103] packets are marked at the wireless device to indicate QoS flow parameters, which are provided along with a QoS Flow Identity QFI (application identifier for the client application) to the (R)AN in the establishment phase over N2 (sent from the wireless device during the registration, i.e. the slice request); [0118] a network slice selection policy NSSP is provisioned to the wireless device, which associates an application with a certain S-NSSAI (dynamic slice request for a traffic descriptor value));
generating the traffic descriptor value ([0118] a network slice selection policy NSSP is provisioned (generated) to the wireless device, which associates an application with a certain S-NSSAI (generating traffic descriptor value)),
pushing, in response to the dynamic slice request, updated UE Route Selection Policy (URSP) rules to a modem of to the UE device, wherein the updated URSP rules associate the traffic descriptor value with a network slice identifier ([0092], [0130], and [Fig. 13] PCF can provide (create/update) policy information to the wireless device 100 (UE) via a message, where the policy information includes URSP; [0095] wireless device 100 can include a modem; [0093] initial registration procedure in Fig. 8A allows the wireless device to receive further services from the network (services are performed in response to the initial registration request and registration process; i.e. the services in Fig. 13 are performed in response to the registration of Fig. 8, thus the policy information message is sent in response to the initial registration request); [0118] the network slice selection policy NSSP includes the S-NSSAI (traffic descriptor value); [0092] URSP is grouped with network slice selection policy NSSP and network slice ID (traffic descriptor value associated with network slice identifier); [Fig. 13] and [0127]-[0128] the network slice ID is generated that includes QoS policy, which can indicate minimum required bandwidth for a network slice (associated with a network slice));
receiving, from the UE device, a protocol data unit (PDU) session establishment request that network slice selection information based on the traffic descriptor value ([0118] the wireless device (UE) requests establishment of a PDU session (sending PDU session establishment request) corresponding to the S-NSSAI (network slice selection information that is based on the traffic descriptor value)).
Qiao does not explicitly teach generating, in response to the dynamic slice request, the traffic descriptor value, wherein the traffic descriptor value is included in an access token, secured using a digital signature, that also indicates the application identifier and the QoS authorized for the client application;
sending, receiving based on the dynamic slice request and separately from the pushing, the access token including the traffic descriptor value to the client application;
It should be noted that as is discussed above, Applicant does not have sufficient support for the “the traffic descriptor value is included in an access token” of the “generating” limitation, and the “access token including the traffic descriptor value” feature of the “sending” limitation. For examination purposes, this feature is interpreted in light of the instant Specification where the traffic descriptor value includes the access token instead.
However, Madisetti does teach generating, in response to the dynamic slice request, the traffic descriptor value, wherein the traffic descriptor value is included in an access token, secured using a digital signature, that also indicates the application identifier and the QoS authorized for the client application ([0172]-[0183] and [Fig. 35] messages (traffic descriptor value) are generated in response to the consumer/subscriber client having subscribed (in response to the dynamic slice request), where the message comprises a message signature (access token included in the traffic descriptor value messages) and a QoS level (indicates QoS authorized for the client application));
sending, receiving based on the dynamic slice request and separately from the pushing, the access token including the traffic descriptor value to the client application ([0172]-[0183] and [Fig. 35] messages (traffic descriptor value) are generated in and delivered to the consumer/subscriber client in response to the client having subscribed (based on the dynamic slice request), where the messages include a message signature (access token));
Qiao and Madisetti are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention, as they are both in the same field of managing network slicing. It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Qiao to include the teachings of Madisetti where the messages include a message signature and a QoS level. The rationale behind this would be to improve the linking smart contracts in transactions on a blockchain network ([0002] Madisetti).
Regarding claim 19, Qiao modified by Madisetti teaches The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 18, as is described above.
Qiao further teaches further comprising instructions for ([Fig. 4] and [0095]-[0096] processor can execute instructions on computer-readable medium):
verifying authorization for the UE device and the client application based on the dynamic slice request ([Fig. 8A] and [0093] the initial registration procedure involves authentication of the wireless device (UE and client application)).
Regarding claim 20, Qiao modified by Madisetti teaches The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 18, as is described above.
Qiao further teaches wherein the designated traffic descriptor value includes a custom traffic descriptor value, for a URSP framework ([0092] the URSP (URSP framework) is grouped with network slice selection policy NSSP (designated traffic descriptor); [0118] the network slice selection policy NSSP includes the S-NSSAI (designated traffic descriptor including a custom traffic descriptor value)).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Qiao et al (US 20190053147 A1), Madisetti et al (US 20220166626 A1), and further in view of Krishan et al (US 20230171099 A1).
Regarding claim 4, Qiao modified by Madisetti teaches The method of claim 1, as is described above.
Qiao modified by Madisetti does not explicitly teach wherein the access token includes a Java Script Object Notation (JSON) Web Token (JWT).
However, Krishan does teach wherein the access token includes a Java Script Object Notation (JSON) Web Token (JWT) ([0035] access token includes a plurality of JSON web token (JWT) claims).
Qiao, Madisetti, and Krishan are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention as they are both in the same field of managing network slicing. It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Qiao/Madisetti to include the teachings of Krishan that uses an access token in the JSON structure. The rationale behind this would be so that the NRF can be configured to determine that the consumer NF is authorized to access the requested service ([0032] Krishan).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Qiao et al (US 20190053147 A1), Madisetti et al (US 20220166626 A1), and further in view of Peteromichelakis et al (WO 2023057081 A1).
Regarding claim 8, Qiao modified by Madisetti teaches The method of claim 1, as is described above.
Qiao modified by Madisetti does not explicitly teach the rest of the claim wherein the client application includes a Network Slice Capability Management (NSCM) client configured to generate the URSP request.
However, Pateromichelakis does teach wherein the client application includes a Network Slice Capability Management (NSCM) client configured to generate the dynamic slice request ([0075] NSCM client is able to provide the request indicating a network slice (dynamic slice request) based on the URSP rules).
Qiao, Madisetti, and Pateromichelakis are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention as they are all in the same field of managing network slicing. It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Qiao/Madisetti to include the teachings of Pateromichelakis where the NSCM client can send the URSP request. The rationale behind this would be to allow the UE to use the HL indicated parameter in the PDU session establishment request message even though there are valid parameters in the URSP rule ([0075] Pateromichelakis).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADAM JOEL CERLANEK whose telephone number is (703)756-1272. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30-5:00.
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, Joseph Avellino can be reached at (571) 272-3905. 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.
/A.J.C./Examiner, Art Unit 2478
/JOSEPH E AVELLINO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2478
Prosecution Insights