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 .
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after allowance or after an Office action under Ex Parte Quayle, 25 USPQ 74, 453 O.G. 213 (Comm'r Pat. 1935). Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, prosecution in this application has been reopened pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 3/23/2026 has been entered.
Claim status
Claims 1, 6, 11, and 14 are amended.
Claims 16-19 are newly added.
Claims 1-19 are pending for examination.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claim 1 is 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 1 recites the limitation “transmitting, to the UE via the NAS message, the PCO …”, in the 4th paragraph of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. “a PCO”. Citing of “a protocol configuration option (PCO), the PCO including an indicator indicating that the UE supports an ability to transfer information to an edge enabler client (EEC) of the UE”, refers to the PCO submitted by the user equipment. “transmitting, to the UE via the NAS message, the PCO …”, as cited in the claim, is not the same PCO as was submitted by the user equipment.
Claims 6, 11, and 14 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) based on them being change in category with respect to claim 1.
Claims 2-10, 7-10, 12-13, and 15-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) based on their dependency on the rejected independent claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 1-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Roy et al. (WO-2022216587-A1), hereinafter “Roy”.
Claims 1, 6, 11, and 14:
Regarding claim 1, Roy teaches, a method performed by a session management function (SMF) entity in a mobile communication system (Fig. 1D; [0104], “an SMF 183 may provide an ECS Address Configuration Information to the WTRU 102, such as in a PCO”) supporting a mobile edge computing (MEC) service (implied by disclosure in [0078], “The ECS 210 may need to be configured in the WTRU 102 before any interactions (e.g., by the WTRU 102) may happen with edge computing. There may be multiple EASs 206 in the EON 214. EASs 206 in different EDNs 214 may be the same EAS 206 (e.g., relating to a same edge application) and/or different EASs 206 (e.g., relating to different edge applications).”), the method comprising:
receiving, from a user equipment (UE) ([0104], “the WTRU 102 may determine to perform provisioning using an ECS provisioning method (EPM) via PCO information (e.g., PCO-EPM).”) via a non-access stratum (NAS) message ([0104], “the WTRU 102 may indicate in the PCO that the WTRU 102 supports the ability to receive one or multiple ECS addresses via NAS.”), a protocol data unit (PDU) session establishment request message including a protocol configuration option (PCO), the PCO including information an indicator indicating that the UE supports an ability to transfer an edge configuration server (ECS) address information to an edge enabler client (EEC) of the UE ([0104], “The WTRU 102 may use the PCO information element when establishing the POU session. For example, the WTRU 102 may indicate in the PCO that the WTRU 102 supports the ability to receive one or multiple ECS addresses via NAS.”);
determining edge configuration server (ECS) configuration information to be sent to the UE based on information obtained from a unified data management (UDM) entity (implied by disclosure in [0104], “an SMF 183 may provide an ECS Address Configuration Information to the WTRU 102, such as in a PCO”; “The WTRU 102 may receive the ECS Address Configuration Information during PDU session establishment and/or modification. For example, the ECS Address Configuration Information may include one or more fully-qualified domain names and/or one or more IP addresses of ECSs 210. After the PDU session is activated, the WTRU 102 may use an ECS address (e.g., received via NAS) to access the ECS 210.”).
Roy, though fails to expressly teach the claim, determining edge configuration server (ECS) configuration information to be sent to the UE based on information obtained from a unified data management (UDM) entity, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to come up with the invention based on disclosures by Roy, [0093], At 432, the AMF 182a may select a UDM entity 410. At 434, the AMF 182a may register with the UDM entity 410 using a Nudm_UECM_Registration. At 436, the AMF 182a may retrieve Steering of Roaming information using a Nudm_SDM_Get message. At 438, the AMF 182a may subscribe to be notified using Nudm_SDM_Subscribe as to when requested data is modified. At 440, the UDM entity 410 may initiate a Nudm_UECM_DeregistrationNotification procedure with respect to the AMF 182b. At 442, the AMF 182b may unsubscribe with the UDM entity 410 for subscription data using Nudm_SDM_unsubscribe. A person would be motivated to use the disclosures regarding UDM to come up with the claimed invention so as to use unified data management functionalities of the UDM involved in data communication between the user equipment and network.
Roy teaches, transmitting, to the UE via the NAS message, the PCO including the ECS configuration information, transferred to the EEC of the UE ([0104], “an SMF 183 may provide an ECS Address Configuration Information to the WTRU 102, such as in a PCO”).
Claim elements of claims 6, 11, and 14 are discussed above in claim 1. Existence of processor and memory are implied.
Claims 2, 7, and 12:
Regarding claim 2, Roy teaches the method of claim 1 (discussed above), wherein the PDU session establishment request message further includes at least one of a data network name (DNN) or single-network slice selection assistance information (S-NSSAI) (implied by disclosures in [0085], “a WTRU 102 may register with the network and the network may not be not the home network of the WTRU 102, the WTRU 102 may not be configured with any ONN and/or S-NSSAI combination that may be used to establish a POU session that would be anchored in the network”; and [0095], “the registration accept message may include any of the following information: (5G GUTI, Registration Area, [Mobility restrictions], [POU Session status], [Allowed NSSAIJ, [Mapping Of Allowed NSSAI], [Configured NSSAI for the Serving PLMN], [Mapping Of Configured NSSAI], [rejected S-NSSAls], [Pending NSSAI, [Mapping Of Pending NSSAI,”).
Claim elements of claims 7 and 12 are discussed above in claim 2.
Claims 3, 8, and 13:
Regarding claim 3, Roy teaches the method of claim 1 (discussed above), wherein the PCO is transmitted to the UE via an access and mobility management function (AMF) entity (Fig. 1D, SMF is connected to gNB through the AMF; PCO transmission through AMF is implied).
Claim elements of claims 8 and 13 are discussed above in claim 3.
Claims 4 and 9:
Regarding claim 4, Roy teaches the method of claim 1 (discussed above), wherein the ECS configuration information further includes an identifier of the UE (implied by disclosures in [0093], “At 416, the AMF 182a may send an identity request message to the WTRU 102. At 418, the WTRU 102 may respond with an identify response message which is sent to the AMF 182a.”; “At 430, the AMF 182a may initiate an identity check by invoking a N5g-eir_EquipmentldentityCheck_Get service operation.” ;see fig.4a).
Claim elements of claim 9 are discussed above in claim 4.
Claims 5 and 10:
Regarding claim 5, Roy teaches the method of claim 1 (discussed above), wherein the ECS configuration information includes an identifier of an ECS provider ([0104], “The WTRU 102 may receive the ECS Address Configuration Information during PDU session establishment and/or modification. For example, the ECS Address Configuration Information may include one or more fully-qualified domain names and/or one or more IP addresses of ECSs 210.”).
Claim elements of claims 10 are discussed above in claim 5.
Regarding claim 15, Roy teaches the method of claim 1 (discussed above).
Regarding claim, wherein the PDU session establishment request message further includes at least one of a data network name (DNN) or single-network slice selection assistance information (S-NSSAI), wherein the PCO is received by the UE, via an access and mobility management function (AMF) entity, and wherein the ECS configuration information further includes at least one of an identifier of the UE or an identifier of an ECS provider, the claim elements are disclosed above in claims 2-5.
Claims 16-19:
Regarding claim 16, Roy teaches the method of claim 1 (discussed above), wherein the information includes an ECS address (implied by disclosures, [0079], “An ECS address may be provisioned (e.g., to a WTRU 102)”; an ECS address may be provisioned via the 5GC by a Protocol Configuration Options (PCO) information element used for Protocol Data Unit (POU) session establishment; [0095], “The 'ECS Provisioning Info' may include any of the following fields (1) ECS Provisioning Method, (2) ECS data network name (ONN), and/or (3) ECS address.”).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to INTEKHAAB AALAM SIDDIQUEE whose telephone number is (571)272-0895. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 9AM-5PM EST.
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, Yemane Mesfin can be reached at 571-272-3927. 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.
/INTEKHAAB A SIDDIQUEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2462
Prosecution Insights