DETAILED ACTION
This is in response to the Applicant's arguments and amendments filed on 10 February 2026 in which claims 19-32 are currently pending and claims 1-18 have been cancelled.
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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
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 final rejection. 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 10 February 2026 has been entered.
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.
Claims 19-32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Patil et al. (PG Pub US 2020/0314615 A1) in view of Ingah (PG Pub US 2021/0051058 A1).
Regarding claims 19, 23, 27, Patil discloses a method, a Network Function (NF) service consumer, and a non-transitory computer readable medium.
at least one processor; and at least one memory including computer program codes (figs. 2, 4);
receiving, from a Network Repository Function (NRF), a message indicating a set of candidate NF service providers, in place of a current NF service provider, and having an ability to provide a service requested by the NV service consumer (“when network function 202 sends a discovery or search request to NRF 214 for a list of network functions 202 and services that match its search criteria, NRF 214 may return a URI list 630. Each item designated by the corresponding URI in the URI List 630 would satisfy the search criteria provided by the network function 202 requesting the search” [0061], “Update operation 606, when invoked by a network function 202 at NRF 214, causes NRF 214 to update the registered information associated with the network function 202. When calling update operation 606, network function 202 may provide NRF 214 with the replacement NF profile” [0053], “the NRF obtains an URI associated with the network function corresponding to the matching NF profile. The NRF aggregates the URIs into a URI list, and sends the URI list as part of search result 816 to the consumer network function” [0085]);
selecting a target NF service provider for providing the service to the NV service consumer from the set of candidate NF service providers (“selecting, among the network functions identified by the list of URIs received from the NRF, a network function based on the desired priority and the priorities associated with the network functions identified by the list of URIs” [0086]).
However, Patil does not explicitly disclose the set of candidate NF service providers was determined after detecting that the service provided to the NF service consumer by the current NF service provider has failed.
Nevertheless, Ingah discloses “Based on the validation, an alert of an identified incompatibility, a potential bottleneck, or other functionality issue may be presented to the user. In response, a replacement network function may be provided to remedy the identified functionality issue” [0023]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the set of candidate NF service providers be determined after detecting that the service provided to the NF service consumer by the current NF service provider has failed because “The selected set of network functions may be validated based on determined capabilities for each of the network functions (e.g., as may be determined according to aspects described herein) and/or according to one or more requirements specified by the user” [0023].
Regarding claims 20, 24, Patil, Ingah discloses everything claimed as applied above. In addition, Patil discloses generating information about the target NF service provider based on an identifier of the target NF service provider; and transmitting the information to the NRF (“assume that the URI list of result 816 identifies network function 202-A and 202-B; and that consumer network function 802 has determined the desired priority having a medium value. When consumer network function 802 receives the URI list, consumer network function 802 selects a network function between network functions 202-A and 202-B listed in result 816. Because network function 202-B has registered at NRF 214 with a medium priority value and consumer network function 802's desired priority is also a medium value, consumer network function 802 selects network function 202-B” [0086], “sending a message (e.g., a transaction request) to the selected network function (block 718). For example, FIG. 8 shows consumer network function 802 invoking a call 818 to network function 202-B. In one implementation, the transaction request may include a message priority, such as 3GPP SBI (Service-Based Interface) message priority, and S-NSSAI. Consumer network function 802 may set the 3GPP SBI message priority in call 818 based on the desired priority” [0088]).
Regarding claims 21, 25, Patil, Ingah discloses everything claimed as applied above. In addition, Patil discloses generating a request for the service comprising a set of criteria associated with attributes of the service; and transmitting the request to the NRF (“request processor 112 receives a request from user device 104 .. The selected set of network functions may be validated based on determined capabilities for each of the network functions .. (e.g., the network functions are compatible, satisfy an expected processor, memory, storage, and/or bandwidth requirement, etc.)” [0023]).
Regarding claims 22, 26, Patil, Ingah discloses everything claimed as applied above. In addition, Patil discloses the NRF comprises a management node (“management operation 502 with NRF” [0048]) and wherein the NF service consumer comprises a network device or a terminal device (“UE device” [0029]).
Regarding claims 28, 29, Patil, Ingah discloses everything claimed as applied above. In addition, Ingah discloses the criteria comprising at least one of: latency, reliability, CPU, memory, work status of the service, or a software version of the service (“a vendor, a hardware/software version, minimum execution environment specifications (e.g., processing requirements, memory requirements, storage requirements, an operating system version, etc.), stated specifications, test data generated as a result of testing the network function, and/or a set of determined capabilities” [0024]).
Regarding claims 30, 31, 32, Patil, Ingah discloses everything claimed as applied above. In addition, Ingah discloses determining a set of criteria associated with attributes of the service, the criteria comprising at least one of: latency, reliability, CPU, memory, work status of the service, or a software version of the service (“a vendor, a hardware/software version, minimum execution environment specifications (e.g., processing requirements, memory requirements, storage requirements, an operating system version, etc.), stated specifications, test data generated as a result of testing the network function, and/or a set of determined capabilities” [0024]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any part of the reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTINE D FUQUA whose telephone number is (571)270-1664. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 AM - 6 PM EST with every other Friday off.
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.
CHRISTINE DUONG FUQUA
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2462
/CHRISTINE T DUONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2462 03/15/2026