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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 05/12/2026 has been entered.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 4, 5, 7, 10, 11, 14, 16, 17, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Catt (Update of Local MBS Procedures, S2-2104283, 3GPP TSG SA WG2 Meeting #145-e, 10 May 2021), hereinafter Catt, in view of Ryu (US 20230085130 A1) further in view of Dao et al. (US 20190191330).
Regarding Claim 1, 7, 11, 17, Catt discloses (Currently Amended) A method of controlling multicast and broadcast service (MBS) by a session management function (SMF) in a wireless communication system, the method comprising: [Page 3: The local multicast session] obtaining information on an MBS service area of an MBS session, wherein the MBS service area is a cell ID list or a tracking area ID (TAI) list; [Page 4: MBS service area (i.e. Cell ID list or TAI list)] wherein the UE mobility event notification indicates that the UE moving into or out of the MBS service area; receiving, from the AMF, user location information for the UE; and determining whether the UE is outside the MBS service area based on the user location information for the UE. [Page 4: In step 5, the SMF checks whether the UE is inside or outside the MBS service area]
Catt is silent with regards to subscribing to a user equipment (UE) mobility event notification from a mobility management function (AMF) by invoking a Namf EventExposure Subscribe service operation to the AMF.
Ryu teaches to subscribing to a user equipment (UE) mobility event notification from a mobility management function (AMF) by invoking a Namf EventExposure Subscribe service operation to the AMF (Paragraph 265).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify the method of Catt with the teachings of Ryu to ensure the SMF obtains the information about the QoS flows for multicast from the MB- SMF.
Catt and Ryu are silent with regards to in response to the UE being out of the MBS service area, deleting an associated quality of serve (QOS) from a next generation radio access network (NG-RAN and a user plane function (UPF).
Dao teaches in response to the UE being out of the MBS service area (Paragraph 440), deleting an associated quality of serve (QOS) from a next generation radio access network (NG-RAN and a user plane function (UPF) (Paragraph 473, 476).
Note: The reference doesn’t disclose multicast of MBS, the primary reference covers that portion of the claim.
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skilled in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify the method of Catt and Ryu with the teachings of Dao so the networks sufficiently and more efficiently provide better QoS for packet flows.
Regarding Claim 4, 14, Catt and Ryu disclose (Original) The method of claim 1. Furthermore, Catt discloses further comprising: transmitting, to the AMF, a NamfEventExposure_ subscribe message to subscribe to the UE mobility event notification from the AMF. [Page 4: If the SMF detects that the UE is outside the MBS service area, the SMF rejects the multicast session join via the Nsmf_PDUSession_UpdateSMContext response]
Regarding Claim 5, 10, 16, 20, Catt and Ryu disclose (Currently Amended) The method of claim 1.
Furthermore, Catt discloses wherein the user location information for the UE includes a cell ID for a target NG-RAN to which the UE moved or a tracking area 1D-[[(]] TAI [J]] for the target NG-RAN. [Page 4: obtaining the MBS service area (i.e. Cell ID list or TAI list) of the indicated MBS session. ]
Regarding Claim 7, Catt discloses a method of controlling multicast and broadcast service (MBS) by an access and mobility management function (AMF) in a wireless communication system, the method comprising: [Page 3: The local multicast session]
wherein the UE mobility event notification indicates that the UE moving into or out of an MBS service area of an MBS session, wherein the MBS service area is a cell ID list or a tracking area ID (TAI) list; [Page 4: MBS service area (i.e. Cell ID list or TAI list)]
Claim(s) 6 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Catt (Update of Local MBS Procedures, S2-2104283, 3GPP TSG SA WG2 Meeting #145-e, 10 May 2021), hereinafter Catt, in view of Ryu (US 20230085130 A1) and futher in view of Nokia et al. (PCC Impacts of 5MBS, S2-2104017, 3GPP TSG SA WG2 Meeting #145-e, 10 May 2021).
Regarding Claim 6, 15 Catt and Ryu are silent with regards to discloses wherein the UE moves from the MBS service area to [[the]] outside of the MBS service area through an N2 handover.
However, Nokia discloses wherein the UE moves from the MBS service area to [[the]] outside of the MBS service area through an N2 handover. [Page 9: Subscribing to the UE mobility event notification service provided by the AMF for reporting of UE presence in Area of Interest which reports when the UE enters or leaves a Presence Reporting Area.]
It would have been obvious at the time of filing to include wherein the UE moves from the MBS service area to [[the]] outside of the MBS service area through an N2 handover as taught by Nokia in view of Catt and Ryu for the purposes of ensuring the SMF obtains the information about QoS flows for multicast from the MB-SMF.
Pertinent Art Cited
Kim (US 20230379942) para337 talks about a V-UPF deleting a tunnel when the UE moves out of coverage and separately talks about deleting QoS flows.
Kim (US 12375888) detx 255 talks about a SMF deleting QoS flow and updating the UPF with that information.
The system in the above two references are closer to the claim because they have MBS and multicast QoS flows but they doesn’t explicitly state the UPF deletes the QoS.
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 Sujoy K Kundu whose telephone number is (571)272-8586. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5 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.
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.
/SUJOY K KUNDU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2471
Prosecution Insights