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 with respect to claims 1, 3, 5-6, 8, 9, 11, 13-14, 16, and 20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
Claims 1, 3, 5-6, 8, 9, 11, 13-14, 16, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Qu et al. (US 2023/0049532) in view of Sivakeesar (US 2022/0053549, “Siva”), which was cited in previously 892 filed on 4/21/2025.
With regard to claim 1, Qu teaches: A method for transmitting information (see figure 4), comprising:
sending, by a terminal, slicing information of a slice required by the terminal to a network device through a Radio Resource Control (RRC) message or an uplink message in a random access (RACH) process (see steps 405-406 of figure 4: transmitting a RACH message (associated with first network slice: see figure 2) and PDU request includes the identifier of the first network slice service. Paragraphs 135-143:
[0140] 405: The MAC layer initiates random access.
[0141] Step 405 is similar to step 203, For details, refer to step 203. Details are not described herein again.
[0142] 406: The terminal device sends a PDU session establishment request.
[0143] Specifically, the NAS stratum of the terminal device may send the PDU session establishment request to a core network device through an AS stratum and the access network device. The PDU session establishment request passes through the AS stratum of the terminal device and the access network device, and arrives at the core network device. After the access network device receives the PDU session establishment request, the access network device sends the PDU session establishment request to the core network device. The PDU session establishment request may include but is not limited to information such as a PDU session identifier and the identifier of the first network slice service.
Also see paragraphs 104-105 and 164-170.
) :
wherein the slicing information of the slice required by the terminal comprises a slicing identity of the terminal (step 202 in figure 2 / steps 401-404 in figure 4: paragraphs 100-103 and 130-133);
receiving, by the terminal, a control result sent by the network device according to whether the network device can provide the terminal with the slice required by the terminal (step 408 in figure 4: paragraphs 146-149:
[0146] 408: The access network device sends a PDU session establishment request accept message to the terminal device.
[0147] The PDU session establishment request accept message may carry a network slice service identifier, to indicate a network slice service that may be initiated by the terminal device.
Also see figure 9 and paragraph 210-213.
[0211] As shown in (b) in FIG. 9, a terminal device initiates two-step random access. When the terminal device sends a MSGA corresponding to a network slice service to an access network device, and receives a fallback random access response (fallback random access response, fallback RAR) sent by the access network device, the terminal device continues to send a MSG3 to the access network device. When the terminal device does not receive a response (namely, a MSG4) from the access network device within a time period set by a random access contention resolution timer (random access contention resolution timer, ra-CR Timer), a value of a counter is increased by 1. In addition, the terminal device needs to resend the MSGA of the network slice service. The fallback RAR indicates the terminal device to separately resend the MSG3.
),
PNG
media_image1.png
559
697
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Although Qu teaches random access process to initiated network slice service (see figure 2/4/9), Qu does not explicitly teach the control result comprises: a result of a RACH process determined according to the slicing information.
Similar to the system of Qu, Siva teaches random access process that is associated with slice type information (see figure 9: paragraphs 133-140). Siva explicitly teaches UE receives the random access response (RAR) with slice type (and tenant ID) from a network device. Thus, the examiner views the RAR with slice information as control result comprises: a result of a RACH process determined according to the slicing information.
PNG
media_image2.png
728
592
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claim invention to have the control result comprises: a result of a RACH process determined according to the slicing information as taught by Siva in the random access process of Qu in order to reduce slice overload (Siva: paragraphs 21-23).
With regard to claim 9, Qu teaches: A terminal, comprising:
a transmitter (transceiver unit, 1002: paragraphs 223 and 229), which is used for sending slicing information of a slice required by the terminal to a network device through a Radio Resource Control (RRC) message or an uplink message in a random access (RACH) process
(see steps 405-406 of figure 4: transmitting a RACH message (associated with first network slice: see figure 2) and PDU request includes the identifier of the first network slice service. Paragraphs 135-143. Also see paragraphs 104-105 and 164-170.
);
wherein the slicing information of the slice required by the terminal comprises a slicing identity of the terminal
(step 202 in figure 2 / steps 401-404 in figure 4: paragraphs 100-103 and 130-133);
a receiver (transceiver unit, 1002: paragraphs 223 and 229), which is used for receiving a control result sent by the network device according to whether the network device can provide the terminal with the slice required by the terminal,
(step 408 in figure 4: paragraphs 146-149: also see figure 9 and paragraph 210-213)
PNG
media_image3.png
441
560
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Although Qu teaches random access process to initiated network slice service (see figure 2/4/9), Qu does not explicitly teach the control result comprises: a result of a RACH process determined according to the slicing information.
Similar to the system of Qu, Siva teaches random access process that is associated with slice type information (see figure 9: paragraphs 133-140). Siva explicitly teaches UE receives the random access response (RAR) with slice type (and tenant ID) from a network device. Thus, the examiner views the RAR with slice information as control result comprises: a result of a RACH process determined according to the slicing information.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claim invention to have the control result comprises: a result of a RACH process determined according to the slicing information as taught by Siva in the random access process of Qu in order to reduce slice overload (Siva: paragraphs 21-23).
With regard to claim 16, Qu teaches: A network device, comprising:
a receiver (transceiver unit, 1002: paragraphs 223 and 229: also see paragraph 249, computer device can be a network device), which is used for receiving slicing information of a slice required by a terminal sent by the terminal through a Radio Resource Control (RRC) message or an uplink message in a random access (RACH) process
(see steps 405-406 of figure 4: transmitting a RACH message (associated with first network slice: see figure 2) and PDU request includes the identifier of the first network slice service. Paragraphs 135-143. Also see paragraphs 104-105 and 164-170.
);
wherein the slicing information of the slice required by the terminal comprises a slicing identity of the terminal
(step 202 in figure 2 / steps 401-404 in figure 4: paragraphs 100-103 and 130-133);
a processor (processor, 1001: paragraphs 223, 229 and 249), which is used for determining whether the slice required by the terminal can be provided for the terminal according to the slicing information, and obtaining a control result;
a transmitter (transceiver unit, 1002: paragraphs 223, 229, and 249), which is used for sending the control result to the terminal (step 408 in figure 4: paragraphs 146-149: also see figure 9 and paragraph 210-213),
Although Qu teaches random access process to initiated network slice service (see figure 2/4/9), Qu does not explicitly teach the control result comprises: a result of a RACH process determined according to the slicing information.
Similar to the system of Qu, Siva teaches random access process that is associated with slice type information (see figure 9: paragraphs 133-140). Siva explicitly teaches UE receives the random access response (RAR) with slice type (and tenant ID) from a network device. Thus, the examiner views the RAR with slice information as control result comprises: a result of a RACH process determined according to the slicing information.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claim invention to have the control result comprises: a result of a RACH process determined according to the slicing information as taught by Siva in the random access process of Qu in order to reduce slice overload (Siva: paragraphs 21-23).
With regard to claims 3 and 11, Qu teaches: wherein the uplink message comprises message 1 in a four-step RACH process (see figure 3 and figure 9: paragraphs 123-125 and 209-213).
PNG
media_image4.png
450
836
media_image4.png
Greyscale
With regard to claims 5 and 13, Qu teaches: wherein the slicing identity of the terminal or the slicing identity supported by the network device comprises a network slicing identity (paragraphs 94-96 and 132-133).
With regard to claims 6 and 14, Qu teaches: wherein a slice of the terminal comprises at least one of a requested slice, an allowed slice, a configured slice and a default slice (paragraph 143 and 218).
With regard to claim 8, Siva also teaches: wherein the result of the RACH process comprises a successful execution of the RACH process and a failure to execute the RACH process (see figure 9: paragraphs 137-138:
[0137] After receiving RACH Request, the gNB allocates a temporary identity (temporary cell RNTI-TC-RNTI) to the UE 3 which is made permanent (as a C-RNTI) after a successful RACH procedure and calculates an appropriate timing advance to be used to ensure the next UE message will be sent and received at the correct timing. The gNB 5 also allocates uplink resources.
[0138] The gNB 5 generates an appropriate random access response (RAR) message (message 2) including the information required for UE 3 to send message 3 (e.g. a Layer 3 message such as an RRC Connection Request) at an appropriate time. This message is then sent to the UE 3 at S910. The RAR message is typically sent on a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) within a time window of a few transmission time intervals (TTI). For the purposes of initial access, the RAR message will typically convey a random access preamble identifier, timing alignment information, initial UL grant, and assignment of a temporary C-RNTI.
).
With regard to claim 20, Qu teaches: wherein the result of the RACH process comprises a successful execution of the RACH process and a failure to execute the RACH process (see figure 9: paragraphs 137-138).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Mildh et al. (US 2019/0364495), which disclose sending access message associated slice identifier (see figure 13).
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 MARCUS R SMITH whose telephone number is (571)270-1096. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00 AM -5:00 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, Deborah J Reynolds can be reached at (571) 272-0734. 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.
/MARCUS SMITH/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2468