DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
The amendment filed 7/22/2025 has been placed of record in the file.
Claims 67, 79, 86, and 87 have been amended.
Claim 76 has been canceled.
Claims 67-75 and 77-87 are now pending.
The applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 67-75 and 77-87 have been considered but are moot in view of the following new grounds of rejection.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 7/22/2025 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 67, 69-71, 73-75, and 77-87 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2020/0053165), hereinafter referred to as Li, in view of Talebi Fard et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2020/0228936), hereinafter referred to as Talebi.
Li disclosed techniques for a SMF to process a session of a UE. In analogous art, Talebi disclosed techniques for managing PDU sessions that are established upon request from a UE. Both systems are directed toward use of a SMF in managing network communications.
Regarding claim 67, Li discloses a method at a session management function entity, comprising: receiving a third message related to a secondary authentication or authorization of a session of a terminal device from an authentication, authorization, and accounting, AAA, server (paragraph 239, AAA sends PDU session modification request to SMF); and sending a fourth message to the AAA server, wherein the fourth message includes information for indicating that the terminal device is not applicable for re-authentication in the current network as it has moved to a first network (paragraph 243, AAA receives reply, and paragraph 3, when UE accesses DN, DN needs to perform secondary authentication).
Li does not explicitly state wherein the move between the current network and the first network comprises a change of core network type or change of radio access technology, RAT, type. However, managing handover in such a fashion was well known in the art as evidenced by Talebi. Since the inventions encompass the same field of endeavor, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Li by adding the ability that the move between the current network and the first network comprises a change of core network type or change of radio access technology, RAT, type as provided by Talebi (see paragraph 170, request due to handover from EPS). One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the benefit that managing 5G systems in this way would assist in enhancing the features of network slicing in communication systems (see Talebi, paragraph 32).
Regarding claim 69, the combination of Li and Talebi discloses wherein the third message is a Remote Authentication Dial In User Service, RADIUS, Change-of-Authorization, CoA, request or a Diameter Re-Auth-Request, RAR; and wherein the fourth message is a RADIUS CoA response or a Diameter Re-Auth-Answer, RAA (Li, paragraph 239, RAR, and paragraph 244, RAA).
Regarding claim 70, the combination of Li and Talebi discloses determining whether to initiate the secondary authentication or authorization of the session of the terminal device after the terminal device moves from the first network to a second network or from the second network to the first network; and in response to a positive determination, sending a first message to the AAA server to initiate the secondary authentication or authorization of the session of the terminal device (Li, paragraph 217, SMF determines that AAA needs to perform authentication, and paragraph 222, SMF sends message to AAA).
Regarding claim 71, the combination of Li and Talebi discloses wherein determining whether to initiate the secondary authentication or authorization of the session of the terminal device after the terminal device moves from the first network to the second network is based on at least one of subscription data of the terminal device or a local policy of the session management function entity or an indication that the secondary authentication or authorization of the session of the terminal device is pending; or determining to initiate the secondary authentication or authorization of the session of the terminal device after the terminal device moves from the first network to the second network or from the second network to the first network (Li, paragraph 218, SMF determines that AAA needs to perform authentication based on locally prestored policy, subscription information, etc.).
Regarding claim 73, the combination of Li and Talebi discloses receiving a second message including a result of authentication/authorization of the session of the terminal device from the AAA server; when the result indicates successful, maintaining the session of the terminal device; and when the result indicates unsuccessful, initiating a session release procedure for releasing the session of the terminal device (Li, paragraph 181, AAA sends message to SMF including result, and paragraph 185, SMF informs about PDU session, and paragraph 205, SMF releases PDU session).
Regarding claim 74, the combination of Li and Talebi discloses wherein the first message is a Remote Authentication Dial In User Service, RADIUS, Access-Request or a Diameter-EAP-Request, DER; and wherein the second message is a RADIUS Access-Accept or a RADIUS Access-reject or a Diameter-EAP-Answer, DEA (Li, paragraph 175, DER, and paragraph 181, DEA).
Regarding claim 75, the combination of Li and Talebi discloses wherein at least one authentication method of the secondary authentication uses an Extensible Authentication Protocol, EAP; and wherein the first message comprises a report of a change between the first network and the second network (Li, paragraph 179, EAP, and paragraph 217, SMF determines that AAA needs to perform authentication, and paragraph 222, SMF sends message to AAA).
Regarding claim 77, the combination of Li and Talebi discloses wherein the first network is an evolved packet system, EPS, and the second network is a fifth generation system, 5GS; and wherein the AAA server is a data network AAA, DN-AAA, server; or wherein the session of the terminal device is a protocol data unit, PDU, session (Li, paragraph 92, DN and 5G system, and paragraph 217, PDU session).
Regarding claim 78, the combination of Li and Talebi discloses wherein the DN-AAA server is a Remote Authentication Dial In User Service, RADIUS, Authentication server or a Diameter Authentication server (Li, paragraph 222, AAA uses diameter protocol).
Regarding claim 79, Li discloses a method at an authentication, authorization, and accounting, AAA, server, comprising: sending a third message related to a secondary authentication or authorization of a session of a terminal device to the session management function entity (paragraph 239, AAA sends PDU session modification request to SMF); receiving a fourth message from the session management function entity, wherein the fourth message includes information for indicating that the terminal device is not applicable for re-authentication in the current network as it has moved to a first network (paragraph 243, AAA receives reply, and paragraph 3, when UE accesses DN, DN needs to perform secondary authentication); and deciding to maintain the session or initiate a session release procedure for releasing the session of the terminal device based on the fourth message (paragraph 181, AAA sends message to SMF including result, and paragraph 185, SMF informs about PDU session, and paragraph 205, SMF releases PDU session).
Li does not explicitly state wherein the move between the current network and the first network comprises a change of core network type or change of radio access technology, RAT, type. However, managing handover in such a fashion was well known in the art as evidenced by Talebi. Since the inventions encompass the same field of endeavor, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Li by adding the ability that the move between the current network and the first network comprises a change of core network type or change of radio access technology, RAT, type as provided by Talebi (see paragraph 170, request due to handover from EPS). One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the benefit that managing 5G systems in this way would assist in enhancing the features of network slicing in communication systems (see Talebi, paragraph 32).
Regarding claim 80, the combination of Li and Talebi discloses wherein the third message is a Remote Authentication Dial In User Service, RADIUS, Change-of-Authorization, CoA, request or a Diameter Re-Auth-Request, RAR; and wherein the fourth message is a RADIUS CoA response or a Diameter Re-Auth-Answer, RAA (Li, paragraph 239, RAR, and paragraph 244, RAA).
Regarding claim 81, the combination of Li and Talebi discloses receiving a first message from the session management function entity to initiate the secondary authentication and/or authorization of the session of the terminal device; and initiating the secondary authentication or authorization of the session based on the first message, wherein the secondary authentication or authorization of the session of the terminal device is determined to be initiated after the terminal device moves from the first network to a second network or from the second network to the first network (Li, paragraph 217, SMF determines that AAA needs to perform authentication, and paragraph 222, SMF sends message to AAA).
Regarding claim 82, the combination of Li and Talebi discloses wherein the secondary authentication or authorization of the session terminal device is determined to be initiated after the terminal device moves from the first network to the second network based on at least one of subscription data of the terminal device or a local policy of the session management function entity or an indication that the secondary authentication or authorization of the session of the terminal device is pending; or the secondary authentication or authorization of the session of the terminal device is determined to be initiated after the terminal device moves from the first network to the second network or from the second network to the first network (Li, paragraph 218, SMF determines that AAA needs to perform authentication based on locally prestored policy, subscription information, etc.).
Regarding claim 83, the combination of Li and Talebi discloses sending a second message including a result of authentication/authorization of the session of the terminal device to the session management function entity (Li, paragraph 181, AAA sends message to SMF including result).
Regarding claim 84, the combination of Li and Talebi discloses wherein the first message is a Remote Authentication Dial In User Service, RADIUS, Access-Request or a Diameter-EAP-Request, DER; and wherein the second message is a RADIUS Access-Accept or a RADIUS Access-reject or a Diameter-EAP-Answer, DEA (Li, paragraph 175, DER, and paragraph 181, DEA).
Regarding claim 85, the combination of Li and Talebi discloses wherein at least one authentication method of the secondary authentication uses an Extensible Authentication Protocol, EAP; and wherein the first network is an evolved packet system, EPS, and the second network is a fifth generation system, 5GS; or wherein the first message comprises a report of a change between the first network and the second network (Li, paragraph 179, EAP, and paragraph 217, SMF determines that AAA needs to perform authentication, and paragraph 222, SMF sends message to AAA).
Regarding claim 86, Li discloses a session management function entity, comprising: a processor; and a memory coupled to the processor, said memory containing instructions executable by said processor, whereby said session management function entity is operative to: receive a third message related to a secondary authentication or authorization of a session of a terminal device from an authentication, authorization, and accounting, AAA, server (paragraph 239, AAA sends PDU session modification request to SMF); and send a fourth message to the AAA server, wherein the fourth message includes information for indicating that the terminal device is not applicable for re-authentication in the current network as it has moved to a first network (paragraph 243, AAA receives reply, and paragraph 3, when UE accesses DN, DN needs to perform secondary authentication).
Li does not explicitly state wherein the move between the current network and the first network comprises a change of core network type or change of radio access technology, RAT, type. However, managing handover in such a fashion was well known in the art as evidenced by Talebi. Since the inventions encompass the same field of endeavor, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Li by adding the ability that the move between the current network and the first network comprises a change of core network type or change of radio access technology, RAT, type as provided by Talebi (see paragraph 170, request due to handover from EPS). One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the benefit that managing 5G systems in this way would assist in enhancing the features of network slicing in communication systems (see Talebi, paragraph 32).
Regarding claim 87, Li discloses an authentication, authorization, and accounting, AAA, server, comprising: a processor; and a memory coupled to the processor, said memory containing instructions executable by said processor, whereby said AAA server is operation to: send a third message related to a secondary authentication or authorization of a session of a terminal device to the session management function entity (paragraph 239, AAA sends PDU session modification request to SMF); receive a fourth message from the session management function entity, wherein the fourth message includes information for indicating that the terminal device is not applicable for re-authentication in the current network as it has moved to a first network (paragraph 243, AAA receives reply, and paragraph 3, when UE accesses DN, DN needs to perform secondary authentication); and decide to maintain the session or initiate a session release procedure for releasing the session of the terminal device based on the fourth message (paragraph 181, AAA sends message to SMF including result, and paragraph 185, SMF informs about PDU session, and paragraph 205, SMF releases PDU session).
Li does not explicitly state wherein the move between the current network and the first network comprises a change of core network type or change of radio access technology, RAT, type. However, managing handover in such a fashion was well known in the art as evidenced by Talebi. Since the inventions encompass the same field of endeavor, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Li by adding the ability that the move between the current network and the first network comprises a change of core network type or change of radio access technology, RAT, type as provided by Talebi (see paragraph 170, request due to handover from EPS). One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the benefit that managing 5G systems in this way would assist in enhancing the features of network slicing in communication systems (see Talebi, paragraph 32).
Claims 68 and 72 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li in view of Talebi, further in view of Velev et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2020/0162919), hereinafter referred to as Velev.
The combination of Li and Talebi disclosed techniques for a SMF to process a session of a UE. In analogous art, Velev disclosed techniques for managing network resources in a mobile communication network. Both systems are directed toward authentication that allows a UE to access a data network.
Regarding claim 68, the combination of Li and Talebi does not explicitly state setting a flag used to indicate a secondary authentication or authorization of the session of the terminal device cannot be performed. However, utilizing indicators in such a fashion was well known in the art as evidenced by Velev. Since the inventions encompass the same field of endeavor, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Li and Talebi by adding the ability for setting a flag used to indicate a secondary authentication or authorization of the session of the terminal device cannot be performed as provided by Velev (see paragraph 131, value indicates failed authentication). One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the benefit that managing indicators in this way would assist in providing secondary authentications/authorizations for network services (see Velev, paragraph 3).
Regarding claim 72, the combination of Li and Talebi does not explicitly state wherein the indication that the secondary authentication or authorization of the session of the terminal device is pending is a flag. However, utilizing indicators in such a fashion was well known in the art as evidenced by Velev. Since the inventions encompass the same field of endeavor, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Li and Talebi by adding the ability that the indication that the secondary authentication or authorization of the session of the terminal device is pending is a flag as provided by Velev (see paragraph 131, value indicates pending authentication). One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the benefit that managing indicators in this way would assist in providing secondary authentications/authorizations for network services (see Velev, paragraph 3).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Victor Lesniewski whose telephone number is (571)272-2812. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday, 9am to 5pm.
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, Carl Colin can be reached at 571-272-3862. 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.
/Victor Lesniewski/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2493