DETAILED ACTION
RCE
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 02/12/2026 has been entered.
Response to Remark
This communication is considered fully responsive to the amendment filed on 02/12/26.
Independent claims have been amended.
New claims 19-29 have been added.
Claim 17 has been canceled.
For the amended independent claim 1, the previous 103 rejection over Zhu in view of Salkintzis has been replaced with a new 102 rejection by Salkintzis.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3, 5, 9, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Salkintzis (US 2020/0236727, “Salkintzis”).
Regarding claim 1, Salkintzis discloses a user equipment, UE, configured for controlling packet data unit, PDU, session continuity in a system comprising:
- a gateway device (See 135 Fig.1 and ¶.44, the interface function is a trusted network gateway function or 5G Residential Gateway (5G-RG)) having an established PDU session with a telecommunications network storing a session management context for the gateway device relating to the established PDU session and providing a local network for a plurality of UEs using the established PDU session of the gateway device for data communication with a data network over the telecommunications network, wherein the UE is configured to control the PDU session continuity (See Fig.2, the established PDU sessions of a child PDU session #1 and a child PDU session #2; See 135 Fig.1 and ¶.44, the interface function 135 is a non-3GPP interworking function (“N3IWF”). In another embodiment, the interface function is a trusted network gateway function (“TNGF”) and/or a trusted WLAN interworking function (“TWIF”). In another embodiment, the interface function is a 5G Residential Gateway (“5G-RG”); See ¶.138, the AMF 145 sends an SM message 715 (e.g., Create SM Context Request message) to the selected SMF 146. As depicted, the SM message includes several components, including a SUPI of the UE 205, the PDU Session ID, the S-NSSAI, DNN, the AMF-ID of the AMF, a GUAMI, an indication that the request type is an initial request, the access type, the RAT type, the UE location, and the PDU Session Establishment Request. Like the NAS message 705, the SM message includes the parameter “MA PDU Network-Upgrade Allowed” or equivalent indicator; See ¶.115, PDU session ID; See ¶.124-126 for the session management context; See ¶.152, QoS flow Identifier (QFI) as the context) by transmitting:
- a PDU session establishment request to the telecommunications network, not via the gateway device, to establish a dedicated PDU session of the UE with the telecommunications network, not via the gateway device (See 502 Fig.5A
PNG
media_image1.png
570
886
media_image1.png
Greyscale
; See 705 Fig.7,
PNG
media_image2.png
321
772
media_image2.png
Greyscale
; Examiner’s Note: as shown above and Fig.1, the PDU session can be established not via the interface function 135 Fig.5A and Fig.7, wherein the interface function is a trusted network gateway function or 5G Residential Gateway (5G-RG); See ¶.109, the SM Request includes the PDU Session Establishment Request received from the UE), wherein the UE is configured to include in the PDU session establishment request at least one reference to the session management context of the established PDU session for the gateway device stored in the telecommunications network (See ¶.44, non-3GPP access network connects to the mobile core network via an interface function. In one embodiment, the interface function is a non-3GPP interworking function (“N3IWF”). In another embodiment, the interface function is a trusted network gateway function (“TNGF”) and/or a trusted WLAN interworking function (“TWIF”). In another embodiment, the interface function is a 5G Residential Gateway (“5G-RG”). The interface function provides interworking between a non-3GPP AN and the mobile core network, supporting connectivity via the “N2” and “N3” interfaces. As depicted, both the 3GPP access network and the interface function communicate with the AMF using a “N2” interface and with the UPFs 141, 142 using a “N3” interface; See 905 & 907 Fig.9, IP flow to QoS flow mapping according to ‘QoS rules’ for non-3GPP or 3GPP; See ¶.92, the multi-access QoS rules comprise QoS rules for the first access network and QoS rules for the second access network. …send a session establishment request to the common user plane function anchoring the first and second data paths, the session establishment (SM) request including the multi-access routing rules and an indication that the first and second data paths are for a multi-access data connection; See ¶.109, the SM Request includes the “PDU Session Establishment Request” received from the UE. The SM Request further includes an Access Network Type parameter. Here, this parameter has the value “Access network Type=3GPP” to indicate to the SMF that the PDU Session Establishment Request was received over 3GPP access network (e.g., the 5G RAN 215). Where the PDU Session Establishment Request is received over the non-3GPP access network, then a value “Access network Type=non-3GPP” is to be used; See ¶.120, each QoS flow is associated with a QoS profile sent to the 5G RAN; See 524 Fig.5A, IPsec child SA(s) established between UE and interface function, 5G-RG; See further ¶.99-100 for SM establishment request includes at least one reference).
Regarding claim 3, Salkintzis discloses “the UE is configured to determine availability of the local network and to transmit the PDU session establishment request when the local network is unavailable and an access request to the gateway device when the local network is available, wherein the UE is configured to include in the access request at least one reference to a session management context of a dedicated PDU session of the UE in the telecommunications network that is not established via the gateway device, to nest at least one dataflow of the dedicated PDU session of the UE into the session management context of the established PDU context of the gateway device. (See ¶.74, when one access becomes unavailable, the multi-access PDU session simply uses the other access. At a later time, a second access may again become available and the multi-access PDU session may operate using multiple data paths (e.g., over multiple access networks). As another example, if one access network fails to meet a QoS requirement for the multi-access PDU session, then the multi-access PDU session may operate using only one access network until the second access network meets QoS requirements (e.g., until network conditions improve or QoS requirements change); See 905 & 907 Fig.9, IP flow to QoS flow mapping according to ‘QoS rules’ for non-3GPP or 3GPP; See ¶.92, the multi-access QoS rules comprise QoS rules for the first access network and QoS rules for the second access network. …send a session establishment request to the common user plane function anchoring the first and second data paths, the session establishment request including the multi-access routing rules and an indication that the first and second data paths are for a multi-access data connection; See ¶.120, each QoS flow is associated with a QoS profile sent to the 5G RAN; See 524 Fig.5A, IPsec child SA(s) established between UE and interface function, 5G-RG; See further ¶.99-100 and ¶.109 for SM establishment request includes at least one reference).”
Regarding claim 5, Salkintzis discloses “the UE is configured to include a data network name, DNN, in the PDU session establishment request referring to a virtual network associated with the established PDU Session of the gateway device (See ¶.108, the NAS message sent by the UE 205 may also include other information, such as the requested DNN (Data Network Name), the requested slice type, etc.).”
Regarding claim 9, it is a session management system claim corresponding to the method claim 1 and is therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of the claim.
Regarding claim 19, it is a user equipment claim corresponding to the claim 1, except the limitations in the following and is therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of the claim.
- an access request to the gateway device (Salkintzis, See 135 Fig.1 and ¶.44, the interface function is a trusted network gateway function or 5G Residential Gateway (5G-RG)), wherein the UE is configured to include in the access request at least one reference to a session management context of a dedicated PDU session of the UE in the telecommunications network that is not via the gateway device to nest at least one dataflow of the dedicated PDU session of the UE that is not via the gateway device into the session management context of the established PDU session of the gateway device (Salkintzis, See 135, 502 & 504 Fig.5A, Figs.6-8; See 903 Fig.9 for Multi-Access routing rules; See 1010 & 1015 Fig.10 for sending a request to the access management function to establish a data path for each access network; See 1110 Fig.11, a request includes a first indication requesting an access data connection).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being unpatentable by Zhu et al. (US 2021/0345161, “Zhu”).
Regarding claim 15, Zhu discloses a gateway device configured to provide a local network for a plurality of UEs and to provide an established PDU session of the gateway device with a telecommunications network for data communication with a data network over the telecommunications network, wherein the gateway device (See Fig.11A, 5G-RG as a gateway) is configured to:
- transmit a reference to a session management context stored in the telecommunications network associated with the established PDU session of the gateway device to at least one of the plurality of UEs over the local network (See 312 & 314 Fig.11B, wherein 5G-RG initiates PDU session modification procedure for the first session; See ¶.22, the first session may be updated in a plurality of manners, so that user plane data transmitted in the first session meets the QoS requirement; See ¶.330, user plane data transmitted through each IPsec tunnel established between the 5G capable UE and the second network is transmitted by using a QoS flow in the first network. As shown in FIG. 12, the 5G capable UE has QoS flows 11 to 17, that is, seven QoS flow services (the QoS flow is an aggregation of services having same QoS); ¶.203, the service descriptor may be a quality of service flow identifier (QFI) or a 5G QoS identifier (5QI), and is used to identify user plane data transmitted by using QoS. 6. The service descriptor may be a differentiated services code point (DSCP) identifier that is another identifier for identifying QoS; See ¶.213, the information about the first terminal in this embodiment of this application may be any information that can be used to identify the first terminal or a session of the first terminal. The information about the first terminal may be the identifier of the first terminal, an IP address of the first terminal, or a session identifier of the first terminal. For example, the first terminal is used as a residential gateway (RG); See further ¶.236-237 for QoS flow ID).
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 of this title, 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 2, 4, 10, 11, 13, 14, 22-27, and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Salkintzis in view of Zhu et al. (US 2021/0345161, “Zhu”).
Regarding claim 2, Salkintzis discloses “the UE is configured to include an address, e.g. an IP address in the PDU session establishment request to the telecommunications network (Salkintzis, See ¶.53, the two child PDU sessions are linked in the UE in the “virtual interface” layer 203 which exposes a single IP interface to upper layers (e.g., the IP layer 201). Accordingly, the two child PDU sessions share the same IP address),” but does not explicitly disclose what Zhu discloses “allocated by the gateway (See ¶.199, a local IP address allocated by the first terminal; ¶.290, the 5G-RG allocates a local IP address to the 5G capable UE and then send a PDU session establishment request to the network).”
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to apply the method of “the UE is configured to include an address, e.g. an IP address in the PDU session establishment request to the telecommunications network” as taught by Zhu into the system of Salkintzis, so that it provides for a 5G capable UE to establish a connection to an IWF network element by using the local IP address (Zhu, See ¶.291).
Regarding claim 4, Salkintzis does not explicitly disclose what Zhu discloses “the UE is configured to receive the at least one reference to the session management context in a message from the gateway device during connection establishment with the gateway device or during address allocation by the gateway device, wherein the message is, for example, an Association Response message, an ICMPv6 Router Advertisement message, a DCHP Offer message or a DHCP Ack message (Zhu, See 512 Fig.15B, UE receives a response message from 5G-RG after that receiving ‘PDU session establishment, modification, delete procedure for the first session’ from UPF; See further ¶.354-356).” Therefore, this claim is rejected with the similar reasons and motivation set forth in the rejection of claim 2.
Regarding claim 10, Salkintzis does not explicitly disclose what Zhu discloses “the session management system is configured to receive an address, allocated by the gateway device to the UE, from at least one of the UE and the gateway device upon receiving the PDU session establishment request and assign the received address to the UE for the dedicated PDU session (Zhu, See 302 Fig.11A, 5G-RG allocates a local IP address to a UE and then send a PDU session establishment request).” Therefore, this claim is rejected with the similar reasons and motivation set forth in the rejection of claim 2.
Regarding claim 11, Salkintzis does not explicitly disclose what Zhu discloses “the session management system is configured to execute at least one of: performing a PDU session modification procedure to modify the established PDU session for the gateway device during or after establishing the dedicated PDU session (Zhu, See Fig.11A-C, PDU modification; See further Fig.14A-C and Fig.15A-C for modification procedure and QoS flow); adding at least one dedicated forwarding rule in the telecommunications network to route data for the UE to a dataflow of the dedicated PDU session; updating the access network of the telecommunications network (See ¶.101, a first control plane network element and the second control plane network element in this embodiment of this application are mainly responsible for user registration authentication, mobility management, and delivering a data packet forwarding policy, a QoS control policy, and the like to a user plane function (UPF); See ¶.106, a UPF network element is a user plane gateway, and is mainly responsible for packet data packet forwarding, QoS control, charging information statistics, and the like).” Therefore, this claim is rejected with the similar reasons and motivation set forth in the rejection of claim 2.
Regarding claim 13, Salkintzis does not explicitly disclose what Zhu discloses “the telecommunications network comprises a policy control system configured for storing a policy control context of a gateway device and/or a UE (Zhu, See Fig.2 and ¶.104, a policy control function, PCF), wherein the session management system is configured to: interact with the policy control system handling the established PDU session of the gateway device using the at least one reference received from the UE to identify the policy control context of the gateway device; and use a part of the policy context of the gateway device associated with the UE for the dedicated PDU session (Zhu, See Fig.11A-C, Fig.14A-C, and ¶.127; See further ¶.213).” Therefore, this claim is rejected with the similar reasons and motivation set forth in the rejection of claim 2.
Regarding claim 14, Salkintzis and Zhu disclose “the session management system is configured for at least one of: receiving and storing an indication from a gateway device in a PDU session establishment request for the gateway device, the indication indicating that the gateway device is available for assigning addresses to UEs (Zhu, See Fig.11A-C and ¶.287-297 for 5G-RG procedures by receiving information; See further Fig.14A-C and the related paragraphs); requesting an address from the gateway device in response to receiving a PDU session establishment request from a UE and receiving the address from the gateway device; sending an address assigned by the gateway device to a UE in a PDU session establishment accept message to the UE (Zhu, See Fig.11A-C and Fig.14A-C for allocating IP address by 5G-RG; Examiner’s Note: Salkintzis discloses ‘PDU session establishment accept’ message, See 544 Fig.5B).” Therefore, this claim is rejected with the similar reasons and motivation set forth in the rejection of claim 2.
Regarding claim 22, Salkintzis discloses a session management system in a telecommunications network storing a session management context including at least one established PDU session for a gateway device providing a local network for data exchange with a data network over the telecommunications network using the established PDU session, wherein the session management system (See Fig.5A) is configured to:
- a dedicated PDU session of the UE that is not established via the gateway device (Salkintzis, See Fig.5A, the PDU session can be established not via the interface function 135 Fig.5A and Fig.7, wherein the interface function is a trusted network gateway function or 5G Residential Gateway (5G-RG)).
Salkintzis does not explicitly disclose what Zhu discloses,
- receive a PDU session modification request from the gateway device containing a reference to a session management context of a dedicated PDU session of the UE (Zhu, See 411 Fig.14B, 5G-RG initiates a PDU session modification procedure for a first session) and modify the established PDU session of the gateway device by including at least one data flow of the dedicated PDU session in the established PDU session of the gateway device (Zhu, See 409 Fig.14A, complete a remaining modification process for the second session; See 416 Fig.14C, determine a QFI in the downlink user plane data from the second network and transmit the downlink user plane data to the 5G-RG by using the QoS flow indicated by using the QoS on the first network). Therefore, this claim is rejected with the similar reasons and motivation set forth in the rejection of claim 2.
Regarding claim 23, Salkintzis does not explicitly disclose what Zhu discloses “the session management system is configured to execute: releasing the dedicated PDU session of the UE (Zhu, See ¶.126, session release).” Therefore, this claim is rejected with the similar reasons and motivation set forth in the rejection of claim 2.
Regarding claim 24, Salkintzis does not explicitly disclose what Zhu discloses “wherein the telecommunications network comprises a policy control system configured for storing a policy control context of a gateway device and/or a UE (Zhu, See Fig.2 and ¶.104, a policy control function, PCF), wherein the session management system is configured to: interact with the policy control system handling the dedicated PDU session of the UE using the at least one reference received from the gateway device to identify the policy control context of the UE and use the policy context of the UE for the established PDU session of the gateway device (Zhu, See Fig.11A-C, Fig.14A-C, and ¶.127; See further ¶.213).
Regarding claim 25, Salkintzis does not explicitly disclose what Zhu discloses “wherein the session management system is configured for at least one of: receiving and storing an indication from a gateway device in a PDU session establishment request for the gateway device (See 303 Fig.11A), the indication indicating that the gateway device is available for assigning addresses to UEs (See ¶.199, a local IP address allocated by the first terminal, i.e. 5G-RG; See ¶.286, a first terminal is a 5G-RG); requesting an address from the gateway device in response to receiving a PDU session establishment request from a UE and receiving the address from the gateway device; sending an address assigned by the gateway device to a UE in a PDU session establishment accept message to the UE (See 304 & 307 Fig.11A, complete a remaining PDU session establishment process).” Therefore, this claim is rejected with the similar reasons and motivation set forth in the rejection of claim 2.
Regarding claim 26, Salkintzis discloses a gateway device configured to provide a local network for a plurality of UEs and to provide an established PDU session of the gateway device with a telecommunications network for data communication with a data network over the telecommunications network, wherein the gateway device (See Fig.5A and ¶.44) and is configured to:
- receive from a UE connecting to the local network of the gateway device at least one reference to a session management context stored in the telecommunications network associated with a dedicated PDU session of the UE that is not established via the gateway device (Salkintzis, See 135 & 502 Fig.5A).
Salkintzis does not explicitly disclose what Zhu discloses,
- transmit a PDU session modification request including the reference over the telecommunications network to include at least one dataflow of the dedicated PDU session of the UE in the established PDU session of the gateway device (Zhu, See Fig.11B, 5G-RG initiates a PDU session modification procedure to the first session and modification process; See Fig.12, QoS flows; See further ¶.205, ¶.236-237, and ¶.330 for QoS flow ID). Therefore, this claim is rejected with the similar reasons and motivation set forth in the rejection of claim 2.
Regarding claim 27, Salkintzis does not explicitly disclose what Zhu discloses “wherein the gateway device is configured to receive an address of the UE from the telecommunications network and to compare the received address with the address allocated to the UE over the local network (Zhu, See 302 & 303 Fig.11A).”
Regarding claim 29, Salkintzis does not explicitly disclose what Zhu discloses “ the gateway device is configured for at least one of the following: transmitting an indication to a session management system, the indication indicating that the gateway device is available for assigning addresses to UEs; receiving a request from a session management system for an address for a UE and providing the address to the session management system for the UE; allocating an address to a UE in a local network provided by the gateway device, wherein the allocated address corresponds to the address provided to the session management system.
Claims 6 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Salkintzis in view of Liao et al. (US 2021/0360742, “Liao”).
Regarding claim 6, Salkintzis do not explicitly disclose what Liao discloses “the UE is configured to receive an authentication token from the gateway device and to transmit the authentication token with the PDU session establishment request to the telecommunications network (Liao, See Fig.6 and ¶.79, for using 3GPP access via NG-RAN, the exchange of N1 messages between the relay UE and the 5GC via the NG-RAN uses existing NAS security key of the 5G-RG when the relay UE performs registration procedure for 5G-RG. The procedure can follow, for example, 3GPP TS 23.502, clause 4.2.2.2 between the relay UE in the 5G-RG and the AMF/AUSF in the 5GC with the following additions: Step 8-9 may include the AMF selecting the AUSF and indicating the relay UE authentication to the AUSF, wherein the AUSF performs authentication for the remote UE; Step 11 may be updated to include, if the identity of the remote UE is requested, the 5G-RG forwards the identity request to the remote UE by using the protocol based on corresponding L2/L3 transport connection; and/or in Step 22 the AMF may reply the N1 message including the piggybacked registration accept/reject message and accept/rejection indication to the 5G-RG, wherein the 5G-RG forwards the registration accept/reject message to the Remote UE, and wherein the 5G-RG indicates to the N3GPP-AN to disconnect the remote UE if receiving the rejection indication or continue to initiate the PDU session management procedure; See 618 Fig.6 for PDU session establishment; See further ¶.99 for security access implemented by AMF and AUSF; See ¶.167 for EAP, extensible authentication protocol).”
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to apply “the UE being configured to receive an authentication token from the gateway device and to transmit the authentication token with the PDU session establishment request to the telecommunications network” as taught by Liao into the system of Salkintzis, so that it provides a way of establishing PDU session authentication connection (Liao, See ¶.101).”
Regarding claim 12, Salkintzis does not explicitly disclose what Liao discloses “the session management system is configured to receive an authentication token from the UE in the PDU session establishment request and to transmit the authentication token to the gateway device resp. receive the authentication token from the gateway device to authenticate the PDU session establishment request from the UE (See Fig.6 and ¶.79, for using 3GPP access via NG-RAN, the exchange of N1 messages between the relay UE and the 5GC via the NG-RAN uses existing NAS security key of the 5G-RG when the relay UE performs registration procedure for 5G-RG. The procedure can follow, for example, 3GPP TS 23.502, clause 4.2.2.2 between the relay UE in the 5G-RG and the AMF/AUSF in the 5GC with the following additions: Step 8-9 may include the AMF selecting the AUSF and indicating the relay UE authentication to the AUSF, wherein the AUSF performs authentication for the remote UE; Step 11 may be updated to include, if the identity of the remote UE is requested, the 5G-RG forwards the identity request to the remote UE by using the protocol based on corresponding L2/L3 transport connection; and/or in Step 22 the AMF may reply the N1 message including the piggybacked registration accept/reject message and accept/rejection indication to the 5G-RG, wherein the 5G-RG forwards the registration accept/reject message to the Remote UE, and wherein the 5G-RG indicates to the N3GPP-AN to disconnect the remote UE if receiving the rejection indication or continue to initiate the PDU session management procedure; See 618 Fig.6 for PDU session establishment; See further ¶.99 for security access implemented by AMF and AUSF; See ¶.167 for EAP, extensible authentication protocol).”
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to apply “the UE being configured to receive an authentication token from the gateway device and to transmit the authentication token with the PDU session establishment request to the telecommunications network” as taught by Liao into the system of Zhu and Salkintzis, so that it provides a way of establishing PDU session authentication connection (Liao, See ¶.101).”
Claims 7 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Salkintzis in view of Zhang et al. (US 2023/0171320, “Zhang”).
Regarding claim 7, Salkintzis do not explicitly discloses what Zhang discloses “the access request by the UE is configured to include the reference in an Association Request, an ICMPv6 Router Solicitation, a DHCP Discover request or a DHCP Request to the gateway device (Zhang, See ¶.272, when the terminal is the FN-RG, the AGF-CP generates a NAS message based on the first message (for example, any one of the DHCP discovery, the DHCP request message) sent by the FN-RG, and then forwards the NAS message to an AMF. The NAS message may be a PDU session establishment request message).”
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to apply “the access request by the UE being configured to include the reference in an Association Request, an ICMPv6 Router Solicitation, a DHCP Discover request or a DHCP Request to the gateway device” as taught by Zhang into the system of Salkintzis, so that it provides a way of completing an operation related to session establishment on a core network control plane (Zhang, See ¶.272).
Regarding claim 20, it is a claim corresponding to the claim 7 and is therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of the claim.
Claims 8 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Salkintzis and further in view of Jeong et al. (US 2022/0369204, “Jeong”).
Regarding claim 8, Zhu and Salkintzis do not explicitly discloses what Jeong discloses “the UE is configured to include a data network name, DNN, in the access request referring to a 5G virtual network, wherein the DNN is different from the DNN associated with the established PDU session of the gateway device (Jeong, See ¶.85, If the access request relates to a session (DNN) mapped to a specific network slice and if rejection occurs during the control process for the maximum number of sessions of the network slice; See ¶.6, virtualized network function).”
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to apply “the UE being configured to include a data network name, DNN, in the access request referring to a 5G virtual network, wherein the DNN is different from the DNN associated with the established PDU session of the gateway device” as taught by Jeong into the system of Zhu and Salkintzis, so that it provides a way of being unable to re-transmit a session establishment request for the corresponding network slice(s) and the mapped DNN(s) until the timer expires (Jeong, See ¶.85).
Regarding claim 21, it is a claim corresponding to the claim 8 and is therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of the claim.
Claims 16 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhu in view of Zhang (US 2023/0171320, “Zhang”).
Regarding claim 16, Zhu does not explicitly disclose what Zhang discloses “the gateway device is configured to receive an address of the UE from the telecommunications network and to compare the received address with the address allocated to the UE over the local network (Zhang, See ¶.7, the access gateway function network element sends the virtual interface information and the at least one of the session identifier and the address of the terminal to the terminal; See ¶.8, an association relationship is established by the terminal and the access gateway function network element between the virtual interface information and the at least one of the session identifier and the address of the terminal, for distinguishing between different services based on the association relationship. In this way, an end-to-end user plane connection between the terminal and the access gateway function network element is implemented, and end-to-end quality of service is ensured; See ¶.38, the terminal receives an address of the terminal from the access gateway function network element, where the address of the terminal corresponds to the first service information. The first service information may include domain name information and/or virtual interface information).”
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to apply “the gateway device being configured to receive an address of the UE from the telecommunications network and to compare the received address with the address allocated to the UE over the local network” as taught by Zhang into the system of Zhu, so that it provides a way for an association relationship to be established by the terminal and the access gateway function network element (Zhang, See ¶.7).
Regarding claim 18, Zhu does not explicitly disclose what Zhang discloses “the gateway device is configured for at least one of the following: transmitting an indication to a session management system, the indication indicating that the gateway device is available for assigning addresses to UEs; receiving a request from a session management system for an address for a UE and providing the address to the session management system for the UE; allocating an address to a UE in a local network provided by the gateway device, wherein the allocated address corresponds to the address provided to the session management system (Zhang, See ¶.7-8, and ¶.38). Therefore, this claim is rejected with the similar reasons and motivation set forth in the rejection of claim 16.
Claim 28 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Salkintzis in view of Zhu and further in view of Jeong.
Regarding claim 28, Salkintzis and Zhu do not explicitly disclose what Jeong discloses wherein the gateway device is configured to receive a data network name, DNN, in an access request referring to a 5G virtual network, wherein the DNN is different from the DNN associated with the established PDU session of the gateway device, and wherein the gateway device is further configured to establish a further PDU session, different from the already established PDU session, with the telecommunication network and include at least one data flow of the UE in the further PDU session (Jeong, See ¶.85, If the access request relates to a session (DNN) mapped to a specific network slice and if rejection occurs during the control process for the maximum number of sessions of the network slice; See ¶.6, virtualized network function).”
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to apply the method of “receive a data network name, DNN, in an access request referring to a 5G virtual network, wherein the DNN is different from the DNN associated with the established PDU session of the gateway device, and wherein the gateway device is further configured to establish a further PDU session, different from the already established PDU session, with the telecommunication network and include at least one data flow of the UE in the further PDU session” as taught by Jeong into the system of Salkintzis, so that it provides a way of being unable to re-transmit a session establishment request for the corresponding network slice(s) and the mapped DNN(s) until the timer expires (Jeong, See ¶.85).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed have been considered. But, in view of the applicant’s amendment to the claims, examiner has clarified and totally remapped the rejection to the argued claim limitations, using the prior art of record in the current prosecution of the claims. Also, the previous 103 rejection over Zhu in view of Salkintzis has been replaced with a new 102 rejection by Salkintzis for independent claim 1.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jung H Park whose telephone number is 571-272-8565. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 7:00 AM-3:00 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, Derrick Ferris can be reached on 571-272-3123. 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.
/JUNG H PARK/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2411
Prosecution Insights