DETAILED ACTION
Applicant’s response filed on 01/26/2026 has been entered and made of record.
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 .
Claim Status
Claims 1, 12, 22 and 27 are amended.
No new claim is/are added.
Claims 1-30 are pending for examination.
Applicant Argument
Applicant’s response has been fully considered. Below are applicant’s main arguments and examiner’s response to those arguments:
Applicant’s argument: (remark pages 13-15), filed on 01/26/2026, with respect to claim 1, “The Applicant traverses the rejections … Hence, the cited references (Fujishiro, Amherst, and Jain), whether taken individually or in combination, fail to teach or suggest all the limitations of independent claim 1”.
Examiner’s response: Examiner respectfully disagrees. First, in response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, examiner would like to mention that one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
Fujishiro teaches while in an inactive or idle mode, upon a pending PDU session (next active PDU session), UE selects a frequency channel to camp on based on the pending PDU session among two or more PDU sessions associated with a respective frequency channel with consideration of a priority of each frequency channel of multiple frequency channels (Fujishiro: [FIG.10], [FIG.15], [FIG.16], [0066], [0070], [0082], [0058], [0079], [0129]). Amherst teaches predict a next active app among multiple apps on mobile phone based on launched times of each app over app usage history and a current time of day to prefetch for faster access (Amherst: [Title], [Page 277, Col 2], [Page 278, Col 1], [Table 3], [Page 283, Col 2]). Therefore, combination of Fujishiro and Amherst teaches the subject matters as claimed.
Applicant’s arguments (remark pages 13-15), filed on 01/26/2026, with respect to claims 1-30 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground of rejection below which better address the claimed invention as amended.
This Office Action is made Final.
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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-3, 5, 11-14, 16, 22 and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujishiro et al. (US 20240298228 A1), hereinafter “Fujishiro”, in view of Amherst et al. (“Practical Prediction and Prefetch for Faster Access to Applications on Mobile phones”), hereinafter “Amherst”.
Per claim 1, 12 and 27:
Regarding claim 1, Fujishiro teaches ‘An apparatus for wireless communication at a user equipment (UE)’ (Fujishiro: [FIG.1]: “UE” and wireless network); ‘comprising: a memory; and at least one processor’ (Fujishiro: [FIG.2]; [0040]: “The controller 130 includes at least one processor and at least one memory”); ‘coupled to the memory’ (this is implied); ‘based at least in part on information stored in the memory’ (Fujishiro: [0040]: “The memory stores a program to be executed by the processor and information to be used for processing by the processor”);
‘predict, while operating in an inactive mode or an idle mode, a next active protocol data unit (PDU) session of two or more PDU sessions based on next connection setup times for each PDU session’ (Fujishiro: [FIG.16]: “SLICE #3”, “PDU SESSION PENDING” (next active PDU session), “F1”-“F4” (a set of frequency channels), “F2”, “Frequency priority”:1, “BEING USED”, select PDU session with a priority of each frequency channel of a set of frequency channels; [0066]: “The slice #1 is associated with a service type of eMBB, the slice #2 is associated with a service type of URLLC, and the slice #3 is associated with a service type of mMTC”, two or more PDU sessions; [0070]: “slice priority for each network slice”; [0082]: “the UE 100 selects one network slice in descending order of slice priority”; [0058]: “The UE 100 in the RRC idle state or the RRC inactive state while moving performs the cell reselection procedure to move from a current serving cell (a cell #1) to a neighboring cell”; [0079]: “Before starting the slice-specific cell reselection procedure, the UE 100 is assumed to be in the RRC idle state or the RRC inactive state”; [0129]: “The cell reselection procedure is performed with the UE 100 being in the RRC idle state or the RRC inactive state. Here, when the UE 100 is in the RRC inactive state, the UE 100 has a pending protocol data unit (PDU) session”); However, Fujishiro fails to expressly teach predict;
‘a current time of day and a priority of each frequency channel of a set of frequency channels’ (Fujishiro: [FIG.10]: “F1”-“F4” (a set of frequency channels), “FREQUENCY PRIORITY” for each “F1”-“F4”). Fujishiro fails to expressly teach ‘a current time of day’;
‘wherein each PDU session of the two or more PDU sessions is associated with a respective frequency channel, the next connection setup times estimated based on connection setup events occurring over a period’ (Fujishiro: [FIG.16]: “SLICE #3”, “PDU SESSION PENDING” (next active PDU session), “F1”-“F4” (a set of frequency channels), “F2”, “Frequency priority”:1, “BEING USED”, select PDU session with a priority of each frequency channel of a set of frequency channels; [0066]: “The slice #1 is associated with a service type of eMBB, the slice #2 is associated with a service type of URLLC, and the slice #3 is associated with a service type of mMTC”, two or more PDU sessions). However, Fujishiro fails to expressly teach ‘the next connection setup times estimated based on connection setup events occurring over a period’;
‘select a frequency channel of the set of frequency channels to camp on based on the next active PDU session’ (Fujishiro: [FIG.15]: block S5: “HIGHEST RANKED CANDICATE CELL PROVIDES SELECTED SLICE”, block S5a: “CAMP ON CANDIDATE CELL”; [FIG.16]: “SLICE #3”, “PDU SESSION PENDING” (next active PDU session), “F1”-“F4” (set of frequency channels), “F2”: “BEING USED”; select a frequency channel of the set of frequency channels to camp on based on next active PDU session).
However, Amherst in the same field of endeavor teaches predict a next active app among multiple apps on mobile phone based on launched times of each app over app usage history (setup events over a period) and a current time of day to prefetch for faster access (Amherst: [Title]: “Practical Prediction and Prefetch for Faster Access to Applications on Mobile phones”; [Page 277, Col 2]: “e will be used in time interval Δt from the current time … an app e from the app usage history. Given an app usage history [app1, ..., appn] where appj is the jth app used and launched at time tj”; [Page 278, Col 1]: “our prediction model predicts what app is going to be used next and the temporal model predicts when some app will be used”; [Table 3]: “Time of Day”; [Page 283, Col 2]: “location and time of day are the most useful contexts in app usage prediction”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Amherst’s teaching with that of Fujishiro by substituting an app with a PDU session to predict, predict, while operating in an inactive mode or an idle mode, a next active protocol data unit (PDU) session of two or more PDU sessions based on next connection setup times for each PDU session, a current time of day and a priority of each frequency channel of a set of frequency channels, wherein each PDU session of the two or more PDU sessions is associated with a respective frequency channel, the next connection setup times estimated based on connection setup events occurring over a period in order to take pre-action for faster access to PDU session (Amherst: [Title]: “Practical Prediction and Prefetch for Faster Access”).
Regarding claim 12, claim 12 recites the method implemented by the apparatus of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 27, claim 27 recites the memory and the method implemented by the apparatus of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above).
Per claim 2 and 13:
Regarding claim 2, combination of Fujishiro and Amherst teaches the apparatus of claim 1 (discussed above).
Fujishiro teaches ‘switch to the frequency channel while operating in the inactive mode or the idle mode when a current frequency channel is different than the frequency channel’ (Fujishiro: [0058]: “The UE 100 in the RRC idle state or the RRC inactive state while moving performs the cell reselection procedure to move from a current serving cell (a cell #1) to a neighboring cell … when the frequency (carrier frequency) is different between the current serving cell and the neighboring cell”).
Regarding claim 13, claim 13 recites the method implemented by the apparatus of claim 2 (see rejection of claim 2 above).
Per claim 3 and 14:
Regarding claim 3, combination of Fujishiro and Amherst teaches the apparatus of claim 1 (discussed above).
Fujishiro teaches ‘receive network slice information indicating the priority of each frequency channel of the set of frequency channels associated with one or more network slices’ (Fujishiro: [FIG.9]: Network to UE: “SLICE FREQUENCY INFORMATION”; [FIG.10]: “FREQUENCY PRIORITY”, “SLICE #1”, “SLICE #2”, “SLICE#3” (one or more network slices), “F1”, “F2”, “F3”, “F4” (a set of frequency channel));
‘wherein each PDU session of the two or more PDU sessions is associated with a respective network slice and a respective frequency channel based on the network slice information’ (Fujishiro: [FIG.16]: “SLICE#3”, “PDU SESSION PENDING”, “F2” (a respective frequency channel); [0066]: “The slice #1 is associated with a service type of eMBB, the slice #2 is associated with a service type of URLLC, and the slice #3 is associated with a service type of mMTC”).
Regarding claim 14, claim 14 recites the method implemented by the apparatus of claim 3 (see rejection of claim 3 above).
Per claim 5 and 16:
Regarding claim 5, combination of Fujishiro and Amherst teaches the apparatus of claim 1 (discussed above).
Fujishiro teaches ‘after performing a cell change’ (Fujishiro: [0058]: “The UE 100 in the RRC idle state or the RRC inactive state while moving performs the cell reselection procedure to move from a current serving cell (a cell #1) to a neighboring cell”).
Regarding claim 16, claim 16 recites the method implemented by the apparatus of claim 5 (see rejection of claim 5 above).
Regarding claim 11, combination of Fujishiro and Amherst teaches the apparatus of claim 1 (discussed above).
Fujishiro teaches ‘a transceiver’ (Fujishiro: [FIG.2]: “RECEIVER”, “TRANSMITTER”); ‘coupled to the at least one processor’ (this is implied).
Regarding claim 22, Fujishiro teaches ‘An apparatus for wireless communication at a user equipment (UE)’ (Fujishiro: [FIG.1]: “UE” and wireless network);
‘means for predicting, while operating in an inactive mode or an idle mode, a next active protocol data unit (PDU) session of two or more PDU sessions based on next connection setup times for each PDU session’ (Fujishiro: [FIG.16]: “SLICE #3”, “PDU SESSION PENDING” (next active PDU session), “F1”-“F4” (a set of frequency channels), “F2”, “Frequency priority”:1, “BEING USED”, select PDU session with a priority of each frequency channel of a set of frequency channels; [0066]: “The slice #1 is associated with a service type of eMBB, the slice #2 is associated with a service type of URLLC, and the slice #3 is associated with a service type of mMTC”, two or more PDU sessions; [0070]: “slice priority for each network slice”; [0082]: “the UE 100 selects one network slice in descending order of slice priority”; [0058]: “The UE 100 in the RRC idle state or the RRC inactive state while moving performs the cell reselection procedure to move from a current serving cell (a cell #1) to a neighboring cell”; [0079]: “Before starting the slice-specific cell reselection procedure, the UE 100 is assumed to be in the RRC idle state or the RRC inactive state”; [0129]: “The cell reselection procedure is performed with the UE 100 being in the RRC idle state or the RRC inactive state. Here, when the UE 100 is in the RRC inactive state, the UE 100 has a pending protocol data unit (PDU) session”); However, Fujishiro fails to expressly teach predict;
‘a current time of day and a priority of each frequency channel of a set of frequency channels’ (Fujishiro: [FIG.10]: “F1”-“F4” (a set of frequency channels), “FREQUENCY PRIORITY” for each “F1”-“F4”). Fujishiro fails to expressly teach ‘a current time of day’;
‘wherein each PDU session of the two or more PDU sessions is associated with a respective frequency channel, the next connection setup times estimated based on connection setup events occurring over a period’ (Fujishiro: [FIG.16]: “SLICE #3”, “PDU SESSION PENDING” (next active PDU session), “F1”-“F4” (a set of frequency channels), “F2”, “Frequency priority”:1, “BEING USED”, select PDU session with a priority of each frequency channel of a set of frequency channels; [0066]: “The slice #1 is associated with a service type of eMBB, the slice #2 is associated with a service type of URLLC, and the slice #3 is associated with a service type of mMTC”, two or more PDU sessions). However, Fujishiro fails to expressly teach ‘the next connection setup times estimated based on connection setup events occurring over a period’;
‘means for selecting a frequency channel to camp on based on the next active PDU session’ (Fujishiro: [FIG.15]: block S5: “HIGHEST RANKED CANDICATE CELL PROVIDES SELECTED SLICE”, block S5a: “CAMP ON CANDIDATE CELL”; [FIG.16]: “SLICE #3”, “PDU SESSION PENDING” (next active PDU session), may select a frequency channel to camp on based on next active PDU session);
However, Amherst in the same field of endeavor teaches predict a next active app among multiple apps on mobile phone based on launched times of each app over app usage history (setup events over a period) and prefetch for faster access (Amherst: [Title]: “Practical Prediction and Prefetch for Faster Access to Applications on Mobile phones”; [Page 277, Col 2]: “e will be used in time interval Δt from the current time … an app e from the app usage history. Given an app usage history [app1, ..., appn] where appj is the jth app used and launched at time tj”; [Page 278, Col 1]: “our prediction model predicts what app is going to be used next and the temporal model predicts when some app will be used”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Amherst’s teaching with that of Fujishiro by substituting an app with a PDU session to predict, while operating in an inactive mode or an idle mode, a next active protocol data unit (PDU) session of two or more PDU sessions based on next connection setup times for each PDU session, a current time of day and a priority of each frequency channel of a set of frequency channels, wherein each PDU session of the two or more PDU sessions is associated with a respective frequency channel, the next connection setup times estimated based on connection setup events occurring over a period in order to take pre-action for faster access to PDU session (Amherst: [Title]: “Practical Prediction and Prefetch for Faster Access”).
Claims 4, 6-10, 15, 17-21, 23-26 and 28-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over combination of Fujishiro and Amherst, in view of Jain et al. (US 20200118145 A1), hereinafter “Jain”.
Per claim 4 and 15:
Regarding claim 4, combination of Fujishiro and Amherst teaches the apparatus of claim 1 (discussed above).
Combination of Fujishiro and Amherst teaches ‘identify a first next connection setup time of the next connection setup times, the first next connection setup time associated with a first PDU session of the two or more PDU sessions’ (Fujishiro: [FIG.16]: “SLICE #3”, “PDU SESSION PENDING” (next PDU session); [0066]: “The slice #1 is associated with a service type of eMBB, the slice #2 is associated with a service type of URLLC, and the slice #3 is associated with a service type of mMTC”, may have two or more PDU sessions. Amherst: [Page 277, Col 2]: “e will be used in time interval Δt from the current time … an app e from the app usage history. Given an app usage history [app1, ..., appn] where appj is the jth app used and launched at time tj”; [Page 278, Col 1]: “our prediction model predicts what app is going to be used next and the temporal model predicts when some app will be used”; may identify a next connection setup time associated with a PDU session);
‘identify a second next connection setup time of the next connection setup times, the second next connection setup time associated with a second PDU session of the two or more PDU sessions, the first next connection setup time occurring earlier than the second next connection setup time in a time domain’ (discussed in element above). However, combination of Fujishiro and Amherst fails to expressly teach identify a second next connection setup time associated a second PDU session which occurring after the first next connection setup time.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Amherst’s teaching of predict a next setup time of an app among multiple apps on mobile phone with that of Fujishiro by substituting an app with a PDU session to identify a next connection setup time associated with a PDU session among the two or more PDU sessions in order to take pre-action for faster access to PDU session (Amherst: [Title]: “Practical Prediction and Prefetch for Faster Access”).
Jain in the same field of endeavor teaches predict multiple predicted next states such as first next state based on first historic events and second next state based on second historic events (Jain: [0067]: “Multiple predicted next states 606-610 and their corresponding historical functions”; [0068]: “the first predicted next state, such as the first historical function … the second predicted next state”; [0006]: “the prediction including an event type for the next event and a time of occurrence for the next event”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Jain’s teaching of multiple predicted next states with that of combination of Fujishiro and Amherst to identify a second next connection setup time associated with a second PDU session of the two or more PDU sessions which occurring after the first next connection setup time in order to choose better pre-action by considering other factors such as slice priority (Amherst: [Title]: “Prefetch for Faster Access”. Fujishiro: [0066]: “the slice #2 is associated with a service type of URLLC”; [0070]: “slice priority for each network slice”; [0082]: “the UE 100 selects one network slice in descending order of slice priority”).
Combination of Fujishiro, Amherst and Jain teaches ‘select the second PDU session as the next active PDU session when a difference between the first next connection setup time and the second next connection setup time satisfies a delta threshold, and a first priority of a first network slice associated with the first PDU session is lower than a second priority of a second network slice associated with the second PDU session’. Combination of Fujishiro, Amherst and Jain teaches identify the first next connection setup time and the second next connection setup time in order to consider slice priority while choosing next pre-action (discussed in elements above). Fujishiro teaches UE would choose slice with higher priority (Fujishiro: [0082]: “the UE 100 selects one network slice in descending order of slice priority”), eMBB slice and URLLC slice (Fujishiro: [0066]: “The slice #1 is associated with a service type of eMBB, the slice #2 is associated with a service type of URLLC”). Therefore, it would be better to choose the second PDU session as next active PDU session if it has higher slice priority than the first PDU session and it may occur very soon after the first PDU session in order to avoid switching to the first PDU session without sending any data before being pre-empted by the second PDU session such as URLLC which has higher slice priority.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Jain’s teaching of multiple predicted next states with that of combination of Fujishiro and Amherst in order to choose better pre-action by considering other factors such as slice priority (Amherst: [Title]: “Prefetch for Faster Access”. Fujishiro: [0066]: “the slice #2 is associated with a service type of URLLC”; [0070]: “slice priority for each network slice”; [0082]: “the UE 100 selects one network slice in descending order of slice priority”).
Regarding claim 15, claim 15 recites the method implemented by the apparatus of claim 4 (see rejection of claim 4 above).
Per claim 6, 17 and 28:
Regarding claim 6, combination of Fujishiro and Amherst teaches the apparatus of claim 1 (discussed above).
Combination of Fujishiro and Amherst teaches ‘calculate a first inter-connection setup time for a first PDU session of the two or more PDU sessions based on a subset of the connection setup events, the subset of the connection setup events including a time sequence of each connection setup event associated with the first PDU session over the period’ (Fujishiro: [FIG.16]: “SLICE #3”, “PDU SESSION PENDING”; [0066]: “The slice #1 is associated with a service type of eMBB, the slice #2 is associated with a service type of URLLC, and the slice #3 is associated with a service type of mMTC”, may have two or more PDU sessions. Amherst: [Page 277, Col 2]: “e will be used in time interval Δt from the current time … for an app e from the app usage history. Given an app usage history [app1, ..., appn] where appj is the jth app used and launched at time tj , we can learn the conditional CDF using the distribution of all durations (tj −tj−1)” (inter-connection setup time), predicted time from last PDU session would be Δt + (now - last PDU session setup time); [Page 278, Col 2]: “traces are obtained at a coarse granularity compared to app usage data” (a subset of app usage history); may calculate an inter-connection setup time for an app (PDU Session) from a time sequence of each connection setup event associated an app (PDU session) over a subset of usage history (period));
‘estimate a first next connection setup time for the first PDU session based on the first inter-connection setup time for the first PDU session and a last first PDU session connection setup time’ (Fujishiro: [FIG.16]: “SLICE #3”, “PDU SESSION PENDING”; Amherst: [Page 278, Col 1]: “our prediction model predicts what app is going to be used next and the temporal model predicts when some app will be used”; [Page 277, Col 2]: app “e will be used in time interval Δt from the current time”; may estimate a first next connection setup time for a PDU session based on an inter-connection setup time for the PDU session and a last the PDU session connection setup time);
‘estimate a second next connection setup time for a second PDU session based on a second inter-connection setup time for the second PDU session and a last second PDU session connection setup time’, (discussed in element above). However, combination of Fujishiro and Amherst fails to expressly teach a second next connection setup time for a second PDU session.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Amherst’s teaching of predict a next setup time of an app among multiple apps on mobile phone with that of Fujishiro by substituting an app with a PDU session to identify a next connection setup time of a PDU session among the two or more PDU sessions in order to take pre-action for faster access to PDU session (Amherst: [Title]: “Practical Prediction and Prefetch for Faster Access”).
Jain teaches predict multiple predicted next states such as first next state based on first historic events and second next state based on second historic events (Jain: [0067]: “Multiple predicted next states 606-610 and their corresponding historical functions”; [0068]: “the first predicted next state, such as the first historical function … the second predicted next state”; [0006]: “the prediction including an event type for the next event and a time of occurrence for the next event”).
Combination of Fujishiro, Amherst and Jain teaches ‘select the first PDU session or the second PDU session as the next active PDU session based on the first next connection setup time, the second next connection setup time, and the current time’ (Fujishiro: [0082]: “the UE 100 selects one network slice in descending order of slice priority”. Amherst: [Page 277, Col 2]: “e will be used in time interval Δt from the current time”. Jain: [0067]: “Multiple predicted next states 606-610 and their corresponding historical functions”, may select the first PDU session or the second PDU session as the next active PDU session based on the first next connection setup time, the second next connection setup time, and a current time with consideration of other factors such as the slice priority).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Jain’s teaching of multiple predicted next states with that combination of Fujishiro and Amherst to estimate a second next connection setup time for a second PDU session based on a second inter-connection setup time for the second PDU session and a last second PDU session connection setup time in order to choose better pre-action by considering other factors such as slice priority (Amherst: [Title]: “Prefetch for Faster Access”. Fujishiro: [0066]: “the slice #2 is associated with a service type of URLLC”; [0070]: “slice priority for each network slice”; [0082]: “the UE 100 selects one network slice in descending order of slice priority”).
Regarding claim 17, claim 17 recites the method implemented by the apparatus of claim 6 (see rejection of claim 6 above).
Regarding claim 28, claim 28 recites the memory and the method implemented by the apparatus of claim 6 (see rejection of claim 6 above).
Per claim 7 and 18:
Regarding claim 7, combination of Fujishiro, Amherst and Jain teaches the apparatus of claim 6 (discussed above).
Fujishiro does not expressly teach, but Amherst teaches ‘calculated using a predictive algorithm’ (Amherst: [Abstract]: ‘app prediction algorithm”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Amherst’s teaching with that of Fujishiro in order to take pre-action for fast access by prediction (Amherst: [Title]: “Practical Prediction and Prefetch for Faster Access”).
Regarding claim 18, claim 18 recites the method implemented by the apparatus of claim 7 (see rejection of claim 7 above).
Per claim 8, 19 and 29:
Regarding claim 8, combination of Fujishiro and Amherst teaches the apparatus of claim 1 (discussed above).
Combination of Fujishiro and Amherst teaches ‘determine a first interval’ (Amherst: [Page 278, Col 1]: “time interval”, may determine a interval);
‘calculate a first inter-connection setup time for a first PDU session of the two or more PDU sessions based on a first quantity of the connection setup events associated with the first PDU session and occurring during the first interval’ (Fujishiro: [FIG.16]: “SLICE #3”, “PDU SESSION PENDING”; [0066]: “The slice #1 is associated with a service type of eMBB, the slice #2 is associated with a service type of URLLC, and the slice #3 is associated with a service type of mMTC”, may have two or more PDU sessions. Amherst: [Page 278, Col 2]: “Count of target app in user’s history” (quantity of connection setup events); [Page 277, Col 2]: “e will be used in time interval Δt from the current time … for an app e from the app usage history. Given an app usage history [app1, ..., appn] where appj is the jth app used and launched at time tj , we can learn the conditional CDF using the distribution of all durations (tj −tj−1)”, may calculate a first inter-connection setup time for a first PDU session of the two or more PDU sessions based on a first quantity of the connection setup events associated with the first PDU session and occurring during the first interval);
‘estimate a first next connection setup time for the first PDU session based on the first inter-connection setup time and a last first PDU session connection setup time’ (Fujishiro: [FIG.16]: “SLICE #3”, “PDU SESSION PENDING”. Amherst: [Page 278, Col 1]: “our prediction model predicts what app is going to be used next and the temporal model predicts when some app will be used”; [Page 277, Col 2]: app “e will be used in time interval Δt from the current time”; may estimate a first next connection setup time for the first PDU session based on the first inter-connection setup time and a last first PDU session connection setup time);
‘estimate a second next connection setup time for a second PDU session based on a second inter-connection setup time for the second PDU session and a last second PDU session connection setup time’, (discussed in element above). However, combination of Fujishiro and Amherst fails to expressly teach estimate a second next connection setup time for a second PDU session.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Amherst’s teaching of predict a next setup time of an app among multiple apps on mobile phone with that of Fujishiro by substituting an app with a PDU session to identify a next connection setup time of a PDU session among the two or more PDU sessions in order to take pre-action for faster access to PDU session (Amherst: [Title]: “Practical Prediction and Prefetch for Faster Access”).
Jain teaches predict multiple predicted next states such as first next state based on first historic events and second next state based on second historic events (Jain: [0067]: “Multiple predicted next states 606-610 and their corresponding historical functions”; [0068]: “the first predicted next state, such as the first historical function … the second predicted next state”; [0006]: “the prediction including an event type for the next event and a time of occurrence for the next event”).
Combination of Fujishiro, Amherst and Jain teaches ‘select the first PDU session or the second PDU session as the next active PDU session based on the first next connection setup time, the second next connection setup time, and a current time of day’ (Fujishiro: [0082]: “the UE 100 selects one network slice in descending order of slice priority”. Amherst: [Page 277, Col 2]: “e will be used in time interval Δt from the current time”. Jain: [0067]: “Multiple predicted next states 606-610 and their corresponding historical functions”; [Table 3]: “Time of Day”; [Page 283, Col 2]: “location and time of day are the most useful contexts in app usage prediction”; select the first PDU session or the second PDU session as the next active PDU session based on the first next connection setup time, the second next connection setup time, and a current time of day with consideration of other factors such as the slice priority).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Jain’s teaching of multiple predicted next states with that combination of Fujishiro and Amherst to estimate a second next connection setup time for a second PDU session based on a second inter-connection setup time for the second PDU session and a last second PDU session connection setup time in order to choose better pre-action by considering other factors such as slice priority (Amherst: [Title]: “Prefetch for Faster Access”. Fujishiro: [0066]: “the slice #2 is associated with a service type of URLLC”; [0070]: “slice priority for each network slice”; [0082]: “the UE 100 selects one network slice in descending order of slice priority”).
Regarding claim 19, claim 19 recites the method implemented by the apparatus of claim 8 (see rejection of claim 8 above).
Regarding claim 29, claim 29 recites the memory and the method implemented by the apparatus of claim 8 (see rejection of claim 8 above).
Per claim 9 and 20:
Regarding claim 9, combination of Fujishiro, Amherst and Jain teaches the apparatus of claim 8 (discussed above).
Fujishiro does not expressly teach, but Amherst teaches ‘calculated using a predictive algorithm’ (Amherst: [Abstract]: ‘app prediction algorithm”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Amherst’s teaching with that of Fujishiro in order to take pre-action for fast access by prediction (Amherst: [Title]: “Practical Prediction and Prefetch for Faster Access”).
Regarding claim 20, claim 20 recites the method implemented by the apparatus of claim 9 (see rejection of claim 9 above).
Per claim 10, 21 and 30:
Regarding claim 10, combination of Fujishiro and Amherst teaches the apparatus of claim 1 (discussed above).
Combination of Fujishiro and Amherst teaches ‘calculate a first average inter-connection time for a first PDU session of the two or more PDU sessions based on a first quantity of the connection setup events associated with the first PDU session over the period’ (Fujishiro: [FIG.16]: “SLICE #3”, “PDU SESSION PENDING”; [0066]: “The slice #1 is associated with a service type of eMBB, the slice #2 is associated with a service type of URLLC, and the slice #3 is associated with a service type of mMTC”, may have two or more PDU sessions. Amherst: [Page 276, Col 1]: “content to the user that is on average fresh within 3 minutes”; [Page 278, Col 2]: “Count of target app in user’s history” (quantity of connection setup events); [Page 277, Col 2]: “e will be used in time interval Δt from the current time … for an app e from the app usage history. Given an app usage history [app1, ..., appn] where appj is the jth app used and launched at time tj , we can learn the conditional CDF using the distribution of all durations (tj −tj−1)”; may calculate a first average inter-connection time for a first PDU session of the two or more PDU sessions based on a first quantity of the connection setup events associated with the first PDU session over the period);
‘estimate a first next connection setup time for the first PDU session based on the first average inter-connection time and a last first PDU session connection setup time’ (Fujishiro: [FIG.16]: “SLICE #3”, “PDU SESSION PENDING”. Amherst: [Page 278, Col 1]: “our prediction model predicts what app is going to be used next and the temporal model predicts when some app will be used”; [Page 277, Col 2]: app “e will be used in time interval Δt from the current time”; may estimate a first next connection setup time for the first PDU session based on the first average inter-connection time and a last first PDU session connection setup time);
‘estimate a second next connection setup time for a second PDU session based on a second average inter-connection time for the second PDU session and a last second PDU session connection setup time’ (discussed in element above). However, combination of Fujishiro and Amherst fails to expressly teach estimate a second next connection setup time for a second PDU session.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Amherst’s teaching of predict a next setup time of an app among multiple apps on mobile phone with that of Fujishiro by substituting an app with a PDU session to identify a next connection setup time of a PDU session among the two or more PDU sessions in order to take pre-action for faster access to PDU session (Amherst: [Title]: “Practical Prediction and Prefetch for Faster Access”).
Jain teaches predict multiple predicted next states such as first next state based on first historic events and second next state based on second historic events (Jain: [0067]: “Multiple predicted next states 606-610 and their corresponding historical functions”; [0068]: “the first predicted next state, such as the first historical function … the second predicted next state”; [0006]: “the prediction including an event type for the next event and a time of occurrence for the next event”).
Combination of Fujishiro, Amherst and Jain teaches ‘select the first PDU session or the second PDU session as the next active PDU session based on the first next connection setup time, the second next connection setup time, and the current time of day’ (Fujishiro: [0082]: “the UE 100 selects one network slice in descending order of slice priority”. Amherst: [Page 277, Col 2]: “e will be used in time interval Δt from the current time”. Jain: [0067]: “Multiple predicted next states 606-610 and their corresponding historical functions”; [Table 3]: “Time of Day”; [Page 283, Col 2]: “location and time of day are the most useful contexts in app usage prediction”; select the first PDU session or the second PDU session as the next active PDU session based on the first next connection setup time, the second next connection setup time, and a current time of day with consideration of other factors such as the slice priority).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Jain’s teaching of multiple predicted next states with that combination of Fujishiro and Amherst to estimate a second next connection setup time for a second PDU session based on a second average inter-connection time for the second PDU session and a last second PDU session connection setup time in order to choose better pre-action by considering other factors such as slice priority (Amherst: [Title]: “Prefetch for Faster Access”. Fujishiro: [0066]: “the slice #2 is associated with a service type of URLLC”; [0070]: “slice priority for each network slice”; [0082]: “the UE 100 selects one network slice in descending order of slice priority”).
Regarding claim 21, claim 21 recites the method implemented by the apparatus of claim 10 (see rejection of claim 10 above).
Regarding claim 30, claim 30 recites the memory and the method implemented by the apparatus of claim 10 (see rejection of claim 10 above).
Regarding claim 23, combination of Fujishiro and Amherst teaches the apparatus of claim 22 (discussed above).
Combination of Fujishiro and Amherst teaches ‘means for identifying a first next connection setup time of the next connection setup times, the first next connection setup time associated with a first PDU session of the two or more PDU sessions’ ([FIG.16]: “SLICE #3”, “PDU SESSION PENDING” (next PDU session); [0066]: “The slice #1 is associated with a service type of eMBB, the slice #2 is associated with a service type of URLLC, and the slice #3 is associated with a service type of mMTC”, may have two or more PDU sessions. Amherst: [Page 277, Col 2]: “e will be used in time interval Δt from the current time … for an app e from the app usage history. Given an app usage history [app1, ..., appn] where appj is the jth app used and launched at time tj”; may identify a next connection setup time associated with a PDU session);
‘means for identifying a second next connection setup time of the next connection setup times, the second next connection setup time associated with a second PDU session of the two or more PDU sessions, the first next connection setup time occurring earlier than the second next connection setup time in a time domain’ (discussed in element above). However, combination of Fujishiro and Amherst fails to expressly teach identify a second next connection setup time associated a second PDU session which occurring after the first next connection setup time.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Amherst’s teaching of predict a next setup time of an app among multiple apps on mobile phone with that of Fujishiro by substituting an app with a PDU session to identify a next connection setup time associated with a PDU session among the two or more PDU sessions in order to take pre-action for faster access to PDU session (Amherst: [Title]: “Practical Prediction and Prefetch for Faster Access”).
Jain in the same field of endeavor teaches predict multiple predicted next states such as first next state based on first historic events and second next state based on second historic events (Jain: [0067]: “Multiple predicted next states 606-610 and their corresponding historical functions”; [0068]: “the first predicted next state, such as the first historical function … the second predicted next state”; [0006]: “the prediction including an event type for the next event and a time of occurrence for the next event”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Jain’s teaching of multiple predicted next states with that combination of Fujishiro and Amherst to identify a second next connection setup time associated with a second PDU session of the two or more PDU sessions which occurring after the first next connection setup time in order to choose better pre-action by considering other factors such as slice priority (Amherst: [Title]: “Prefetch for Faster Access”. Fujishiro: [0066]: “the slice #2 is associated with a service type of URLLC”; [0070]: “slice priority for each network slice”; [0082]: “the UE 100 selects one network slice in descending order of slice priority”).
Combination of Fujishiro, Amherst and Jain teaches ‘means for selecting the second PDU session as the next active PDU session when a difference between the first next connection setup time and the second next connection setup time satisfies a delta threshold, and a first priority of a first network slice associated with the first PDU session is lower than a second priority of a second network slice associated with the second PDU session’. Combination of Fujishiro, Amherst and Jain teaches identify the first next connection setup time and the second next connection setup time in order to consider slice priority while choosing next pre-action (discussed in elements above). Fujishiro teaches UE would choose slice with higher priority (Fujishiro: [0082]: “the UE 100 selects one network slice in descending order of slice priority”), eMBB slice and URLLC slice (Fujishiro: [0066]: “The slice #1 is associated with a service type of eMBB, the slice #2 is associated with a service type of URLLC”). Therefore, it would be better to choose the second PDU session as next active PDU session if it has higher slice priority than the first PDU session and it may occur very soon after the first PDU session in order to avoid switching to the first PDU session without sending any data before being pre-empted by the second PDU session such as URLLC which has higher slice priority.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Jain’s teaching of multiple predicted next states with that of combination of Fujishiro and Amherst in order to choose better pre-action by considering other factors such as slice priority (Amherst: [Title]: “Prefetch for Faster Access”. Fujishiro: [0066]: “the slice #2 is associated with a service type of URLLC”; [0070]: “slice priority for each network slice”; [0082]: “the UE 100 selects one network slice in descending order of slice priority”).
Regarding claim 24, combination of Fujishiro and Amherst teaches the apparatus of claim 22 (discussed above).
Combination of Fujishiro and Amherst teaches ‘means for calculating a first inter-connection setup time for a first PDU session of the two or more PDU sessions based on a subset of the connection setup events, the subset of the connection setup events including a time sequence of each connection setup event associated with the first PDU session over the period’ (Fujishiro: [FIG.16]: “SLICE #3”, “PDU SESSION PENDING”; [0066]: “The slice #1 is associated with a service type of eMBB, the slice #2 is associated with a service type of URLLC, and the slice #3 is associated with a service type of mMTC”, may have two or more PDU sessions. Amherst: [Page 277, Col 2]: “e will be used in time interval Δt from the current time … for an app e from the app usage history. Given an app usage history [app1, ..., appn] where appj is the jth app used and launched at time tj , we can learn the conditional CDF using the distribution of all durations (tj −tj−1)” (inter-connection setup time), predicted time from last PDU session would be Δt + (now - last PDU session setup time); [Page 278, Col 2]: “traces are obtained at a coarse granularity compared to app usage data” (a subset of app usage history); may calculate an inter-connection setup time for an app (PDU Session) from a time sequence of each connection setup event associated with an app (PDU session) over a subset of usage history (period));
‘means for estimating a first next connection setup time for the first PDU session based on the first inter-connection setup time for the first PDU session and a last first PDU session connection setup time’ (Fujishiro: [FIG.16]: “SLICE #3”, “PDU SESSION PENDING”; Amherst: [Page 278, Col 1]: “our prediction model predicts what app is going to be used next and the temporal model predicts when some app will be used”; [Page 277, Col 2]: app “e will be used in time interval Δt from the current time”; may estimate a next connection setup time for a PDU session based on the inter-connection setup time for the PDU session and a last the PDU session connection setup time);
‘means for estimating a second next connection setup time for a second PDU session based on a second inter-connection setup time for the second PDU session and a last second PDU session connection setup time’ (discussed in element above). However, combination of Fujishiro and fails to expressly teach a second next connection setup time for a second PDU session.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Amherst’s teaching of predict a next setup time of an app among multiple apps on mobile phone with that of Fujishiro by substituting an app with a PDU session to identify a next connection setup time of a PDU session among the two or more PDU sessions in order to take pre-action for faster access to PDU session (Amherst: [Title]: “Practical Prediction and Prefetch for Faster Access”).
Jain in the same field of endeavor teaches predict multiple predicted next states such as first next state based on first historic events and second next state based on second historic events (Jain: [0067]: “Multiple predicted next states 606-610 and their corresponding historical functions”; [0068]: “the first predicted next state, such as the first historical function … the second predicted next state”; [0006]: “the prediction including an event type for the next event and a time of occurrence for the next event”).
Combination of Fujishiro, Amherst and Jain teaches ‘means for selecting the first PDU session or the second PDU session as the next active PDU session based on the first next connection setup time, the second next connection setup time, and the current time’ (Fujishiro: [0082]: “the UE 100 selects one network slice in descending order of slice priority”. Amherst: [Page 277, Col 2]: “e will be used in time interval Δt from the current time”. Jain: [0067]: “Multiple predicted next states 606-610 and their corresponding historical functions”, may select the first PDU session or the second PDU session as the next active PDU session based on the first next connection setup time, the second next connection setup time, and a current time with consideration of other factors such as the slice priority).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Jain’s teaching of multiple predicted next states with that combination of Fujishiro and Amherst to estimate a second next connection setup time for a second PDU session based on a second inter-connection setup time for the second PDU session and a last the second PDU session connection setup time in order to choose better pre-action by considering other factors such as slice priority (Amherst: [Title]: “Prefetch for Faster Access”. Fujishiro: [0066]: “the slice #2 is associated with a service type of URLLC”; [0070]: “slice priority for each network slice”; [0082]: “the UE 100 selects one network slice in descending order of slice priority”).
Regarding claim 25, combination of Fujishiro and Amherst teaches the apparatus of claim 22 (discussed above).
Combination of Fujishiro and Amherst teaches ‘means for determining a first interval’ (Amherst: [Page 278, Col 1]: “time interval”, may determine a interval);
‘means for calculating a first inter-connection setup time for a first PDU session of the two or more PDU sessions based on a first quantity of the connection setup events associated with the first PDU session and occurring during the first interval’ (Fujishiro: [FIG.16]: “SLICE #3”, “PDU SESSION PENDING”; [0066]: “The slice #1 is associated with a service type of eMBB, the slice #2 is associated with a service type of URLLC, and the slice #3 is associated with a service type of mMTC”, may have two or more PDU sessions. Amherst: [Page 278, Col 2]: “Count of target app in user’s history” (quantity of connection setup events); [Page 277, Col 2]: “e will be used in time interval Δt from the current time … for an app e from the app usage history. Given an app usage history [app1, ..., appn] where appj is the jth app used and launched at time tj , we can learn the conditional CDF using the distribution of all durations (tj −tj−1)”, may calculate an inter-connection setup time for a PDU session of the two or more PDU sessions based on a quantity of the connection setup events associated with the PDU session and occurring during an interval);
‘means for estimating a first next connection setup time for the first PDU session based on the first inter-connection setup time and a last first PDU session connection setup time’ (Fujishiro: [FIG.16]: “SLICE #3”, “PDU SESSION PENDING”. Amherst: [Page 278, Col 1]: “our prediction model predicts what app is going to be used next and the temporal model predicts when some app will be used”; [Page 277, Col 2]: app “e will be used in time interval Δt from the current time”; may estimate a next connection setup time for a PDU session based on an inter-connection setup time and a last the PDU session connection setup time);
‘means for estimating a second next connection setup time for a second PDU session based on a second inter-connection setup time for the second PDU session and a last second PDU session connection setup time’ (discussed in element above). However, combination of Fujishiro and Amherst fails to expressly teach estimate a second next connection setup time for a second PDU session.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Amherst’s teaching of predict a next setup time of an app among multiple apps on mobile phone with that of Fujishiro by substituting an app with a PDU session to identify a next connection setup time of a PDU session among the two or more PDU sessions in order to take pre-action for faster access to PDU session (Amherst: [Title]: “Practical Prediction and Prefetch for Faster Access”).
Jain teaches predict multiple predicted next states such as first next state based on first historic events and second next state based on second historic events (Jain: [0067]: “Multiple predicted next states 606-610 and their corresponding historical functions”; [0068]: “the first predicted next state, such as the first historical function … the second predicted next state”; [0006]: “the prediction including an event type for the next event and a time of occurrence for the next event”).
Combination of Fujishiro, Amherst and Jain teaches ‘means for selecting the first PDU session or the second PDU session as the next active PDU session based on the first next connection setup time, the second next connection setup time, and the current time of day’ (Fujishiro: [0082]: “the UE 100 selects one network slice in descending order of slice priority”. Amherst: [Page 277, Col 2]: “e will be used in time interval Δt from the current time”. Jain: [0067]: “Multiple predicted next states 606-610 and their corresponding historical functions”; [Table 3]: “Time of Day”; [Page 283, Col 2]: “location and time of day are the most useful contexts in app usage prediction”; select the first PDU session or the second PDU session as the next active PDU session based on the first next connection setup time, the second next connection setup time, and a current time of day with consideration of other factors such as the slice priority).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Jain’s teaching of multiple predicted next states with that combination of Fujishiro and Amherst to estimate a second next connection setup time for a second PDU session based on a second inter-connection setup time for the second PDU session and a last second PDU session connection setup time in order to choose better pre-action by considering other factors such as slice priority (Amherst: [Title]: “Prefetch for Faster Access”. Fujishiro: [0066]: “the slice #2 is associated with a service type of URLLC”; [0070]: “slice priority for each network slice”; [0082]: “the UE 100 selects one network slice in descending order of slice priority”).
Regarding claim 26, combination of Fujishiro and Amherst teaches the apparatus of claim 22 (discussed above).
Combination of Fujishiro and Amherst teaches ‘means for calculating a first average inter-connection time for a first PDU session of the two or more PDU sessions based on a first quantity of the connection setup events associated with the first PDU session over the period’ (Fujishiro: [FIG.16]: “SLICE #3”, “PDU SESSION PENDING”; [0066]: “The slice #1 is associated with a service type of eMBB, the slice #2 is associated with a service type of URLLC, and the slice #3 is associated with a service type of mMTC”, may have two or more PDU sessions. Amherst: [Page 276, Col 1]: “content to the user that is on average fresh within 3 minutes”; [Page 278, Col 2]: “Count of target app in user’s history” (quantity of connection setup events); [Page 277, Col 2]: “e will be used in time interval Δt from the current time … for an app e from the app usage history. Given an app usage history [app1, ..., appn] where appj is the jth app used and launched at time tj , we can learn the conditional CDF using the distribution of all durations (tj −tj−1)”; may calculate a first average inter-connection time for a first PDU session of the two or more PDU sessions based on a first quantity of the connection setup events associated with the first PDU session over the period);
‘means for estimating a first next connection setup time for the first PDU session based on the first average inter-connection time and a last first PDU session connection setup time’ (Fujishiro: [FIG.16]: “SLICE #3”, “PDU SESSION PENDING”. Amherst: [Page 278, Col 1]: “our prediction model predicts what app is going to be used next and the temporal model predicts when some app will be used”; [Page 277, Col 2]: app “e will be used in time interval Δt from the current time”; may estimate a first next connection setup time for the first PDU session based on the first average inter-connection time and a last first PDU session connection setup time);
‘means for estimating a second next connection setup time for a second PDU session based on a second average inter-connection time for the second PDU session and a last second PDU session connection setup time’ (discussed in element above). However, combination of Fujishiro and Amherst fails to expressly teach estimate a second next connection setup time for a second PDU session.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Amherst’s teaching of predict a next setup time of an app among multiple apps on mobile phone with that of Fujishiro by substituting an app with a PDU session to identify a next connection setup time of a PDU session among the two or more PDU sessions in order to take pre-action for faster access to PDU session (Amherst: [Title]: “Practical Prediction and Prefetch for Faster Access”).
Jain teaches predict multiple predicted next states such as first next state based on first historic events and second next state based on second historic events (Jain: [0067]: “Multiple predicted next states 606-610 and their corresponding historical functions”; [0068]: “the first predicted next state, such as the first historical function … the second predicted next state”; [0006]: “the prediction including an event type for the next event and a time of occurrence for the next event”).
Combination of Fujishiro, Amherst and Jain teaches ‘means for select the first PDU session or the second PDU session as the next active PDU session based on the first next connection setup time, the second next connection setup time, and the current time of day’ (Fujishiro: [0082]: “the UE 100 selects one network slice in descending order of slice priority”. Amherst: [Page 277, Col 2]: “e will be used in time interval Δt from the current time”. Jain: [0067]: “Multiple predicted next states 606-610 and their corresponding historical functions”; [Table 3]: “Time of Day”; [Page 283, Col 2]: “location and time of day are the most useful contexts in app usage prediction”; select the first PDU session or the second PDU session as the next active PDU session based on the first next connection setup time, the second next connection setup time, and a current time of day with consideration of other factors such as the slice priority).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Jain’s teaching of multiple predicted next states with that combination of Fujishiro and Amherst to estimate a second next connection setup time for a second PDU session based on a second average inter-connection time for the second PDU session and a last second PDU session connection setup time in order to choose better pre-action by considering other factors such as slice priority (Amherst: [Title]: “Prefetch for Faster Access”. Fujishiro: [0066]: “the slice #2 is associated with a service type of URLLC”; [0070]: “slice priority for each network slice”; [0082]: “the UE 100 selects one network slice in descending order of slice priority”).
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 GUOXING FAN whose telephone number is (703)756-1310. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 am - 5:00 pm ET.
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.
/G.F./Examiner, Art Unit 2462
/YEMANE MESFIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2462