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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 1/12/2026 is being considered by the examiner.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 1/26/2026 has been entered.
Claims 1 and 11 are amended, claims 3 and 13 are canceled, and no claims added; claims 1, 2, 4-12 and 14-20 remain pending in this application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments filed 1/26/2026 with respect to claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4, 6-7, 10-12, 14, 16-17, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over X. Li et al., "5G-Crosshaul Network Slicing: Enabling Multi-Tenancy in Mobile Transport Networks," in IEEE Communications Magazine, vol. 55, no. 8, pp. 128-137, Aug. 2017, (hereinafter “Li”) in view of US 20210144790 A1 Faccin; Stefano et al, and further in view of US 20190335295 A1 Jamkhedkar; Prashant et al.
Consider Claims 1 and 11.
Li teaches A system for providing Multi-Tenant Location as a Service (MT-LaaS) in a wireless communication network (Li at 130 Fig. 2, “5G-Crosshaul Architecture”: extended 5G-Crosshaul architecture based on the baseline design in [6], supporting several use cases of multi-tenancy), the system comprising:
at least one memory that stores computer executable instructions ( Li at 131 Col. 2 “..infrastructure elements’ (SDN controllers, cloud management systems, network elements, etc.)..”);
and at least one processor that executes the computer executable instructions to cause actions to be performed ( Li at 131 Col. 2 “..infrastructure elements’ (SDN controllers, cloud management systems, network elements, etc.)..”), the actions including:
for each tenant of a plurality of tenants ( Li at 131 Col. 2 “..SDN controllers capabilities to create per tenant networks, allocating software switches within XPUs dedicated to per-tenant traffic, defining security groups and per-tenant addressing, switching and routing within XPUs, and logically separating traffic within XPEs..”):
electronically defining, for each tenant, at least one attribute or policy (Li at 135 Col. 1 “..Different tenants request the provisioning of VIs to the MTA. By means of a template, blueprint, or SLA, each tenant specifies not only the slice characteristics (topology, QoS, etc.) but also some extended attributes such as the level of resiliency desired…”) for a network technology that is used by the MT-LaaS to determine network function
(Li Fig. 1; Li at 135 Col. 2 “..Provisioning of virtual infrastructures under the control and operation of different tenants • Provisioning of tenant-owned network services
as defined by ETSI NFV..”; 132 Col. 2 “..At a lower level of service coordination, the
NFVO in the XCI is responsible for the instantiation of the different NS components, based on the descriptors and metadata pro..”)
electronically defining, for each tenant, at least one attribute or policy for a network core that is used by the MT-LaaS service to provide customized network services (Li Fig. 1; Li at 132 Col. 1 “The tenant request usually specifies the type of VNFs (i.e., the desired virtual application components) in the NS Descriptor, their capabilities and dimensions through one or more VNF Descriptors, and how they must be interconnect ed through a VNF-FG Descriptor”), wherein a first service provider provides the MT-LaaS (Li at 129 Col. 2 “..Each tenant, such as a mobile (virtual) network operator (MNO or MVNO), owns and operates a network slice. . . The M(V)NO tenants can further deploy their own NSs or allow multiple third party tenants (e.g. over-the-top, OTT, service providers) to instantiate their NSs on top of the VI”) and a second service provider provides the network core (Li at 129 Col. 2 “the owner of the physical infrastructure allocates VIs over its substrate network, providing multiple network slices to offer different tenants”);
Thus Li teaches a framework for providing 5G network services for each tenant in a multi-tenant architecture.
Li does not teach a positioning technology that is used to determine geographic position data of one or more User Equipment devices (UEs);
defining at least one attribute or policy for a network core to provide customized location services; and
determining the geographic position data of the one or more UEs utilizing the positioning technology and network core electronically as defined for each tenant; and
transmitting the geographic position data for use by the first service provider providing the MT-LaaS.
However, position location services are a well known example of 5G network services that are contemplated to be provided in a multi-tenant network architecture using network slicing. In the claim language, Stefano teaches
electronically defining, for each tenant, at least one attribute or policy for a positioning technology that is used to determine geographic position data of one or more User Equipment devices (UEs) (Stefano [0077] GST parameters Table 1 PG 13 “Positioning Support” “. . .prediction frequency (e.g. second, minute, hour, threshold-based), and accuracy (e.g. +/−1 m, +/−0.01 m).…”);
electronically defining, for each tenant, at least one attribute or policy for a network core that is used by the MT-LaaS (Stefano [0062] “..Each network slice may be characterized by a set of parameters which may be defined based on a generic network slice template (GST). Some of the parameters in the GST may point explicitly to the definition of parameters and bounds on the service delivered to the end customer..”) to provide customized location services (Stefano [0077] GST parameters Table 1 PG 13 “Positioning Support” “.. Describes if the network slice provides geo-localization methods or supporting methods in terms of availability (e.g. CIF< E-CID, OTDOA, RF Fingerprinting, AECID, hybrid positioning…”); and
determining the geographic position data of the one or more UEs utilizing the positioning technology and network core (Stefano Fig. 1, [0093] “..the AMF may query the NSSF, with the requested NSSAI, the subscribed S-NSSAIs, PLMN ID of the subscription permanent identifier (SUPI), location information, and possibly access technology being used by the UE…”, [0101] “..AMF may query the NSSF with this specific S-NSSAI, location information, PLMN ID of the SUPI to select the network slice instance to serve the UE..”) electronically as defined for each tenant (Stefano [0062] “..Each network slice may be characterized by a set of parameters which may be defined based on a generic network slice template (GST). Some of the parameters in the GST may point explicitly to the definition of parameters and bounds on the service delivered to the end customer. . .”); and
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art, to modify the invention of Li to include the noted teachings of Stefano in order to support efficient techniques for handling network slices in consideration of network slice parameters (Stefano [0062-63]).
The combination of Li and Stefano does not explicitly teach transmitting the geographic position data for use by the first service provider providing the MT-LaaS.
Jamkhedkar is related art and teaches A system for providing Multi-Tenant Location as a Service (MT-LaaS) in a wireless communication network (Figs. 1-6; See e.g. ¶28 “multi-tenant location service 114”), where “the solution provider can on-board service providers. The solution provider can receive service provider information that identifies the new service provider. The solution provider can then create a new data element corresponding to locations of one or more tenants of the new service provider. The solution provider can resolve service provider information including user experiences provided by the new service provider.” (Jamkhedkar ¶18). Further, “The solution provider can receive a user request from a user device, where the user request can indicate a geographical location. The solution provider can use a store search to determine a store reference based on the user request and a user location corresponding to the geographical location. The store reference can indicate one or more tenants that are accessible via a user interface (UI) of the user device. The solution provider can access location data for the user device based on the store reference and a user account associated with the user.” (Jamkhedkar ¶17).
Jamkhedkar teaches transmitting the geographic position data for use by the first service provider providing the MT-LaaS (Fig. 1 ¶23 “locations platform 102 also communicates, via the tenant API 110, with the SDK 126. The SDK 126 (as further discussed with reference to FIG. 2), can obtain the location data from the tenant API, and provide a user experience to the UI 106 of the user device 104.” ¶24 “the white-label functionality of the application 130(2) can be provided by the separate third party tenant server 129.”; See also ¶17 “The location data can indicate a service that is accessible at the user device (e.g., via the UI) and that is associated with a first tenant of the tenants. The solution provider can then provide, based on the location data, an user experience to the to the user device, where the experience environment facilitates access to the service via the UI.”).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art, to modify the combination to include the noted teachings of Jamkhedkar in order to configure GUIs of user applications based on a user experience corresponding the determined service for a given tenant to deliver appropriate user experiences for a user application based on the location data, without needing dedicated mobile applications and/or separate dedicated web pages. Jamkhedkar ¶16.
Further regarding Claim 11, the combination teaches the one or more User Equipment devices (UEs) associated with the tenant (Stefano [0079] “..Network slices may differ for supported features and network optimizations. The operator may deploy multiple network slice instances delivering exactly the same features but for different groups of UEs (e.g., as they deliver a different committed service or because they may be dedicated to a customer)..” where customer is synonymous with “tenant” as claimed; [0080] “..The selection of the set of network slice instances for a UE, where each of the network slice instances can correspond to one or more allowed S-NSSAIs..”).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art, to modify the combination to include the noted teachings of Stefano in order to support efficient techniques for handling network slices in consideration of network slice parameters (Stefano [0062-63]).
Consider Claims 2 and 12.
The combination teaches The system of claim 11, wherein the at least one attribute or policy for the network core specifies that the network core may be provided by a wireless network slice (Li at 128 Col. 2 “..we define a network slice as a self-contained, coherent set of functions along with the infrastructure required to support such functions, offering one or more services for end users…” 129 Col. 2 “..providing multiple network slices to offer different tenants…”).
Consider Claim 4 and 14.
The combination teaches The system of claim 11 wherein the one or more actions further comprise: electronically defining, for each tenant, one or more storage attributes or policies for the geographic position data (Li at 131 Col. 2 “..Finally, the VIM is responsible for controlling and managing the NFVI computing (via computing controllers), storage (via storage controllers), and network resources (via SDN controllers)…”).
Consider Claim 6 and 16.
The combination teaches The system of claim 11 wherein the at least one attribute of the positioning technology is one or more of Multi-Cell Round Trip Time (MC-RTT), Cell-ID, E-CID, DL- TDoA, UL-TDoA, AoA, AoD, A-GPS, Google ELS, Apple HELO, and NextNav (Stefano [0077] GST parameters Table 1 PG 13 “Positioning Support” “.. Describes if the network slice provides geo-localization methods or supporting methods in terms of availability (e.g. CIF< E-CID, OTDOA, RF Fingerprinting, AECID, hybrid positioning…”).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art, to modify the invention of Li to include the noted teachings of Stefano in order to support efficient techniques for handling network slices in consideration of network slice parameters (Stefano [0062-63]).
Consider Claim 7 and 17.
The combination teaches The system of claim 11 wherein the one or more actions additionally comprise:
electronically defining, for each tenant, additional attributes or policies of the MT-LaaS related to one or more of analytics, charging, alarms, key performance indicators, or geographic position data protection and retention (Stefano [0077] GST parameters Table 1 Pg. 12 “performance monitoring” “Performance prediction” ).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art, to modify the invention of Li to include the noted teachings of Stefano in order to support efficient techniques for handling network slices in consideration of network slice parameters (Stefano [0062-63]).
Consider Claim 10 and 20.
The combination teaches The system of claim 11 wherein the one or more actions additionally comprise:
electronically defining an Application Programming Interface (API) for use by the tenant to interact with the MT-LaaS via a Common Application Programming Interface Function (CAPIF) (Li 131 Col. 1 “..and a set of application programming interfaces (APIs) to support the various multi-tenancy services, as shown in Fig. 2, for the control of a VI or NS lifetime, instantiation, modification, and deletion (API classes a and d in the figure), and for the control of the VI in its limited or full-featured form (API classes b and c, respectively).}..”; See also Stefano [0077] GST parameters Table 1 Pg. 12 “Performance prediction”, “..An application programming interface (API) would be provided allowing the NSC to send a request (e.g. KPI prediction for a certain geo-location and a certain time in the future) and receiving the prediction..”).
Claims 5, 8, 15 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li, Stefano and Jamkhedkar, supra, further in view of US 20210360371 A Qiao; Weihua et al.
Consider Claim 5 and 15.
The combination teaches The system of claim 11 (See claim 11 rejection).
The combination does not teach wherein the at least one attribute of the positioning technology includes whether the positioning technology is observable by the UEs.
Qiao teaches wherein the at least one attribute of the positioning technology includes whether the positioning technology is observable by the UEs (Qiao [0393] “..based on the (R)AN positioning capability information of the at least one base station, the UE positioning capability information, the UE service area information, and/or the UE velocity information, the GMLC may determine at least one of: supported capability of positioning service level, supported positioning service area, and/or supported enhanced positioning service area…”).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art, to modify the combination to include the noted teachings of Qiao in order to satisfy different levels of services and requirements for positioning (Qiao [0373]).
Consider Claim 8 and 18.
The combination teaches The system of claim 11 (See claim 11 rejection).
The combination does not teach operating a Gateway Mobile Location Center (GMLC) node of the wireless communication network that supports network slicing;
and operating a Location Management Function (LMF) of the wireless communication network that supports network slicing.
Qiao teaches operating a Gateway Mobile Location Center (GMLC) node of the wireless communication network that supports network slicing; and operating a Location Management Function (LMF) of the wireless communication network that supports network slicing (Qiao [0035] “.. AMF, LMC, LMF, UDM, OAM, GMLC, LCS client, NEF and AF are example network functions which may be implemented either as a network element on a (dedicated) hardware, and/or a network node as depicted FIG. 4, or as a software instance running on a (dedicated) hardware and/or shared hardware, or as a virtualized function instantiated on an appropriate platform…”).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art, to modify the combination to include the noted teachings of Qiao in order to satisfy different levels of services and requirements for positioning (Qiao [0373]).
Claims 9 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li, Stefano and Jamkhedkar, supra, and further in view of US 20230345516 A1 CAI; Zheng et al.
Consider Claim 9 and 19.
The combination teaches The system of claim 11 (see claim 11 rejection).
The combination does not teach wherein the at least one attribute or policy for the network core specifies at least one attribute or policy for disaggregated elements of an Open Radio Access Network and whether at least one disaggregated element is operated by the tenant.
Cai teaches wherein the at least one attribute or policy for the network core specifies at least one attribute or policy for disaggregated elements of an Open Radio Access Network and whether at least one disaggregated element is operated by the tenant (Cai [0004] “..O-RAN includes multiple disaggregated components..” [0006] “..For example, the core network may include one set of policies and the near RT RIC and non-RT RIC in the O-RAN may include distinct sets of policies. Policies may relate to performance parameters, such as, for example latency and throughput. Applications running within the network may request access to the network components and the corresponding policies..”).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art, to modify the combination to include the noted teachings of Cai in order to control policy within the network so that applications are directed to an appropriate network component based on their characteristics and the capabilities of the network components (Cai [0007]).
Pertinent Prior Art(s)
The prior art made of record though not relied upon in the current rejection is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US 20220159605 A1 LI; Hongkun et al.
[0147] “..While each of the foregoing elements are depicted as part of the 5G core network 170, it will be appreciated that any one of these elements may be owned and/or operated by an entity other than the core network operator...”; [0173] “Network slicing is a mechanism that could be used by mobile network operators to support multiple ‘virtual’ networks behind the air interface across the fixed part of the mobile operator's network, both backhaul and core network. This involves ‘slicing’ the network into multiple virtual networks to support different radio access networks (RANs) or different service types running across a single RAN. Network slicing enables the operator to create networks customized to provide optimized solutions for different market scenarios which demands diverse requirements, e.g. in the areas of functionality, performance, and isolation..” thus implying multi-tenancy as network may be provided by a separate entity and employ slicing to meet requirements for various RANs i.e. “tenants” as claimed).
[0111] the core network 106/107/109 may provide call control, billing services, mobile location-based services
[0185] network capabilities (e.g., event monitoring, location service) can be implemented through a set of network function services. Any entity (e.g., NF, UE and SCS/AS) can subscribe to a service by invoking the same operations.
US 20230140034 A1 Bui; Dinh Thai et al.
0022] FIG. 15 is a block diagram of a multi-tenant MEC architecture supporting network and application slicing.
[0038] The wireless network 100 may include a network element or elements 190 that may include core network functionality, and which provides connectivity via a link or links 181 with a further network, such as a telephone network and/or a data communications network (e.g., the Internet). Such core network functionality for 5G may include location management functions (LMF(s)).
US 20190335295 A1 Jamkhedkar; Prashant et al.
[0016] Thus, the solution provider can utilize a unified locations platform that stores information of merchant location data across many locations. The unified locations platform can onboard new tenants as needed by using a location data model. The unified locations platform can process user requests and determine the appropriate tenant location and associated service for each user request, based on the location data. The unified locations platform can configure GUIs of user applications based on a user experience corresponding the determined service for a given tenant. The unified locations platform can thus expose appropriate user experiences for a user application based on the location data, without needing dedicated mobile applications and/or separate dedicated web pages.
[0051] FIG. 5 is a flow diagram illustrating embodiments of operations for on-boarding a new tenant by the locations platform.
[0052] Beginning with 502, the locations platform 102 receives service provider information. The service provider information can be received by the multi-tenant location service 114 from the service provider data center 120. The service provider information can include one or more of service(s) offered by the tenant, a type of tenant, whether the tenant includes a separate check-in service, and/or user experience(s) offered by the tenant, among others.
[0057] At 512, the locations platform 102 associates the optimized tenant location data with one or more services, as well as with corresponding user experiences. In some embodiments, the search service 116 can communicate with the SDK 126 to register any new user experiences for faster access.
[0059] FIG. 6 illustrates an order-ahead user experience. In FIG. 6, the UI 106 displays several locations 606(1)-606(4), as well as the location 604 of the user device 104. The UI 106 can be displayed via an application 130(1). The order-ahead user experience may have been selected based on a user request provided by the user prior to the display shown in FIG. 6. Thus, the user experience shown in FIG. 6 is interactive, and further allows the user to select a specific tenant out of tenants indicated by locations 606(1)-606(4). Upon the further user selection, the locations platform 102 and/or the SDK 126 can reconfigure the user experience to match that of the selected tenant.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to UMAIR AHSAN whose telephone number is (571)272-1323. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 10-5 PM EST or by emailing UMAIR.AHSAN@USPTO.GOV.
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, Alison Slater can be reached on (571) 270-0375. 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.
/UMAIR AHSAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2647
Prosecution Insights