DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Claims 1, 22-24, 26-28, 30-32, and 34-35 have been amended.
Claims 1 and 21-35 are presently pending.
1. Applicant's arguments with respect to the claim(s) have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
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.
Claims 1, 21, 24, 28-29, 32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GODIN et al. (US 20230142879, hereinafter, “GODIN”) in view of TU et al. (WO 2022052875 A1, hereinafter, “TU”).
Claim 1. GODIN teaches: An access mobility and management function (AMF) entity in a mobile communication system, the AMF entity comprising: - See Fig. 2, ¶ [0024], (“Access and Mobility management Function, AMF”)
a transceiver; - See Fig. 2, ¶ [0024], (“transceivers”) and
a controller coupled with the transceiver, and configured to: - See Fig. 7, ¶ [0129], (“controller”)
identify a protocol data unit (PDU) session associated with the first S- NSSAI which is to be transferred to the second S-NSSAI for the second network slice, - See Fig. 6, ¶ [0098], (“AMF detects that PDU session 1 of the user terminal 200 which utilised slice 10 in the source node 206 is to be remapped to slice 11”)
transmit, to a session management function (SMF) entity, a PDU session update request message including the second S-NSSAI, - See Fig. 5, ¶ [0098], (“AMF is configured to send 520 an Update message to SMF 212 indicating “end of slice 10 and try remapping to slice 11””) and
receive, from the SMF entity, a PDU session update response message as a response to the PDU session update request message, - See Fig. 5, ¶ [0102], (“the SMF 212 is configured to trigger towards the user terminal the NAS PDU Session Modification Command “Cause, PCO (PDU Session Address Lifetime value), end slice 10, try alternate slice 11” 530 to invoke SSC mode 3.”)
wherein the PDU session update response message is one of a PDU session modification command message or a PDU session release message - in ¶ [0101], (“AMF considers that slice 10, 12, 14 is still temporarily possible for this user terminal until it receives from SMF(s) notification for the actual release of all PDU sessions established on slice 10, 12, 14”); ¶ [0102], (“the SMF 212 is configured to trigger…the NAS PDU Session Modification Command ”) based on a session and service continuity (SSC) mode for the PDU session - in ¶ [0102], (“the SMF 212 is configured to trigger…the NAS PDU Session Modification Command “Cause, PCO (PDU Session Address Lifetime value), end slice 10, try alternate slice 11” 530 to invoke SSC mode 3.”) and whether the PDU session is retained or re-established, - in ¶ [0103], (“background information that SSC mode 3 corresponds to the network behaviour…inviting the user terminal to as soon as possible re-establish another (new) PDU Session…an optional new “end slice 10, try alternate slice 11” Information Element is used to indicate the targeted slice for the new PDU Session”)
wherein, in case that the SSC mode for the PDU session is an SSC mode 3, the PDU session update response message is the PDU session modification command message, - in ¶ [0102], (“…the NAS PDU Session Modification Command “Cause, PCO (PDU Session Address Lifetime value), end slice 10, try alternate slice 11” 530 to invoke SSC mode 3.”) and
GODIN does not explicitly teach:
receive, from a network entity, a notification message including a first single-network slice selection assistance information (S-NSSAI) for a first network slice which is unavailable and a second S-NSSAI for a second network slice which is used by the AMF entity to replace the first S-NSSAI,
identify that the first S-NSSAI for the first network slice has to be replaced by the second S-NSSAI for the second network slice based on the notification message,
wherein the PDU session update response message includes the second S-NSSAI received from the network entity for replacing the first S-NSSAI which is unavailable or congested.
However, TU teaches:
receive, from a network entity, a notification message - See Fig. 8, ¶ [0098], (“B6): The NSSF returns a response message to the AMF to obtain network slice information. This response message carries information such as the first NSSAI, the second NSSAI...”) including a first single-network slice selection assistance information (S-NSSAI) for a first network slice which is unavailable and a second S-NSSAI for a second network slice - See Fig. 3, 8, ¶ [0097], (“B5): The NSSF discovers that some or all of the S-NSSAIs in the second NSSAI are unavailable in the currently accessed AMF…the NSSF maps the part or all of the S-NSSAIs in the second NSSAI that are unavailable…and replaces the part or all of the S-NSSAIs in the second NSSAI that are unavailable…forming the first NSSAI (Allowed NSSAI2)…¶ [0098] B6): The NSSF returns a response message to the AMF to obtain network slice information. This response message carries information such as the first NSSAI, the second NSSAI”) which is used by the AMF entity to replace the first S-NSSAI, - in ¶ [0104], (“B12): The AMF notifies the SMF that the S-NSSAI of its PDU Session has been updated to the second S-NSSAI”)
identify that the first S-NSSAI for the first network slice has to be replaced by the second S-NSSAI for the second network slice based on the notification message, - in ¶ 0098], (“B6): The NSSF returns a response message to the AMF…This response message carries information such as the first NSSAI, the second NSSAI…¶ [0101], (“B9): AMF determines that the first S-NSSAI corresponding to the activated PDU Session is not in the first NSSAI (Allowed NSSAI2)…¶ [0102] B10): AMF replaces the first S-NSSAI of the PDU Session with the corresponding second S-NSSAI in the first NSSAI…¶ [0103] B11): AMF subsequently uses the second S-NSSAI as the S-NSSAI of the activated PDU Session. ¶ [0104] B12): The AMF notifies the SMF that the S-NSSAI of its PDU Session has been updated to the second S-NSSAI.”)
wherein the PDU session update response message includes the second S-NSSAI – in ¶ [0105], (“SMF subsequently uses the second S-NSSAI as the S-NSSAI of the PDU Session to update other network element functional entities NF.”) received from the network entity for replacing the first S-NSSAI which is unavailable or congested. – in ¶ [0076], (“The NSSF discovers that some or all of the S-NSSAIs…are unavailable…the NSSF maps the part or all of the S-NSSAIs…and replaces the part or all of the S-NSSAIs in the second NSSAI…forming the first NSSAI (Allowed NSSAI2)…¶ [0077] A6): The NSSF returns a response message to the AMF to obtain network slice information. This response message carries information such as the first NSSAI, the second NSSAI, and their mapping relationship.”)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified GODIN with TU to include AMF receives slice unavailability notification and replaces the first S-NSSAI for the first network slice with the second S-NSSAI for the second network slice based on the notification, as taught by TU. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to maintain session continuity when a network slice becomes unavailable, as suggested by TU, when the first S-NSSAI currently corresponding to the terminal does not belong to the first NSSAI currently allowed to be used by the terminal, determining the second S-NSSAI mapped in the first NSSAI; replacing the first S-NSSAI with the second S-NSSAI. - ¶ [0007]
Claim 21. Combination of GODIN and TU teaches The AMF entity of claim 1, - refer to the indicated claim for reference(s).
TU further teaches:
wherein the network entity is one of a network slice network slice selection function (NSSF) entity or a policy control function (PCF) entity. - See Fig. 8, ¶ [0098], (“The NSSF returns a response message to the AMF…carries information such as the first NSSAI, the second NSSAI…”)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified YOUN with TU to include the network entity is a NSSF entity or a PCF entity, as taught by TU. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to maintain session continuity, as suggested by TU, when the first S-NSSAI currently corresponding to the terminal does not belong to the first NSSAI currently allowed to be used by the terminal, replacing the first S-NSSAI with the second S-NSSAI. - ¶ [0007]
Claim 24. GODIN teaches: A session management function (SMF) entity in a mobile communication system, the SMF entity comprising: - See Fig. 2, ¶ [0024], (“Session Management Function, SMF”)
a transceiver; - See Fig. 2, ¶ [0024], (“transceivers”) and
a controller coupled with the transceiver, and configured to: - See Fig. 7, ¶ [0129], (“controller”)
receive, from an access and mobility management (AMF) entity, - See Fig. 5, ¶ [0098], (“AMF is configured to send…””) a protocol data unit (PDU) session update request message including a second single-network slice selection assistance information (S-NSSAI), - See Fig. 5, ¶ [0098], (“AMF is configured to send 520 an Update message to SMF 212 indicating “end of slice 10 and try remapping to slice 11””)
identify a PDU session for a first S-NSSAI associated with a first network slice which is to be transferred to the second S-NSSAI for a second network slice, - See Fig. 6, ¶ [0098], (“AMF detects that PDU session 1 of the user terminal 200 which utilised slice 10 in the source node 206 is to be remapped to slice 11”); ¶ [0043], (“Slices are identified by Single-Network Slice Assistance Information, S-NSSAI”)
transmit, to the AMF entity, a PDU session update response message - See Fig. 5, ¶ [0102], (“the SMF 212 is configured to trigger towards the user terminal the NAS PDU Session Modification Command “Cause, PCO (PDU Session Address Lifetime value), end slice 10, try alternate slice 11” 530 to invoke SSC mode 3.”) as a response to the PDU session update request message, - See Fig. 5, ¶ [0098], (“AMF is configured to send 520 an Update message to SMF 212 indicating “end of slice 10 and try remapping to slice 11””) and determine whether the PDU session is to be retained or to be re-established, - in ¶ [0103], (“background information that SSC mode 3 corresponds to the network behaviour…inviting the user terminal to as soon as possible re-establish another (new) PDU Session…an optional new “end slice 10, try alternate slice 11” Information Element is used to indicate the targeted slice for the new PDU Session”)
wherein the PDU session update response message is one of a PDU session modification command message or a PDU session release message based on a session and service continuity (SSC) mode for the PDU session - in ¶ [0102], (“the SMF 212 is configured to trigger towards the user terminal the NAS PDU Session Modification Command “Cause, PCO (PDU Session Address Lifetime value), end slice 10, try alternate slice 11” 530 to invoke SSC mode 3.”) and whether the PDU session is retained or re-established, - in ¶ [0103], (“background information that SSC mode 3 corresponds to the network behaviour…inviting the user terminal to as soon as possible re-establish another (new) PDU Session…an optional new “end slice 10, try alternate slice 11” Information Element is used to indicate the targeted slice for the new PDU Session”)
wherein, in case that the SSC mode for the PDU session is an SSC mode 3, the PDU session update response message is the PDU session modification command message, - in ¶ [0102], (“the SMF 212 is configured to trigger towards the user terminal the NAS PDU Session Modification Command “Cause, PCO (PDU Session Address Lifetime value), end slice 10, try alternate slice 11” 530 to invoke SSC mode 3.”) and
GODIN does not explicitly teach:
wherein the PDU session update response message includes the second S-NSSAI received from a network entity for replacing the first S-NSSAI which is unavailable or congested.
However, TU teaches:
wherein the PDU session update response message includes the second S-NSSAI – in ¶ [0105], (“SMF subsequently uses the second S-NSSAI as the S-NSSAI of the PDU Session to update other network element functional entities NF.”) received from a network entity for replacing the first S-NSSAI which is unavailable or congested. – in ¶ [0076], (“The NSSF discovers that some or all of the S-NSSAIs…are unavailable in the currently accessed AMF or area…the NSSF maps the part or all of the S-NSSAIs…and replaces the part or all of the S-NSSAIs in the second NSSAI that are unavailable in the currently accessed AMF or area with the mapped S-NSSAIs, forming the first NSSAI (Allowed NSSAI2)…¶ [0077] A6): The NSSF returns a response message to the AMF to obtain network slice information. This response message carries information such as the first NSSAI, the second NSSAI, and their mapping relationship.”)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified GODIN with TU to include received from a network entity for replacing the first S-NSSAI which is unavailable or congested, as taught by TU. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to maintain session continuity when a network slice becomes unavailable, as suggested by TU, when the first S-NSSAI currently corresponding to the terminal does not belong to the first NSSAI currently allowed to be used by the terminal, determining the second S-NSSAI mapped in the first NSSAI; replacing the first S-NSSAI with the second S-NSSAI. - ¶ [0007]
Claim 28 is rejected under the same rationale as Claim 1 since they recite nearly identical limitations.
Claim 29 is rejected under the same rationale as Claim 21 since they recite nearly identical limitations.
Claim 32 is rejected under the same rationale as Claim 24 since they recite nearly identical limitations.
Claims 22, 26, 30, 34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GODIN et al. (US 20230142879, hereinafter, “GODIN”) in view of TU et al. (WO 2022052875 A1, hereinafter, “TU”), and further in view of IANEV et al. (US 20230362766, hereinafter, “IANEV”).
Claim 22. Combination of GODIN and TU teaches The AMF entity of claim 1, - refer to the indicated claim for reference(s).
Combination of GODIN and TU does not explicitly teach:
in case that the PDU session is to be retained, wherein the PDU session modification command message includes a PDU session identifier (ID).
However, IANEV teaches:
in case that the PDU session is to be retained, wherein the PDU session modification command message - in ¶ [0068], (“During the PDU Session Modification procedure, when the SMF 104 sends the PDU Session Modification command to the UE 101 via the AMF 104”) includes a PDU session identifier (ID). - in ¶ [0064], (“N2 message (S-NSSAI-1, original S-NSSAI=S-NSSAI-3, alternative S-NSSAI=S-NSSAI-2, NAS message (PDU Session ID, N1 SM container (PDU Session Modification command (New S-NSSAI = S-NSSAI-1)))) - During the PDU Session Modification procedure for replacing the network slice S-NSSAI-1”)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified GODIN and TU with IANEV to include in case that the PDU session is to be retained, the PDU session modification command message includes a PDU session ID and the second S-NSSAI, as taught by IANEV. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to ensure service continuity, as suggested by IANEV, This allows for improved service continuity by transferring the active PDU Session(s) on the current network slice to an alternative network slice thus maintaining the service continuity, instead releasing the PDU Session(s). - ¶ [0051]
Claim 26, 30, 34 are rejected under the same rationale as Claim 22 since they recite nearly identical limitations.
Claims 23, 27, 31, 35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GODIN et al. (US 20230142879, hereinafter, “GODIN”) in view of TU et al. (WO 2022052875 A1, hereinafter, “TU”), and further in view of Velev et al. (US 20200120589, hereinafter, “Velev”).
Claim 23. Combination of GODIN and TU teaches The AMF entity of claim 1, - refer to the indicated claim for reference(s).
Combination of GODIN and TU does not explicitly teach:
in case that the PDU session is to be re-established, wherein the PDU session update response message further includes information requesting a PDU session re-establishment on the second S-NSSAI.
However, Velev teaches:
in case that the PDU session is to be re-established, - in ¶ [0095], (“the established PDU session may still need to be re-established with another S-NSSAI which is part of the set of stored Allowed S-NSSAIs due to the change in NSI.”) wherein the PDU session update response message further includes information requesting a PDU session re-establishment on the second S-NSSAI. - See Fig. 5, ¶ [0097], (“the first SMF 245 generates and sends an N11 SM Response message to the AMF 135 (see signaling 518). Here, the N11 SM Response message includes N11 information… an N1 SM Information container that contains a PDU Session Release Request message. The PDU Session Release Request message contains…a new set of parameters (e.g., S-NSSAI-b) and an appropriate Cause value…the PDU session can be re-established with the new set of parameters (e.g., new S-NSSAI-b).”); ¶ [0101], (“the SMF 235 indicates that the PDU Session re-establishment should be performed with the new S-NSSAI…the UE 205 re-establishes the PDU Session(s) associated with the old S-NSSAI using the new S-NSSAI”)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified GODIN and TU with Velev to include in case that the PDU session is to be re-established, the PDU session update response message includes the second S-NSSAI and information requesting a PDU session re-establishment, as taught by Velev. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to ensure service continuity, as suggested by Velev, a change of the set of Allowed S-NSSAIs associated with the UE 205 is needed, there are several situations which may occur about the modification of the Set of Network Slice(s) for a UE. - ¶ [0097]
Claim 27, 31, 35 are rejected under the same rationale as Claim 23 since they recite nearly identical limitations.
Claims 25, 33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GODIN et al. (US 20230142879, hereinafter, “GODIN”) in view of TU et al. (WO 2022052875 A1, hereinafter, “TU”), and further in view of KIM et al. (US 20230397058, hereinafter, “KIM”).
Claim 25. Combination of GODIN and TU teaches The SMF entity of claim 24, - refer to the indicated claim for reference(s).
GODIN teaches:
wherein the controller is further configured to: in case that the PDU session is determined to be retained, - See Fig. 5, ¶ [0102], (“the SMF 212 is configured to trigger towards the user terminal the NAS PDU Session Modification Command “Cause, PCO (PDU Session Address Lifetime value), end slice 10, try alternate slice 11” 530 to invoke SSC mode 3.”)
Combination of GODIN and TU does not explicitly teach:
transmit, to a user plane function (UPF) entity associated with the PDU session, a N4 message including the second S- NSSAI.
However, KIM teaches:
transmit, to a user plane function (UPF) entity associated with the PDU session, a N4 message including the second S- NSSAI. – See Fig. 13b, ¶ [0247], (“When the SMF receives an indication from the AMF that network slice remapping is required in step 3, the remapped S-NSSAI may be determined instead of the original S-NSSAI for the corresponding PDU session…¶ [0248] 11. The SMF may create a data transmission tunnel to the NG-RAN by transferring the AN Tunnel Info for N3 tunnel information received in step 3 to the UPF using the N4 Session Establishment procedure.”)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified GODIN and TU with KIM to include transmit a N4 message to a UPF entity associated with the PDU session, as taught by KIM. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to improve session handling, as suggested by KIM, it is possible to increase communication efficiency by continuing to use the PDU session previously used by the terminal through network remapping. - ¶ [0009]
Claim 33 is rejected under the same rationale as Claim 25 since they recite nearly identical limitations.
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 Shima Wasel whose telephone number is (703)756-4725. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 am - 5:00 pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Khaled Kassim can be reached at (571) 270-3770. 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.
/SHIMA WASEL/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2475
/KHALED M KASSIM/supervisory patent examiner, Art Unit 2475
Prosecution Insights