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 Amendment
The examiner has noticed that claims 1, 6, 11, and 16 have been amended. Claims1-3, 5-8, 10-13, 15-18, and 20-22 are currently pending in the present application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see response, filed 06/23/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1, 6, 11, and 16 under 35 USC § 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Abraham, Gan and Hong.
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, 3, 5-6, 8, 10-11, 13, 15, 16, 18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Abraham et al. (US 2019/0200414) in view of Gan et al. (US 20240305956) in further view of Hong (US 2024/0284485).
Regarding claim 1, Abraham teaches a method performed by a session management function (SMF) entity, the method comprising: receiving, from an access and mobility management function (AMF) entity, a first protocol data unit (PDU) session update request message, wherein the first PDU session update request message includes information for requesting deactivation of a PDU session and information on a cause for the deactivation of the PDU session (Paragraphs [0072] describes message from the AMF to the SMF bundles “PDU session deactivation” or requesting deactivation of a PDU session with cause);
transmitting, to the AMF entity, a first PDU session update response message (Paragraph [0074] describes the SMF response message sent back to the AMF identified as acknowledging the deactivation request message);
Abraham doesn’t teach receiving, from the AMF entity, a second PDU session update request message, wherein the second PDU session update request message includes information for requesting activation of the PDU session, and information on the PDU session to be activated; and transmitting, to the AMF entity, a second PDU session update response message including multicast broadcast service (MBS) session information, wherein, in case that an MBS session associated with the PDU session is in an inactive state, the MBS session information indicates the MBS session is in the inactive state, wherein, in case that the MBS session is in an active state, the MBS session information including first information on an identity (ID) of the MBS session in the active state indicates a user equipment (UE) joined the MBS session, and wherein information on the PDU session to be activated is included in a service request associated with the UE in an idle state in which connections of PDU sessions of the UE are deactivated.
However, in analogues art Gan teaches receiving, from the AMF entity, a second PDU session update request message, wherein the second PDU session update request message includes information for requesting activation of the PDU session, and information on the PDU session to be activated (Paragraph [0139] describes a subsequent updateSMcontext request sent from the AMF to the SMF whose input specifies “PDU Session to be re-activated (information requesting activation and identifying which PDU session is to be activated));
In analogues art Hong teaches and transmitting, to the AMF entity, a second PDU session update response message including multicast broadcast service (MBS) session information, wherein, in case that an MBS session associated with the PDU session is in an inactive state, the MBS session information indicates the MBS session is in the inactive state (Paragraphs [0161]-[0165] describes multicast session state (active/inactive) field and that this state field is carried in AMF driven PDU-session related signaling (a PDU session modify command /N2 message) where this filed is set to “inactive”),
Hong teaches wherein, in case that the MBS session is in an active state, the MBS session information including first information on an identity (ID) of the MBS session in the active state indicates a user equipment (UE) joined the MBS session (Paragraphs [0161]-[0165] describes the MBS session ID is the identifier used when a UE requests/ is authorized to join an MBS session, processed through SMF signaling tied to the UE’s PDU session),
Gan teaches and wherein information on the PDU session to be activated is included in a service request associated with the UE in an idle state in which connections of PDU sessions of the UE are deactivated (Paragraphs [0130]; [0133] describes that a UE without an activated PDU-session user plane /NAS connection is in “idle state” (PDU session connections deactivated) and the reactivation of that PDU session is triggered by a service request from the UE which is the AMF learns which PDU session needs to be activated and relays this to the SMF).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Abraham and Gan, the AMF to SMF PDU session deactivation or reactivation update request and response signaling structure, triggered by a service request from an idle UE with the teachings of Hong MBS session active or inactive state and MBS session ID information in association with that same PDU session context to Ensures resources are allocated only when the UE is in the allowed MBS area (Hong, Paragraphs [00124]-[00126]).
Regarding claim 3, Abraham, Gan and Hong, Hong teaches wherein the MBS session information further includes second information on an ID of a unicast quality of service (QoS) flow mapped with an MBS QoS flow in the MBS session (Paragraphs [0128]; [0145]; [0161]-[0165] describes MBS information package includes mapping information that shows which unicast QoS flows correspond to which MBS QoS flows).
Regarding claim 5, Abraham, Gan and Hong, Gan teaches wherein the idle state is based on an access network (AN) release (Paragraphs [0090]; [0140] discloses that the UE transitioning to idle state because of a release initiated by the access network).
Claims 6, 11 and 16 are rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 1 respectively.
Claims 8, 13 and 18 are rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 3 respectively.
Claims 10, 15, and 20 are rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 5 respectively.
Claim 22 is rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 21 respectively.
Claim(s) 2, 7, 12 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Abraham in view of Gan in further view of Hong and Ge et al. (US 2024/0206010).
Regarding claim 2, Abraham, Gan and Hong, don’t teach wherein the service request is associated with an expiration of a timer for the service request.
In analogous art, Ge teaches wherein the service request is associated with an expiration of a timer for the service request (Paragraphs [0628]-[ 0630] describes the timer expiration is associated with the successful completion of service requests, as the AS waits for the timer to expire before determining that UEs have completed their service requests and are ready to receive MBS data).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify Abraham, Gan and Hong to incorporate the teachings of Ge the server obtains session-related status information and uses it as a trigger to start, stop, or delay sending service data over multicast to Reduce packet loss by ensuring terminals are connected (Ge, Paragraphs [0023]-[0027]).
Claims 7, 12 and 17 are rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 2 respectively.
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 MEHERET WOLDEGEBREAL KIDANE whose telephone number is (571)270-3642. The examiner can normally be reached M-F8:30-5.
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, Ricky Ngo can be reached at 571-272-3139. 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.
/M.W.K./Examiner, Art Unit 2464
/KAN YUEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2464
Prosecution Insights