DETAILED ACTION
This Office action is in response to Applicant’s amendment filed on 1/20/2026, Claims 1, 4, 7-8, 14-15 and 17-18 are still pending. This action is made FINAL.
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 Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1, 4, 7, 8, 14, 15, 17 and 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al (US 20200146077 A1, hereinafter Li) in view of Abraham et al (US 20190090123 A1, hereinafter Abraham).
Consider claim 1, Li discloses a method for establishing a session, comprising: sending, by a user equipment (UE), a session establishment request to an access and mobility management function (AMF) entity, wherein the session establishment request is a request for establishing a control plane session, and the session establishment request is in a Non Access Stratum (NAS) message (FIG. 11 is a call flow illustrating one embodiment of a method for non-IP PDU session establishment for NIDD…In step 0, the UE may send a request (i.e. a registration or service request) to establish a new PDU session to AMF through the RAN. UE may provide the following information inserted in the NAS message: Type of PDU session: non-IP, Fig. 11 and paragraphs 99-101);
receiving, by the UE, an NAS message sent by the AMF entity, wherein the NAS message is configured to establish the control plane session between the UE and the AMF entity (In step 13, the AMF notifies the RAN and UE about the completion of session establishment, Fig. 11 and paragraph 146); and,
performing, by the UE, data transmission with the AMF entity through an NAS mobility management message (Specifically, a UE first inserts data into a NAS message, which is sent to the AMF. In the first architecture, AMF is capable of forwarding the data to the appropriate network functions (NEF or UPF), thus the SMF will not be involved, Fig. 9 and paragraph 86);
wherein the NAS mobility management message is configured for transmitting data related to the control plane session between the UE and the AMF entity, and the data comprises data communicated via a direct connection between the AMF entity and a user plane function (UPF) entity based on tunnel information of the AMF entity and tunnel information of the UPF entity such that the data transmission through the NAS mobility management message bypasses a session management function (SMF) entity
(Specifically, a UE first inserts data into a NAS message, which is sent to the AMF. In the first architecture, AMF is capable of forwarding the data to the appropriate network functions (NEF or UPF), thus the SMF will not be involved, Fig. 9 and paragraph 86; FIG. 12 is a call flow illustrating one embodiment of a method for MO non-IP data transfer, both with and without SMF respectively, paragraph 148;Tunnel information between AMF and NEF, between AMF and UPF, or between SMF and NEF for NIDD, paragraph 138).
However, Li does not expressly disclose wherein before the UE sends the session establishment request to the AMF entity, the method comprises:
negotiating, by the UE, with the AMF entity in a registration process; and,
determining, by the UE, that a type of a session to be established is the control plane session when a negotiation result is Control Plane CIoT EPS optimization.
In the same field of endeavor, Abraham discloses wherein before the UE sends the session establishment request to the AMF entity, the method comprises:
negotiating, by the UE, with the AMF entity in a registration process such that the AMF entity determines a type of session for data transmission in a negotiation result that is Control Plane CIoT EPS Optimization (the UE may include an indication in a registration request, such a flag, that indicates that the UE requires CIoT transmission and NIDD, paragraph 78).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine to combine the teachings of Li with the teachings of Abraham in order to indicate that at least a portion of non-IP data is Cellular Internet of Things and select an appropriate AMF.
Consider claim 4, Li discloses a method for establishing a session, comprising:
receiving, by an access and mobility management function (AMF) entity, a session establishment request sent by a user equipment (UE), wherein the session establishment request is a request for establishing a control plane session, and the session establishment request is in a Non Access Stratum (NAS) message; instructing, by the AMF entity, a session management function (SMF) entity to establish the control plane session for the UE (FIG. 11 is a call flow illustrating one embodiment of a method for non-IP PDU session establishment for NIDD…In step 0, the UE may send a request (i.e. a registration or service request) to establish a new PDU session to AMF through the RAN. UE may provide the following information inserted in the NAS message: Type of PDU session: non-IP, Fig. 11 and paragraphs 99-101);
performing, by the AMF entity, data transmission with the UE through an NAS mobility management message (see Fig. 13);
wherein the NAS mobility management message is configured for transmitting data related to the control plane session between the UE and the AMF entity, and the data comprises data communicated via a direct connection between the AMF entity and a user plane function (UPF) entity based on tunnel information of the AMF entity and tunnel information of the UPF entity such that the data transmission through the NAS mobility management message bypasses a session management function (SMF) entity (Specifically, a UE first inserts data into a NAS message, which is sent to the AMF. In the first architecture, AMF is capable of forwarding the data to the appropriate network functions (NEF or UPF), thus the SMF will not be involved, Fig. 9 and paragraph 86; FIG. 12 is a call flow illustrating one embodiment of a method for MO non-IP data transfer, both with and without SMF respectively, paragraph 148;Tunnel information between AMF and NEF, between AMF and UPF, or between SMF and NEF for NIDD, paragraph 138).
However, Li does not expressly disclose wherein the AMF entity determines that a type of a session to be established is the control plane session according to a negotiation result with the UE in a registration process of the UE, wherein the negotiation result is Control Plane CIoT EPS optimization.
In the same field of endeavor, Abraham discloses wherein the AMF entity determines that a type of a session to be established is the control plane session according to a negotiation result with the UE in a registration process of the UE, wherein the negotiation result is Control Plane CIoT EPS optimization (A UE may also set up PDU sessions using NIDD. FIG. 10 illustrates an example of PDU sessions set up for NIDD with UE 1002. In a first example, a UE may indicate at least a portion of data is CIoT. In a second example, the UE may include an indication in a registration request, such a flag, that indicates that the UE requires CIoT transmission and NIDD. A RAN may select an AMF for the NIDD based on the CIoT requirement indicated by the UE, paragraph 78).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine to combine the teachings of Li with the teachings of Abraham in order to indicate that at least a portion of non-IP data is Cellular Internet of Things and select an appropriate AMF.
Consider claim 7, and as applied to claim 4, Abraham discloses further comprising: receiving, by the AMF entity, service quality information of the session instructed by the SMF entity (The SDC-SMF may enable the SMF to manage Quality of Service (QoS) for a small data stream, paragraph 9).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine to combine the teachings of Li with the teachings of Abraham in order to indicate that at least a portion of non-IP data is Cellular Internet of Things and select an appropriate AMF.
Consider claim 8, and as applied to claim 4 above, Li discloses further comprising: performing, by the AMF entity, data transmission with an UPF entity through the tunnel information of the UPF entity or the tunnel information of the AMF entity (Tunnel information between AMF and NEF, between AMF and UPF, or between SMF and NEF for NIDD, Fig. 11 and paragraph 158,see also Fig. 13 and paragraphs 158-160).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the teachings of Li with the teachings of Abraham in order to efficiently establish a PDU session for NIDD in 5G.
Consider claim 14, and as applied to claim 1 above, Li discloses a user equipment for establishing a session, comprising a processor, a memory and a transceiver, wherein the processor is configured to read a program in the memory and perform the method of claim 1 (see Fig. 29 and paragraph 164).
Consider claim 15, and as applied to claim 4 above, Li discloses an access and mobility management function entity for establishing a session, wherein the access and mobility management function entity comprises a processor, a memory and a transceiver, wherein the processor is configured to read a program in the memory and perform the method of claim 4 (see Fig. 34 and paragraph 164).
Consider claim 17, and as applied to claim 1 above, Li discloses a non-transitory computer readable storage medium for establishing a session, comprising program codes that, when running on a computing device, cause the computing device to perform the method of claim 1 (see paragraph 396).
Consider claim 18, and as applied to claim 4 above, Li discloses a
non-transitory computer readable storage medium for establishing a session, comprising program codes that, when running on a computing device, cause the computing device to perform the method of claim 4 (see paragraph 396).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 1/20/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Abraham fails to disclose the negotiation between The UE and the AMF as required in claim 1 (p.9.). Applicant submits that “ in Abraham, the indication in the registration request is used for the RAN selecting the AMF for the NIDD. In fact, the AMF is selected by the RAN based on the CIoT requirement indicated by the UE. That is, once the AMF is selected, the selected AMF must support the CIoT, since the RAN will not select an AMF not supporting CIOT based on the CIoT requirement indicated by the UE. After the AMF supporting CIoT is selected, when the
selected AMF participates the data communication, the selected AMF cannot reject the CIoT requirement. This indicates that the selected AMF does not participate the determination of the type of the session, which is a one-sided indication from the UE” (pp.7-8).
The Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Abraham discloses in paragraph 78 that “the UE may include an indication in a registration request, such a flag, that indicates that the UE requires CIoT transmission and NIDD. A RAN may select an AMF for the NIDD based on the CIoT requirement indicated by the UE.” Thus, the RAN may select an AMF based on the CIoT requirement indicated by the UE, but, the registration of the UE is between the UE and the AMF. The RAN selecting an AMF capable of supporting CIoT does not necessarily mean that the selected AMF must support the CIoT for the UE, as the AMF has to first, accept the registration of the UE and second, accept the session establishment request from the UE at the time the UE wants to send data.
Applicant further submits that “in present application, the UE negotiates with the AMF entity in a registration process, meaning that: the UE does not determine the type of session at the beginning of the registration, and only when a negotiation result is Control Plane CIoT EPS optimization, the UE determines that the type of the session is the control plane session. While in Abraham, the UE includes an indication in a registration request, that is, at the beginning of the registration process, the UE has determined the type of session and then notifies the determination to RAN via the indication in the registration request, so that the RAN can look for the appropriate AMF.” (p. 8).
The Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Applicant’s specification discloses that the UE “negotiate[s] with the access and mobility management function entity to determine the session type to be control plane session in the registration process before sending the session establishment request to the access and mobility management function entity” (e.g. see paragraph 131). Applicant’s specification does not disclose that the UE does not determine the type of session at the beginning of the registration. Furthermore, if the UE wants to negotiate anything, it makes sense for the UE to determine what it wants to negotiate before beginning the negotiation, not after.
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 GERMAN VIANA DI PRISCO whose telephone number is (571)270-1781. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 8:30-5:00 EST.
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, RAFAEL PEREZ-GUTIERREZ can be reached at (571) 272-7915. 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.
/GERMAN VIANA DI PRISCO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2642