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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 05/25/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed 05/25/2026 has been entered.
Claims 2, 4, 9, 11, 16 and 18 have been amended.
Claims 2-21 remain pending in the application.
The Double Patenting rejection has been withdrawn based on the claim amendments.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 2-21 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.
Claims 2, 6-7, 9, 13-14, 16 and 20-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ninglekhu et al. (20220272620) in view of Wong et al. (US 20210392615 A1) and further in view of Liu et al. (EP 4184988 A1) and Talebi et al. (US 20210410059 A1).
Regarding claim 2, Ninglekhu teaches a user equipment (UE) (e.g. UE 102 of Figs. 1 and 14) comprising: a processor (processor 118); and memory (memory 132) storing computer- executable instructions (UE may be provisioned with URSP rules by PCF of the HPLMN, [0199]) that, when executed by the processor, cause the UE to:
register for a first network slice and a second network slice, wherein the second network slice is configured to provide higher priority transport of data packets during protocol data unit (PDU) sessions than the first network slice (Alternatively, the registration request message could be enhanced to allow the UE to indicate to the network that it wants to register with slices A and B and that slice A is higher priority, [0416]).
However, Ninglekhu does not clearly teach when using a priority data transport service (PDTS), send data packets via the second network slice based on a first set of UE route selection policy (URSP) rules, receive user input to deactivate the PDTS; send a PDU session establishment request to deactivate the PDTS, receive, based at least in part on the PDU session establishment request to deactivate the PDTS, a second set of URSP rules to replace the first set of URSP rules, wherein replacement of the first set of URSP rules include deleting the first set of URSP rules; and send data packets via the first network slice based on the second set of URSP rules.
In an analogous art, Wong teaches when using a priority data transport service (PDTS), send data packets via the second network slice based on a first set of UE route selection policy (URSP) rules (certain applications associated with the UE (e.g., App. 1, App. 2) may be grouped to use a particular DNN value (e.g., DNN 1), as previously described. IP traffic associated with DNN1 can be pages with a first paging cause value (e.g., X1)… a value of “0” can be reserved for highest (e.g., emergency) priority paging causes, [0161]), receive user input to deactivate the PDTS (USRPe rules are modified, for instance when the priority of applications changes based on user input, [0163]); send a PDU session establishment request to deactivate the PDTS, receive, based at least in part on the PDU session establishment request to deactivate the PDTS, a second set of URSP rules to replace the first set of URSP rules (If the USRPe rules are modified, for instance when the priority of applications changes based on user input, the PCFe 710 receives new URSPe rules data from the UDR 701, and then forward these new rules to the UE, [0163]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the slice priority of Ninglekhu with the rule of Wong to provide a methods and a system for special handling within the UE in order to provide good user experience as suggested, Wong [0016].
However, Ninglekhu and Wong do not clearly teach wherein replacement of the first set of URSP rules include deleting the first set of URSP rules and send data packets via the first network slice based on the second set of URSP rules.
In an analogous art, Liu teaches wherein replacement of the first set of URSP rules include deleting the first set of URSP rules (The terminal device deletes, based on the URSP deletion instruction, page 12, line 52), and send data packets via the first network slice based on second set of URSP rules (If the URSP list currently stored in the terminal device is Table 1 and the URSP carried in the URSP delivery instruction received by the terminal device is a URSP-C, the terminal device stores the URSP-C in the local URSP list (namely, Table 1), to form a URSP list shown in Table 2. Then, in a process of running an application C, the terminal device may activate a PDU session with a network slice of the application C based on the URSP-C in the list, to use the network slice to communicate with the application server C, page 9, lines 49-54).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the slice priority of Ninglekhu and Wong with the rule of Liu to provide a methods and a system to dynamically adjust a range of application accounts that use the network slice of the application, to resolve a problem of waste of network slice resources to some extent as suggested, Liu page 1, lines 48-50.
However, Ninglekhu, Wong and Liu do not clearly teach wherein when the UE switches from not using the PDTS to using the PDTS, the UE deletes the second set of URSP rules and receives the first set of URSP rules while keeping the PDU sessions active and maintaining connection to the PDU sessions.
In an analogous art, Talebi teaches wherein when the UE switches from not using the PDTS to using the PDTS (UE in CM IDLE state may initiate a service request procedure in order to send uplink signaling messages, user data, to request MPS priority treatment, to request emergency services fallback, or as a response to a network paging request. After receiving the service request message, the AMF may perform authentication. After the establishment of the signaling connection to an AMF, the UE or network may send signaling messages, e.g., PDU session establishment from the UE to a SMF, via the AMF. The service request procedure may be employed by a UE in CM-CONNECTED to request invocation or activation of MPS priority treatment for one or more PDU sessions of the UE, [0359], Fig. 19), the UE deletes the second set of URSP rules and receives the first set of URSP rules (AMF in response to receiving the MPS indication may determine that network does not support MPS or MPS for DTS. The AMF may trigger the UCU procedure and transmit or update the URSP for the UE, [0362]; when the UE receives the URSP or configuration parameters for MPS (or MPS for DTS), the UE may send a second NAS message. The UE may employ the configuration parameters or the URSP to determine one or more elements of the second NAS message. The second NAS message may be a PDU session establishment/modification request message, [0363]) while keeping the PDU sessions active and maintaining connection to the PDU sessions (The PDU Session Establishment Request may comprise a PDU session ID, Requested PDU Session Type… and [Always-on PDU Session Requested], [0365]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the slice priority of Ninglekhu, Wong and Liu with the URSP updated of Talebi to provide a methods and a system wherein if the AMF 155 is aware that some signaling is pending in the AMF 155 or between the UE 100 and the 5GC, the AMF 155 may not release the signaling connection after the completion of the registration procedure as suggested, Talebi [0250].
Regarding claim 6, Ninglekhu as modified by Wong, Liu and Talebi teaches the UE of claim 2, wherein: the UE is subscribed to the PDTS (FIG. 12 shows a user interface that could be used locally in a UE to select contexts, preconditions, and Preparation Actions to enable context aware URSP rules for mutually exclusive access to network slices, Ninglekhu [0470], for example Deregister LP slice, Deregister HP slice form the Select Pre-Condition section); the second network slice is usable by UEs that are subscribed to the PDTS to activate and use the PDTS (Send a Registration Update so that slice B is removed from the Allowed NSSAI and Slice A is added”. The UE would do this by including slice A's S-NSSAI in its request NSSAI and not including slice B's S-NSSAI. As the preparation action completes, UE is registered with slice A, Ninglekhu [0415] and Slice A's traffic always takes higher priority over traffic that is targeted for slice B, Ninglekhu [0406]); and one or more data packets are sent during a PDU session via the second network slice (The RSD that the UE selects from the URSP may include preparation actions … for instance, ending an ongoing session of a lower priority slice and/or ensuring for a congestion free network slice, before requesting registration for a higher priority network slice. PDU Session is established in the S-NSSAI that was added to the allowed NSSAI and the UE uses the PDU Session to send the new traffic, Ninglekhu [0806]).
Regarding claim 7, Ninglekhu as modified by Wong, Liu and Talebi teaches the UE of claim 6, wherein the computer-executable instructions, when executed by the processor, further cause the UE to, prior to receiving a second set of URSP rules, send credentials for authenticating with the PDTS (The AMF may request the UE User ID for EAP authentication (EAP ID) for the S-NSSAI, Ninglekhu [0253], see user/administrator encryption key entry of Fig. 13).
Regarding claim 9, Ninglekhu a method (method of Figs. 8, 16 and 20) comprising: registering, by a user equipment (UE), for a first network slice and a second network slice, wherein the second network slice is configured to provide higher priority transport of data packets during protocol data unit (PDU) sessions than the first network slice (The registration request message could be enhanced to allow the UE to indicate to the network that it wants to register with slices A and B and that slice A is higher priority, [0416]).
However, Ninglekhu does not clearly teach when using a priority data transport service (PDTS), send data packets via the second network slice based on a first set of UE route selection policy (URSP) rules, receive user input to deactivate the PDTS; send a PDU session establishment request to deactivate the PDTS, receive, based at least in part on the PDU session establishment request to deactivate the PDTS, a second set of URSP rules to replace the first set of URSP rules, wherein replacement of the first set of URSP rules include deleting the first set of URSP rules; and send data packets via the first network slice based on the second set of URSP rules.
In an analogous art, Wong teaches when using a priority data transport service (PDTS), send data packets via the second network slice based on a first set of UE route selection policy (URSP) rules (certain applications associated with the UE (e.g., App. 1, App. 2) may be grouped to use a particular DNN value (e.g., DNN 1), as previously described. IP traffic associated with DNN1 can be pages with a first paging cause value (e.g., X1)… a value of “0” can be reserved for highest (e.g., emergency) priority paging causes, [0161]), receive user input to deactivate the PDTS (USRPe rules are modified, for instance when the priority of applications changes based on user input, [0163]); send a PDU session establishment request to deactivate the PDTS, receive, based at least in part on the PDU session establishment request to deactivate the PDTS, a second set of URSP rules to replace the first set of URSP rules (If the USRPe rules are modified, for instance when the priority of applications changes based on user input, the PCFe 710 receives new URSPe rules data from the UDR 701, and then forward these new rules to the UEe, [0163]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the slice priority of Ninglekhu with the rule of Wong to provide a methods and a system for special handling within the UE in order to provide good user experience as suggested, Wong [0016].
However, Ninglekhu and Wong do not clearly teach wherein replacement of the first set of URSP rules include deleting the first set of URSP rules and send data packets via the first network slice based on the second set of URSP rules.
In an analogous art, Liu teaches wherein replacement of the first set of URSP rules include deleting the first set of URSP rules (The terminal device deletes, based on the URSP deletion instruction, page 12, line 52), and send data packets via the first network slice based on second set of URSP rules (If the URSP list currently stored in the terminal device is Table 1 and the URSP carried in the URSP delivery instruction received by the terminal device is a URSP-C, the terminal device stores the URSP-C in the local URSP list (namely, Table 1), to form a URSP list shown in Table 2. Then, in a process of running an application C, the terminal device may activate a PDU session with a network slice of the application C based on the URSP-C in the list, to use the network slice to communicate with the application server C, page 9, lines 49-54).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the slice priority of Ninglekhu and Wong with the rule of Liu to provide a methods and a system to dynamically adjust a range of application accounts that use the network slice of the application, to resolve a problem of waste of network slice resources to some extent as suggested, Liu page 1, lines 48-50.
However, Ninglekhu, Wong and Liu do not clearly teach wherein when the UE switches from not using the PDTS to using the PDTS, the UE deletes the second set of URSP rules and receives the first set of URSP rules while keeping the PDU sessions active and maintaining connection to the PDU sessions.
In an analogous art, Talebi teaches wherein when the UE switches from not using the PDTS to using the PDTS (UE in CM IDLE state may initiate a service request procedure in order to send uplink signaling messages, user data, to request MPS priority treatment, to request emergency services fallback, or as a response to a network paging request. After receiving the service request message, the AMF may perform authentication. After the establishment of the signaling connection to an AMF, the UE or network may send signaling messages, e.g., PDU session establishment from the UE to a SMF, via the AMF. The service request procedure may be employed by a UE in CM-CONNECTED to request invocation or activation of MPS priority treatment for one or more PDU sessions of the UE, [0359], Fig. 19), the UE deletes the second set of URSP rules and receives the first set of URSP rules (AMF in response to receiving the MPS indication may determine that network does not support MPS or MPS for DTS. The AMF may trigger the UCU procedure and transmit or update the URSP for the UE, [0362]; when the UE receives the URSP or configuration parameters for MPS (or MPS for DTS), the UE may send a second NAS message. The UE may employ the configuration parameters or the URSP to determine one or more elements of the second NAS message. The second NAS message may be a PDU session establishment/modification request message, [0363]) while keeping the PDU sessions active and maintaining connection to the PDU sessions (The PDU Session Establishment Request may comprise a PDU session ID, Requested PDU Session Type… and [Always-on PDU Session Requested], [0365]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the slice priority of Ninglekhu, Wong and Liu with the URSP updated of Talebi to provide a methods and a system wherein if the AMF 155 is aware that some signaling is pending in the AMF 155 or between the UE 100 and the 5GC, the AMF 155 may not release the signaling connection after the completion of the registration procedure as suggested, Talebi [0250].
Regarding claim 13, Ninglekhu as modified by Wong, Liu and Talebi teaches the method of claim 9, wherein: the UE is subscribed to the PDTS (FIG. 12 shows a user interface that could be used locally in a UE to select contexts, preconditions, and Preparation Actions to enable context aware URSP rules for mutually exclusive access to network slices, Ninglekhu [0470], for example Deregister LP slice, Deregister HP slice form the Select Pre-Condition section); the second network slice is usable by UEs that are subscribed to the PDTS to activate and use the PDTS (Send a Registration Update so that slice B is removed from the Allowed NSSAI and Slice A is added”. The UE would do this by including slice A's S-NSSAI in its request NSSAI and not including slice B's S-NSSAI. As the preparation action completes, UE is registered with slice A, Ninglekhu [0415] and Slice A's traffic always takes higher priority over traffic that is targeted for slice B, Ninglekhu [0406]); and one or more data packets are sent during a PDU session via the second network slice (The RSD that the UE selects from the URSP may include preparation actions … for instance, ending an ongoing session of a lower priority slice and/or ensuring for a congestion free network slice, before requesting registration for a higher priority network slice. PDU Session is established in the S-NSSAI that was added to the allowed NSSAI and the UE uses the PDU Session to send the new traffic, Ninglekhu [0806]).
Regarding claim 14, Ninglekhu as modified by Wong, Liu and Talebi teaches the method of claim 13, further comprising, prior to receiving of the first set of URSP rules, sending credentials for authenticating with the PDTS (The AMF may request the UE User ID for EAP authentication (EAP ID) for the S-NSSAI, Ninglekhu [0253], see user/administrator encryption key entry of Fig. 13).
Regarding claim 16, Ninglekhu a non-transitory computer storage medium (e.g. UE 102 of Figs. 1 and 14) having a plurality of programming instructions stored thereon that, when executed by a user equipment (UE), cause the UE to perform operations comprising: registering for a first network slice and a second network slice, wherein the second network slice is configured to provide higher priority transport of data packets during protocol data unit (PDU) sessions than the first network slice (Alternatively, the registration request message could be enhanced to allow the UE to indicate to the network that it wants to register with slices A and B and that slice A is higher priority, [0416]).
However, Ninglekhu does not clearly teach when using a priority data transport service (PDTS), send data packets via the second network slice based on a first set of UE route selection policy (URSP) rules, receive user input to deactivate the PDTS; send a PDU session establishment request to deactivate the PDTS, receive, based at least in part on the PDU session establishment request to deactivate the PDTS, a second set of URSP rules to replace the first set of URSP rules, wherein replacement of the first set of URSP rules include deleting the first set of URSP rules; and send data packets via the first network slice based on the second set of URSP rules.
In an analogous art, Wong teaches when using a priority data transport service (PDTS), send data packets via the second network slice based on a first set of UE route selection policy (URSP) rules (certain applications associated with the UEe (e.g., App. 1, App. 2) may be grouped to use a particular DNN value (e.g., DNN 1), as previously described. IP traffic associated with DNN1 can be pages with a first paging cause value (e.g., X1)… a value of “0” can be reserved for highest (e.g., emergency) priority paging causes, [0161]), receive user input to deactivate the PDTS (USRPe rules are modified, for instance when the priority of applications changes based on user input, [0163]); send a PDU session establishment request to deactivate the PDTS, receive, based at least in part on the PDU session establishment request to deactivate the PDTS, a second set of URSP rules to replace the first set of URSP rules (If the USRPe rules are modified, for instance when the priority of applications changes based on user input, the PCFe 710 receives new URSPe rules data from the UDR 701, and then forward these new rules to the UEe, [0163]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the slice priority of Ninglekhu with the rule of Wong to provide a methods and a system for special handling within the UE in order to provide good user experience as suggested, Wong [0016].
However, Ninglekhu and Wong do not clearly teach wherein replacement of the first set of URSP rules include deleting the first set of URSP rules and send data packets via the first network slice based on the second set of URSP rules.
In an analogous art, Liu teaches wherein replacement of the first set of URSP rules include deleting the first set of URSP rules (The terminal device deletes, based on the URSP deletion instruction, page 12, line 52), and send data packets via the first network slice based on second set of URSP rules (If the URSP list currently stored in the terminal device is Table 1 and the URSP carried in the URSP delivery instruction received by the terminal device is a URSP-C, the terminal device stores the URSP-C in the local URSP list (namely, Table 1), to form a URSP list shown in Table 2. Then, in a process of running an application C, the terminal device may activate a PDU session with a network slice of the application C based on the URSP-C in the list, to use the network slice to communicate with the application server C, page 9, lines 49-54).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the slice priority of Ninglekhu and Wong with the rule of Liu to provide a methods and a system to dynamically adjust a range of application accounts that use the network slice of the application, to resolve a problem of waste of network slice resources to some extent as suggested, Liu page 1, lines 48-50.
However, Ninglekhu, Wong and Liu do not clearly teach wherein when the UE switches from not using the PDTS to using the PDTS, the UE deletes the second set of URSP rules and receives the first set of URSP rules while keeping the PDU sessions active and maintaining connection to the PDU sessions.
In an analogous art, Talebi teaches wherein when the UE switches from not using the PDTS to using the PDTS (UE in CM IDLE state may initiate a service request procedure in order to send uplink signaling messages, user data, to request MPS priority treatment, to request emergency services fallback, or as a response to a network paging request. After receiving the service request message, the AMF may perform authentication. After the establishment of the signaling connection to an AMF, the UE or network may send signaling messages, e.g., PDU session establishment from the UE to a SMF, via the AMF. The service request procedure may be employed by a UE in CM-CONNECTED to request invocation or activation of MPS priority treatment for one or more PDU sessions of the UE, [0359], Fig. 19), the UE deletes the second set of URSP rules and receives the first set of URSP rules (AMF in response to receiving the MPS indication may determine that network does not support MPS or MPS for DTS. The AMF may trigger the UCU procedure and transmit or update the URSP for the UE, [0362]; when the UE receives the URSP or configuration parameters for MPS (or MPS for DTS), the UE may send a second NAS message. The UE may employ the configuration parameters or the URSP to determine one or more elements of the second NAS message. The second NAS message may be a PDU session establishment/modification request message, [0363]) while keeping the PDU sessions active and maintaining connection to the PDU sessions (The PDU Session Establishment Request may comprise a PDU session ID, Requested PDU Session Type… and [Always-on PDU Session Requested], [0365]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the slice priority of Ninglekhu, Wong and Liu with the URSP updated of Talebi to provide a methods and a system wherein if the AMF 155 is aware that some signaling is pending in the AMF 155 or between the UE 100 and the 5GC, the AMF 155 may not release the signaling connection after the completion of the registration procedure as suggested, Talebi [0250].
Regarding claim 20, Ninglekhu as modified by Wong, Liu and Talebi teaches the non-transitory computer storage medium of claim 16, wherein: the UE is subscribed to the PDTS (FIG. 12 shows a user interface that could be used locally in a UE to select contexts, preconditions, and Preparation Actions to enable context aware URSP rules for mutually exclusive access to network slices, Ninglekhu [0470], for example Deregister LP slice, Deregister HP slice form the Select Pre-Condition section); the second network slice is usable by UEs that are subscribed to the PDTS to activate and use the PDTS (Send a Registration Update so that slice B is removed from the Allowed NSSAI and Slice A is added”. The UE would do this by including slice A's S-NSSAI in its request NSSAI and not including slice B's S-NSSAI. As the preparation action completes, UE is registered with slice A, Ninglekhu [0415] and Slice A's traffic always takes higher priority over traffic that is targeted for slice B, Ninglekhu [0406]); and one or more data packets are sent during a PDU session via the second network slice (The RSD that the UE selects from the URSP may include preparation actions … for instance, ending an ongoing session of a lower priority slice and/or ensuring for a congestion free network slice, before requesting registration for a higher priority network slice. PDU Session is established in the S-NSSAI that was added to the allowed NSSAI and the UE uses the PDU Session to send the new traffic, Ninglekhu [0806]).
Regarding claim 21, Ninglekhu as modified by Wong, Liu and Talebi teaches the non-transitory computer storage medium of claim 20, wherein the operations further comprise, prior to receiving of the first set of URSP rules, sending credentials for authenticating with the PDTS (The AMF may request the UE User ID for EAP authentication (EAP ID) for the S-NSSAI, Ninglekhu [0253], see user/administrator encryption key entry of Fig. 13).
Claims 3, 10 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ninglekhu et al. (20220272620) in view of Wong and further in view of Liu, Talebi and Ianev et al. (US 20220256417 A1).
Regarding claim 3, Ninglekhu as modified by Wong, Liu and Talebi teaches the UE of claim 2, wherein the computer-executable instructions when executed by the processor, further cause the UE to: receive user input (the UE may allow a user to press a button to trigger the procedure for an application, Ninglekhu [0505]), wherein the user input corresponds to at least one of navigating a browser to a site or launching an application (This new procedure may also be triggered when a new application is installed or updated on the UE, when the OS is updated, when a new OS is installed. Furthermore, the procedure may be triggered by a GUI. For example, a GUI that lists applications that are installed on the UE may allow a user to press a button to trigger the procedure for an application, Ninglekhu [0505]); and determine that a URSP rule of the first set of USRP rules or the second set of URSP rules specifies an identifier (ID) of at least one of the site or the application (OSId and OSAppID, IP tuples, domain descriptors, Non-IP descriptors, DNN, and Connection Capabilities) is used by the UE to determine what traffic the rule applies to, Ninglekhu [0178]).
However, Ninglekhu, Wong, Liu and Talebi do not teach receive user input to activate a priority data transport service (PDTS).
In an analogous art, Ianev teaches receive user input to activate a priority data transport service (PDTS) (It is proposed that when the UE 3 triggers a request for service via a PDU Session Establishment Request message or a Service Request message, the user may choose to prioritize the service and if so, the UE 3 provides priority for the PDU Session over the NAS. The PDU Session priority may also be based on user preferences set in the UE 3 in advance by prioritizing the type of the service, [0155]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the claimed invention to have modified the additional slice priority of Ninglekhu, Wong, Liu and Talebi with the slice priority of Ianev to provide a device, a method and a system that allow mobile terminal users to prioritize a service or a type of service that would improve the service continuity across network slices for user preferred services as suggested.
Regarding claim 10, Ninglekhu as modified by Wong, Liu and Talebi teaches the method of claim 9, further comprises: receiving user input (the UE may allow a user to press a button to trigger the procedure for an application, Ninglekhu [0505]), wherein the user input corresponds to at least one of navigating a browser to a site or launching an application (This new procedure may also be triggered when a new application is installed or updated on the UE, when the OS is updated, when a new OS is installed. Furthermore, the procedure may be triggered by a GUI. For example, a GUI that lists applications that are installed on the UE may allow a user to press a button to trigger the procedure for an application, Ninglekhu [0505]); and prior to the receiving of the first set of URSP rules, determining that a URSP rule of a second set of URSP rules stored in memory of the UE specifies an identifier (ID) of at least one of the site or the application (OSId and OSAppID, IP tuples, domain descriptors, Non-IP descriptors, DNN, and Connection Capabilities) is used by the UE to determine what traffic the rule applies to, Ninglekhu [0178]).
However, Ninglekhu, Wong, Liu and Talebi do not teach receive user input to activate a priority data transport service (PDTS).
In an analogous art, Ianev teaches receive user input to activate a priority data transport service (PDTS) (It is proposed that when the UE 3 triggers a request for service via a PDU Session Establishment Request message or a Service Request message, the user may choose to prioritize the service and if so, the UE 3 provides priority for the PDU Session over the NAS. The PDU Session priority may also be based on user preferences set in the UE 3 in advance by prioritizing the type of the service, [0155]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the claimed invention to have modified the additional slice priority of Ninglekhu, Wong, Liu and Talebi with the slice priority of Ianev to provide a device, a method and a system that allow mobile terminal users to prioritize a service or a type of service that would improve the service continuity across network slices for user preferred services as suggested.
Regarding claim 17, Ninglekhu as modified by Wong, Liu and Talebi teaches the non-transitory computer storage medium of claim 16, the operations further comprise: receiving user input (the UE may allow a user to press a button to trigger the procedure for an application, Ninglekhu [0505]), wherein the user input corresponds to at least one of navigating a browser to a site or launching an application (This new procedure may also be triggered when a new application is installed or updated on the UE, when the OS is updated, when a new OS is installed. Furthermore, the procedure may be triggered by a GUI. For example, a GUI that lists applications that are installed on the UE may allow a user to press a button to trigger the procedure for an application, Ninglekhu [0505]); and prior to the receiving of the first set of URSP rules, determining that a URSP rule of a second set of URSP rules stored in memory of the UE specifies an identifier (ID) of at least one of the site or the application (OSId and OSAppID, IP tuples, domain descriptors, Non-IP descriptors, DNN, and Connection Capabilities) is used by the UE to determine what traffic the rule applies to, Ninglekhu [0178]).
However, Ninglekhu, Wong, Liu and Talebi do not teach receive user input to activate a priority data transport service (PDTS).
In an analogous art, Ianev teaches receive user input to activate a priority data transport service (PDTS) (It is proposed that when the UE 3 triggers a request for service via a PDU Session Establishment Request message or a Service Request message, the user may choose to prioritize the service and if so, the UE 3 provides priority for the PDU Session over the NAS. The PDU Session priority may also be based on user preferences set in the UE 3 in advance by prioritizing the type of the service, [0155]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the claimed invention to have modified the additional slice priority of Ninglekhu, Wong, Liu and Talebi with the slice priority of Ianev to provide a device, a method and a system that allow mobile terminal users to prioritize a service or a type of service that would improve the service continuity across network slices for user preferred services as suggested.
Claims 5, 12 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ninglekhu et al. (20220272620) in view of Wong and further in view of Liu, Talebi and Faccin et al. (US 20180324577 A1).
Regarding claim 5, Ninglekhu as modified by Wong, Liu and Talebi teaches the UE of claim 2.
However, Ninglekhu, Wong, Liu and Talebi do not teach wherein a URSP rule of the first set of URSP rules prevents one or more data packets from being sent over Wi-Fi during a PDU session.
In an analogous art, Faccin teaches wherein a URSP rule of the second set of URSP rules, prevents the one or more data packets from being sent over Wi-Fi during the PDU session (UE Route Selection Policy (URSP) may include a prioritized list of URSP rules, and each USRP rule may be composed of one or more of the following components: Non-seamless offload: This indicates if the matching traffic is Prohibited, Preferred or Permitted (i.e. allowed but not preferred) to be offloaded to non-3GPP access outside of a PDU session. Non-seamless offload may also indicate a specific non-3GPP access type (e.g. wireless local area network (WLAN), a service set identifier (SSID) of a network) on which the matching traffic is Prohibited, [0126]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the claimed invention to have modified the additional slice priority of Ninglekhu, Wong, Liu and Talebi with the URSP of Faccin to provide a device, a method and a system for handling mobility between areas with heterogeneous network slices in wireless communications systems operating according to new radio (NR) technologies as suggested.
Regarding claim 12, Ninglekhu as modified by Wong, Liu and Talebi teaches the method of claim 9.
However, Ninglekhu, Wong, Liu and Talebi do not teach wherein the first set URSP rule of the set of URSP rules prevents one or more data packets from being sent over Wi-Fi during a PDU session.
In an analogous art, Faccin teaches wherein a URSP rule of the second set of URSP rules, prevents the one or more data packets from being sent over Wi-Fi during the PDU session (UE Route Selection Policy (URSP) may include a prioritized list of URSP rules, and each USRP rule may be composed of one or more of the following components: Non-seamless offload: This indicates if the matching traffic is Prohibited, Preferred or Permitted (i.e. allowed but not preferred) to be offloaded to non-3GPP access outside of a PDU session. Non-seamless offload may also indicate a specific non-3GPP access type (e.g. wireless local area network (WLAN), a service set identifier (SSID) of a network) on which the matching traffic is Prohibited, [0126]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the claimed invention to have modified the additional slice priority of Ninglekhu, Wong, Liu and Talebi with the URSP of Faccin to provide a device, a method and a system for handling mobility between areas with heterogeneous network slices in wireless communications systems operating according to new radio (NR) technologies as suggested.
Regarding claim 19, Ninglekhu as modified by Wong, Liu and Talebi teaches the non-transitory computer storage medium of claim 16.
However, Ninglekhu, Wong, Liu and Talebi do not teach wherein the first URSP rule of the set of URSP rules prevents one or more data packets from being sent over Wi-Fi during a PDU session.
In an analogous art, Faccin teaches wherein a URSP rule of the first set of URSP rules, prevents the one or more data packets from being sent over Wi-Fi during the PDU session (UE Route Selection Policy (URSP) may include a prioritized list of URSP rules, and each USRP rule may be composed of one or more of the following components: Non-seamless offload: This indicates if the matching traffic is Prohibited, Preferred or Permitted (i.e. allowed but not preferred) to be offloaded to non-3GPP access outside of a PDU session. Non-seamless offload may also indicate a specific non-3GPP access type (e.g. wireless local area network (WLAN), a service set identifier (SSID) of a network) on which the matching traffic is Prohibited, [0126]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the claimed invention to have modified the additional slice priority of Ninglekhu, Wong, Liu and Talebi with the URSP of Faccin to provide a device, a method and a system for handling mobility between areas with heterogeneous network slices in wireless communications systems operating according to new radio (NR) technologies as suggested.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 8, 11, 15 and 18 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Wang et al. (US 20230019215 A1): Systems and methods are disclosed herein that relate to Time Sensitive Communication (TSC) to Fifth Generation (5G) Quality of Service (QoS) mapping and associated QoS binding. In one embodiment, a method for QoS mapping in a 5G System (5GS) for a virtual Time Sensitive Networking (TSN) bridge comprises, at a first network function, obtaining information from a TSN Application Function (AF) comprising baseline TSC QoS parameters and one or more additional parameters comprising either or both of: (a) one or more additional TSC QoS attributes and (b) one or more additional traffic attributes.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICOLE M LOUIS-FILS whose telephone number is (571)270-0671. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday.
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, Charles Appiah can be reached at 571-272-7904. 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.
/NICOLE M LOUIS-FILS/Examiner, Art Unit 2641
/CHARLES N APPIAH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2641
Prosecution Insights