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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
1. Claims 1-4, 6-9, 11-18, and 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jayaramachar et al (2023/0110286) in view of Li (2022/0330085) or Sharma (2023/0007536) further in view of Landais et al (2021/0297896) OR Bartolome Rodrigo et al (2022/0393971).
Regarding claims 1, 11 and 22. Jayaramachar teaches a program, method, and a system (100) for implementing primary secondary routing in a network, the system (100) comprising:
a controller (102) in communication with one or more public land mobile network (PLMN) clusters associated with the network, the controller (102) comprising one or more processors coupled to a memory storing instructions executable by the one or more processors, the controller (102) (figures 2-4 – item 126B (hSEPP = controller) communication with PLMN Region C (e.g, cluster 1) and PLMN Region D (e.g., cluster 2) (0050, 0052)) configured to:
receive, from a first mobile computing device (108-1) (figures 2-4, item 200 (consumer NF), a request ( figures 2-4, 0054-0056 – subscription request) to be transmitted to a second mobile computing device (108-2) (figures 2-4, item 202 (producer NF));
select a primary PLMN cluster and a secondary PLMN cluster among the one or more PLMN clusters communicatively coupled to the first mobile computing device (108-1) and the second mobile computing device (108-2) (figures 2-4, 0054-0056 wherein primary cluster (item 100B – PLMN region C) and secondary cluster (item 100C – PLMN region D).
Jayaramachar does not teach determine an operating condition of each end point of the selected primary PLMN cluster; and in the event, the operating condition of all the end points of the primary PLMN cluster is determined to be inactive, route the request through the secondary PLMN cluster for transmitting the request to the second mobile computing device(108-2).
Li teaches a controller (abstract – Service Communication Proxy (SCP), 0014 – SCP can be deployed in a distributed, redundant, and/or scalable way. SCPs can be deployed at a PLMN level) to optimize message routing, in case of congestion or failure, etc., wherein the request (0073, 0086, 0089) from the consumer NF can be redirected to the equivalent target without NF consumer/producer involvement (0049, 0054, 0074, 0086, figure 8, 0168-0169,0170, 0173-0175).
Sharma teaches secondary PLMN clusters to provide load-balancing functionality and/or redundancy functionality. For example, the NF consumer sends a request and if the primary PLMNN cluster goes offline and./or is otherwise unavailable, either of the secondary PLMN clusters may be automatically promoted to act as the primary PLMN cluster, thereby providing for automatic fail-over (0014, 0037, 0078-0081, figures 2A-2B). For example, the load-balancing policy may be a round-robin policy (0083).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Jayaramachar to determine the status of PLMN clusters as taught by Li or Sharma in order to redirect data flow to the secondary PLMN cluster when the first PLMN cluster is congested or in failure (Li) or to provide automatic fail-over when the primary PLMN cluster goes offline and/or is otherwise unavailable (Sharma).
Regarding RCE 2/19/2026. Applicant amends and argues prior art does not teach determine an operating condition of each end point … wherein each end point comprises a network-accessible service access point within the selected primary PLMN cluster and wherein the operating condition of each end point is individually assessed with respect to the request.
Landais teaches using multiple SCPs based on round-robin approach or other suitable methods. The SCPs provide for points of entry for a cluster of NFs (e.g. wherein each end point comprises a network-accessible service access point within the selected primary PLMN cluster) (0097, 0099). Landais teaches service communication proxy (SCP) and/or security edge production proxy (SEPP) for managing load and overload (0105-0106). Some embodiments allow SCP or SEPP to signal information about signalling capacity (e.g., operating conditions of each end point is individually assessed) to peer NFs or SCPs/SEPPS wherein the signalling capacity may be “dynamic” information reflecting the available resources of the SCP or SEPP to process incoming requests … this can enable NF service consumers/clients to distribute the load across available SCPs or SEPPs according to the signalled load and/or overload information. Therefor the NF service consumer can reduce their traffic towards overloaded SCPs/SEPPs (0107). An SCP or SEPP may signal its load control information by including a “3gpp-Sbi-Lei” header in HTTP responses (with and HTTP status code) or notification requests it forwards or originates, with information identifying the SCP or SEPP (0108).
Bartolome Rodrigo also teaches employing SCPs per PLMN region (0009, 0030 – an SCP per PLMN having different “groups” of network functions (NFs), 0041 – SCP can be deployed at PLMN level, 0048 – SCP pre region) which allows route decisions to be taken on region level, simplifying configurations and is less error prone. Bartolome Rodrigo also teaches sharing information regarding SCPs wherein the information includes: availability, priority, capacity, locality, etc. (0042, 0052, 0157 – an availability of each SCP) wherein SCP information is carried in discovery/response message(s) (0086-0087, 0107).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Jayaramachar in view of Li OR Sharma to employ SCPs as taught by Landais OR Bartolome Rodrigo thereby providing for points of entry for clusters of NFs which allows SCPs to signal information reflecting available resources of the SCPs thereby reducing overload situations (Landais at 0106) OR allowing route decisions to be taken on region level, which simplifies configuration (Bartolome Rodrigo at 0009).
Regarding claim 21. Jayaramachar teaches a first mobile computing device (108-1) in a network, the first mobile computing device (108-2) comprising: a processor; and a memory, wherein the processor is coupled to the memory storing instructions executable by the processor (figures 2-4, item 200 – consumer NF), the processor configured to:
generate a request ( figures 2-4, 0054-0056 – subscription request) to be transmitted to a second mobile computing device (108-2) figures 2-4, item 202 (producer NF); and
transmit the request to the second mobile computing device (108-2) through a public land mobile network (PLMN) cluster, wherein the PLMN cluster is communicatively coupled to the first mobile computing device (108- 1) and the second mobile computing device (108-2) (figures 2-4, 0054-0056 wherein primary cluster (item 100B – PLMN region C) and secondary cluster (time 100C – PLMN region D),
wherein the processor is communicatively coupled to a controller (102) (figures 2-4 – item 126B (hSEPP = controller) communication with PLMN Region C (e.g, cluster 1) and PLMN Region D (e.g., cluster 2) (0050, 0052)) configured to: receive, from the first mobile computing device (108-1), the request ( figures 2-4, 0054-0056 – subscription request) to be transmitted to the second mobile computing device (108-2) (figures 2-4, item 202 (producer NF);
select a primary PLMN cluster and a secondary PLMN cluster among one or more PLMN clusters communicatively coupled to the first mobile computing device (108-1) and the second mobile computing device (108-2) (figures 2-4, 0054-0056 wherein primary cluster (item 100B – PLMN region C) and secondary cluster (time 100C – PLMN region D);
Jayaramachar does not teach determine an operating condition of each end point of the selected primary PLMN cluster; and in the event, the operating condition of all the end points of the primary PLMN cluster is determined to be inactive, route the request through the 20 secondary PLMN cluster to the second mobile computing device (108-2).
Li teaches a controller (abstract – Service Communication Proxy (SCP), 0014 – SCP can be deployed in a distributed, redundant, and/or scalable way. SCPs can be deployed at a PLMN level) to optimize message routing, in case of congestion or failure, etc., wherein the request (0073, 0086, 0089) from the consumer NF can be redirected to the equivalent target without NF consumer/producer involvement (0049, 0054, 0074, 0086, figure 8, 0168-0169, 0173-0175).
Sharma teaches secondary PLMN clusters to provide load-balancing functionality and/or redundancy functionality. For example, the NF consumer sends a request and if the primary PLMNN cluster goes offline and./or is otherwise unavailable, either of the secondary PLMN clusters may be automatically promoted to act as the primary PLMN cluster, thereby providing for automatic fail-over (0014, 0037, 0078-0081, figures 2A-2B). For example, the load-balancing policy may be a round-robin policy (0083).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Jayaramachar to determine the status of PLMN clusters as taught by Li or Sharma in order to redirect data flow to the secondary PLMN cluster when the first PLMN cluster is congested or in failure (Li) or to provide automatic fail-over when the primary PLMN cluster goes offline and/or is otherwise unavailable (Sharma).
Regarding RCE 2/19/2026. Applicant amends and argues prior art does not teach determine an operating condition of each end point … wherein each end point comprises a network-accessible service access point within the selected primary PLMN cluster and wherein the operating condition of each end point is individually assessed with respect to the request.
Landais teaches using multiple SCPs based on round-robin approach or other suitable methods. The SCPs provide for points of entry for a cluster of NFs (e.g. wherein each end point comprises a network-accessible service access point within the selected primary PLMN cluster) (0097, 0099). Landais teaches service communication proxy (SCP) and/or security edge production proxy (SEPP) for managing load and overload (0105-0106). Some embodiments allow SCP or SEPP to signal information about signalling capacity (e.g., operating conditions of each end point is individually assessed) to peer NFs or SCPs/SEPPS wherein the signalling capacity may be “dynamic” information reflecting the available resources of the SCP or SEPP to process incoming requests … this can enable NF service consumers/clients to distribute the load across available SCPs or SEPPs according to the signalled load and/or overload information. Therefor the NF service consumer can reduce their traffic towards overloaded SCPs/SEPPs (0107). An SCP or SEPP may signal its load control information by including a “3gpp-Sbi-Lei” header in HTTP responses (with and HTTP status code) or notification requests it forwards or originates, with information identifying the SCP or SEPP (0108).
Bartolome Rodrigo also teaches employing SCPs per PLMN region (0009, 0030 – an SCP per PLMN having different “groups” of network functions (NFs), 0041 – SCP can be deployed at PLMN level, 0048 – SCP pre region) which allows route decisions to be taken on region level, simplifying configurations and is less error prone. Bartolome Rodrigo also teaches sharing information regarding SCPs wherein the information includes: availability, priority, capacity, locality, etc. (0042, 0052, 0157 – an availability of each SCP) wherein SCP information is carried in discovery/response message(s) (0086-0087, 0107).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Jayaramachar in view of Li OR Sharma to employ SCPs as taught by Landais OR Bartolome Rodrigo thereby providing for points of entry for clusters of NFs which allows SCPs to signal information reflecting available resources of the SCPs thereby reducing overload situations (Landais at 0106) OR allowing route decisions to be taken on region level, which simplifies configuration (Bartolome Rodrigo at 0009).
Regarding claims 2 and 12. Jayaramachar teaches wherein in the event, the operating condition of at least one end point of the primary PLMN cluster is determined to be active, the controller (102) is configured to directly route the request, through said at least one end point of the primary PLMN cluster, from the first mobile computing device (108-1) to the second mobile computing device (108-2) (figure 3, 0054 wherein the request is forwarded to another NRF in a different region using intermediate forwarding, figure 4, 0055 wherein the request is forwarded to another NRF in a different region (Region D) using intermediate forwarding).
Li teaches a controller (abstract – Service Communication Proxy (SCP), 0014 – SCP can be deployed in a distributed, redundant, and/or scalable way. SCPs can be deployed at a PLMN level) to optimize message routing, in case of congestion or failure, etc., wherein the request (0073, 0086, 0089) from the consumer NF can be redirected to the equivalent target without NF consumer/producer involvement (0049, 0054, 0074, 0086, figure 8, 0168-0169, 0173-0175).
Sharma teaches secondary PLMN clusters to provide load-balancing functionality and/or redundancy functionality. For example, the NF consumer sends a request and if the primary PLMNN cluster goes offline and./or is otherwise unavailable, either of the secondary PLMN clusters may be automatically promoted to act as the primary PLMN cluster, thereby providing for automatic fail-over (0014, 0037, 0078-0081, figures 2A-2B). For example, the load-balancing policy may be a round-robin policy (0083).
Regarding claims 3 and 13. Jayaramachar does not teach wherein when the operating condition of more than one end points of the primary PLMN cluster is determined to be active, the controller (102) is configured to distribute data traffic, pertaining to one or more requests, in the network proportionally among the active end points of the primary PLMN cluster.
Li teaches a controller (abstract – Service Communication Proxy (SCP), 0014 – SCP can be deployed in a distributed, redundant, and/or scalable way. SCPs can be deployed at a PLMN level) to optimize message routing, in case of congestion or failure, etc., wherein the request (0073, 0086, 0089) from the consumer NF can be redirected to the equivalent target without NF consumer/producer involvement (0049, 0054, 0074, 0086, figure 8, 0168-0169, 0173-0175). Li further teaches the SCP can distribute the traffic according to predefined policy, e.g., 10% traffic going to the new instance and 90% traffic going to the legacy traffic (0127, 0192).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Jayaramachar to determine the status of PLMN clusters as taught by Li in order to redirect/distribute data flow to the secondary PLMN cluster when the first PLMN cluster is congested or in failure (Li).
Regarding claims 4 and 14. Jayaramachar does not teach wherein when the operating condition of all the end points of the primary PLMN cluster is determined to be inactive, the controller 30 §=©.(102)is configured to route the request from the primary PLMN cluster towards the secondary PLMN cluster using a Round Robin approach.
Sharma teaches secondary PLMN clusters to provide load-balancing functionality and/or redundancy functionality. For example, the NF consumer sends a request and if the primary PLMNN cluster goes offline and./or is otherwise unavailable, either of the secondary PLMN clusters may be automatically promoted to act as the primary PLMN cluster, thereby providing for automatic fail-over (0014, 0037, 0078-0081, figures 2A-2B). For example, the load-balancing policy may be a round-robin policy (0083).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Jayaramachar to determine the status of PLMN clusters as taught by Sharma in order to provide automatic fail-over when the primary PLMN cluster goes offline and/or is otherwise unavailable (Sharma).
Regarding claims 6 and 15. Jayaramachar teaches wherein the system (100) facilitates configuration of the one or more PLMN clusters as any of the primary PLMN cluster and the secondary PLMN cluster based on mapping of routing tables (figure 9, 0063-0064, figure 10, 0065, 0067-0068, Table 1, figure 11, 0069, figure 12, 0070).
Li teaches mapping of routing clusters (0022, 0054, 0127, 0178).
Regarding claims 7 and 16. Jayaramachar teaches wherein the controller (102) is configured to map one primary PLMN cluster with more than one secondary PLMN cluster (figure 9, 0063-0064, figure 10, 0065, 0067-0068, Table 1, figure 11, 0069, figure 12, 0070).
Li teaches mapping of routing clusters (0022, 0054, 0127, 0178).
Regarding claims 8 and 17. Jayaramachar teaches wherein the controller (102) is configured to map more than one primary PLMN cluster with one secondary PLMN cluster (figure 9, 0063-0064, figure 10, 0065, 0067-0068, Table 1, figure 11, 0069, figure 12, 0070).
Li teaches mapping of routing clusters (0022, 0054, 0127, 0178).
Regarding claims 9 and 18. Jayaramachar teaches wherein in case the operating condition of all the end points of the secondary PLMN cluster is determined to be inactive, the controller (102) is configured to trigger a negative response corresponding to the received request (0058-0059).
Li teaches detecting PLMN clusters down via a response message (0044, 0153).
Sharma teaches detecting the status of PLMN clusters via a response message (0006-0007, 0010, 0021, 0025, 0029, 0033, 0078, 0080).
2. Claims 5 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jayaramachar in view of Li or Sharma and Landais OR Bartolome Rodrigo further in view of Hyun et al (2020/0322841).
Regarding claims 5 and 20. Jayaramachar in view of Li or Sharma and Landais OR Bartolome Rodrigo do not explicitly teach wherein when the operating condition of all the end points of the primary PLMN cluster is determined to be inactive, the controller (102) is configured to route the request from the primary PLMN cluster towards the secondary PLMN cluster using a Weighted Scheduling approach.
Hyun teaches determining the capability of the UE to support multi-links and performs a weighted fair scheduling based on the link characteristics of the links (0053). In case of handover of the UE, it may be possible to transmit data packet via a RAT link which is not involved in the HO to prevent the data packet flow from being broken. This makes it possible to protect against the packet transmission interruption occurring during the intra-RAT HO, resulting in improvement of voice communication quality (0050).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Jayaramachar in view of Li or Sharma and Landais OR Bartolome Rodrigo to determine the UE capability to use multiple links as taught by Hyun in order to perform a weighted fair scheduling based on link characteristics of each link thereby improving voice communication quality.
3. Claims 10 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jayaramachar in view of Li or Sharma and Landais OR Bartolome Rodrigo further in view of Chandramouli et al (2023/0276339).
Regarding claims 10 and 19. Jayaramachar in view of Li or Sharma and Landais OR Bartolome Rodrigo do not explicitly teach wherein the system (100) is capable of implementing any or a combination of ingress primary secondary routing technique and egress primary secondary routing technique within the network.
Chandramouli teaches a SCP deployment for indirect communication (figure 4d, 0171) wherein SCP comprises an egress proxy 412 and an ingress proxy 414 (0172). When the NF consumer sends a service request to service agent 400a, it is determined that the request is for a NF producer outside of the first service mess 416 (0173). The request is therefore routed from service agent 400a to egress proxy 412. To be able to successfully route the request, egress proxy may have to determine the next hop of the request which is ingress proxy 412 (0174) wherein the routing may be based on one or more routing and selection policies controlled by the SCP controller 408 (0175).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Jayaramachar in view of Li or Sharma and Landais OR Bartolome Rodrigo to deploy the SCP for indirect communication as taught by Chardramouli thereby enabling NF consumer request to be routed from an SCP egress proxy of a first service mess to an SCP ingress of the second service mess.
Response to Arguments
4. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-22 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.
Conclusion
5. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
---(2023/0188972) Goel et al teaches providing/forwarding information regarding SCPs (0040-0045) wherein the SCP information includes the available SCP instances fulfilling certain criteria (e.g., serving a given NF set) and the service can be used in inter-PLMN and intra-PLMN scenarios (0066)
6. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BARRY W TAYLOR whose telephone number is (571)272-7509. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday: 7-5.
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, Matthew Anderson can be reached at 571-272-4177. 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.
/BARRY W TAYLOR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2646