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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 3 February 2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment, filed 3 February 2026, has been entered and carefully considered.
Claims 1, 4, 15, 33 and 35 are amended.
Claims 2, 3, 19-32, 34 and 36-40 are canceled.
Claims 1, 4-18, 33 and 35 are currently pending.
The outstanding rejections of Claims 1, 4-10, 12, 13 and 15-18 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and Claim 11 under 35 U.S.C. 103 are withdrawn in light of Applicant’s amendment to Claims 1, 4 and 15.
The outstanding rejection of Claims 33 and 35 under 35 U.S.C. 103 is withdrawn in light of Applicant’s amendment to said claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1 and 4 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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 16, which depends on Claim 15, recites “wherein the fallback type comprises at least one of: redirection; and handover.” However, Claim 15 earlier recites “a fallback type comprising at least one of redirection and handover.” As Claim 16 does not comprise any further language, it does not further limit the subject matter of parent Claim 15. Applicant may cancel the claim, amend the claim to place the claim in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim complies with the statutory requirements.
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, 5-10, 12, 13 and 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by 3GPP TS 23.502 V16.4.0 (3rd Generation Partnership Project; Technical Specification Group Services and System Aspects; Procedures for the 5G System (5GS); Stage 2 (Release 16)), hereinafter 3GPP, in view of Huang et al, United States Pre-Grant Publication 2021/0007030), hereinafter Huang.
Regarding Claim 1, 3GPP discloses a method performed by a session management function, comprising:
receiving a first message including fallback information for a terminal device from an access and mobility management function (Clause 4.13.6.1 - the NG-RAN initiates either handover or AN release via inter-system redirection to EPS; Clause 4.11.1.2.1 and Figure 4.11.1.2.1-1, step 10a - the AMF sends the Nsmf_PDUSession_UpdateSMContext Request (data forwarding information) to the PGW-C+SMF for handover, or Clause 4.11.1.3.2 and Figure 4.11.1.3.2-1, step 5a – the AMF sends a Nsmf_PDUSession_ContextRequest to the SMF for redirection);
determining that data buffering for the terminal device is required (Clause 4.11.1.3.2A and Figure 4.11.1.3.2A-1 on page 207 – buffering is performed when the redirection procedure is performed); and
in response to a determination that the data buffering for the terminal device is required, sending a second message comprising a buffering indication to a user plane function, wherein the buffering indication indicates that buffering is on for the user plane function to buffer the data for the terminal device (Clause 4.11.1.3.2 and Figure 4.11.1.3.2-1, steps 5b and 5c – the SMF sends an N4 session modification to a UPF and sends a Nsmf_PDUsession_contextresponse to the AMF; Clause 4.11.1.3.2A and Figure 4.11.1.3.2A-1 on page 207 – at steps 10a, b, and c – the SMF provides data forwarding tunnel info to the UPF if data is buffered; clause 4.2.6, pages 74-75 at step 6a - an SMF sending an N4 Session Modification Request to the UPF that contains the Buffering On/Off indicator).
However, 3GPP does not disclose wherein the fallback information comprises an indication of a fallback type comprising at least one of redirection and handover, the indication of the fallback type comprising redirection in the received first message. In an analogous art, Huang discloses this. Specifically, Huang discloses, as shown in Figure 2 and described in paragraph 0026, that an EPS fallback procedure is initiated either via a redirection command (resulting in EPS fallback via redirection at step 222) or a handover command (resulting in EPS fallback via handover at step 223). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine 3GPP and Huang. One would have been motivated to do so in order to allow upper layers of the UE to obtain EPS fallback status information (see paragraphs 0004-0005 of Huang).
Regarding Claim 5, 3GPP discloses the redirection comprises at least one of: redirection to a first network from a second network (Clause 4.11.1.3.2A - 5GS to EPS redirection is performed, therefore meeting the claimed alternative limitation); and redirection to the first network connected to a core network of the second network.
Regarding Claim 6, 3GPP discloses the handover comprises at least one of: handover to a first network from a second network (Clause 4.11.1.2.1 – handover from 5GS to EPS is performed, therefore meeting the claimed alternative limitation); and handover to the first network connected to a core network of the second network.
Regarding Claim 7, 3GPP discloses the first network comprises an evolved packet system (EPS) and the second network comprises a fifth generation system (Clause 4.11.1.3.2A - 5GS (second network) to EPS redirection (first network) is performed).
Regarding Claim 8, 3GPP discloses the fallback comprises at least one of evolved packet system (EPS) fallback (Clause 4.11.1.2.1 – handover from 5GS to EPS is performed or Clause 4.11.1.3.2A - 5GS to EPS redirection is performed, therefore meeting the claimed alternative limitation) or radio access technology, RAT, fallback.
Regarding Claim 9, 3GPP discloses the fallback is related to Internet protocol multimedia subsystem (IMS) service (Clause 4.13.6.1 – the EPS fallback for IMS voice is performed).
Regarding Claim 10, 3GPP discloses the session management function comprises a packet data network gateway control plane function (PGW-C) combined with the session management function (Figure 4.11.1.2.1-1 or Figure 4.11.1.3.2A-1 – the SMF comprises a PGW-C+SMF).
Regarding Claim 12, 3GPP discloses the second message comprises an N4 Session Modification Request message (Figure 4.11.1.2.1-1, step 10b – the SMF sends a N4 Session Modification message to the UPF; clause 4.2.6, pages 74-75 at step 6a - an SMF sending an N4 Session Modification Request to the UPF that contains the Buffering On/Off indicator).
Regarding Claim 13, 3GPP discloses the second message is sent during or before an access network release procedure (Figure 4.11.1.2.1-1, step 10b – in handover scenario, the SMF sends a N4 Session Modification message to the UPF prior to handover completion and bearer modification; in redirection scenario, Figure 4.11.1.3.2 – steps 15-15c – in redirection scenario, the N4 modification message is sent prior to PDU session release associated with 3GPP access).
Regarding Claim 15, 3GPP discloses a method performed by an access and mobility management function, comprising:
receiving a third message including fallback information for a terminal device from a radio access network entity (Clause 4.13.6.1 – the NG-RAN initiates either handover or AN release via inter-system redirection; Clause 4.11.1.2.1 and Figure 4.11.1.2.1-1, step 1 - the NG-RAN sends a message indicating handover is required, or; Clause 4.11.1.3.2 and Figure 4.11.1.3.2-1, step 4 – the AMF receives a context request in response to the RAN initiating a TAU request); and
sending a first message including the fallback information for the terminal device to a session management function (Clause 4.11.1.2.1 and Figure 4.11.1.2.1-1, step 10a - the AMF sends the Nsmf_PDUSession_UpdateSMContext Request (data forwarding information) to the PGW-C+SMF for handover, or Clause 4.11.1.3.2 and Figure 4.11.1.3.2-1, step 5a – the AMF sends a Nsmf_PDUSession_ContextRequest to the SMF for redirection) to indicate to the session management function that buffering is required for the terminal device (Clause 4.11.1.3.2A and Figure 4.11.1.3.2A-1 on page 207 – buffering is performed when the redirection procedure is performed; Clause 4.11.1.3.2 and Figure 4.11.1.3.2-1, steps 5b and 5c – the SMF sends an N4 session modification to a UPF and seconds a Nsmf_PDUsession_contextresponse to the AMF; Clause 4.11.1.3.2A and Figure 4.11.1.3.2A-1 on page 207 – at steps 10a, b, and c – the SMF provides data forwarding tunnel info to the UPF if data is buffered; clause 4.2.6, pages 74-75 at step 6a - an SMF sending an N4 Session Modification Request to the UPF that contains the Buffering On/Off indicator).
However, 3GPP does not disclose wherein the fallback information comprises an indication of a fallback type comprising at least one of redirection and handover, the indication of the fallback type comprising redirection in the received first message. In an analogous art, Huang discloses this. Specifically, Huang discloses, as shown in Figure 2 and described in paragraph 0026, that an EPS fallback procedure is initiated either via a redirection command (resulting in EPS fallback via redirection at step 222) or a handover command (resulting in EPS fallback via handover at step 223). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine 3GPP and Huang. One would have been motivated to do so in order to allow upper layers of the UE to obtain EPS fallback status information (see paragraphs 0004-0005 of Huang).
Regarding Claim 16, the combination of 3GPP and Huang further discloses the fallback type comprises at least one of: redirection; and handover (refer to Figure and paragraph 0026 of Huang, as described above in the rejection of Claim 15).
Regarding Claim 17, 3GPP discloses the redirection comprises at least one of: redirection to a first network from a second network (Clause 4.11.1.3.2A - 5GS to EPS redirection is performed, therefore meeting the claimed alternative limitation); and redirection to the first network connected to a core network of the second network.
Regarding Claim 18, 3GPP discloses the handover comprises at least one of: handover to a first network from a second network (Clause 4.11.1.2.1 – handover from 5GS to EPS is performed, therefore meeting the claimed alternative limitation); and handover to the first network connected to a core network of the second network.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over 3GPP in view of Huang, as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of Yao et al (United States Pre-Grant Publication 2021/0392519), hereinafter Yao. The combination of 3GPP and Huang discloses the limitations of Claim 1, as described above. 3GPP further discloses sending a the Nsmf_PDUSession_UpdateSMContext Request (data forwarding information) to the PGW-C+SMF for handover (Clause 4.11.1.2.1 and Figure 4.11.1.2.1-1, step 10a). However, the aforementioned references do not disclose the first message comprises an Nsmf_PDUSession_UpdateSMContext Request message with N2 PDU Session Resource Modify Response Transfer or PDU Session Resource Modify Unsuccessful Transfer. In analogous art, Yao discloses this. Specifically, Yao discloses sending for a PDU session modification, the N2 information element that indicates the “PDU Session Resource modify response transfer” (paragraph 0110). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine 3GPP / Huang and Yao. One would have been motivated to do so in order to allow for monitoring and troubleshooting PDU session modification failures (paragraph 0010 of Yao).
Claims 33 and 35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over 3GPP in view of Huang and Yao.
Regarding Claim 33, 3GPP discloses a session management function (configured to):
receive a first message including fallback information for a terminal device from an access and mobility management function (Clause 4.13.6.1 - the NG-RAN initiates either handover or AN release via inter-system redirection to EPS; Clause 4.11.1.2.1 and Figure 4.11.1.2.1-1, step 10a - the AMF sends the Nsmf_PDUSession_UpdateSMContext Request (data forwarding information) to the PGW-C+SMF for handover, or Clause 4.11.1.3.2 and Figure 4.11.1.3.2-1, step 5a – the AMF sends a Nsmf_PDUSession_ContextRequest to the SMF for redirection);
determine that data buffering for the terminal device is required (Clause 4.11.1.3.2A and Figure 4.11.1.3.2A-1 on page 207 – buffering is performed when the redirection procedure is performed); and
in response to a determination that the data buffering for the terminal device is required, send a second message comprising a buffering indication to a user plane function, wherein the buffering indication indicates that buffering is on for the user plane function to buffer the data for the terminal device (Clause 4.11.1.3.2 and Figure 4.11.1.3.2-1, steps 5b and 5c – the SMF sends an N4 session modification to a UPF and seconds a Nsmf_PDUsession_contextresponse to the AMF; Clause 4.11.1.3.2A and Figure 4.11.1.3.2A-1 on page 207 – at steps 10a, b, and c – the SMF provides data forwarding tunnel info to the UPF if data is buffered; clause 4.2.6, pages 74-75 at step 6a - an SMF sending an N4 Session Modification Request to the UPF that contains the Buffering On/Off indicator).
However, 3GPP does not disclose wherein the fallback information comprises an indication of a fallback type comprising at least one of redirection and handover, the indication of the fallback type comprising redirection in the received first message. In an analogous art, Huang discloses this. Specifically, Huang discloses, as shown in Figure 2 and described in paragraph 0026, that an EPS fallback procedure is initiated either via a redirection command (resulting in EPS fallback via redirection at step 222) or a handover command (resulting in EPS fallback via handover at step 223). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine 3GPP and Huang. One would have been motivated to do so in order to allow upper layers of the UE to obtain EPS fallback status information (see paragraphs 0004-0005 of Huang).
However, the aforementioned references do not disclose the SMF comprising: one or more processors; and one or more memories (1422) storing computer program codes, the one or more memories and the computer program codes configured to, with the one or more processors, cause the session management function (1400) at least to (perform the functions listed above). In an analogous art, Yao discloses this. Specifically, Yao discloses components of 3GPP networks and 5GC networks comprising processors, memories to store instructions to be executed by the processors (paragraph 0008). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine 3GPP / Huang and Yao. One would have been motivated to do so in order to allow for monitoring and troubleshooting PDU session modification failures (paragraph 0010 of Yao).
Regarding Claim 35, 3GPP discloses an access and mobility management function (configured to):
receive a third message including fallback information for a terminal device from a radio access network entity (Clause 4.13.6.1 – the NG-RAN initiates either handover or AN release via inter-system redirection; Clause 4.11.1.2.1 and Figure 4.11.1.2.1-1, step 1 - the NG-RAN sends a message indicating handover is required, or; Clause 4.11.1.3.2 and Figure 4.11.1.3.2-1, step 4 – the AMF receives a context request in response to the RAN initiating a TAU request); and
send a first message including the fallback information for the terminal device to a session management function (Clause 4.11.1.2.1 and Figure 4.11.1.2.1-1, step 10a - the AMF sends the Nsmf_PDUSession_UpdateSMContext Request (data forwarding information) to the PGW-C+SMF for handover, or Clause 4.11.1.3.2 and Figure 4.11.1.3.2-1, step 5a – the AMF sends a Nsmf_PDUSession_ContextRequest to the SMF for redirection) to indicate to the session management function that buffering is required for the terminal device (Clause 4.11.1.3.2A and Figure 4.11.1.3.2A-1 on page 207 – buffering is performed when the redirection procedure is performed; Clause 4.11.1.3.2 and Figure 4.11.1.3.2-1, steps 5b and 5c – the SMF sends an N4 session modification to a UPF and seconds a Nsmf_PDUsession_contextresponse to the AMF; Clause 4.11.1.3.2A and Figure 4.11.1.3.2A-1 on page 207 – at steps 10a, b, and c – the SMF provides data forwarding tunnel info to the UPF if data is buffered; clause 4.2.6, pages 74-75 at step 6a - an SMF sending an N4 Session Modification Request to the UPF that contains the Buffering On/Off indicator).
However, 3GPP does not disclose wherein the fallback information comprises an indication of a fallback type comprising at least one of redirection and handover, the indication of the fallback type comprising redirection in the received first message. In an analogous art, Huang discloses this. Specifically, Huang discloses, as shown in Figure 2 and described in paragraph 0026, that an EPS fallback procedure is initiated either via a redirection command (resulting in EPS fallback via redirection at step 222) or a handover command (resulting in EPS fallback via handover at step 223). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine 3GPP and Huang. One would have been motivated to do so in order to allow upper layers of the UE to obtain EPS fallback status information (see paragraphs 0004-0005 of Huang).
However, the aforementioned references do not disclose the AMF comprising: one or more processors; and one or more memories storing computer program codes, the one or more memories and the computer program codes configured to, with the one or more processors, cause the access and mobility management function at least to perform the functions listed above. In an analogous art, Yao discloses this. Specifically, Yao discloses components of 3GPP networks and 5GC networks comprising processors, memories to store instructions to be executed by the processors (paragraph 0008). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine 3GPP / Huang and Yao. One would have been motivated to do so in order to allow for monitoring and troubleshooting PDU session modification failures (paragraph 0010 of Yao).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4 and 14 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. Specifically with regards to Claim 14, the subject matter from intervening claim 13 would need to be revised to remove the claim “during or” in order to align with the allowable subject matter of Claim 14.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Dao et al (United States Pre-Grant Publication 2018/0199398) discloses the SMF 218 may send an N4 Session Modification Request (7212) to the UPF 212 for these PDU sessions. The message (7212) indicates the release of (R)AN N3 tunnel information such as the (R)AN Address and Tunnel Endpoint Identifier for the downlink user plane, a Buffering Command, and a Reactivation Timer, and cause code (e.g. Handover rejected, or No Data Activity). It is noted that the Buffering Command may be used to indicate whether the UPF 212 shall buffer the incoming downlink packets (paragraph 0444).
Chong et al (European Patent Application Publication 3462776 A1) discloses an N4 session modification request includes a first command, and the first command is for instructing the UPF+PGW-U to buffer data on a user plane tunnel.
Talat (United States Pre-Grant Publication 2022/0022102) discloses source NG-RAN 202 may initiate Xn based Inter NG-RAN handover or N2 based inter NG-RAN handover, or redirection to E-UTRA connected to the 5G core network 51. In the step S506, after completion of the Inter NG-RAN (inter-RAT) handover or redirection to E-UTRA connected to the 5G core network (paragraph 0042).
Xu et al (United States Pre-Grant Publication 2023/00224768) discloses establishing a voice session using EPS fallback when VoNR is not supported by a first gNB (Figure 3A).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW W. CHRISS whose telephone number is (571)272-1774. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8am-4pm ET.
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, Kevin Bates can be reached at (571) 272-3980. 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.
/ANDREW W CHRISS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2472