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 .
Priority
It is noted that the present application is a 371 National Phase Patent Application of PCT/IB2022/053022, for which the 371(c) filing date is 03/31/2022. Applicant claims the benefit of US Provisional Application No. 63/170,164, filed 04/02/2021. Claims 1-3, 5-6, 8-15, 17-20 and 22 have been afforded the benefit of this filing date.
Response to Arguments
The drawings were received on 01/27/2026. These drawings are acceptable.
Applicant’s arguments, see page 9, Claim Objections of Claim 14 are Overcome, filed 01/27/2026, with respect to claim 14 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objection of claim 14 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see page 9, , filed 01/27/2026, with respect to claims 16 and 21 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claims 16 and 21 under 35 U.S.C.101 has been withdrawn in view of canceling the claims 16 and 21.
Applicant's arguments, see pages 9-13, Independent Claims 1, 14, 15, and 18 are Patentable, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant Argument (01/27/2026, page 11):
However, Applicant disagrees and submits that the above assessment of the combination of the disclosures of SAW and Luo appears to be based on improper hindsight reasoning in contradiction to MPEP 2142 which states…
Examiner Respectfully Disagrees:
In response to applicant's argument that the examiner's conclusion of obviousness is based upon improper hindsight reasoning, it must be recognized that any judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, and does not include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971).
Applicant Further Argues (01/27/2026, page 11):
(Emphasis Added). Applicant submits that the Office Action's above assessment is not based on the facts gleaned from the disclosure of SAW and Lou as SAW describes that the UE requests three slices, each by its name and Luo describes a UE determining whether information about at least one network slice corresponds to a UE obtained first identifier broadcast by a third access device. SAW clearly describes that the UE "includes S-NSSAI-A, S-NSSAI-B, S-NSSAI-C in the Requested NSSAI list in Registration Request." (see SAW, Fig. 6.X.3.1-1 and step 8) and Lou describes "the terminal device determines whether the information about the at least one network slice corresponding to the first identifier broadcast by the third access device is obtained," and "if the mapping relationship is not obtained, the terminal device needs to apply to the third access network device for obtaining the mapping relationship (see Lou, [0077]). Thus, combining these references appears to disclose the UE of SAW receiving a first identifier broadcast by a access device but fails to change what the UE of SAW transmits in the Registration Request, as the disclosure of Lou fails to disclose anything that would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art to change the UE of SAW from sending the Registration Request with the names of the slices.
Examiner Respectfully Disagrees:
SAWG2’140E UE already discloses sending a message, the examiner is modifying SAWG2’140E UE to include an identifier because LUO teaches an identifier can be used to indicate a slice list (LUO, paragraph [0078], “The at least one first network slice may be understood as a network slice list (or a network slice set) supported by or corresponding to the first identifier. The slice list includes information about at least one network slice. Herein, unified descriptions are provided. Information about a network slice (for example, the first network slice or a second network slice that appears below) in embodiments of this application may be identified by using single network slice selection assistance information (S-NSSAI), a slice/service type (SST), or a slice index, or may be identified by using a slice identifier that can be identified by the terminal device. This is not limited.” and paragraph [0079], “The RRC message may include a slice list corresponding to the first identifier. Optionally, the RRC message may further include the first identifier. In other words, the RRC message may include a mapping relationship (or a correspondence) between the first identifier and the slice list.”). LUO is not required to disclose UE to send an identifier, as SAWG2’140E discloses the feature of sending the message by the UE. LUO teaches a device can sent a message with an identifier corresponding to the slice to another device. Thus, in combination teach the said limitation.
Applicant Further Argues (01/27/2026, page 12):
Additionally, Claim 18 recites "transmitting the network slice subscription data including the identifiers for the plurality of lists of subscribed network slices that can be used simultaneously by the UE to the AMF," which recites some similar recitations as those discussed above with reference to amended Claim 1. For similar reasons, Applicant respectfully submits that the prior art of record, either individually or in any proper combination, fails to disclose or suggest all the recitations of amended Claims 14, 15, and 18. Accordingly, Applicant respectfully requests the rejection of Claims 1, 14, 15, and 18 under 35 U.S.C. 103 be withdrawn and the claims allowed.
Examiner Respectfully Disagrees:
SO discloses transmitting the network slice subscription data including the identifiers for the plurality of lists of subscribed network slices that can be used simultaneously by the UE to the AMF (SO, paragraph [0127], Fig.3:3b, “3b. UDM to initial AMF: Response to Nudm_SDM_Get. The AMF gets the Slice Selection Subscription data including Subscribed S-NSSAIs. The UDM may provide indication that the subscription data for network slicing is updated for the UE.”), and in combination with LUO (LUO, paragraph 78-79) teaches a message can be sent to another device with an identifier to corresponds to the slice list. Thus, in combination teach the said limitation.
Examiner further notes the Claim 1 is rejected under SAWG2'140E in view of LUO which were originally Claims 1 and 4, and the amended Claims 14, and 15 are similarly rejected and Claim 18 is rejected under SO in view of LUO.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-6, 8, 10-11, 13-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SAWG2'140E (SA WG2 Meeting #140E S2-2005804) (IDS, 09/30/2023, 8 pages) in view of LUO (US-20220394608-A1).
Regarding Claim 1, SAWG2'140E discloses a method of operating a core network function of a core network (Fig.6.X.3.1-1), comprising:
receiving a message (Fig.6.X.3.1-1:1) from a wireless device (Fig.6.X.3.1-1, UE), the message (i) identifying one or more network slices that are requested to be registered by the wireless device (page 4, paragraph 2, "UE shall first initiate a mobility or periodic registration procedure with the network with the Requested NSSAI to include S-NSSAI-D." and page 5 paragraph 1, Fig.6.X.3.1-1:1, "UE initiates initial Registration Request, and includes the support for the capability, "Support for simultaneous slice usage constraints"." and page 5, paragraph 8, "UE includes S-NSSAI-A, S-NSSAI-B, S-NSSAI-C in the Requested NSSAI list in Registration Request, as these three slices are allowed to be registered simultaneously as per the received slice compatibility information." (i.e., Examiner points to Fig.6.X.3.1-1:1 of UE sending a registration request. Page 4 is to show the registration procedure to include network slices and can be multiple as indicated by page 5, par.8.));
and (ii) comprising (page 5, paragraph 8, "UE includes S-NSSAI-A, S-NSSAI-B, S-NSSAI-C in the Requested NSSAI list in Registration Request, as these three slices are allowed to be registered simultaneously as per the received slice compatibility information." (i.e., the list identifier will be addressed by LUO.));
receiving from subscription data management of the wireless device subscription data comprising subscribed network slices for the wireless device (page 5 paragraph 2-3, Fig.6.X.3.1-1:2,3, "AMF receives the subscribed NSSAI list from UDM." (i.e., UDM is equivalent to "subscription data management"))
and an identifier for the subscribed network slices that can be used simultaneously by the wireless device (page 3 under "Tags", paragraph 1, "Whether the network slices with same SST value" (i.e., "an identifier" is the Slice Service Type (SST). The message Fig.6.X.3.1-1:1 from the UE asks simultaneous slice to be registered so there for the UDM provides NSSAI list.));
generating information describing a plurality of lists of network slices that can be registered simultaneously by the wireless device ((page 3, 6.X.2, lines 3-4, "AMF provides the UE with "Slice compatibility" information for each of the S-NSSAI which are part of the UE’s Configured NSSAI list. "Slice compatibility" information consists of:", and page 3, 6.X.2, lines 5-6, "1. List of other S-NSSAIs in the Configured NSSAI list the current S-NSSAI is allowed to simultaneously register with;" and page 3, 6.X.2, lines 7-9, "2. List of other S-NSSAIs in the Configured NSSAI list the current S-NSSAI is allowed to have simultaneous PDU sessions with…" and page 3, 6.X.2, lines 10-13, "3. List of other S-NSSAIs in the Configured NSSAI list the current S-NSSAI is allowed to have simultaneous active user plane resources for the established PDU sessions with." and page 3, 6.X.2, lines 14-15, "#1 and #2 are mandatory, while #3 is optional." (i.e., There are 3 lists and the third list being optional.));
and transmitting a response to the wireless device (Fig.6.X.3.1-1:7), the response indicating whether the one or more network slices have been registered and including the information describing the plurality of lists of network slices (page 5 paragraph 7, Fig.6.X.3.1-1:7, "AMF sends Registration Accept to the UE. AMF includes the Configured NSSAI, and the slice compatibility information for each Configured S-NSSAI." (i.e., AMF sending the registration accept to the UE.)),
each of the lists indicating a set of network slices that can be registered simultaneously by the wireless device ((page 5 paragraph 8, Fig.6.X.3.1-1, "Based on the received slice compatibility information, UE shall take a decision on which network slices to request registration as part of Requested NSSAI list. " (i.e., NSSAI list consist of S-NSSAIs.)).
However, SAWG2'140E does not disclose (ii) comprising a list identifier associated with one of the plurality of lists of network slices.
LUO discloses (ii) comprising a list identifier associated with one of the plurality of lists of network slices (paragraph [0078], "The at least one first network slice may be understood as a network slice list (or a network slice set) supported by or corresponding to the first identifier…" and paragraph [0079], "The RRC message may include a slice list corresponding to the first identifier. Optionally, the RRC message may further include the first identifier. In other words, the RRC message may include a mapping relationship (or a correspondence) between the first identifier and the slice list…" (i.e., the slice list with an identifier. The slice list is understood as NSSAI and that is comprised of S-NSSAI. Examiner also points to par.96 Fig.3 for visual of slices.)).
SAWG2'140E and LUO are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field Affiliation to network, e.g. registration. 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 SAWG2'140E to implement identifier for the list such as an identifier for NSSAI in order to have increase efficiency on communication between UDM, AMF, and the UE and help with UE to reduce power consumption (LUO, paragraph [0010], “to reduce a procedure in which the terminal device triggers an application for the information about the at least one first network slice corresponding to the first identifier, and help reduce the power consumption of the terminal device.”).
Regarding Claim 2, SAWG2'140E in view of LUO discloses all the limitation of claim 1.
SAWG2'140E further discloses wherein the information describing the plurality of lists of network slices that can be registered simultaneously comprises the of each of the plurality of lists of network slices that can be registered simultaneously (page 5 paragraph 2-3, Fig.6.X.3.1-1:2,3, "AMF receives the subscribed NSSAI list from UDM." (i.e., As mapped in claim 1, there are a plurality of lists that can be provided to the AMF which would then be provided to the UE.)).
LUO further discloses list identifiers (paragraph [0078], "The at least one first network slice may be understood as a network slice list (or a network slice set) supported by or corresponding to the first identifier…" and paragraph [0079], "The RRC message may include a slice list corresponding to the first identifier. Optionally, the RRC message may further include the first identifier. In other words, the RRC message may include a mapping relationship (or a correspondence) between the first identifier and the slice list…" (i.e., the slice list with an identifier.)).
The proposed combination as well as the motivations for combining the references presented in the rejection of the parent claim apply to this claim and are incorporated herein by reference.
Regarding Claim 3, SAWG2'140E in view of LUO discloses all the limitation of claim 1.
SAWG2'140E further discloses wherein the information describing the plurality of lists of network slices that can be registered simultaneously comprises the plurality of lists of network slices that can be registered simultaneously (page 3, 6.X.2, line 5, line 3-4, "AMF provides the UE with "Slice compatibility" information for each of the S-NSSAI which are part of the UE’s Configured NSSAI list. "Slice compatibility" information consists of:" and page 3, 6.X.2, line 5, "List of other S-NSSAIs " (i.e., 6.X.2 provides 3 lists and each of the list has S-NSSAIs that can be registered simultaneously.)).
Regarding Claim 5, SAWG2'140E in view of LUO discloses all the limitation of claim 1.
SAWG2'140E further discloses further comprising:
receiving a mobility registration update request to update a mobility registration for the wireless device, the mobility registration update request comprising [[a]](page 5 paragraph 8, Fig.6.X.3.1-1:8, "UE may either trigger an initial registration procedure, or a mobility/periodic registration update at this step." (i.e., Fig.6.X.3.1-1:8 showing UE mobility reg. request.)); and
transmitting a mobility registration update response to the wireless device indicating whether the one of the plurality of lists of network slices associated with the list identifier is registered for the wireless device (page 5 paragraph 9, Fig.6.X.3.1-1:9, "AMF proceeds with the registration procedure as described in clause 4.2.2.2 in TS 23.502 [6]. AMF sends Registration Accept to the UE, and includes S-NSSAI-A, S-NSSAI-B, S-NSSAI-C in the list of Allowed NSSAI since they are compatible." (i.e., AMF responds back with allowed NSSAI.)).
LUO further discloses the list identifier (paragraph [0078], "The at least one first network slice may be understood as a network slice list (or a network slice set) supported by or corresponding to the first identifier…" and paragraph [0079], "The RRC message may include a slice list corresponding to the first identifier. Optionally, the RRC message may further include the first identifier. In other words, the RRC message may include a mapping relationship (or a correspondence) between the first identifier and the slice list…" (i.e., the slice list with an identifier. The slice list is understood as NSSAI and that is comprised of S-NSSAI. Examiner also points to par.96 Fig.3 for visual of slices.)).
The proposed combination as well as the motivations for combining the references presented in the rejection of the parent claim apply to this claim and are incorporated herein by reference.
Regarding Claim 6, SAWG2'140E in view of LUO discloses all the limitation of claim 5.
SAWG2'140E further discloses wherein the mobility registration update request further identifies a network slice that the wireless device requests to register (page 5 paragraph 9, Fig.6.X.3.1-1:9, "AMF proceeds with the registration procedure as described in clause 4.2.2.2 in TS 23.502 [6]. AMF sends Registration Accept to the UE, and includes S-NSSAI-A, S-NSSAI-B, S-NSSAI-C in the list of Allowed NSSAI since they are compatible." (i.e., AMF providing UE with Allowed NSSAI that has S-NSAAI-A-B-C.)),
and wherein the identified network slice is included in the one of the plurality of lists of network slices (page 4, under "note", paragraph 2, "UE shall first initiate a mobility or periodic registration procedure with the network with the Requested NSSAI" (i.e., S-NSSAI are found in NSSAI.)).
Regarding Claim 8, SAWG2'140E in view of LUO discloses all the limitation of claim 1.
SAWG2'140E further discloses wherein the information describing a plurality of lists of network slices that can be registered simultaneously by the wireless device identifies one or more additional configured network selection assistance information, NSSAI, that are configured for the wireless device (page 3, 6.X.2, line 5-6, "List of other S-NSSAIs in the Configured NSSAI list the current S-NSSAI is allowed to simultaneously register with;" (i.e., 6.X.2 shows the three list #1, #2, and #3. By providing list #1 with #2 and #3 it shows one or more of NSSAI that is configured for the UE.)),
wherein each of the one or more additional configured NSSAI indicates a set of network slices that are allowed to be used simultaneously with the requested network slice (page 3, 6.X.2, line 5-6, "List of other S-NSSAIs in the Configured NSSAI list the current S-NSSAI is allowed to simultaneously register with;" (i.e., NSSAI is composed of S-NSSAI.)).
Regarding Claim 10, SAWG2'140E in view of LUO discloses all the limitation of claim 1.
SAWG2'140E further discloses wherein the message comprises an initial registration request to register the wireless device to the core network (page 5 paragraph 1, Fig.6.X.3.1-1:1, "UE initiates initial Registration Request, and includes the support for the capability, "Support for simultaneous slice usage constraints"." (i.e., UE initiates a reg. request.)),
and wherein the response comprises a mobility registration update response (page 5 paragraph 7, Fig.6.X.3.1-1:7, "AMF sends Registration Accept to the UE. AMF includes the Configured NSSAI, and the slice compatibility information for each Configured S-NSSAI." (i.e., the AMF responds to the UE reg. request.)).
Regarding Claim 11, SAWG2'140E in view of LUO discloses all the limitation of claim 1.
SAWG2'140E further discloses wherein the message comprises a mobility registration update request (page 5 paragraph 8, Fig.6.X.3.1-1:8, "UE may either trigger an initial registration procedure, or a mobility/periodic registration update at this step." (i.e., UE initiates an update request.)),
and wherein the response comprises a mobility registration update response (page 5 paragraph 9, Fig.6.X.3.1-1:9, "AMF proceeds with the registration procedure as described in clause 4.2.2.2 in TS 23.502 [6]. AMF sends Registration Accept to the UE, and includes S-NSSAI-A, S-NSSAI-B, S-NSSAI-C in the list of Allowed NSSAI since they are compatible." (i.e., AMF responds to the mobility request.)).
Regarding Claim 12, SAWG2'140E in view of LUO discloses all the limitation of claim 11.
SAWG2'140E further discloses wherein the registration request comprises [[a]](page 5, paragraph 8, Fig.6.X.3.1-1:8, "UE includes S-NSSAI-A, S-NSSAI-B, S-NSSAI-C in the Requested NSSAI list in Registration Request, as these three slices are allowed to be registered simultaneously as per the received slice compatibility information." (i.e., UE requests network slices to register simultaneously as shown by Fig.6.X.3.1-1:8.)).
LUO discloses the list identifier associated with one of the plurality of lists of network slices (paragraph [0078], "The at least one first network slice may be understood as a network slice list (or a network slice set) supported by or corresponding to the first identifier…" and paragraph [0079], "The RRC message may include a slice list corresponding to the first identifier. Optionally, the RRC message may further include the first identifier. In other words, the RRC message may include a mapping relationship (or a correspondence) between the first identifier and the slice list…" and paragraph [0137], "It may be understood that the second identifier is introduced herein only to represent a slice area corresponding to the second access network device, for example, the information about the second access network slice, and has no other special meaning." (i.e., the slice list with an identifier. The slice list is understood as NSSAI and that is comprised of S-NSSAI.)).
The proposed combination as well as the motivations for combining the references presented in the rejection of the parent claim apply to this claim and are incorporated herein by reference.
Regarding Claim 13, SAWG2'140E in view of LUO discloses all the limitation of claim 1.
SAWG2'140E further discloses wherein the core network function comprises an access and mobility management function, AMF (page 5 paragraph 2-3, Fig.6.X.3.1-1:2,3, "AMF receives the subscribed NSSAI list from UDM." (i.e., Fig.6.X.3.1-1 shows an AMF.)).
Regarding Claim 14, which is similar in scope to claim 1, thus rejected under the same rationale.
Regarding Claim 15, which is similar in scope to claim 1, thus rejected under the same rationale.
Regarding Claim 17, which is similar in scope to claim 1, thus rejected under the same rationale.
Claim(s) 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SAWG2'140E (SA WG2 Meeting #140E S2-2005804) (IDS, 09/30/2023, 8 pages) in view of LUO (US-20220394608-A1) in further view of SO (US-20200107250-A1).
Regarding Claim 9, SAWG2'140E in view of LUO discloses all the limitation of claim 8.
However, SAWG2'140E in view of LUO do not disclose wherein the response further comprises information identifying additional configured network slices for a serving network and a home network of the wireless device.
SO discloses wherein the response further comprises information identifying additional configured network slices for a serving network and a home network of the wireless device (paragraph [0044], "during the UE Registration with the serving PLMN…the serving VPLMN will then map the Subscribed S-NSSAI(s) configured by the HPLMN to the applicable S-NSSAI(s) configured by the serving VPLMN." And paragraph [0046], “the set of provisioned/configured S-NSSAI configured by the HPLMN… the corresponding mapping S-NSSAI(s) configured by the VPLMN” (i.e., Provide UE with S-NSSAI(s) that is configured by HPLMN.)).
SAWG2'140E in view of LUO and SO are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field Affiliation to network, e.g. registration. 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 SAWG2'140E to implement the method of SO in order to provide consistent roaming with slices that similar to slices in HPLMN (SO, paragraph [0055], "in case of roaming, the UE's serving PLMN is the VPLMN, and hence, the UE, VPLMN and HPLMN are all required to support Coexistent Slicing Group in order to enable this feature.").
Claim(s) 18-20, 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SO (US-20200107250-A1) in view of LUO (US-20220394608-A1).
Regarding Claim 18, SO discloses A method of operating a core network node, comprising:
receiving, at a Unified Data Management, UDM, function, a request from an access and mobility management function, AMF, for network slice subscription data for a user equipment, UE (paragraph [0126], Fig.4:3a, "…then initial AMF request UE's Slice Selection Subscription data from UDM by invoking the Nudm_SDM_Get (see clause 5.2.3.3.1 in 3GPP TS 23.502 [3]) service operation. UDM may get this information from UDR by Nudr_UDM_Query(SUPI, Subscribed S-NSSAIs). In addition, if the serving PLMN, and in case of roaming, the Home PLMN and the UE are capable of supporting the Coexistent Slicing Group, the initial AMF includes also the UE's capability in Nudm_SDM_Get service operation." (i.e., Fig.4:3a shows UDM receiving a message from AMF for network slice subscription data.));
obtaining the network slice subscription data for the UE (paragraph [0126], "UDM responds with slice selection data to initial AMF with the consideration for the support for the Coexistent Slicing Group in the serving PLMN," and paragraph [0025], “In some embodiment disclosed in the present document, network slices within the Coexistent Slicing Group can serve the UE simultaneously.” (i.e., UDM provides AMF with slice selection that can serve the UE simultaneously.)),
the network slice subscription data comprising a plurality of lists of subscribed network slices that can be used simultaneously by the UE (paragraph [0154], "the coexistent slice grouping technique groups network slices in groups in which intra-group network slices are capable of serving the wireless terminal simultaneously" (i.e., creating plurality of groups of slices that are capable to serve the UE simultaneously.))
and identifiers for the plurality of lists of subscribed network slices that can be used simultaneously by the UE (paragraph [0156], "the signaling mechanism includes an additional identifier for the S-NSSAI that signals the one or more coexistent slice groupings." and paragraph [0155], "a slice descriptor field, such as the SD field depicted in FIG. 3, of an identifier of the S-NSSAI." (i.e., the S-NSSAI have an identifier such as SD field. The identifier for the list or group will be mapped by another prior art.)); and
transmitting the network slice subscription data including the identifiers for the plurality of lists of subscribed network slices that can be used simultaneously by the UE to the AMF (paragraph [0127], Fig.4:3b, "3b. UDM to initial AMF: Response to Nudm_SDM_Get. The AMF gets the Slice Selection Subscription data including Subscribed S-NSSAIs. The UDM may provide indication that the subscription data for network slicing is updated for the UE." (i.e., UDM transmitting to the AMF.)).
However, SO does not explicitly disclose identifiers for the plurality of lists of subscribed network slices.
LUO discloses identifiers for the plurality of lists of subscribed network slices (paragraph [0078], "The at least one first network slice may be understood as a network slice list (or a network slice set) supported by or corresponding to the first identifier…" and paragraph [0079], "The RRC message may include a slice list corresponding to the first identifier. Optionally, the RRC message may further include the first identifier. In other words, the RRC message may include a mapping relationship (or a correspondence) between the first identifier and the slice list…" and paragraph [0137], "It may be understood that the second identifier is introduced herein only to represent a slice area corresponding to the second access network device, for example, the information about the second access network slice, and has no other special meaning." (i.e., the slice list with an identifier.)).
SO and LUO are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field Affiliation to network, e.g. registration. 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 SO to implement identifier for the list such as an identifier for NSSAI in order to have increase efficiency on communication between UDM, AMF, and the UE and help with UE to reduce power consumption (LUO, paragraph [0010], “to reduce a procedure in which the terminal device triggers an application for the information about the at least one first network slice corresponding to the first identifier, and help reduce the power consumption of the terminal device.”).
Regarding Claim 19, which is similar in scope to claim 18, thus rejected under the same rationale.
Regarding Claim 20, which is similar in scope to claim 18, thus rejected under the same rationale.
Regarding Claim 22, which is similar in scope to claim 18, thus rejected under the same rationale.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 Erkin S. Abdullaev whose telephone number is (571)272-4135. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday - 8:00 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Wesley Kim can be reached at (571)272-7867. 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.
ERKIN S. ABDULLAEV
Examiner
Art Unit 2648
/ERKIN ABDULLAEV/Examiner, Art Unit 2648
/WESLEY L KIM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2648