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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 has 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
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.
Claims 1,2,4,6,7,10,12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhu et al. (WO 2022001318, hereinafter Zhu) in view of Kumar at el. (US 20200296569) in further view of Ying et al. (US 20200374698, hereinafter Ying)
Regarding claim 1, Zhu discloses a method of handling rejection and admission of a terminal device to a core network, CN, of a telecommunication system, the method comprising:
receiving a terminal device registration request indicative of the terminal requesting access to the telecommunication system (Page 53: Lines 28-30; The terminal device initiates a registration request by sending a registration request message to the access network device. The access network device receives the registration request message from the terminal device; Page 38: Lines 6-8; The AMF receives a registration request from the terminal device);
sending, to a network slice selection function, NSSF, of the CN, a CN registration request message indicative of the terminal device registration request (Page 38: Lines 40-43; The AMF sends to the NSSF, first radio resource information, the identifier of the network slice to which the terminal device requests access, and first location of the terminal device) and wherein the CN registration request message is further indicative of at least one network slice of the telecommunication system (Page 38: Lines 40-43; The message from the AMF to the NSSF includes the identifier of the network slice to which the terminal device requests access);
receiving, from the NSSF, a CN response message indicative of admission to at least one network slice regarding the terminal device (Page 42: Lines 43-44 and Page 43: Line 1; The NSSF sends the identifier of the network slice to which the terminal device is allowed to access to the AMF);
and sending a registration acceptance message to the terminal device when the received CN response message is indicative of admission of the terminal device to at least one network slice (Page 61: Lines 9-11; The AMF sends a registration accept message to the terminal device. The registration accept message includes an identifier of a network slice to which the terminal device is allowed access; A registration accept message including an identifier of a network slice to which the terminal device is allowed access to would only be sent if the NSSF provided the AMF with the slice identifier after admission to the slice).
Zhu does not disclose wherein the CN request message comprises information comprised in an identifier of the terminal device, request and admission to a slice regarding the terminal device is based on the information comprised in the identifier of the terminal device, and sending a registration accept message to the terminal device when at least one of authentication, registration and session management, SM, policy control of the terminal device is successfully performed by an access and mobility function, AMF, of the CN.
Kumar, however, discloses a request message comprising information comprised in an identifier of the terminal device (Par. 115: Lines 23-44; Registration requests can include user identity (5G Globally Unique Temporary Identity (GUTI), Subscription Permanent Identifier (SUPI) or Permanent Equipment Identifier (PEI)); A GUTI, SUPI and PEI are each identifiers of the terminal device or subscriber and comprises information identifying the terminal device). Kumar further discloses that the AMF processes the registration request and communicates with the NSSF as past of the network slice selection procedure (Par. 115: Lines 23-62; The AMF shares device capabilities and NSSAI with the NSSF, and the NSSF sends a response allowing network slice selection).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of Zhu to include, in the CN registration request message sent from the AMF to the NSSF, information comprised in an identifier of the terminal device, as taught by Kumar, such as user identity information including a GUTI, SUPI, or PEI. Doing so would allow the NSSF to make network slice selection and admission decisions using the terminal's registration context and identity information while preserving compatibility with standard 5G registration procedures. Furthermore, Kumar teaches that registration requests include such identifier information and that the registration procedure includes authentication followed by transmission of a registration accept message, thereby yielding the claimed registration acceptance message when authentication and registration have been successfully performed. The combination merely applies Kumar's well-known registration identity information within Zhu's network slice selection procedure to improve identification and management of the terminal during slice selection and admission, resulting in the predictable use of prior art elements according to their established functions.
Zhu in view of Kumar does not disclose sending a registration acceptance message to the terminal device when the received CN response message is indicative of admission of the terminal device to at least one network slice and when at least one of authentication, registration and session management, SM, policy control of the terminal device is successfully performed by an access and mobility function, AMF, of the CN.
Ying, however, discloses sending a registration acceptance message to the terminal device when at least one of authentication, registration and session management, SM, policy control of the terminal device is successfully performed by an access and mobility function, AMF, of the CN (Par. 160: The authentication is successful, the AMF sends a registration accept message to the terminal; Par. 65; The AMF is responsible for authentication on the terminal; The registration acceptance message would only be sent if the received CN response message was indicative of admission; No patentable weight given to the optional limitations due to optional language “or”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified the combined method of Zhu and Kumar to send the registration acceptance message after successful authentication of the terminal device by the AMF, as taught by Ying. Doing so ensures that a registration acceptance message is transmitted only after the terminal device has both been admitted to the selected network slice, as taught by Zhu, and successfully authenticated by the AMF, as taught by Ying, thereby improving the reliability and security of the network registration procedure while maintaining compatibility with established 5G registration procedures. The combination merely applies Ying's well-known authentication-controlled registration completion to Zhu's network slice admission procedure, as enhanced by Kumar's inclusion of terminal identifier information, resulting in the predictable use of prior art elements according to their established functions.
Regarding claim 2 as applied to claim 1, Zhu discloses wherein the terminal
device registration request comprises an indication of at least one of:
at least one network slice (Page 38: Lines 40-43; The message from the AMF to
the NSSF includes the identifier of the network slice to which the terminal device
requests access);
and a slice and/or service type, SST, of at least one network slice (No patentable
weight given due to the optional language "at least one of").
Regarding claim 4 as applied to claim 1, Zhu discloses wherein the terminal
device registration request comprises network slice selection assistance information,
NSSAI (Par. 38: Lines 9-15; The registration request message may include the
requested NSSAI that may include one S-NSSAI or multiple S-NSSAIs).
Regarding claim 6 as applied to claim 5, Zhu in view of Kumar in further view of Ying disclose the limitations of claim 5 but do not disclose wherein the information comprised in the identifier of the terminal device comprises at least one of a subscriber permanent identifier, SUPI, and an international mobile subscriber identity, IMSI.
Kumar, however, discloses wherein the information comprised in the identifier of the terminal device comprises at least one of a subscriber permanent identifier, SUPI, and an international mobile subscriber identity, IMSI (Par. 115: Lines 23-44; Registration requests can include user identity (5G Globally Unique Temporary Identity (GUTI), Subscription Permanent Identifier (SUPI) or Permanent Equipment Identifier (PEI)); A GUTI, SUPI and PEI are each identifiers of the terminal device or subscriber and comprises information identifying the terminal device).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have implemented the identifier information of the combined method of Zhu, Kumar, and Ying such that the information comprised in the identifier of the terminal device comprises at least one of a Subscription Permanent Identifier (SUPI) and an International Mobile Subscriber Identity (IMSI), as taught by Kumar. Doing so would provide a standardized and unique subscriber identifier for use during the registration procedure, thereby facilitating reliable identification of the terminal device and its associated subscription information while maintaining compatibility with established 5G registration procedures. The modification merely applies Kumar's well-known subscriber identifier format within the registration and network slice selection procedure of Zhu, as further enhanced by Ying, resulting in the predictable use of prior art elements according to their established functions.
Regarding claim 7 as applied to claim 1, Zhu discloses wherein the CN
registration request message comprises a tracking area identity, TAI, associated with
the terminal device and/or with the at least one network slice indicated in the terminal
device registration request (Page 38: Lines 40-43; The AMF sends to the NSSF, first
radio resource information, the identifier of the network slice to which the terminal
device requests access, and first location of the terminal device; Page. 5: Last
Paragraph; The first location information corresponds to a TAI; The remaining
limitations were given no patentable weight due to the optional language "and/or").
Regarding claim 10 as applied to claim 9, Zhu discloses wherein the
registration acceptance message comprises an indication of the least one network slice
to which the terminal device is admitted (Page 43: Lines 22-25; The AMF sends to the
terminal a registration accept message along with the identification of the allowed
network slice).
Regarding claim 12 as applied to claim 1, Zhu discloses wherein the method is
performed by at least one access and mobility function, AMF, of the CN (Page 2:
Summary of the Invention: Par. 3; The CN device may be an AMF).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhu et al. (WO 2022001318, hereinafter Zhu) in view of Kumar at el. (US 20200296569) in further view of Ying et al. (US 20200374698, hereinafter Ying) in further view of Sugawara (WO 2021090878)
Regarding claim 3 as applied to claim 1, Zhu in view of Kumar in further view of Ying disclose a terminal registration request message that includes NSSAI (as detailed in the rejection of claim 1). Zhu in view of Kumar in further view of Ying do not disclose wherein the terminal device registration request further comprises an indication of a slice differentiator, SD, of the least one network slice.
Sugawara, however, discloses the composition of S-NSSAI information (Page
16: Last Paragraph: Lines 1-3; The S-NSSAI may be composed of both SST
(Slice/Service Type and SD).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art
before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the NSSAI in Zhu (in
view of Kumar) to include the standard S-NSSAI composition taught by Sugawara (SST
+ SD), so that the terminal registration request carries both SST and SD. Doing so
would merely apply the known, standardized S-NSSAI structure to the existing NSSAI-
based registration procedure to enable finer differentiation among slices, a predictable
use of SD that would have involved nothing more than routine design choice.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhu et al. (WO 2022001318, hereinafter Zhu) in view of Kumar at el. (US 20200296569) in further view of Ying et al. (US 20200374698, hereinafter Ying) in further view of Li (US 20200296617)
Regarding claim 5 as applied to claim 1, Zhu in view of Kumar in further view of Ying does not disclose wherein the information comprised in the identifier of the terminal device is indicative of a priority of the terminal device.
Li, however, discloses wherein the information comprised in the identifier of the terminal device is indicative of a priority of the terminal device (Par. 19: Lines 1-7; The user information includes a user level identifier, and the user level identifier is used to indicate the priority of the user).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified the combined method of Zhu, Kumar, and Ying such that the information comprised in the identifier of the terminal device is indicative of a priority of the terminal device, as taught by Li. Doing so would enable the core network to readily identify the priority associated with the terminal device and appropriately prioritize registration, network slice admission, and allocation of network resources according to the terminal device's priority, thereby improving the efficiency and management of network services. The modification merely applies the well-known use of identifier information to indicate user priority within the registration and network slice selection procedure of Zhu, as enhanced by Kumar and Ying, resulting in the predictable use of prior art elements according to their established functions
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhu et al. (WO 2022001318, hereinafter Zhu) in view of Kumar at el. (US 20200296569) in further view of Ying et al. (US 20200374698, hereinafter Ying) in further view of Schliwa-Bertling Paul et al. (WO 2020104969, hereinafter Schliwa)
Regarding claim 11, Zhu in view of Kumar in further view of Ying discloses selectively initiating registration in response to determining that the terminal device is admitted (as discussed in the rejection of claim 1), but does not disclose selectively initiating the registration further comprising sending an indication of the initiation of the registration of the terminal device to a Network Slice Admission Control Function (NSACF).
Schliwa, however, discloses selectively initiating the registration further comprising sending an indication of the initiation of the registration of the terminal device to a Network Slice Admission Control Function (NSACF). Specifically, Schliwa discloses that, where admission control is performed on a per S-NSSAI basis, the Network Data Analytics Function (NWDAF) subscribes to registering and deregistering events in the Access and Mobility Management Function (AMF), and the registration event information is provided to the Network Slice Selection Function (NSSF) so that the NSSF may maintain and update the number of users associated with the S-NSSAI for admission control purposes (Par. 80: Lines 33-38). The registration events generated by the AMF constitute an indication of the initiation of registration of the terminal device, and the indication is provided to the admission-control architecture responsible for maintaining admission information for the network slice.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Zhu in view of Kumar and Ying to further transmit an indication of a terminal device registration event generated by the AMF to the admission-control architecture, as taught by Li, so that admission-control information, including the number of users associated with a network slice, may be maintained and updated. Doing so would have predictably improved the accuracy of network slice admission control by ensuring that admission decisions are based on current registration information while using known techniques for communicating registration events between network functions.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FABIAN BOTELLO whose telephone number is (571)272-4439. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 am - 5:30 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.
/FABIAN BOTELLO/Examiner, Art Unit 2648
/WESLEY L KIM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2648
Prosecution Insights