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 .
The applicant filed preliminary amendment in 02/01/2024 and claims 8-14, 32-34, and 36-37 are pending in the application, including independent claims 8, 14 and 32.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 02/01/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 8 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) (1) as being anticipated by Kim et al. [hereinafter as Kim] US 2022/0330128 A1.
Regarding claim 8, Kim discloses wherein a first edge enabler server (EES) comprising (Fig.1-2&10 [0164], a source EES/first edge enabler server (EES) 100):
a memory (Fig.1-2&10 [0166], a memory 1012); and
at least one processor coupled to the memory (Fig.1-2&10 [0165]-[0166], a controller 1011/ processor coupled to the memory 1012) and
configured to send a control message to a User Equipment (UE) indicating that the first EES is scheduled to be shut down or be unavailable (Fig.1-2&8 [0146], the source EES 100 is configured to transmit notification message i.e., control message to the EEC 52 of the UE 50 indicating that the source EES/first EES unavailability at step 801, notification for “out of service” i.e., scheduled to be unavailable and Fig.9 [0155]-[0156], the source EES 100 is determining the necessity of interaction to be unavailability for notification of Out of Service).
Regarding claim 14, Kim discloses wherein a method performed by a first edge enabler server (EES) (Fig.1-2&10 [0164], a method performed by a source EES/first edge enabler server (EES) 100), the method comprising:
sending a control message to a User Equipment (UE) indicating that the first EES
is scheduled to be shut down or be unavailable (Fig.1-2&8 [0146], the source EES 100 is configured to transmit notification message i.e., control message to the EEC 52 of the UE 50 indicating that the source EES/first EES unavailability at step 801, notification for “out of service” i.e., scheduled to be unavailable and Fig.9 [0155]-[0156], the source EES 100 is determining the necessity of interaction to be unavailability for notification of Out of Service).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 9, 11, 13, 32, 33, 36 and 37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. [hereinafter as Kim] US 2022/0330128 A1 in view of Kim et al. [hereinafter as Kim] U.S 2021/0352156 A1.
Regarding claim 9, Kim’128 disclose all the elements of claim 8 as stated above.
However, Kim’128 does not explicitly discloses wherein the control message causes the UE to send an edge enabler client (EEC) registration request to a second EES different from the first EES.
In the same field of endeavor, Kim’156 teaches wherein the control message causes the UE to send an edge enabler client (EEC) registration request to a second EES different from the first EES (Fig.5 [0119][0121], at operation 540 & 544, notification for dynamic information message/control message causes the EEC 52 of the UE 1 to send an edge enabler client (EEC) registration request to the target EES 200 i.e., a second EES different from the first EES 100).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide to have modified Kim’128 to incorporate the teaching of Kim’156 in order to provide development for 5G communication system network improvement. It would have been beneficial to use a notification for dynamic information message/control message at operation 540 & 544 which causes the EEC 52 of the UE 1 to send an edge enabler client (EEC) registration request to the target EES 200 i.e., a second EES different from the first EES 100 as taught by Kim’156 to have incorporated in the system of Kim’128 to provide for ultralow-latency services. (Kim’156, Fig.1 [0055] and Fig.5 [0119][0121])
Regarding claim 11, Kim’128 disclose all the elements of claim 8 as stated above.
However, Kim’128 does not explicitly discloses wherein the control message causes the UE to determine whether to send an edge enabler client (EEC) registration request to a second EES or an EEC deregistration request to the first EES.
In the same field of endeavor, Kim’156 teaches wherein the control message causes the UE to determine whether to send an edge enabler client (EEC) registration request to a second EES or an EEC deregistration request to the first EES (Fig.5 [0119][0121], at operation 540 & 544, notification for dynamic information message/control message causes the EEC 52 of the UE 1 to determine whether to send an edge enabler client (EEC) registration request to the target EES 200 i.e., a second EES).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide to have modified Kim’128 to incorporate the teaching of Kim’156 in order to provide development for 5G communication system network improvement. It would have been beneficial to use a notification for dynamic information message/control message at operation 540 & 544 which causes the EEC 52 of the UE 1 to determine to send an edge enabler client (EEC) registration request to the target EES 200 i.e., a second EES different from the first EES 100 as taught by Kim’156 to have incorporated in the system of Kim’128 to provide for ultralow-latency services. (Kim’156, Fig.1 [0055] and Fig.5 [0119][0121])
Regarding claim 13, Kim’128 disclose all the elements of claim 8 as stated above.
However, Kim’128 does not explicitly discloses wherein the control message is an edge enabler client (EEC) registration update response, an EEC registration response, an EEC deregistration response, an edge application server (EAS) discovery response, or an EAS discovery notification.
In the same field of endeavor, Kim’156 teaches wherein the control message is an edge enabler client (EEC) registration update response, an EEC registration response, an EEC deregistration response, an edge application server (EAS) discovery response, or an EAS discovery notification (Fig.1-2 [0060]-[0061], the control message is an edge enabler client (EEC) registration update response, an EEC registration response, an EEC deregistration response, an edge application server (EAS) discovery response, or an EAS discovery notification).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide to have modified Kim’128 to incorporate the teaching of Kim’156 in order to provide development for 5G communication system network improvement. It would have been beneficial to use the control message which is an edge enabler client (EEC) registration update response, an EEC registration response, an EEC deregistration response, an edge application server (EAS) discovery response, or an EAS discovery notification as taught by Kim’156 to have incorporated in the system of Kim’128 to provide for ultralow-latency services. (Kim’156, Fig.1 [0055] and Fig.2 [0060]-[0061])
Regarding claim 32, Kim’128 discloses wherein a User Equipment (UE) comprising (Fig.1-2&8 [0040][0048], UE 50):
a memory (Fig.1-2 [0040], a memory); and
at least one processor coupled to the memory and configured to (Fig.1-2 [0040], a processor coupled to the memory and configured to):
receive a control message from a first edge enabler server (EES) or an edge
configuration server indicating that the first EES is scheduled to be shut down or be
unavailable (Fig.2&8 [0146], the EEC 52 of the UE 50 is receiving notification message i.e., control message from a source EES 100 or an edge configuration server indicating that the source EES/first EES unavailability at step 801, notification for “out of service” i.e., scheduled to be unavailable and Fig.9 [0155]-[0156], the source EES 100 is determining the necessity of interaction to be unavailability for notification of Out of Service).
However, Kim’128 does not explicitly discloses wherein depending on receiving the control message, send an edge enabler client (EEC) registration request to a second EES different from the first EES.
In the same field of endeavor, Kim’156 teaches wherein depending on receiving the control message, send an edge enabler client (EEC) registration request to a second EES different from the first EES (Fig.5 [0119][0121], at operation 544, the EEC 52 of the UE 1 to send an edge enabler client (EEC) registration request to the target EES 200 i.e., a second EES different from the first EES 100, depending on receiving notification for dynamic information message/control message at operation 540).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide to have modified Kim’128 to incorporate the teaching of Kim’156 in order to provide development for 5G communication system network improvement. It would have been beneficial to send an edge enabler client (EEC) registration request at operation 544 from the EEC 52 of the UE 1 to the target EES 200 i.e., a second EES different from the first EES 100, depending on receiving notification for dynamic information message/control message at operation 540 as taught by Kim’156 to have incorporated in the system of Kim’128 to provide for ultralow-latency services. (Kim’156, Fig.1 [0055] and Fig.5 [0119][0121])
Regarding claim 33, Kim’128 and Kim’156 disclose all the elements of claim 32 as stated above wherein Kim’156 further discloses the at least one processor is configured to determine, based on the control message, whether to send the EEC registration request to the second EES or an EEC deregistration request to the first EES (Fig.5 [0119][0121], at operation 540 & 544, notification for dynamic information message/control message causes the EEC 52 of the UE 1 to determine whether to send an edge enabler client (EEC) registration request to the target EES 200 i.e., a second EES different from the first EES 100).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide to have modified Kim’128 to incorporate the teaching of Kim’156 in order to provide development for 5G communication system network improvement. It would have been beneficial to use a notification for dynamic information message/control message at operation 540 & 544 which causes the EEC 52 of the UE 1 to determine to send an edge enabler client (EEC) registration request to the target EES 200 i.e., a second EES different from the first EES 100 as taught by Kim’156 to have incorporated in the system of Kim’128 to provide for ultralow-latency services. (Kim’156, Fig.1 [0055] and Fig.5 [0119][0121])
Regarding claim 36, Kim’128 and Kim’156 disclose all the elements of claim 32 as stated above wherein Kim’128 further discloses the control message is sent by the first EES (Fig.1-2&8 [0146], the notification message i.e., control message is sent by the source EES 100/first EES).
Regarding claim 37, Kim’128 and Kim’156 disclose all the elements of claim 36 as stated above wherein Kim’156 further discloses the control message is an edge enabler client (EEC) registration update response, an EEC registration response, an EEC deregistration response, an edge application server (EAS) discovery response, or an EAS discovery notification (Fig.1-2 [0060]-[0061], the control message is an edge enabler client (EEC) registration update response, an EEC registration response, an EEC deregistration response, an edge application server (EAS) discovery response, or an EAS discovery notification).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide to have modified Kim’128 to incorporate the teaching of Kim’156 in order to provide development for 5G communication system network improvement. It would have been beneficial to use the control message which is an edge enabler client (EEC) registration update response, an EEC registration response, an EEC deregistration response, an edge application server (EAS) discovery response, or an EAS discovery notification as taught by Kim’156 to have incorporated in the system of Kim’128 to provide for ultralow-latency services. (Kim’156, Fig.1 [0055] and Fig.2 [0060]-[0061])
Claims 10 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Kim et al. [hereinafter as Kim] U.S 2022/0330128 A1 in view of Sabella et al. (provisional application No. 63/130317 filed on 12/23/2020) [hereinafter as Sabella] U.S 2022/0086218 A1.
Regarding claim 10, Kim’128 discloses all the elements of claim 8 as stated above.
However, Kim’128 does not explicitly discloses wherein the control message causes the UE to send an edge enabler client (EEC) deregistration request to the first EES.
In the same field of endeavor, Sabella teaches wherein the control message causes the UE to send an edge enabler client (EEC) deregistration request to the first EES (Fig.21 [0213], control message causes the EEC 2115 of the UE 1 to send an edge enabler client (EEC) de-registration request to the source EES 100 i.e., a first EES).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide to have modified Kim’128 to incorporate the teaching of Sabella in order to provide for ultra-low latency services. It would have been beneficial to use the control message which causes the EEC 2115 of the UE 1 to send an edge enabler client (EEC) de-registration request to the source EES 100 i.e., a first EES as taught by Sabella to have incorporated in the system of Kim’128 to provide for ultra-high reliability and high data capacity requirements. (Sabella, Fig.21 [0213] and Fig.18 [0204])
Regarding claim 12, Kim’128 discloses all the elements of claim 8 as stated above.
However, Kim’128 does not explicitly discloses wherein the control message indicates a grace period until the first EES becomes unavailable, or a date and time or period of time when the first EES is unavailable.
In the same field of endeavor, Sabella teaches wherein the control message indicates a grace period until the first EES becomes unavailable, or a date and time or period of time when the first EES is unavailable (Fig.1&4-5 [0030][0044][0081], the control message indicates a MEC application start-up procedure(s) and/or MEC application graceful termination/stop i.e., grace period until the first EES becomes unavailable, or a date and time or period of time when the first EES is unavailable).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide to have modified Kim’128 to incorporate the teaching of Sabella in order to provide for ultra-low latency services. It would have been beneficial to use the control message which indicates a MEC application start-up procedure(s) and/or MEC application graceful termination/stop i.e., grace period until the first EES becomes unavailable, or a date and time or period of time when the first EES is unavailable as taught by Sabella to have incorporated in the system of Kim’128 to provide for ultra-high reliability and high data capacity requirements. (Sabella, Fig.1&4-5 [0030][0044][0081] and Fig.18 [0204])
Claim 34 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. [hereinafter as Kim] U.S 2022/0330128 A1 in view of Kim et al. [hereinafter as Kim] U.S 2021/0352156 A1 further in view of Sabella et al. (provisional application No. 63/130317 filed on 12/23/2020) [hereinafter as Sabella] U.S 2022/0086218 A1.
Regarding claim 34, Kim’128 and Kim’156 discloses all the elements of claim 32 as stated above.
However, Kim’128 and Kim’156 does not explicitly discloses wherein the control message indicates a grace period until the first EES becomes unavailable, or a date and time or period of time when the first EES is unavailable.
In the same field of endeavor, Sabella teaches wherein the control message indicates a grace period until the first EES becomes unavailable, or a date and time or period of time when the first EES is unavailable (Fig.1&4-5 [0030][0044][0081], the control message indicates a MEC application start-up procedure(s) and/or MEC application graceful termination/stop i.e., grace period until the first EES becomes unavailable, or a date and time or period of time when the first EES is unavailable).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide to have modified Kim’128 and Kim’156 to incorporate the teaching of Sabella in order to provide for ultra-low latency services. It would have been beneficial to use the control message which indicates a MEC application start-up procedure(s) and/or MEC application graceful termination/stop i.e., grace period until the first EES becomes unavailable, or a date and time or period of time when the first EES is unavailable as taught by Sabella to have incorporated in the system of Kim’128 and Kim’156 to provide for ultra-high reliability and high data capacity requirements. (Sabella, Fig.1&4-5 [0030][0044][0081] and Fig.18 [0204])
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Yao et al. (Pub. No.: US 2024/0137269 A1) teaches Method for Instantiating Edge application Server and Apparatus.
Ge et al. (Pub. No.: US 2024/0121672 A1) teaches Context Relocation Method and Apparatus.
Takakura et al. (Pub. No.: US 2024/0107424 A1) teaches Server, Requesting Entity and Methods Therefor.
Gupta et al. (Pub. No.: US 2022/0369218 A1) teaches Method and System for Distributed Discovery and Notification for Edge Computing.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VANNEILIAN LALCHINTHANG whose telephone number is (571)272-6859. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10AM-6PM.
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, Edan Orgad can be reached at (571) 272-7884. 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.
/V.L/Examiner, Art Unit 2414
/EDAN ORGAD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2414