DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 02/18/2026 has been entered and considered by Examiner. Claims 1-5, 7-19, 21-22 are presented for examination. This Action is made FINAL.
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 1-5, 7-19, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Qiao et al. (US Pub. 20200092424 A1) in view of Oktay et al. (US Pub. 20190259092 A1) in further view of Bull et al. (US Pub. 20180013680 A1).
Re Claims 1, 13, and 17, Qiao discloses a system comprising:
at least one memory element for storing data (Figs. 3 and 4) [0107, 0305, 0320]; and
at least one processor for executing instructions associated with the data (Figs. 3 and 4) [0107, 0305, 0320], wherein executing the instructions causes the system to perform operations (Figs. 3 and 4) [0107, 0305, 0320], comprising:
obtaining, by a session management node of a mobile network, usage information for a protocol data unit (PDU) session for a particular user equipment (100) associated with an enterprise entity [0214, 0252, 0259, 0286],
wherein the particular user equipment is utilizing a particular radio resource for a mobile network slice for the PDU session [0286, 0229-230],
the particular radio resource is configured for use by the enterprise entity for the mobile network slice for a plurality of user equipment associated with the enterprise entity including the particular user equipment [0145, 0157-159, 0259, 0286],
the mobile network slice is capable of being utilized by other network entity via at least one other radio resource that is not configured for use by the enterprise entity (Same network slice instance maybe selected employing different S-NSSAI) [0157, 0160, 0163-169], and
one of a radio node of the mobile network that is providing the particular radio resource or a charging function of the mobile network is configured with a mapping [0157, 0173, 0194], the mapping including an identifier of the particular radio resource configured for use by the enterprise entity that is stored in association with an identifier of the enterprise entity [0157-159, 0173, 0194];
reporting charging information for the PDU session of the particular user equipment to the charging function (CHF) of the mobile network to facilitate storing a charging data record (CDR) for the PDU session for the particular user equipment by the charging function [0228-230, 0286-292],
wherein the CDR stored by the charging function is to include the identifier of the enterprise entity for the particular radio resource that the particular user equipment is utilizing for the mobile network slice for the PDU session and that is configured for use by the enterprise entity (The CHF generates the CDR, for the PDU session, to identify session information for the operator/user entity regarding resource usage of the network slice, which was allocated for the PDU session; note the CDR must be originally stored by the CHF, in order to generate the record and update the record at a later time) [0228-230, 0286-292].
But Qiao doesn’t explicitly teach other particular user equipment.
However, Oktay discloses the mobile network slice is capable of being utilized by other particular user equipment via at least one other radio resource that is not configured for use by the enterprise entity (Groups of users from different network entities can share resources of unused and available network slice) [0027, 0031];
Since, all are analogous arts addressing resource allocation used in a mobile network; Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings of Qiao with Oktay to enhance network resource usage, thus, improving resource allocation for the mobile network.
But Qiao with Oktay don’t explicitly teach the mapping including an identifier of the particular radio resource configured for use by the enterprise entity for the plurality of user equipment associated with the enterprise entity in which the particular radio resource is stored in association with an identifier of the enterprise entity and including at least one other identifier for the at least one other radio resource not configured for use by the enterprise entity that is stored in association with at least one identifier for at least one other entity;
However, Bull discloses one of a radio node of the mobile network that is providing the particular radio resource or a charging function of the mobile network is configured with a mapping [0039-41], the mapping including an identifier of the particular radio resource configured for use by the enterprise entity for the plurality of user equipment (12a-12b) associated with the enterprise entity in which the particular radio resource is stored in association with an identifier of the enterprise entity and including at least one other identifier for the at least one other radio resource not configured for use by the enterprise entity that is stored in association with at least one identifier for at least one other entity (Fig. 3, the network node contain the mapping that includes a list of IDs for resource allocation to another network node, the list also contain identifiers that are not current configured for use by any network node that’s awaiting scheduling) [0066-68, 0072-73, 0039-41];
Since, all are analogous arts addressing resource allocation used in a mobile network; Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings of Qiao and Oktay with Bull to allow efficient resource identification and processing, thus, improving processing speed for the mobile network.
Claim 1 differs from claim 17 only by the additional recitation of the following limitation, which is also taught by the cited prior art. The cited prior art Qiao further discloses a method (Figs. 11-12).
All other identical limitations are rejected based on the same rationale as shown above.
Claim 13 differs from claim 17 only by the additional recitation of the following limitation, which is also taught by the cited prior art. The cited prior art Qiao further discloses one or more non-transitory computer readable storage media encoded with instructions that, when executed by a processor, cause the processor to perform operations [0107, 0305, 0320].
All other identical limitations are rejected based on the same rationale as shown above.
Re Claims 2, and 18, Qiao as modified by Oktay and Bull, Oktay further discloses the mobile network slice is operated by a mobile network operator that is not the enterprise entity [0021]. See motivation to combine the references from the above.
Re Claims 3, 14, and 19, Qiao as modified by Oktay and Bull, Oktay further discloses the particular radio resource configured for use by the enterprise entity for the plurality of user equipment associated with the enterprise entity is at least one of:
a radio frequency allocated to the enterprise entity for the mobile network slice [0026];
a radio frequency band allocated to the enterprise entity for the mobile network slice [0026]; or
a radio beam represented by a beam identifier. See motivation to combine the references from the above.
Re Claims 4, and 15, Qiao discloses the obtaining comprises: when the charging function is configured with the mapping, obtaining, by the session management node of the mobile network, a radio usage report from a radio node of the mobile network, the radio usage report comprising the identifier of the enterprise entity and an identifier of the particular radio resource that the particular user equipment is utilizing for the mobile network slice for the PDU session [0286, 0229-230],
obtaining, by the session management node, a usage report from a user plane function of the mobile network, the usage report comprising usage details for the PDU session of the particular user equipment [0286, 0229-230].
Re Claims 5, and 16, Qiao discloses reporting the charging information for the PDU session of the particular user equipment includes reporting the CDR and the identifier of the enterprise entity that is associated with the particular radio resource that the particular user equipment is utilizing for the mobile network slice for the PDU session [0228-230, 0286-292].
Re Claim 7, Qiao discloses the obtaining comprises: when the charging function is configured with the mapping, obtaining, by the session management node of the mobile network, a radio usage report from a radio node of the mobile network, the radio usage report comprising the identifier of the particular radio resource that the particular user equipment is utilizing for the mobile network slice for the PDU session [0214, 0252, 0259, 0286]; and
obtaining, by the session management node, a usage report from a user plane function of the mobile network, the usage report comprising usage details for the PDU session of the particular user equipment [0228-230, 0286-292].
Re Claim 8, Qiao discloses reporting the charging information for the PDU session of the particular user equipment includes reporting the CDR and the identifier of the particular radio resource that the particular user equipment is utilizing for the mobile network slice for the PDU session [0228-230, 0286-292].
Re Claim 9, Qiao discloses when the charging function is configured with the mapping, obtaining, by a radio node of the mobile network, a data packet from the particular user equipment via the particular radio resource [0214, 0252, 0259, 0286];
providing, by the radio node of the mobile network in a header of a data packet [0141], the identifier of the enterprise entity and an identifier of the particular radio resource that the particular user equipment is utilizing for the mobile network slice for the PDU session [0214, 0252, 0259, 0286]; and
forwarding the data packet toward a user plane function (UPF 110) of the mobile network [0249-251, 0285].
Re Claim 10, Qiao discloses the obtaining comprises: obtaining, by the session management node of the mobile network, a report from the user plane function of the mobile network, the report comprising usage details for the PDU session of the particular user equipment, the identifier of the particular radio resource that the particular user equipment is utilizing for the mobile network slice for the PDU session, and the identifier of the enterprise entity [0228-230, 0286-292].
Re Claim 11, Qiao discloses reporting the charging information for the PDU session of the particular user equipment includes reporting the usage details for the PDU session of the particular user equipment, the identifier of the particular radio resource that the particular user equipment is utilizing for the mobile network slice for the PDU session, and the identifier of the enterprise entity [0228-230, 0286-292].
Re Claim 12, Qiao discloses the identifier of the enterprise entity is one of:
a Third Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) Object Identifier (OID) [0223, 0226];
an Organizationally Unique Identifier (OUI) [0286-292]; or
a Roaming Consortium Organizational Identifier (RCOI) [0173].
Re Claim 21, Qiao as modified by Oktay and Bull, Bull further discloses the identifier of the enterprise entity and the identifier of the particular radio resource that the particular user equipment is utilizing for the mobile network slice for the PDU session are included in a user plane General Packet Radio Service (GPRS) Tunneling Protocol (GTP-U) extension header provided by the radio node [0024, 0029-31]. See motivation to combine the references from the above.
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Qiao et al. (US Pub. 20200092424 A1) in view of Oktay et al. (US Pub. 20190259092 A1) in further view of Bull et al. (US Pub. 20180013680 A1) in further view of Ryu et al. (US Pub. 20220159615 A1).
Re Claims 22, Qiao, as modified by Oktay and Bull, discloses all limitations this claim depended on.
But Qiao, as modified by Oktay and Bull, doesn’t explicitly disclose the following limitation taught by Ryu.
Ryu discloses the radio usage report includes a first information element (IE) that includes the identifier of the enterprise entity and includes a second information element (IE) that includes the identifier of the particular radio resource that the particular user equipment is utilizing for the mobile network slice for the PDU session [0230].
Since, all are analogous arts addressing resource allocation used in a mobile network; Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings of Qiao, Oktay, and Bull with Ryu to allow various identification for different data, thus, improving processing record keeping for the system.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's latest filed arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With regard to the references failing to teach every element recited in the independent claims; the Examiner respectfully disagrees with the arguments by the Applicant. Even though, the Examiner acknowledges Applicant's invention may possess some novel features, the claims are written too broad that can be read on the current cited prior art(s). Further actions must be taken to explicitly claim those novel features of the current application.
With regards to the argument for the limitation “…the particular radio resource is configured for use by the enterprise entity for the mobile network slice for a plurality of user equipment associated with the enterprise entity including the particular user equipment…”, the Examiner asserts that Qiao discloses radio resource for used by an operator for network slice for a group of UEs that’s associated with the operator in order to provide the services of the operator.
“… enable operator(s) and 3rd party services to be hosted close to the UE's access point of attachment. The 5G core network may select a UPF 110 close to the UE 100 and may execute the traffic steering from the UPF 110 to the local data network via a N6 interface. In an example, the selection and traffic steering may be based on the UE's 100 subscription data, UE 100 location, the information from application function AF 145, policy, other related traffic rules, and/or the like. …” [0145];
“…The operator may deploy multiple network slice instances delivering the same features but for different groups of UEs, e.g. as they deliver a different committed service and/or because they may be dedicated to a customer… a UE 100 may simultaneously be served by one or more network slice instances via a 5G-AN” [0157-158].
With regards to the argument for the limitation “…the mapping including an identifier of the particular radio resource configured for use by the enterprise entity for the plurality of user equipment associated with the enterprise entity in which the particular radio resource is stored in association with an identifier of the enterprise entity and including at least one other identifier for the at least one other radio resource not configured for use by the enterprise entity that is stored in association with at least one identifier for at least one other entity …”, the Examiner asserts that Bull discloses, on Fig. 3, the network node contain the mapping that includes a list of IDs for resource allocation to another network node that’s used the UEs of the operator, the list also contain identifiers that are not current configured for use by any network node that’s awaiting scheduling. See paragraphs for more details [0066-68, 0072-73, 0039-41].
“During operation, in at least one embodiment, slice manager 28 can operate to configure vRAN slices 16.1-16.N according to either a separate or combined instance structure, as set by a network operator and/or service provider.” [0039]; “… can store an association of per-subscriber SPID slice mapping using a subscriber's SPID and the corresponding vRAN slice ID to which each subscriber is mapped; and can signal each corresponding vRAN slice and respective token bucket scheduler the SPID for subscriber traffic to be handled thereby. In some embodiments, RAN management system 26 can manage subscriber to CN slice mapping in combination with an Operation Support System (OSS)…” [0041]; “…determines either that a packet has been received at token bucket scheduler 18.1 from vRAN slice 16.1 for a particular UE transmission or the token bucket scheduler 18.1 determines that a buffered packet for a particular UE transmission is waiting to be scheduled.” [0068].
ARGUMENT DOES NOT REPLACE EVIDENCE WHERE EVIDENCE IS NECESSARY
The arguments made by the counsel cannot take the place of evidence in the record. The Applicant representative’s arguments for the obvious reason to combine the implicit and explicit teaching of the cited reference(s) failed to provide factual support to sustain the ground of arguments. The mere statement of disagreement of the prior art made by the Applicant’s representative cannot be served as evidence for support. Please see the following case law for detail:
In re Schulze, 346 F.2d 600, 602, 145 USPQ 716, 718 (CCPA 1965); In re Geisler, 116 F.3d 1465,43 USPQ2d 1362 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (“An assertion of what seems to follow from common experience is just attorney argument and not the kind of factual evidence that is required to rebut a prima facie case of obviousness.”). See MPEP § 716.01(c) for examples of attorney statements which are not evidence and which must be supported by an appropriate affidavit or declaration.
ARGUING AGAINST REFERENCES INDIVIDUALLY
One cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck and Co., Inc., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
As discussed above, it is apparent that the Applicant's cited limitations, elements, and arguments have already been disclosed by the relevant prior art(s) or were thoroughly addressed by the Examiner. Additionally, the current Office Action provides further elaboration on the explicit and implicit teachings of the aforementioned disclosed reference(s). It is important to note that any justifications and citations utilized in the preceding Office Action which were not contested by the Applicant shall be regarded as an implicit admission by the Applicant on the matter at hand.
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 extension fee 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.
Inquiries
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to PAKEE FANG whose telephone number is (571)270-3633. The Examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri 9:00AM-5:00PM.
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, Armouche, Hadi can be reached on 571-270-3618. 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.
/PAKEE FANG/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2409