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 Amendment
The Amendment filed August 14, 2026, has been entered. Claims 1, 4-5, 8, 11-12, 15, 17-18, and 20-30 are pending in the application. Applicant has submitted amendments to the claims along with other remarks. Claims 1, 4-5, 8, 11-12, 15, 17-18, and 20-30 are still rejected by prior art references, refer to the following rejection for details.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments and amendments, see pp. 10-14 of the response, filed August 14, 2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1, 4-5, 8, 11-12, 15, 17-18, and 20-30 under § 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. However, upon further consideration for the amendments, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of new reference, please see the rejection for details.
Claim Objections
The numbering of claims is not in accordance with 37 CFR 1.126 which requires the original numbering of the claims to be preserved throughout the prosecution. When claims are canceled, the remaining claims must not be renumbered. When new claims are presented, they must be numbered consecutively beginning with the number next following the highest numbered claims previously presented (whether entered or not).
Misnumbered claims 2, 3, 6, 7, 9, 10, 13, 14, 16, and 19 should be numbered consecutively.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1, 8, 15, 20, and 25-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chinese Publication No. 104394525 (hereinafter “Wang”) in view of Non-patent Literature entitled, “Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol IPv6 (hereinafter “Mrugalski”).
Regarding claim 1, Wang teaches: A device, comprising: one or more processors configured to: receive, from a User Equipment ("UE") and by a session management element of a core of a wireless network, an Internet Protocol ("IP") prefix delegation request ([0015] The subscription data information of HSS can carry information about multiple IP addresses of the same type required by UE. During the UE attachment request process, when the mobility management entity MME sends a location update request message to HSS, HSS will carry the information about multiple IP addresses of the same type required by UE to P-GW through the serving gateway S-GW, ultimately achieving the purpose of allocating multiple IP addresses of the same type to UE.); output, by the session management element, to a UE information repository of the core of the wireless network, and based on the IP prefix delegation request, a UE information request ([0025] The P-GW receives a create session request message sent by the serving gateway S-GW, and obtains information of multiple IP addresses of the same type of the UE from the message; [0029] The P-GW receives the create session request message sent by the serving gateway S-GW, and obtains the number of multiple IP addresses pre-set by the home subscription server HSS for the UE, including the number of multiple IP addresses belonging to the same type); receive, by the session management element, from the UE information repository, and in response to the UE information request, a response that indicates that the UE is authorized for a particular quantity of IP addresses ([0018] The HSS sends the UE's multiple IP address information of the same type to the UE by sending a location update response message to the mobility management entity MME.); identify, by the session management element, a particular set of IP addresses based on the response to the UE information request, wherein a quantity of IP addresses included in the particular set of IP addresses is based on the particular quantity for which the UE is authorized, as indicated in the UE information received from the UE information repository ([0029] the number of multiple IP addresses pre-set by the home subscription server HSS for the UE); and perform, by the session management element, a plurality of actions in response to receiving the IP prefix delegation request and further based on identifying the particular set of IP addresses ([0005] Only when the UE initiates another PDN connection request will the P-GW allocate one or two IP addresses; [0023] The selected P-GW sends a session creation response message).
Wang teaches: facilitating the establishment of a communication session ([0030] The P-GW allocates a corresponding number of IP addresses to the UE based on the number of multiple IP addresses pre-set by the HSS for the UE, and uses the allocated IP addresses as the UE's multiple IP address information of the same type, including multiple IP addresses of the same type.). However, Wang does not explicitly teach: the specific “IP prefix delegation request,” or wherein the plurality of actions include: providing an indication, to a gateway of the core of the wireless network, that a particular communication session between the UE and the gateway is associated with the particular set of IP addresses; and outputting, to the UE, information indicating the identified particular set of IP addresses, wherein the UE and the gateway communicate via the particular communication session using one or more of the particular set of IP addresses.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Mrugalski teaches: IP prefix delegation request (p. 21/173, The prefix delegation mechanism, originally described in [RFC3633], is another stateful mode of operation and was originally intended for simple delegation of prefixes from a delegating router (DHCP server) to requesting routers (DHCP clients)) or wherein the plurality of actions include: providing an indication, to a gateway of the core of the wireless network, that a particular communication session between the UE and the gateway is associated with the particular set of IP addresses (p. 24/173 In this example, the server (delegating router) is configured with a set of prefixes to be used for assignment to customers at the time of each customer's first connection to the ISP service. The prefix delegation process begins when the client (requesting router) requests configuration information through DHCP. The DHCP messages from the client are received by the server in the aggregation device. When the server receives the request, it selects an available prefix or prefixes for delegation to the client. The server then returns the prefix or prefixes to the client.); and outputting, to the UE, information indicating the identified particular set of IP addresses, wherein the UE and the gateway communicate via the particular communication session using one or more of the particular set of IP addresses (p. 60/173 When a client detects that it may have moved to a new link, it uses Confirm if it only has addresses and Rebind if it has delegated prefixes (and addresses). It uses Information‐request messages when it needs configuration information but no addresses and no prefixes.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wang to include the feature of an IP prefix delegation and a combination of Wang with Mrugalski renders the claim prima facie obvious within the described scope of the prior art and any indicated differences within the level of one of ordinary skill in the art (e.g., telecommunications engineer) according to a combination of known prior art elements with known methods to yield predictable results. MPEP 2143(I)(A) (e.g., determining an IP prefix delegation).
Regarding claim 8, Wang teaches: A non-transitory computer-readable medium, storing a plurality of processor-executable instructions to: receive, from a User Equipment ("UE") and by a session management element of a core of a wireless network, an Internet Protocol ("IP") prefix delegation request ([0015] The subscription data information of HSS can carry information about multiple IP addresses of the same type required by UE. During the UE attachment request process, when the mobility management entity MME sends a location update request message to HSS, HSS will carry the information about multiple IP addresses of the same type required by UE to P-GW through the serving gateway S-GW, ultimately achieving the purpose of allocating multiple IP addresses of the same type to UE.); output, by the session management element, to a UE information repository of the core of the wireless network, and based on the IP prefix delegation request, a UE information request ([0025] The P-GW receives a create session request message sent by the serving gateway S-GW, and obtains information of multiple IP addresses of the same type of the UE from the message; [0029] The P-GW receives the create session request message sent by the serving gateway S-GW, and obtains the number of multiple IP addresses pre-set by the home subscription server HSS for the UE, including the number of multiple IP addresses belonging to the same type); receive, by the session management element, from the UE information repository, and in response to the UE information request, a response that indicates that the UE is authorized for a particular quantity of IP addresses ([0018] The HSS sends the UE's multiple IP address information of the same type to the UE by sending a location update response message to the mobility management entity MME.); identify, by the session management element, a particular set of IP addresses based on the response to the UE information request, wherein a quantity of IP addresses included in the particular set of IP addresses is based on the particular quantity for which the UE is authorized, as indicated in the UE information received from the UE information repository ([0029] the number of multiple IP addresses pre-set by the home subscription server HSS for the UE); and perform, by the session management element, a plurality of actions in response to receiving the IP prefix delegation request and further based on identifying the particular set of IP addresses ([0005] Only when the UE initiates another PDN connection request will the P-GW allocate one or two IP addresses; [0023] The selected P-GW sends a session creation response message)
Wang teaches: facilitating the establishment of a communication session ([0030] The P-GW allocates a corresponding number of IP addresses to the UE based on the number of multiple IP addresses pre-set by the HSS for the UE, and uses the allocated IP addresses as the UE's multiple IP address information of the same type, including multiple IP addresses of the same type.). However, Wang does not explicitly teach: the specific “IP prefix delegation request,” or wherein the plurality of actions include: providing an indication, to a gateway of the core of the wireless network, that a particular communication session between the UE and the gateway is associated with the particular set of IP addresses; and outputting, to the UE, information indicating the identified particular set of IP addresses, wherein the UE and the gateway communicate via the particular communication session using one or more of the particular set of IP addresses.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Mrugalski teaches: IP prefix delegation request (p. 21/173, The prefix delegation mechanism, originally described in [RFC3633], is another stateful mode of operation and was originally intended for simple delegation of prefixes from a delegating router (DHCP server) to requesting routers (DHCP clients)) or wherein the plurality of actions include: providing an indication, to a gateway of the core of the wireless network, that a particular communication session between the UE and the gateway is associated with the particular set of IP addresses (p. 24/173 In this example, the server (delegating router) is configured with a set of prefixes to be used for assignment to customers at the time of each customer's first connection to the ISP service. The prefix delegation process begins when the client (requesting router) requests configuration information through DHCP. The DHCP messages from the client are received by the server in the aggregation device. When the server receives the request, it selects an available prefix or prefixes for delegation to the client. The server then returns the prefix or prefixes to the client.); and outputting, to the UE, information indicating the identified particular set of IP addresses, wherein the UE and the gateway communicate via the particular communication session using one or more of the particular set of IP addresses (p. 60/173 When a client detects that it may have moved to a new link, it uses Confirm if it only has addresses and Rebind if it has delegated prefixes (and addresses). It uses Information‐request messages when it needs configuration information but no addresses and no prefixes.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wang to include the feature of an IP prefix delegation and a combination of Wang with Mrugalski renders the claim prima facie obvious within the described scope of the prior art and any indicated differences within the level of one of ordinary skill in the art (e.g., telecommunications engineer) according to a combination of known prior art elements with known methods to yield predictable results. MPEP 2143(I)(A) (e.g., determining an IP prefix delegation).
Regarding claim 15, Wang teaches: A method, comprising: receive, from a User Equipment ("UE") and by a session management element of a core of a wireless network, an Internet Protocol ("IP") prefix delegation request ([0015] The subscription data information of HSS can carry information about multiple IP addresses of the same type required by UE. During the UE attachment request process, when the mobility management entity MME sends a location update request message to HSS, HSS will carry the information about multiple IP addresses of the same type required by UE to P-GW through the serving gateway S-GW, ultimately achieving the purpose of allocating multiple IP addresses of the same type to UE.); output, by the session management element, to a UE information repository of the core of the wireless network, and based on the IP prefix delegation request, a UE information request ([0025] The P-GW receives a create session request message sent by the serving gateway S-GW, and obtains information of multiple IP addresses of the same type of the UE from the message; [0029] The P-GW receives the create session request message sent by the serving gateway S-GW, and obtains the number of multiple IP addresses pre-set by the home subscription server HSS for the UE, including the number of multiple IP addresses belonging to the same type); receive, by the session management element, from the UE information repository, and in response to the UE information request, a response that indicates that the UE is authorized for a particular quantity of IP addresses ([0018] The HSS sends the UE's multiple IP address information of the same type to the UE by sending a location update response message to the mobility management entity MME.); identify, by the session management element, a particular set of IP addresses based on the response to the UE information request, wherein a quantity of IP addresses included in the particular set of IP addresses is based on the particular quantity for which the UE is authorized, as indicated in the UE information received from the UE information repository ([0029] the number of multiple IP addresses pre-set by the home subscription server HSS for the UE); and perform, by the session management element, a plurality of actions in response to receiving the IP prefix delegation request and further based on identifying the particular set of IP addresses ([0005] Only when the UE initiates another PDN connection request will the P-GW allocate one or two IP addresses; [0023] The selected P-GW sends a session creation response message)
Wang teaches: facilitating the establishment of a communication session ([0030] The P-GW allocates a corresponding number of IP addresses to the UE based on the number of multiple IP addresses pre-set by the HSS for the UE, and uses the allocated IP addresses as the UE's multiple IP address information of the same type, including multiple IP addresses of the same type.). However, Wang does not explicitly teach: the specific “IP prefix delegation request,” or wherein the plurality of actions include: providing an indication, to a gateway of the core of the wireless network, that a particular communication session between the UE and the gateway is associated with the particular set of IP addresses; and outputting, to the UE, information indicating the identified particular set of IP addresses, wherein the UE and the gateway communicate via the particular communication session using one or more of the particular set of IP addresses.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Mrugalski teaches: IP prefix delegation request (p. 21/173, The prefix delegation mechanism, originally described in [RFC3633], is another stateful mode of operation and was originally intended for simple delegation of prefixes from a delegating router (DHCP server) to requesting routers (DHCP clients)) or wherein the plurality of actions include: providing an indication, to a gateway of the core of the wireless network, that a particular communication session between the UE and the gateway is associated with the particular set of IP addresses (p. 24/173 In this example, the server (delegating router) is configured with a set of prefixes to be used for assignment to customers at the time of each customer's first connection to the ISP service. The prefix delegation process begins when the client (requesting router) requests configuration information through DHCP. The DHCP messages from the client are received by the server in the aggregation device. When the server receives the request, it selects an available prefix or prefixes for delegation to the client. The server then returns the prefix or prefixes to the client.); and outputting, to the UE, information indicating the identified particular set of IP addresses, wherein the UE and the gateway communicate via the particular communication session using one or more of the particular set of IP addresses (p. 60/173 When a client detects that it may have moved to a new link, it uses Confirm if it only has addresses and Rebind if it has delegated prefixes (and addresses). It uses Information‐request messages when it needs configuration information but no addresses and no prefixes.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wang to include the feature of an IP prefix delegation and a combination of Wang with Mrugalski renders the claim prima facie obvious within the described scope of the prior art and any indicated differences within the level of one of ordinary skill in the art (e.g., telecommunications engineer) according to a combination of known prior art elements with known methods to yield predictable results. MPEP 2143(I)(A) (e.g., determining an IP prefix delegation).
Regarding claim 20, Wang does not explicitly teach: wherein identifying the particular quantity of IP addresses includes identifying at least one of: a quantity of IP prefixes, or an IP prefix length.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Mrugalski teaches: wherein identifying the particular quantity of IP addresses includes identifying at least one of: a quantity of IP prefixes, or an IP prefix length (p. 62/173, The client MAY include values in IA Prefix options (see Section 21.22) encapsulated within IA_PD options as hints for the delegated prefix and/or prefix length for which the client has a preference. See Section 18.2.4 for more on prefix‐length hints.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wang to include the feature of a prefix length and a combination of Wang with Mrugalski renders the claim prima facie obvious within the described scope of the prior art and any indicated differences within the level of one of ordinary skill in the art (e.g., telecommunications engineer) according to a combination of known prior art elements with known methods to yield predictable results. MPEP 2143(I)(A) (e.g., determining an IP prefix length).
Regarding claim 25, Wang does not explicitly teach: wherein the IP prefix delegation request specifies a first quantity of requested IP addresses, and wherein the particular quantity for which the UE is authorized is a different second quantity.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Mrugalski teaches: wherein the IP prefix delegation request specifies a first quantity of requested IP addresses, and wherein the particular quantity for which the UE is authorized is a different second quantity (p. 60/173 When a client requests multiple IA option types or multiple instances of the same IA types in a Solicit, Request, Renew, or Rebind, it is possible that the available server(s) may only be configured to offer a subset of them.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wang to include the feature of a prefix length and a combination of Wang with Mrugalski renders the claim prima facie obvious within the described scope of the prior art and any indicated differences within the level of one of ordinary skill in the art (e.g., telecommunications engineer) according to a combination of known prior art elements with known methods to yield predictable results. MPEP 2143(I)(A) (e.g., determining an IP prefix length).
Regarding claim 26, Wang does not explicitly teach: wherein the second quantity of IP addresses for which the UE is authorized is less than the first quantity specified in the IP prefix delegation request.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Mrugalski teaches: wherein the second quantity of IP addresses for which the UE is authorized is less than the first quantity specified in the IP prefix delegation request (p. 60/173 When a client requests multiple IA option types or multiple instances of the same IA types in a Solicit, Request, Renew, or Rebind, it is possible that the available server(s) may only be configured to offer a subset of them.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wang to include the feature of a prefix length and a combination of Wang with Mrugalski renders the claim prima facie obvious within the described scope of the prior art and any indicated differences within the level of one of ordinary skill in the art (e.g., telecommunications engineer) according to a combination of known prior art elements with known methods to yield predictable results. MPEP 2143(I)(A) (e.g., providing a second quantity less than a first quantity).
Regarding claim 27, Wang does not explicitly teach: wherein the UE includes a Fixed Wireless Access ("FWA") device that implements a local network, wherein the UE is communicatively coupled to a local device via the local network, wherein the UE assigns a particular IP address, of the particular set of IP addresses, to the local device, wherein the UE receives particular traffic from the gateway of the core of the wireless network and identifies that the particular traffic includes the particular IP address, and wherein the UE forwards the particular traffic to the local device based on identifying that the particular traffic from the gateway includes the particular IP address.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Mrugalski teaches: wherein the UE includes a Fixed Wireless Access ("FWA") device (p. 82/173, 18.2.12. Refreshing Configuration Information . . . The client changes access points (e.g., if using Wi‐Fi technology).) that implements a local network (e.g., router), wherein the UE is communicatively coupled to a local device via the local network, wherein the UE assigns a particular IP address, of the particular set of IP addresses, to the local device, wherein the UE receives particular traffic from the gateway of the core of the wireless network and identifies that the particular traffic includes the particular IP address, and wherein the UE forwards the particular traffic (p. 11/173, “router” - A node that forwards IP packets not explicitly addressed to itself.) to the local device based on identifying that the particular traffic from the gateway includes the particular IP address (p. 34/173 9.1. Relay‐forward Message).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wang to include the feature of a prefix length and a combination of Wang with Mrugalski renders the claim prima facie obvious within the described scope of the prior art and any indicated differences within the level of one of ordinary skill in the art (e.g., telecommunications engineer) according to a combination of known prior art elements with known methods to yield predictable results. MPEP 2143(I)(A) (e.g., acting as a router and forwarding data).
Regarding claim 28, Wang does not explicitly teach: wherein the IP prefix delegation request specifies a first quantity of requested IP addresses, and wherein the particular quantity for which the UE is authorized is a different second quantity.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Mrugalski teaches: wherein the IP prefix delegation request specifies a first quantity of requested IP addresses, and wherein the particular quantity for which the UE is authorized is a different second quantity (p. 60/173 When a client requests multiple IA option types or multiple instances of the same IA types in a Solicit, Request, Renew, or Rebind, it is possible that the available server(s) may only be configured to offer a subset of them.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wang to include the feature of a prefix length and a combination of Wang with Mrugalski renders the claim prima facie obvious within the described scope of the prior art and any indicated differences within the level of one of ordinary skill in the art (e.g., telecommunications engineer) according to a combination of known prior art elements with known methods to yield predictable results. MPEP 2143(I)(A) (e.g., determining an IP prefix length).
Regarding claim 29, Wang does not explicitly teach: wherein the second quantity of IP addresses for which the UE is authorized is less than the first quantity specified in the IP prefix delegation request.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Mrugalski teaches: wherein the second quantity of IP addresses for which the UE is authorized is less than the first quantity specified in the IP prefix delegation request (p. 60/173 When a client requests multiple IA option types or multiple instances of the same IA types in a Solicit, Request, Renew, or Rebind, it is possible that the available server(s) may only be configured to offer a subset of them.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wang to include the feature of a prefix length and a combination of Wang with Mrugalski renders the claim prima facie obvious within the described scope of the prior art and any indicated differences within the level of one of ordinary skill in the art (e.g., telecommunications engineer) according to a combination of known prior art elements with known methods to yield predictable results. MPEP 2143(I)(A) (e.g., providing a second quantity less than a first quantity).
Regarding claim 30, Wang does not explicitly teach: wherein the UE includes a Fixed Wireless Access ("FWA") device that implements a local network, wherein the UE is communicatively coupled to a local device via the local network, wherein the UE assigns a particular IP address, of the particular set of IP addresses, to the local device, wherein the UE receives particular traffic from the gateway of the core of the wireless network and identifies that the particular traffic includes the particular IP address, and wherein the UE forwards the particular traffic to the local device based on identifying that the particular traffic from the gateway includes the particular IP address.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Mrugalski teaches: wherein the UE includes a Fixed Wireless Access ("FWA") device (p. 82/173, 18.2.12. Refreshing Configuration Information . . . The client changes access points (e.g., if using Wi‐Fi technology).) that implements a local network (e.g., router), wherein the UE is communicatively coupled to a local device via the local network, wherein the UE assigns a particular IP address, of the particular set of IP addresses, to the local device, wherein the UE receives particular traffic from the gateway of the core of the wireless network and identifies that the particular traffic includes the particular IP address, and wherein the UE forwards the particular traffic (p. 11/173, “router” - A node that forwards IP packets not explicitly addressed to itself.) to the local device based on identifying that the particular traffic from the gateway includes the particular IP address (p. 34/173 9.1. Relay‐forward Message).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wang to include the feature of a prefix length and a combination of Wang with Mrugalski renders the claim prima facie obvious within the described scope of the prior art and any indicated differences within the level of one of ordinary skill in the art (e.g., telecommunications engineer) according to a combination of known prior art elements with known methods to yield predictable results. MPEP 2143(I)(A) (e.g., acting as a router and forwarding data).
Claims 4-5, 11-12, and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang and Mrugalski in view of Non-patent literature entitled, “4G and 5G Migration and Interworking Strategy” (hereinafter “Shetty”)
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Wang and Mrugalski does not explicitly teach: wherein outputting the request for UE information includes outputting the request for UE information via an N10 interface.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Shetty teaches: wherein outputting the request for UE information includes outputting the request for UE information via an N10 interface(Figure 1, N10 connection between SMF and UDM).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Wang and Mrugalski to include the feature of an N10 interface and a combination of Wang and Mrugalski with Shetty renders the claim prima facie obvious within the described scope of the prior art and any indicated differences within the level of one of ordinary skill in the art (e.g., telecommunications engineer) according to a combination of known prior art elements with known methods to yield predictable results. MPEP 2143(I)(A) (e.g., providing a connection between the UDM and SMF).
Regarding claim 5, Wang discloses a P-GW, S-GW, and MME. The combination of Wang and Mrugalski does not explicitly disclose an SMF.
Shetty discloses that components of the P-GW, S-GW, and MME are interworkable with an SMF configuration during a migration from 4G to 5G (Figure 1: 4G-5G interworking Architecture):
Thus, the combination of Wang and Mrugalski and Shetty each disclose a device, non-transitory computer-readable medium, or core networking functions. A person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have recognized that the SMF of Shetty could have been substituted for the P-GW, S-GW, and/or MME of Wang because both perform the function of providing similar core network functions. Furthermore, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have been able to carry out the substitution. Finally, the substitution achieves the predictable result of an SMF in place of core 4G functions using the methods known in Shetty.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the SMF in Shetty for the P-GW, S-GW, and/or MME techniques in Wang according to known methods to yield the predictable result of providing the functionality of ab SMF or P-GW, S-GW, and/or MME.
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Wang and Mrugalski does not explicitly teach: wherein outputting the information request includes outputting the information request via an N10 interface.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Shetty teaches: wherein outputting the request for UE information includes outputting the request for UE information via an N10 interface(Figure 1, N10 connection between SMF and UDM).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Wang and Mrugalski to include the feature of an N10 interface and a combination of Wang and Mrugalski with Shetty renders the claim prima facie obvious within the described scope of the prior art and any indicated differences within the level of one of ordinary skill in the art (e.g., telecommunications engineer) according to a combination of known prior art elements with known methods to yield predictable results. MPEP 2143(I)(A) (e.g., providing a connection between the UDM and SMF).
Regarding claim 12, Wang discloses a P-GW, S-GW, and MME. The combination of Wang and Mrugalski does not explicitly disclose an SMF.
Shetty discloses that components of the P-GW, S-GW, and MME are interworkable with an SMF configuration during a migration from 4G to 5G (Figure 1: 4G-5G interworking Architecture):
Thus, the combination of Wang and Mrugalski and Shetty each disclose a device, non-transitory computer-readable medium, or core networking functions. A person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have recognized that the SMF of Shetty could have been substituted for the P-GW, S-GW, and/or MME of Wang because both perform the function of providing similar core network functions. Furthermore, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have been able to carry out the substitution. Finally, the substitution achieves the predictable result of an SMF in place of core 4G functions using the methods known in Shetty.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the SMF in Shetty for the P-GW, S-GW, and/or MME techniques in Wang according to known methods to yield the predictable result of providing the functionality of ab SMF or P-GW, S-GW, and/or MME.
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Wang and Mrugalski does not explicitly teach: wherein outputting the information request includes outputting the information request via an N10 interface.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Shetty teaches: wherein outputting the request for UE information includes outputting the request for UE information via an N10 interface(Figure 1, N10 connection between SMF and UDM).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Wang and Mrugalski to include the feature of an N10 interface and a combination of Wang and Mrugalski with Shetty renders the claim prima facie obvious within the described scope of the prior art and any indicated differences within the level of one of ordinary skill in the art (e.g., telecommunications engineer) according to a combination of known prior art elements with known methods to yield predictable results. MPEP 2143(I)(A) (e.g., providing a connection between the UDM and SMF).
Regarding claim 18, Wang discloses a P-GW, S-GW, and MME. The combination of Wang and Mrugalski does not explicitly disclose an SMF.
Shetty discloses that components of the P-GW, S-GW, and MME are interworkable with an SMF configuration during a migration from 4G to 5G (Figure 1: 4G-5G interworking Architecture):
Thus, the combination of Wang and Mrugalski and Shetty each disclose a device, non-transitory computer-readable medium, or core networking functions. A person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have recognized that the SMF of Shetty could have been substituted for the P-GW, S-GW, and/or MME of Wang because both perform the function of providing similar core network functions. Furthermore, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have been able to carry out the substitution. Finally, the substitution achieves the predictable result of an SMF in place of core 4G functions using the methods known in Shetty.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the SMF in Shetty for the P-GW, S-GW, and/or MME techniques in the combination of Wang and Mrugalski according to known methods to yield the predictable result of providing the functionality of ab SMF or P-GW, S-GW, and/or MME
Claims 21 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang and Mrugalski in view of U.S. Publication No. 2025/0193150 (hereinafter “Zhang”)
Regarding claim 21, the combination of Wang and Mrugalski does not explicitly teach: wherein the UE is a first UE, wherein the quantity of IP addresses is a first quantity of IP addresses, wherein the method further comprises: identifying a second quantity of IP addresses associated with a second UE, wherein the second quantity is different from the first quantity; and providing the identified second quantity of IP addresses to the second UE.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Zhang teaches: identifying a second quantity of IP addresses associated with a second UE ([0083] As mentioned above, the operator would like to reuse their IP addresses for different UEs,), wherein the second quantity is different from the first quantity ([0083] This NAT-1 may translate an IPv4 address in a private IP address range “10.0.*.*” into an IPv4 address in a public IP address range “202.106.0.*” and vice versa. Similarly, another NAT rule, NAT-2, may be configured at UPF-2 232, which serves UE-3 213 and UE-4 214.); and providing the identified second quantity of IP addresses to the second UE ([0189] After that, a PDU session is successfully established for the UE-1 211, and UE-1 211 may communicate its uplink/downlink data with the Internet 295 via the firewall/NAT at the selected UPF 231, as shown in FIG. 2.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Wang and Mrugalski to include the feature of a second UE and a combination of Wang and Mrugalski with Zhang renders the claim prima facie obvious within the described scope of the prior art and any indicated differences within the level of one of ordinary skill in the art (e.g., telecommunications engineer) according to a combination of known prior art elements with known methods to yield predictable results. MPEP 2143(I)(A) (e.g., providing a second UE).
Regarding claim 22, the combination of Wang and Mrugalski does not explicitly teach: wherein the UE is a first UE, wherein the quantity of IP addresses is a first quantity of IP addresses, wherein the method further comprises: identifying a second quantity of IP addresses associated with a second UE, wherein the second quantity is different from the first quantity; and providing the identified second quantity of IP addresses to the second UE.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Zhang teaches: identifying a second quantity of IP addresses associated with a second UE ([0083] As mentioned above, the operator would like to reuse their IP addresses for different UEs,), wherein the second quantity is different from the first quantity ([0083] This NAT-1 may translate an IPv4 address in a private IP address range “10.0.*.*” into an IPv4 address in a public IP address range “202.106.0.*” and vice versa. Similarly, another NAT rule, NAT-2, may be configured at UPF-2 232, which serves UE-3 213 and UE-4 214.); and providing the identified second quantity of IP addresses to the second UE ([0189] After that, a PDU session is successfully established for the UE-1 211, and UE-1 211 may communicate its uplink/downlink data with the Internet 295 via the firewall/NAT at the selected UPF 231, as shown in FIG. 2.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Wang and Mrugalski to include the feature of a second UE and a combination of Wang and Mrugalski with Zhang renders the claim prima facie obvious within the described scope of the prior art and any indicated differences within the level of one of ordinary skill in the art (e.g., telecommunications engineer) according to a combination of known prior art elements with known methods to yield predictable results. MPEP 2143(I)(A) (e.g., providing a second UE).
Claims 23 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang in view of Mrugalski and further in view of Non-patent Literature entitled, “Diagnosing Channel Issues Using GTP Protocol Messages in LTE Core Networks” (hereinafter “Feghhi”)
Regarding claim 23, the combination of Wang and Mrugalski does not explicitly teach: wherein the communication session includes a particular tunnel, wherein when communicating with the UE via the particular communication session, the gateway forwards first traffic, associated with a first IP address of the particular set of IP addresses, to the UE via the particular tunnel, and further forwards traffic, associated with a second IP address of the particular set of IP addresses, to the UE via the particular tunnel.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Feghhi teaches: wherein the communication session includes a particular tunnel, wherein when communicating with the UE via the particular communication session, the gateway forwards first traffic, associated with a first IP address of the particular set of IP addresses, to the UE via the particular tunnel, and further forwards traffic, associated with a second IP address of the particular set of IP addresses, to the UE via the particular tunnel (p. 2/6, col. 1, All control and data packets travelling through GTP tunnels are routed using TEIDs (Tunnel Endpoint IDs), unique identifiers within each mobile network. TEIDs are generated and maintained using GTP-C messages. Fig. 2 shows the GTP protocol stacks for GTP-C and GTP-U packets. It is important to note that all user-plane traffic is encapsulated inside GTPU packets. There are a variety of GTP-C control messages to control GTP tunnels, which usually come in Request/Response pairs.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Wang and Mrugalski to include the feature of communication via tunnel and a combination of Wang and Mrugalski with Feghhi renders the claim prima facie obvious within the described scope of the prior art and any indicated differences within the level of one of ordinary skill in the art (e.g., telecommunications engineer) according to a combination of known prior art elements with known methods to yield predictable results. MPEP 2143(I)(A) (e.g., communication via tunnel).
Regarding claim 24, the combination of Wang and Mrugalski does not explicitly teach: wherein the communication session includes a particular tunnel, wherein when communicating with the UE via the particular communication session, the gateway forwards first traffic, associated with a first IP address of the particular set of IP addresses, to the UE via the particular tunnel, and further forwards traffic, associated with a second IP address of the particular set of IP addresses, to the UE via the particular tunnel.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Feghhi teaches: wherein the communication session includes a particular tunnel, wherein when communicating with the UE via the particular communication session, the gateway forwards first traffic, associated with a first IP address of the particular set of IP addresses, to the UE via the particular tunnel, and further forwards traffic, associated with a second IP address of the particular set of IP addresses, to the UE via the particular tunnel (p. 2/6, col. 1, All control and data packets travelling through GTP tunnels are routed using TEIDs (Tunnel Endpoint IDs), unique identifiers within each mobile network. TEIDs are generated and maintained using GTP-C messages. Fig. 2 shows the GTP protocol stacks for GTP-C and GTP-U packets. It is important to note that all user-plane traffic is encapsulated inside GTPU packets. There are a variety of GTP-C control messages to control GTP tunnels, which usually come in Request/Response pairs.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wang to include the feature of communication via tunnel and a combination of Wang and Mrugalski with Feghhi renders the claim prima facie obvious within the described scope of the prior art and any indicated differences within the level of one of ordinary skill in the art (e.g., telecommunications engineer) according to a combination of known prior art elements with known methods to yield predictable results. MPEP 2143(I)(A) (e.g., communication via tunnel).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 JUSTIN BARRY whose telephone number is (571)272-0201. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00am EST to 5:00pm EST.
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, Jinsong HU can be reached at (571) 272-3965. 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.
/JAB/ Examiner, Art Unit 2643
/JINSONG HU/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2643
Prosecution Insights