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, see page 14, filed 06/22/26, with respect to the rejection of claims 1 and 3-21 under 102 rejection have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is made in view of Shekhar et al. (US 20230370950 A1).
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, 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, 3-9, 12-17 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Velev et al. (US 20240073802 A1) in view of in view of Shekhar et al. (US 20230370950 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Velev teaches a method (method for requesting to collect information of Fig. 5), comprising:
generating, by a network device of a network, a request for network slice status information associated with a plurality of user equipments (UEs) registered with the network (NSACF 210 sends a request to the CHF 205 to create a charging data record (“CDR”) for a specific network slice attribute. The request may include a network slice ID (e.g., S-NSSAI) and network slice attribute identifier (e.g., AttributeID). The AttributeID may be mandatory if multiple controlled slice attributes have been configured for the network slice. For example, the NSACF 210 may send the CHF 205 a Charging Data Request [Initial] (SliceID=S-NSSAI-1, AttributeID, AttributeStatus). The AttributeID parameter identifies the network slice attribute (e.g., number of UEs concurrently registered, or number of number of PDU Sessions in the S-NSSAI-1). The AttributeStatus parameter may indicate the current status of the attribute, [0152]);
providing, by the network device, the request for the network slice status information to another network device of the network (NSACF 210 sends a request to the CHF 205 to create a charging data record (“CDR”) for a specific network slice attribute see messaging 515, step 1, [0152]);
receiving, by the network device and based on the request, the network slice status information from the other network device (CHF 205 responds with Charging Data Response [Initial] (SliceID=S-NSSAI-1, AttributeID, AttributeQuotas) (see messaging 525) , step 3, [0154]);
determining, by the network device, a modified policy for the plurality of UEs based on the network slice status information (The AttributeQuotas parameter indicates a response the NSACF 210 is to take. In one embodiment, the AttributeQuotas parameter indicates a new quota value for the reached network slice parameter. In another embodiment, the AttributeQuotas parameter indicates a policy to be applied while the quota is consumed, [0154]); and
causing, by the network device, the modified policy to be implemented for the plurality of UEs (which means that the NSACF 210 may enforce start of rejection for new UEs to register or new PDU Sessions to be established, [0154]).
However, Velev does not teach wherein the network device includes a policy control function and the other network device includes a network slice admission control function.
In an analogous art, Shekhar teaches wherein the network device includes a policy control function and the other network device includes a network slice admission control function (NSACF 124 and PCF 126 of Fig. 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the slice status of Velev with the network slice admission control of Shekhar to provide network slice admission control in a mobile network environment, which can improve user experience in mobile networks, such as in Third Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) Fifth Generation (5G) mobile networks, Sixth Generation (6G) mobile networks as suggested, Shekhar [0007].
Regarding claim 3, Velev as modified by Shakhar teaches the method of claim 1, wherein generating the request for the network slice status information associated with the plurality of UEs comprises: generating the request for the network slice status information associated with the plurality of UEs based on a trigger (For example, the NSACF 210 may determine to trigger the reporting when the quota is about 99%, [0136]).
Regarding claim 4, Velev as modified by Shakhar teaches the method of claim 3, wherein the trigger includes one or more of: a registration of a new UE with the network, a creation of a protocol data unit session with the network, or a receipt of configuration information for the network (When the “ReportingGranularity” is sent to “1”, the reporting NF should send a notification to the NSACF 210 for new registered UEs, or new established PDU Sessions or new increased UL/DL throughput, [0133]).
Regarding claim 5, Velev as modified by Shakhar teaches the method of claim 1, wherein determining the modified policy for the plurality of UEs based on the network slice status information comprises: determining to increase a maximum quantity of UEs to be registered with the network (If a UE moves from one AMF to another (e.g., inter-AMF mobility), the AMF may not immediately send notification to the NSACF 210, as the status of the attribute would be reduced in one NF (e.g., source AMF) and increased in another NF (e.g., target AMF), [0133] and .
Regarding claim 6, Velev as modified by Shakhar teaches the method of claim 1, wherein determining the modified policy for the plurality of UEs based on the network slice status information comprises: determining to decrease a maximum quantity of UEs to be registered with the network (If a UE moves from one AMF to another (e.g., inter-AMF mobility), the AMF may not immediately send notification to the NSACF 210, as the status of the attribute would be reduced in one NF (e.g., source AMF) and increased in another NF (e.g., target AMF), [0133] and The slice attributes may be: Number of terminals, i.e., the number of UEs concurrently registering for a network slice, [0084]).
Regarding claim 7, Velev as modified by Shakhar teaches the method of claim 1, wherein determining the modified policy for the plurality of UEs based on the network slice status information comprises: determining to increase a maximum quantity of protocol data unit sessions for the plurality of UEs (If it is not exceeded, the PDU session is accepted and the count for “Nb of PDU sessions” is increased by one, [0070]).
Regarding claim 8, Velev teaches a network device (network apparatus 700 of Fig. 7 performing method of Fig. 5) of a network, comprising: one or more processors (processor 705) configured to:
generate a request for network slice status information associated with a plurality of user equipments (UEs) registered with the network based on a trigger (NSACF 210 sends a request to the CHF 205 to create a charging data record (“CDR”) for a specific network slice attribute. The request may include a network slice ID (e.g., S-NSSAI) and network slice attribute identifier (e.g., AttributeID). The AttributeID may be mandatory if multiple controlled slice attributes have been configured for the network slice. For example, the NSACF 210 may send the CHF 205 a Charging Data Request [Initial] (SliceID=S-NSSAI-1, AttributeID, AttributeStatus). The AttributeID parameter identifies the network slice attribute (e.g., number of UEs concurrently registered, or number of number of PDU Sessions in the S-NSSAI-1). The AttributeStatus parameter may indicate the current status of the attribute, [0152]; For example, the NSACF 210 may determine to trigger the reporting when the quota is about 99%, [0136]);
provide the request for the network slice status information to another network device of the network (NSACF 210 sends a request to the CHF 205 to create a charging data record (“CDR”) for a specific network slice attribute see messaging 515, step 1, [0152]);
receive, based on the request, the network slice status information from the other network device (CHF 205 responds with Charging Data Response [Initial] (SliceID=S-NSSAI-1, AttributeID, AttributeQuotas) (see messaging 525) , step 3, [0154]);
determine a modified policy for the plurality of UEs based on the network slice status information (The AttributeQuotas parameter indicates a response the NSACF 210 is to take. In one embodiment, the AttributeQuotas parameter indicates a new quota value for the reached network slice parameter. In another embodiment, the AttributeQuotas parameter indicates a policy to be applied while the quota is consumed, [0154]); and
cause the modified policy to be implemented for the plurality of UEs (which means that the NSACF 210 may enforce start of rejection for new UEs to register or new PDU Sessions to be established, [0154]).
However, Velev does not teach wherein the network device includes a policy control function and the other network device includes a network slice admission control function.
In an analogous art, Shekhar teaches wherein the network device includes a policy control function and the other network device includes a network slice admission control function (NSACF 124 and PCF 126 of Fig. 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the slice status of Velev with the network slice admission control of Shekhar to provide network slice admission control in a mobile network environment, which can improve user experience in mobile networks, such as in Third Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) Fifth Generation (5G) mobile networks, Sixth Generation (6G) mobile networks as suggested, Shekhar [0007].
Regarding claim 12, Velev as modified by Shekhar teaches the network device of claim 8, wherein the one or more processors, to cause the modified policy to be implemented for the plurality of UEs, are configured to one or more of: update a session management policy associated with the plurality of UEs; or update an access and mobility policy associated with the plurality of UEs (SMF 143 may create or update the charging record in the CHF 148 during the PDU Session establishment procedure.. If it is not exceeded, the PDU session is accepted and the count for “Nb of PDU sessions” is increased by one. Otherwise, if the number of PDU Sessions is exceeded, then the PDU Session is rejected. In some embodiments, the SMF 143 may update the CHF 148 during the PDU session release procedure, [0070]).
Regarding claim 13, Velev as modified by Shekhar teaches the network device of claim 8, wherein the one or more processors, to cause the modified policy to be implemented for the plurality of UEs, are configured to: cause a network slice access control procedure to be performed that increases or decreases a maximum quantity of UEs to be registered with the network (If a UE moves from one AMF to another (e.g., inter-AMF mobility), the AMF may not immediately send notification to the NSACF 210, as the status of the attribute would be reduced in one NF (e.g., source AMF) and increased in another NF (e.g., target AMF), [0133] and The slice attributes may be: Number of terminals, i.e., the number of UEs concurrently registering for a network slice, [0084]).
Regarding claim 14, Velev as modified by Shekhar teaches the network device of claim 8, wherein the one or more processors, to cause the modified policy to be implemented for the plurality of UEs, are configured to: cause a network slice access control procedure to be performed that increases or decreases a maximum quantity of protocol data unit sessions for the plurality of UEs (If it is not exceeded, the PDU session is accepted and the count for “Nb of PDU sessions” is increased by one, [0070]).
Regarding claim 15, Velev teaches a non-transitory computer-readable medium (memory 710 of Fig. 7) storing a set of instructions, the set of instructions comprising: one or more instructions that, when executed by one or more processors of a network device of a network, cause the network device to:
generate a request for network slice status information associated with a plurality of user equipments (UEs) registered with the network based on one or more of: a registration of a new UE with the network, a creation of a protocol data unit session with the network, or a receipt of configuration information for the network (NSACF 210 sends a request to the CHF 205 to create a charging data record (“CDR”) for a specific network slice attribute. The request may include a network slice ID (e.g., S-NSSAI) and network slice attribute identifier (e.g., AttributeID). The AttributeID may be mandatory if multiple controlled slice attributes have been configured for the network slice. For example, the NSACF 210 may send the CHF 205 a Charging Data Request [Initial] (SliceID=S-NSSAI-1, AttributeID, AttributeStatus). The AttributeID parameter identifies the network slice attribute (e.g., number of UEs concurrently registered, or number of number of PDU Sessions in the S-NSSAI-1). The AttributeStatus parameter may indicate the current status of the attribute, [0152]);
provide the request for the network slice status information to another network device of the network (NSACF 210 sends a request to the CHF 205 to create a charging data record (“CDR”) for a specific network slice attribute see messaging 515, step 1, [0152]);
receive, based on the request, the network slice status information from the other network device (CHF 205 responds with Charging Data Response [Initial] (SliceID=S-NSSAI-1, AttributeID, AttributeQuotas) (see messaging 525) , step 3, [0154]);
determine a modified policy for the plurality of UEs based on the network slice status information (The AttributeQuotas parameter indicates a response the NSACF 210 is to take. In one embodiment, the AttributeQuotas parameter indicates a new quota value for the reached network slice parameter. In another embodiment, the AttributeQuotas parameter indicates a policy to be applied while the quota is consumed, [0154]); and
cause the modified policy to be implemented for the plurality of UEs (which means that the NSACF 210 may enforce start of rejection for new UEs to register or new PDU Sessions to be established, [0154]).
However, Velev does not teach wherein the network device includes a policy control function and the other network device includes a network slice admission control function.
In an analogous art, Shekhar teaches wherein the network device includes a policy control function and the other network device includes a network slice admission control function (NSACF 124 and PCF 126 of Fig. 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the slice status of Velev with the network slice admission control of Shekhar to provide network slice admission control in a mobile network environment, which can improve user experience in mobile networks, such as in Third Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) Fifth Generation (5G) mobile networks, Sixth Generation (6G) mobile networks as suggested, Shekhar [0007].
Regarding claim 16, Velev teaches as modified by Shekhar the non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 15, wherein the one or more instructions, which cause the network device to determine the modified policy for the plurality of UEs based on the network slice status information, cause the network device to: determine to increase or decrease a maximum quantity of UEs to be registered with the network (If a UE moves from one AMF to another (e.g., inter-AMF mobility), the AMF may not immediately send notification to the NSACF 210, as the status of the attribute would be reduced in one NF (e.g., source AMF) and increased in another NF (e.g., target AMF), [0133] and The slice attributes may be: Number of terminals, i.e., the number of UEs concurrently registering for a network slice, [0084]).
Regarding claim 17, Velev as modified by Shekhar teaches the non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 15, wherein the one or more instructions, that cause the network device to determine the modified policy for the plurality of UEs based on the network slice status information, cause the network device to: determine to increase or decrease a maximum quantity of protocol data unit sessions for the plurality of UEs (If it is not exceeded, the PDU session is accepted and the count for “Nb of PDU sessions” is increased by one., [0070]).
Regarding claim 20, Velev as modified by Shekhar teaches the non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 15, wherein the one or more instructions, that cause the network device to cause the modified policy to be implemented for the plurality of UEs, cause the network device to one or more of: update a session management policy associated with the plurality of UEs; or update an access and mobility policy associated with the plurality of UEs (SMF 143 may create or update the charging record in the CHF 148 during the PDU Session establishment procedure … If it is not exceeded, the PDU session is accepted and the count for “Nb of PDU sessions” is increased by one. Otherwise, if the number of PDU Sessions is exceeded, then the PDU Session is rejected. In some embodiments, the SMF 143 may update the CHF 148 during the PDU session release procedure, [0070].
Claims 10-11 and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Velev in view of Shekhar and further in view of Ianev et al. (US 20240373481 A1).
Regarding claim 10, Velev as modified by Shekhar teaches the network device of claim 8.
However, Velev and Shekhar do not teach wherein the one or more processors, to determine the modified policy for the plurality of UEs based on the network slice status information, are configured to: identify one or more of the plurality of UEs that are impacted by the network slice status information; and update a user equipment route selection policy for the one or more of the plurality of UEs that are impacted by the network slice status information.
In an analogous art, Ianev teaches wherein the one or more processors, to determine the modified policy for the plurality of UEs based on the network slice status information, are configured to: identify one or more of the plurality of UEs that are impacted by the network slice status information (When a UE triggers Registration Request with the AMF, the AMF checks if any network slice(s) in the Requested NSSAI of the Registration Request message by the UE are tagged as overflown in the AMF, [0384]); and update a user equipment route selection policy for the one or more of the plurality of UEs that are impacted by the network slice status information (If one or more network slices from the Requested NSSAI(s) are found by the AMF to be overflown, the AMF forwards these overflown network slices to the PCF and the PCF updates the URSP rules for the UE so that the overflown S-NSSAI(s) is with lowest possible priority for selecting by the applications in the UE, [0384]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the slice status of Velev and Shekhar with the URSP of UEs of Ianev to provide a mechanism for allocating/managing UP resources per a network slice to improve slice registration as suggested, Ianev [0013].
Regarding claim 11, Velev as modified by Shekhar teaches the network device of claim 8.
However, Velev and Shekhar do not teach wherein the one or more processors, to determine the modified policy for the plurality of UEs based on the network slice status information, are configured to: identify one or more protocol data unit sessions, of the plurality of UEs, that are impacted by the network slice status information; and update a user equipment route selection policy for the one or more protocol data unit sessions that are impacted by the network slice status information.
In an analogous art, Ianev teaches wherein the one or more processors, to determine the modified policy for the plurality of UEs based on the network slice status information, are configured to: identify one or more protocol data unit sessions, of the plurality of UEs, that are impacted by the network slice status information (When a UE triggers Registration Request with the AMF, the AMF checks if any network slice(s) in the Requested NSSAI of the Registration Request message by the UE are tagged as overflown in the AMF, [0384]); and update a user equipment route selection policy for the one or more protocol data unit sessions that are impacted by the network slice status information (If one or more network slices from the Requested NSSAI(s) are found by the AMF to be overflown, the AMF forwards these overflown network slices to the PCF and the PCF updates the URSP rules for the UE so that the overflown S-NSSAI(s) is with lowest possible priority for selecting by the applications in the UE, [0384]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the slice status of Velev and Shekhar with the URSP of UEs of Ianev to provide a mechanism for allocating/managing UP resources per a network slice to improve slice registration as suggested, Ianev [0013].
Regarding claim 18, Velev as modified by Shekhar teaches the non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 15.
However, Velev and Shekhar do not teach wherein the one or more instructions, that cause the network device to determine the modified policy for the plurality of UEs based on the network slice status information, cause the network device to: identify one or more of the plurality of UEs that are impacted by the network slice status information; and update a user equipment route selection policy for the one or more of the plurality of UEs that are impacted by the network slice status information.
In an analogous art, Ianev teaches wherein the one or more instructions, that cause the network device to determine the modified policy for the plurality of UEs based on the network slice status information, cause the network device to: identify one or more of the plurality of UEs that are impacted by the network slice status information (When a UE triggers Registration Request with the AMF, the AMF checks if any network slice(s) in the Requested NSSAI of the Registration Request message by the UE are tagged as overflown in the AMF, [0384]); and update a user equipment route selection policy for the one or more of the plurality of UEs that are impacted by the network slice status information (If one or more network slices from the Requested NSSAI(s) are found by the AMF to be overflown, the AMF forwards these overflown network slices to the PCF and the PCF updates the URSP rules for the UE so that the overflown S-NSSAI(s) is with lowest possible priority for selecting by the applications in the UE, [0384]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the slice status of Velev and Shekhar with the URSP of UEs of Ianev to provide a mechanism for allocating/managing UP resources per a network slice to improve slice registration as suggested, Ianev [0013].
Regarding claim 19, Velev as modified by Shekhar teaches the non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 15.
However, Velev and Shekhar do not teach wherein the one or more instructions, that cause the network device to determine the modified policy for the plurality of UEs based on the network slice status information, cause the network device to: identify one or more protocol data unit sessions, of the plurality of UEs, that are impacted by the network slice status information; and update a user equipment route selection policy for the one or more protocol data unit sessions that are impacted by the network slice status information.
In an analogous art, Ianev teaches wherein the one or more instructions, that cause the network device to determine the modified policy for the plurality of UEs based on the network slice status information, cause the network device to: identify one or more protocol data unit sessions, of the plurality of UEs, that are impacted by the network slice status information (When a UE triggers Registration Request with the AMF, the AMF checks if any network slice(s) in the Requested NSSAI of the Registration Request message by the UE are tagged as overflown in the AMF, [0384]); and update a user equipment route selection policy for the one or more protocol data unit sessions that are impacted by the network slice status information (If one or more network slices from the Requested NSSAI(s) are found by the AMF to be overflown, the AMF forwards these overflown network slices to the PCF and the PCF updates the URSP rules for the UE so that the overflown S-NSSAI(s) is with lowest possible priority for selecting by the applications in the UE, [0384]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the slice status of Velev and Shekhar with the URSP of UEs of Ianev to provide a mechanism for allocating/managing UP resources per a network slice to improve slice registration as suggested, Ianev [0013].
Claims 10-11 and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Velev in view of Shekhar and further in view of Kiss et al. (US 20250310860 A1).
Regarding claim 21, Velev as modified by Shekhar teaches the method of claim 1.
However, Velev and Shekhar do not teach wherein determining the modified policy for the plurality of UEs based on the network slice status information comprises: determining to decrease a maximum quantity of protocol data unit sessions for the plurality of UEs.
In an analogous art, Kiss teaches wherein determining the modified policy for the plurality of UEs based on the network slice status information comprises: determining to decrease a maximum quantity of protocol data unit sessions for the plurality of UEs (The NSACF 225 may control (e.g., increase, decrease, etc.) the current number of PDU sessions per network slice such that it does not exceed the maximum number of PDU sessions allowed to be served by that network slice, [0039]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the slice status of Velev and Shekhar with the NSACF control of Kiss to better manage the number of user equipment (UEs) and/or sessions registered to an individual network slice as suggested, Kiss [0001].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Nayak et al. (US 20230016724 A1): The present disclosure relates to the field of network slicing in wireless communication. In accordance with an aspect of the disclosure, a method performed by an access and mobility function (AMF) entity is provided. The method includes receiving, from a user equipment (UE), a registration request including a requested network slice selection assistance information (NSSAI); transmitting, to a Network Slice Admission Control Function (NSACF) entity, a request for determination of an availability of a number of UEs based on the registration request; and in case that a rejection for the request is received from the NSACF, transmitting, to the UE, information on a back-off timer.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICOLE M LOUIS-FILS whose telephone number is (571)270-0671. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday.
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, Charles Appiah can be reached at 571-272-7904. 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.
/NICOLE M LOUIS-FILS/Examiner, Art Unit 2641
/CHARLES N APPIAH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2641
Prosecution Insights