Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 4-10, 13-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang (US 2022/0104004) in view of Thiebaut (WO 2022/008951).
As to claim 1, Huang discloses a method for obtaining a cellular network address, the method comprising: receiving a request from a network function 170 (see at least figure 3) residing outside of a cellular network core 150 of a cellular network, the request indicating an external Internet Protocol (IP) address associated with a user equipment (UE) 100 (see figure 3, paragraph [0083]); determining, by the UPF 330 (see figure 3), the cellular network address for the UE 110 that corresponds to the external IP address (see paragraph [0078] which discloses “If core network 150 includes a 5G core network, AMF 320 may instruct SMF 340 to set up a connection between UE device 110 and the network using UPF 330. PGW 240 or UPF 330 may allocate an IP address and/or a port to UE device 110 from an IP address pool.”); routing, by the UPF 330, an indication of the determined cellular network address to the NEF 360 (see paragraphs [0079], [0085]); and transmitting, by the NEF 360, the indication of the determined cellular network address to the network function 170 residing outside of the cellular network core 150 (see paragraphs [0083], [0085]).
Huang fails to expressly disclose routing, by the network exposure function NEF 360 of the cellular network core 150, the request to a user plane function (UPF) 330 of the cellular network core 150, and in response to the request, routing, by the UPF 330, an indication of the determined cellular network address to the NEF 360. Thiebaut discloses routing, by a network exposure function NEF of a cellular network core, a request to a user plane function (UPF) of the cellular network core (see page 32, lines 24-27), and in response to the request, routing, by the UPF, an indication of a determined cellular network address to the NEF (see page 32, lines 29-35). Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the above teaching of Thiebaut to Huang, in order to yield predictable results such as allowing the request to be processed by the UPF 330 as soon as possible.
As to claim 4, Huang discloses that the network function 170 (see at least figure 3) resides outside of the cellular network 150.
As to claims 5, 13, Huang discloses that determining, by the NEF, whether the request from the network function is authorized, wherein routing the request to the UPF is performed after authorization is determined (see paragraphs [0083], [0089]).
As to claims 6, 14, Huang discloses that the network function 170 (see at least figure 3) is a traffic analysis gateway, wherein external network traffic for a plurality of UE that passes through the UPF is analyzed by the traffic analysis gateway. See paragraphs [0017], [0019].
As to claims 7, 15, Huang discloses determining, by the traffic analysis gateway 170, that an event has occurred for the external IP address of the UE based on external network traffic. See paragraphs [0083], [0084].
As to claims 8, 16, Huang discloses that the request is transmitted by the traffic analysis gateway in response to determining the event has occurred. See paragraphs [0083], [0084].
As to claims 9, 18, Huang discloses that the cellular network core is a 5G New Radio (NR) cellular network core (see paragraph [0023]).
As to claim 10, it is rejected for similar reasons with respect to independent claim 1 as set forth above.
As to claim 17, Huang discloses that a policy of a plurality of stored policies is applied to the cellular network address based at least in part on determining the event has occurred. See paragraphs [0048], [0083], [0084].
As to claim 19, Huang fails to disclose that the NEF is configured to: receive a request for traffic characteristics of traffic corresponding to the UE; transmit a data request to a session management function (SMF) to trigger the UPF to output data corresponding to the traffic characteristics of the traffic; and transmit the data corresponding to the traffic characteristics to the network function. The examiner, however, takes Official Notice that the claimed limitations are known in the art, because they are basic operations of a NEF. Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Huang as claimed, in order to ensure that UE traffic are routed properly.
As to claim 20, it is rejected for similar reasons with respect to independent claim 1 as set forth above. Huang further discloses a network function 170 (see at least figure 3), residing outside of a cellular network core 150 of a cellular network, that is authorized to communicate with a network exposure function (NEF) 360 of the cellular network core 150 (see paragraphs [0049], [0083], [0089]), wherein the network function 170 communicates with one or more application functions (AFs) residing outside of the cellular network (see paragraphs [0030], [0086]. [0087]); a radio access network (RAN) (see paragraph [0044]), comprising a plurality of gNodeBs 310, that is in communication with the cellular network core 150.
Claims 2-3, 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang in view of Thiebaut as applied to claims 1, 10 above, and further in view of Liu (US 2021/0014766).
As to claims 2, 11, Huang fails to disclose that the request includes an indication of a data network name (DNN), an indication of single network slice selection assistance information (S-NSSAI), or both. Liu discloses that a request includes an indication of a data network name (DNN), an indication of single network slice selection assistance information (S-NSSAI), or both (see paragraph [0117]). Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the above teaching of Liu to Huang, in order to select a UPF to support an external network indicated by the DNN (as suggested by Liu at paragraph [0117]).
As to claims 3, 12, the combination of Huang and Liu discloses that the indication of DNN, the indication of S-NSSAI, or both are used to select the UPF from a plurality of UPFs of the cellular network core (see Liu, paragraph [0117]).
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 NGUYEN THANH VO whose telephone number is (571)272-7901. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8-5.
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, Matthew Anderson can be reached at (571) 272-4177. 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.
/NGUYEN T VO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2646