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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
Acknowledgement is made of the amendment filed on December 11, 2025, in which:
Claims 1, 2, 5, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, and 20 are Currently amended.
Claims 1-20 are currently pending and an Office action on the merits follows.
Response to Arguments
On pages 8-12 of the applicant’s remarks, the applicant argues that Lee fails to teach “wherein the registration support information indicates at last a first time period during which or a first location at which the end device is to initiate a re-registration procedure with the one or more network devices.” The examiner respectfully disagrees. Lee paragraphs [0076], [0107], [0123], [0127] explain providing a slice update notification when there is public slice change information. Public slice information may include information such as a slice available location, time, period, and/or application. Figure 4 and paragraphs [0113]-[0116] explain performing re-registration when the UE identifies that there is a public slice available at the current location and/or current time based on the public slice information. Therefore, the examiner respectfully maintains the rejection as further explained below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 3, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 14, 16, 17, 18, 19, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Pub No.: US-20230135667-A1 (herein “Lee”).
Claims 1, 9, and 17
Consider claim 1, Lee teaches a method comprising:
receiving, by one or more network devices, a new network slice configuration notification pertaining to an end device (see Lee Fig. 2, Fig. 5, [0075], [0080], [0119] note the AMF receives subscription info response 218 and slice info response 222 with slice information);
transmitting, by the one or more network devices, a first message, which includes a new network slice configuration, to the end device (see Lee Fig. 2, Fig. 5, [0081], [0088] note the AMF transmits the registration accept with the slice information);
receiving, by the one or more network devices, a second message that includes registration support information regarding re-registration of the end device with the network device (see Lee Fig. 2, Fig. 5, [0091], [0123] note the AMF receives the slice update information 510), wherein the registration support information indicates at last a first time period during which or a first location at which the end device is to initiate a re-registration procedure with the one or more network devices (see Lee [0076], [0107], [0113]-[0116], [0123], [0127] note indicating the slice is available for a specific location, a specific time, a specific period, or a specific application);
transmitting, by the one or more network devices, a third message, which includes the registration support information, to the end device (see Lee Fig. 5, [0126] note AMF transmits the UE configuration update 514 for the new allowed slice); and
performing, by the one or more network devices, the re-registration procedure initiated by the end device based on the registration support information (see Lee Fig. 4, Fig. 7, [0113]-[0115], [0140] note the UE performs re-registration procedure).
Claim(s) 9 and 17 is/are rejected for at least the same reason(s) set forth in claim 1.
Claims 2, 10, and 19
Consider claim 2, Lee teaches wherein the registration support information indicates at least a second time period or a second location that the end device can access a network slice associated with the new network slice configuration (see Lee [0067], [0076], [0080] note indicating the slice is available for a specific location, a specific time, a specific period, or a specific application).
Claim(s) 10 and 19 is/are rejected for at least the same reason(s) set forth in claim 2.
Claims 3 and 11
Consider claim 3, Lee teaches wherein the registration support information correlates to at least one network slice included in the new network slice configuration (see Lee Fig. 5, [0123] note notifying the AMF that the slice is available at a time/location when the slice is available).
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected for at least the same reason(s) set forth in claim 3.
Claims 6, 14, and 18
Consider claim 6, Lee teaches wherein the registration support information is generated based on historical behavior of the end device (see Lee Fig. 6, [0131]-[0133] note the NF 200 may be an NWDAF that manages statistics that monitor information about a data usage of the UE for a condition before sending an update).
Claim(s) 14 and 18 is/are rejected for at least the same reason(s) set forth in claim 6.
Claims 8, 16, and 20
Consider claim 8, Lee teaches wherein the one or more network device are an access and mobility management function (AMF) (see Lee Fig. 5, Fig. 11, note AMF 120).
Claim(s) 16 and 20 is/are rejected for at least the same reason(s) set forth in claim 8.
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.
Claim(s) 4, 5, 12, and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee, and further in view of Pub. No.: US-20230309047-A1 (herein “Casati”).
Claims 4 and 12
Consider claim 4, Lee fails to teach wherein the registration support information is included in a new user equipment route selection policy (URSP) rule. Casati explains the UE configuration update command comprising configured NSSAI, URSP, among other information identifying the network, network slices, etc. (see Casati Fig. 3, [0090], [0092]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lee to include the recited teaching of Casati. Such a modification would improve Lee by improving operator control of user equipment behavior in registering with network slices (see Casati [0006]).
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected for at least the same reason(s) set forth in claim 4.
Claims 5 and 13
Consider claim 5, Lee fails to teach further comprising: receiving, by the one or more network devices, a response to the third message from the end device; and transmitting, by the one or more network devices, the response to a policy control function device of a core network. Casati explains UE configuration update procedure with transparent UE policy delivery from the AMF to the UE which the UE responds to the AMF with the result of the UE policy update and the AMF forwards the response to the PCF using Namf_Conmmunication_N1MessageNotify (see Casati Fig. 3, Fig. 4, [0090]-[0096], [0101]-[0103]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lee to include the recited teaching of Casati. Such a modification would improve Lee by providing acknowledgement that the UE has been successfully configured to the PCF (see Casati [0103]).
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected for at least the same reason(s) set forth in claim 5.
Claim(s) 7 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee, and further in view of Pub No.: US-20200322879-A1 (herein “Zhu”).
Claims 7 and 15
Consider claim 7, Lee fails to state wherein the first message and the third message are non-access stratum messages. Zhu explains the AMF sending the UE NAS messages to notify the terminal with network slice information (see Zhu Fig. 7, [0218]-[0220]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lee to include the recited teaching of Zhu. Such a modification would improve Lee by improving service capability of the user terminal (see Zhu [0016]).
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected for at least the same reason(s) set forth in claim 7.
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 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.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARCUS C HAMMONDS whose telephone number is (571)270-3193. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10:00AM-6:00PM.
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, ALISON T. SLATER can be reached at (571)270-0375. 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.
/MARCUS HAMMONDS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2647
Prosecution Insights