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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/03/2024, 01/29/2025, and 02/24/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zaus et al. (US 2022/0321673), Zaus hereinafter, in view of Kim et al. (US 2023/0053805), Kim hereinafter.
Re. Claim 1. Zaus teaches a method (Zaus, 0012: In one aspect, the exemplary embodiments introduce mechanisms to determine a method for ACR that is supported by the UE and network entities involved in the ACR.), comprising:
obtaining at least one of application context relocation (ACR) capability information supported by an edge application server (EAS) (Zaus, 0051: During the registration procedure, the EAS 172 may send an EAS profile information element (IE) to the EES 174. The EAS profile IE may include the service continuity supported indication referenced above. In addition, the EAS 172 may indicate which ACR methods are supported by the EAS 172.),
ACR capability information supported by an edge enabler client (EEC) (Zaus, 0056: During either EEC registration or EAS discovery, the EEC 240 may send a service continuity supported indication to the EES 174 in an application client profile IE. In addition, the EEC 240 may also signal which ACR methods are supported by the AC 235 and which ACR methods are supported by the EEC 240.),
ACR capability information supported by an application client (AC) (Zaus, 0050: In 405, the AC 235 sends a message to the EEC 240 indicating which ACR methods are supported by the AC 235.), or
ACR capability information supported by an edge enabler server (EES) (Zaus, 0081: In a first example, a processor of a user equipment (UE) operating as an edge enabler client (EEC) is configured to perform operations comprising receiving, from an edge configuration server (ECS), a message comprising information for one or more edge enabler servers (EESs), wherein the information for each EES comprises whether the EES supports service continuity and one or more ACR methods supported by the EES and selecting one of the EESs to perform an operation with based on the information.); and
selecting ACR mode information for the AC based on the at least one of the ACR capability information supported by the EAS (Zaus, 0045: The exemplary embodiments introduce mechanisms that enable the entities involved in an ACR procedure (e.g., AC, EEC, s-EAS, s-EES, t-EAS, t-EES, etc.) to indicate their capabilities related to ACR to the other entities so that when an ACR procedure is triggered by one of the entities, the EEC or s-EES may determine whether all the other entities to be involved in the ACR procedure support a specific ACR method. The capability information may be used during EES selection and EAS discovery to initially select serving entities and then select target entities that support an ACR method that matches the capabilities of the AC/EEC of the UE 110.),
the ACR capability information supported by the EEC (Zaus, 0045: The exemplary embodiments introduce mechanisms that enable the entities involved in an ACR procedure (e.g., AC, EEC, s-EAS, s-EES, t-EAS, t-EES, etc.) to indicate their capabilities related to ACR to the other entities so that when an ACR procedure is triggered by one of the entities, the EEC or s-EES may determine whether all the other entities to be involved in the ACR procedure support a specific ACR method. The capability information may be used during EES selection and EAS discovery to initially select serving entities and then select target entities that support an ACR method that matches the capabilities of the AC/EEC of the UE 110.),
the ACR capability information supported by the AC (Zaus, 0045: The exemplary embodiments introduce mechanisms that enable the entities involved in an ACR procedure (e.g., AC, EEC, s-EAS, s-EES, t-EAS, t-EES, etc.) to indicate their capabilities related to ACR to the other entities so that when an ACR procedure is triggered by one of the entities, the EEC or s-EES may determine whether all the other entities to be involved in the ACR procedure support a specific ACR method. The capability information may be used during EES selection and EAS discovery to initially select serving entities and then select target entities that support an ACR method that matches the capabilities of the AC/EEC of the UE 110.), or
the ACR capability information supported by the EES (Zaus, 0081: In a first example, a processor of a user equipment (UE) operating as an edge enabler client (EEC) is configured to perform operations comprising receiving, from an edge configuration server (ECS), a message comprising information for one or more edge enabler servers (EESs), wherein the information for each EES comprises whether the EES supports service continuity and one or more ACR methods supported by the EES and selecting one of the EESs to perform an operation with based on the information.),
While Zaus teaches ACR capability information may be used for selecting entities involved in an ACR procedure, Zaus does not positively recite selecting ACR mode information, nor does Zaus explicitly disclose wherein the ACR mode information indicates an identifier indicating the AC and an ACR scenario selected for the AC.
However, in the related art, Kim teaches selecting ACR mode information (Kim, Fig. 2, 0078: In step 2, the EES may select (or determine) an application context relocation mode (hereinafter, referred to as a relocation mode) based on an application context relocation initiation UE capability and an application context relocation initiation EAS capability received from the EEC and the EAS, respectively.)
wherein the ACR mode information indicates an identifier indicating the AC and an ACR scenario selected for the AC (Kim, 0106: In step 1, the source EES or the source EAS may transmit a relocation-in-progress indication to each device based on a configured relocation mode. And 0107: The relocation in-progress indication may include information indicating that the corresponding application context relocation procedure is already in progress. Further, the indication may include information on which application of the UE context relocation is in progress (e.g., application ID or EAS (instance) ID). [The configured relocation mode corresponds to the ACR scenario selected for the AC.]).
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 combine the invention of Zaus with the method of selecting an application context relocation mode between an EEC, EES, and EAS. The resulting invention would provide for preventing a plurality of devices from repeatedly performing initiation of an application context relocation procedure (Kim, 0014).
Re. Claim 2. Zaus and Kim teach claim 1.
Zaus further teaches wherein the method is performed by the EES or a chip of the EES (Zaus, 0085: In a fifth example, an edge enabler server (EES) of an edge data network (EDN) is configured to perform operations comprising receiving, from one or more edge application servers (EAS), a first message indicating whether each EAS supports service continuity and one or more application context relocation (ACR) methods supported by each of the EASs that support service continuity and receiving, from an edge enabler client (EEC) of a user equipment (UE), a second message indicating that an application client (AC) of the UE requesting service from the EDN requires service continuity support from the EDN, one or more ACR methods supported by the AC and one or more ACR methods supported by the EEC.).
Re. Claim 3. Zaus and Kim teach claim 2.
Zaus further teaches sending the ACR mode information to at least one of the EAS or the EEC (Zaus, 0057: Accordingly, in this example, the EEC 240 may send a discovery request to the EES 174. In response, the EES 174 may send a discovery response to the EEC 240 to provide information that explicitly or implicitly indicates an address for the EAS 172. And 0060: During a EAS discovery procedure for an EAS or a t-EAS, an EES may select one or more EASs with an EAS profile matching the application client profile, the service continuity required indication and the supported ACR methods indication. The EES may consider a supported ACR methods indication matching, if it has at least one supported ACR methods in common with the other entities (e.g., AC 235, EEC 240 and s-EES 174 for the case of EAS discovery or AC 235, EEC 240, s-EES 174 and s-EAS 172 for the case of t-EAS discovery). The EES may then attempt to find at least one ACR method common to the other entities. The EES may then inform the requesting entity about the common ACR methods in the EAS discovery response message.).
Re. Claim 4. Zaus and Kim teach claim 2.
Zaus further teaches wherein the obtaining the ACR capability information supported by the EAS comprises: receiving, from the EAS, the ACR capability information supported by the EAS (Zaus, 0085: In a fifth example, an edge enabler server (EES) of an edge data network (EDN) is configured to perform operations comprising receiving, from one or more edge application servers (EAS), a first message indicating whether each EAS supports service continuity and one or more application context relocation (ACR) methods supported by each of the EASs that support service continuity and receiving, from an edge enabler client (EEC) of a user equipment (UE), a second message indicating that an application client (AC) of the UE requesting service from the EDN requires service continuity support from the EDN, one or more ACR methods supported by the AC and one or more ACR methods supported by the EEC.).
Re. Claim 5. Zaus and Kim teach claim 2.
Zaus further teaches wherein the obtaining the ACR capability information supported by the EEC and the ACR capability information supported by the AC comprises: receiving, from the EEC, the ACR capability information supported by the EEC and the ACR capability information supported by the AC (Zaus, 0085: In a fifth example, an edge enabler server (EES) of an edge data network (EDN) is configured to perform operations comprising receiving, from one or more edge application servers (EAS), a first message indicating whether each EAS supports service continuity and one or more application context relocation (ACR) methods supported by each of the EASs that support service continuity and receiving, from an edge enabler client (EEC) of a user equipment (UE), a second message indicating that an application client (AC) of the UE requesting service from the EDN requires service continuity support from the EDN, one or more ACR methods supported by the AC and one or more ACR methods supported by the EEC.).
Re. Claim 6. Zaus in view of Kim teaches claim 2.
Yet, Zaus does not explicitly teach receiving, from the EEC, ACR scenario request information,
wherein the ACR scenario request information is for requesting an allocation of the ACR scenario.
However, in the related art, Kim teaches receiving, from the EEC, ACR scenario request information (Kim, Fig. 7, 0167: In case that the application context relocation procedure is initiated or triggered in the EEC or the source EAS, the source EES may receive a context relocation request from the EEC (step 2A) or may receive a context relocation request from the source EAS (step 2B).),
wherein the ACR scenario request information is for requesting an allocation of the ACR scenario (Kim, Fig. 7, 0167: In case that the application context relocation procedure is initiated or triggered in the EEC or the source EAS, the source EES may receive a context relocation request from the EEC (step 2A) or may receive a context relocation request from the source EAS (step 2B).).
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 combine the invention of Zaus with the method of selecting an application context relocation mode between an EEC, EES, and EAS. The resulting invention would provide for preventing a plurality of devices from repeatedly performing initiation of an application context relocation procedure (Kim, 0014).
Re. Claim 7. Zaus in view of Kim teaches claim 1.
Zaus in view of Kim further teaches wherein the method is performed by the EEC or a chip of the EEC (Zaus, 0081: In a first example, a processor of a user equipment (UE) operating as an edge enabler client (EEC) is configured to perform operations comprising receiving, from an edge configuration server (ECS), a message comprising information for one or more edge enabler servers (EESs), wherein the information for each EES comprises whether the EES supports service continuity and one or more ACR methods supported by the EES and selecting one of the EESs to perform an operation with based on the information.
Kim, 0175: FIG. 8 illustrates an embodiment of a detailed operation of the above-described embodiments for a target EES based application context relocation procedure (a procedure initiated by an EEC in a UE, an application client, or an MT and sending an application context relocation request to the target EES).).
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 combine the invention of Zaus with the method of selecting an application context relocation mode between an EEC, EES, and EAS. The resulting invention would provide for preventing a plurality of devices from repeatedly performing initiation of an application context relocation procedure (Kim, 0014).
Re. Claim 8. Zaus and Kim teach claim 7.
Zaus further teaches sending, by the EEC, the ACR mode information to at least one of the AC or the EES (Zaus, 0063: When the EEC 240 signals to the EES during EEC registration or EAS discovery (e.g., 425) or when the EEC signals to the ECS 180 during service provisioning (e.g., 420), the EEC 240 may provide a service continuity supported indication and indicate which ACR methods are supported by the AC 235 and the EEC 240.).
Re. Claim 9. Zaus and Kim teach claim 7.
Zaus further teaches wherein the obtaining the ACR capability information supported by the AC comprises: receiving, from the AC, the ACR capability information supported by the AC (Zaus, 0050: In 405, the AC 235 sends a message to the EEC 240 indicating which ACR methods are supported by the AC 235.).
Re. Claim 10. Zaus and Kim teach claim 7.
Zaus further teaches wherein the obtaining the ACR capability information supported by the EES comprises: receiving, from the EES, the ACR capability information supported by the EES (Zaus, 0059: In some embodiments, the EES 174 may inform the EEC 240 of only the common ACR methods where the AC 235 or EEC 240 initiates the ACR signaling procedure (e.g., method 1, 2, 5). [The common ACR methods correspond to the ACR capability information supported by the EES.]).
Re. Claim 11. Zaus and Kim teach claim 7.
Zaus further teaches wherein the obtaining the ACR capability information supported by the EAS comprises: receiving, from the EAS, the ACR capability information supported by the EAS (Zaus, 0077: Similarly, as indicated above, the EAS profile may be modified to indicate which ACR methods are supported by the EAS and/or EES. And 0077: The EAS profile may also be included by the EAS in messages towards the EEC, e.g., EAs discovery response, EAS discovery notification, etc.).
Re. Claim 12. Zaus teaches an apparatus (Zaus, 0021: In addition to an EAS, an ACR procedure may involve an AC of the UE, an edge enabler client (EEC) of the UE, a source edge enabler server (s-EES), a s-EAS, a target EES (t-EES) and a t-EAS.), comprising:
at least one processor (Zaus, 0038: The edge data network 170 may also include an edge enabler server (EES). [A processor is a necessary component of a server.]); and
one or more memories coupled to the at least one processor and storing programming instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor (Zaus, 0038: The edge data network 170 may also include an edge enabler server (EES). [Memory is a necessary component of a server.]).
Further components of claim 12 perform the same steps as claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1).
Re. Claim 13. Zaus and Kim teach claim 12.
Claim 13 is directed toward an apparatus corresponding to the subject matter of claim 2. Claim 13 does not define or limit over the subject matter of claim 2. Therefore, claim 13 is rejected for similar reasons as laid out with regard to claim 2 above.
Re. Claim 14. Zaus and Kim teach claim 13.
Claim 14 is directed toward an apparatus corresponding to the subject matter of claim 3. Claim 14 does not define or limit over the subject matter of claim 3. Therefore, claim 14 is rejected for similar reasons as laid out with regard to claim 3 above.
Re. Claim 15. Zaus and Kim teach claim 13.
Claim 15 is directed toward an apparatus corresponding to the subject matter of claim 4. Claim 15 does not define or limit over the subject matter of claim 4. Therefore, claim 15 is rejected for similar reasons as laid out with regard to claim 4 above.
Re. Claim 16. Zaus and Kim teach claim 13.
Claim 16 is directed toward an apparatus corresponding to the subject matter of claim 5. Claim 16 does not define or limit over the subject matter of claim 5. Therefore, claim 16 is rejected for similar reasons as laid out with regard to claim 5 above.
Re. Claim 17. Zaus and Kim teach claim 12.
Claim 17 is directed toward an apparatus corresponding to the subject matter of claim 7. Claim 17 does not define or limit over the subject matter of claim 7. Therefore, claim 17 is rejected for similar reasons as laid out with regard to claim 7 above.
Re. Claim 18. Zaus and Kim teach claim 12.
Zaus further teaches wherein the apparatus is further caused to: send the ACR mode information to at least one of the AC or the EES (Zaus, 0063: When the EEC 240 signals to the EES during EEC registration or EAS discovery (e.g., 425) or when the EEC signals to the ECS 180 during service provisioning (e.g., 420), the EEC 240 may provide a service continuity supported indication and indicate which ACR methods are supported by the AC 235 and the EEC 240.).
Re. Claim 19. Zaus and Kim teach claim 12.
Zaus further teaches wherein the apparatus is caused to obtain the ACR capability information supported by the AC by receiving, from the AC, the ACR capability information supported by the AC (Zaus, 0050: In 405, the AC 235 sends a message to the EEC 240 indicating which ACR methods are supported by the AC 235.).
Re. Claim 20. Zaus and Kim teach claim 12.
Zaus further teaches wherein the apparatus is caused to one or more of obtain the ACR capability information supported by the EES by receiving, from the EES, the ACR capability information supported by the EES (Zaus,0059: In some embodiments, the EES 174 may inform the EEC 240 of only the common ACR methods where the AC 235 or EEC 240 initiates the ACR signaling procedure (e.g., method 1, 2, 5). [The common ACR methods correspond to the ACR capability information supported by the EES.]);
or obtain the ACR capability information supported by the EAS by receiving, from the EAS, the ACR capability information supported by the EAS (Zaus, 0077: Similarly, as indicated above, the EAS profile may be modified to indicate which ACR methods are supported by the EAS and/or EES. And 0077: The EAS profile may also be included by the EAS in messages towards the EEC, e.g., EAs discovery response, EAS discovery notification, etc.).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CASON H MORSE whose telephone number is (571)270-5235. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30-6:00 Mon.-Thurs., Fri. varies.
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, Rebecca Song can be reached at (571) 270-3667. 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.
/C.H.M./Examiner, Art Unit 2417
/REBECCA E SONG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2417
Prosecution Insights