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. 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- 4, 7-8, 10-15 and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cho et al (US 2025/0150890)(hereinafter Cho) in view of Higuchi et al (US 2023/0217309)(hereinafter Higuchi). Regarding claim 1, Cho discloses a method comprising: receiving, at an access point device (see Cho, Fig. 1, e.g., Network element 104) , information about network traffic that is untagged (see Cho, Fig. 1, p. [0014], e.g., gaming traffic and p. [0017], e.g., the network element 104 may perform a network scheduling for the UE 102 that prioritizes the gaming traffic associated with the UE 102 over non-gaming traffic associated with another UE) ; identifying, by the access point device within the information about the network traffic, a set of attribute values associated with the network traffic (see Cho, Fig. 1, p. [0014], e.g., the network element 104 may identify gaming traffic associated with the UE 102. The network element may identify the gaming traffic based on an RTP packet header ) ; transmitting, by the access point device, the network traffic over a network slice (see Cho, Fig. 1, p. [0015-0017], e.g., the network element 104 may perform a network scheduling for the UE 102 that prioritizes the gaming traffic associated with the UE 102 over non-gaming traffic associated with another UE and Fig. 2, p. [0020-00 24], e.g., the network element may determine whether the UE is associated with a prioritized service (e.g., whether a subscriber associated with the UE is on the prioritized service). The prioritized service may be associated with network slicing and Fig. 5, block 540, p. [0044-0046]) ; receiving, at the access point device from the at least one second computing device (e.g., gaming ser v er 106) , updated configuration data (see Cho, Fig. 1, p. [0015-0116], e.g., the network element 104 may receive, from the gaming server 106, an indication of the traffic pattern) . However, Cho does not expressly disclose the method comprising: assigning, by the access point device based on the set of attribute values and based on configuration data, a tag to the network traffic; transmitting, by the access point device, the network traffic over a network slice associated with the tag ; providing an indication of the tag and information about network traffic to at least one second computing device. Higuchi discloses the above recited limitations . In particular, Higuchi discloses the method comprising: assigning, by the access point device based on the set of attribute values and based on configuration data, a tag to the network traffic (see Higuchi, Fig. 9, p. [0046], e.g., APP #1 to which a high priority is configured assigns a tag for control on the network side to the communication and FIG. 7 may be viewed as multiple APNs (Access point names) from the terminal 20); transmitting, by the access point device, the network traffic over a network slice associated with the tag (see Higuchi, Fig. 7, p. [0043-0044], e.g., the virtual communication path may be a network slice by 5GC, may be a bearer with a different priority (QCI), or may be another virtual communication path and Fig. 9, p. [0046], e.g., the core network determines the communication path, based on a predetermined tag (for example, an IP address, an application type, or the like) assigned by APP) ; providing an indication of the tag and information about network traffic to at least one second computing device (see Higuchi, Fig. 9, p. [0046], e.g., a state in which a plurality of virtual communication paths are provided is mainly assumed, even in a case of a single communication path, a case in which the core network determines the communication path, based on a predetermined tag assigned by APP). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Higuchi ’s teachings into Cho . The suggestion/motivation would have been to efficiently transfer a data traffic to a destination by assigning a tag for control on the network side to the communication. Regarding claim 2, the combined teaching of Cho and Higuchi disclose the method of claim 1, wherein the tag is assigned based at least in part on a destination device associated with the network traffic (see Higuchi, Fig. 9, p. [0046], e.g., a predetermined tag (for example, an IP address, an application type, or the like) assigned by APP) . Regarding claim 3, the combined teaching of Cho and Higuchi disclose the method of claim 1, wherein the tag is assigned based at least in part on an origination device associated with the network traffic (see Higuchi, Fig. 9, p. [0046], e.g., a predetermined tag (for example, an IP address, an application type, or the like) assigned by APP). Regarding claim 4, the combined teaching of Cho and Higuchi disclose the method of claim 1, wherein the network traffic is determined to be a response to second network traffic and the tag is determined based being assigned to the second network traffic (see Higuchi, Fig. 9, p. [0046], e.g., a state in which a plurality of virtual communication paths are provided is mainly assumed, even in a case of a single communication path, a case in which the core network determines the communication path, based on a predetermined tag assigned by APP). Regarding claim 7, the combined teaching of Cho and Higuchi disclose the method of claim 1, wherein the updated configuration data is generated from information about network traffic received from multiple access point devices (see Cho, Fig. 1, p. [0015-0116], e.g., the network element 104 may receive, from the gaming server 106, an indication of the traffic pattern). Regarding claim 8, the combined teaching of Cho and Higuchi disclose the method of claim 1, wherein the at least one second computing device comprises a core management device (see Higuchi, Fig. 3, p. [0039], e.g., various core nodes, p. [0046], e.g., the core network can control the priority of the communication on the network side) . Regarding claim 10, Cho discloses a computing device (see Cho, Fig. 4, e.g., network element 104) comprising: one or more processors; and one or more non-transitory computer-readable media storing computer-executable instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause computing device to perform operations comprising: receiving network traffic that is untagged (see Cho, Fig. 1, p. [0014], e.g., gaming traffic and p. [0017], e.g., the network element 104 may perform a network scheduling for the UE 102 that prioritizes the gaming traffic associated with the UE 102 over non-gaming traffic associated with another UE); determining information about the network traffic (see Cho, Fig. 1, p. [0014-017], e.g., gaming traffic); identifying, based on the information about the network traffic, a set of attribute values associated with the network traffic (see Cho, Fig. 1, p. [0014], e.g., the network element 104 may identify gaming traffic associated with the UE 102. The network element may identify the gaming traffic based on an RTP packet header) ; However, Cho does not expressly disclose the computing device to perform operations comprising: assigning, based on the set of attribute values and based on configuration data, a tag to the network traffic; and allocating the network traffic to a network slice associated with the tag. Higuchi discloses the above recited limitations (see Higuchi, Fig. 9, p. [0046], e.g., APP #1 to which a high priority is configured assigns a tag for control on the network side to the c ommunication and Fig. 9, p. [0046], e.g., a state in which a plurality of virtual communication paths are provided is mainly assumed, even in a case of a single communication path, a case in which the core network determines the communication path, based on a predetermined tag assigned by APP). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Higuchi’s teachings into Cho. The suggestion/motivation would have been to efficiently transfer a data traffic to a destination by assigning a tag for control on the network side to the communication. Regarding claim 11, the combined teaching of Cho and Higuchi disclose the computing device of claim 10, wherein the computing device manages access to a network that is partitioned into a number of network slices (see Cho, p. [0022], e.g., when the UE is associated with the prioritized service, the UE may be associated with network slicing. When the UE is not associated with the prioritized service, the UE may not be associated with network slicing (or network non-slicing). Regarding claim 12, the combined teaching of Cho and Higuchi disclose the computing device of claim 10, wherein the computing device is implemented in a base station that manages a fixed wireless access (FWA) network (see Cho, p. [0029], e.g., other network entities that can support wireless communication for the UE 302) . Regarding claim 13, the combined teaching of Cho and Higuchi disclose the computing device of claim 10, wherein the network traffic is received from a user device in geographic proximity to the computing device (see Cho, p. [0029], e.g., The RAN 304 may provide one or more cells that cover geographic areas) . Regarding claim 14, the combined teaching of Cho and Higuchi disclose the computing device of claim 10, wherein the operations further comprise providing an indication of the tag and information about network traffic to at least one second computing device (see Higuchi, Fig. 9, p. [0046], e.g., a state in which a plurality of virtual communication paths are provided is mainly assumed, even in a case of a single communication path, a case in which the core network determines the communication path, based on a predetermined tag assigned by APP). Regarding claim 15, the combined teaching of Cho and Higuchi disclose the computing device of claim 14, wherein the operations further comprise receiving, from the at least one second computing device, updated configuration data that includes the indication of the tag and the information about network traffic (see Cho, Fig. 1, p. [0015-0116], e.g., the network element 104 may receive, from the gaming server 106, an indication of the traffic pattern). Regarding claim 17, Cho discloses a o ne or more non-transitory computer-readable media (see Cho, Fig. 4, e.g., network element 104) storing computer-executable instructions that, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform operations comprising: receiving network traffic that is untagged (see Cho, Fig. 1, p. [0014], e.g., gaming traffic and p. [0017], e.g., the network element 104 may perform a network scheduling for the UE 102 that prioritizes the gaming traffic associated with the UE 102 over non-gaming traffic associated with another UE); determining information about the network traffic (see Cho, Fig. 1, p. [0014-017], e.g., gaming traffic); identifying, based on the information about the network traffic, a set of attribute values associated with the network traffic (see Cho, Fig. 1, p. [0014], e.g., the network element 104 may identify gaming traffic associated with the UE 102. The network element may identify the gaming traffic based on an RTP packet header). However, Cho does not expressly disclose the one or more processors to perform operations comprising: assigning, based on the set of attribute values and based on configuration data, a tag to the network traffic; and allocating the network traffic to a network slice associated with the tag. Higuchi discloses the above recited limitations (see Higuchi, Fig. 9, p. [0046], e.g., APP #1 to which a high priority is configured assigns a tag for control on the network side to the communication and Fig. 9, p. [0046], e.g., a state in which a plurality of virtual communication paths are provided is mainly assumed, even in a case of a single communication path, a case in which the core network determines the communication path, based on a predetermined tag assigned by APP). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Higuchi’s teachings into Cho. The suggestion/motivation would have been to efficiently transfer a data traffic to a destination by assigning a tag for control on the network side to the communication. Regarding claim 18, the combined teaching of Cho and Higuchi disclose the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 17, wherein the information about the network traffic comprises information about an origination device or a destination device associated with the network traffic (see Higuchi, Fig. 9, p. [0046], e.g., a predetermined tag (for example, an IP address, an application type, or the like) assigned by APP). Claims 5 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combined teaching of Cho and Higuchi in view of Nagarkar et al (US 10,764,333) (hereinafter Nagarkar). Regarding claim 5, the combined teaching of Cho and Higuchi do not expressly disclose wherein the tag is assigned based on a degree of similarity between the information about the network traffic and second information about second network traffic associated with the tag in the configuration data. Nagarkar discloses the above recited limitations (see Nagarkar, claim 2, e.g., tag being determined using a configuration data in a shared network where a first local area network shares the tag with a second shared network). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Nagarkar’s teachings into the combined teaching of Cho and Higuchi. The suggestion/motivation would have been to use configuration data in a shared network where a first local network shares the tag with the second network. Regarding claim 19, the combined teaching of Cho, Higuchi and Nagarkar disclose the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 17, wherein the tag is assigned using one or more machine learning models based on a degree of similarity between the information about the network traffic and second information about second network traffic associated with the tag in the configuration data (see Nagarkar, claim 2, e.g., tag being determined using a configuration data in a shared network where a first local area network shares the tag with a second shared network). Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combined teaching of Cho and Higuchi, and further in view of Healy et al (US 2018/0241720) (hereinafter Healy) FILLIN "Insert the additional prior art reference(s) relied upon for the obviousness rejection." \d "[ 4 ]" . Regarding claim 6, the combined teaching of Cho and Higuchi do not expressly disclose the method of claim 1, wherein the information about the network traffic is received using deep packet inspection. Healy discloses the above recited limitations (see Healy, p. [0111], e.g., traffic identification functions which tag the network traffic with information from the internet layer (e.g. internet layer type, IP address) and transport layer (e.g. transport layer type, ports) encapsulation and Fig. 5, p. [0129], e.g., a Deep Packet Inspection (DPI) function 210 inspects the message payload and adds IP addresses and DPI tags. The DPI function 210 inspects the TCP payload and adds Application levels tags). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Cho, Higuchi and Healy to use DPI function to process the internet packet and transport packet tags in order to determine an applicable policy. Claims 9 , 16 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combined teaching of Cho and Higuchi in view of Salkintzis (US 2025/0374353). Regarding claims 9 and 16, the combined teaching of Cho and Higuchi do not expressly disclose wherein the network slice is configured to transmit a type of network traffic in an optimal manner. Salkintzis discloses the above recited limitations (see Salkintzis, p. [0070-0071], e.g., network slice is optimized for a type of traffic). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Salkintzis ’s teachings into the combined teaching of Cho and Higuchi . One skilled in the art would be motivated to combine them in order to efficiently optimize a network slice by optimizing the network slice by type. Regarding claim 1 6 , the combined teaching of Cho, Higuchi and Salkintzis disclose the computing device of claim 10, wherein the network slice is optimized for a type or category of network traffic (see Salkintzis, p. [0070-0071], e.g., network slice is optimized for a type of traffic). Regarding claim 20, the combined teaching of Cho, Higuchi and Salkintzis disclose the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 17, wherein the network slice is optimized for a category of network traffic and the tag is assigned based on the network traffic being determined to be the category of network traffic (see Salkintzis, p. [0070-0071], e.g., network slice is optimized for a type of traffic). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT MINH TRANG T NGUYEN whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)270-5248 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT M-F 8:30am-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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Chirag C Shah can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 571-272-3144 . 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. /MINH TRANG T NGUYEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2477