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
This action is responsive to the application filed on 01/11/2024 has a total of 20 claims pending in the application; there are 2 independent claims and 18 dependent claims, all of which are ready for examination by the examiner.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-7 and 13-17 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims or amend these claims into their base claims, respectively.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 and 11 recite the limitation “selecting an edge application server (EAS) discovery function (EASDF) entity or a plurality of candidate EASDF entities of a first network based on the SM context creation request message”, the limitation either selects one EASDF or a plurality of EASF entities.
On the other hand, claim 2 and 12 recites “transmitting to the EASDF entity…receiving, from the ESADF entity...” which selecting one EASDF entity elected in claim 1. While claim 8 and 18 recites “transmitting, to each of the plurality of candidate EASFD entities… receiving, from each of the plurality of candidate EASDF entities...” which selecting a plurality of EASDF entities selected in claim 1 and 11. Which makes the claims unclear on how claims 2, 12, 8, and 18 would be incorporated into claim 1 and 11, respectively, or on how would they be incorporated to fit the alternative limitation. Thus, making the claims unclear and indefinite. Examiner suggests amending the claims to make it clear that the EASDF entity is selected in claim 2 and 12 and the candidate EASDF entities are selected in claim 8 and 18. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 3-7, 9-17 and 19-20, the limitations either they select one EASDF entity or a session based on the EASD entity. Examiner suggests amending the claims to make it clear that the EASDF entity is selected in claim 2 and 12 and the candidate EASDF entities are selected in claim 8 and 18. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
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 1-2, 8-12 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over YING et al. Publication No. (US 2021/0219124 A1) in view of KIM et al. Publication No. (US 2022/0360977 A1).
Regarding claim 1, YING teaches a method performed by a first session management function (SMF) entity (V-AMF entity FIG.3) of a first network in a wireless communication system (V-SMF entity visited network FIG.3A), the method comprising:
receiving, from an access and mobility management function (AMF) entity (V-AMF entity FIG.3A), a session management (SM) context creation request message (The V-AMF entity sends a PDU session create session management context request to the V-SMF entity [0204] S304-FIG.3) including an identifier (ID) of a second SMF of a second network (the request includes an identifier of a second SMF entity used to indicate that the second SMF entity is an SMF entity in the private network or in the public network [0028]), home routed session breakout (HR-SBO) allowance information (the request includes an indication information used to indicate whether the PDU session is allowed to be used for local breakout, whether the PDU session is home-routed to a home network of the terminal device. “Allowing local breakout”[0183-185] S302-FIG.3), and protocol data unit (PDU) session creation information (The PDU session create session management context request may be a network element SMF PDU session create session management context request (e.g.,Nsmf-PDUSession-Create-SM Context Request), the request may carry the public PDU session indication [0205-206]); and
selecting an application server entity or a plurality of candidate entities of a first network based on the SM context creation request message (The V-SMF entity selects the visited user plane function (V-UPF) entity, the V-SMF entity selects a UPF entity from a UPF entity resource pool of a private network based on the public PDU session indication carried in the PDU session create management context request, communication with a public network can be implemented through the selected UPF entity [0207-208] S305-FIG.3).
YING does not explicitly teach selecting edge application server (EAS) discovery function (EASDF).
KIM teaches selecting edge application server (EAS) discovery function (EASDF) (KIM: provides a communication method related to a change of an application server performed by an SMF node, The application server may be an application server based on edge computing, the application server may be an edge application server (EAS) or a multi-access edge computing (MEC) application server discovery function [0362-367] FIG.16).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified YING by the teaching of KIM to select edge application server discovery function when selecting UPF in order to enhance the user experience by using services based on edge computing (KIM: [0697] FIG.17).
Regarding claim 2, the modified YING teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising: transmitting, to the EASDF entity, a request message requesting address information of the EASDF entity; and receiving, from the EASDF entity, a response message including the address information of the EASDF entity (The SMF node may transmit a message requesting information on the IP address of the changed application server when the application server is changed, and receives a response changed application server IP address [0347] 4a-FIG.13).
Claims 3-7 (allowable subject matter).
Regarding claim 8, the modified YING teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising: transmitting, to each of the plurality of candidate EASDF entities, a request message requesting address information of the plurality of candidate EASDF entities; and receiving, from each of the plurality of candidate EASDF entities (KIM: the network node may include information (eg, indication) for requesting the IP address of the application server to be changed in the notification message, when the network node transmits a notification message related to the change of the UP path for specific traffic to the AF, the AF may perform an operation of changing the application server according to the changed UP path. The information for requesting the changed IP address of the application server may be information for requesting the IP address of the application server (ie, the changed application server) after AF changes the application server [0386-388] 4a-FIG.13), a response message including the address information of the plurality of candidate EASDF entities (see also KIM: N11 response message to the SMF from old AMF to new AMF [0179-185] FIG.13).
Regarding claim 9, YING teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising selecting a first user plane function (UPF) of the first network based on the PDU session creation information (The V-SMF entity selects the visited user plane function (V-UPF) entity, the V-SMF entity selects a UPF entity from a UPF entity resource pool of a private network based on the public PDU session indication carried in the PDU session create management context request, communication with a public network can be implemented through the selected UPF entity [0207-208] S305-FIG.3).
Regarding claim 10, the modified YING teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising selecting an uplink classifier/branching point (ULCL/BP) user plane function (UPF) (KIM: the SMF may perform a procedure for establishing a UL CL node with UPF 1 [0595-601] FIG.18) and a local UPF of the first network based on the PDU session creation information (YING: the V-SMF entity selects a UPF entity from a UPF entity resource pool of a private network based on the public PDU session indication carried in the PDU session create management context request, communication with a public network can be implemented through the selected UPF entity [0207-208] FIG.2).
Regarding claims 11-12 and 18-20, the independent claim and each dependent claim are related to the same limitation set for hereinabove in claims 1-2 and 8-10, respectively, where the difference used is the “first SMF” has a transceiver and a processor (YING: FIG.10) and the wordings of the claims were interchanged within the claim itself or some of the claims were presented as a combination of two or more previously presented limitations. This change does not affect the limitation of the above treated claims. Adding these phrases to the claims and interchanging the wording did not introduce new limitations to these claims. Therefore, these claims were rejected for similar reasons as stated above.
Claims 13-17 (allowable subject matter).
Conclusion
When responding to this office action, Applicant is advised to clearly point out the patentable novelty which he or she thinks the claims present, in view of the state of the art disclosed by the references cited or the objections made. He or she must also show how the amendments avoid such references or objections See 37 CFR 1.111 (c).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABDELNABI O MUSA whose telephone number is (571)270-1901, and email address is abdelnabi.musa@uspto.gov ‘preferred’. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9:00 am - 5:00 pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kevin Bates, can be reached on 571-2723980. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system? Contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ABDELNABI O MUSA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2472