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
Claim Status
1. This is in response to application filed on 1/17/2024 in which claims 1-20 are presented for examination.
Priority
2. Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Information Disclosure Statement
3. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
4. Claim 17-20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
a. Claim 17 is missing; claims 17-20 need to be renumbered and the claim dependency of claim 19 needs to be changed.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
5. 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 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 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 6-10, 12 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Speicher et al. (US 2023/0239779), (hereinafter, Speicher).
Regarding claims 1 and 16, Speicher disclose an apparatus comprising: at least one processor; at least one memory storing instructions which when executed by the at least one processor cause the apparatus to perform at least:
retrieving information associated with network slice selection (= network slice may be identified to a UE via Single-Network Selection Assistance Information (S-NSSAI) provided by the network to the UE, see [0049]; at 305, the UE 115-b may receive, from the base station 105c, a control message including an access network node configuration, the configuration indicating a set of IWFs and a set of network slices associated with the set of IWFs; the set of network slices may be used concurrently by the UE 115-b; and the set of IWFs are associated with the network slices that may be used concurrently, see [0127]);
selecting a network slice simultaneous registration group using the information associated with network slice selection ((= network slice may be identified to a UE via Single-Network Selection Assistance Information (S-NSSAI) provided by the network to the UE; if two S-NSSAIs are indicated as being as part of the same Network Slice Simultaneous Registration Group (NSSRG) and the UE supports NSSRG at 310, the UE 115-b may select IWF from the set of IWFs based on a target network slice being indicated in the access network node configuration as associated with the selected IWF, see [0128]); and
providing, to a network entity, a requested network slice selection assistance information based on the selected network slice simultaneous registration group
(= network slice may be identified to a UE via Single-Network Selection Assistance Information (S-NSSAI) provided by the network to the UE; if two S-NSSAIs are indicated as being as part of the same Network Slice Simultaneous Registration Group (NSSRG) and the UE supports NSSRG, the UE may access two slices concurrently, see [0049]; UE 115-b may select the IWF based on the selected network IWF being associated with an NSSRG including the target network slice, where the access network node configuration indicates a set of NSSRGs associated with each IWF of the set of IWFs, see [0128]; and at 315, the UE 115-b may transmit, to the base station 105-c, a name resolution request message indicating the selected IWF; and at 325, a registration message, see [0131]).
Regarding claim 6, as mentioned in claim 1, Speicher discloses the apparatus, wherein the selecting a network slice simultaneous registration group using the information associated with network slice selection comprises: selecting the network slice simultaneous registration group using: i) the information associated with network slice selection, and ii) single-network slice selection assistance information associated with an application used in a user equipment (see, [0049, 0128 and 0132]).
Regarding claim 7, as mentioned in claim 1, Speicher discloses the apparatus, wherein the selecting a network slice simultaneous registration group using the information associated with network slice selection comprises: selecting the network slice simultaneous registration group using: i) the information associated with network slice selection, and ii) single-network slice selection assistance information associated with an existing protocol data unit session of a user equipment (see, [0049, 0128 and 0132]).
Regarding claim 8, as mentioned in claim 1, Speicher discloses the apparatus, wherein the retrieving information associated with network slice selection comprises: receiving, via a user input, the information associated with network slice selection (see, [0049, 0128 and 0132]).
Regarding claim 9, as mentioned in claim 1, Speicher discloses the apparatus, wherein the retrieving comprises at least one of: receiving from a network function or retrieving an accessible configuration (see, [0049, 0127 and 0132]).
Regarding claim 10, as mentioned in claim 1, Speicher discloses the apparatus, wherein the providing comprises: determining at least one single-network slice selection assistance information associated with the selected network slice simultaneous registration group; and providing, to a network entity, a requested network slice selection assistance information comprising the determined at least one single-network slice selection assistance information (see, [0049, 0127 and 0132]).
Regarding claim 12, Speicher discloses an apparatus comprising: at least one processor, at least one memory storing instructions of a network function, wherein the instructions when executed by the at least one processor causes the apparatus to at least perform:
providing, to a user equipment, information associated with network slice selection, for the selection of a network slice simultaneous registration group at the user equipment (= network slice may be identified to a UE via Single-Network Selection Assistance Information (S-NSSAI) provided by the network to the UE, see [0049]; at 305, the UE 115-b may receive, from the base station 105c, a control message including an access network node configuration, the configuration indicating a set of IWFs and a set of network slices associated with the set of IWFs; the set of network slices may be used concurrently by the UE 115-b; and the set of IWFs are associated with the network slices that may be used concurrently, see [0127]) and
receiving, from the user equipment, a requested network slice selection assistance information based on a first network slice simultaneous registration group selected by the user equipment. (= network slice may be identified to a UE via Single-Network Selection Assistance Information (S-NSSAI) provided by the network to the UE; if two S-NSSAIs are indicated as being as part of the same Network Slice Simultaneous Registration Group (NSSRG) and the UE supports NSSRG, the UE may access two slices concurrently, see [0049]; UE 115-b may select the IWF based on the selected network IWF being associated with an NSSRG including the target network slice, where the access network node configuration indicates a set of NSSRGs associated with each IWF of the set of IWFs, see [0128]; and at 315, the UE 115-b may transmit, to the base station 105-c, a name resolution request message indicating the selected IWF; and at 325, a registration message, see [0131]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
6. 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.
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 2-4, 11, 13-15 and 18-20, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Speicher in view of Wang et al., (US 2019/0037409), (hereinafter, Wang).
Regarding claims 2 and 18, as mentioned in claims 1 and 16, Speicher explicitly fails to disclose the apparatus/method, wherein the information associated with network slice selection comprises a priority value for a network slice access stratum group.
However, Wang, which is analogous art equivalently discloses the apparatus/method, wherein the information associated with network slice selection comprises a priority value for a network slice access stratum group (= WTRU may follow a priority order in selecting network slice, see [0040]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teaching of Gauthier with Oren for the benefit of achieving a communication system that utilizes network slice information parameters in order to select an appropriate slice for a device.
Regarding claim 3, as mentioned in claims 2, Speicher explicitly fails to disclose the apparatus, wherein the information associated with network slice selection comprises an indication to use the priority value of the network slice access stratum group when selecting the network slice simultaneous registration group.
However, Wang, which is analogous art equivalently discloses the apparatus, wherein the information associated with network slice selection comprises an indication to use the priority value of the network slice access stratum group when selecting the network slice simultaneous registration group (= WTRU may follow a priority order in selecting network slice, see [0040]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teaching of Gauthier with Oren for the benefit of achieving a communication system that utilizes network slice information parameters in order to select an appropriate slice for a device.
Regarding claim 4, as mentioned in claims 1, Speicher explicitly fails to disclose the apparatus, wherein the information associated with network slice selection comprises at least one of: a priority value for a network slice simultaneous registration group; a priority value for an application; a priority value associated with a traffic descriptor; or a priority value for single-network slice selection assistance information.
However, Wang, which is analogous art equivalently discloses the apparatus, wherein the information associated with network slice selection comprises at least one of: a priority value for a network slice simultaneous registration group; a priority value for an application; a priority value associated with a traffic descriptor; or a priority value for single-network slice selection assistance information (= WTRU may follow a priority order in selecting network slice, see [0040]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teaching of Gauthier with Oren for the benefit of achieving a communication system that utilizes network slice information parameters in order to select an appropriate slice for a device.
Regarding claim 11, as mentioned in claims 1, Speicher explicitly fails to disclose the apparatus, wherein the information associated with network slice selection is received in one of: a registration accept message, a configuration update command message, and a manage user equipment policy command message.
However, Wang, which is analogous art equivalently discloses the apparatus, wherein the information associated with network slice selection is received in one of: a registration accept message, a configuration update command message, and a manage user equipment policy command message (see, [0050]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teaching of Gauthier with Oren for the benefit of achieving a communication system that utilizes network slice information parameters in order to select an appropriate slice for a device.
Regarding claim 13, as mentioned in claims 12, Speicher explicitly fails to disclose the apparatus wherein the information associated with network slice selection comprises a priority value for a network slice access stratum group.
However, Wang, which is analogous art equivalently discloses the apparatus, wherein the information associated with network slice selection comprises a priority value for a network slice access stratum group (= WTRU may follow a priority order in selecting network slice, see [0040]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teaching of Gauthier with Oren for the benefit of achieving a communication system that utilizes network slice information parameters in order to select an appropriate slice for a device.
Regarding claim 14, as mentioned in claims 13, Speicher explicitly fails to disclose the apparatus wherein the information associated with network slice selection comprises an indication to use the priority value of the network slice access stratum group when selecting the network slice simultaneous registration group.
However, Wang, which is analogous art equivalently discloses the apparatus, wherein the information associated with network slice selection comprises an indication to use the priority value of the network slice access stratum group when selecting the network slice simultaneous registration group (= WTRU may follow a priority order in selecting network slice, see [0040]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teaching of Gauthier with Oren for the benefit of achieving a communication system that utilizes network slice information parameters in order to select an appropriate slice for a device.
Regarding claim 15, as mentioned in claims 12, Speicher explicitly fails to disclose the apparatus wherein the information associated with network slice selection comprises at least one of: a priority value for a network slice simultaneous registration group; a priority value for an application; a priority value associated with a traffic descriptor; or a priority value for single-network slice selection assistance information.
However, Wang, which is analogous art equivalently discloses the apparatus, wherein the information associated with network slice selection comprises at least one of: a priority value for a network slice simultaneous registration group; a priority value for an application; a priority value associated with a traffic descriptor; or a priority value for single-network slice selection assistance information (= WTRU may follow a priority order in selecting network slice, see [0040]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teaching of Gauthier with Oren for the benefit of achieving a communication system that utilizes network slice information parameters in order to select an appropriate slice for a device.
Regarding claim 19, as mentioned in claims 16, Speicher explicitly fails to disclose the apparatus wherein the information associated with network slice selection comprises an indication to use the priority value of the network slice access stratum group when selecting the network slice simultaneous registration group.
However, Wang, which is analogous art equivalently discloses the apparatus, wherein the information associated with network slice selection comprises an indication to use the priority value of the network slice access stratum group when selecting the network slice simultaneous registration group (= WTRU may follow a priority order in selecting network slice, see [0040]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teaching of Gauthier with Oren for the benefit of achieving a communication system that utilizes network slice information parameters in order to select an appropriate slice for a device.
Regarding claim 20, as mentioned in claims 16, Speicher explicitly fails to disclose the method wherein the information associated with network slice selection comprises at least one of: a priority value for a network slice simultaneous registration group; a priority value for an application; a priority value associated with a traffic descriptor; or a priority value for single-network slice selection assistance information.
However, Wang, which is analogous art equivalently discloses the method, wherein the information associated with network slice selection comprises at least one of: a priority value for a network slice simultaneous registration group; a priority value for an application; a priority value associated with a traffic descriptor; or a priority value for single-network slice selection assistance information (= WTRU may follow a priority order in selecting network slice, see [0040]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teaching of Gauthier with Oren for the benefit of achieving a communication system that utilizes network slice information parameters in order to select an appropriate slice for a device.
Allowable Subject Matter
7. Claim 5 is 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.
CONCLUSION
8. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
a. Ishii (US 2024/0397392) teaches multiple network slice groupings in a registration area.
b. Watfa et al., (US 2019/0223093) teaches network slice selection.
c. Ishii (US 2023/0262591) teaches cell selection/reselection for network slicing.
9. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KWASI KARIKARI whose telephone number is (571)272-8566. The examiner can normally be reached M-Sat: 6am-10pm.
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, Charles Appiah can be reached on 571-272-7904. 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.
/Kwasi Karikari/
Primary Examiner: Art Unit 2641.