DETAILED ACTION
The action is responsive to claims filed on 03/09/2026. Claims 1, 3-9, and 11-13 are pending for evaluation.
Note: The claims are presented with independent claims listed first in numerical order, followed by dependent claims also in numerical order; any dual or mirror claims are grouped with the lowest-numbered claim in their respective pairing.
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 .
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed on 03/09/2026 has been entered. Claims 1, 3, 4, 8, 9, and 11-13 have been amended; Claims 2 and 10 have been canceled. Claims 1, 3-9, and 11-13 remain pending for evaluation. Applicant’s amendments to the Claims have overcome each and every objection previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed on 12/12/2025.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 03/09/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to Applicant’s argument on pgs. 6-7 of Applicant Remarks that, in substance, the combination of Krishnamoorthi/Wang fails to teach or suggest at least “determining, by the network device, a registration area of the terminal based on the network slice that the terminal is allowed to access and the network slice that the terminal is rejected to access, such that the registration area excludes a tracking area that supports both a first network slice and a second network slice, wherein the first network slice is included in the network slice that the terminal is rejected to access, and the second network slice is included in the network slice that the terminal is allowed to access,” in independent Claims 1 and 9, Examiner respectfully disagrees.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
Krishnamoorthi is relied upon for the registration area/tracking area exclusion framework. In particular, Krishnamoorthi teaches that S-NSSAIs may be interpreted as allowed in explicitly listed tracking areas and not allowed in other tracking areas, and further teaches communicating allowed/not-allowed S-NSSAI information on a tracking area specific bases withing a registration area (Krishnamoorthi Para. [0089. 0096-0097]).
Wang is relied upon to teach the tracking area/slice support relationship. Wang Para. [0150] teaches requested NSSAI may include S-NSSAIs supported by the current tracking area and incompatible S-NSSAI, and Wang Para. [0153-0155] teach that, in that tracking area context, S-NSSAI #1 is included in the ALLOWED NSSAI while NSSAI #2 is placed in the Rejected NSSAI due to incompatibility with the Allowed NSSAI.
Thus, Krishnamoorthi provides the tracking area exclusion/exception mechanism, while Wang teaches that a tracking area may support S-NSSAIs corresponding to both a network slice that the terminal is allowed to access and network slice the terminal is rejected to access.
Applicant’s arguments regarding Wang individually, or regarding secondary references such as Liang or Ianev that are not relied upon for this combined teaching, do not overcome the rejection.
In conclusion, Krishnamoorthi/Wang teaches “determining, by the network device, a registration area of the terminal based on the network slice that the terminal is allowed to access and the network slice that the terminal is rejected to access, such that the registration area excludes a tracking area that supports both a first network slice and a second network slice, wherein the first network slice is included in the network slice that the terminal is rejected to access, and the second network slice is included in the network slice that the terminal is allowed to access.” Accordingly, Krishnamoorthi/Wang teaches the claimed subject matter in the amended independent Claims 1 and 9.
Applicant’s arguments presented with respect to the dependent claims are substantively the same as those set forth for Claims 1 and 9. Accordingly, the same reasoning and supporting explanation provided for Claims 1 and 9 are equally applicable to the dependent claims.
In response to Applicant’s argument on pgs. 7-9 of Applicant Remarks that, in substance, the combination of Wang/Ianev/Liang fails to teach or suggest at least “wherein the registration area excludes a tracking area supporting both a first network slice and a second network slice, wherein a network slice that the terminal is rejected to access comprises the first network slice, a network slice that the terminal is allowed to access comprises the second network slice,” in independent Claims 8 and 13, Examiner respectfully disagrees.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive because they attack Liang individually, whereas the rejection is based on the combined teachings of Wang, Ianev, and Liang. As explained above, Wang is relied upon for the registration/slice framework, including that S-NSSAIs supported by a current tracking area may correspond to both a network slice the terminal is allowed to access and a network slice the terminal is rejected to access. Liang is relied upon for the registration-area exclusion feature, namely that a registration area may be generated to exclude a tracking area. Ianev is relied upon for the mobility registration update when the terminal moves outside the registration area.
Thus, Liang need not independently teach that the excluded tracking area supports both the first and second network slices, and applicant’s arguments against Liang individually do not address the combined teachings relied upon in the rejection.
In conclusion, Wang/Ianev/Liang teaches “wherein the registration area excludes a tracking area supporting both a first network slice and a second network slice, wherein a network slice that the terminal is rejected to access comprises the first network slice, a network slice that the terminal is allowed to access comprises the second network slice.” Accordingly, Wang/Ianev/Liang teaches the claimed subject matter in the amended independent Claims 8 and 13 and the 35 §103 rejection of Claims 8 and 13 is maintained.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 4, 9, 11, and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Krishnamoorthi et al. (US 2025/0081093, previously presented), Krishnamoorthi hereinafter, in view of Wang et al. (US 2023/0284121, previously presented), Wang hereinafter.
Regarding Claim 1, Krishnamoorthi teaches a network slice-based communication method, the method comprising (Para. [0084]; See also Fig. 6, Para. [0078-0086]; Para. [0087-0093]; Para. [0094-0095]; Para. [0096-0097]; Para. [0098-0101]; Para. [0102-0106]; Para. [0107-0110]; Fig. 7, Para. [0111]; Fig. 8, Para. [0112]):
determining, by a network device, a network slice that a terminal is allowed to access and a network slice that the terminal is rejected to access (Para. [0084] - In this regard, during registration in a Public Land Mobile Network (PLMN), as part of the Non-Access Stratum (NAS) procedures defined in 3GPP Technical Specification (TS) 24.501 16.6.0, the UE 312 includes an Information Element (IE) called ‘Requested NSSAI’ as part of the registration request message. The IE contains a set of Single Network Slice Selection Assistance Information (S-NSSAI) that indicates the set of network slices 602 that the UE 312 requests permission to use in the PLMN. Upon reception of this IE, the core network takes this information into account to determine a RA 600 for the UE 312. Then, based on the slice deployment, UE subscription, and other policies, it determines the set of S-NSSAIs that the UE 312 is allowed and not allowed to use within the RA in terms of the Allowed Network Slice Selection Assistance Information (NSSAI) and Rejected NSSAI IEs and communicates this via the NAS registration accept message towards the UE 312. The set of allowed and rejected S-NSSAIs in the response are assumed to be valid throughout the current RA; See also Fig. 6, Para. [0078-0086]; Para. [0087-0093]; Para. [0094-0095]; Para. [0096-0097]; Para. [0098-0101]; Para. [0102-0106]; Para. [0107-0110]; Fig. 7, Para. [0111]; Fig. 8, Para. [0112]);
determining, by the network device, a registration area of the terminal based on the network slice that the terminal is allowed to access and the network slice that the terminal is rejected to access (Para. [0084] - In this regard, during registration in a Public Land Mobile Network (PLMN), as part of the Non-Access Stratum (NAS) procedures defined in 3GPP Technical Specification (TS) 24.501 16.6.0, the UE 312 includes an Information Element (IE) called ‘Requested NSSAI’ as part of the registration request message. The IE contains a set of Single Network Slice Selection Assistance Information (S-NSSAI) that indicates the set of network slices 602 that the UE 312 requests permission to use in the PLMN. Upon reception of this IE, the core network takes this information into account to determine a RA 600 for the UE 312. Then, based on the slice deployment, UE subscription, and other policies, it determines the set of S-NSSAIs that the UE 312 is allowed and not allowed to use within the RA in terms of the Allowed Network Slice Selection Assistance Information (NSSAI) and Rejected NSSAI IEs and communicates this via the NAS registration accept message towards the UE 312. The set of allowed and rejected S-NSSAIs in the response are assumed to be valid throughout the current RA; See also Fig. 6, Para. [0078-0086]; Para. [0087-0093]; Para. [0094-0095]; Para. [0096-0097]; Para. [0098-0101]; Para. [0102-0106]; Para. [0107-0110]; Fig. 7, Para. [0111]; Fig. 8, Para. [0112]);
and sending, by the network device, information about the registration area to the terminal (Para. [0084] - In this regard, during registration in a Public Land Mobile Network (PLMN), as part of the Non-Access Stratum (NAS) procedures defined in 3GPP Technical Specification (TS) 24.501 16.6.0, the UE 312 includes an Information Element (IE) called ‘Requested NSSAI’ as part of the registration request message. The IE contains a set of Single Network Slice Selection Assistance Information (S-NSSAI) that indicates the set of network slices 602 that the UE 312 requests permission to use in the PLMN. Upon reception of this IE, the core network takes this information into account to determine a RA 600 for the UE 312. Then, based on the slice deployment, UE subscription, and other policies, it determines the set of S-NSSAIs that the UE 312 is allowed and not allowed to use within the RA in terms of the Allowed Network Slice Selection Assistance Information (NSSAI) and Rejected NSSAI IEs and communicates this via the NAS registration accept message towards the UE 312. The set of allowed and rejected S-NSSAIs in the response are assumed to be valid throughout the current RA; See also Fig. 6, Para. [0078-0086]; Para. [0087-0093]; Para. [0094-0095]; Para. [0096-0097]; Para. [0098-0101]; Para. [0102-0106]; Para. [0107-0110]; Fig. 7, Para. [0111]; Fig. 8, Para. [0112]).
Examiner’s Note: Krishnamoorthi Para. [0084] teaches Claim 1. First, Para. [0084] discloses that, during registration, the core network receives the UE’s requested NSSAI information and determines a set of network slices that the UE is allowed to use and a set of network slices that the UE is not allowed to use within the registration area (i.e., allowed and rejected S-NSSAIs). Para. [0084] further explains that the core network (i.e., a network device) determines a registration area (RA) for the UE based on the slice deployment, UE subscription, and the allowed and rejected S-NSSAIs, thereby teaching determining the registration area of the terminal based on the network slices that the terminal is allowed to access and the network slices that the terminal is rejected to access. Finally, Para. [0084] states that the core network communicates this information – including the allowed NSSAI, the rejected NSSAI, and the determined registration area – via the NAS Registration Accept message to the UE, which teaches sending information about the registration area to the terminal.
Yet, Krishnamoorthi does not expressly teach such that the registration area excludes a tracking area that supports both a first network slice and a second network slice, wherein the first network slice is included in the network slice that the terminal is rejected to access, and the second network slice is included in the network slice that the terminal is allowed to access.
However, Wang teaches
such that the registration area excludes a tracking area that supports both a first network slice and a second network slice, wherein the first network slice is included in the network slice that the terminal is rejected to access, and the second network slice is included in the network slice that the terminal is allowed to access (Fig. 7, step 703; Para. [0153-0155] - [0153] The AMF and/or NSSF may be configured via OAM about network slice attribute including the “simultaneous use of the network slice”. The AMF and/or NSSF determines the Allowed NSSAI (e.g., containing S-NSSAI #1) and the Registration Area. The AMF and/or NSSF may determine based on the configuration that one or more S-NSSAIs (e.g., containing S-NSSAI #2) in the Requested NSSAI are incompatible with the Allowed NSSAI, e.g., supported by the current Tracking Area and AMF but incompatible with the Allowed NSSAI based on the configuration, the AMF and/or NSSF puts the one or more S-NSSAIs in the rejected NSSAI with a rejection cause indicating that these S-NSSAIs are supported in the current Registration Area and AMF but not compatible with the Allowed NSSAI, which means that the UE can register with the rejected S-NSSAI within the current Registration Area… [0155] In operation 703, the AMF sends a Registration Accept message to the UE and includes the Allowed NSSAI (e.g., containing S-NSSAI #1), the Rejected NSSAI (e.g., containing S-NSSAI #2) and the Registration Area; See also Para. [0149, 0150, 0151-0167]; Fig. 1, Para. [0047-0076]; Fig. 2, Para. [0077-0091]; Fig. 4, Para. [0100-0113]; Fig. 5, Para. [0114-0130]; Fig. 6, Para. [0131-0148]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Krishnamoorthi’s invention of “systems and methods for heterogeneous slice deployment within a registration area” (Krishnamoorthi Para. [0016]) with Wang’s invention of registration-based network slice re-selection using rejection information (Wang Para. [0010]) because Wang’s invention provides methods “which can increase the flexibility and efficiency of utilizing network slices, and extend the applicability of network slices” (Wang Para. [0009]).
Regarding Claim 9, Krishnamoorthi teaches an apparatus, comprising (Fig. 9, Para. [0113]; See also Fig. 10, Para. [0114-0117]; Fig. 11, Para. [0118]; Fig. 14, Para. [0122-0124]; Fig. 15, Para. [0125-0131]):):
at least one processor coupled to at least one non-transitory memory and configured to execute program instructions stored in the at least one non-transitory memory, thereby causing the apparatus to perform operations comprising (Fig. 9, elements 904 and 906; Para. [0113]; See also Fig. 10, Para. [0114-0117]; Fig. 11, Para. [0118]; Fig. 14, Para. [0122-0124]; Fig. 15, Para. [0125-0131]):
determining a network slice that a terminal is allowed to access and a network slice that the terminal is rejected to access (Para. [0084]; See also Fig. 6, Para. [0078-0086]; Para. [0087-0093]; Para. [0094-0095]; Para. [0096-0097]; Para. [0098-0101]; Para. [0102-0106]; Para. [0107-0110]; Fig. 7, Para. [0111]; Fig. 8, Para. [0112]);
determining a registration area of the terminal based on the network slice that the terminal is allowed to access and the network slice that the terminal is rejected to access (Para. [0084]; See also Fig. 6, Para. [0078-0086]; Para. [0087-0093]; Para. [0094-0095]; Para. [0096-0097]; Para. [0098-0101]; Para. [0102-0106]; Para. [0107-0110]; Fig. 7, Para. [0111]; Fig. 8, Para. [0112]);
and sending information about the registration area to the terminal (Para. [0084]; See also Fig. 6, Para. [0078-0086]; Para. [0087-0093]; Para. [0094-0095]; Para. [0096-0097]; Para. [0098-0101]; Para. [0102-0106]; Para. [0107-0110]; Fig. 7, Para. [0111]; Fig. 8, Para. [0112]).
Yet, Krishnamoorthi does not expressly teach such that the registration area excludes a tracking area that supports both a first network slice and a second network slice, wherein the first network slice is included in the network slice that the terminal is rejected to access, and the second network slice is included in the network slice that the terminal is allowed to access.
However, Wang teaches
such that the registration area excludes a tracking area that supports both a first network slice and a second network slice, wherein the first network slice is included in the network slice that the terminal is rejected to access, and the second network slice is included in the network slice that the terminal is allowed to access (Fig. 7, step 703; Para. [0153-0155]; See also Para. [0149, 0150, 0151-0167]; Fig. 1, Para. [0047-0076]; Fig. 2, Para. [0077-0091]; Fig. 4, Para. [0100-0113]; Fig. 5, Para. [0114-0130]; Fig. 6, Para. [0131-0148]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Krishnamoorthi’s invention of “systems and methods for heterogeneous slice deployment within a registration area” (Krishnamoorthi Para. [0016]) with Wang’s invention of registration-based network slice re-selection using rejection information (Wang Para. [0010]) because Wang’s invention provides methods “which can increase the flexibility and efficiency of utilizing network slices, and extend the applicability of network slices” (Wang Para. [0009]).
Regarding Claims 3 and 11, Krishnamoorthi in view of Wang teaches Claims 1 and 9.
Yet, Krishnamoorthi does not expressly teach wherein the first network slice is a network slice not supported by a current tracking area.
However, Wang teaches
wherein the first network slice is a network slice not supported by a current tracking area (Fig. 7, step 703; Para. [0153-0155]; See also Para. [0149, 0151-0167]; Fig. 1, Para. [0047-0076]; Fig. 2, Para. [0077-0091]; Fig. 4, Para. [0100-0113]; Fig. 5, Para. [0114-0130]; Fig. 6, Para. [0131-0148]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Krishnamoorthi’s invention of “systems and methods for heterogeneous slice deployment within a registration area” (Krishnamoorthi Para. [0016]) with Wang’s invention of registration-based network slice re-selection using rejection information (Wang Para. [0010]) because Wang’s invention provides methods “which can increase the flexibility and efficiency of utilizing network slices, and extend the applicability of network slices” (Wang Para. [0009]).
Regarding Claims 4 and 12, Krishnamoorthi in view of Wang teaches Claims 1 and 9.
Krishnamoorthi further teaches
wherein the tracking area is a tracking area of an access network device (Fig. 6; Para. [0078] - FIG. 6 illustrates the cellular communications system 300 of FIG. 3 providing heterogeneous deployment of network slices within a Registration Area (RA) 600. The cellular communications system 300 includes a NG-RAN infrastructure that can connect to multiple network slices 602-1, 602-2. Embodiments described herein enable the AMF 400 to configure a UE 312 with a RA 600 that contains Tracking Areas (TAS) TA1-TA8 with heterogenous network slice support. For example, a first network slice 602-1 (e.g., slice 0) can be supported in the entire RA 600 while a second network slice 602-2 (e.g., slice 1) can be supported only in TA1, TA2, and TA3; See also Para. [0075, 0077, 0079, 0079, 0087, 0089-0112, 0134, 0149, 0153-0159; 0162-0165]).
Examiner’s Note: The examiner interprets a UE as an access network device.
Claim(s) 8 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang in view of Ianev and Tamura (US 2021/0337380, previously presented), Ianev hereinafter, and in further view of Liang et al. (US 2022/0116816, previously presented), Liang hereinafter.
Regarding Claim 8, Wang teaches a network slice-based communication method, the method comprising (Fig. 7, Para. [0149-0167]; See also Fig. 1, Para. [0047-0076]; Fig. 2, Para. [0077-0091]; Fig. 4, Para. [0100-0113]; Fig. 5, Para. [0114-0130]; Fig. 6, Para. [0131-0148] ):
receiving information about a registration area of a terminal from a network device (Fig. 7, step 701; Para. [0150] - In operation 701, the UE initiates a Registration Procedure with Requested NSSAI. The UE generates the Requested NSSAI in the NAS message based on the Default Configured NSSAI, the Configured NSSAI for the Serving PLMN, and the Allowed NSSAI if available. The Requested NSSAI may include incompatible S-NSSAIs, e.g. S-NSSAIs supported by the current Tracking Area and the current AMF but incompatible based on the configuration; See also Para. [0149, 0151-0167]; Fig. 1, Para. [0047-0076]; Fig. 2, Para. [0077-0091]; Fig. 4, Para. [0100-0113]; Fig. 5, Para. [0114-0130]; Fig. 6, Para. [0131-0148]),
a tracking area supporting both a first network slice and a second network slice, wherein a network slice that the terminal is rejected to access comprises the first network slice, a network slice that the terminal is allowed to access comprises the second network slice (Fig. 7, step 703; Para. [0153-0155] - [0153] The AMF and/or NSSF may be configured via OAM about network slice attribute including the “simultaneous use of the network slice”. The AMF and/or NSSF determines the Allowed NSSAI (e.g., containing S-NSSAI #1) and the Registration Area. The AMF and/or NSSF may determine based on the configuration that one or more S-NSSAIs (e.g., containing S-NSSAI #2) in the Requested NSSAI are incompatible with the Allowed NSSAI, e.g., supported by the current Tracking Area and AMF but incompatible with the Allowed NSSAI based on the configuration, the AMF and/or NSSF puts the one or more S-NSSAIs in the rejected NSSAI with a rejection cause indicating that these S-NSSAIs are supported in the current Registration Area and AMF but not compatible with the Allowed NSSAI, which means that the UE can register with the rejected S-NSSAI within the current Registration Area… [0155] In operation 703, the AMF sends a Registration Accept message to the UE and includes the Allowed NSSAI (e.g., containing S-NSSAI #1), the Rejected NSSAI (e.g., containing S-NSSAI #2) and the Registration Area; See also Para. [0149, 0151-0167]; Fig. 1, Para. [0047-0076]; Fig. 2, Para. [0077-0091]; Fig. 4, Para. [0100-0113]; Fig. 5, Para. [0114-0130]; Fig. 6, Para. [0131-0148]);
and performing, … procedure to request to access the first network slice (Fig. 7, step 701; Para. [0150]; See also Para. [0149, 0151-0167]; Fig. 1, Para. [0047-0076]; Fig. 2, Para. [0077-0091]; Fig. 4, Para. [0100-0113]; Fig. 5, Para. [0114-0130]; Fig. 6, Para. [0131-0148]).
Yet, Wang does not expressly teach performing, when the terminal moves into a tracking area outside the registration area, a mobility registration update procedure.
However, Ianev teaches
performing, when the terminal moves into a tracking area outside the registration area, a mobility registration update procedure (Para. [0063] - A UE needs to register with the network to get authorized to receive services, to enable mobility tracking and to enable reachability. The Registration procedure is used when the UE needs to perform initial registration to the 5G system, mobility registration update upon changing to a new Tracking area (TA) outside the UE's registration area in idle mode, when the UE performs a periodic registration update (due to a predefined time period of inactivity), and additionally when the UE needs to update its capabilities or protocol parameters that are negotiated in the Registration procedure)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Wang’s invention of registration-based network slice re-selection using rejection information (Wang Para. [0010]) with Ianev’s invention of “user equipment, a core network node, a control method and a system that solve the problem of how to realize communication with privacy considerations for performing communication using Network Slicing" systems” (Ianev Para. [0035]) because Ianev’s invention provides solutions regarding “how to realize communication with privacy considerations for performing communication using Network Slicing” (Ianev Para. [0048]).
Yet, Wang nor Ianev teach wherein the registration area excludes a tracking area.
However, Liang teaches
wherein the registration area excludes a tracking area (Para. [0063] - For example, in order to ensure that the UE 101 can access some specific slices, the AMF 102 can generate a registration area of the UE 101 that includes the service areas of these slices (e.g., if a tracking area 1 (TA1) is not included in the service area of Slice A, the registration excludes such TA1. However, excluding TA1 from the registration is optional for registration area generation. The registration area can still include TA1. However the S-NSSAI of slice A is not included in the allowed NSSAI; See also Para. [00062])
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide wherein the registration area excludes a tracking area as taught by Liang, in the combined system of Wang/Ianev, so that it would provide “systems and methods for authorizing network slicing” (Liang Para. [0002]) which allows dynamic generation of a registration area that explicitly excludes a tracking area associated with a particular network slice based on service-area determination (Liang Para. [0062-0063]).
Examiner’s Note: Wang provides the baseline registration and slice-handling framework by teaching that a network device (i.e., AMF) supplies the UE with the registration-area information and evaluates requested S-NSSAIs within a tracking area, resulting in both allowed and rejected network slices being identified for the UE during registration (Fig. 7, Para. [0150-0155]). In this framework, the determination of rejected versus allowed slices is independent of why rejection occurs, which maps to the claimed identification of a first network slice that the terminal is rejected to access and a second network slice that the terminal is allowed to access within the tracking area. Ianev complements Wang by explicitly addressing UE mobility behavior, teaching that when a terminal moves into a tracking area that is outside a previously defined registration area, the terminal performs a mobility registration update procedure to request network access, thereby supplying the procedural mechanism absent from Wang. Liang further refines the spatial relationship of the registration area may be constructed to exclude one or more tracking areas (Liang Para. [0062-0063]), which provides an explicit technical basis for Wang’s registration area to not encompass all tracking areas encountered by the UE.
Regarding Claim 13, Wang teaches an apparatus, comprising (Fig. 9, Para. [0177-0183]; See also Fig. 8, Para. [0168-0176]):
at least one processor coupled to at least one non-transitory memory and configured to execute program instructions stored in the at least one non-transitory memory, thereby causing the apparatus to perform operations comprising (Fig. 9, elements 900, 910, and 912; Para. [0177-0183]; See also Fig. 8, Para. [0168-0176]):
receiving information about a registration area of the apparatus from a network device (Fig. 7, step 701; Para. [0150]; See also Para. [0149, 0151-0167]; Fig. 1, Para. [0047-0076]; Fig. 2, Para. [0077-0091]; Fig. 4, Para. [0100-0113]; Fig. 5, Para. [0114-0130]; Fig. 6, Para. [0131-0148]),
wherein the registration area excludes a tracking area supporting both a first network slice and a second network slice, wherein a network slice that the terminal is rejected to access comprises the first network slice, a network slice that the terminal is allowed to access comprises the second network slice (Fig. 7, step 703; Para. [0153-0155]; See also Para. [0149, 0151-0167]; Fig. 1, Para. [0047-0076]; Fig. 2, Para. [0077-0091]; Fig. 4, Para. [0100-0113]; Fig. 5, Para. [0114-0130]; Fig. 6, Para. [0131-0148]);
and performing, … procedure to request to access the first network slice (Fig. 7, step 701; Para. [0150]; See also Para. [0149, 0151-0167]; Fig. 1, Para. [0047-0076]; Fig. 2, Para. [0077-0091]; Fig. 4, Para. [0100-0113]; Fig. 5, Para. [0114-0130]; Fig. 6, Para. [0131-0148]).
Yet, Wang does not expressly teach performing, when the terminal moves into a tracking area outside the registration area, a mobility registration update procedure.
However, Ianev teaches
performing, when the terminal moves into a tracking area outside the registration area, a mobility registration update procedure (Para. [0063])
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Wang’s invention of registration-based network slice re-selection using rejection information (Wang Para. [0010]) with Ianev’s invention of “user equipment, a core network node, a control method and a system that solve the problem of how to realize communication with privacy considerations for performing communication using Network Slicing" systems” (Ianev Para. [0035]) because Ianev’s invention provides solutions regarding “how to realize communication with privacy considerations for performing communication using Network Slicing” (Ianev Para. [0048]).
Yet, Wang nor Ianev teach wherein the registration area excludes a tracking area.
However, Liang teaches
the registration area excludes a tracking area (Para. [0063]; See also Para. [00062])
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide wherein the registration area excludes a tracking area as taught by Liang, in the combined system of Wang/Ianev, so that it would provide “systems and methods for authorizing network slicing” (Liang Para. [0002]) which allows dynamic generation of a registration area that explicitly excludes a tracking area associated with a particular network slice based on service-area determination (Liang Para. [0062-0063]).
Claim(s) 5-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Krishnamoorthi in view of Wang and in further view of Liang.
Regarding Claim 5, Krishnamoorthi in view of Wang teaches Claim 1.
Yet, Krishnamoorthi does not expressly teach receiving, by the network device via a first access network device in a first network, information about a network slice that the terminal requests to access, wherein the information about the network slice that the terminal requests to access comprises identification information of a first network slice not supported by a first tracking area and comprises identification information of a second network slice supported by the first tracking area, and the first tracking area is a tracking area of the first access network device; the network slice that the terminal is allowed to access comprises the second network slice, and the network slice that the terminal is rejected to access comprises the first network slice; and the registration area excludes a tracking area that supports the first network slice and the second network slice, or the registration area excludes a tracking area of an access network device that supports the first network slice and the second network slice.
However, Wang teaches
receiving, by the network device via a first access network device in a first network, information about a network slice that the terminal requests to access (Fig. 5, step 501; Para. [0115] - In operation 501, the UE initiates a Registration Procedure with Requested NSSAI via RAN node 1. The UE generates the Requested NSSAI in the NAS message based on the Default Configured NSSAI, the Configured NSSAI for the Serving PLMN, and the Allowed NSSAI if available. The Requested NSSAI may include incompatible S-NSSAIs, e.g. S-NSSAI(s) supported by the current Tracking Area (e.g., S-NSSAI #1) and S-NSSAI(s) (e.g., S-NSSAI #2) not supported by the current Tracking Area; See also Para. [0149, 0151-0167]; Fig. 1, Para. [0047-0076]; Fig. 2, Para. [0077-0091]; Fig. 4, Para. [0100-0113]; Fig. 5, Para. [0114-0130]; Fig. 6, Para. [0131-0148]; Fig. 7, Para. [0149-0167]),
Examiner’s Notes: Wang Para. [0115] discloses that the UE initiates registration to an AMF (i.e., network device) via a RAN node (i.e., first access network device),, thereby teaching the claimed receiving by the network device via a first access network device.
wherein the information about the network slice that the terminal requests to access comprises identification information of a first network slice not supported by a first tracking area and comprises identification information of a second network slice supported by the first tracking area, and the first tracking area is a tracking area of the first access network device (Fig. 5, step 501; Para. [0115] - In operation 501, the UE initiates a Registration Procedure with Requested NSSAI via RAN node 1. The UE generates the Requested NSSAI in the NAS message based on the Default Configured NSSAI, the Configured NSSAI for the Serving PLMN, and the Allowed NSSAI if available. The Requested NSSAI may include incompatible S-NSSAIs, e.g. S-NSSAI(s) supported by the current Tracking Area (e.g., S-NSSAI #1) and S-NSSAI(s) (e.g., S-NSSAI #2) not supported by the current Tracking Area; See also Para. [0149, 0151-0167]; Fig. 1, Para. [0047-0076]; Fig. 2, Para. [0077-0091]; Fig. 4, Para. [0100-0113]; Fig. 5, Para. [0114-0130]; Fig. 6, Para. [0131-0148]; Fig. 7, Para. [0149-0167]);
Examiner’s Note:
S-NSSAI #1 is mapped to the “second network slice”
S-NSSAI #2 is mapped to the “First Network Slice”
The examiner interprets NSSAI (Network Slice Selection Assistance Information) as identification information for a network slice.
the network slice that the terminal is allowed to access comprises the second network slice, and the network slice that the terminal is rejected to access comprises the first network slice (Fig. 5, step 503; Para. [0119] - In operation 503, the AMF 1 sends a Registration Accept message to the UE and includes the Allowed NSSAI (e.g., containing S-NSSAI #1), the Rejected NSSAI (e.g., containing S-NSSAI #2) and the Registration Area; See also Para. [0118]; Fig. 1, Para. [0047-0076]; Fig. 2, Para. [0077-0091]; Fig. 4, Para. [0100-0113]; Fig. 5, Para. [0114-0130]; Fig. 6, Para. [0131-0148]; Fig. 7, Para. [0149-0167]);
and … a tracking area that supports the first network slice and the second network slice, or … a tracking area of an access network device that supports the first network slice and the second network slice (Fig. 7, step 703; Para. [0153-0155]; See also Para. [0149, 0151-0167]; Fig. 1, Para. [0047-0076]; Fig. 2, Para. [0077-0091]; Fig. 4, Para. [0100-0113]; Fig. 5, Para. [0114-0130]; Fig. 6, Para. [0131-0148]).
Examiner’s Note: Wang Para. [0153] teaches a tracking area that supports both a first network slice and a second network slice by describing a tracking area within a registration area that supports multiple S-NSSAIs (allowed and rejected), consistent with the mapping applied for Claim 8; additionally, because Claim 5 uses “or,” teaching either alternative satisfies the limitation.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Krishnamoorthi’s invention of “systems and methods for heterogeneous slice deployment within a registration area” (Krishnamoorthi Para. [0016]) with Wang’s invention of registration-based network slice re-selection using rejection information (Wang Para. [0010]) because Wang’s invention provides methods “which can increase the flexibility and efficiency of utilizing network slices, and extend the applicability of network slices” (Wang Para. [0009]).
Yet, Krishnamoorthi nor Wang teach the registration area excludes a tracking area.
However, Liang teaches
the registration area excludes a tracking area (Para. [0063]; See also Para. [00062]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the registration area excludes a tracking area as taught by Liang, in the combined system of Krishnamoorthi /Wang, so that it would provide “systems and methods for authorizing network slicing” (Liang Para. [0002]) which allows dynamic generation of a registration area that explicitly excludes a tracking area associated with a particular network slice based on service-area determination (Liang Para. [0062-0063]).
Regarding Claim 6, Krishnamoorthi in view of Wang and Liang teach Claim 5.
Yet, Krishnamoorthi does not expressly teach wherein the first network slice is a network slice that the terminal is allowed to access in the first network.
However, Wang teaches
wherein the first network slice is a network slice that the terminal is allowed to access in the first network (Fig. 7, step 703; Para. [0153-0155]; See also Para. [0149, 0151-0167]; Fig. 1, Para. [0047-0076]; Fig. 2, Para. [0077-0091]; Fig. 4, Para. [0100-0113]; Fig. 5, Para. [0114-0130]; Fig. 6, Para. [0131-0148]).
Examiner’s Note: Wang Para. [0153-0155] teaches that the AMF/NSSF determines network slices that are supported within the current registration area and accessible by the UE, thereby teaching that the first network slice is a network slice the terminal is allowed to access in the first network as recited in Claim 6.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Krishnamoorthi’s invention of “systems and methods for heterogeneous slice deployment within a registration area” (Krishnamoorthi Para. [0016]) with Wang’s invention of registration-based network slice re-selection using rejection information (Wang Para. [0010]) because Wang’s invention provides methods “which can increase the flexibility and efficiency of utilizing network slices, and extend the applicability of network slices” (Wang Para. [0009]).
Regarding Claim 7, Krishnamoorthi in view of Wang and Liang teach Claim 5.
Yet, Krishnamoorthi does not expressly teach determining, by the network device, a network slice supported by the tracking area of the first access network device.
However, Wang teaches
determining, by the network device, a network slice supported by the tracking area of the first access network device (Fig. 7, step 701; Para. [0150] - In operation 701, the UE initiates a Registration Procedure with Requested NSSAI. The UE generates the Requested NSSAI in the NAS message based on the Default Configured NSSAI, the Configured NSSAI for the Serving PLMN, and the Allowed NSSAI if available. The Requested NSSAI may include incompatible S-NSSAIs, e.g. S-NSSAIs supported by the current Tracking Area and the current AMF but incompatible based on the configuration; See also Fig. 1, Para. [0047-0076]; Fig. 2, Para. [0077-0091]; Fig. 4, Para. [0100-0113]; Fig. 5, Para. [0114-0130]; Fig. 6, Para. [0131-0148]; Fig. 7, Para. [0149-0167]).
Examiner’s Note: The examiner’s interprets the UE messaging the AMF regarding requested NSSAI (i.e., network slice) as the AMF (i.e., network device) “determining” “a network slice supported by the tracking area.”
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Krishnamoorthi’s invention of “systems and methods for heterogeneous slice deployment within a registration area” (Krishnamoorthi Para. [0016]) with Wang’s invention of registration-based network slice re-selection using rejection information (Wang Para. [0010]) because Wang’s invention provides methods “which can increase the flexibility and efficiency of utilizing network slices, and extend the applicability of network slices” (Wang Para. [0009]).
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RAENITA ANN FENNER whose telephone number is (571)270-0880. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 - 5:30 PM.
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, Marcus Smith can be reached at (571) 270-1096. 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.
/R.A.F./Examiner, Art Unit 2468
/Thomas R Cairns/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2468
Prosecution Insights