DETAILED ACTION
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 Objections
Claim 19 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 19, lines 3, the occurrence of "a first KPI" should be "--- a first key performance indicator (KPI) ----"
Appropriate corrections are required.
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 of this title, 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 1-5, 8-12 and 15-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu et al. [hereinafter as Liu], US 2024/0107592 A1 in view of Ravichandran et al. [hereinafter as Ravichandran], US 2020/0186411 A1 further in view of Bhandari et al. [hereinafter as Bhandari], US 2021/0266870 A1. Regarding claim 1, Liu discloses wherein a method (Fig.1 [0050], a method) comprising:
storing definitions for multiple mode parameters for a central unit (CU) of a radio access
network (RAN) (Fig.1 [0051], storing parameters 118 defined (i.e., definitions for multiple mode parameters) for one or more configurations 115A-n, 116A-n and 117A-n for a central unit (CU) of a radio access network (RAN) e.g., O-RAN C-plane PRACH time offset configuration 115A-n, 3GPP configuration index-based PRACH time offset configuration 116A-n and other configurations 117A-n and Fig.1 [0054], storing parameters 128 defined (i.e., definitions for multiple mode parameters) for one or more configurations 125A-n, 126A-n and 127A-n and Fig.1 [0002], the RAN architecture includes central units (CUs), distributed units (DUs), and radio units (RUs). Generally, CUs centralize RAN packet processing functions, DUs conduct baseband processing functions across cell sites, and RUs provide radio functions at antenna sites --- CUs and DUs can be located “in the cloud”, such as at a data center which may or may not be proximal to the RU).
However, Liu does not explicitly disclose wherein each mode parameter defines a section of the CU that provides a relative performance level for a slice subnet over the RAN.
In the same field of endeavor, Ravichandran teaches wherein each mode parameter defines a section of the CU that provides a relative performance level for a slice subnet over the RAN (Fig.1A-B [0036][0040][0041][0111], each mode parameter of parameters provides or monitors i.e., defines a section of the CU that provides SLAs/KPIs i.e., a relative performance level for a slice subnet over the RAN, and Fig.5A-B [0224], access network node has “central unit (CU)”, implicitly implied and Fig.1A-B [0026], network slice subnets 106 of RAN e.g., a RAN slice subnet connecting to a core slice subnet).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide to have modified Liu to incorporate the teaching of Ravichandran in order to provide for effective service SLA maintenance under adverse network conditions. It would have been beneficial to use each mode parameter of parameters which provides or monitors i.e., defines a section of the CU that provides SLAs/KPIs i.e., a relative performance level for a slice subnet over the RAN, and access network node has “central unit (CU)”, implicitly implied and whereby, network slice subnets 106 of RAN e.g., a RAN slice subnet connecting to a core slice subnet as taught by Ravichandran to have incorporated in the system of Liu to provide for improvement of the effectiveness of the orchestration. (Ravichandran, Fig.1A-B [0026], Fig.2 [0036] [0040]-[0041], Fig.5A-B [0111], Fig.5A-B [0224] and Fig.5A-B [0241])
However, Liu and Ravichandran do not explicitly disclose wherein receiving a slice configuration request for a network slice that identifies one of the multiple mode parameters; and instantiating the network slice to operate over the section of the CU that is associated with the identified one of the multiple mode parameters.
In the same field of endeavor, Bhandari teaches wherein receiving a slice configuration request for a network slice that identifies one of the multiple mode parameters (Fig.8a [0081], receiving a specific slice configuration request for a NSSAI i.e., network slice that identifies one or more S-NSSAI parameters i.e., multiple mode parameters); and
instantiating the network slice to operate over the section of the CU that is associated
with the identified one of the multiple mode parameters (Fig.8a&11 [0112]-[0114], instantiating the network slice to operate over CU-CP and CU-UP i.e., section of the CU that is associated with the identified one or more S-NSSAI parameters/ one of the multiple mode parameters and Fig.12 [0116]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide to have modified Liu and Ravichandran to incorporate the teaching of Bhandari in order to provide for an enhanced signaling efficiency. It would have been beneficial to instantiate the network slice to operate over CU-CP and CU-UP i.e., section of the CU that is associated with the identified one or more S-NSSAI parameters/ one of the multiple mode parameters as taught by Bhandari to have incorporated in the system of Liu and Ravichandran to provide for an enhanced spectral efficiency, improved coverage, reduced latency compared to existing systems. (Bhandari, Fig.2 [0059], Fig.8a&11 [0112]-[0114] and Fig.12 [0116])
Regarding claim 2, Liu, Ravichandran and Bhandari disclosed all the elements of claim 1 as stated above wherein Ravichandran further discloses the relative performance level relates to a key performance indicator (KPI) for capacity over the slice subnet (Fig.5A-B [0233]-[0234], the relative performance level relates to a key performance indicator (KPI) for capacity limits over the one or more network slice subnet).
Regarding claim 3, Liu, Ravichandran and Bhandari disclosed all the elements of claim 2 as stated above wherein Ravichandran further discloses the KPI includes a compute value, a storage value or a number of connections value (Fig.4 [0105], the KPI includes a compute value).
Regarding claim 4, Liu, Ravichandran and Bhandari disclosed all the elements of claim 1 as stated above wherein Ravichandran further discloses the relative performance level relates to a key performance indicator (KPI) for latency over the NSSAI slice subnet (Fig.5A-B [0149], the required/relative performance level relates to a key performance indicator (KPI) for latency, throughput, granularity over the slice subnet).
Additionally, Bhandari discloses the relative performance level relates to a key performance indicator (KPI) for latency over the slice subnet (Fig.12 [0115], the required/relative performance level relates to a key performance indicator (KPI) for latency over the slice subnet).
Regarding claim 5, Liu, Ravichandran and Bhandari disclosed all the elements of claim 1 as stated above wherein Ravichandran further discloses the relative performance level relates to a key performance indicator (KPI) for architecture of the slice subnet (Fig.5A-B [0234], the relative performance level relates to a key performance indicator (KPI) for architecture of the NSSAI slice subnet).
Additionally, Bhandari discloses the relative performance level relates to a key performance indicator (KPI) for architecture of the slice subnet (Fig.6 [0072], the relative performance level relates to a key performance indicator (KPI) for architecture of the NSSAI slice subnet).
Regarding claim 8, Liu, Ravichandran and Bhandari disclosed all the elements of claim 1 as stated above wherein Bhandari further discloses each of the multiple mode parameters includes a corresponding cost-factor for implementation on the CU (Fig.1-2 [0059]-[0060], each of the multiple mode parameters includes a corresponding lower cost and lower latency i.e., cost-factor for implementation on the CU).
Regarding claim 9, Liu, Ravichandran and Bhandari disclosed all the elements of claim 1 as stated above wherein Bhandari further discloses the RAN includes at least one CU-control plane (CU-CP) and multiple CU-user-planes (CU-UPs) (Fig.1-2 [0140]-[0141], the RAN includes at least one CU-control plane (CU-CP) and at least one or more CU-UPs i.e., multiple CU-user-planes (CU-UPs)).
Regarding claim 10, Liu discloses wherein a network device (Fig.1 [0048], a RAN 105 network device) comprising:
a processor configured to (Fig.1 [0048], a processor 112 configured to):
store definitions for multiple mode parameters for a central unit (CU) of a radio access network (RAN) (Fig.1 [0051], storing parameters 118 defined (i.e., definitions for multiple mode parameters) for one or more configurations 115A-n, 116A-n and 117A-n for a central unit (CU) of a radio access network (RAN) e.g., O-RAN C-plane PRACH time offset configuration 115A-n, 3GPP configuration index-based PRACH time offset configuration 116A-n and other configurations 117A-n and Fig.1 [0054], storing parameters 128 defined (i.e., definitions for multiple mode parameters) for one or more configurations 125A-n, 126A-n and 127A-n and Fig.1 [0002], the RAN architecture includes central units (CUs), distributed units (DUs), and radio units (RUs). Generally, CUs centralize RAN packet processing functions, DUs conduct baseband processing functions across cell sites, and RUs provide radio functions at antenna sites --- CUs and DUs can be located “in the cloud”, such as at a data center which may or may not be proximal to the RU).
However, Liu does not explicitly disclose wherein each mode parameter defines a section of the CU that provides a relative performance level for a slice subnet over the RAN.
In the same field of endeavor, Ravichandran teaches wherein each mode parameter defines a section of the CU that provides a relative performance level for a slice subnet over the RAN (Fig.1A-B [0036][0040][0041][0111], each mode parameter of parameters provides or monitors i.e., defines a section of the CU that provides SLAs/KPIs i.e., a relative performance level for a slice subnet over the RAN, and Fig.5A-B [0224], access network node has “central unit (CU)”, implicitly implied and Fig.1A-B [0026], network slice subnets 106 of RAN e.g., a RAN slice subnet connecting to a core slice subnet).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide to have modified Liu to incorporate the teaching of Ravichandran in order to provide for effective service ASLA maintenance under adverse network conditions. It would have been beneficial to use each mode parameter of parameters which provides or monitors i.e., defines a section of the CU that provides SLAs/KPIs i.e., a relative performance level for a slice subnet over the RAN, and access network node has “central unit (CU)”, implicitly implied and whereby, network slice subnets 106 of RAN e.g., a RAN slice subnet connecting to a core slice subnet as taught by Ravichandran to have incorporated in the system of Liu to provide for improvement of the effectiveness of the orchestration. (Ravichandran, Fig.1A-B [0026], Fig.2 [0036] [0040]-[0041], Fig.5A-B [0111], Fig.5A-B [0224] and Fig.5A-B [0241])
However, Liu and Ravichandran do not explicitly disclose wherein receive a slice configuration request for a network slice that identifies one of the multiple mode parameters; and instantiate the network slice to operate over the section of the CU that is associated with the identified one of the multiple mode parameters.
In the same field of endeavor, Bhandari teaches wherein receive a slice configuration request for a network slice that identifies one of the multiple mode parameters (Fig.8a [0081], receiving a specific slice configuration request for a NSSAI i.e., network slice that identifies one or more S-NSSAI parameters i.e., multiple mode parameters); and
instantiate the network slice to operate over the section of the CU that is associated with the identified one of the multiple mode parameters (Fig.8a&11 [0112]-[0114], instantiating the network slice to operate over CU-CP and CU-UP i.e., section of the CU that is associated with the identified one or more S-NSSAI parameters/ one of the multiple mode parameters and Fig.12 [0116]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide to have modified Liu and Ravichandran to incorporate the teaching of Bhandari in order to provide for an enhanced signaling efficiency. It would have been beneficial to instantiate the network slice to operate over CU-CP and CU-UP i.e., section of the CU that is associated with the identified one or more S-NSSAI parameters/ one of the multiple mode parameters as taught by Bhandari to have incorporated in the system of Liu and Ravichandran to provide for an enhanced spectral efficiency, improved coverage, reduced latency compared to existing systems. (Bhandari, Fig.2 [0059], Fig.8a&11 [0112]-[0114] and Fig.12 [0116])
Regarding claim 11, Liu, Ravichandran and Bhandari disclosed all the elements of claim 10 as stated above wherein Ravichandran further discloses the relative performance level relates to a combination of at least two of:
a first key performance indicator (KPI) for capacity over the slice subnet (Fig.5A-B [0233]-[0234], the relative performance level relates to a key performance indicator (KPI) for capacity limits over the one or more network slice subnet),
a second KPI for latency over the slice subnet (Fig.5A-B [0149], the required/relative performance level relates to a key performance indicator (KPI) for latency, throughput, granularity over the slice subnet), or
a third KPI for architecture of the slice subnet (Fig.5A-B [0234], the relative performance level relates to a key performance indicator (KPI) for architecture of the NSSAI slice subnet).
Regarding claim 12, Liu, Ravichandran and Bhandari disclosed all the elements of claim 10 as stated above wherein Ravichandran further discloses the relative performance level relates to a one or more of:
uplink or downlink delays over the slice subnet, throughput for the slice subnet, or
protocol data unit (PDU) session retainability for the slice (Fig.5A-B [0228], performance KPI e.g., analysis-delay-thres delays over the slice subnet and Fig.5A-B [0193]-[0194], KPIs of the service latency, throughput for the slice subnet and Fig.5A-B [0237]-[0238], the KPIs related to the network slice subnets).
Regarding claim 15, Liu, Ravichandran and Bhandari disclosed all the elements of claim 10 as stated above wherein Bhandari further discloses each of the multiple mode parameters includes a corresponding cost-factor for implementation on the CU (Fig.1-2 [0059]-[0060], each of the multiple mode parameters includes a corresponding lower cost and lower latency i.e., cost-factor for implementation on the CU).
Regarding claim 16, Liu, Ravichandran and Bhandari disclosed all the elements of claim 10 as stated above wherein Liu further discloses the network device includes a gNodeB (Fig.1-2 [0193], the network device includes a gNodeB (gNB)).
Regarding claim 17, Liu, Ravichandran and Bhandari disclosed all the elements of claim 10 as stated above wherein Bhandari further discloses the network device includes multiple distributed CU-user-planes (CU-UPs) (Fig.1-2 [0140]-[0141], the network device includes at least one or more CU-UPs i.e., multiple distributed CU-user-planes (CU-UPs)).
Regarding claim 18, Liu discloses wherein a non-transitory, computer-readable storage medium storing instructions, executable by a processor of a network device (Fig.1 [0148], a non-transitory, computer-readable storage medium storing instructions, executable by a processor of a network device and Fig.1 [0048], a processor 112 of a radio access network (RAN) network device), for:
storing definitions for multiple mode parameters for a central unit (CU) of a radio access
network (RAN) (Fig.1 [0051], storing parameters 118 defined (i.e., definitions for multiple mode parameters) for one or more configurations 115A-n, 116A-n and 117A-n for a central unit (CU) of a radio access network (RAN) e.g., O-RAN C-plane PRACH time offset configuration 115A-n, 3GPP configuration index-based PRACH time offset configuration 116A-n and other configurations 117A-n and Fig.1 [0054], storing parameters 128 defined (i.e., definitions for multiple mode parameters) for one or more configurations 125A-n, 126A-n and 127A-n and Fig.1 [0002], the RAN architecture includes central units (CUs), distributed units (DUs), and radio units (RUs). Generally, CUs centralize RAN packet processing functions, DUs conduct baseband processing functions across cell sites, and RUs provide radio functions at antenna sites --- CUs and DUs can be located “in the cloud”, such as at a data center which may or may not be proximal to the RU).
However, Liu does not explicitly disclose wherein each mode parameter defines a section of the CU that provides a relative performance level for a slice subnet over the RAN.
In the same field of endeavor, Ravichandran teaches wherein each mode parameter defines a section of the CU that provides a relative performance level for a slice subnet over the RAN (Fig.1A-B [0036][0040][0041][0111], each mode parameter of parameters provides or monitors i.e., defines a section of the CU that provides SLAs/KPIs i.e., a relative performance level for a slice subnet over the RAN, and Fig.5A-B [0224], access network node has “central unit (CU)”, implicitly implied and Fig.1A-B [0026], network slice subnets 106 of RAN e.g., a RAN slice subnet connecting to a core slice subnet).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide to have modified Liu to incorporate the teaching of Ravichandran in order to provide for effective service ASLA maintenance under adverse network conditions. It would have been beneficial to use each mode parameter of parameters which provides or monitors i.e., defines a section of the CU that provides SLAs/KPIs i.e., a relative performance level for a slice subnet over the RAN, and access network node has “central unit (CU)”, implicitly implied and whereby, network slice subnets 106 of RAN e.g., a RAN slice subnet connecting to a core slice subnet as taught by Ravichandran to have incorporated in the system of Liu to provide for improvement of the effectiveness of the orchestration. (Ravichandran, Fig.1A-B [0026], Fig.2 [0036] [0040]-[0041], Fig.5A-B [0111], Fig.5A-B [0224] and Fig.5A-B [0241])
However, Liu and Ravichandran do not explicitly disclose wherein receiving a slice configuration request for a network slice that identifies one of the multiple mode parameters; and instantiating the network slice to operate over the section of the CU that is associated with the identified one of the multiple mode parameters.
In the same field of endeavor, Bhandari teaches wherein receiving a slice configuration request for a network slice that identifies one of the multiple mode parameters (Fig.8a [0081], receiving a specific slice configuration request for a NSSAI i.e., network slice that identifies one or more S-NSSAI parameters i.e., multiple mode parameters); and
instantiating the network slice to operate over the section of the CU that is associated
with the identified one of the multiple mode parameters (Fig.8a&11 [0112]-[0114], instantiating the network slice to operate over CU-CP and CU-UP i.e., section of the CU that is associated with the identified one or more S-NSSAI parameters/ one of the multiple mode parameters and Fig.12 [0116]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide to have modified Liu and Ravichandran to incorporate the teaching of Bhandari in order to provide for an enhanced signaling efficiency. It would have been beneficial to instantiate the network slice to operate over CU-CP and CU-UP i.e., section of the CU that is associated with the identified one or more S-NSSAI parameters/ one of the multiple mode parameters as taught by Bhandari to have incorporated in the system of Liu and Ravichandran to provide for an enhanced spectral efficiency, improved coverage, reduced latency compared to existing systems. (Bhandari, Fig.2 [0059], Fig.8a&11 [0112]-[0114] and Fig.12 [0116])
Regarding claim 19, Liu, Ravichandran and Bhandari disclosed all the elements of claim 18 as stated above wherein Ravichandran further discloses the relative performance level relates to a combination of:
a first KPI for capacity over the slice subnet (Ravichandran_Fig.5A-B [0233]-[0234], the relative performance level relates to a key performance indicator (KPI) for capacity limits over the one or more network slice subnet), and
a second KPI for architecture of the slice subnet (Fig.5A-B [0234], the relative performance level relates to a key performance indicator (KPI) for architecture of the NSSAI slice subnet).
Claims 6-7, 13-14 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu et al. [hereinafter as Liu], US 2024/0107592 A1 in view of Ravichandran et al. [hereinafter as Ravichandran], US 2020/0186411 A1 in view of Bhandari et al. [hereinafter as Bhandari], US 2021/0266870 A1 further in view of Ahuja et al. [hereinafter as Ahuja], US 2025/0077324 A1.
Regarding claim 6, Liu, Ravichandran and Bhandari disclosed all the elements of claim 1 as stated above.
However, Liu, Ravichandran and Bhandari do not explicitly disclose the identified one of the multiple mode parameters provides reduced performance, relative to a designed slice performance, for the network slice over the slice subnet.
In the same field of endeavor, Ahuja teaches wherein the identified one of the multiple mode parameters provides reduced performance, relative to a designed slice performance, for the network slice over the slice subnet (Fig.1 [0021] [0039], the identified one of the multiple mode parameters provides reduced performance for the network slice over the subnet and Fig.1 [0040]-[0042][0050], a designed slice performance of network slice design (NSD) system).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide to have modified Liu, Ravichandran and Bhandari to incorporate the teaching of Ahuja in order to provide for higher latency in 4G and 5G networks. It would have been beneficial to use the identified one of the multiple mode parameters which provides reduced performance for the network slice over the subnet and, a designed slice performance of network slice design (NSD) system as taught by Ahuja to have incorporated in the system of Liu, Ravichandran and Bhandari to provide for improving system performance. (Ahuja, Fig.1 [0021] [0039] and Fig.1 [0040]-[0042][0050])
Regarding claim 7, Liu, Ravichandran and Bhandari disclosed all the elements of claim 1 as stated above.
However, Liu, Ravichandran and Bhandari do not explicitly disclose the identified one of the multiple mode parameters provides improved performance, relative to a designed slice performance, for the network slice over the slice subnet.
In the same field of endeavor, Ahuja teaches wherein the identified one of the multiple mode parameters provides improved performance, relative to a designed slice performance, for the network slice over the slice subnet (Fig.1 [0021] [0039], the identified one of the multiple mode parameters provides improved performance for the network slice over the subnet and Fig.1 [0040]-[0042][0050], a designed slice performance of network slice design (NSD) system).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide to have modified Liu, Ravichandran and Bhandari to incorporate the teaching of Ahuja in order to provide for higher latency in 4G and 5G networks. It would have been beneficial to use the identified one of the multiple mode parameters which provides improved performance for the network slice over the subnet and, a designed slice performance of network slice design (NSD) system as taught by Ahuja to have incorporated in the system of Liu, Ravichandran and Bhandari to provide for improving system performance. (Ahuja, Fig.1 [0021] [0039] and Fig.1 [0040]-[0042][0050])
Regarding claim 13, Liu, Ravichandran and Bhandari disclosed all the elements of claim 10 as stated above.
However, Liu, Ravichandran and Bhandari do not explicitly disclose the identified one of the multiple mode parameters provides reduced performance, relative to a designed slice performance, for the network slice over the slice subnet.
In the same field of endeavor, Ahuja teaches wherein the identified one of the multiple mode parameters provides reduced performance, relative to a designed slice performance, for the network slice over the slice subnet (Fig.1 [0021] [0039], the identified one of the multiple mode parameters provides reduced performance for the network slice over the subnet and Fig.1 [0040]-[0042][0050], a designed slice performance of network slice design (NSD) system).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide to have modified Liu, Ravichandran and Bhandari to incorporate the teaching of Ahuja in order to provide for higher latency in 4G and 5G networks. It would have been beneficial to use the identified one of the multiple mode parameters which provides reduced performance for the network slice over the subnet and, a designed slice performance of network slice design (NSD) system as taught by Ahuja to have incorporated in the system of Liu, Ravichandran and Bhandari to provide for improving system performance. (Ahuja, Fig.1 [0021] [0039] and Fig.1 [0040]-[0042][0050])
Regarding claim 14, Liu, Ravichandran and Bhandari disclosed all the elements of claim 10 as stated above.
However, Liu, Ravichandran and Bhandari do not explicitly disclose the identified one of the multiple mode parameters provides improved performance, relative to a designed slice performance, for the network slice over the slice subnet.
In the same field of endeavor, Ahuja teaches wherein the identified one of the multiple mode parameters provides improved performance, relative to a designed slice performance, for the network slice over the slice subnet (Fig.1 [0021][0039], the identified one of the multiple mode parameters provides improved performance for the network slice over the subnet and Fig.1 [0040]-[0042][0050], a designed slice performance of network slice design (NSD) system).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide to have modified Liu, Ravichandran and Bhandari to incorporate the teaching of Ahuja in order to provide for higher latency in 4G and 5G networks. It would have been beneficial to use the identified one of the multiple mode parameters which provides improved performance for the network slice over the subnet and, a designed slice performance of network slice design (NSD) system as taught by Ahuja to have incorporated in the system of Liu, Ravichandran and Bhandari to provide for improving system performance. (Ahuja, Fig.1 [0021] [0039] and Fig.1 [0040]-[0042][0050])
Regarding claim 20, Liu, Ravichandran and Bhandari disclosed all the elements of claim 18 as stated above.
However, Liu, Ravichandran and Bhandari do not explicitly disclose the identified one of the multiple mode parameters provides improved performance, relative to a designed slice performance, for the network slice over the slice subnet.
In the same field of endeavor, Ahuja teaches wherein the identified one of the multiple mode parameters provides improved performance, relative to a designed slice performance, for the network slice over the slice subnet (Fig.1 [0021] [0039], the identified one of the multiple mode parameters provides improved performance for the network slice over the subnet and Fig.1 [0040]-[0042][0050], a designed slice performance of network slice design (NSD) system).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide to have modified Liu, Ravichandran and Bhandari to incorporate the teaching of Ahuja in order to provide for higher latency in 4G and 5G networks. It would have been beneficial to use the identified one of the multiple mode parameters which provides improved performance for the network slice over the subnet and, a designed slice performance of network slice design (NSD) system as taught by Ahuja to have incorporated in the system of Liu, Ravichandran and Bhandari to provide for improving system performance. (Ahuja, Fig.1 [0021] [0039] and Fig.1 [0040]-[0042][0050])
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Sharma et al. (Pub. No.: US 2024/0298252 A1) teaches RAN Intelligent Controller (RIC) Enabled Dynamic Access and Mobility Management Function (AMF) Selection.
Yeh et al. (Pub. No.: US 2022/0014963 A1) teaches Reinforcement Learning for Multi-Access Traffic Management.
Chou (U.S Patent No.: US 11917527 B2) teaches Resource Allocation and Activation/Deactivation Configuration of Open Radio Access Network (O-RAN) Network Slice Subnets.
Saad et al. (Pub. No.: US 2022/0086082 A1) teaches Apparatus, System and Method for Steering Traffic Over Network Slices.
Veluchamy et al. (Pub. No.: US 2025/0008378 A1) teaches Implementing a Dynamical Antenna Array Reconfiguration in a Telecommunications Network.
Zhang et al. (U.S Patent No.: US 10574993 B2) teaches Coding Data using an Enhanced Context-Adaptive Binary Arithmetic Coding (CABAC) Design.
Bhaskaran et al. (Pub. No.: US 2021/0112565 A1) teaches End to End Slicing in Wireless Communications Systems.
Kim (U.S Patent No.: US 10708968 B2) teaches Method of Controlling Mobility of UE and Apparatus Therefor.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VANNEILIAN LALCHINTHANG whose telephone number is (571)272-6859. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10AM-6PM.
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, Edan Orgad can be reached at (571) 272-7884. 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.
/V.L/Examiner, Art Unit 2414
/SITHU KO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2414