DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . This Office Action is in response to the submission filed 2026-04-15 (herein referred to as the Reply) where claim(s) 1, 3-20 are pending for consideration.
35 USC §103 - Claim Rejections
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 non-obviousness.
Claim(s) is/are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SACHS_896 (US20200259896) in view of XIONG_631 (US20220174631)
Claim(s) 1, 20
SACHS_896 teaches
a processor and a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium which is coupled to the processor, and the non- transitory computer-readable storage medium is configured to store instructions, the processor being configured to execute the instructions to cause the mobile-network entity to:
receive a management request from a Time Sensitive Network (TSN) management entity, 5G entity such as VEP, receives a request for TSN stream from a TSN endpoint via CUC. <FIG(s). 199; para. 1950-1954>.
wherein the management request indicates
one or more TSN management operations and The 5G entity will then map user plane packets from the TSN stream to the corresponding PDU session and QoS Flow, as well as performing required actions defined by the TSN features used in the TSN network. <para. 1955, 1978>.
one or more TSN parameters; and VEP will also receive the QoS for the TSN stream and map it to 5G QoS. <para. 1953-1954>.
send an instruction based on the management request to one or more other mobile-network entities, Based on the QoS settings/TSN configuration, the 5G device will either establish a new PDU session or use an existing PDU session or modify an existing PDU session to meet the requested QoS. This operation includes sending, to an SMF, forwarding rules and a packet filter set. <para. 1936, 1954, 2244-2245, 2257, 2385>.
wherein the instruction indicates
one or more mobile-network operations and one or more mobile-network parameters, Based on the QoS settings/TSN configuration, the 5G device will either establish a new PDU session or use an existing PDU session or modify an existing PDU session to meet the requested QoS. This operation includes sending, to an SMF, forwarding rules and a packet filter set <para. 1936, 1954, 2244-2245, 2257, 2385>.
SACHS_896 does not explicitly teach
wherein the instruction further indicates at least one of the TSN parameters of the one or more TSN parameters.
However in a similar endeavor, XIONG_631 teaches
wherein the instruction further indicates at least one of the TSN parameters of the one or more TSN parameters. AMF sends instruction to the UE to establish a PDU session PDU session establishment instruction may include: the TSN Domain ID, the UL or DL TSN Synchronization, the Activation, the S-NSSAI, and the DNN. The TSN Domain ID and/or TSN Synchronization are considered TSN parameters. Said parameters were previously a request received by the AMF. <FIG(s). 8; para. 0180-0191>.
Before the effective filing date of the claim invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art to have modified the system/techniques disclosed by SACHS_896 with the embodiment(s) disclosed by XIONG_631. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to provide a time synchronization method and apparatus, a computer-readable medium, and an electronic device, to control a time synchronization operation of a user equipment (UE). <para. 0004>.
Claim(s) 3
SACHS_896 teaches
determine at least one of the one or more mobile-network operations or the one or more mobile-network parameters based on at least one of the one or more TSN management operations or the one or more TSN parameters. Based on the QoS settings/TSN configuration, the 5G device will either establish a new PDU session or use an existing PDU session or modify an existing PDU session to meet the requested QoS. This operation includes sending, to an SMF, forwarding rules and a packet filter set <para. 1936, 1954, 2244-2245, 2257, 2385>.
Claim(s) 4
SACHS_896 teaches
identify the one or more other mobile-network entities based on at least one of the one or more mobile-network operations or the one or more mobile-network parameters. A new PDU session or use an existing PDU session or modify an existing PDU session to meet the requested QoS includes sending, to an SMF, forwarding rules and a packet filter set. In this case the “one or more other mobile-network entities” is simply the SMF and the SMF is the device that by protocol receives the forwarding rules and filter set to establish the PDU session <para. 1936, 1954, 2244-2245, 2257, 2385>.
Claim(s) 5
SACHS_896 teaches
wherein the instruction is useable to trigger the one or more other mobile-network entities to perform the one or more mobile-network operations according to the one or more mobile-network parameters. This limitation is option due to the intended use language and therefore does not need to be anticipated by art as it is not explicitly required by the claim. See Examiner’s Notes for more details.
Claim(s) 6
SACHS_896 teaches
maintain a mapping relationship between a set of TSN parameters of the one or more TSN parameters and a set of mobile-network parameters of the one or more mobile-network parameters; and The 5G entity will then map user plane packets from the TSN stream to the corresponding PDU session and QoS Flow, as well as performing required actions defined by the TSN features used in the TSN network. <para. 1323, 1953-1966, 1978>.
determine the one or more mobile-network operations or the one or more mobile-network parameters based on the management request and the mapping relationship. Based on the QoS settings/TSN configuration and mapping, the 5G device will either establish a new PDU session or use an existing PDU session or modify an existing PDU session to meet the requested QoS. This operation includes sending, to an SMF, forwarding rules and a packet filter set . <para. 1936, 1953-1966, 2244-2245>.
Claim(s) 7
SACHS_896 teaches
wherein the set of TSN parameters of the one or more TSN parameters comprises at least one of:
one or more TSN domain identifications (IDs); TSN domain number <FIG(s). 109; para. 2314-2315; Claim(s) 194, 225>.
Claim(s) 8
In the embodiments discussed herein, SACHS_896 does not explicitly teach
wherein the set of mobile-network parameters comprises at least one of:
one or more User Equipment (UE) IDs;
one or more User Plane Function (UPF) IDs;
one or more Protocol Data Unit (PDU) session IDs; or
one or more Data Network Access Identifier (DNAI).
However, implicitly SACHS_896 teaches
wherein the set of mobile-network parameters comprises at least one of:
one or more Protocol Data Unit (PDU) session IDs; or PDU session ID is mapped to TSN stream/domains. Accordingly sending a PDU modification request or establishment request would implicitly require the PDU session, which is by way of a PDU session ID. <para. 1933, 2244-2245>.
Before the effective filing date of the claim invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art to have modified embodiments of SACHS_896, as discussed herein, with other embodiment(s) disclosed by SACHS_896. In other words, it would have been obvious that the PDU modify request to the other 5G network entity would include a PDU session ID in order to proper enable the other entity to identify which PDU session was being referred to, other wise the receiver would not know which PDU session is being requested to be established/modified.
Claim(s) 10
SACHS_896 teaches
further configured to:
provide the one or more mobile-network parameters to the one or more other mobile-network entities (220) to trigger them to execute the one or more mobile-network operations comprising at least one of: modifying the PDU session. Based on the QoS settings/TSN configuration, the 5G device will either establish a new PDU session or use an existing PDU session or modify an existing PDU session to meet the requested QoS. This operation includes sending, to an SMF, forwarding rules and a packet filter set . <para. 1936, 1954, 2244-2245, 2257, 2385>.
Claim(s) 17
SACHS_896 teaches
receive an instruction from another mobile-network entity, wherein the instruction is usable to indicate a mobile-network operation, a mobile-network parameter,
SACHS_896 does not explicitly teach
wherein the instruction further indicates a TSN parameter; perform the mobile-network operation according to the TSN parameter.
However in a similar endeavor, XIONG_631 teaches
wherein the instruction further indicates a TSN parameter; perform the mobile-network operation according to the TSN parameter. AMF sends instruction to the UE to establish a PDU session PDU session establishment instruction may include: the TSN Domain ID, the UL or DL TSN Synchronization, the Activation, the S-NSSAI, and the DNN. The TSN Domain ID and/or TSN Synchronization are considered TSN parameters. Said parameters were previously a request received by the AMF. UE establishes PDU session in accordance with said parameters <FIG(s). 8; para. 0180-0191>.
Before the effective filing date of the claim invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art to have modified the system/techniques disclosed by SACHS_896 with the embodiment(s) disclosed by XIONG_631. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to provide a time synchronization method and apparatus, a computer-readable medium, and an electronic device, to control a time synchronization operation of a user equipment (UE). <para. 0004>.
Claim(s) 18
SACHS_896 teaches
wherein the TSN-aware mobile-network entity (220) is configured with at least one of a User Plane Function (UPF) or a User Equipment (UE). In one embodiment, the SMF receives the PDU request from a UPF both of which are within the 5G network and therefore is considered configured with a UPF. <FIG(s). 198, 199, 200; para. 1923-1929, 1936>.
Claim(s) 19
SACHS_896 teaches
operate according to at least one policy of a TSN domain (300). SMF controls UEs to function in accordance with the TSN domain when in the PDU session. <FIG(s). 111; para. 2298-2299, 2345, 2351>.
Claim(s) is/are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SACHS_896 (US20200259896) in view of XIONG_631 (US20220174631), and further view of SACHS_175 (US20230239175)
Claim(s) 9
SACHS_896 does not explicitly teach
wherein the one or more TSN management operations comprise at least one of:
attaching a TSN domain to a mobile-network bridge;
detaching a TSN domain from a mobile-network bridge;
merging of two or more TSN domains;
splitting one or more TSN domains;
updating the domain identification (ID) or a Grand Master (GM) ID of one or more TSN domains and/or mobile-network bridges; or
adding one or more ports to a mobile-network bridge.
However in a similar endeavor, SACHS_175 teaches
wherein the one or more TSN management operations comprise at least one of:
splitting one or more TSN domains (300); TSN network may be split into multiple domains <FIG(s). 2; para. 0010-0011, 0016-0017>.
Before the effective filing date of the claim invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art to have modified the system/techniques disclosed by SACHS_896 and XIONG_631 with the embodiment(s) disclosed by SACHS_175. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to provide techniques to enable 5GS to interact with multiple TSN domains and multiple non-3GPP network controllers. <para. 0016>.
Claim(s) is/are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SACHS_896 (US20200259896) in view of XIONG_631 (US20220174631), and further view of ROST_172 (US20210204172)
Claim(s) 11
SACHS_896 does not explicitly teach
wherein the one or more TSN operations comprise removing or adding a User Equipment (UE), respectively, from or to a mobile-network bridge of a TSN domain.
However in a similar endeavor, ROST_172 teaches
wherein the one or more TSN operations comprise removing or adding a User Equipment (UE), respectively, from or to a mobile-network bridge of a TSN domain. Changes in 3GPP bridge include additional UEs <para. 0118-0119>.
Before the effective filing date of the claim invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art to have modified the system/techniques disclosed by SACHS_896 and XIONG_631 with the embodiment(s) disclosed by ROST_172. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to provide improved handling the interaction between these two domains in 3GPP and TSN communications <para. 0093>.
Claim(s) is/are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SACHS_896 (US20200259896) in view of XIONG_631 (US20220174631), in view of ROST_172 (US20210204172), and further view of SEO_672 (US20140192672)
Claim(s) 12
SACHS_896 does not explicitly teach
wherein the one or more mobile-network operations comprise a reconfiguration to bind the UE to another mobile- network entity.
However in a similar endeavor, SEO_672 teaches
wherein the one or more mobile-network operations comprise a reconfiguration to bind the UE to another mobile-network entity. Network entity (target enB) sends another network entity (serving enB) a reconfiguration message to including handover command UE from serving to target. <para. 0103-0104>.
Before the effective filing date of the claim invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art to have modified the system/techniques disclosed by SACHS_896, XIONG_631 and ROST_172 with the embodiment(s) disclosed by SEO_672. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to enable measurement reporting and its related procedures can be efficiently performed. <para. 0016>.
Claim(s) 13
SACHS_896 does not explicitly teach
further configured to:
provide the one or more mobile-network parameters to the one or more other mobile- network entities to trigger them to perform the reconfiguration,
wherein the reconfiguration comprises at least one of:
modifying a configuration of the UE;
modifying a routing profile of the UE for the PDU session;
modifying a Data Network Access Identifier (DNAI) of an active PDU session;
configuring an Uplink Classifier (UL CL) in the PDU session.
However in a similar endeavor, SEO_672 teaches
provide the one or more mobile-network parameters to the one or more other mobile-network entities (220) to trigger them to perform the reconfiguration, wherein the reconfiguration comprises at least one of: modifying a configuration of the UE; RRC Connection Reconfiguration message that reconfigures the UE's RRC connection, for example security configuration or C-RNTI parameters <para. 0104>.
Before the effective filing date of the claim invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art to have modified the system/techniques disclosed by SACHS_896, XIONG_631 and ROST_172 with the embodiment(s) disclosed by SEO_672. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to enable measurement reporting and its related procedures can be efficiently performed. <para. 0016>.
Claim(s) is/are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SACHS_896 (US20200259896) in view of XIONG_631 (US20220174631), and further view of FLETCHER_010 (US20140090010)
Claim(s) 14
SACHS_896 does not explicitly teach
further configured to:
receive one or more confirmations from the one or more other mobile-network entities,
wherein each confirmation of the one or more confirmations indicates that at least one mobile-network operation according to at least one TSN management operation of the one or more TSN management operations has been executed; and
acknowledge the management request based on a received confirmation of the one or more confirmations.
However in a similar endeavor, FLETCHER_010 teaches
receive one or more confirmations from the one or more other mobile-network entities, acknowledge the management request based on a received confirmation of the one or more confirmations. A request causes a first network device to send an authorization request to another network device and receive an authorization result (confirmation). In response the first device processing the request (acknowledge) including sending messages accommodate the request. <FIG(s). 2; para. 0044-0053; Claim 1>.
wherein each confirmation of the one or more confirmations is useable to indicate that at least one mobile-network operation according to at least one TSN management operation of the one or more TSN management operations has been executed; and This limitation is option due to the intended use language and therefore does not need to be anticipated by art as it is not explicitly required by the claim. See Examiner’s Notes for more details.
Before the effective filing date of the claim invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art to have modified the system/techniques disclosed by SACHS_896 and XIONG_631 with the embodiment(s) disclosed by FLETCHER_010. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to increase or decrease the level of quality of service (to be referred to as "QoS") to an application. <para. 0009>.
Claim(s) is/are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SACHS_896 (US20200259896) in view of XIONG_631 (US20220174631), and further view of MAS ROSIQUE_366 (US20210058366)
Claim(s) 16
SACHS_896 does not explicitly teach
further configured to:
initiate a policy control process to authorize the management request.
However in a similar endeavor, MAS ROSIQUE_366 teaches
initiate a policy control process to authorize the management request. Policy control entity can authorize the request, can create the policy session and determine the session policies, the PCC rules and policy control request triggers including the request for information about a network address translation <FIG(s). 6; para. 0077-0079, 0131>.
Before the effective filing date of the claim invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art to have modified the system/techniques disclosed by SACHS_896 and XIONG_631 with the embodiment(s) disclosed by MAS ROSIQUE_366. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to overcome the known problems in 5G and to avoid errors occurring in the handling of user data packet sessions in which a network address translation is carried out in the user plane. <para. 0070>.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) is/are indicated as having allowable subject matter and objected to.
Claim(s) 15
The claim(s) is/are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
In addition to the explicit reasons given herein, allowability is also determined in view of the combination of references required for obviousness, the inter-relationship between other claimed limitations, and the claimed invention as a whole. Accordingly, amendments that do not incorporate the allowable claims into the base/intervening claims in its entirely, are not allowable. This includes amendments that incorporate the allowable claims into the base/intervening claims in part or in a non-narrowing manner (i.e., changing the scope of the subject matter).
Response to Arguments
The following arguments in the Reply have been fully considered and are persuasive:
Items related to the claim objections and USC112(b) rejections.
The Reply’s arguments with respect to the other matters have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to the rejection(s), which was necessitated by the Applicant’s amendments, being used in the current rejection.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDRE TACDIRAN whose telephone number is 571-272-1717. The examiner can normally be reached on M-TH, 10-5PM EST. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jeffrey Rutkowski can be reached on 571-270-1215. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
/ANDRE TACDIRAN/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2415
Prosecution Insights