DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claims Status
2. The response filed on March 24, 2026 has been entered and made of record.
3. Claims 1, 3, 5, 11, 12 and 17 have been amended.
4. Claims 4 and 18 have been cancelled.
5. Claims 1-3, 5-17 and 19-20 are currently pending.
Statement of Substance of Interview
6. Applicant’s representative initiated the interview prior to filing the official Response and discussed proposed amendments related to currently amended claims. Even though no specific agreement was reached, potential amendments for the independent claims overcome the prior arts of record specifically cited for independent claims, contingent upon an opportunity for the Examiner to consider applicant’s amendments to claim language in a formal response to the office. It was noted that Applicant's representative's explanations are clear, detailed and most helpful (Applicant initiated interview summary dated February 25, 2026).
Response to Arguments
7. The applicant's arguments filed on March 24, 2026 regarding claims 1-3, 5, 11-12 and 17 have been fully considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection. The rejection has been revised and set forth below according to the amended claims. A response is considered necessary for applicant’s arguments/remarks since the cited references, Kim in combination with Hu and Talebi Fard (cited prior art for new ground(s) of rejection from previous dependent claims) will continue to be used to meet amended limitations.
Regarding claims 1, 11 and 17 applicant argued that Talebi Fard fails to teach the amended features of the claim i.e. “the one or more deferrable actions includes deferring charging interactions between the management network function and a charging function (CHF) for a period of time corresponding to the peak capacity of the core network” (Applicant, page 9-10, Remarks Made in an Amendment dated March 06, 2026).
In response to applicant’s argument, the examiner respectfully disagrees with the above argument.
As a support of evidence, Talebi Fard discloses:
“The SMF 314 depicted in FIG. 3 may establish, modify, and/or release a PDU session based on messaging received UE 301. The SMF 314 may allocate, manage, and/or assign an IP address to UE 301, for example, upon establishment of a PDU session. There may be multiple SMFs in the network, each of which may be associated with a respective group of wireless devices, base stations, and/or UPFs. A UE with multiple PDU sessions may be associated with a different SMF for each PDU session. As noted above, SMF 314 may select one or more UPFs to handle a PDU session and may control the handling of the PDU session by the selected UPF by providing rules for packet handling (PDR, FAR, QER, etc.). Rules relating to QoS and/or charging for a particular PDU session may be obtained from PCF 320 and provided to UPF 305” (Fig.3, paragraph [0075]).
“The CHF 380 may control billing-related tasks associated with UE 301. For example, UPF 305 may report traffic usage associated with UE 301 to SMF 314. The SMF 314 may collect usage data from UPF 305 and one or more other UPFs. The usage data may indicate how much data is exchanged, what DN the data is exchanged with, a network slice associated with the data, or any other information that may influence billing. The SMF 314 may share the collected usage data with the CHF. The CHF may use the collected usage data to perform billing-related tasks associated with UE 301. The CHF may, depending on the billing status of UE 301, instruct SMF 314 to limit or influence access of UE 301 and/or to provide billing-related notifications to UE 301” (Fig.3, paragraph [0082]).
“Based on the update of the session management context, the SMF may update a PCF for purposes of policy control. For example, if a location of the UE has changed, the SMF may notify the PCF of the UE's a new location (paragraph [0172]).
“At 1240, the network sets up a data path for uplink data associated with the PDU session. The SMF may select a PCF and establish a session management policy association. Based on the association, the PCF may provide an initial set of policy control and charging rules (PCC rules) for the PDU session. When targeting a particular PDU session, the PCF may indicate, to the SMF, a method for allocating an IP address to the PDU Session, a default charging method for the PDU session, an address of the corresponding charging entity, triggers for requesting new policies, etc. The PCF may also target a service data flow (SDF) comprising one or more PDU sessions. When targeting an SDF, the PCF may indicate, to the SMF, policies for applying QoS requirements, monitoring traffic (e.g., for charging purposes), and/or steering traffic (e.g., by using one or more particular N6 interfaces)” (Fig. 12, paragraph [0179]).
“In an example, SMF overload control may be performed. The SMF may employ/contain mechanisms for avoiding and handling overload situations. This may include the following measures: SMF overload control that could result in rejections of NAS requests. In an example, the SMF overload control may be activated by a SMF of an underlay network or an SMF of an overlay network due to congestion situation at the SMF e.g., configuration, by a restart or recovery condition of a UPF, or by a partial failure or recovery of a UPF for a particular UPF(s). In an example, the SMF congestion control may be due to excessive load in the underlay network for traffic (e.g., signaling and data transmission) associated with one or more overlay networks” (paragraph [0257]).
“in an example, if the SMF has reached overload situation, the SMF may activates NAS level congestion control. The SMF may restrict the load that the AMF(s) are generating, if the AMF is configured to enable the overload restriction. In an example, the SMF may perform NAS level congestion control for signaling or data traffic from the AMF based on the access type. In an example, when the SMF determines to perform congestion control or overload control for access of a UE to an overlay network, the SMF may restrict NAS messages that comprise extended access type (e.g., underlay access). The access type may be associated to a PDU session in the underlay network (e.g., the second PDU session)” (paragraph [0258]).
In the context of the pending limitation is broadly interpreted to Figs. 3, 12, paragraphs [0075], [0082], [0172], [0179], [0257]-[0258] of cited prior art Talebi Fard as “the plurality of deferrable actions including: selecting a predetermined local policy stored on the management network function in lieu of obtaining a policy based on the session request from a policy control function (PCF) on the core network; and deferring charging interactions between the management network function and a charging function (CHF) for a period of time corresponding to the peak capacity of the core network”. Accordingly, it is clear that Talebi Fard in combination with Kim and Hu teach claim limitations.
Therefore, in view of above, while Applicant’s remarks and arguments have been considered, they are not persuasive. The dependent claims 2-3, 5-10 and 12-16 and 19-20 are not patentable according to the solid prior art teachings.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
8. 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.
9. Claims 1-3, 8-13, 16-17 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 2025/0185086 A1), hereinafter “Kim” in view of Hu (US 2022/0256396 A1), hereinafter “Hu” in view of Talebi Fard et al. (US 2024/0129794 A1), hereinafter “Talebi Fard”.
Regarding claim 1, Kim discloses a method for deferring load in a core network of the telecommunications network (Fig. 10 a – 10 b, procedure that enables the exposure of analytics information to the UE, AI/ML model/data deployment and sharing over a 5G system), the method comprising:
receiving, at a management network function (Fig. 10 a, step 2, paragraphs [0266]-[0267], Session Management Function (SMF)), a session request associated with creating a communication session (Fig. 10 a, step 2, paragraphs [0266]-[0267], PDU session establishment request);
based on the load exceeding the threshold load (Fig. 10 a, step 3-4, paragraphs [0274]-[0276], analytics information exposure to the UE based on subscription information and/or local configuration), determining a deferral action policy (Fig. 10 a, step 3-4, paragraphs [0274]-[0276], [0357]-[0359], enabling or disabling analytic information exposure when SMF is not congested or congested) to apply to a communication session responsive to the session request (Fig. 10 a, step 3-4, paragraphs [0274]-[0276], SMF may perform this behavior when SMF is not congested), the deferral action policy indicating one or more deferrable actions to be delayed or modified while the load of the core network exceeds the threshold load (Fig. 10 a, step 3-4, paragraphs [0357]-[0359], SMF may disable analytics information exposure to UE, even if no PDU Session has been released and the UE has not requested to disable analytics information exposure to UE; SMF may disable when SMF is congested); and
causing a communication session (Fig. 10 a, step 4-5, paragraphs [0278]-[0279], PDU Session Establishment Accept) to be created responsive to the session request in which the deferral action policy is applied to the communication session (Fig. 10 a, step 4-5, paragraphs [0278]-[0279], SMF may include a Reject (or NACK) to activate the Analytics Information Exposure Request in the PDU Session Establishment Accept message).
While Kim implicitly refers to “determining that a load of the core network at a time the session request is received exceeds a threshold load associated with a peak capacity of the core network in handing additional communication sessions” (paragraphs [0274]-[0276], PDU session establishment accept message including an acceptance or rejection of the activation request to expose analytics information), Hu from the same or similar field of endeavor explicitly discloses determining that a load (Figs.1-2, paragraphs [155], [0178]-[0180], data processing node may determine, based on processor usage and/or a packet loss rate of the data processing node, whether the data processing node is in the congested state) of the core network (Figs.1-2, paragraphs [0108], [0112], [0202], control node or data node including SMF or AMF) at a time the session request is received exceeds a threshold load associated with a peak capacity of the core network in handing additional communication sessions (Figs.1-2, paragraphs [0155], [0178]-[0180], when CPU usage of the data processing node reaches (or exceeds) a first usage threshold (for example, 90%), the data processing node determines that the data processing node is in the congested state).
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 “determining that a load of the core network at a time the session request is received exceeds a threshold load associated with a peak capacity of the core network in handing additional communication sessions” as taught by Hu, in the system of Kim, so that it would provide a congestion control method to optimize a congestion control manner of a wireless communication systems to have a relatively strong congestion control capability, to cope with node congestion that may occur in large-capacity and high-rate transmission (Hu, paragraph [0005]).
Neither Kim nor Hu explicitly discloses “the one or more deferrable actions includes deferring charging interactions between the management network function and a charging function (CHF) for a period of time corresponding to the peak capacity of the core network”.
However, Talebi Fard from the same or similar field of endeavor discloses the one or more deferrable actions includes deferring charging interactions between the management network function and a charging function (CHF) (Figs. 3, 12, paragraphs [0075], [0082], [0179], [0257]-[0258], SMF sharing the collected usage data with the CHF) for a period of time corresponding to the peak capacity of the core network (Figs. 3, 12, paragraphs [0075], [0082], [0179], [0257]-[0258], collected usage data with charging function for a period of time; congestion control or overload control for access of a UE to an overlay network).
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 “the one or more deferrable actions includes deferring charging interactions between the management network function and a charging function (CHF) for a period of time corresponding to the peak capacity of the core network” as taught by Talebi Fard, in the combined system of Kim and Hu, so that it would provide session establishment procedure for a wireless device to create a new protocol data unit session (PDU) to hand over an existing PDU session to a 3GPP network, or for any other suitable reason (Talebi Fard, paragraph [0174]).
Regarding claim 2, Kim discloses applying the deferral action policy to the communication session for as long as a current load of the core network exceeds the threshold load (paragraphs [0274]-[0276], [0357]-[0359], enabling or disabling analytic information exposure when SMF is congested or not congested).
Regarding claim 3, Kim in view of Hu and Talebi Fard disclose the method according to claim 1.
Talebi Fard further discloses the one or more deferrable actions further include selecting a predetermined local policy stored on the management network function (Fig. 12, paragraphs [0172], [0179], [0257], [0258], SMF overload control that could result in rejections of NAS requests; in an example, the SMF overload control may be activated by a SMF of an underlay network or an SMF of an overlay network due to congestion situation at the SMF e.g., configuration, by a restart or recovery condition of a UPF, or by a partial failure or recovery of a UPF for a particular UPF(s)) in lieu of obtaining a policy based on the session request from a policy control function (PCF) on the core network (Fig. 12, paragraphs [0172], [0179], [0257], [0258], in an example, if the SMF has reached overload situation, the SMF may activates NAS level congestion control; the SMF may restrict the load that the AMF(s) are generating, if the AMF is configured to enable the overload restriction; in an example, the SMF may perform NAS level congestion control for signaling or data traffic from the AMF based on the access type; in an example, when the SMF determines to perform congestion control or overload control for access of a UE to an overlay network, the SMF may restrict NAS messages that comprise extended access type (e.g., underlay access); the access type may be associated to a PDU session in the underlay network (e.g., the second PDU session)).
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 “the one or more deferrable actions further include selecting a predetermined local policy stored on the management network function in lieu of obtaining a policy based on the session request from a policy control function (PCF) on the core network” as taught by Talebi Fard, in the combined system of Kim and Hu, so that it would provide session establishment procedure for a wireless device to create a new protocol data unit session (PDU) to hand over an existing PDU session to a 3GPP network, or for any other suitable reason (Talebi Fard, paragraph [0174]).
Regarding claim 8, Kim discloses the management network function is a session management function (SMF) in the core network of a fifth generation (5G) mobile communication network (paragraphs [0266]-[0267], SMF receiving PDU session establishment request).
Regarding claim 9, Kim in view of Hu and Talebi Fard disclose the method according to claim 1.
Hu further discloses determining an updated load of the core network; determining that the updated load is within a threshold load associated with a non-peak capacity; and discontinuing, based on the updated load being within the threshold load, the deferral action policy and reverting to a standard policy associated with operation of the management network function during non-peak capacity of the core network (paragraphs [0158], [0182], [0231], after the control node receives the third indication, after the control node determines that the data processing node is not in the congested state, the control node does not prohibit the first terminal apparatus from establishing a new user plane connection; after receiving the third indication, if receiving a second user plane connection establishment request from the first terminal apparatus, the control node may send, to the first terminal apparatus, an accept response corresponding to the second user plane connection establishment request, to indicate that establishing a user plane connection of the first terminal apparatus based on the second user plane connection establishment request is accepted).
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 “determining an updated load of the core network; determining that the updated load is within a threshold load associated with a non-peak capacity; and discontinuing, based on the updated load being within the threshold load, the deferral action policy and reverting to a standard policy associated with operation of the management network function during non-peak capacity of the core network” as taught by Hu, in the combined system of Kim and Talebi Fard, so that it would provide a congestion control method to optimize a congestion control manner of a wireless communication systems to have a relatively strong congestion control capability, to cope with node congestion that may occur in large-capacity and high-rate transmission (Hu, paragraph [0005]).
Regarding claim 10, Kim discloses performing deferred actions not performed during the peak capacity of the core network as a result of the deferral action policy being applied to communications transmitted during a period of peak capacity, the deferred actions being performed in a paced manner (paragraphs [0284], [0292]-[0293], simplified, transformed, aggregated or merged analytic data/information).
Regarding claim 11, Kim discloses a method for deferring load in a core network of a telecommunications network (Fig. 10 a – 10 b, procedure that enables the exposure of analytics information to the UE, AI/ML model/data deployment and sharing over a 5G system), the method comprising:
receiving, at a management network function, a session request associated with creating a communication session (Fig. 10 a, paragraphs [0266]-[0267], PDU session establishment request);
causing the communication session to be created using a standard policy associated with a period of non-peak capacity of the core network (Fig. 10 a, paragraphs [0274]-[0276], analytics information exposure when SMF is not congested);
based on determining that the load exceeds the threshold load (Fig. 10 a, step 3, paragraphs [0274]-[0276], analytics information exposure to the UE based on subscription information and/or local configuration), determining a deferral action policy associated with a period of peak capacity of the core network to apply to the communication session in lieu of the standard policy, the deferral action policy indicating or more deferrable actions to be delayed or modified while the load of the core network exceeds the threshold load (Fig. 10 a, paragraphs [0357]-[0359], SMF may disable analytics information exposure to UE, even if no PDU Session has been released and the UE has not requested to disable analytics information exposure to UE; SMF may disable when SMF is congested); and
causing the communication session to continue in which the deferral action policy is applied to the communication session for as long as a current load of the core network exceeds the threshold load (Fig. 10 a, step 4-5, paragraphs [0278]-[0279], SMF may include a Reject (or NACK) to activate the Analytics Information Exposure Request in the PDU Session Establishment Accept message).
While Kim implicitly refers to “determining that a load of the core network exceeds a threshold load” (paragraphs [0274]-[0276], PDU session establishment accept message including an acceptance or rejection of the activation request to expose analytics information), Hu from the same or similar field of endeavor explicitly discloses determining that a load of the core network exceeds a threshold load (Figs.1-2, paragraphs [0155], [0178]-[0180], when CPU usage of the data processing node reaches (or exceeds) a first usage threshold (for example, 90%), the data processing node determines that the data processing node is in the congested state).
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 “determining that a load of the core network exceeds a threshold load” as taught by Hu, in the system of Kim, so that it would provide a congestion control method to optimize a congestion control manner of a wireless communication systems to have a relatively strong congestion control capability, to cope with node congestion that may occur in large-capacity and high-rate transmission (Hu, paragraph [0005]).
Neither Kim nor Hu explicitly discloses “the one or more deferrable actions includes deferring charging interactions between the management network function and a charging function (CHF) for a period of time corresponding to the peak capacity of the core network”.
However, Talebi Fard from the same or similar field of endeavor discloses the one or more deferrable actions includes deferring charging interactions between the management network function and a charging function (CHF) (Figs. 3, 12, paragraphs [0075], [0082], [0179], [0257]-[0258], SMF sharing the collected usage data with the CHF) for a period of time corresponding to the peak capacity of the core network (Figs. 3, 12, paragraphs [0075], [0082], [0179], [0257]-[0258], collected usage data with charging function for a period of time; congestion control or overload control for access of a UE to an overlay network).
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 “the one or more deferrable actions includes deferring charging interactions between the management network function and a charging function (CHF) for a period of time corresponding to the peak capacity of the core network” as taught by Talebi Fard, in the combined system of Kim and Hu, so that it would provide session establishment procedure for a wireless device to create a new protocol data unit session (PDU) to hand over an existing PDU session to a 3GPP network, or for any other suitable reason (Talebi Fard, paragraph [0174]).
Regarding claim 12, Kim in view of Hu and Talebi Fard disclose the method according to claim 11.
Talebi Fard further discloses the one or more deferrable actions include the one or more deferrable actions include causing the management network function (Figs. 3, 12, paragraphs [0075], [0082], [0179], [0257]-[0258], SMF sharing the collected usage data with the CHF) to buffer communications to the charging function (CHF) and a policy control function (PCF) on the core network (Fig. 12, paragraphs [0172], [0179], [0257], [0258], in an example, if the SMF has reached overload situation, the SMF may activates NAS level congestion control; the SMF may restrict the load that the AMF(s) are generating, if the AMF is configured to enable the overload restriction; in an example, the SMF may perform NAS level congestion control for signaling or data traffic from the AMF based on the access type; in an example, when the SMF determines to perform congestion control or overload control for access of a UE to an overlay network, the SMF may restrict NAS messages that comprise extended access type (e.g., underlay access); the access type may be associated to a PDU session in the underlay network (e.g., the second PDU session)) .
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 “the one or more deferrable actions include causing the management network function to buffer communications to a-the charging function (CHF) and a policy control function (PCF) on the core network” as taught by Talebi Fard, in the combined system of Kim and Hu, so that it would provide session establishment procedure for a wireless device to create a new protocol data unit session (PDU) to hand over an existing PDU session to a 3GPP network, or for any other suitable reason (Talebi Fard, paragraph [0174]).
Regarding claim 13, Kim in view of Hu and Talebi Fard disclose the method according to claim 12.
Talebi Fard further discloses replaying the buffered communications to the CHF and the PCF after the period of peak capacity has concluded and during a later period of non-peak capacity of the core network (Figs. 3, 12, paragraphs [0075], [0082], [0172], [0179], rules relating to QoS and/or charging for a particular PDU session obtained from PCF and provided to UPF; collected usage data with CHF).
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 “replaying the buffered communications to the CHF and the PCF after the period of peak capacity has concluded and during a later period of non-peak capacity of the core network” as taught by Talebi Fard, in the combined system of Kim and Hu, so that it would provide session establishment procedure for a wireless device to create a new protocol data unit session (PDU) to hand over an existing PDU session to a 3GPP network, or for any other suitable reason (Talebi Fard, paragraph [0174]).
Regarding claim 16, the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 8.
Regarding claim 17, Kim discloses a system (Figs. 2-3, 4, 10 a – 10 b, procedure that enables the exposure of analytics information to the UE, AI/ML model/data deployment and sharing over a 5G system) comprising:
at least one processor; memory in electronic communication with the at least one processor (Figs. 2-3, 4) ; and
receiving, at a management network function implement n a core network of a 5G mobile communication network (Figs. 4, 10 a, step 2, paragraphs [0266]-[0267], Session Management Function (SMF)), a session request associated with creating a communication session (Fig. 10 a, step 2, paragraphs [0266]-[0267], PDU session establishment request);
based on the load exceeding the threshold load (Fig. 10 a, step 3-4, paragraphs [0274]-[0276], analytics information exposure to the UE based on subscription information and/or local configuration), determining a deferral action policy (Fig. 10 a, step 3-4, paragraphs [0274]-[0276], [0357]-[0359], enabling or disabling analytic information exposure when SMF is not congested or congested) to apply to a communication session responsive to the session request (Fig. 10 a, step 3-4, paragraphs [0274]-[0276], SMF may perform this behavior when SMF is not congested), the deferral action policy indicating a plurality of deferrable actions to be delayed or modified while the load of the core network exceeds the threshold load (Fig. 10 a, step 3-4, paragraphs [0357]-[0359], SMF may disable analytics information exposure to UE, even if no PDU Session has been released and the UE has not requested to disable analytics information exposure to UE; SMF may disable when SMF is congested); and
creating a communication session (Fig. 10 a, step 4-5, paragraphs [0278]-[0279], PDU Session Establishment Accept) responsive to the session request in which the deferral action policy is applied to the communication session (Fig. 10 a, step 4-5, paragraphs [0278]-[0279], SMF may include a Reject (or NACK) to activate the Analytics Information Exposure Request in the PDU Session Establishment Accept message).
While Kim implicitly refers to “determining that a load of the core network at a time the session request is received exceeds a threshold load associated with a peak capacity of the core network in handing additional communication sessions” (paragraphs [0274]-[0276], PDU session establishment accept message including an acceptance or rejection of the activation request to expose analytics information), Hu from the same or similar field of endeavor explicitly discloses determining that a load (Figs.1-2, paragraphs [155], [0178]-[0180], data processing node may determine, based on processor usage and/or a packet loss rate of the data processing node, whether the data processing node is in the congested state) of the core network (Figs.1-2, paragraphs [0108], [0112], [0202], control node or data node including SMF or AMF) at a time the session request is received exceeds a threshold load associated with a peak capacity of the core network in handing additional communication sessions (Figs.1-2, paragraphs [0155], [0178]-[0180], when CPU usage of the data processing node reaches (or exceeds) a first usage threshold (for example, 90%), the data processing node determines that the data processing node is in the congested state).
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 “determining that a load of the core network at a time the session request is received exceeds a threshold load associated with a peak capacity of the core network in handing additional communication sessions” as taught by Hu, in the system of Kim, so that it would provide a congestion control method to optimize a congestion control manner of a wireless communication systems to have a relatively strong congestion control capability, to cope with node congestion that may occur in large-capacity and high-rate transmission (Hu, paragraph [0005]).
Neither Kim nor Hu explicitly discloses “the plurality of deferrable actions including: selecting a predetermined local policy stored on the management network function in lieu of obtaining a policy based on the session request from a policy control function (PCF) on the core network; and deferring charging interactions between the management network function and a charging function (CHF) for a period of time corresponding to the peak capacity of the core network”.
However, Talebi Fard from the same or similar field of endeavor discloses the plurality of deferrable actions including: selecting a predetermined local policy stored on the management network function in lieu of obtaining a policy based on the session request from a policy control function (PCF) on the core network (Fig. 12, paragraphs [0172], [0179], [0257], [0258], SMF may select PCF and establish a session management policy association); and
deferring charging interactions between the management network function and a charging function (CHF) for a period of time corresponding to the peak capacity of the core network (Figs. 3, 12, paragraphs [0075], [0082], [0179], [0257]-[0258], SMF sharing the collected usage data with the CHF; collected usage data with charging function for a period of time; congestion control or overload control for access of a UE to an overlay network)
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 “the plurality of deferrable actions including: selecting a predetermined local policy stored on the management network function in lieu of obtaining a policy based on the session request from a policy control function (PCF) on the core network; and deferring charging interactions between the management network function and a charging function (CHF) for a period of time corresponding to the peak capacity of the core network” as taught by Talebi Fard, in the combined system of Kim and Hu, so that it would provide session establishment procedure for a wireless device to create a new protocol data unit session (PDU) to hand over an existing PDU session to a 3GPP network, or for any other suitable reason (Talebi Fard, paragraph [0174]).
Regarding claim 20, the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 8.
10. Claims 5-7, 14-15 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 2025/0185086 A1), hereinafter “Kim” in view of Hu (US 2022/0256396 A1), hereinafter “Hu” in view of Talebi Fard et al. (US 2024/0129794 A1), hereinafter “Talebi Fard” in view of Starsinic et al. (US 2024/0196265 A1; support for the cited paragraphs sporadically through the disclosure of provisional application number 63/430,846 filed on December 7, 2022), hereinafter “Starsinic”.
Regarding claim 5, Kim in view of Hu and Talebi Fard disclose the method according to claim 1.
Neither Kim, Hu nor Starsinic explicitly discloses “one or more deferrable actions further include using a precoded template of high frequency user plane function (UPF) messages to encode and send messages to the UPF during the period of peak capacity”.
However, Starsinic from the same or similar field of endeavor discloses one or more deferrable actions further include using a precoded template of high frequency user plane function (UPF) messages to encode and send messages to the UPF during the period of peak capacity (Fig.2, paragraph [0082], triggering event occurring 202, such as high congestion occurrence at the SMF or the like; SMF may pass 204 PDUSIRs to the UPF based on the triggering event 202 or for each new QoS Flow, depending on preference and efficiency desired).
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 “one or more deferrable actions further include using a precoded template of high frequency user plane function (UPF) messages to encode and send messages to the UPF during the period of peak capacity” as taught by Starsinic, in the combined system of Kim, Hu and Talebi Fard, so that it would provide determining a priority level of a protocol data unit (PDU) on a per-unit basis of PDUs associated with a quality of service (QOS) downlink flow (Starsinic, paragraph [0009]).
Regarding claim 6, Kim discloses sending a standard message at a later time during a period in which the core network is experiencing non-peak capacity (Figs. 5-6, step 10 a – step 10b, paragraphs [0165]-[0166], N4 Session Establishment procedure).
Regarding claim 7, Kim in view of Hu and Talebi Fard disclose the method according to claim 1.
While Kim, Hu in view of Talebi Fard implicitly refers to “the communication session is an IP Multimedia Subsystem (IMS) voice call”, Starsinic from the same or similar field of endeavor discloses the communication session is an IP Multimedia Subsystem (IMS) voice call (paragraph [0068], IP multimedia subsystem (IMS) server) that serves interface between CN and PSTN).
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 “the communication session is an IP Multimedia Subsystem (IMS) voice call” as taught by Starsinic, in the combined system of Kim, Hu and Talebi Fard, so that it would provide determining a priority level of a protocol data unit (PDU) on a per-unit basis of PDUs associated with a quality of service (QOS) downlink flow (Starsinic, paragraph [0009]).
Regarding claim 14, the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 5.
Regarding claim 15, the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 7.
Regarding claim 19, the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 5.
Citations of Pertinent Prior Art
11. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
• Kim et al. (US 2019/0357119 A1) entitled: "Method For Controlling Congestion When Congestion Occurs In Network"
• Muthukumar et al. (US 2024/0323747 A1) entitled: "Fail Open Mechanism For N10 Interface"
• Tornkvist et al. (US 2023/0232193 A1) entitled: "Method And Apparatus For Managing Charging Operations For A Communication Network"
Conclusion
12. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new grounds 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 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 SITHU KO whose telephone number is 571-272-8647. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 8:30am-5:00pmEST.
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.
/SITHU KO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2414
Prosecution Insights