Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
DETAILED ACTION
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on February 25, 2026 has been entered. Claims 1, 3-6, 8, 9, 11-14, 16, and 18-22 are currently pending and an Office action on the merits follows.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 3-6, 8, 9, 11-14, 16, and 18-22 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
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, 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.
Claim(s) 1, 3-6, 8, 9, 11-14, 16, and 18-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pub No.: US-20210136715-A1 (herein “Jeong”), and further in view of Pub No.: US-20220369204-A1 (herein “Lee”).
Claims 1 and 8
Consider claim 1, Jeong teaches an apparatus (see Jeong Fig. 1, Fig. 3, NSSF 134) for performing a first network function (NF), the apparatus comprising:
at least one memory (see Jeong Fig. 7, [0139] note memory 720); and
at least one processor (see Jeong Fig. 7, [0139] note processor 730) coupled with the at least one memory and configured to cause the apparatus to:
determine a number of user equipments (UEs) registered with a network slice (see Jeong Fig. 1, Fig. 3, [0077], [0081], [0086], [0099] note NSSF 134 determining the information for each slice e.g. maximum capacity and current load for the slice S314); and
transmit an indication to a second NF to activate an admission control mode for the network slice based on the number of UEs registered with the network slice being greater than a threshold value, or deactivate the admission control mode for the network slice based on the number of UEs registered with the network slice being less than or equal to the threshold value (see Jeong Fig. 3, [0100]-[0102] note transmitting the NSSelection RESP indicating that the network slice exceeds its allowable quota and therefore failure to select the corresponding network slice), wherein the admission control mode triggers a procedure for UEs availability check for the network slice before sending a registration accept message to the UE of the number of UEs, the UEs availability check comprising determining if a current number of registered UEs is compliant with a maximum number of UEs allowed to register (see Jeong Fig. 3, Fig. 4, [0100]-[0102], [0115] note upon reception of the NSSelection RESP the AMF performs access control based on the slice information received in the NSSelection RESP the condition of one or more slices requested by the UE before sending the registration accept message to the UE in Fig. 3, step S317).
Jeong fails to teach wherein the threshold value comprises one of: a quota of UEs allowed to register with the network slice, wherein the quota is less than a maximum number of UEs allowed to register; and a percentage of the maximum number of number of UEs allowed to register with the network slice, wherein the percentage is less than the maximum number of UEs allowed to register. Lee teaches configuring information for providing a network slice management function in consideration of quotas for a specific network slice including parameters to determine that the quota reaches or approaches the upper limit, i.e. a threshold value of the ratio, percentage, of the current slice usage to the maximum upper limit (see Lee Fig. 9, [0150], [0153], [0154]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Jeong to include the recited teaching of Lee. Such a modification would improve Jeong by efficiently providing services to a user device using a network slice communication system (see Lee [0011]).
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected for at least the same reason(s) set forth in claim 1.
Claims 3, 11, and 18
Consider claim 3, Jeong as modified by Lee teaches wherein the admission control mode applies only if a procedure for UEs availability check for the network slice is to increase the number of UEs (see Jeong Fig. 3, [0098] note requesting the NSSAI if admitted is a request to increase the number of UEs).
Claim(s) 11 and 18 is/are rejected for at least the same reason(s) set forth in claim 3.
Claims 4, 12, and 19
Consider claim 4, Jeong as modified by Lee teaches wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the first NF to determine the number of UEs registered with the network slice comprises the at least one processor configured to cause the first NF to receive one or more notifications from the second NF indicating a current status of the number of UEs registered with the network slice (see Jeong Fig. 3, [0100], [0101] note sending the AMF the quota limit exceeded or available for the slice).
Claim(s) 12 and 19 is/are rejected for at least the same reason(s) set forth in claim 4.
Claims 5, 13, and 20
Consider claim 5, Jeong as modified by Lee teaches wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the first NF to receive a request from the second NF to change the number of UEs registered with the network slice (see Jeong Fig. 3, [0098] note requesting the NSSAI).
Claim(s) 13 and 20 is/are rejected for at least the same reason(s) set forth in claim 5.
Claims 6 and 14
Consider claim 6, Jeong as modified by Lee teaches, wherein the first NF comprises a network slice admission control function (NSACF) (see Jeong Fig. 1, Fig. 3, [0094] note NSSF 134/NRF/SCP/PCF), wherein the second NF comprises an access and mobility management function (AMF) (see Jeong Fig. 1, Fig. 3, [0098] note AMF 131), a distributed NSACF, a session management function (SMF), or a combination thereof.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected for at least the same reason(s) set forth in claim 6.
Claims 21 and 22
Consider claim 21, Jeong as modified by Lee teaches wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the first NF to receive an indication from the second NF to subscribe for notification associated with the admission control mode of the network slice (see Jeong [0097] note the AMF may request subscription data from the UDM for one or more pieces of subscribed S-NSSAI for the UE).
Claim(s) 22 is/are rejected for at least the same reason(s) set forth in claim 21.
Claims 9 and 16
Consider claim 9, Jeong teaches an apparatus (see Jeong Fig. 1, Fig. 3, AMF 131) for performing a second network function (NF), the apparatus comprising:
at least one memory (see Jeong Fig. 7, [0139] note memory 720); and
at least one processor (see Jeong Fig. 7, [0139] note processor 730) coupled with the at least one memory and configured to cause the apparatus to:
receive a request from a first NF to activate an admission control mode for a network slice based on a number of user equipments (UEs) registered with the network slice being greater than a threshold value, or deactivate the admission control mode for the network slice based on the number of UEs registered with the network slice being less than or equal to the threshold value (see Jeong Fig. 3, [0100]-[0102] note transmitting the NSSelection RESP indicating that the network slice exceeds its allowable quota and therefore failure to select the corresponding network slice), wherein the admission control mode triggers a procedure for UEs availability check for the network slice before transmitting a registration accept message to at least one UE of the number of UEs registered to the network slice, the UE availability check comprising determining if a current number of registered UEs is compliant with a maximum number of UEs allowed to register (see Jeong Fig. 3, Fig. 4, [0100]-[0102], [0115] note upon reception of the NSSelection RESP the AMF performs access control based on the slice information received in the NSSelection RESP the condition of one or more slices requested by the UE before sending the registration accept message to the UE in Fig. 3, step S317).
Jeong fails to teach wherein the threshold value comprises one of: a quota of UEs allowed to register with the network slice, wherein the quota is less than a maximum number of UEs allowed to register; and a percentage of the maximum number of number of UEs allowed to register with the network slice, wherein the percentage is less than the maximum number of UEs allowed to register. Lee teaches configuring information for providing a network slice management function in consideration of quotas for a specific network slice including parameters to determine that the quota reaches or approaches the upper limit, i.e. a threshold value of the ratio, percentage, of the current slice usage to the maximum upper limit (see Lee Fig. 9, [0150], [0153], [0154]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Jeong to include the recited teaching of Lee. Such a modification would improve Jeong by efficiently providing services to a user device using a network slice communication system (see Lee [0011]).
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected for at least the same reason(s) set forth in claim 9.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARCUS C HAMMONDS whose telephone number is (571)270-3193. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10:00AM-6:00PM.
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, ALISON T. SLATER can be reached at (571)270-0375. 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.
/MARCUS HAMMONDS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2647
Prosecution Insights