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 .
Claims 1-20 are presented for examination.
This action is in response to amendment filed on November 11, 2025.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 5-8, 12-15, 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Velev et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2024/0236912 A1 (hereinafter Velev).
As per claims 1, 8, 15, Velev discloses a first wireless transmit/receive unit (WTRU) (see all wireless devices can be Wireless Transmit/Receive Unit WTRU on page 4 section [0046-0047]), the first WTRU (see UE 205 as the first WTRU as claimed on page 6 section [0073] and Figure 3 and see all wireless device devices including UE can be wireless transmit/receive unit WTRU on page 4 section [0047]) comprising: a processor that is configured to:
determine that an application provides a service and that the service can be used remotely (see UE 205, or first WTRU as claimed, determining S-NSSAI#1 network slice that provides remote network service, or application providing a server as claimed, to be useable and requiring registration on page 6 section [0073] and Figure 3);
send a first message to a second WTRU based on the determination (see sending a service NAS registration request 309 to AMF2 245, or second WTRU as claimed, on page 6 section [0035] and see AMF2 transmitting and receiving data from UE in RAN2, operating as Wireless Transmit/Receive Unit WTRU on page 3 section [0042]), wherein the first message indicates an identification of the service (see requesting S-NSSAI#1, or identification of the server as claimed on page 6 section [0075]) and indicates a set of transport parameters (see other parameters, or transport parameters as claimed, on page 6 section [0075] and see parameters including configuration, resource assignment, policies pertaining to transport on page 13 section [0177]);
receive a second message from the second WTRU (see UE205 receiving a NAS registration accept message 317 on page 7 section [0079] and Figure 3), wherein the second message indicates that the second WTRU has created a resource associated with the service (see AMF2 245, or second WTRU as claimed, completed registration request and allowed resource service on requested S-NSSAI#1 on page 7 section [0079]), and wherein the second message indicates that the service has been registered with the second WTRU (see AMF2 245, or second WTRU as claimed, completed registration request on page 7 section [0079]); and
send a third message to the second WTRU using at least one transport parameter from the set of transport parameters (see using S-NSSAI#1 parameters to access the communication network on page 6 section [0074]), wherein the third message comprises data associated with the service that has been registered (see communicating with AMF2 245, or second WTRU as claimed, on page 6 section [0068] after UE205, or first WTRU as claimed, granted access for S-NSSAI#1 for network services on page 6 section [0069]).
As per claims 5, 12, 18, Velev discloses the first WTRU of claims claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to: send a service update message to the second WTRU, wherein the service update message indicates that there has been a modification of data associated with the service (see updating request 323 for connections on page 9 section [0113] and see updating request message 323 for UE service status on page 7 section [0087]).
As per claims 6, 13, 19, Velev discloses the first WTRU of claims claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to: send a deregistration request message to the second WTRU, wherein the deregistration request message indicates a request for the second WTRU to deregister the service; and receive a deregistration response message, wherein the deregistration response message indicates that the service has been deregistered (see deregistration request 319 for UE subscription change with response return message return arrow on page 7 section [0080] and Figure 3).
As per claims 7, 14, 20, Velev discloses the first WTRU of claims claim 1, wherein the first message is sent via an interface, the second message is received via the interface, and the third message is sent via the interface (see using application and network interfaces and example of interface types such as 3GPP on page 12 section [0173]).
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.
Claims 2-3, 9-10, 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Velev et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2024/0236912 A1 (hereinafter Velev) above, and further in view of Kunz et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2024/0129723 A1 (hereinafter Kunz).
As per claims 2, 9, 16, Velev do not disclose expressly: first WTRU of claim 1, wherein the second WTRU is at least one of a multi-access edge computing (MEC) device, a constrained MEC device, or an MEC device associated with a Telco Edge node.
Kunz teaches: wherein the second WTRU is at least one of a multi-access edge computing (MEC) device, a constrained MEC device, or an MEC device associated with a Telco Edge node (see multi-access edge (MEC) computing service on page 1 section [0009] and see user equipment requesting access to the MEC services on page 1 section [0010]).
Velev and Kunz are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor, WTRU service network systems. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to use multi-access edge computing (MEC) device to provide service. The motivation for doing so would have been able to have the ability to access multi-access edge computing service of a mobile wireless communication network (see page 1 section [0005] in Kunz). Therefore, it would have been obvious o combine Velev and Kunz for the benefit of using a multi-access edge computing (MEC) device to obtain the invention as specified in claims 2, 9, 16.
As per claims 3, 10, Velev and Kunz discloses the first WTRU of claim 1, wherein the first WTRU is at least one of a multi-access edge computing (MEC) device, a constrained MEC, or a server node (see multi-access edge (MEC) computing service on page 1 section [0009] and see user equipment requesting access to the MEC services on page 1 section [0010] and see WTRU EAS 216 requesting service from WTRU EES 214 on page 7 section [0079] and Figure 2 in Kunz). The motivation to combine is same as above.
Claims 4, 11, 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Velev et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2024/0236912 A1 (hereinafter Velev) above, and further in view of Chai et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2015/0043558 A1 (hereinafter Choi).
As per claims 4, 11, 17, Velev do not disclose expressly: wherein the processor is further configured to: send a negotiation request message to the second WTRU indicating a transport data type; and receive a negotiation response message from the second WTRU indicating the at least one transport parameter from the set of transport parameters.
Choi teaches: wherein the processor is further configured to: send a negotiation request message to the second WTRU indicating a transport data type; and receive a negotiation response message from the second WTRU indicating the at least one transport parameter from the set of transport parameters (see wireless AP and STAs sending negotiation request and responses of different data types to set up network connection on page 11 section [0171]).
Velev and Choi are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor, WTRU service network systems. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to use negotiation request and response to set up wireless connection. The motivation for doing so would have been able to set up transmission access window (see page 11 section [0171] in Choi). Therefore, it would have been obvious o combine Velev and Choi for the benefit of using negotiation request and response to obtain the invention as specified in claims 4, 11, 17.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed November 11, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
As per claims 1, 8, 15, the applicant asserts that Velev do not disclose expressly: “a first message to a second WTRU” because AMF2 is different from UE and thus cannot be a WTRU (see Remarks on page 7). The examiner respectfully disagrees.
Velev disclose expressly WTRU is a wireless transmit/receive unit, or any unit capable of transmit or receiving radio transmission (see page 4 section [0046]).
Velev disclose expressly user equipment UE can be WTRU (see page 4 section [0047]). Hence UE can be a WTRU and is mapped to the first WTRU as claimed.
Velev disclose expressly AMF2 is providing communication service to UE in RAN2 area and thus can be WTRU (see page 3 section [0042]). Hence AMF2 can be a WTRU and is mapped to the second WTRU as claimed.
As per claims 1, 8, 15, the applicant asserts that Velev do not disclose expressly: “and indicates a set of transport parameters” because Velev only discloses identification parameters (see Remarks on page 7). The examiner respectfully disagrees.
Velev disclose expressly: indicates a set of transport parameters (see other parameters, or transport parameters as claimed, on page 6 section [0075] and see parameters including configuration, resource assignment, policies pertaining to transport on page 13 section [0177]). Velev disclose parameters can used for transport policies and configurations as claimed.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALAN S CHOU whose telephone number is (571)272-5779. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00-5:00 EST.
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, Chris L Parry can be reached at (571)272-8328. 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.
/ALAN S CHOU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2451