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 is a final action for application number 18/568,397 in response to an amendment filed on 03/31/2026; the original application filed on 12/08/2023.
Claims 1-13 are currently pending and have been considered below.
Claims 1, 5, 6 and 10 are independent claims.
Claims 11-13 are new.
Claims 1-3, 5-8 and 10 have been amended.
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ arguments with respect to claims 1-13 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.
Claims 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (US 2020/0053643 A1) in view of Mahmoud et al. (GB 2612708 A).
Regarding claims 1 and 5, a User Equipment (UE), [Figure 10 illustrates a UE, (Lee et al., Paragraph 42)], comprising:
at least one memory, [Figure 10, Ref # 930], and at least one hardware processor coupled to the at least one memory, [Figure 10, Ref # 910], wherein the at least one hardware processor is configured to:
communicate with a communication apparatus, [Figure 6, wherein the UE 610 is in communication with RAN 615],
and send a registration request message, [Figure 6, Ref # 635 and 640 wherein RAN 615 receives a registration request from the UE, (Lee et al., Paragraph 107)],
wherein the registration request message includes Requested Network Slice Selection Assistance Information (NSSAI) for a first access, [the UE 610 may cause the requested
NSSAI 635 generated by the UE 610 to be included in the registration request message 640, (Lee et al., Paragraph 108)],
wherein the Requested NSSAI includes first Single Network Slice Selection Assistance Information (S-NSSAI), [the UE 610 may cause a slice group ID to which S-NSSAIs included in the requested NSSAI 635 generated by the UE 610 belong to be included in the registration request message 640, (Lee et al., Paragraph 108)],
wherein the first S-NSSAI shares a Network Slice Simultaneous Registration Group (NSSRG) value common to second S-NSSAI of Allowed NSSAI for a second access, [Figure 1, wherein S-NSSAI #1 and NSSAI #2 are part of Slice Group 1, the S-NSSAI #1 and the S-NSSAI #2 and the SG ID 1 that is a slice group ID to which the S-NSSAIs belong may be included as requested NSSAIs requested by the UE 610 in the registration request message 640, (Lee et al., Paragraph 108)],
Lee et al. fails to explicitly teach that an access type of the first access is different from an access type of the second access,
Mahmoud et al. teaches that the pending NSSAI includes an indication of at least one second S-NSSAI which were indicated in a previous request, received from the UE, over a second access technology different to the first access technology, (Mahmoud et al., Paragraph 22),
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to modify Lee et al. by including that an access type of the first access is different from an access type of the second access, (Mahmoud et al., Paragraph 22), in order to determine whether the requested S.NSSAI is for an additional network slice while NSSAI is pending, (Mahmoud et al., Paragraph 19).
Regarding claims 2 and 7, the method further comprising receiving, from the communication apparatus, information related to the NSSRG value, [the network slice information and the slice group information included in the connection setup response message 230, (Lee et al., Paragraph 75)].
Regarding claims 3 and 8, the method wherein the information related to the NSSRG value is included in a registration accept message, [The AMF 620 may transmit registration accept messages 665 and 670 to the UE 610, (Lee et al., Paragraph 118)].
Regarding claims 4 and 9, the method wherein the communication apparatus is an Access and Mobility Management Function (AMF), [Figure 6, Ref # 620].
Regarding claims 6 and 10, a communication apparatus, [Figure 10 illustrates a network entity], comprising:
at least one memory, [Figure 10 Network Entity 210 including memory 1030],
and at least one hardware processor coupled to the at least one memory, [Figure 10 Network Entity 210 including processor 1010]
wherein the at least one hardware processor is configured to:
communicate with a User Equipment (UE), [Figure 6, wherein Network Entity “RAN 615” OR “AMF 620” communicates with “UE 610”],
and receive a registration request message, [Figure 6, Ref # 635 and 640 wherein RAN 615 receives a registration request from the UE, (Lee et al., Paragraph 107)],
wherein the registration request message includes Requested Network Slice Selection Assistance Information (NSSAI) for a first access, [the UE 610 may cause the requested
NSSAI 635 generated by the UE 610 to be included in the registration request message 640, (Lee et al., Paragraph 108)],
wherein the Requested NSSAI includes first Single Network Slice Selection Assistance Information (S-NSSAI), [the UE 610 may cause a slice group ID to which S-NSSAIs included in the requested NSSAI 635 generated by the UE 610 belong to be included in the registration request message 640, (Lee et al., Paragraph 108)],
wherein the first S-NSSAI shares Network Slice Simultaneous Registration Group (NSSRG) value common to second S-NSSAI of Allowed NSSAI for a second access, [Figure 1, wherein S-NSSAI #1 and NSSAI #2 are part of Slice Group 1, he S-NSSAI #1 and the S-NSSAI #2 and the SG ID 1 that is a slice group ID to which the S-NSSAIs belong may be included as requested NSSAIs requested by the UE 610 in the registration request message 640, (Lee et al., Paragraph 108)],
Lee et al. fails to explicitly teach that an access type of the first access is different from an access type of the second access,
Mahmoud et al. teaches that the pending NSSAI includes an indication of at least one second S-NSSAI which were indicated in a previous request, received from the UE, over a second access technology different to the first access technology, (Mahmoud et al., Paragraph 22),
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to modify Lee et al. by including that an access type of the first access is different from an access type of the second access, (Mahmoud et al., Paragraph 22), in order to determine whether the requested S.NSSAI is for an additional network slice while NSSAI is pending, (Mahmoud et al., Paragraph 19).
Regarding claims 11 and 13, the method according to claim 1, wherein one of the access type of the first access and the access type of the second access is a 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) access and the other of the access type of the first access and the access type of the second access is a non-3GPP access, [if a slice is successfully authorized, then it is considered as authorized for both access types (i.e. 3GPP and non-3GPP access type, (Mahmoud et al., Paragraph 4)].
Regarding claim 12, the method according to claim 1, wherein the registration request message is sent to the communication apparatus, [Lee et al., Figure 2, Ref # 220].
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 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 Shukri Taha whose telephone number is 571-270-1921. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:30am-5pm Mon-Fri.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Joseph Avellino can be reached on 571-272-3905.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR.
Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/SHUKRI TAHA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2478
Prosecution Insights