DETAILED ACTION
Claim(s) 1-8 have been examined and are pending.
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 .
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
The factual inquiries 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 nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over YOUN (US 20230189358 A1) in view of 3GPP TS 23.501 (3GPP TS 23.501 V17.1.0 (2021-06), "3rd Generation Partnership Project; Technical Specification Group Services and System Aspects; System architecture for the 5G System (5GS); Stage 2 (Release 17)", 24 June 2021, Pages 1-526, cited in IDS received November 29, 2024)
In regards to claim 1, YOUN (US 20230189358 A1) teaches a method for a Network Slice Admission Control Function (NSACF) comprising: receiving, from a core network node for session management control and Packet data network Gateway (PGW) Control plane control, a request message to count the number of Protocol Data Unit (PDU) session for a network slice (YOUN teaches a NSACF, a NF, that receives from a core network node for session management control and Packet data network (PGW) Control plane control, PGW-C+SMF, a request, quota control request, to count a number of PDU sessions for a network slice, “[0189] 3. An operator policy related to quota control for a PDU session in a specific network slice may be set in PGW-C+SMF. If an operator policy related to quota control for a PDU session in a specific network slice is set in PGW-C+SMF, PGW-C+SMF may check the operator policy to determine whether to send a quota control request to the NF. The NF may be a network node that controls the allocation of the number of PDN sessions in a specific network slice… [0191]… In step 3, if it is determined that a specific session needs network slice access control, PGW-C+SMF may send a quota control request to the NF. PGW-C+SMF may include information indicating a specific PDU session (e.g., a PDN connection that may be converted to a 5G session by an interworking procedure) in the quota control request message. [0192] 5. If an operator policy for quota control for a PDU session in a specific network slice is set in the NF, the NF may determine a method to be applied to a specific PDN session by checking the operator policy. For example, if the number of currently created PDU sessions for a corresponding network slice exceeds a configured number, the NF may transmit a response to the SMF indicating that the number of PDU sessions in the specific network slice exceeds the quota.”); and
Network Slice Admission Control (NSAC) Feature of YOUN differs from that of claim 1, in that YOUN is silent on not counting the number of the PDU session for the network slice in a case where a User Equipment (UE) with ongoing Protocol Data Network (PDN) connection moves from Evolved Packet Core network (EPC) to 5G Core Network (5GC). Despite these differences similar features have been seen in other prior art involving NSAC. 3GPP TS 23.501, for example teaches a feature for NSAC involving not counting the number of the PDU session for the network slice in a case where a User Equipment (UE) with ongoing Protocol Data Network (PDN) connection moves from Evolved Packet Core network (EPC) to 5G Core Network (5GC) ([TS 23.501, Page 230]“When the UE with ongoing PDN connection(s) moves from EPC to 5GC, or from 5GC to EPC, the session continuity is guaranteed as the admission was granted at the time of PDN connection establishment, i.e. the number of PDU session is not counted again in 5GC.”).
Thus based upon the features of 3GPP TS 23.501 it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the NSAC feature of YOUN, by adopting a feature for not counting the number of the PDU session for the network slice in a case where a User Equipment (UE) with ongoing Protocol Data Network (PDN) connection moves from Evolved Packet Core network (EPC) to 5G Core Network (5GC), as seen in the NSAC feature of 3GPP TS 23.501, to thus arrive at in claim 1, in order to provide an efficient/effective NSAC feature for roaming/handover.
In regards to claim 5, YOUN (US 20230189358 A1) teaches a Network Slice Admission Control Function (NSACF) comprising: a memory; and at least one processor configured to access the memory and configured to (“[0072] The one or more processors 102 and 202 may be referred to as controllers, microcontrollers, microprocessors, or microcomputers. The one or more processors 102 and 202 may be implemented by hardware, firmware, software, or a combination thereof. As an example, one or more application specific integrated circuits (ASICs), one or more digital signal processors (DSPs), one or more digital signal processing devices (DSPDs), one or more programmable logic devices (PLDs), or one or more field programmable gate arrays (FPGAs) may be included in the one or more processors 102 and 202. The descriptions, functions, procedures, suggestions, methods and/or operational flowcharts disclosed in the present disclosure may be implemented using firmware or software and the firmware or software may be configured to include the modules, procedures, or functions. Firmware or software configured to perform the descriptions, functions, procedures, suggestions, methods and/or operational flowcharts disclosed in the present disclosure may be included in the one or more processors 102 and 202 or stored in the one or more memories 104 and 204 so as to be driven by the one or more processors 102 and 202. The descriptions, functions, procedures, suggestions, methods and/or operational flowcharts disclosed in the present disclosure may be implemented using firmware or software in the form of code, commands, and/or a set of commands.”): receive, from a core network node for session management control and Packet data network Gateway (PGW) Control plane control, a request message to count the number of Protocol Data Unit (PDU) session for a network slice (YOUN teaches a NSACF, a NF, that receives from a core network node for session management control and Packet data network (PGW) Control plane control, PGW-C+SMF, a request, quota control request, to count a number of PDU sessions for a network slice, “[0189] 3. An operator policy related to quota control for a PDU session in a specific network slice may be set in PGW-C+SMF. If an operator policy related to quota control for a PDU session in a specific network slice is set in PGW-C+SMF, PGW-C+SMF may check the operator policy to determine whether to send a quota control request to the NF. The NF may be a network node that controls the allocation of the number of PDN sessions in a specific network slice… [0191]… In step 3, if it is determined that a specific session needs network slice access control, PGW-C+SMF may send a quota control request to the NF. PGW-C+SMF may include information indicating a specific PDU session (e.g., a PDN connection that may be converted to a 5G session by an interworking procedure) in the quota control request message. [0192] 5. If an operator policy for quota control for a PDU session in a specific network slice is set in the NF, the NF may determine a method to be applied to a specific PDN session by checking the operator policy. For example, if the number of currently created PDU sessions for a corresponding network slice exceeds a configured number, the NF may transmit a response to the SMF indicating that the number of PDU sessions in the specific network slice exceeds the quota.”);
Network Slice Admission Control (NSAC) Feature of YOUN differs from that of claim 5, in that YOUN is silent on not counting a number of the PDU sessions for the network slice in a case where a User Equipment (UE) with ongoing Protocol Data Network (PDN) connection moves from Evolved Packet Core network (EPC) to 5G Core Network (5GC). Despite these differences similar features have been seen in other prior art involving NSAC. 3GPP TS 23.501, for example teaches a feature for NSAC involving not counting the number of the PDU session for the network slice in a case where a User Equipment (UE) with ongoing Protocol Data Network (PDN) connection moves from Evolved Packet Core network (EPC) to 5G Core Network (5GC) ([TS 23.501, Page 230]“When the UE with ongoing PDN connection(s) moves from EPC to 5GC, or from 5GC to EPC, the session continuity is guaranteed as the admission was granted at the time of PDN connection establishment, i.e. the number of PDU session is not counted again in 5GC.”).
Thus based upon the features of 3GPP TS 23.501 it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the NSAC feature of YOUN, by adopting a feature for not counting a number of the PDU sessions for the network slice in a case where a User Equipment (UE) with ongoing Protocol Data Network (PDN) connection moves from Evolved Packet Core network (EPC) to 5G Core Network (5GC), as seen in the NSAC feature of 3GPP TS 23.501, to thus arrive at in claim 5, in order to provide an efficient/effective NSAC feature for roaming/handover.
In regards to claim(s) 2 and 6, YOUN teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the counting is to increase or decrease the number of the PDU session for the network slice (“[0167] A network control node (e.g., session management function (SMF)) may check the limit control policy defined by the operator. The network control node may determine whether to send a limit control request message to a limit control network node (e.g., a network function (NF)). The network control node may include information about a specially managed PDU session in the limit control request message. The limit control request message may include information indicating what type of session the network control node manages. The limit control request message may include information on an information network slice index management node (e.g., NWDAF. NSSF or a new network node including a corresponding function) that can affect the increase or decrease of the limit session number… [0174] When this kind of a PDU session is established, the operator may configure the counter to increment by a specific value (e.g., one or two). When this kind of a PDU session is released, the operator may configure the counter to decrement by a specific value (e.g., 1 or 2). When a PDU session of this kind is modified (e.g., adding/removing ULCL or BP, adding/removing one access to MA PDU, etc.), the operator may set the counter to a specific value (e.g. one or two) or may maintain the counter without incrementing/decreasing to the same value. For quota control for each operator, the PDN connection established in the EPC associated with S-NSSAI (Single Network Slice Selection Assistance Information) for interworking between EPC and 5GC may be considered. When this kind of PDN connection is established, the operator may configure it to increment the counter by a certain value (e.g. 1) or may maintain the counter at the same value without incrementing. When this kind of PDN connection is disconnected, the operator may configure the counter to decrement by a certain value (e.g. 1) or may maintain the counter at the same value without incrementing it. When this kind of PDN connection is delivered to the PDU session through the interworking procedure, the operator may configure the counter to increment by a specific value (e.g., 1) or may maintain the counter at the same value without increasing.”)
In regards to claim(s) 3 and 7, YOUN teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the core network node for session management control and Packet data network Gateway (PGW) Control plane control is a SMF+PGW-C (“[0189] 3. An operator policy related to quota control for a PDU session in a specific network slice may be set in PGW-C+SMF. If an operator policy related to quota control for a PDU session in a specific network slice is set in PGW-C+SMF, PGW-C+SMF may check the operator policy to determine whether to send a quota control request to the NF. The NF may be a network node that controls the allocation of the number of PDN sessions in a specific network slice… [0191]… In step 3, if it is determined that a specific session needs network slice access control, PGW-C+SMF may send a quota control request to the NF. PGW-C+SMF may include information indicating a specific PDU session (e.g., a PDN connection that may be converted to a 5G session by an interworking procedure) in the quota control request message. [0192] 5. If an operator policy for quota control for a PDU session in a specific network slice is set in the NF, the NF may determine a method to be applied to a specific PDN session by checking the operator policy. For example, if the number of currently created PDU sessions for a corresponding network slice exceeds a configured number, the NF may transmit a response to the SMF indicating that the number of PDU sessions in the specific network slice exceeds the quota.”).
In regards to claim(s) 4 and 8, YOUN teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the moving from the EPC to 5GC is a handover from the EPC to the 5GC (“[0199] ii) If the corresponding PDN connection is a PDN connection requiring interworking, step b is skipped and step c is performed. Because an event related to the PDN connection has already occurred during the attach procedure, step b is skipped. A PDN connection for interworking has been established, and an interworking procedure may be performed. During the handover procedure from ECS to 5GS, the P-GW+SMF may recognize the handover situation of the PDN connection requiring interworking. In this case, step b is skipped and step c is performed.”).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TARELL A HAMPTON whose telephone number is (571)270-7162. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM.
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, Ayaz Sheikh can be reached at 5712723795. 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.
/TARELL A HAMPTON/Examiner, Art Unit 2476
/PHIRIN SAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2476