CTNF 18/664,151 CTNF 89113 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Status of Claims: Claims 1-20 are pending in Instant Application. Priority Priority is not claimed. Double Patenting 08-33 AIA The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg , 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman , 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi , 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum , 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel , 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington , 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA/25, or PTO/AIA/26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. 08-35 AIA Claim s 1-20 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim s 1-20 of copending Application No. 18/664,139 . Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they are drawn to obvious variations . This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented. Claims of Instant Application Claims of Co-pending Application18/664,139 Reasons 1. A first network entity for wireless communication, the first network entity comprising: at least one memory; and at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory and configured to cause the first network entity to: in response to a mobility of a device indicating impending transfer from a source edge data network service area supported by the first network entity to a target edge data network service area: identify a first network slice associated with the source edge data network service area, wherein the first network slice supports a vertical application layer (VAL) service for the device; determine a second network slice associated with the target edge data network service area, wherein the second network slice is capable of supporting the VAL service for the device; and communicate, to the device, according to a hypertext markup transfer protocol using a custom notify method, a slice configuration associated with the second network slice to maintain a continuity of the VAL service for the device. 1. A first network entity for wireless communication, the first network entity comprising: at least one memory; and at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory and configured to cause the first network entity to: in response to a mobility of a device indicating impending transfer from a source network entity to a target network entity: identify a first network slice associated with the source network entity, wherein the first network slice supports a vertical application layer (VAL) service for the device; determine a second network slice associated with the target network entity, wherein the second network slice is capable for supporting the VAL service for the device; and communicate, to the device, according to a hypertext markup transfer protocol using a custom notify method, a slice configuration associated with the second network slice to maintain a continuity of the VAL service for the device. The instant claim is narrower than the co-pending claim because it recites source and target edge data network service areas instead of the more broadly recited source and target network entities. Claims of Instant Application Claims of Co-pending Application18/664,139 Reasons 2. The first network entity of claim 1, wherein: the slice configuration comprises a uniform resource locator (URL) address associated with a notify path, and the at least one processor is configured to cause the first network entity to: communicate with a second network entity in the target edge data network service area to determine the second network slice. 2. The first network entity of claim 1, wherein: the slice configuration comprises a uniform resource locator (URL) address associated with a notify path; the first network entity comprises a service enabler architecture layer network slice capability enablement (SNSCE) server; the source network entity comprises a source Public Land Mobile Network (PLMN); the target network entity comprises a target PLMN; and the device comprises an SNSCE client . See also claim 9. Similar limitations, except that the co-pending recites PLMN. 3. The first network entity of claim 2, wherein: the first network entity comprises a source service enabler architecture layer network slice capability enablement (SNSCE) server in the source edge data network service area; the second network entity comprises a target SNSCE server in the target edge data network service area; and the device comprises an SNSCE client. 4. The first network entity of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the first network entity to: receive, from the device, one of: (i) a hypertext markup transfer protocol (HTTP) 204 no content status code; or (ii) a HTTP status code respectively indicating success or failure of the device receiving the slice configuration; and 3. The first network entity of claim 2, wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the first network entity to: receive, from the device, one of: (i) a hypertext markup transfer protocol (HTTP) 204 no content status code from the device; and (ii) a HTTP status respectively indicating success or failure of the device receiving the slice configuration; and Same claim limitations. Claims of Instant Application Claims of Co-pending Application18/664,139 Reasons record an indication of the received one of the HTTP no content status code or the HTTP status code. record an indication of the received HTTP 204 no content status code or the HTTP status code. Same claim limitations. 5. The first network entity of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the first network entity to: communicate using a first application programming interface with a vertical application layer server that supports the vertical application layer service (API); and communicate with the device using a second API. 4. The first network entity of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the first network entity to: communicate with each of the source network entity and the target network entity using a first application programming interface (API); and communicate with the device using a second API. Similar claim limitations. 6. The first network entity of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the first network entity to: communicate using a first application programming interface (API), with both the device and a vertical application layer server associated with the vertical application layer service. 5. The first network entity of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the first network entity to: communicate with each of the source network entity, the target network entity, and the device using a first application programming interface (API). Similar claim limitations. 7. The first network entity of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the first network entity to: determine the mobility of the device indicates impending transfer from the source edge data network service area to the target edge data network service area based on receiving a request from a VAL server that provides the VAL service. 6. The first network entity of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the first network entity to: determine the mobility of the device indicates impending transfer from the source network entity to the target network entity based on receiving a request from a VAL server associated with the VAL service. Similar claim limitations. Claims of Instant Application Claims of Co-pending Application18/664,139 Reasons 8. The first network entity of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the first network entity to: determine whether the first network slice supports a quality of service (QOS) requirement associated with the VAL service; and determine the mobility of the device indicates impending transfer from the source edge data network service area to the target edge data network service area based at least in part on determining that the first network slice does not support the QoS requirement associated with the VAL service. 7. The first network entity of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the first network entity to: determine whether the first network slice supports a quality of service (QoS) requirement associated with the VAL service from the source network entity; and determine the mobility of the device indicates impending transfer from the source network entity to the target network entity based at least in part on determining that the first network slice does not support of the QoS requirement associated with the VAL service from the target network entity. Similar claim limitations. 9. A processor for wireless communication at a first network entity, the processor comprising: at least one controller coupled with at least one memory and configured to cause the processor to: in response to a mobility of a device indicating impending transfer from a source edge data network service area supported by the first network entity to a target edge data network service area: identify a first network slice associated with the source edge data network service area, wherein the first network slice supports a vertical application layer (VAL) service for the device; 8. A processor for wireless communication at a first network entity, the processor comprising: at least one controller coupled with at least one memory and configured to cause the processor to: in response to a mobility of a device indicating impending transfer from a source network entity to a target network entity: identify a first network slice associated with the source network entity, wherein the first network slice supports a vertical application layer (VAL) service for the device; Same reason as claim 1. Claims of Instant Application Claims of Co-pending Application18/664,139 Reasons determine a second network slice associated with the target edge data network service area, wherein the second network slice is capable of supporting the VAL service for the device; and communicate, according to a hypertext markup transfer protocol using a custom notify method, a slice configuration associated with the second network slice to maintain continuity of the VAL service for the device. determine a second network slice associated with the target network entity, wherein the second network slice is capable for supporting the VAL service for the device; and communicate, to the device, according to a hypertext markup transfer protocol using a custom notify method, a slice configuration associated with the second network slice to maintain a continuity of the VAL service for the device. Same reason as claim 1. 10. A method for wireless communication at a first network entity, the method comprising: in response to a mobility of a device indicating impending transfer from a source edge data network service area supported by the first network entity to a target edge data network service area: identifying a first network slice associated with the source edge data network service area, wherein the first network slice supports a vertical application layer (VAL) service for the device; determining a second network slice associated with the target edge data network service area, wherein the second network slice is capable of supporting the VAL service for the device; and 10. A method for wireless communication at a first network entity, the method comprising: in response to a mobility of a device indicating impending transfer from a source network entity to a target network entity : identifying a first network slice associated with the source network entity , wherein the first network slice supports a vertical application layer (VAL) service for the device; determining a second network slice associated with the target network entity, wherein the second network slice is capable for supporting the VAL service for the device; and Same reason as claim 1. Claims of Instant Application Claims of Co-pending Application18/664,139 Reasons communicating, according to a hypertext markup transfer protocol using a custom notify method, a slice configuration associated with the second network slice to maintain a continuity of the VAL service for the device. communicating to the device , according to a hypertext markup transfer protocol using a custom notify method, a slice configuration associated with the second network slice to maintain a continuity of the VAL service for the device. Same reason as claim 1. 11. The method of claim 10, wherein communicating the slice configuration comprises a uniform resource locator (URL) address associated with a notify path, and the method further comprises: communicating with a second network entity in the target edge data network service area to determine the second network slice. 11. The method of claim 10, wherein : the slice configuration comprises a uniform resource locator (URL) address associated with a notify path; the first network entity comprises a service enabler architecture layer network slice capability enablement (SNSCE) server; the source network entity comprises a source Public Land Mobile Network (PLMN); the target network entity comprises a target PLMN ; and the device comprises an SNSCE client. See also claim 9. Same reason as claims 2 and 3. 12. The method of claim 11, wherein: the first network entity comprises a source service enabler architecture layer network slice capability enablement (SNSCE) server in the source edge data network service area; the second network entity comprises a target SNSCE server in the target edge data network service area; and the device comprises an SNSCE client. 13. The method of claim 10, further comprising: receiving one of: (i) a hypertext markup transfer protocol (HTTP) 204 no content status code; or 12. The method of claim 11, further comprising: receiving, from the device, one of: (i) a hypertext markup transfer protocol (HTTP) 204 no content status code from the device; and Similar claim limitations. Claims of Instant Application Claims of Co-pending Application18/664,139 Reasons (ii) a HTTP status code respectively indicating success or failure of the device receiving the slice configuration; and recording an indication of the received one of the HTTP no content status code or the HTTP status code. (ii) a HTTP status respectively indicating success or failure of the device receiving the slice configuration; and recording an indication of the received HTTP 204 no content status code or the HTTP status code. Similar claim limitations 14. The method of claim 10, further comprising: determining the mobility of the device indicates impending transfer from the source edge data network service area to the target edge data network service area based on receiving a request from a VAL server that provides the VAL service. 15. The method of claim 10, further comprising: determining the mobility of the device indicates impending transfer from the source network entity to the target network entity based on receiving a request from a VAL server associated with the VAL service. Similar claim limitations 15. The method of claim 10, further comprising: determining whether the first network slice supports a quality of service (QOS) requirement associated with the VAL service; and determining the mobility of the device indicates impending transfer from the source edge data network service area to the target edge data network service area based at least in part on determining that the first network slice does not support the QoS requirement associated with the VAL service. 16. The method of claim 10, further comprising: determining whether the first network slice supports a quality of service (QoS) requirement associated with the VAL service from the source network entity; and determining the mobility of the device indicates impending transfer from the source network entity to the target network entity based at least in part on determining that the first network slice does not support of the QoS requirement associated with the VAL service from the target network entity. Similar claim limitations Claims of Instant Application Claims of Co-pending Application18/664,139 Reasons 16. A device for wireless communication, the device comprising: at least one memory; and at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory and configured to cause the device to: communicate with a source edge data network service area to receive a vertical application layer (VAL) service supported by a first network slice; and receive, from a first network entity according to a hypertext markup transfer protocol using a custom notify method, a slice configuration associated with a second network slice to maintain a continuity of the VAL service for the device; perform a transfer to a target edge data network area; and communicate with the target edge data network area using the slice configuration to receive the VAL service supported by the second network slice. 17. A device for wireless communication, the device comprising: at least one memory; and at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory and configured to cause the device to: communicate with a source network entity to receive a vertical application layer (VAL) service supported by a first network slice; receive, from a first network entity according to a hypertext markup transfer protocol using a custom notify method, a slice configuration associated with a second network slice to maintain continuity of the VAL service for the device; perform a transfer to a target network entity; and communicate with the target network entity using the slice configuration of the second network slice to receive the VAL service supported by the second network slice. Same reason as claim 1. 17. The device of claim 16, wherein: the slice configuration comprises a uniform resource locator (URL) address associated with a notify path; the first network entity comprises a source service enabler architecture layer network slice capability enablement (SNSCE) server in the source edge data network service area; 18. The device of claim 17 , wherein: the first network entity comprises a service enabler architecture layer network slice capability enablement (SNSCE) server; the source network entity comprises a source Public Land Mobile Network (PLMN); the target network entity comprises a target PLMN; and the device comprises an SNSCE client . Same reason as claims 2-3. Claims of Instant Application Claims of Co-pending Application18/664,139 Reasons the at least one memory comprises an SNSCE client; and the at least one processor is configured to cause the device to communicate, via the target edge data network service area, with a second network entity comprising a target SNSCE server in the target edge data network service area to maintain VAL service continuity subsequent to performing the transfer to the target edge data network area. See also claim 9. Same reason as claims 2-3. 18. The device of claim 16, wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the device to: determine whether the slice configuration is successfully received; and communicate, via the source edge data network service area to the first network entity, a hypertext markup transfer protocol (HTTP) 204 no content status code in response to determining that the slice configuration is successfully received. 19. The device of claim 17 , wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the device to: determine whether the slice configuration is successfully received; and communicate, via the source network entity to the first network entity, a hypertext markup transfer protocol (HTTP) 204 no content status code in response to determining that the slice configuration is successfully received. Similar claim limitations 19. The device of claim 16, wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the device to: determine whether the slice configuration is successfully received; and 20. The device of claim 17 , wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the device to: determine whether the slice configuration is successfully received; and Similar claim limitations. Claims of Instant Application Claims of Co-pending Application18/664,139 Reasons communicate, via the source edge data network service area to the first network entity, a hypertext markup transfer protocol (HTTP) status code indicating failure in response to determining that the slice configuration is not successfully received. communicate, via the source network entity to the first network entity, a hypertext markup transfer protocol (HTTP) status code indicating failure in response to determining that the slice configuration is not successfully received. Similar claim limitations 20. The device of claim 16, wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the device to: communicate, via the source edge data network service area, using a first application programming interface (API) with a vertical application layer server that supports the vertical application layer service; and communicate, via the source edge data network service area, with the first network entity using a second API. Claims 4, 5, 13, 14 Same reason as above. 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co. , 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1-2 , 5-7 , 9-11 , 14-16 , and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Adjakple et al. ( U.S. Publication No. 2024/0236835 ) in view of Shah et al. ( U.S. Publication No. 2026/0100989 ), and further in view of Sangameshwara et al. ( U.S. Publication No. 2024/0380824 ) . As per claim 1, Adjakple discloses a first network entity for wireless communication ( Adjakple: paragraph 0009; an apparatus may include a UE ), the first network entity comprising: at least one memory ( Adjakple: paragraph 0009; a memory ); and at least one processor ( Adjakple: paragraph 0009; a processor ) coupled with the at least one memory ( Adjakple: paragraph 0009; The memory may store instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause the apparatus to perform one or more operations ) and configured to cause the first network entity to: in response to a mobility of a device indicating impending transfer from a source edge data network service area supported by the first network entity to a target edge data network service area ( Adjakple: paragraph 0006; when the UE moves, the application located at the old edge network may not be suitable…paragraph 0094; Each DNN Replacement rule may consist of one or more “Original DNN”, a “Replacement DNN” and service area information where the rules may be applied…paragraph 0140; Original DNN should be replaced with Replacement DNN #2 in service area #2 ): identify a first network slice associated with the source edge data network service area ( Adjakple: paragraph 0144; the DNN Replacement Rules may be slice-based…the DNN Replacement Rules information element may indicate to the UE that the replacement rules only apply to certain slices. The slices may be identified by an S-NSSAI. In another alternative, the DNN Replacement Rule information element may indicate to the UE that the replacement rules only apply to certain slices…paragraph 0094; service area information where the rules may be applied ); determine a second network slice associated with the target edge data network service area ( Adjakple: paragraph 0144; the DNN Replacement Rules may be slice-based…the DNN Replacement Rules information element may indicate to the UE that the replacement rules only apply to certain slices. The slices may be identified by an S-NSSAI. In another alternative, the DNN Replacement Rule information element may indicate to the UE that the replacement rules only apply to certain slices…paragraph 0094; service area information where the rules may be applied…paragraph 0140; Original DNN should be replaced with Replacement DNN #2 in service area #2 ); and communicate, to the device, a slice configuration associated with the second network slice to maintain a continuity of the VAL service for the device ( Adjakple: paragraph 0232; The proposed augmentation of the SF traffic influence request also provides the SMF with information about DNN replacement and application requirements for EAS relocation before the session continuity procedure is performed ). However Adjakple does not explicitly mention wherein the first network slice supports a vertical application layer (VAL) service for the device; and wherein the second network slice is capable of supporting the VAL service for the device. However Shah teaches: wherein the first network slice supports a vertical application layer (VAL) service for the device ( Shah: paragraph 0003; network slicing for providing a dedicated network specialized to a specific service…paragraph 0008; A method performed by a vertical application layer (VAL) server in a wireless communication system…paragraph 0083; the VAL service area controller configures at least one VAL service area ID based on a VAL service area ); and wherein the second network slice is capable of supporting the VAL service for the device ( Shah: paragraph 0003; network slicing for providing a dedicated network specialized to a specific service…paragraph 0008; A method performed by a vertical application layer (VAL) server in a wireless communication system…paragraph 0192; The Entity-1 provides the service enabler layer support functions for Avatar management to the VAL client(s) ); Therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in Shah with the teachings as in Adjakple. The motivation for doing so would have been for providing methods and wireless networks for including Vertical Application Layer (VAL) Service Area and service enabler layer support functions for VAL client(s) ( Shah: paragraphs 0001 and 0192 ). However Adjakple and Shah do not explicitly mention according to a hypertext markup transfer protocol using a custom notify method. However Sangameshwara teaches: communicate, to the device, according to a hypertext markup transfer protocol using a custom notify method ( Sangameshwara: paragraph 0024; send an HTTP response to the SNM-S upon matching the ID received in the channel ID parameter associated with the HTTP POST request with the locally stored channel ID at the SNM-C, process a VAL notification message list parameter comprising decoding at least one encoded VAL notification message received in an HTTP request entity-body of the HTTP POST request, and deliver each push notification message received from the VAL notification message list parameter to a VAL client running on a UE ). Therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in Sangameshwara with the teachings as in Adjakple and Shah. The motivation for doing so would have been for providing a high-level procedure using a hypertext transport protocol (HTTP) to enable an SNM server (SNM-S) to push the notification messages to an SNM client (SNM-C) ( Sangameshwara: Abstract ). As per claim 2, the modified Adjakple teaches the first network entity of claim 1, wherein: the slice configuration comprises a uniform resource locator (URL) address associated with a notify path ( Sangameshwara: paragraph 0034 and fig. 7; PUSH callback-URL notification message in the SEAL notification management service during create notification channel procedure invocation…paragraph 0067; sets request URI to the PUSH callback-URL or the PUSH callback-URI ), and the at least one processor is configured to cause the first network entity to: communicate with a second network entity in the target edge data network service area to determine the second network slice ( Adjakple: paragraph 0232; The proposed augmentation of the SF traffic influence request also provides the SMF with information about DNN replacement and application requirements for EAS relocation before the session continuity procedure is performed ). The same motivation to combine as the independent claim applies here. As per claim 5, the modified Adjakple teaches the first network entity of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the first network entity to: communicate using a first application programming interface with a vertical application layer server that supports the vertical application layer service (API) ( Shah: paragraph 0191; The registration of these mapping may be done by the VAL server (100) to the SEAL server (200) by an API call and can update these mappings by invoking these APIs with updated geographical areas…paragraph 0257; first information on a first list of at least one VAL service area ID and geographical information corresponding to the at least one VAL service area ID via an application programing interface (API) for configuring a VAL service area ID and receiving, from the location management server ); and communicate with the device using a second API ( Shah: paragraph 0257; second information as a response to the first information, the second information including a second list of at least one VAL service area ID via the API ). The same motivation to combine as the independent claim applies here. As per claim 6, the modified Adjakple teaches the first network entity of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the first network entity to: communicate using a first application programming interface (API), with both the device and a vertical application layer server associated with the vertical application layer service ( Shah: paragraph 0035 and fig. 9; the VAL service area can be defined once, then the Service Arca information can be used at multiple application programing interface (APIs). When there is change/update in the VAL service Area, then the VAL server can just update the VAL service area at the SEAL server…paragraph 00191; The registration of these mapping may be done by the VAL server (100) to the SEAL server (200) by an API call and can update these mappings by invoking these APIs with updated geographical areas…paragraph 0207; The Entity-2 may expose the API for the consumer to create, register, modify or delete the Avatar and associated information or properties or configuration of Avatars. The consumer may be Entity-1 or MeAS or 3GPP NF (e.g. SMF, AMF, UDM, NEF, etc.,) or VAL server. In step-1, the Entity-1 or MeAS or 3GPP NF or VAL server sends request message to create or modify or delete the Avatar. In an embodiment, the request message is to manage the Avatar. The request also indicates the operation being requested to be performed by the Entity-2 ). The same motivation to combine as the independent claim applies here. As per claim 7, the modified Adjakple teaches the first network entity of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the first network entity to: determine the mobility of the device indicates impending transfer from the source edge data network service area to the target edge data network service area ( Adjakple: paragraph 0006; when the UE moves, the application located at the old edge network may not be suitable…paragraph 0094; Each DNN Replacement rule may consist of one or more “Original DNN”, a “Replacement DNN” and service area information where the rules may be applied…paragraph 0140; Original DNN should be replaced with Replacement DNN #2 in service area #2 ) based on receiving a request from a VAL server that provides the VAL service ( Shah: paragraph 0207; VAL server sends request message…paragraph 0008; vertical application layer (VAL) server in a wireless communication system ). The same motivation to combine as the independent claim applies here. With respect to claim 9, it is substantially similar to claim 1 and is rejected in the same manner, the same art and reasoning applying. Further, Adjakple also teaches a processor for wireless communication at a first network entity, the processor comprising: at least one controller coupled with at least one memory and configured to cause the processor to: ( Adjakple: paragraph 0009 and figs. 9F-9G; a processor, communications circuitry, and a memory. The memory may store instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause the apparatus to perform one or more operations ). With respect to claim 10, it is substantially similar to claim 1 and is rejected in the same manner, the same art and reasoning applying. Further, Adjakple also teaches a method for wireless communication at a first network entity ( Adjakple: paragraph 0303 and figs. 9F-9G; wireless communications and operations in accordance with the systems, methods, and apparatuses ). Regarding claim 11, it is substantially similar to claim 2, and is rejected in the same manner, the same arts and reasoning applying. Regarding claims 14-15, they are substantially similar to claims 7-8, respectively, and are rejected in the same manner, the same arts and reasoning applying. With respect to claim 16, it is substantially similar to claim 1 and is rejected in the same manner, the same art and reasoning applying. Further, Adjakple also teaches a device for wireless communication, the device comprising: at least one memory; and at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory and configured to cause the device to: ( Adjakple: paragraph 0303; apparatus or device WTRU 102 that may be configured for wireless communications and operations in accordance with the systems, methods, and apparatuses described herein, such as a WTRU 102 of FIG. 9A, 9B, 9C, 9D, or 9E. As shown in FIG. 9F, the example WTRU 102 may include a processor 118, a transceiver 120, a transmit/receive element 122, a speaker/microphone 124, a keypad 126, a display/touchpad/indicators 128, non-removable memory 130, removable memory 132 ). Regarding claim 20, it is substantially similar to claim 5, and is rejected in the same manner, the same arts and reasoning applying . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 3 , 12 , and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Adjakple et al. ( U.S. Publication No. 2024/0236835 ) in view of Shah et al. ( U.S. Publication No. 2026/0100989 ), in view of Sangameshwara et al. ( U.S. Publication No. 2024/0380824 ), and further in view of Mladin et al. ( U.S. Publication No. 2025/0365202 ) . As per claim 3, the modified Adjakple teaches the first network entity of claim 2. However the modified Adjakple does not explicitly mention wherein: the first network entity comprises a source service enabler architecture layer network slice capability enablement (SNSCE) server in the source edge data network service area); the second network entity comprises a target SNSCE server in the target edge data network service area; and the device comprises an SNSCE client. However Mladin teaches: wherein: the first network entity comprises a source service enabler architecture layer network slice capability enablement (SNSCE) server in the source edge data network service area ( Mladin: paragraph 0032 and fig. 9; SEAL Network Slice Capability Exposure (NSCE): In Release 18. 3GPP recognized the need for network slice capability exposure enhancements to SEAL that have yet to be realized and that enable trusted third parties to access the network slicing APIs defined and exposed by the 5G core network (CN). Aspects of the study include further exposure of network slice lifecycle management operations to trusted third party application layer enablement to support network slice management and control. Such enablement supports the network slice related operations, such as the mapping or migration of one or more vertical applications to one or more network slices ); the second network entity comprises a target SNSCE server in the target edge data network service area ( Mladin: paragraph 0033; The network slice capability exposure client communicates with the network slice capability exposure server over the NSCE-UU reference point. The network slice capability exposure client provides the support for network slice capability exposure functions to the VAL client(s) over the NSCE-C reference point. The VAL server(s) communicates with the network slice capability exposure server over the NSCE-S reference point ); and the device comprises an SNSCE client ( Mladin: paragraph 0034; NSCE client may be realized as functionality integrated within the SEAL client shown ). Therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in Mladin with the teachings as in the modified Adjakple. The motivation for doing so would have been for providing functionality to coordinate network or service slices supporting a group of services ( Mladin: Abstract ). Regarding claim 12, it is substantially similar to claim 3, and is rejected in the same manner, the same arts and reasoning applying. As per claim 17, the modified Adjakple teaches the device of claim 16, wherein: the slice configuration comprises a uniform resource locator (URL) address associated with a notify path ( Sangameshwara: paragraph 0034 and fig. 7; PUSH callback-URL notification message in the SEAL notification management service during create notification channel procedure invocation…paragraph 0067; sets request URI to the PUSH callback-URL or the PUSH callback-URI ). However the modified Adjakple does not explicitly mention the first network entity comprises a source service enabler architecture layer network slice capability enablement (SNSCE) server in the source edge data network service area; and the at least one memory comprises an SNSCE client; and the at least one processor is configured to cause the device to communicate, via the target edge data network service area, with a second network entity comprising a target SNSCE server in the target edge data network service area to maintain VAL service continuity subsequent to performing the transfer to the target edge data network area. However Mladin teaches: the first network entity comprises a source service enabler architecture layer network slice capability enablement (SNSCE) server in the source edge data network service area ( Mladin: paragraph 0032 and fig. 9; SEAL Network Slice Capability Exposure (NSCE): In Release 18. 3GPP recognized the need for network slice capability exposure enhancements to SEAL that have yet to be realized and that enable trusted third parties to access the network slicing APIs defined and exposed by the 5G core network (CN). Aspects of the study include further exposure of network slice lifecycle management operations to trusted third party application layer enablement to support network slice management and control. Such enablement supports the network slice related operations, such as the mapping or migration of one or more vertical applications to one or more network slices ); the at least one memory comprises an SNSCE client ( Mladin: paragraph 0034; NSCE client may be realized as functionality integrated within the SEAL client shown ); and the at least one processor is configured to cause the device to communicate ( Mladin: paragraph 0033; The network slice capability exposure client communicates with the network slice capability exposure server over the NSCE-UU reference point…paragraph 0034; NSCE client may be realized as functionality integrated within the SEAL client ), via the target edge data network service area, with a second network entity comprising a target SNSCE server ( Mladin: paragraph 0033; The network slice capability exposure client communicates with the network slice capability exposure server over the NSCE-UU reference point ) in the target edge data network service area ( Adjakple: paragraph 0006; when the UE moves, the application located at the old edge network may not be suitable…paragraph 0140; Replacement DNN #2 in service area #2 ) to maintain VAL service continuity subsequent to performing the transfer to the target edge data network area ( Adjakple: paragraph 0232; The proposed augmentation of the SF traffic influence request also provides the SMF with information about DNN replacement and application requirements for EAS relocation before the session continuity procedure is performed. See also Mladin: Abstract; coordinate network or service slices supporting a group of services…paragraph 0030; Vertical Application Layer (VAL) client(s) accesses the services offered by SEAL client(s) on the UE ). Therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in Mladin with the teachings as in the modified Adjakple. The motivation for doing so would have been for providing functionality to coordinate network or service slices supporting a group of services ( Mladin: Abstract ) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 4 , 13 , and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Adjakple et al. ( U.S. Publication No. 2024/0236835 ) in view of Shah et al. ( U.S. Publication No. 2026/0100989 ), in view of Sangameshwara et al. ( U.S. Publication No. 2024/0380824 ), and further in view of Zhu et al. ( U.S. Publication No. 2024/0259857 ) . As per claim 4, the modified Adjakple teaches the first network entity of claim 1. However the modified Adjakple does not explicitly mention wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the first network entity to: receive, from the device, one of: (i) a hypertext markup transfer protocol (HTTP) 204 no content status code; or (ii) a HTTP status code respectively indicating success or failure of the device receiving the slice configuration; and record an indication of the received one of the HTTP no content status code or the HTTP status code. However Zhu teaches: wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the first network entity to: receive, from the device, one of: (i) a hypertext markup transfer protocol (HTTP) 204 no content status code; or (ii) a HTTP status code respectively indicating success or failure of the device receiving the slice configuration ( Zhu: paragraph 0119; the response is an HTTP response message including the status code “204 No Content” in the header of the HTTP message ); and record an indication of the received one of the HTTP no content status code or the HTTP status code ( Zhu: paragraph 0120 and table 6; The MTS consumer 701 uses the DELETE method to unregister from the MTS service 710. This DELETE method supports the request and response data structures, and response codes, as specified in table 6 ). Therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in Zhu with the teachings as in the modified Adjakple. The motivation for doing so would have been in order to provide HTTP response code handling, including status code 204 No Content and other response codes, for confirming successful or unsuccessful processing of the request ( Zhu: paragraphs 0119 and 0120 ). Regarding claim 13, it is substantially similar to claim 4, and is rejected in the same manner, the same arts and reasoning applying. As per claim 18, the modified Adjakple teaches the device of claim 16. However the modified Adjakple does not explicitly mention wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the device to: determine whether the slice configuration is successfully received; and communicate, via the source edge data network service area to the first network entity, a hypertext markup transfer protocol (HTTP) 204 no content status code in response to determining that the slice configuration is successfully received. However Zhu teaches: wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the device to: determine whether the slice configuration is successfully received; and communicate, via the source edge data network service area to the first network entity, a hypertext markup transfer protocol (HTTP) 204 no content status code in response to determining that the slice configuration is successfully received ( Zhu: paragraph 0119; the response is an HTTP response message including the status code “204 No Content” in the header of the HTTP message, which indicates that the service consumer's 701 request has been successfully processed (i.e., deleting the indicated MTS session) and is not returning any content ). Therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in Zhu with the teachings as in the modified Adjakple. The motivation for doing so would have been in order to provide HTTP response code handling, including status code 204 No Content and other response codes, for confirming successful or unsuccessful processing of the request ( Zhu: paragraphs 0119 and 0120 ). As per claim 19, the modified Adjakple teaches the device of claim 16, wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the device to: determine whether the slice configuration is successfully received; and communicate, via the source edge data network service area to the first network entity, a hypertext markup transfer protocol (HTTP) status code indicating failure in response to determining that the slice configuration is not successfully received ( Zhu: paragraph 0144; On failure or redirection (operation 2), one of the HTTP status code listed in Table 6.2.3.2.3.1-3 of [R04] is returned ). Therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in Zhu with the teachings as in the modified Adjakple. The motivation for doing so would have been in order to provide HTTP response code handling, including status code 204 No Content and other response codes, for confirming successful or unsuccessful processing of the request ( Zhu: paragraphs 0119 and 0120 ) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Adjakple et al. ( U.S. Publication No. 2024/0236835 ) in view of Shah et al. ( U.S. Publication No. 2026/0100989 ), in view of Sangameshwara et al. ( U.S. Publication No. 2024/0380824 ), and further in view of Seed et al. ( U.S. Publication No. 2025/0212105 ) . As per claim 8, the modified Adjakple teaches the first network entity of claim 1. However the modified Adjakple does not explicitly mention wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the first network entity to: determine whether the first network slice supports a quality of service (QOS) requirement associated with the VAL service; and determine the mobility of the device indicates impending transfer from the source edge data network service area to the target edge data network service area based at least in part on determining that the first network slice does not support the QoS requirement associated with the VAL service. However Seed teaches: wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the first network entity to: determine whether the first network slice supports a quality of service (QOS) requirement associated with the VAL service ( Seed: paragraph 0018; network slice monitoring and triggering of dynamic network slice lifecycle management operations due to changes in application requirements (e.g., QoS)…paragraph 0030; The query request(s) may be used by the NSCE server to determine the types of network slices (e.g., SST values) supported by the core network and the locations in the network where these types of network slices are supported (e.g., within specific regions, domains in the network and/or within specific edge data networks). The query request(s) may also be used by the NSCE server to determine whether there are any existing network slice instances (NSIs) already allocated which meet the minimum required service or QoE KPIs of the VAL client(s) on the specified UE(s) ); and determine the mobility of the device indicates impending transfer from the source edge data network service area to the target edge data network service area based at least in part on determining that the first network slice does not support the QoS requirement associated with the VAL service ( Seed: paragraph 0049; obtaining authorization for the VAL client(s) on the UE(s) to access the VAL server(s) via the network slice instances, where obtaining authorization comprises one or more of the following operations: sending an authorization request to a service in the network (e.g., AS, EAS, authorization service) to obtain an authorization approval for the VAL client(s), querying entities in the system (e.g., OAM service) to determine whether network slice instances exist which already meet the minimum required service or QoE KPIs of the VAL client(s) on the specified UE(s) and whether these network slices have availability to the UE(s) at the required scheduled time(s), location(s) and/or routes, if adequate network slice instance(s) do not exist, then triggering the allocation of a new or modification of an existing network slice instance that comprises adequate network resources to meet the minimum required service or QoE KPIs of the VAL client(s) on the specified UE(s) and that have availability to the UE(s) at the required scheduled time(s), location(s) and/or routes, obtaining authorization for the VAL client(s) on the UE(s) to access the network slice instances. Adjakple: paragraph 0006; when the UE moves, the application located at the old edge network may not be suitable…paragraph 0094; Each DNN Replacement rule may consist of one or more “Original DNN”, a “Replacement DNN” and service area information where the rules may be applied…paragraph 0140; Original DNN should be replaced with Replacement DNN #2 in service area #2 ). Therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in Seed with the teachings as in the modified Adjakple. The motivation for doing so would have for providing network slice monitoring and triggering of dynamic network slice lifecycle management operations due to changes in application requirements (e.g., QoS) or a network slice status change ( Seed: paragraphs 0018 ). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KARINA J. GARCIA-CHING whose telephone number is (571)270-7159. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Wednesday (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, Vivek Srivastava can be reached at (571) 272-7304. 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. /KARINA J GARCIA-CHING/Examiner, Art Unit 2449 /VIVEK SRIVASTAVA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2449 Application/Control Number: 18/664,151 Page 2 Art Unit: 2449 Application/Control Number: 18/664,151 Page 3 Art Unit: 2449 Application/Control Number: 18/664,151 Page 4 Art Unit: 2449 Application/Control Number: 18/664,151 Page 5 Art Unit: 2449 Application/Control Number: 18/664,151 Page 6 Art Unit: 2449 Application/Control Number: 18/664,151 Page 7 Art Unit: 2449 Application/Control Number: 18/664,151 Page 8 Art Unit: 2449 Application/Control Number: 18/664,151 Page 9 Art Unit: 2449 Application/Control Number: 18/664,151 Page 10 Art Unit: 2449 Application/Control Number: 18/664,151 Page 11 Art Unit: 2449 Application/Control Number: 18/664,151 Page 12 Art Unit: 2449 Application/Control Number: 18/664,151 Page 13 Art Unit: 2449 Application/Control Number: 18/664,151 Page 14 Art Unit: 2449 Application/Control Number: 18/664,151 Page 15 Art Unit: 2449 Application/Control Number: 18/664,151 Page 16 Art Unit: 2449 Application/Control Number: 18/664,151 Page 17 Art Unit: 2449 Application/Control Number: 18/664,151 Page 18 Art Unit: 2449 Application/Control Number: 18/664,151 Page 19 Art Unit: 2449 Application/Control Number: 18/664,151 Page 20 Art Unit: 2449 Application/Control Number: 18/664,151 Page 21 Art Unit: 2449 Application/Control Number: 18/664,151 Page 22 Art Unit: 2449 Application/Control Number: 18/664,151 Page 23 Art Unit: 2449 Application/Control Number: 18/664,151 Page 24 Art Unit: 2449 Application/Control Number: 18/664,151 Page 25 Art Unit: 2449 Application/Control Number: 18/664,151 Page 26 Art Unit: 2449 Application/Control Number: 18/664,151 Page 27 Art Unit: 2449 Application/Control Number: 18/664,151 Page 28 Art Unit: 2449 Application/Control Number: 18/664,151 Page 29 Art Unit: 2449 Application/Control Number: 18/664,151 Page 30 Art Unit: 2449 Application/Control Number: 18/664,151 Page 31 Art Unit: 2449 Application/Control Number: 18/664,151 Page 32 Art Unit: 2449
Prosecution Insights