DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Priority
Should applicant desire to obtain the benefit of foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d) prior to declaration of an interference, a certified English translation of the foreign application must be submitted in reply to this action. 37 CFR 41.154(b) and 41.202(e).
Failure to provide a certified translation may result in no benefit being accorded for the non-English application.
Claim Objections
Claims 16, 24 are objected to because of the following informalities: claims 16, 24 recite the limitation “the request PDU session” which for clarity should be amended to recite “the requested PDU session”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 16, 19-22, 24, 27-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) as being anticipated by Gao et al (USPN 20230054288).
Regarding claim 24, Gao discloses
a first node in a wireless communication, the first node comprising: (RAN/AMF/CN node in wireless network, comprising: [0017, 0064-0066]
a transceiver (transceiver, FIG. 8 #815 [0280]
at least one processor coupled to the transceiver and configured to: (processor, FIG. 8 #810, coupled to transceiver [0280]
determine to remap a network slice resource for a requested packet data unit (PDU) session (first node makes slice resource re-mapping serving slices or PDU session [0064-0071, 0111, 0119-0129], FIG. 4
transmit, to a second node, a first message including first information related to remapping the network slice resource for the request PDU session (AMF/CN performing slice remapping and sends message in which the remapped S-NSSAI is included [0112, 0113, 0119-0129], FIG. 4.
Claim 16 is rejected based on similar ground(s) provided in rejection of claim 24.
Regarding claim 29, Gao discloses
a second node in a wireless communication, the second node comprising: (second network node/RAN/core network node comprising [0017, 0249]
a transceiver (transceiver, FIG. 8 #815 [0280]
at least one processor coupled to the transceiver and configured to (processor, FIG. 8 #810, coupled to transceiver and operable to [0280]
receive, from a first network node, a first message including first information related to remapping a network slice resource (second node configured to receive message including slice remapping assistance information [0113, 0241, 0120, 0152], FIGs. 4, 5.
Claim 21 is rejected based on similar ground(s) provided in rejection of claim 29.
Regarding claims 19, 22, 27, 30, Gao discloses “wherein the first information related to remapping the network slice resource includes at least one of: information for indicating a way of a PDU session or quality of service (QoS) flows in the PDU session being allocated with an available resource” indicator conveys manner/way by which a PDU session will be allocated with an available/re-mapped slice resource [0243], Table 42.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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.
Claims 17, 18, 20, 23, 25, 26, 28, 31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gao in view of NPL titled 3GPP TR 38.832 (V0.2.0 2020-09), hereafter 3GPP.
Regarding claims 17, 25, Gao discloses “receiving, from a third node, a second message including second information related to usage of a network slice resource for the requested PDU session;
wherein the second information related to usage of a network slice resource includes at least one of:” the slice assistance information can either be generated by the first network itself or provided by a second network node [0066, 0118].
Gao does not expressly disclose “information on whether a network slice is able to pre-empt other network slice resource or not”
3GPP discloses use of pre-emption of resources from other S-NSSAIs (sections 6.2.1, 6.2.3)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement “information on whether a network slice is able to pre-empt other network slice resource or not” as taught by 3GPP into Gao’s system with the motivation to perform slice resource remapping in a handover (3GPP, sections 6.1, 6.2.2.1, 6.2.2.3, 6.2.2.7)).
Regarding claims 18, 26, Gao discloses “wherein a network slice of the network slice resource for the requested PDU session is not supported and rejected by the third node” third node/target gNB/CN rejects and does not support network slice [0061, 0121, 153].
Regarding claims 20, 23, 28, 31, Gao discloses “wherein the second node comprises a core network” second network node being AMF/core network [0064-0066].
Gao does not expressly disclose “wherein the first node comprises a master node of a base station”
3GPP discloses “wherein the first node comprises a master node of a base station” master node/MN makes slice re-mapping decision and transmits to AMF/core network (section 6.2.2.7).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement “wherein the first node comprises a master node of a base station” as taught by 3GPP into Gao’s system with the motivation to perform slice resource remapping in a handover (3GPP, sections 6.1, 6.2.2.1, 6.2.2.3, 6.2.2.7)).
Claims 16, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) as being anticipated by NPL titled 3GPP TR 38.832 (V0.2.0 2020-09), hereafter 3GPP.
Regarding claim 16, 3GPP discloses
a method of a first node in a wireless communication, the method comprising: (method performed by T-gNB/MN/AMF/first node within 5G wireless communication system (sections 6.2.2.2-6.2.2.7)
determining to remap a network slice resource for a requested packet data unit (PDU) session (first node makes slice resource re-mapping/fallback decision for PDU session when ongoing S-NSSAI is rejected (sections 6.1, 6.2.2.1, 6.2.2.3, 6.2.2.7)
transmitting, to a second node, a first message including first information related to remapping the network slice resource for the request PDU session (first node transmits message, i.e. handover request acknowledge or PDU session modification indication with slice resource remapping decision, to S-gNB/AMF/5GC/second node (sections 6.2.2.1, 6.2.2.3, 6.2.2.7).
Regarding claim 20, 3GPP discloses “wherein the first node comprises a master node of a base station, and wherein the second node comprises a core network” master node/MN makes slice re-mapping decision and transmits to AMF/core network (section 6.2.2.7).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Tiwari et al (USPN 20190116526) FIG. 4
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THAI NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7632. The examiner can normally be reached M-F campus 10:30-5pm, telework 6pm-8pm| Telework count days.
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, Ian N Moore can be reached at (571)272-3085. 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.
/THAI NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2469
Prosecution Insights