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 .
This Office Action is in response to initial filing on 03/31/2026.
Claims 1-10 have been amended.
Claims 11-15 are cancelled.
Claims 16-25 have been newly added.
Claim 1-10 and 16-25 are currently pending and have been considered below.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 02/06/2024. These drawings are reviewed and accepted by the Examiner.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 05/21/2026 and 05/05/2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 1-10 and 16-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by applicant’s submission of prior art Jeong et al (US 2021/0136715).
Regarding claim 1, discloses an access management function ("AMF") (Figure 1, AMF 131),
at least one memory ([0148] A memory 812);
a processor ([0147] A controller 811 may be implemented with at least one processor) coupled with the at least one memory and AMF (when the NF is the AMF 131, the controller 811 may perform the aforementioned operation of the AMF 131)
receive a registration request from a device to register to a network slice subject to network slice admission control ("NSAC") ([0095], the UE 120 intends to access, and transmit a connection request (e.g., radio resource control (RRC) connection (network slice selection assistance information (NSSAI)) message; [0096], forward an initial UE message including a registration request (e.g., Registration Req (Requested NSSAI)) to the AMF 131 based on the connection request message, …; [0150], a UE transmits a registration request message requesting to use a certain slice to an AMF. …);
determine that a registration to the network slice is rejected for NSAC ([0102], AMF 131 transmits a response message to the registration request to the UE 120 … the response message may be an accept (e.g., registration accept) message. When access to the slice is restricted due to the quota limit, the response message may include rejected slice information …; [0103], When the received response message includes information indicating that access to a particular slice or slices is rejected due to the quota limit …);
initiate a timer in response to the registration to the network slice being rejected ([0116], the message may include a timer value used when whether to try re-access to the slice, access to which is pending due to the limit of quota, i.e., the maximum number of accesses, is determined) and send, to the device, an update message in response to expiry of the timer ([0117], the UE 120 receives separate accept information from the network or until the timer is expired when the timer for retry has been received ), the update message comprising a first indication that the device is permitted to register to the network slice ([0164], when the UE transmitted a registration request, the registration response message may be used, and otherwise, a UE configuration update message may be used; [0165] In operation 8, the UE may update the status of the slice based on the message received from the AMF. When some slices that have been included in the pending NSSAI are included in the allowed NSSAI in the operation 7, the UE may determine that use of the slice is permitted).
Regarding claim 2, Jeong discloses the AMF apparatus of claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to cause the AMF apparatus to determine that the device does not support extended rejected network slice selection assistance information ("ER-NSSAI") ([0100], When selection of a network slice or an NF that is able to deal with the request has failed, e.g., when the network slice exceeds its allowable quota, the NSSF 134 may transmit a result and/or cause of the failure in the network slice selection response message. [0150], … message may include information indicating whether to support a function for quota management for each slice (cause reception, back-off timer use, rejected/pending NSSAI handling, etc.) or whether to support a generic network slice template (gst) based slice control function, which may be included as part of 5G mobility management (5GMM) capability in the registration request. Examiner note: the claim language “does not support extended rejected network slice selection assistance information” must be given a broadest reasonable interpretation of ‘when selection of a network slice or an NF that is able to deal with the request has failed, e.g., when the network slice exceeds its allowable quota, the NSSF 134 may transmit a result and/or cause of the failure in the network slice selection response message.’ And ‘information indicating whether to support a function for quota management for each slice (cause reception, back-off timer use, rejected/pending NSSAI handling, etc.) or whether to support a generic network slice template (gst) based slice control function, which may be included as part of 5G mobility management (5GMM) capability in the registration request.’ Further, which aligns with the requirements in [0087] and [0113] of the instant specification.), wherein the processor is configured to cause the AMF [0116], the message may include a timer value used when whether to try re-access to the slice, access to which is pending due to the limit of quota, i.e., the maximum number of accesses, is determined).
Regarding claim 3, Jeong discloses the AMF apparatus of claim 2, wherein the processor is further configured to cause the AMF apparatus to:
map a NSAC-based rejection cause value to a non-NSAC-based rejection cause value in response to determining that the device does not support ER- NSSAI ([0126], when the network slice exceeds its allowable quota, the NSSF 134 may transmit a result and/or cause of the failure in the network slice selection response message. By doing this, the NSSF 134 may inform the AMF 131 of the cause of the NF selection failure.[0128], When access to the slice is restricted due to the quota limit, rejected slice information (rejected nssai) may include an identifier of the rejected slice and may indicate that quota (the number of users accessing the slice, the number of sessions of the slice, etc.) limit is a cause of the rejection of the access ); and send rejected network slice selection assistance information ("NSSAI") to the device, wherein the rejected NSSAI indicates the network slice and comprises the non-NSAC-based rejection cause value ([0128] the AMF 131 transmits a response message to the registration request to the UE 120 that has transmitted the registration request. When access to all the slices requested by the UE 120 is restricted due to the quota limits, the response message may be a UE registration reject message. When access to the slice is restricted due to the quota limit, rejected slice information (rejected nssai) may include an identifier of the rejected slice and may indicate that quota (the number of users accessing the slice, the number of sessions of the slice, etc.) limit is a cause of the rejection of the access).
Regarding claim 4, in the obvious combination, Jeong discloses the AMF apparatus of claim 2, wherein, to determine that the device does not support ER-NSSAI, the processor is configured to cause the AMF apparatus to receive capability information comprising a second indication that the device does not support ER-NSSAI ([0150], The message may include information indicating whether to support a function for quota management for each slice (cause reception, back-off timer use, rejected/pending NSSAI handling, etc.) or whether to support a generic network slice template (gst) based slice control function, which may be included as part of 5G mobility management (5GMM) capability in the registration request).
Regarding claim 5, in the obvious combination, Jeong discloses the AMF apparatus of claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to cause the AMF apparatus to determine that the AMF apparatus lacks analytics information to support extended rejected network slice selection assistance information ("ER-NSSAI") (([0100], When selection of a network slice or an NF that is able to deal with the request has failed, e.g., when the network slice exceeds its allowable quota, the NSSF 134 may transmit a result and/or cause of the failure in the network slice selection response message. [0150], … message may include information indicating whether to support a function for quota management for each slice (cause reception, back-off timer use, rejected/pending NSSAI handling, etc.) or whether to support a generic network slice template (gst) based slice control function, which may be included as part of 5G mobility management (5GMM) capability in the registration request. Given the broadest reasonable interpretation, the Examiner notes that the term “lacks analytics information” is fairly interpreted as “When selection of a network slice or an NF that is able to deal with the request has failed, e.g., when the network slice exceeds its allowable quota, the NSSF 134 may transmit a result and/or cause of the failure in the network slice selection,” [0150]), wherein the processor is configured to cause the AMF apparatus to initiate the timer in response to determining that the apparatus lacks analytics information to support ER-NSSAI NSSAI ([0116], the message may include a timer value used when whether to try re-access to the slice, access to which is pending due to the limit of quota, i.e., the maximum number of accesses, is determined).
Regarding claim 6, in the obvious combination, Jeong discloses the AMF apparatus of claim 1, wherein, to determine that the registration to the network slice is rejected, the processor is configured to cause the AMF apparatus to receive a second indication from a network function that a maximum number of registered users is reached for the network slice ([0128], … When access to all the slices requested by the UE 120 is restricted due to the quota limits, the response message may be a UE registration reject message. When access to the slice is restricted due to the quota limit, rejected slice information (rejected nssai) may include an identifier of the rejected slice and may indicate that quota (the number of users accessing the slice, the number of sessions of the slice, etc.) limit is a cause of the rejection of the access.).
Regarding claim 7, in the obvious combination, Jeong discloses the AMF apparatus of claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to cause the AMF apparatus to:
send rejected network slice selection assistance information ("NSSAI") to the device ([0126], when the network slice exceeds its allowable quota, the NSSF 134 may transmit a result and/or cause of the failure in the network slice selection response message. By doing this, the NSSF 134 may inform the AMF 131 of the cause of the NF selection failure.), wherein the rejected NSSAI indicates the network slice and comprises a non-NSAC-based rejection cause value ([0126], the NSSF 134 may inform the AMF 131 of the cause of the NF selection failure. In the allowable quota based control for a slice in particular, the NSSF 134 may give information about a detailed cause (e.g., of the quota, which one—the number of UEs/subscribers, the number of sessions, or the like—has reached the highest value)), wherein, to indicate that the device is permitted to register to the network slice, the first indication comprises a respective indication that the rejected NSSAI is to be deleted ([0128], The response message may also include an indication to guide access through a particular RAT. Moreover, the response message may include a timer value used when whether to try re-access to the current RAT and slice, access to which has been rejected due to the limit of quota, i.e., the maximum number of accesses, is determined. In this process, the AMF 131 is required to have stored information about the requested slice and the slice, access to which is pending due to the quota limit, in a UE context for the UE 120.).
Regarding claim 8, in the obvious combination, Jeong discloses the AMF apparatus of claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to cause the AMF apparatus to: store, for the device, mobility context information comprising rejected network slice selection assistance information ("NSSAI") which indicates that the network slice was rejected for NSAC ([0126], The information including the network slice may be made up in the form of a name or identifier to identify the selected candidate or the selected instance. When selection of a network slice or an NF that is able to deal with the request has failed, e.g., when the network slice exceeds its allowable quota, the NSSF 134 may transmit a result and/or cause of the failure in the network slice selection response message. By doing this, the NSSF 134 may inform the AMF 131 of the cause of the NF selection failure); and determine whether the network slice is again available, wherein the processor is configured to cause the AMF apparatus to send the update message in response to determining that the network slice is again available ([0128], The response message may also include an indication to guide access through a particular RAT. Moreover, the response message may include a timer value used when whether to try re-access to the current RAT and slice, access to which has been rejected due to the limit of quota, i.e., the maximum number of accesses, is determined. In this process, the AMF 131 is required to have stored information about the requested slice and the slice, access to which is pending due to the quota limit, in a UE context for the UE 120; [0105] In operation S320, the AMF 131 may transmit information indicating that a slice becomes accessible to the UE 120 whose access to the slice was pending due to the quota limit of the slice but is allowed now. In this case, the AMF 131 may give the information using a UE configuration update procedure).
Regarding claim 9, in the obvious combination, Jeong discloses the AMF apparatus of claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to cause the AMF apparatus to:
send a rejected network slice selection assistance information ("NSSAI") to the device, wherein the rejected NSSAI contains single network slice selection assistance information ("S-NSSAI") that corresponds to the network slice ([0150], “The message may include a set of identifiers (S-NSSAI) of target slices that the UE requests permission to use, i.e., Requested NSSAI. The message may include information indicating whether to support a function for quota management for each slice (cause reception, back-off timer use, rejected/pending NSSAI handling, etc.) or whether to support a generic network slice template (gst) based slice control function”), wherein, to send the update message, the processor is configured to cause the AMF apparatus to initiate a User Equipment ("UE") configuration update procedure , wherein, to indicate that the device is permitted to register to the network slice ([0105] In operation S320, the AMF 131 may transmit information indicating that a slice becomes accessible to the UE 120 whose access to the slice was pending due to the quota limit of the slice but is allowed now. In this case, the AMF 131 may give the information using a UE configuration update procedure), the update message comprises updated rejected network slice selection assistance information ("NSSAI") that excludes the S-NSSAI corresponding to the network slice ([0128], The response message may also include an indication to guide access through a particular RAT. Moreover, the response message may include a timer value used when whether to try re-access to the current RAT and slice, access to which has been rejected due to the limit of quota, i.e., the maximum number of accesses, is determined. In this process, the AMF 131 is required to have stored information about the requested slice and the slice, access to which is pending due to the quota limit, in a UE context for the UE 120).
Claim 10 contains subject matter similar to claim 44, and thus, is rejected under similar rationale. (Jeong, [0021], “a method, performed by a network entity,” [0139], “The network entity may include NFs such as an AMF”).
Claims 11-15 (Cancelled)
Claim 16 contains subject matter similar to claim 2, and thus, is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 17 contains subject matter similar to claim 3, and thus, is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 18 contains subject matter similar to claim 4, and thus, is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 19 contains subject matter similar to claim 5, and thus, is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 20 contains subject matter similar to claim 6, and thus, is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 21 contains subject matter similar to claim 7, and thus, is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 22 contains subject matter similar to claim 8, and thus, is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 23 contains subject matter similar to claim 9, and thus, is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 24 contains subject matter similar to claim 44, and thus, is rejected under similar rationale. (Jeong, [0016], “a transceiver; and at least one processor coupled with the transceiver”).
Claim 25 contains subject matter similar to claim 2, and thus, is rejected under similar rationale.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 11246089 to Niemi et al: Registering to slices with mapped S-NSSAI alone in a 5GS is described.
WO 2022014944 to Kim et al: Device for processing network slice selection assistance information (NSSAI) rejected due to a network slice-specific authentication and authorization (NSSAA) failure.
US 20210212010 Lee et al: A network function (NF) entity performing communication in a wireless communication system includes: in case that a first registration request of a user equipment (UE) for a slice is received at an access and mobility function (AMF) entity through a first network.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JULIO R PEREZ whose telephone number is (571)272-7846. The examiner can normally be reached 10Am - 6PM EST M-F.
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, Kathy Wang-Hurst can be reached at 5712705371. 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.
/JULIO R PEREZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2644
Prosecution Insights