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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to the communication mailed on 4/8/2026 and applicant has submitted an amendment, filed on 6/3/2026.
Claims 1-15 are pending, with claims 1, 7, 14, 15 have been amended.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to claims 1-15 filed on 6/3/2026 have been considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102 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.
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.
Claims1, 2, 4-8, 10-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Application Publication 20210258864 (hereinafter referred to as Jeong) in view of US Patent Application Publication 20240323824 (hereinafter referred to as He).
Consider claim 1, Jeong discloses a method performed by a second network node (see at least ¶ [0119], Fig. 5, “…master NF…”) (14) for handling a network function, NF instance in a communication network (see at least ¶ [0118], Fig. 5), the method comprising
receiving (301) from a first network node (see at least ¶ [0122], Fig. 5, “…other NF instance…”), a register request for the NF instance, wherein the register request comprises an NF profile of the NF instance (see at least ¶ [0118], Fig. 5, “…an NF set may be newly created or added, or configuration information of an NF set may be updated at operation 501…” and see at least ¶ [0119], “…The master NF may perform a process for registering the profile of the NF set to which it belongs with the NRF (or SCP) at operation 502. … the service request may include the identifier (ID) of the NF set to be registered and NF set profile. The NF set profile may include identifiers of NF instances belonging to the NF set…”and further see at least ¶ [0151], “…The producer NF may process the service request from the consumer NF and transmit a response message corresponding thereto at operation 1102…”. The producer NF #2 implied second network and consumer NF #1 implied first network and further see at least ¶ [0170], “…transmit and receive signals to and from another network entity. The transceiver may transmit data and control information for providing a service to a base station (RAN), and may transmit information according to the disclosure to another NF…”); and
including (302), with the proviso that the NF profile of the NF instance does not contain an indication of an NF Set ID, an NF Set ID to the NF profile of the NF instance (see at least ¶ [0120], “…The NRF may use the received information to store the profile of the NF set and generate resources for this at operation 503. Thereafter, the resource for the NF set profile can be identified by the NF set ID…” and see at least ¶ [0122], “…The NRF may deliver the NF set profile to other NF instances belonging to the NF set to notify the created/updated set profile at operation 505. Here, the NRF may use an NF status notify or NF set status notify service…”).
Jeong disclose all the subject matters of the claimed invention concept. However, Jeong does not particularly disclose wherein the NF Set ID is generated by the second network node. In an analogous field of endeavor, attention is directed to He, which teaches wherein the NF Set ID is generated by the second network node (see He, at least ¶ [0273], Fig. 8, “…a consumer NRF 802 and a consumer SCP 803 (all of which are located in a first/source domain), and a producer SCP 804, a producer NRF 805 and a producer NF 806 (all of which are located in a second/target domain) …” and see at least ¶ [0301], “…the producer SCP 904 performs an NF selection for the service request received in 9002 using the parameters received in 9002. In the present instance, the producer NF 906 is selected…” and see at least ¶ [0306], “…the producer SCP 904 forwards the NF service response received in 9009 to the consumer SCP 903, which in turn forwards the NF service response to the consumer NF 901 at 9011…” and see at least ¶ [0337], “…The subsequent notification messages are sent by producer SCP to the consumer SCP in the target domain, adding a discovery header (which may comprise the NF set ID) and removing the target URI. The producer SCP may further indicate its ability and/r desire to delegate the discovery and selection to the target domain…”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious a finding that one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention could have combined the elements as claimed by the know method, and that in combination. Each element merely performs the same function as it does separately; Jeong disclosed invention, and have wherein the NF Set ID is generated by the second network node, as taught by He, thereby, to provide a communication system can be seen as a facility that enables communication sessions between two or more entities such as user terminals, access nodes and/or other nodes by providing carriers between the various entities involved in the communications path, as discussed by He, (see at least ¶ [0002]).
Consider claim 7, Jeong teaches a second network node (see at least ¶ [0119], Fig. 5, “…master NF…”) (14) for handling a network function, NF, instance in a communication network, wherein the second network node is configured to:
receive from a first network node (see at least ¶ [0122], Fig. 5, “…other NF instance…”), a register request for the NF instance, wherein the register request comprises an NF profile of the NF instance (see at least ¶ [0118], Fig. 5, “…an NF set may be newly created or added, or configuration information of an NF set may be updated at operation 501…” and see at least ¶ [0119], “…The master NF may perform a process for registering the profile of the NF set to which it belongs with the NRF (or SCP) at operation 502. … the service request may include the identifier (ID) of the NF set to be registered and NF set profile. The NF set profile may include identifiers of NF instances belonging to the NF set…”and further see at least ¶ [0151], “…The producer NF may process the service request from the consumer NF and transmit a response message corresponding thereto at operation 1102…”. The producer NF #2 implied second network and consumer NF #1 implied first network and further see at least ¶ [0170], “…transmit and receive signals to and from another network entity. The transceiver may transmit data and control information for providing a service to a base station (RAN), and may transmit information according to the disclosure to another NF…”); and
include, with the proviso that the NF profile of the NF instance does not contain an indication of an NF Set ID, an NF Set ID to the NF profile of the NF instance (see at least ¶ [0120], “…The NRF may use the received information to store the profile of the NF set and generate resources for this at operation 503. Thereafter, the resource for the NF set profile can be identified by the NF set ID…” and see at least ¶ [0122], “…The NRF may deliver the NF set profile to other NF instances belonging to the NF set to notify the created/updated set profile at operation 505. Here, the NRF may use an NF status notify or NF set status notify service…”).
Jeong disclose all the subject matters of the claimed invention concept. However, Jeong does not particularly disclose wherein the NF Set ID is generated by the second network node. In an analogous field of endeavor, attention is directed to He, which teaches wherein the NF Set ID is generated by the second network node (see He, at least ¶ [0273], Fig. 8, “…a consumer NRF 802 and a consumer SCP 803 (all of which are located in a first/source domain), and a producer SCP 804, a producer NRF 805 and a producer NF 806 (all of which are located in a second/target domain) …” and see at least ¶ [0301], “…the producer SCP 904 performs an NF selection for the service request received in 9002 using the parameters received in 9002. In the present instance, the producer NF 906 is selected…” and see at least ¶ [0306], “…the producer SCP 904 forwards the NF service response received in 9009 to the consumer SCP 903, which in turn forwards the NF service response to the consumer NF 901 at 9011…” and see at least ¶ [0337], “…The subsequent notification messages are sent by producer SCP to the consumer SCP in the target domain, adding a discovery header (which may comprise the NF set ID) and removing the target URI. The producer SCP may further indicate its ability and/r desire to delegate the discovery and selection to the target domain…”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious a finding that one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention could have combined the elements as claimed by the know method, and that in combination. Each element merely performs the same function as it does separately; Jeong disclosed invention, and have wherein the NF Set ID is generated by the second network node, as taught by He, thereby, to provide a communication system can be seen as a facility that enables communication sessions between two or more entities such as user terminals, access nodes and/or other nodes by providing carriers between the various entities involved in the communications path, as discussed by He, (see at least ¶ [0002]).
Consider claim 15, Jeong teaches a second network node (see at least ¶ [0119], Fig. 5, “…master NF…”) handling a network function, NF, instance in a communication network, wherein the second network node comprises processor circuitry and a memory for storing instructions executable by said processor circuitry (see at least ¶ [0174], “…The one or more programs stored in the computer-readable storage medium are configured to be executable by one or more processors of an electronic device…”), and
whereby the processing circuitry is operative to receive from a first network node (see at least ¶ [0122], Fig. 5, “…other NF instance…”), a register request for the NF instance, wherein the register request comprises an NF profile of the NF instance (see at least ¶ [0118], Fig. 5, “…an NF set may be newly created or added, or configuration information of an NF set may be updated at operation 501…” and see at least ¶ [0119], “…The master NF may perform a process for registering the profile of the NF set to which it belongs with the NRF (or SCP) at operation 502. … the service request may include the identifier (ID) of the NF set to be registered and NF set profile. The NF set profile may include identifiers of NF instances belonging to the NF set…”); and
include, with the proviso that the NF profile of the NF instance does not contain an indication of an NF Set ID, an NF Set ID to the NF profile of the NF instance (see at least ¶ [0120], “…The NRF may use the received information to store the profile of the NF set and generate resources for this at operation 503. Thereafter, the resource for the NF set profile can be identified by the NF set ID…” and see at least ¶ [0122], “…The NRF may deliver the NF set profile to other NF instances belonging to the NF set to notify the created/updated set profile at operation 505. Here, the NRF may use an NF status notify or NF set status notify service…”).
Jeong disclose all the subject matters of the claimed invention concept. However, Jeong does not particularly disclose wherein the NF Set ID is generated by the second network node. In an analogous field of endeavor, attention is directed to He, which teaches wherein the NF Set ID is generated by the second network node (see He, at least ¶ [0273], Fig. 8, “…a consumer NRF 802 and a consumer SCP 803 (all of which are located in a first/source domain), and a producer SCP 804, a producer NRF 805 and a producer NF 806 (all of which are located in a second/target domain) …” and see at least ¶ [0301], “…the producer SCP 904 performs an NF selection for the service request received in 9002 using the parameters received in 9002. In the present instance, the producer NF 906 is selected…” and see at least ¶ [0306], “…the producer SCP 904 forwards the NF service response received in 9009 to the consumer SCP 903, which in turn forwards the NF service response to the consumer NF 901 at 9011…” and see at least ¶ [0337], “…The subsequent notification messages are sent by producer SCP to the consumer SCP in the target domain, adding a discovery header (which may comprise the NF set ID) and removing the target URI. The producer SCP may further indicate its ability and/r desire to delegate the discovery and selection to the target domain…”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious a finding that one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention could have combined the elements as claimed by the know method, and that in combination. Each element merely performs the same function as it does separately; Jeong disclosed invention, and have wherein the NF Set ID is generated by the second network node, as taught by He, thereby, to provide a communication system can be seen as a facility that enables communication sessions between two or more entities such as user terminals, access nodes and/or other nodes by providing carriers between the various entities involved in the communications path, as discussed by He, (see at least ¶ [0002]).
Consider claims 2, 8 (depends on at least claims 1, 7), Jeong in view of He discloses the limitations of claims 1, 7 as applied to claim rejection 1, 7 above and further discloses:
Jeong teaches wherein the included NF Set ID is a unique identity in the communication network (see at least ¶ [0095], “…an identifier that can identify the corresponding NF set (NF set ID or ID of the NF instance that manages NF set information…” and see at least ¶ [0096], “…identified by an AMF set ID or an ID of the NF that manages information for each set…”).
Consider claims 4, 10 (depends on at least claims 1, 7), Jeong in view of He discloses the limitations of claims 1, 7 as applied to claim rejection 1, 7 above and further discloses:
Jeong teaches wherein the NF set ID identifies one or more NF instances that have access to a same context data (see at least ¶ [0095], “…an identifier that can identify the corresponding NF set (NF set ID or ID of the NF instance that manages NF set information…” and see at least ¶ [0096], “…identified by an AMF set ID or an ID of the NF that manages information for each set…”).
Consider claims 5, 11 (depends on at least claims 1, 7), Jeong in view of He discloses the limitations of claims 1, 7 as applied to claim rejection 1, 7 above and further discloses:
Jeong teaches providing (303) the included NF set ID to a discovery process for discovery NF instances in the communication network (see at least ¶ [0019], “…receiving, from a service communication proxy (SCP) entity, a network function (NF) discovery request message including first information associated with a target SCP entity, and transmitting, to the SCP entity, an NF discovery response message including second information associated with the target SCP entity based on the first information…”).
Consider claims 6, 12 (depends on at least claims 1, 7), Jeong in view of He discloses the limitations of claims 1, 7 as applied to claim rejection 1, 7 above and further discloses:
Jeong teaches wherein the NF instance is for an NF comprising one or more of the following: Session Management Function, SMF, Access Management Function, AMF, Authentication Service Function, AUSF, Policy Control Function, PCF, Unified Data Manager, UDM, Network Repository Function, NRF, and Network Exposure Function, NEF (see at least ¶ [0057], “…the NF may be at least one entity among an access and mobility management function (AMF) entity, a session management function (SMF) entity, and a network slice selection function (NSSF) entity. However, embodiments of the disclosure may be equally applied even when an NF is actually implemented as an instance (e.g., AMF instance, SMF instance, or NSSF instance)…”).
Consider claim 13 (depends on at least claim 1), Jeong in view of He discloses the limitations of claim 1 as applied to claim rejection 1 above and further discloses:
Jeong teaches a computer program product comprising instructions, which, when executed on at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to carry the method according to claim 1, as performed by the second network node (see at least ¶ [0174], “…The one or more programs stored in the computer-readable storage medium are configured to be executable by one or more processors of an electronic device…”).
Consider claim 14 (depends on at least claim 1), Jeong in view of He discloses the limitations of claim 1 as applied to claim rejection 1 above and further discloses:
Jeong teaches a computer-readable storage medium, having stored there on a computer program product comprising instructions which, when executed on at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to carry out the method according to claim 1, as performed by the second network node (see at least ¶ [0174], “…The one or more programs stored in the computer-readable storage medium are configured to be executable by one or more processors of an electronic device…”).
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 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.
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.
Claims 3, 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Application Publication 20210258864 (hereinafter referred to as Jeong) in view of US Patent Application Publication 20240323824 (hereinafter referred to as He) and further in view of US Patent No.: 10509638 (hereinafter referred to as Gala).
Consider claim 3, 9 (depends on at least claim 1, 7), Jeong in view of He discloses the limitations of claim 1, 7 as applied to claim rejection 1, 7 above and further discloses:
Jeong in view of He disclose all the subject matters of the claimed invention concept. However, Jeong in view of He does not particularly disclose wherein the included NF Set ID comprises a string of numbers and/or letters out of a specific string series for the second radio network node to use. In an analogous field of endeavor, attention is directed to Gala, which teaches wherein the included NF Set ID comprises a string of numbers and/or letters out of a specific string series for the second radio network node to use (see Gala, at least Col. 6, Line 15-18, “…the container ID (304) may be a string of characters (e.g., letters, numbers, symbols, etc.) that may be used to uniquely identify…”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious a finding that one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention could have combined the elements as claimed by the know method, and that in combination. Each element merely performs the same function as it does separately; Jeong and He disclosed inventions, and have wherein the included NF Set ID comprises a string of numbers and/or letters out of a specific string series for the second radio network node to use, as taught by Gala, thereby, to provide a systems management service for standardizing systems management functionality and interfacing in a single, unified architecture, as discussed by Gala, (see at least Col. 2, Line 48-50).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHUONG A NGO whose telephone number is (571)270-7264. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday from 5:30AM-3:30PM.
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, Anthony S Addy can be reached at (571) 272-7795. 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.
/CHUONG A NGO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2645
Prosecution Insights