DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
2. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55
Information Disclosure Statement
3. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on March 14, 2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
4. The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant' s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
5. 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.
6. 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)(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.
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.
7. Claim(s) 1, 8, 9, 11, 13, 15, 18, 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Vakeesar et al. (WO 2022248035 A1), hereinafter Vakeesar et al…
8. Regarding claim 1, A method performed by a first network node in a communication network, comprising: receiving a request about QoS information for a terminal device, Vakeesar et al. teaches (“Fig. 9 shows a signaling diagram for the interaction between an AMF, a SMF and an AF according to embodiments of the invention. This means that the first network node 100 act as a SMF in this case while the second network node 300 act as an AMF. Further, the client device is herein a UE.” [Pg. 26 Lines 23-26]) The first node is the SMF. The client device is a UE, a UE teaches a terminal device.
Following up with, (“Fig. 9, the SMF 100 receives the event exposure subscribe request 520 from the AMF 300 and derives the request for a notification of number of QoS flows per 5QI per S- NSSAI per CAG-ID/NID/PLMN-ID, and a UE identifier. In step 3 in Fig. 9, the SMF 100 identifies the UE based on UE identifier in the event exposure subscribe request 520 and thereafter determines a number of currently supported QoS flows per 5QI per S-NSSAI per CAG-ID/NID/PLMN-ID for the identified UE based on the received event exposure subscribe request 520” [Pg. 26 Lines 34-36 and Pg. 27 Lines 1-4]). The SMF receives event exposure subscribe request teaching receiving a request about QoS information. The SMF identifies the UE based on UE identifier and determines the QoS flows teaching QoS information for a terminal device.
In further, determining the QoS information for the terminal device, based at least on a location of the terminal device and/or a network status, Vakeesar et al. teaches, (“At the moment, Quality-of- Service (QoS) Notification Control (QNC) mechanism passes fulfilment status of each Guaranteed Bit Rate (GBR) QoS flow along with user relative location information in terms of cell Identity/identifier (ID)” [Pg. 9 Lines 36 and Pg. 10 Lines 1-3]). The user relative location information is given in terms of identifier.
Following up with, (“Fig. 9, the SMF 100 receives the event exposure subscribe request 520 from the AMF 300 and derives the request for a notification of number of QoS flows per 5QI per S- NSSAI per CAG-ID/NID/PLMN-ID, and a UE identifier. In step 3 in Fig. 9, the SMF 100 identifies the UE based on UE identifier in the event exposure subscribe request 520 and thereafter determines a number of currently supported QoS flows per 5QI per S-NSSAI per CAG-ID/NID/PLMN-ID for the identified UE based on the received event exposure subscribe request 520” [Pg. 26 Lines 34-36 and Pg. 27 Lines 1-4]). The SMF identifies UE based on UE identifier and determines number of QoS flows.
In further, and transmitting a response including the determined QoS information, Vakeesar et al. teaches, (“Fig. 9, the SMF 100 transmits an event exposure notification 530 to the AMF 300 in response to the reception of the event exposure subscribe request 520. The event exposure notification 530 indicates the determined number of currently supported QoS flows per S- NSSAI for the identified UE.” [Pg. 27 Lines 6-9]). SMF 100 transmits event exposure notification including number of QoS flows.
9. Regarding claim 8, the method according to claim 1, wherein the first network node determines the QoS information for the terminal device, based further on a policy and charging control rule, PCC rule, and/or a single network slice selection assistance information, NSSAI, and/or the location of the terminal device, and/or the network status, and/or an available period/time, Vakeesar et al. teaches, Vakeesar et al. teaches, (“Fig. 9 shows a signaling diagram for the interaction between an AMF, a SMF and an AF according to embodiments of the invention. This means that the first network node 100 act as a SMF in this case while the second network node 300 act as an AMF. Further, the client device is herein a UE.” [Pg 26. Lines 22-26]). The client device is a UE, teaching the terminal device.
Following up with, (“Fig. 9, the SMF 100 receives the event exposure subscribe request 520 from the AMF 300 and derives the request for a notification of number of QoS flows per 5QI per S- NSSAI per CAG-ID/NID/PLMN-ID, and a UE identifier. In step 3 in Fig. 9, the SMF 100 identifies the UE based on UE identifier in the event exposure subscribe request 520 and thereafter determines a number of currently supported QoS flows per 5QI per S-NSSAI per CAG-ID/NID/PLMN-ID for the identified UE based on the received event exposure subscribe request 520” [Pg. 26 Lines 34-36 and Pg. 27 Lines 1-4]). The SMF is a first network node to determine a number of QoS flows per 5QI per S-NSSAI for the identified UE teaching determining QoS information for terminal device based on NSSAI.
10. Regarding claim 9, The method according to claim 8, wherein the first network node obtains the PCC rule, from a policy control function, PCF- and/or wherein the first network node obtains the NSSAI from a unified data repository, UDR, and/or a network slice selection function, NSSF, Vakeesar et al. teaches, (“The SMF may perform an SM Policy Association Establishment procedure as defined in clause 4.16.4 of TS 23.502 to establish an SM Policy Association with the PCF and get the default PCC Rules that also apply to additional QoS/KPI requirements for the PDU session” [Pg. 34 Lines 15-18]). Establishing SM Policy Association with the PCF and get the default PCC rules teaches obtaining PCC rule from PCF.
11. Regarding claim 11, the method according to claim 1, wherein the first network node determines the QoS information, by applying a predetermined policy about a relationship between the QoS information for the terminal device, and the location of the terminal device, and/or the network status, and/or a device type of the terminal device, and/or a device subscription for the terminal device, Vakeesar et al. teaches, (“The SMF may perform an SM Policy Association Establishment procedure as defined in clause 4.16.4 of TS 23.502 to establish an SM Policy Association with the PCF and get the default PCC Rules that also apply to additional QoS/KPI requirements for the PDU session” [Pg. 34 Lines 15-18]). PCC rules apply to QoS/KPI requirements teaching applying a predetermined policy between the QoS information.
Following up with, (“In step 9 in Fig. 13, the SMF provides the additional QoS/KPI requirements to the chosen UPF and get response in terms of what can be fulfilled” [Pg. 34 Lines 27-28]). Providing QoS/KPI requirements to get response of what can be fulfilled teaches determines the QoS information.
In further, wherein the device subscription for the terminal device comprises a mapping relationship between the location of the terminal device and the QoS information-; and/orAttorney Docket: 3602-2925US1 wherein the determined QoS information comprise QoS characteristics available for the terminal device, Vakeesar et al. teaches, (In step 9 in Fig. 11, each SMF will periodically report the number of currently active or supported QoS flows per 5QI per S-NSSAI that is associated with each UE it serves. Based on UE location information, the AMF can determine the number of UEs that have registered to use a given S-NSSAI in a given service area. It can also determine data traffic density per 5QI per S-NSSAI per service area based on UE location information and periodical SMF input taking place in step 9” [Pg. 31 Lines 36-37 and Pg. 32 Lines 1-4]). Reporting number of active or supported QoS flows associated with each UE it serves teaches QoS information for the terminal device. The number of active or supported QoS flows associated with each UE teaches characteristics available for the terminal device.
12. Regarding claim 13, the method according to claim 11, wherein the QoS characteristics comprise at least one of:
o 5G QoS Identifier, 5QI;
o QoS Class Identifier, QCI;
o Allocation and Retention Priority, ARP;
o Network Slice Selection Assistance Information, NSSAI;
o Guaranteed Flow Bit Rate, GFBR;
o Maximum Flow Bit Rate, MFBR;
o Maximum Packet Loss Rate;
o per Session Aggregate Maximum Bit Rate, Session-AMBR;
o Aggregate Maximum Bit Rate, AMBR; Reflective QoS Attribute, RQA;
o Notification control;
o QoS Flow ID, QFI; and/or QoS Rules; and wherein the determined QoS information further comprises a specific location area for the QoS characteristics-j wherein the determined QoS information further comprises: an available time window and/or an available location area for the OoS characteristics.
Vakeesar et al teaches, (“In step 9 in Fig. 11, each SMF will periodically report the number of currently active or supported QoS flows per 5QI per S-NSSAI that is associated with each UE it serves” [Pg. 31 Lines 36-37]). The QoS flows per 5QI per S-NSSAI teaches a 5G QoS Identifier, 5QI.
13. Regarding claim 15, the method according to claim 1, wherein the request comprises a subscription of a notification about change of the QoS information-; and/or wherein the first network node receives the request from the terminal device, or a second network node severing the terminal device, Vakeesar et al. teaches, (“the first network node being configured to receive an event exposure subscribe request from an Access and Mobility Management Function, AMF, the event exposure subscribe request indicating a request for a notification of number of QoS flows per S-NSSAI, and a client device identifier” [Pg. 4 Lines 15-18]). The Event exposure subscribe request comprises a subscription that request for a notification.
Following up with, (“Also, a number of QoS flows per S-NSSAI may be understood as a number of currently supported QoS flows per S-NSSAI” [Pg. 4 Lines 24-25]). The number of currently supported QoS flows teaches a notification about change of QoS information.
14. Regarding claim 18, a method performed by a second network node in a communication network, comprising: transmitting a request about QoS information for a terminal device, Vakeesar et al. teaches, (“Fig. 9 shows a signaling diagram for the interaction between an AMF, a SMF and an AF according to embodiments of the invention. This means that the first network node 100 act as a SMF in this case while the second network node 300 act as an AMF. Further, the client device is herein a UE.” [Pg 26. Lines 22-26]). The second network node is the AMF.
Following up with, (“Fig. 9, the AMF 300 transmit an event exposure subscribe request 520 to a SMF 100. The event exposure subscribe request 520 indicates a request for a notification of a number of QoS flows per 5QI per S-NSSAI per UE per service area, and also a UE identifier. This is for the AMF 300 to determine how many QoS flows are currently managed by the first network node 100 for an identified UE.” [Pg. 26 Lines 28-32]). Transmitting an event exposure subscribe request comprising UE per service area, and UE identifier to the SMF teaches transmitting a request about QoS information for the terminal device (e.g. UE).
In further, and receiving a response including determined QoS information, Vakeesar et al. teaches, (“Fig. 9, the SMF 100 transmits an event exposure notification 530 to the AMF 300 in response to the reception of the event exposure subscribe request 520. The event exposure notification 530 indicates the determined number of currently supported QoS flows per S- NSSAI for the identified UE.” [Pg. 27 Lines 6-9]). The SMF transmits to AMF event exposure indicates number of supported QoS flows for identified UE, teaching receiving response including QoS information.
In further, wherein the determined QoS information for the terminal device is based at least on a location of the terminal device and/or a network status, Vakeesar et al. teaches, (“At the moment, Quality-of- Service (QoS) Notification Control (QNC) mechanism passes fulfilment status of each Guaranteed Bit Rate (GBR) QoS flow along with user relative location information in terms of cell Identity/identifier (ID)” [Pg. 9 Lines 36 and Pg. 10 Lines 1-3]). The user relative location information is given in terms of identifier.
Following up with, (“In step 3 in Fig. 9, the SMF 100 identifies the UE based on UE identifier in the event exposure subscribe request 520 and thereafter determines a number of currently supported QoS flows per 5QI per S-NSSAI per CAG-ID/NID/PLMN-ID for the identified UE based on the received event exposure subscribe request 520” [Pg. 27 Lines 1-4]). The SMF determines number of QoS flows based on UE identifier.
15. Regarding claim 23, the method according to claim 18, wherein the request comprises a subscription of a notification about change of the QoS information;- and/or wherein the second network node is severing the terminal device, and transmits the request to a first network node; and/or wherein the first network node comprises a network exposure function, NEF: and wherein the first network node receives the request from the terminal device, directly or via another network node, Vakeesar et al. teaches, (“the first network node being configured to receive an event exposure subscribe request from an Access and Mobility Management Function, AMF, the event exposure subscribe request indicating a request for a notification of number of QoS flows per S-NSSAI, and a client device identifier” [Pg. 4 Liens 15-18]). The first node receives event exposure subscribe request from the AMF (e.g. another network node). The request comprises a subscription that request for a notification.
Following up with, (“Also, a number of QoS flows per S-NSSAI may be understood as a number of currently supported QoS flows per S-NSSAI” [Pg. 4 Lines 24-25]). The number of currently supported QoS flows teaches a notification about change of QoS information.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
16. 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.
17. 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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.
18. Claim(s) 2, 3, 5, 6, 19, 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vakeesar et al. (WO 2022248035 A1) in view of Yang et al. (CN 111130628 A / translation has been relied upon and is provided in this correspondence).
19. Regarding claim 2, Vakeesar et al. teaches the request, (“Fig. 9, the SMF 100 receives the event exposure subscribe request 520 from the AMF 300 and derives the request for a notification of number of QoS flows per 5QI per S- NSSAI per CAG-ID/NID/PLMN-ID, and a UE identifier. In step 3 in Fig. 9, the SMF 100 identifies the UE based on UE identifier in the event exposure subscribe request 520 and thereafter determines a number of currently supported QoS flows per 5QI per S-NSSAI per CAG-ID/NID/PLMN-ID for the identified UE based on the received event exposure subscribe request 520” [Pg. 26 Lines 34-36 and Pg. 27 Lines 1-4]). The event exposure subscribe request teaches the request.
Although Vakeesar et al. teaches the request, Vakeesar et al. does not explicitly teach the method according to claim 1, wherein the request comprises at least one of: an internet protocol address of the terminal device, a QoS service name, an Access Point Name, APN, and/or a data network name, DNN.
In the same field of endeavor of including wherein the request comprises at least one of: an internet protocol address of the terminal device, a QoS service name, an Access Point Name, APN, and/or a data network name, DNN, Yang et al. teaches, (“the method may comprise: data service request message sent by the terminal ground base station receives on the aircraft, data service request message is used for requesting for data service, the data service request message comprises an access point (Access Point Name, APN)” [Pg. 2 Paragraph 13-14]). The service request comprises an APN.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Vakeesar et al. to include the APN within the request for data service as taught by Yang et al… The suggestion/motivation to do so would help (“in order to distinguish the aircraft sensor devices and the common terminal” [Pg. 8 Paragraph 2]).
20. Regarding claim 3, the method according to claim 2, further comprises: obtaining an identifier of the terminal device in the communication network, based on the internet protocol address of the terminal device, Vakeesar et al. teaches, (“In step 3 in Fig. 9, the SMF 100 identifies the UE based on UE identifier in the event exposure subscribe request 520 and thereafter determines a number of currently supported QoS flows per 5QI per S-NSSAI per CAG-ID/NID/PLMN-ID for the identified UE based on the received event exposure subscribe request 520” [Pg. 27 Lines 1-4]). The UE (e.g. terminal) is identified based on the UE identifier.
Following up with, (“The AF further provides per UE-specific designated service area and a UE is identified by GPSI, IP address or Medium Access Control (MAC) address” [Pg. 27 Lines 37 and Pg. 28 Lines 1-2]) The UE (e.g. terminal), is identified by the IP address.
In further, and obtaining the location of the terminal device, based on the identifier of the terminal device and/or wherein the location of the terminal device is obtained, based on a mapping relationship between the location and an internet protocol address range including the internet protocol address of the terminal device, (“At the moment, Quality-of- Service (QoS) Notification Control (QNC) mechanism passes fulfilment status of each Guaranteed Bit Rate (GBR) QoS flow along with user relative location information in terms of cell Identity/identifier (ID)” [Pg. 9 Lines 36 and Pg. 10 Lines 1-3]). The user relative location information is given in terms of identifier.
Following up with, (“Fig. 9, the SMF 100 receives the event exposure subscribe request 520 from the AMF 300 and derives the request for a notification of number of QoS flows per 5QI per S- NSSAI per CAG-ID/NID/PLMN-ID, and a UE identifier. In step 3 in Fig. 9, the SMF 100 identifies the UE based on UE identifier in the event exposure subscribe request 520 and thereafter determines a number of currently supported QoS flows per 5QI per S-NSSAI per CAG-ID/NID/PLMN-ID for the identified UE based on the received event exposure subscribe request 520” [Pg. 26 Lines 34-36 and Pg. 27 Lines 1-4]). The SMF identifies UE based on UE identifier and determines number of QoS flows.
21. Regarding claim 5, the method according to claim 3, wherein the identifier of the terminal device comprises a generic public subscription identifier, GPSI, or an international mobile subscriber identity, IMSI, or a subscription permanent identifier, SUPI, Vakeesar et al. teaches, (“The AF further provides per UE-specific designated service area and a UE is identified by GPSI, IP address or Medium Access Control (MAC) address” [Pg. 27 Lines 37 and Pg. 28 Lines 1-2]) The UE (e.g. terminal), is identified by the GPSI.
22. Regarding claim 6, the method according to claim 3, wherein the first network node obtains the location of the terminal device from a unified data management, UDM, and/or an access and mobility management function, AMF, and/or Gateway Mobile Location Centre, GMLC, Vakeesar et al. teaches, (“At the moment, Quality-of- Service (QoS) Notification Control (QNC) mechanism passes fulfilment status of each Guaranteed Bit Rate (GBR) QoS flow along with user relative location information in terms of cell Identity/identifier (ID)” [Pg. 9 Lines 36 and Pg. 10 Lines 1-3]). The user relative location information is given in terms of identifier.
Following up with, (“Fig. 9, the SMF 100 receives the event exposure subscribe request 520 from the AMF 300 and derives the request for a notification of number of QoS flows per 5QI per S- NSSAI per CAG-ID/NID/PLMN-ID, and a UE identifier. In step 3 in Fig. 9, the SMF 100 identifies the UE based on UE identifier in the event exposure subscribe request 520 and thereafter determines a number of currently supported QoS flows per 5QI per S-NSSAI per CAG-ID/NID/PLMN-ID for the identified UE based on the received event exposure subscribe request 520” [Pg. 26 Lines 34-36 and Pg. 27 Lines 1-4]). The first network node is the SMF. The event exposure request comprises of the UE identifier teaching obtains the location of the terminal device and/or AMF.
23. Regarding claim 19, Vakeesar et al. teaches the request, (“Fig. 9, the AMF 300 transmit an event exposure subscribe request 520 to a SMF 100. The event exposure subscribe request 520 indicates a request for a notification of a number of QoS flows per 5QI per S-NSSAI per UE per service area, and also a UE identifier. This is for the AMF 300 to determine how many QoS flows are currently managed by the first network node 100 for an identified UE.” [Pg. 26 Lines 28-32]). Transmitting an event exposure subscribe request.
Although Vakeesar et al. teaches the request, Vakeesar et al. does not explicitly teach the method according to claim 1, wherein the request comprises at least one of: an internet protocol address of the terminal device, a QoS service name, an Access Point Name, APN, and/or a data network name, DNN.
In the same field of endeavor of including wherein the request comprises at least one of: an internet protocol address of the terminal device, a QoS service name, an Access Point Name, APN, and/or a data network name, DNN, Yang et al. teaches, (“the method may comprise: data service request message sent by the terminal ground base station receives on the aircraft, data service request message is used for requesting for data service, the data service request message comprises an access point (Access Point Name, APN)” [Pg. 2 Paragraph 13-14]). The service request comprises an APN.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Vakeesar et al. to include the APN within the request for data service as taught by Yang et al… The suggestion/motivation to do so would help (“in order to distinguish the aircraft sensor devices and the common terminal” [Pg. 8 Paragraph 2]).
24. Regarding claim 21, the method according to claim 19, wherein the QoS characteristics comprise at least one of:
o 5G QoS Identifier, 5QI;
o QoS Class Identifier, QCI;
o Allocation and Retention Priority, ARP;
o Network Slice Selection Assistance Information, NSSAI;
o Guaranteed Flow Bit Rate, GFBR;
o Maximum Flow Bit Rate, MFBR;
o Maximum Packet Loss Rate;
o per Session Aggregate Maximum Bit Rate, Session-AMBR;
o Aggregate Maximum Bit Rate, AMBR; Reflective QoS Attribute, RQA;
o Notification control;
o QoS Flow ID, QFI; and/or QoS Rules; and wherein the determined QoS information further comprises a specific location area for the QoS characteristics-j wherein the determined QoS information further comprises: an available time window and/or an available location area for the QoS characteristics.
Vakeesar et al teaches, (“Fig. 9, the AMF 300 transmit an event exposure subscribe request 520 to a SMF 100. The event exposure subscribe request 520 indicates a request for a notification of a number of QoS flows per 5QI per S-NSSAI per UE per service area, and also a UE identifier. This is for the AMF 300 to determine how many QoS flows are currently managed by the first network node 100 for an identified UE.” [Pg. 26 Lines 28-32]). The QoS flows per 5QI per S-NSSAI teaches a 5G QoS Identifier, 5QI and NSSAI.
25. Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vakeesar et al. (WO 2022248035 A1) in view of Jin et al. (WO 2022007847 A1/ translation has been relied upon and is provided in this correspondence).
26. Regarding claim 7, Vakeesar et al. teaches the first network node obtains network status, (“At the moment, Quality-of- Service (QoS) Notification Control (QNC) mechanism passes fulfilment status of each Guaranteed Bit Rate (GBR) QoS flow along with user relative location information in terms of cell Identity/identifier (ID)” [Pg. 9 Lines 36 and Pg. 10 Lines 1-3]). The user relative location information is given in terms of identifier. The location is the network status.
Following up with, (“Fig. 9, the SMF 100 receives the event exposure subscribe request 520 from the AMF 300 and derives the request for a notification of number of QoS flows per 5QI per S- NSSAI per CAG-ID/NID/PLMN-ID, and a UE identifier. In step 3 in Fig. 9, the SMF 100 identifies the UE based on UE identifier in the event exposure subscribe request 520 and thereafter determines a number of currently supported QoS flows per 5QI per S-NSSAI per CAG-ID/NID/PLMN-ID for the identified UE based on the received event exposure subscribe request 520” [Pg. 26 Lines 34-36 and Pg. 27 Lines 1-4]). The SMF identifies UE based on UE identifier (e.g. network status) and determines number of QoS flows.
Although Vakeesar et al. teaches the first network node obtains network status, Vakeesar et al. does not explicitly teach obtaining network status from a network data analytics function, NWDAF; wherein the network status comprises information about network resources, and/or congestion status.
In the same field of endeavor of including obtaining network status from a network data analytics function, NWDAF; wherein the network status comprises information about network resources, and/or congestion status Jin et al. teaches, (“In the first possible implementation manner, the first core network element is the PCF, the terminal device can send a first request to the PCF through the SMF to request a recovery strategy, the PCF obtains network status information from the NWDAF” [Pg. 24 Paragraph 6]). The PCF is the terminal device that obtains network status from the NWDAF.
Following up with, (“The NWDAF may obtain the transmission status of the first UPF from the first UPF, and/or whether the service processing capability of the first UPF meets the service index. As an optional manner, when the NWDAF obtains the congestion of the first UPF from the first UPF, it may determine from the OAM whether there is an access network device that is not congested” [Pg. 29 Paragraph 5-6 and Pg. 30 Paragraph 1]). Transmission status teaches information about network resources. NWDAF also obtains congestion.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Vakeesar et al. to include a terminal (e.g. PCF) to obtain network status information from the NWDAF as taught by Jin et al… The suggestion/motivation to do so would allow (“…for the terminal device according to the network transmission information sent by the NWDAF, and sends the request. To the terminal device, so that the terminal device no longer blindly tries, can make adjustments in time, can quickly restore the service for the user, reduce the delay, and improve the user experience” [Pg. 5 Paragraph 1]).
27. Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vakeesar et al. (WO 2022248035 A1) in view of Marupaduga et al. (US 20220330256 A1).
28. Regarding claim 17, Vakeesar et al. teaches, the first network node and wherein the first network node receives the request from the terminal device, directly or via another network node, Vakeesar et al. teaches, (“Fig. 9 shows a signaling diagram for the interaction between an AMF, a SMF and an AF according to embodiments of the invention. This means that the first network node 100 act as a SMF in this case while the second network node 300 act as an AMF. Further, the client device is herein a UE.” [Pg. 26 Lines 23-26]) The first node is the SMF and the second network node is the AMF. The client device is a UE, a UE teaches a terminal device.
Following up with, (“Fig. 9, the SMF 100 receives the event exposure subscribe request 520 from the AMF 300 and derives the request for a notification of number of QoS flows per 5QI per S- NSSAI per CAG-ID/NID/PLMN-ID, and a UE identifier” [Pg. 26 Lines 34-36]).
Although Vakeesar et al. teaches the first network node and wherein the first network node receives the request from the terminal device, directly or via another network node, Vakeesar et al. does not explicitly teach comprises a network exposure function, NEF.
In the same field of endeavor of including the network exposure function, Marupaduga et al. teaches, (“the controller node 230 may comprise user plane NFs and/or control plane NFs, including but not limited to a Core Access and Mobility Management Function (AMF), an Authentication Server Function (AUSF), a Unified Data Management (UDM), a Session Management Function (SMF), a Policy Control Function (PCF), an Application Function (AF), a Network Exposure Function (NEF), a NF Repository Function (NRF), a Network Slice Selection Function (NSSF), a Short Message Service Function (SMSF), and the like” [0052]). The controller node comprises a NEF.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Vakeesar et al. to include the controller node that includes the network exposure function (NEF) as taught by Marupaduga et al… The suggestion/motivation to do so would allow (“The controller node 230 may be any network node configured to communicate and/or control information over the system 200. The controller node 230 may be configured to transmit control information associated with resource usage thresholds and/or usage parameters” [0052]).
29. Claim(s) 26 and 31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vakeesar et al. (WO 2022248035 A1) in view of Thomas (US 11889344 B2).
30. Regarding claim 26, Vakeesar et al. teaches a communication network, comprising: Attorney Docket: 3602-2925US1 transmitting a request about QoS information for a terminal device, (“Fig. 9, the AMF 300 transmit an event exposure subscribe request 520 to a SMF 100. The event exposure subscribe request 520 indicates a request for a notification of a number of QoS flows per 5QI per S-NSSAI per UE per service area, and also a UE identifier. This is for the AMF 300 to determine how many QoS flows are currently managed by the first network node 100 for an identified UE.” [Pg. 26 Lines 28-32]). Transmitting an event exposure subscribe request for a number of QoS teaches transmitting a request about QoS information for an identified UE. The UE teaches a terminal device.
In further, determined QoS information, Vakeesar et al. teaches, (“Fig. 9, the SMF 100 identifies the UE based on UE identifier in the event exposure subscribe request 520 and thereafter determines a number of currently supported QoS flows per SQI per S-NSSAI per CAG-IO/NIO/PLMN-IO for the identified UE based on the received event exposure subscribe request 520” [Pg. 27 Lines 1-4]). The SMF determines a number of supported QoS flows teaching determined QoS information.
In further, wherein the determined QoS information for the terminal device is based at least on a location of the terminal device and/or a network status, Vakeesar et al. teaches, Vakeesar et al. teaches, (“At the moment, Quality-of- Service (QoS) Notification Control (QNC) mechanism passes fulfilment status of each Guaranteed Bit Rate (GBR) QoS flow along with user relative location information in terms of cell Identity/identifier (ID)” [Pg. 9 Lines 36 and Pg. 10 Lines 1-3]). The user relative location information is given in terms of identifier.
Following up with, (“Fig. 9, the SMF 100 receives the event exposure subscribe request 520 from the AMF 300 and derives the request for a notification of number of QoS flows per 5QI per S- NSSAI per CAG-ID/NID/PLMN-ID, and a UE identifier. In step 3 in Fig. 9, the SMF 100 identifies the UE based on UE identifier in the event exposure subscribe request 520 and thereafter determines a number of currently supported QoS flows per 5QI per S-NSSAI per CAG-ID/NID/PLMN-ID for the identified UE based on the received event exposure subscribe request 520” [Pg. 26 Lines 34-36 and Pg. 27 Lines 1-4]). The SMF identifies UE based on UE identifier and determines number of QoS flows.
Although Vakeesar et al. teaches a communication network, comprising: Attorney Docket: 3602-2925US1 transmitting a request about QoS information for a terminal device, determined QoS information, and wherein the determined QoS information for the terminal device is based at least on a location of the terminal device and/or a network status, Vakeesar et al. does not explicitly teach a method performed by a terminal device in a communication network.
In the same field of endeavor of including a method performed by a terminal device in a communication network, Thomas teaches, (“For example, a UE 1 may be a first apparatus 100, and a UE 2 may be a second apparatus 200.” [Pg. 35 Section 12 Lines 47-49]). The first apparatus is a UE teaching a terminal device.
Following up with, (“According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, a method for performing wireless communication by a second apparatus is provided. The method includes: receiving a transport block from a first apparatus based on a QoS flow for the first apparatus and QoS flow-SLRB mapping information representing mapping relation between QoS flow” [Pg. 31 Section 3 Lines 49-54]). Receiving a transport block from a first apparatus based on QoS flow teaches receiving a response in a communication network.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Vakeesar et al. to include a UE 1 (e.g. first apparatus) to receive a transport block based on a QoS flow as taught by Thomas. The suggestion/motivation to do so would allow (“UEs with similar QoS characteristics in a validity area may enable efficient delivery of QoS-to-SLRB mapping information and save on broadcast system information signaling overhead” [Pg. 31 Section 4 Lines 17-20]).
31. Regarding claim 31, the method according to claim 26, wherein the request comprises a subscription of a notification about change of the QoS information-; and/or wherein the terminal device transmits the request to a first network node, directly or via another network node; and/or wherein the first network node comprises a network exposure function, NEF, Vakeesar et al. teaches, (“the first network node being configured to receive an event exposure subscribe request from an Access and Mobility Management Function, AMF, the event exposure subscribe request indicating a request for a notification of number of QoS flows per S-NSSAI, and a client device identifier” [Pg. 4 Lines 15-18]). The event exposure subscribe request comprises a subscription that request for a notification of a number of QoS flows (e.g. change of QoS information).
32. Claim(s) 27, 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vakeesar et al. (WO 2022248035 A1) in view of Thomas (US 11889344 B2) in further view of Yang et al. (CN 111130628 A / translation has been relied upon and is provided in this correspondence).
33. Regarding claim 27, Vakeesar et al. teaches the request, (“Fig. 9, the AMF 300 transmit an event exposure subscribe request 520 to a SMF 100. The event exposure subscribe request 520 indicates a request for a notification of a number of QoS flows per 5QI per S-NSSAI per UE per service area, and also a UE identifier. This is for the AMF 300 to determine how many QoS flows are currently managed by the first network node 100 for an identified UE.” [Pg. 26 Lines 28-32]). The event exposure subscribe request is a request.
Although Vakeesar et al. teaches the request, Vakeesar et al. does not explicitly teach the method according to claim 26, wherein the request comprises at least one of: an internet protocol address of the terminal device, a QoS service name, an Access Point Name, APN, and/or a data network name, DNN.
In the same field of endeavor of including wherein the request comprises at least one of: an internet protocol address of the terminal device, a QoS service name, an Access Point Name, APN, and/or a data network name, DNN, Yang et al. teaches, (“the method may comprise: data service request message sent by the terminal ground base station receives on the aircraft, data service request message is used for requesting for data service, the data service request message comprises an access point (Access Point Name, APN)” [Pg. 2 Paragraph 13-14]). The service request comprises an APN.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Vakeesar et al. to include the APN within the request for data service as taught by Yang et al… The suggestion/motivation to do so would help (“in order to distinguish the aircraft sensor devices and the common terminal” [Pg. 8 Paragraph 2]).
34. Regarding claim 29, the method according to claim 27, wherein the QoS characteristics comprise at least one of:
o 5G QoS Identifier, 5QI;
o QoS Class Identifier, QCI;
o Allocation and Retention Priority, ARP;
o Network Slice Selection Assistance Information, NSSAI;
o Guaranteed Flow Bit Rate, GFBR;
o Maximum Flow Bit Rate, MFBR;
o Maximum Packet Loss Rate;
o per Session Aggregate Maximum Bit Rate, Session-AMBR;
o Aggregate Maximum Bit Rate, AMBR; Reflective QoS Attribute, RQA;
o Notification control;
o QoS Flow ID, QFI; and/or QoS Rules; and wherein the determined QoS information further comprises a specific location area for the QoS characteristics-j wherein the determined QoS information further comprises: an available time window and/or an available location area for the QoS characteristics.
Vakeesar et al teaches, (“Fig. 9, the AMF 300 transmit an event exposure subscribe request 520 to a SMF 100. The event exposure subscribe request 520 indicates a request for a notification of a number of QoS flows per 5QI per S-NSSAI per UE per service area, and also a UE identifier. This is for the AMF 300 to determine how many QoS flows are currently managed by the first network node 100 for an identified UE.” [Pg. 26 Lines 28-32]). The QoS flows per 5QI per S-NSSAI teaches a 5G QoS Identifier, 5QI and NSSAI.
Conclusion
35. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
36. The relevance of this prior art, “Communication Device And Method For Mobile Communication Based On Quality Of Service (QOS) Control” Document ID US 12082052 B2; A communication device is provided to obtain information related to QoS, determine to transmit information, and transmits information for QoS. The art focuses on improving the accuracy of control related to QoS to enhance quality of a radio network.
37. The relevance of this prior art, “VERIFICATION” Document ID US 20220408260 A1; The art focuses on modifying and enhancing security for communication between terminal nodes. The invention includes services capabilities such as network exposure function (NEF) in a 5G network.
38. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892 form. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAUL THANH TRAN whose telephone number is (571)272-9841. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri Flex 8:00am-5:00pm.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAUL THANH TRAN whose telephone number is (571)272-9841. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri Flex 8:00am-5:00pm.
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, Gary Mui can be reached at 571-270-1420. 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.
/PAUL THANH TRAN/Examiner, Art Unit 2465
March 26, 2026
/GARY MUI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2465