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 application filed on 7/31/2026.
Claims 27-48 have been examined and are pending with this action.
Priority
Examiner acknowledges that the Applicant claims a foreign priority benefit of 371 of PCTCN2021127618 filed on 10/29/2021.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 4/26/2024 and these drawings are accepted.
Arguments
Applicant arguments related to limitations are not persuasive based on the following arguments.
Applicant:
Applicant argues that the limitation transmitting, to Unified Data Management node
is not disclosed in the art provided.
Examiner:
Examiner cites that Zhu discloses (Zhu:“ a PDU session ID is mandatory when communicating with some 5G core network nodes, such as
unified data management ”),
Zhu in general discloses a method and an apparatus for allocating a PDU session ID for a terminal device and in above citation PDU session communication with UDM node is disclosed. The amendment made to the dependent claims and arguments made on them were also discussed on the interview and are objected in the latest office action.
Based on the above explanation, applicants’ arguments are not persuasive.
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.
claims 27-28, 30-34, 36-40, 42-44 & 46-48 are rejected based on rationale provided for
are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhu (WO 2020248579 A1) in view of David et al (US 20190053295 A1).
As per claim 27, Zhu discloses a method performed by a first network node (Zhu: “allocate a unique PDU Session ID for the PDN connection, since a PDU session ID is mandatory when
communicating with some 5G core network nodes”), comprising:
transmitting, to Unified Data Management node, (UDM) (Zhu:“ a PDU session ID is mandatory when communicating with some 5G core network nodes, such as
unified data management ”), during establishment of a Packet Data Network, PDN, connection (Zhu: “5GS to establish a packet data network connection, PDN connection. A combined PDN gateway control plane and session management function, PGW-C+SMF may be selected for establishing the PDN connection. "), and
receiving a response message from the UDM node (Zhu:“In step S304, UDM 200 gets all the registered PDU Session IDs from the smf-registrations data.
In step S305, UDM 200 responds the Nudm_SDM_Get and in the message, a list of used PDU Session IDs is included & UDM sends in the response message all the PDU Session IDs”),
Zhu does not explicitly teaches a request message for retrieving a list of Packet Data Unit, PDU.
David however discloses a request message for retrieving a list of Packet Data Unit, PDU, Session Identifiers (s) that have been already registered for a User Equipment, UE (David: [ABS} “ a registration request for an UE for registering said UE in said telecommunication network, retrieving, by said AMF, from an Unified Data Management, UDM, node, one or more DNNs to which PDU sessions are expected to be established by said UE in said telecommunication network,”),
Therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Zhu in view of David to figure out request message for retrieving a list of Packet Data Unit, PDU. One would be motivated to do so because this technology aid in to establish a PDU session. (David).
As per claim 37, Zhu discloses a method performed by a Unified Data Management node (Zhu:“ a PDU session ID is mandatory when communicating with some 5G core network nodes, such as
unified data management ”), comprising:
transmitting a response message to the first network node (Zhu: “UDM sends in the response message all the PDU Session IDs already been allocated for the UE. With these procedures, PGW-C+SMF 100’ can set PDU Session ID”).
Zhu does not explicitly teaches a request message for retrieving a list of Packet Data Unit, PDU.
David however discloses receiving, from a first network node, during establishment of a Packet Data Network, PDN, connection (David: “receiving, by an Access & Mobility Function, AMF, a registration request for an UE for registering said UE in said telecommunication network, retrieving, by said AMF, from an Unified Data Management, UDM, node, one or more DNNs to which PDU sessions are expected to be established by said UE in said telecommunication network,"),
a request message for retrieving a list of Packet Data Unit, PDU, Session Identifiers(s) that have been already registered for a User Equipment, UE (David: [ABS} “ a registration request for an UE for registering said UE in said telecommunication network, retrieving, by said AMF, from an Unified Data Management, UDM, node, one or more DNNs to which PDU sessions are expected to be established by said UE in said telecommunication network,”),
Therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Zhu in view of David to figure out request message for retrieving a list of Packet Data Unit, PDU. One would be motivated to do so because this technology aid in to establish a PDU session. (David).
Claim 47 & 48 are rejected based on rationale provided for claims 27 and 37.
As per claim 28, Zhu in view of David discloses the method of claim 27, wherein the response message comprises a list of PDU Session ID(s) that have been already been registered for PDN connections established by the UE (Zhu: “Since the UE 300 does not support 5GC NAS, no PDU Session ID is included in (extended) Protocol Configuration Options, (e) PCO, in the PDN Connectivity Request message"),, and the method further comprises:
assigning, for the PDN connection being established by the UE, a PDU Session ID that is not within the received list of PDU Session Identifiers(s) (Zhu: “when the N1 mode capability is OFF, the PGWC+SMF may assign a first PDU session ID for (a PDN connection of) the UE. ”).
As per claim 30, Zhu in view of David discloses the method of claim 27, further comprising: in a case where the PDN connection assigned with the PDU Session ID is successfully established (Zhu: “when the N1 mode capability is OFF, the PGWC+SMF may assign a first PDU session ID for (a PDN connection of) the UE. ”).,
Zhu does not explicitly teaches a registration information.
David however discloses transmitting, to the UDM node, registration information comprising the assigned PDU Session ID (David: [ABS} “ a registration request for an UE for registering said UE in said telecommunication network, retrieving, by said AMF, from an Unified Data Management, UDM, node, one or more DNNs to which P
DU sessions are expected to be established by said UE in said telecommunication network,”).
Therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Zhu in view of David to figure out registration information. One would be motivated to do so because this technology aid in to establish a PDU session. (David).
As per claim 31, Zhu in view of David discloses the method of claim 30, wherein the registration information comprising the assigned PDU Session ID is transmitted via an Nudm_UECM_Registration (Zhu: “In step S304, UDM 200 gets all the registered PDU Session IDs from the smf-registrations data.”).
As per claim 32 Zhu in view of David discloses the method of claim 27, wherein the UE does not support 5G (Zhu: “PGW-C+SMF 100’ for UE 300 not supporting 5GC NAS and use SBI based network functions to serve the PDN connection of the UE 300.”).
, and the first network node is Session Management Function, SMF,+ PDN Gateway-Control plane, PGW-C (Zhu: “when PGW C+SMF 100’ retrieves the subscription data from UDM 200 using Nudm_SDM_Get, UDM sends in the response message all the PDU Session IDs already been allocated for the UE.”).
As per claim 33, Zhu in view of David discloses the method of claim 27, wherein the request message comprises a request message for retrieving only the list of PDU Session ID(s) (Zhu: “UDM 200 to retrieve the subscription data and in the message, PDU Session ID request indication is included to request UDM 200 to provide all the PDU Session IDs allocated for the UE 300.. ”). that have been assigned for PDN connections established by the UE (Zhu: “when the N1 mode capability is OFF, the PGWC+SMF may assign a first PDU session ID for (a PDN connection of) the UE. ”).
As per claim 34, Zhu in view of David discloses the method of claim 27, wherein the request message comprises a request message for retrieving registration information that comprises the list of PDU Session ID(s) that have been assigned for PDN connections established by the UE (Zhu: “C+SMF 100’ retrieves the subscription data from UDM 200 using Nudm_SDM_Get, UDM sends in the response message all the PDU Session IDs already been allocated for the UE. With these procedures. ”).
As per claim 36, Zhu in view of David discloses the method of claim 27, wherein the list of PDU Session ID(s) is comprised in registration information in the response message (Zhu: “In step S304, UDM 200 gets all the registered PDU Session IDs from the smf-registrations data.”).
Claim 38-40, 42-44 & 46 are rejected based on rationale provided for claims 28, 30-34 & 36.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 29 and 35, 41 and 45 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Both claims needs to be dissolved in independent claims for potential allowance.
Conclusion
This action is FINAL. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. This includes:
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Sibte Bukhari whose telephone number is (571) 270-7122. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9:00 - 6:00.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Vivek Srivastava can be reached on (571) 272-7304. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/SIBTE H BUKHARI/Examiner, Art Unit 2449
Prosecution Insights