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 .
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 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.
Drawings
2. The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show ‘respective structural details/characters of corresponding labeled numbers for figures 1 through 8 as described in the specification’.
Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
3. 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.
4. Claims 1-9, 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Publication No.: US 2024/0049101 A1 to Zhang, Zhuoyun (Zhang), in view of 3GPP TSG-SA WG2 Meeting #126 (3GPP TSG-SA WG2) as disclosed in the IDS.
As to Claims 1, 14 and 15, Zhang discloses an apparatus for identifying and/or referring to user equipment route selection policy information when operating a user equipment connected to a telecommunications network, wherein the telecommunications network comprises a core network comprising a policy and charging function, wherein the policy and charging function is configured to transmit user equipment route selection policy information to the user equipment (Figs. 1a and 1b, ‘the network device 12 may refer to a device that may send a URSP to the UE 11, for example, the network device 12 may be a core network device on a network side. The core network device mentioned herein may be a 5G core network device, for example, a policy control function (PCF) network element, an access and mobility management function (AMF) network element, or a session management function (SMF) network element’, ¶ 0034), wherein a piece of user equipment route selection policy information or a part thereof is able to be identified via a user equipment route selection policy identifier (Figs. 1a and 1b, ‘specifically, the URSP rules may include, but are not limited to, a traffic descriptor and a route selection descriptor (RSD). The traffic descriptor may include an application identifier, an internet protocol (IP) descriptor, a non-IP descriptor, and the like. A URSP of each UE may be identified by using a UE policy section identifier (UPSI), and the UPSI may also be referred to as a policy section identifier (PSI) for short’, ¶ 0029), wherein the apparatus comprises a processor and a memory having processor-executable instructions stored thereon, wherein the processor-executable instructions, when executed by the processor, facilitate performance of the following.
Zhang does not expressly disclose in a first step, the piece of user equipment route selection policy information or the part thereof is assigned to the user equipment route selection policy identifier; and in a second step, a further or operatively used piece of user equipment route selection policy information or a part thereof refers to the user equipment route selection policy identifier.
However, 3GPP TSG-SA WG2 discloses in a first step, the piece of user equipment route selection policy information or the part thereof is assigned to the user equipment route selection policy identifier (‘the UE sends at initial registration a policy identifier to assist the PCF to learn which rules are stored in the UE. In addition, the PCF makes policy evaluation and checks if the new ruleIds calculated for the UE are the same than the ones received from the UE. If not, the PCF identifies the changes and updates only the affected rules in the UE’, Pg. 2 ll 11-16); and
in a second step, a further or operatively used piece of user equipment route selection policy information or a part thereof refers to the user equipment route selection policy identifier (‘the UE sends at initial registration a policy identifier to assist the PCF to learn which rules are stored in the UE. In addition, the PCF makes policy evaluation and checks if the new ruleIds calculated for the UE are the same than the ones received from the UE. If not, the PCF identifies the changes and updates only the affected rules in the UE’, Pg. 2, section 6.1 2.2.1, line 11-16).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide ‘in a first step, the piece of user equipment route selection policy information or the part thereof is assigned to the user equipment route selection policy identifier; and in a second step, a further or operatively used piece of user equipment route selection policy information or a part thereof refers to the user equipment route selection policy identifier’ as disclosed by 3GPP TSG-SA WG2 into Zhang so as to effectively update and optimize route selection policy in wireless communication system, 3GPP TSG-SA WG2 Pg. 4, section 6.1 2.2.1.
As to Claim 2, Zhang further discloses wherein the reference, by the further or operatively used piece of user equipment route selection policy information or the part thereof, to the piece of user equipment route selection policy information or the part thereof results in the further or operatively used piece of user equipment route selection policy information or the part thereof comprising the user equipment route selection policy content of the piece of user equipment route selection policy information or the part thereof (‘in the foregoing method embodiments shown in Fig. 2 and Fig. 4, an example in which the policy generation attribute may be added to the route selection policy is used for description. In another embodiment, the policy generation attribute may alternatively be added to the PSI, to identify different versions of rule content of the URSP. For example, when the policy generation attribute is the version number parameter, the PSI may include the following three parts: (a) a PLMN identifier part, where the part includes an identifier of a PLMN of a PCF that provides a route selection policy; (b) a route selection policy code (UE policy selection code, UPSC), where the route selection policy code includes a unique value in the PLMN selected by the PCF; and (c) a version number parameter of a URSP’, ¶s 0089-0092).
As to Claim 3, Zhang further discloses wherein the user equipment comprises a user equipment route selection policy component repository, wherein the user equipment route selection policy component repository comprises one or more pieces of referable user equipment route selection policy information or a part thereof, each of the one or more pieces of referable user equipment route selection policy information or the part thereof comprising or being assigned or associated to a respective user equipment route selection policy identifier, wherein the further or operatively used piece of user equipment route selection policy information uses at least part of the one or more pieces of referable user equipment route selection policy information or the part thereof (‘after receiving the PSI reported by the UE 11, the PCF 12 may obtain a latest PSI corresponding to the UE 11 from the UDR 14, then compare the PSI obtained from the Unified Data Repository (UDR) 14 with the PSI reported by the UE 11, use a URSP corresponding to the UE stored in the UDR 14 as a latest URSP if the PSI obtained from the UDR 14 is different from the PSI reported by the UE 11, and deliver a corresponding PSI stored in the UDR 14 as an updated PSI to the UE 11, so that the UE 11 performs route selection policy update’, ¶ 0039).
As to Claim 4, Zhang does not expressly disclose wherein the one or more pieces of referable user equipment route selection policy information comprise a validity indication, wherein the user equipment evaluates a piece of referable user equipment route selection policy information based on the validity indication indicating that the one or more pieces of referable user equipment route selection policy information are valid.
However, 3GPP TSG-SA WG2 discloses wherein the one or more pieces of referable user equipment route selection policy information comprise a validity indication, wherein the user equipment evaluates a piece of referable user equipment route selection policy information based on the validity indication indicating that the one or more pieces of referable user equipment route selection policy information are valid (‘when the UE has valid USRP rules, the UE shall perform the association based on user preference and these rules. URSP is only applied when there is no applicable user preference for the matching application’, Pg. 4, ll 26-27).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide ‘wherein the one or more pieces of referable user equipment route selection policy information comprise a validity indication, wherein the user equipment evaluates a piece of referable user equipment route selection policy information based on the validity indication indicating that the one or more pieces of referable user equipment route selection policy information are valid’ as disclosed by 3GPP TSG-SA WG2 into Zhang so as to effectively update and optimize route selection policy in wireless communication system, 3GPP TSG-SA WG2 Pg. 4, section 6.1 2.2.1.
As to Claim 5, Zhang further discloses wherein the telecommunications network or a part thereof comprises or is able to access a user equipment route selection policy repository, wherein the user equipment route selection policy repository comprises one or more pieces of referable user equipment route selection policy information or a part thereof, wherein each of the one or more pieces of referable user equipment route selection policy information or the part thereof comprises or is assigned or associated to a respective user equipment route selection policy identifier (‘in some other implementations, in addition to delivering the first route selection policy, the network device may further deliver a first policy section identifier (PSI) of the first route selection policy, the delivered first PSI being used for the user equipment to determine whether route selection policy update needs to be performed. Correspondingly, in addition to receiving the first route selection policy delivered by the network device, the user equipment may further receive the first policy section identifier (PSI) of the first route selection policy delivered by the network device’, ¶ 0049); wherein in order for the user equipment to operatively use the further or operatively used piece of user equipment route selection policy information or the part thereof referring to or comprising the user equipment route selection policy identifier, the method further comprises the steps of: in a third step, subsequent to the first step, the user equipment receives the further or operatively used piece of user equipment route selection policy information or the part thereof; and in a fourth step, subsequent to the third step, the user equipment retrieves, from the user equipment route selection policy repository, a piece of referable user equipment route selection policy information or a part thereof via using the respective user equipment route selection policy identifier (‘after receiving the PSI reported by the UE 11, the PCF 12 may obtain a latest PSI corresponding to the UE 11 from the UDR 14, then compare the PSI obtained from the Unified Data Repository (UDR) 14 with the PSI reported by the UE 11, use a URSP corresponding to the UE stored in the UDR 14 as a latest URSP if the PSI obtained from the UDR 14 is different from the PSI reported by the UE 11, and deliver a corresponding PSI stored in the UDR 14 as an updated PSI to the UE 11, so that the UE 11 performs route selection policy update’, ¶ 0039).
As to Claim 6, Zhang further discloses wherein, in a fifth step, subsequent to the fourth step, the user equipment subscribes to changes with respect to the piece of referable user equipment route selection policy information or the part thereof, and, in case of such changes, the user equipment receives a notification of modification or a notification of deletion regarding the piece of referable user equipment route selection policy information from the user equipment route selection policy repository (‘according to some implementations, when the latest route selection policy is located in the UDR, the network device may send a policy update determining request to the UDR, to request the UDR to determine, according to a reported policy generation attribute, whether route selection policy update needs to be performed on the user equipment. In this case, the policy update determining request may include a PSI of the latest route selection policy and the reported second policy generation attribute. The UDR may determine the latest route selection policy according to the PSI in the policy update determining request, and compare the second policy generation attribute in the policy update determining request with the policy generation attribute in the latest route selection policy, so that when detecting that the two policy generation attributes are different, the UDR returns the latest route selection policy corresponding to the PSI and a comparison result to the network device, and when detecting that the two policy generation attributes are the same, the UDR returns a comparison result to the network device’, ¶ 0067).
As to Claim 7, Zhang further discloses wherein, in a sixth step, subsequent to the fifth step, the user equipment transmits to the user equipment route selection policy repository a corresponding information in case that the notification of modification or the notification of deletion regarding the piece of referable user equipment route selection policy information resulted in a modification of the further or operatively used piece of user equipment route selection policy information or the part thereof, or a removal of the further or operatively used piece of user equipment route selection policy information or the part thereof, or an error regarding the further or operatively used piece of user equipment route selection policy information or the part thereof (‘according to some implementations, when the latest route selection policy is located in the UDR, the network device may send a policy update determining request to the UDR, to request the UDR to determine, according to a reported policy generation attribute, whether route selection policy update needs to be performed on the user equipment. In this case, the policy update determining request may include a PSI of the latest route selection policy and the reported second policy generation attribute. The UDR may determine the latest route selection policy according to the PSI in the policy update determining request, and compare the second policy generation attribute in the policy update determining request with the policy generation attribute in the latest route selection policy, so that when detecting that the two policy generation attributes are different, the UDR returns the latest route selection policy corresponding to the PSI and a comparison result to the network device, and when detecting that the two policy generation attributes are the same, the UDR returns a comparison result to the network device’, ¶ 0067).
As to Claim 8, Zhang further discloses wherein, subsequent to the first step, the user equipment queries a user equipment route selection policy repository for at least one further piece of user equipment route selection policy information or a part thereof relating to query information, and the user equipment receives at least one matching further piece of user equipment route selection policy information or a part thereof (‘according to some implementations, when the latest route selection policy is located in the UDR, the network device may send an attribute query request to the UDR, to request the UDR to return the policy generation attribute in the latest route selection policy, and then perform a subsequent operation of comparing the policy generation attributes’, ¶ 0065).
As to Claim 9, Zhang further discloses wherein the policy and charging function and/or a user equipment route selection policy repository is able to be requested, by the user equipment or another entity, to modify one or more route selection policy rules or user equipment route selection policy information based on a provided partial piece of user equipment route selection policy identifier, thereby applying such modifications to all concerned pieces of user equipment route selection policy information having or corresponding to user equipment route selection policy identifiers that are sharing the parts or a certain structure or different information fields of the partial piece of user equipment route selection policy identifier, and/or matching parameters within the user equipment route selection policy rule or user equipment route selection policy information (‘the policy generation attribute may uniquely identify the URSP. Therefore, by introducing a policy generation attribute is introduced in a URSP or a PSI, the UE may report a policy generation attribute corresponding to a stored URSP to the PCF in the report process, and after receiving the policy generation attribute reported by the UE, the PCF may compare a latest policy generation attribute corresponding to the UE in the UDR with the policy generation attribute reported by the UE, to accurately determine whether the URSP in the UE needs to be updated, so that when determining that the URSP needs to be updates, the PCF delivers the URSP corresponding to the UE stored in the UDR and a corresponding PSI to the UE, and the UE performs route selection policy update’, ¶ 0044).
Conclusion
5. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GBEMILEKE J ONAMUTI whose telephone number is (571) 270-5619. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 AM - 5:00 PM.
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, ASAD NAWAZ can be reached at (571)272-3988. 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.
/GBEMILEKE J ONAMUTI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2463
Prosecution Insights