DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claims 1-9, 11, 13, 15-19, and 30 have been examined.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-9, 11, 13, 15-19, and 30 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 line 5 “service, QoS, constraints” should read --service (QoS) constraints--
Claim 9 line 3-4 “network, VPLMN;” should read --network (VPLMN);--
Claim 9 line 5-6 “network, HPLMN;” should read --network (HPLMN);--
Claim 9 line 7 “function, V-SMF;” should read --function (V-SMF)--
Claim 9 line 11-12 “function, H-SMF;” should read --function (H-SMF)--
Claim 11 line 3 “EPS to 5GS” should read –evolved packet system (EPS) to fifth generation system (5GS)--
Claim 11 line 5 “NG-RAN” should read --next generation radio access network (NG-RAN)--
Claim 11 line 5 “function, V-SMF;” should read --function (V-SMF)--
Claim 13 line 4 “QoS” should read --quality of service (QoS)--
Claim 16 line 2 “function, PCF” should read –function (PCF)--
Claim 30 line 8 “service, QoS, constraints” should read --service (QoS) constraints--
Claims 2-8, 15, 17-19 are objected to because they depended on an objected parent claim.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 3-7, 11, 13, and 15-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
In reference to claims 3-6
Claim 3 recites the limitation "third QoS configuration” in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation because the claim/parent claim(s) fail to first recite “second QoS configuration”. The Examiner recommends amending the limitation to "second QoS configuration” in claim 3, and similarly in dependent claims 4-6 to overcome the rejection.
In reference to claim 11
The limitation “insertion/change” in lines 5 and 6 renders the claim indefinite because the meaning of “/” is not defined by the claim or specification rendering the scope of the claim unclear. For the purpose the of examination, the Examiner assumes the limitation reads “insertion or change”
In reference to claims 13, 15
Claim 13 recites the limitation "third QoS configuration” in lines 8-9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation because the claim/parent claim(s) fail to first recite “second QoS configuration”. The Examiner recommends amending the limitation to "second QoS configuration” in claim 13, and similarly in dependent claim 15 to overcome the rejection.
In reference to claim 16
Claim 16 recites the limitations "the third node" in line 2, “the fourth message” in line 3, and “the fifth message” in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim.
In reference to claims 7, 17-19
Claims 7 and 17-19 are rejected because they depend on a rejected parent claim.
Examiner’s Comments
The Examiner notes MPEP 2111.04 II. Contingent Limitations:
“The broadest reasonable interpretation of a method (or process) claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met. For example, assume a method claim requires step A if a first condition happens and step B if a second condition happens. If the claimed invention may be practiced without either the first or second condition happening, then neither step A or B is required by the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim. If the claimed invention requires the first condition to occur, then the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim requires step A. If the claimed invention requires both the first and second conditions to occur, then the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim requires both steps A and B.
The broadest reasonable interpretation of a system (or apparatus or product) claim having structure that performs a function, which only needs to occur if a condition precedent is met, requires structure for performing the function should the condition occur. The system claim interpretation differs from a method claim interpretation because the claimed structure must be present in the system regardless of whether the condition is met and the function is actually performed.”
The Examiner notes that independent claim 30 is directed at an apparatus which requires structure for performing the functions should the condition occur. Independent claim 1 is directed to a method and has a contingent limitation (i.e. accepting during the mobility or handover procedure the first QoS configuration even if the first QoS configuration exceeds the QoS constraints) that includes a step that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 8-9, and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by 3GPP TSG-SA WG2 Meeting #141e S2-2008214; Title: QoS control in V-SMF (S2-2008214).
In reference to claim 1
S2-2008214 teaches a method performed by a first network node (e.g. V-SMF, see Fig. 4.3.2.2.2-1, section 4.3.2.2.2) in a first communication network (e.g. VPLMN, see Fig. 4.3.2.2.2-1, section 4.3.2.2.2), comprising:
transmitting, to a second network node (e.g. H-SMF, see Fig. 4.3.2.2.2-1, section 4.3.2.2.2) in a second communication network (e.g. HPLMN, see Fig. 4.3.2.2.2-1, section 4.3.2.2.2), a first message for creating or updating a session in a mobility or handover procedure, the first message including quality of service (QoS) constraints configured for the first communication network (see Fig. 4.3.2.2.2-1 step 6, section 4.3.2.2.2);
receiving, from the second network node, a second message including a first QoS configuration, the first QoS configuration including at least one QoS parameter authorized in the second communication network (see Fig. 4.3.2.2.2-1 step 13, section 4.3.2.2.2); and
accepting during the mobility or handover procedure the first QoS configuration even if the first QoS configuration exceeds the QoS constraints (see Fig. 4.3.2.2.2-1 step 13, section 4.3.2.2.2).
- In reference to claim 8
S2-2008214 teaches wherein the first message is a request for creating or updating a session for mobility or handover (see Fig. 4.3.2.2.2-1 step 6, section 4.3.2.2.2); and wherein the second message is a response to the request for creating or updating a session (see Fig. 4.3.2.2.2-1 step 13, section 4.3.2.2.2).
- In reference to claim 9
S2-2008214 teaches wherein the first communication network comprises a visited public land mobile network (e.g. VPLMN, see Fig. 4.3.2.2.2-1, section 4.3.2.2.2); wherein the second communication network comprises a home public land mobile network (e.g. HPLMN, see Fig. 4.3.2.2.2-1, section 4.3.2.2.2); wherein the first network node comprises a visit session management function (e.g. V-SMF, see Fig. 4.3.2.2.2-1, section 4.3.2.2.2); and wherein the second network node comprises a home session management function (e.g. H-SMF, see Fig. 4.3.2.2.2-1, section 4.3.2.2.2).
- In reference to claim 11, as best understood
S2-2008214 teaches wherein the mobility or handover procedure comprises: an EPS to 5GS idle mobility with N26; an EPS to 5GS handover with N26; an Inter NG-RAN node N2 based handover with V-SMF insertion/change; or a Mobility Registration with V-SMF insertion/change see Fig. 4.3.2.2.2-1, section 4.3.2.2.2).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure are:
US 2020/0374741 pertains to a quality of service parameter processing method and a system, where the method includes obtaining, by a control plane device, a core network packet delay budget between a first access network device and a first user plane function device, sending, by the control plane device, the CN PDB to the first access network device, determining, by the first access network device, an access network PDB between a terminal device and the first access network device based on the CN PDB and an end-to-end PDB between the terminal device and the first user plane function device, and scheduling, by the first access network device, an air interface resource between the terminal device and the first access network device based on the AN PDB.
US 2022/0030460 pertains to terminal transmits request information for a TSC service to a network node, the request information including time parameters of the TSC service. The network node transmits response information including modified time parameters to the terminal, so that the terminal may perform the TSC service based on the response information, thereby implementing the TSC service initiated by the terminal. See Fig. 5
US 2022/0386401 pertains to a wireless device may be capable of simultaneously accessing a plurality of networks that are associated with a visited network. The visited network may or may not allow the wireless device to simultaneously access the plurality of networks, for example, based on a status of the visited network. Prior to a wireless device requesting access to a plurality of networks, a visited network may indicate whether the visited network supports, for the wireless device, simultaneous access to a plurality of networks. See Fig. 28
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN S ROBERTS whose telephone number is (571)272-3095. The examiner can normally be reached M to F, 9am to 5pm.
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, Faruk Hamza can be reached at (571) 272-7969. 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.
BRIAN S. ROBERTS
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2466
/BRIAN S ROBERTS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2466
Prosecution Insights