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 .
Priority
The instant application claims priority to KOREA, REPUBLIC OF 10-2022-0001607 01/05/2022.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted, IDS - 06/07/2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 07/24/2026 and fresh/clean version of applicant’s amendment 07/27/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-20 remain pending
in the application. Claims 1-20 were amended in 07/24/2026 and fresh/clean version supplemental-amendments 07/27/2026 includes further amended Claim 6 and Claim 9.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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
he 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:
• Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
• Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
• Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
• 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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable
over Zhang et al. (US-20210320988-A1), hereinafter “Zhang” in view of COLOM IKUNO et al. (US-11546824-B2) hereinafter “COLOM IKUNO”.
Regarding Claim 1,
Zhang discloses, ‘A method performed by a session management function (SMF) entity in a wireless communication system, the method comprising: receiving, from an access and mobility management function (AMF) entity, a protocol data unit (PDU) session setup request message including information on a radio access gateway (RAG) entity of a radio access network (RAN) node’(The SMF perform the session management and interacts to the AMF for the PDU session creation [0037]. In Fig. 7 illustrates from AMF to SMF,
PNG
media_image1.png
478
764
media_image1.png
Greyscale
and PDU session includes PDU session-setup between the BS and the NW/GW-AP [0057]);
And discloses, ‘determining the RAG entity of the RAN node based on a reachability for a central unit (CU)-control plane (CP) of the RAN node and a distributed unit (DU) of the RAN node’
In Fig. 2, Fig. 9 to Fig. 11 illustrates NW-architecture service management orchestration to attain service objective [0105] include components UE, AMF, SMF, UPF, SMF, UPF and ICN-NW. A packet transmitted E2E PDU-session from UE to UPF (UPF at NW-edge) and anchor-UPF [0034]. SMF serves as control plane and select anchor point. The SMF Interacts to a AMF PDU-session creation [0037]. ICN to 5G network aggregation at the edges of the NW closer to end-user-UPF also extent to the NW in the central-office anchor-UPF [0033]
PNG
media_image2.png
386
656
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
234
640
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Edge computing dynamically orchestrated and implementation executed includes deployment of NW-layers from client and distributed computed devices, one/more edge-GW, aggregation nodes, core NW distributed access-layers [0084]. Edge compute resources/nodes are connected to RAN and end-point devices [0086] by NW-layers from client and distributed-compute-nodes, GW-nodes, aggregation-nodes and core-DN implemented/orchestrated dynamically to meet service objectives [0086, 0090]. In Fig. 7 illustrates PDU-session-establishment between the BS/RAN and the ICN-AP [0057]. SMF selects a UPF and sends a N4-session to the selected UPF-AP then UPF-AP assigns tunnel. SMF interacts the AMF which then requests that the RAN assign a radio-resource/slice to establish the tunnel [0061-0063]. In Fig. 3 illustrates user-plane stack includes the packets E2E-PDU session UE[Wingdings font/0xE0]RAN[Wingdings font/0xE0]UPF-AP [Wingdings font/0xE0] ICN-DN [0039]. UPF/ICN-AP sends tunneling packet source-IP=UPF-AP, destination-IP=RAN [0049]. Fig. 6 illustrates switches between source-destination RAN [0056]. Disclosure exemplified a parameter latency for the reachability and accessibility for the edge device layer in Fig. 10 [0079-0080].
PNG
media_image4.png
366
680
media_image4.png
Greyscale
And discloses, ‘transmitting, to the AMF entity, a PDU session setup response message’ (In Fig. 7A, response to the AMF by SMF step-5);
And discloses, ‘transmitting, to a user plane function (UPF) anchor entity, a first session setup request message’ ( the session creation-request step-8. );
And discloses, ‘receiving, from the UPF anchor entity, a first session setup response message’ (In Fig. 7B step-9 receive response from the UPF-anchor);
PNG
media_image1.png
478
764
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
428
622
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Switches between the BSs (source and destination) is performed/selection of RAN [0056] and Fig. 6. Reachability/accessibility performed the PDU session procedure by SMF and the SMF is a control plane entities [0037], and Fig. 7.
And discloses, ‘transmitting, to a RAG entity, a second session setup request message’ (And, SMF sends session request to the selected UPF-AP that assigns tunnel [0062]. SMF requests the AMF which then requests the BS/RAN to assign a radio resource/RB to establish tunnel [0063]. In Fig. 7B receive ICN-AP-tunnel, create RB, create RAN N3-tunnel, AN-specific resources.);
And discloses ‘and receiving, from the RAG entity, a second session setup response message’ (establish session-N3 between UPF in Fig. 7B/7C; and N3 tunnel between the RAN and the UPF in Fig. 5 [0049]. )
PNG
media_image6.png
408
682
media_image6.png
Greyscale
And Zhang discloses, ‘UPF edge’ and didn’t disclose
‘wherein the RAG entity comprises a central unit (CU)-user plane (UP) and a UPF edge’ ,
COLOM IKUNO in the relevant art discloses, BS/RAN-CU connected to UPF-Edge within a single MEC-server in Fig. 18.
PNG
media_image7.png
192
677
media_image7.png
Greyscale
And discloses, ‘wherein the UPF edge in the RAG entity is connected to the UPF anchor entity via an interface for a segment routing over internet protocol (IP) v6 (SRv6) tunneling,
and wherein the UPF edge is for processing of an IP packet and the UPF anchor entity is for routing of the IP packet.’
Fig. 12 illustrates route decision implemented in UPF, Col. 3 [0001]. SMF component in Fig. 1, and in Fig. 12 packet-process-flow, when originates from DN, PDR execution header and insert-header is performed in UPF-DN-side. The process is performed within an entry of data flow into UPF Col. 8 [0001, 0022-0025]. Routed by UPF-anchor and UPF edge IP-packet processing Col. 5 [0024-0026], Fig. 8 and Fig. 9.
Therefore, a person in the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of
the claim invention would have recognized that the disclosure of Zhang and to include
with that of Colom Ikuno to come up with the claim invention,
Regarding CU-UP and UPF-edge, Zhang motive to establish PDU session and tunnel connected between the RAN and the UPF-anchor provides session management operated by the CPF entities e.g., as SMF and AMF includes tunnel-interface and NW access layer/GW and to the DN-side and also to the RAN-sides encompasses the BS and network GW/hub in Fig. 10, [0078] and in Fig. 12; Provided a multiple services, and multi-tenant dynamically managed and orchestrated to meet the service objectives [0084]. Zhang discloses, user plane connectivity UE[Wingdings font/0xE0]RAN/BS[Wingdings font/0xE0]UPF-AP[Wingdings font/0xE0]DN in Fig. 1. Core NW includes central-office implemented based on latencies and number of access-layers in Fig. 10. Example of orchestration virtual NW-functions as computed nodes in Fig. 13 and Fig. 4 exemplified the UPF functional splits. Colom Ikuno complements the motive integrated BS/RAN-CU to UPF Edge within single MEC.
Regarding, interface/routing/tunnelling by SRV6 and IP-packet processing, Zhang motive to perform ICN-packet routing [0148], E2E QoS flow either from core/ICN-DN to user-side alternatively from UE to ICN-DN illustrated in Fig. 4. And, extracting the ICN packet from the PDU includes a GTP tunnel header, a UDP/IP,
packet [0147]. In Fig. 4,
PNG
media_image8.png
40
168
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Zhang specific motive to priority (latency and throughput) and QoS, reliability and resiliency to attain mission critical reliability to perform routing [0080]. Maintain E2E service flow [0081]. Implement ICN-packet E2E PDU-session flow at IP layer [0026]. Colom Ikuno complements the motive of route decision for packet flow illustrated Fig. 12. This would achieve latency, throughput and meet high bandwidth requirement.
Zhang motive to perform E2E PDU session includes packets encapsulated/tunnels. Includes services, container/VMs for the aggregation of multiple UPFs to UPF-anchor [0039] and in Fig. 4. E2E PDU session includes intermediate-UPF installed at NW-edges in MEC. And, UPF-anchor at DN [0035].
Reasonable expectation of success for Zhang, important motivation factor considered by Zhang for orchestration attain 1) priority as latency and throughput. And, 2) reliability and resiliency to attain/route mission critical reliability [0080].
Though discloses route-IP packet, And didn’t disclose “Radio access GW includes CU-CP and UPF-edge and interfaced/connected SRV6”,
COLOM IKUNO discloses MEC server includes BS/RAN-CU + UPF-edge connected by SRV6 in Fig. 18. Routed by UPF-anchor and UPF edge IP-packet processing Col. 5 [0024-0026], Fig. 8 and Fig. 9.
E2E PDU session includes intermediate-UPF installed at NW-edges in MEC. And, UPF-anchor at DN [0035] complemented by COLOM IKUNO in Fig. 18 implemented by MEC server. IP-packet processed by UP-edge and route decision in Fig. 12.
Regarding Claim 2,
‘The method of claim 1’ (disclosed above),
And discloses, ‘further comprising: transmitting, to the UPF anchor entity, a session modification request message’(in Fig. 7A step-8 modification-request);
‘and receiving, from the UPF anchor entity a session modification response message.’ (in 7B step-9 modification response.)
Regarding Claim 3,
‘The method of claim 1’ (disclosed above),
And discloses, ‘further comprising: receiving, from the AMF entity a PDU session update request message’ (In Fig. 7C step-14.);
And discloses, ‘transmitting, to a target RAG entity a third session setup request message’ (In Fig. 7B and 7C, N3-tunnel established and switch from S-gNB to the T-gnB [0056] and Fig. 6);
And discloses, ‘receiving, from the target RAG entity a third session setup response message.’(updated after UPF/ICN-AP notified that a tunnel has been switched to T-gnB [0056])
And Zhang discloses, ‘transmitting, to the UPF anchor entity a session modification request message’ (In Fig. 7C step-15 session-modification to UPF-anchor);
‘receiving, from the UPF anchor entity a session modification response message’ (and step-17 response from the UPF-anchor);
‘and transmitting, to the AMF entity a PDU session update response message.’ (SMF interact to the AMF for the PDU session, tunnel established and modifications to the SMF and AMF from the UPF/ICN-AP [0063-0066].)
Regarding Claim 4,
‘The method of claim 3’ (disclosed above),
And discloses, ‘further comprising: transmitting, to a source RAG entity a session deletion request message’ (PDU session procedure includes modification/deletion [0037]);
‘and receiving, from the source RAG entity a session deletion response message’ ([0037, 0056] and Fig. 7B-7C tunnel-established includes radio resource and tunnel established between the RAN and the UPF-AP in Fig. 7C.)
Regarding Claim 5,
‘The method of claim 1’ (disclosed above),
And discloses, ‘wherein the PDU session setup request message includes information on a capability of accessing the RAG entity.’ (in Fig. 7A and 7B PDU session establishment and access to RAN; uses N3-interface to establish the session in Fig. 4 and Fig. 6. ICN-packet E2E PDU session [0035, 0039].)
Regarding Claim 6,
‘The method of claim 1’ (disclosed above),
And discloses, ‘wherein the first session setup response message includes at least one of information on IP address of a terminal or information on a tunnel connected between the RAG entity and the UPF anchor entity.’ (in Fig. 7B and 7C the tunnel established between the RAN and the UPF includes tunnel-information [0049-0050]. In Fig. 4 QoS-flow from BS/RAN to UPF and to DN includes source-IP for BS/RAN and destination-IP for the UPF [0044] and QoS flow from DN to UPF, BS/RAN and UE-side includes IP [0049]. )
Regarding Claim 7,
‘The method of claim 1’ (disclosed above),
And discloses, ‘wherein the second session setup response message includes at least one of context information for a terminal, information on a tunnel connected between the RAG entity and the UPF anchor entity, or information on a tunnel endpoint identifier (TEID) of the RAG entity.’ ([0049-0050] and in Fig. 4, )
PNG
media_image9.png
438
712
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 8,
‘The method of claim 3’ (disclosed above),
And discloses, ‘wherein the PDU session update request message includes information on a TEID generated by the target RAG entity.’ (in Fig. 6 illustrates a S-gnB and a T-gnB in Fig. 6 and [0062]. )
PNG
media_image10.png
308
646
media_image10.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 9,
‘The method of claim 3’ (disclosed above),
And discloses, ‘wherein the third session setup request message includes at least one of information of a tunnel connected between the target RAG entity and the UPF anchor entity, and information on a TEID generated by the target RAG entity.’ (In Fig. 6 [0056] and in Fig. 7B-7C.)
Regarding Claim 10,
‘The method of claim 3’ (disclosed above),
And discloses, ‘wherein the session modification request message incldues a message requesting to generate a tunnel connected between the target RAG entity and the UPF anchor entity.’ (In Fig. 7C step-15 session-modification to UPF-anchor and step-17 response from the UPF-anchor includes tunnel established.)
Regarding Claim 11,
Similar to Claim 1 method Claim disclosed above, ‘An apparatus performed by a session management function (SMF) entity in a wireless communication system, the apparatus comprising: a transceiver; and a controller coupled to the transceiver and configured to: receive, from an access and mobility management function (AMF) entity, a protocol data unit (PDU) session setup request message including information on a radio access gateway (RAG) entity of a radio access network (RAN) node, determine the RAG entity of the RAN node based on a reachability for a central unit (CU)-control plane (CP) of the RAN node and a distributed unit (DU) of the RAN node, transmit, to the AMF entity, a PDU session setup response message, transmit, to a user plane function (UPF) anchor entity, a first session setup request message, receive, from the UPF anchor entity, a first session setup response message, transmit, to the RAG entity, a second session setup request message, and receive, from the RAG entity, a second session setup response message, and wherein the RAG entity comprises a CU-user plane (UP) and a UPF edge, wherein the UPF edge in the RAG entity is connected to the UPF anchor entity via an interface for a segment routing over internet protocol (IP) v6 (SRv6) tunneling, and wherein the UPF edge is for processing of an IP packet and the UPF anchor entity is for routing of the IP packet’ (In Fig. 18 illustrates machine 1800 one/more technique/methodologies to perform and operate number of components. Circuitry/processing implemented in entities of the machine [0149]. In Fig. 9 illustrates core/central-network includes multiple entities [0074]. Techniques integrate 5G includes PDU session-establishment procedures for ICN-operation in 5G NW. ICN-aware devices aggregation at the edges of NW/central-office to the UPF [0033]. NW management h/w includes compute h/w to perform virtualized NW-function and offers compute resources for the execution of services and functions for connected devices [0077]. )
Regarding Claim 12,
‘The SMF entity of claim 11’ (disclosed above),
Similar to Claim 2 disclosed above, ‘wherein the controller is further configured to: transmit, to the UPF anchor entity, a session modification request message, and receive, from the UPF anchor entity, a session modification response message’
Regarding Claim 13,
‘The SMF entity of claim 11’ (disclosed above),
Similar to Claim 3 disclosed above, ‘wherein the controller is further configured to: receive, from the AMF entity, a PDU session update request message, transmit, to a target RAG entity, a third session setup request message, receive, from the target RAG entity, a third session setup response message, transmit, to the UPF anchor entity, a session modification request message, receive, from the UPF anchor entity, a session modification response message, and transmit, to the AMF entity, a PDU session update response message’
Regarding Claim 14,
‘The SMF entity of claim 13’ (disclosed above),
Similar to Claim 4 disclosed above, ‘wherein the controller is further configured to: transmit, to a source RAG entity, a session deletion request message, and receive, from the source RAG entity, a session deletion response message’
Regarding Claim 15,
‘The SMF entity of claim 11’ (disclosed above),
Similar to Claim 5 disclosed above, ‘wherein the PDU session setup request message includes information on a capability of accessing the RAG entity.’
Regarding Claim 16,
‘The SMF entity of claim 11’ (disclosed above),
Similar to Claim 6 disclosed above, ‘wherein the first session setup response message includes at least one of information on an IP address of a terminal or information on a tunnel connected between the RAG entity and the UPF anchor entity.’
Regarding Claim 17,
‘The SMF entity of claim 11’ (disclosed above),
Similar to Claim 7 disclosed above, ‘wherein the second session setup response message includes at least one of context information for a terminal, information on a tunnel connected between the RAG entity and the UPF anchor entity, or information on a tunnel endpoint identifier (TEID) of the RAG entity.’
Regarding Claim 18,
‘The SMF entity of claim 13’ (disclosed above),
Similar to Claim 8 disclosed above, ‘wherein the PDU session update request message includes information on a TEID generated by the target RAG entity.’
Regarding Claim 19,
‘The SMF entity of claim 13’ (disclosed above),
Similar to Claim 9 disclosed above, ‘wherein the third session setup request message includes at least one of information on a tunnel connected between the target RAG entity and the UPF anchor entity, and information on a TEID generated by the target RAG entity.’
Regarding Claim 20,
‘The SMF entity of claim 13’ (disclosed above),
Similar to Claim 10 disclosed above, ‘wherein the session modification request message includes a message requesting to generate a tunnel connected between the target RAG entity and the UPF anchor entity.’
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 07/27/2024 have been fully considered but they are
not persuasive.
Arguments and Examiners response:
With respect to applicant’s arguments/remarks, examiner responses are:
Regarding applicant argument of III-Interview summary, page-7, Examiner presented interview summary clarify/addressed applicant proposed amendments specific claim limitations yet encouraged the applicant submit the proposed amendment as part of compact decision. For details, Examiner presented interview summary 6/30/2026. Specific claim limitation “segmented routing” and “IP-packet processing”
And provided authenticate and credible published literature as prior art “P. L. Ventre et al., "Segment Routing: A Comprehensive Survey of Research Activities, Standardization Efforts, and Implementation Results," in IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, vol. 23, no. 1, page-182-221” includes Index-terms relevant to the proposed claim limitations in an standardization efforts of tech terms.
Regarding applicant argument IV- 35 USC 103 Rejections of Claims 1-20, page-7, “It is well settled that in determining the differences between prior arts and the claims …”, Examiner respectfully disagree,
Examiner intent and effort to contribute as part of examination practice, analyze and derive findings to lead and direct towards patentability decision. Analyze the claim subject matter and specific claims whether disclosed by presented prior arts. Here most important to derive relevant/specific disclosure from the presented prior art in contrast to the presented amended claims.
Let us analyze the claim invention as a whole in an effort to response the arguments of the applicant, with a question what is performed, how, why is performed ? To derive key feature of the invention whether can be attained by presented prior arts, a viable combinations. Present an important motivation that can be complemented by the prior arts. Is this invention, was known one skill in art?
Method performed by Session management function,
Though Claim emphasize on the PDU session setup by SMF yet an unique contribution and key takeaway, orchestration that is dynamically orchestrated, implemented and executed to meet service objectives uses aggregation of access-layers, resources and nodes.
- What is performed PDU session setup SMF receives from AMF,
PDU session setup includes a Radio access GW of RAN
Zhang discloses, the SMF serves control plane and select anchor point. The SMF Interacts to a AMF PDU-session creation [0037]. In Fig. 7 illustrates details procedure to setup the PDU session. The PDU session management includes PDU session setup/modification/release between the gNB/BS/AN and the ICN-anchor [0057].
- How this was performed?
> determine the radio access GW-RAN based on reachability for CU-CP and a DU-RAN
That is selection of RAN includes components of RAN control-plane and a DU-RAN. Zhang discloses PDU session setup request between RAN, AMF, SMF and UPF.
Zhang, SMF selects UPF anchor [0061] [Wingdings font/0xE0] N4-session-setup,
UPF assigns tunnels [0062],
SMF to the AMF and requests the gNB/AN/BS assigns radio resource and setup/tunnel established [0063] and details in Fig. 7A/7B/7C.
Switches between the BSs (source and destination) is performed/selection of RAN [0056] and Fig. 6. Reachability/accessibility of the, how Zhang did, performed the PDU session procedure that is done by SMF and the SMF is a control plane entities [0037], and Fig. 7.
Regarding RAN-DU, disclosure, edge computing dynamically orchestrated and implemented/executed includes deployment of NW-layers from client and distributed computed devices, one/more edge-GW, aggregation nodes, core NW distributed access-layers [0084]. Edge compute resources/nodes are connected to RAN and end-point devices [0086] by NW-layers from client and distributed-compute-nodes, GW-nodes, aggregation-nodes and core-DN implemented/orchestrated dynamically to meet service objectives [0086, 0090]. In Fig. 10 disclosure exemplified the edge devices and the access layer.
> Tx-AMF for the PDU session setup; transmit/receive to/from UPF anchor claim element 3 to 7 disclosed above page-4 to page-10 presented a viable combination prior arts Zhang and Colom Ikuno.
Regarding applicant argument IV, page 7 to page-8, “obviousness, three basic criteria must be met…”
Examiner made a viable combination of the presented prior art identified the claim subject matter as a whole the claim invention, “PDU session setup procedure” “performed by SMF”, “session established by IP/tunnelling” and “uses UPF functional splits”. Zhang, in Fig. 4 illustrates E2E PDU session tunnelling of VM/container/service aggregates multiple UPFs [0039].
For viable combination let us deep dive to identify the motivation,
Applicant amendments included packet-encapsulated/tunnel limited by SRV6 between UPF-edge of radio access/GW-RAN to UPF-anchor, wherein the UPF edge is IP-packet processing and the UPF-anchor is for route-IP-packet. Zhang motive to perform E2E PDU session includes packets encapsulated/tunnels. Includes services, container/VMs for the aggregation of multiple UPFs to UPF-anchor [0039] and in Fig. 4. E2E PDU session includes intermediate-UPF installed at NW-edges in MEC. And, UPF-anchor at DN [0035].
Reasonable expectation of success for Zhang, important motivation factor considered by Zhang for orchestration attain 1) priority as latency and throughput. And, 2) reliability and resiliency to attain/route mission critical reliability [0080].
Though discloses route-IP packet, And didn’t disclose “Radio access GW includes CU-CP and UPF-edge and interfaced/connected SRV6”,
COLOM IKUNO discloses MEC server includes BS/RAN-CU + UPF-edge connected by SRV6 in Fig. 18. Routed by UPF-anchor and UPF edge IP-packet processing Col. 5 [0024-0026], Fig. 8 and Fig. 9.
E2E PDU session includes intermediate-UPF installed at NW-edges in MEC. And, UPF-anchor at DN [0035] complemented by COLOM IKUNO in Fig. 18 implemented by MEC server. IP-packet processed by UP-edge and route decision in Fig. 12.
Therefore every limitations of amended claims are disclosed by combination of the prior arts Zhang and COLOM IKUNO.
Regarding the applicant argument dependent Claims 2-10 and 12-20, page-12, disclosed above of this OA page-10 to page-18.
Applicant argument/remarks were addressed.
Examiner thanks applicant and attorney for their time and effort.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to
applicant's disclosure:
Ventre, Pier Luigi, et al. "Segment routing: A comprehensive survey of research activities, standardization efforts, and implementation results." IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials 23.1 (2020): 182-221. (Year: 2020)
ETSI TS 123 502 V16.10.0 (2021-09); 5G; Procedures for the 5G System (5GS) (3GPP TS 23.502 version 16.10.0 Release 16) Procedures for the 5G System (5GS) (Year: 2021); SMF-procedure section 4.3 page-88, PDU session establishment, modification/release; session continuity UP-path management page-130; SMF-UPF interaction page-153; N3 tunnel procedure between the SMF-UPF and S-RAN/T-RAN, page-171.
ETSI TS 138 401 V16.7.0 (2021-10); 5G; NG-RAN; Architecture description (3GPP TS 38.401 version 16.7.0 Release 16) (Year: 2021); RAN-architecture gNB-CU-UP and integrated page-12 to 14.
ETSI TS 129 502 V16.10.0 (2022-01); 5G; 5G System; Session Management Services; Stage 3 (Year: 2022); session-management-context-creation/update page-18, page-28; tunnel and activation for the pdu-session, page-29.
Anthony et al (US10638372B2), “Geographic dispersion of radio access network (RAN) node functions”. In Fig. 7, RAN-node, RAN-session-management anchor, CN-UPF and UP-GW.
ETSI TS 128 554 V16.8.0 (2021-04); 5G; Management and orchestration; 5G end to end Key Performance Indicators (KPI) (3GPP TS 28.554 version 16.8.0 Release 16); Uplink/Downlink-delay in gNB-CU-UP for a network slice subnet page-14 and page-17; upstream/downstream throughput in N3-interface between the gNB and the UPF, page-20.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Syed Ahmed whose telephone number is (703)-756-5308. The examiner can normally be reached from Monday-Friday 9am-6pm. The examiner can also be reached on alternate If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Faruk Hamza can be reached on (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.
/S.A./Examiner, Art Unit 2466
/CHRISTOPHER M CRUTCHFIELD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2466
Prosecution Insights