Art Rejection
1. The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
2. Claims 1-3, 5-12, 15 and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over He, U.S. pat. Appl. Pub. No. 2023/0208804, in view of Kim, U.S. pat. Appl. Pub. No. 2016/0255514.
Per claim 1, He discloses a computer implemented method comprising:
a) determining, by a user plane function (UPF) implemented by one or more computing
devices, that a count of sessions for an Internet Protocol (IP) pool has reached a threshold, e.g., usage level reaches a threshold (see par 0041, 0046);
b) sending to a session management function (SMF), by the UPF, a notification that the count
of sessions for the IP pool has reached the threshold (see par 0043, 0046);
c) in response to the sending, receiving from the SMF, by the UPF, an instruction to release/assign remaining sessions from the IP pool to UE (see par 0043, 0052); and
d) releasing/assigning, by the UPF, the remaining sessions from the IP pool to the UE (see par 0053).
He does not teach that the threshold is a floor threshold and in response to sending the notification of the count has fallen to the floor threshold, issuing instruction to release remaining sessions for the IP pool to the SMF. However, Kim discloses a method of managing allocated IP address pool to ensure that the IP pool is not overutilized or underutilized (see Kim, par 0088-0089), wherein in response to a notification that IP pool usage level has reached the floor threshold, sending instruction to release the remaining (unused) IP addresses for the pool (see Kim, par 0100).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify He with Kim teaching because it would have enabled the SMF to manage the IP pool more efficiently, i.e., ensure the IP pool is not overutilized or underutilized.
Per claim 2, He teaches that the notification is a report of usage of IP pool by the UPF (see par 0046).
Per claim 3, Kim teaches sending an instruction to release unused IP pool (see par 0100). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to utilize any known instruction type/format in practicing Kim.
Per claim 5, He teaches receiving the IP pool as an allocation of an IP pool subnet from the SMF (see par 0006-0009).
Per claim 6, Kim teaches allocating additional IP pool subset in response to receiving indication that usage of IP pool meets a ceiling threshold (see par 0089).
Per claim 7, Kim teaches reclaiming the IP pool after the release (see par 0089).
Per claim 8, He teaches releasing session associated with UE IP address upon receiving a request to delete/remove the session (see par 0013).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to recognize that the SMF would have to allocate a new session to the detached UE in response to a request to reattach the UE to the network (see par 0052).
Claims 9-12, 15 and 17-20 are similar in scope as that of claims 1-3 and 7-8 and hence are rejected for the same rationale set forth for claims 1-3 and 6-8.
Allowable Subject Matter
3. Claims 4, 13, 14, 16 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.
Response to Amendment
4. Applicants' arguments filed February 5, 2026, with respect to claims 1-3, 5-12, 15 and 17-20 have been fully considered but are moot in view of new grounds of rejection set forth above.
Applicant alleges that He does not teach solving underutilization problem of the IP pool associated with UPF. Applicant also alleges that Salama (previously cited) is directed to managing IP allocations to edge router rather than underutilization by the UPF of an IP pool allocated by SMF.
Examiner submits that newly cited art, Kim, discloses managing IP pools for base stations of a telecommunication network including handling overutilization and underutilization of the IP pool (see Kim, par 0088-0089), wherein the base stations are part of RAN which typically employs SMF and UPF components for managing UE request to connect and access the RAN network (see He, par 0014). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify He with Kim teachings because it would have enabled the SMF to manage the IP pool more efficiently, i.e., ensure the IP pool is not overutilized or underutilized.
5. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Viet Vu whose telephone number is 571-272-3977. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Thursday from 8:00am to 6:00pm. The Group general information number is 571-272-2400. The Group fax number is 571-273-8300.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Emmanuel Moise, can be reached at 571-272-3865.
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).
/Viet D Vu/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2455
10/5/26
Prosecution Insights