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 1-20 are pending.
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) 1-3, 15-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sivavakeesar et al. US 20190357131.
Regarding claim 1, A communication method, comprising: obtaining, by an access network device (gNB(A), Figure 1, element 5), restricted cell information of a first network slice (the core network function, element 7, can also configure a handover restriction list for a given UE, element 3, to identify forbidden tracking area(s), location area(s) and/or cells, the configuration is based on the UE's service level agreement, UE capabilities, supported slice types of UE and of the gNB, para. 0124, the handover restriction list for a given UE, once configured, can be sent to a gNB to which that UE is connecting in an initial context setup request message from the core network node, para. 0125), wherein the restricted cell information indicates one or more restricted cells in which a service of a terminal device in the first network slice is restricted (a handover restriction list may be configured to enable handover to be restricted, at a cell granularity level, based on slice types supported by a cell, gNB 5 and/or tracking area, UE SLA and/or UE Capabilities, the Handover Restriction List is configured to include a forbidden cell-list, Figure 8, element 800, in the form of a list of base station/cell identifiers, para. 0128); and paging, by the access network device in a first cell, the terminal device based on the restricted cell information, or handing over, by the access network device, the terminal device to the first cell based on the restricted cell information, wherein the first cell does not belong to the restricted cells of the first network slice (when handover is required, a source gNB can beneficially select a target gNB based, at least partially, on the forbidden cell-list in the handover restriction list, para. 0129, gNB (A) selects a target gNB (B), based purely on the signal strength measurement results and by limiting the number of target candidates, to those that support slices a UE in question is interested in, the selected target will be a gNB that does support a preferred slice type, gNB (A) then sends a handover request to the selected target gNB (B) including slice usage information identifying the slice types used by a UE, para. 0134).
Regarding claim 2, The method according to claim 1, wherein the obtaining, by the access network device, the restricted cell information of the first network slice comprises: receiving, by the access network device, the restricted cell information from an operation, administration and maintenance device; or receiving, by the access network device, the restricted cell information from a mobility management network element (the core network node can configure one or more allowed cell lists (ACLs) based on eNB/gNB capability information with respect to the slice support information gathered through OAM based configuration, para. 0126-0127).
Regarding claim 3, The method according to claim 1, wherein the restricted cell information comprises an identifier of a first area, a slice identifier of the first network slice, and information about the one or more cells in which the service of the terminal device is restricted; or the restricted cell information comprises an identifier of a first area, a slice identifier of the first network slice, and information about another cell that is in the first area and that is other than the one or more cells in which the service of the terminal device is restricted, wherein the first area is any one of a management area of the access network device, a tracking area (TA), a registration area (RA), and a public land mobile network (PLMN) (handover restriction list, Figure 8, a Handover Restriction List may be configured to enable handover to be restricted, at a cell granularity level based on slice types supported by a cell, gNB and/or tracking area, UE SLA and/or UE Capabilities, includes a forbidden cell-list in the form of a list of base station/cell identifiers (e.g. a global eNB ID (or equivalent gNB ID) with an associated list of E-UTRAN cell global identifiers (or equivalent 5G/NG cell identifiers)), para. 0128, gNB (A) selects a target gNB (B)), based on the signal strength measurement results and by limiting the number of target candidates to those that support slices a UE in question is interested in, the selected target will be a gNB that does support a preferred slice type. a handover request to the selected target gNB (B) includes slice usage information identifying the slice types used by a UE comprising slice usage information such as a slice identifier, para. 0134).
Claims 15-16 are rejected under the same rationale.
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 the 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:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 4, 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sivavakeesar in view of Zhang et al. US 20210144674.
Regarding claim 4, The method according to claim 1, further comprising: receiving, by the access network device, a paging message from the mobility management network element, wherein the paging message comprises the slice identifier of the first network slice; and wherein the paging, by the access network device in the first cell, the terminal device based on the restricted cell information comprises: determining, by the access network device, the first cell based on the slice identifier and the restricted cell information, wherein the first cell is another cell that is in a cell managed by the access network device and that is other than the restricted cell (the core network function can configure a paging area for a given UE based on supported slice types of that UE and of the gNBs from which the information has been received, to optimize paging such that paging is only carried out in cells that support slice types supported by a UE that is being paged, when a paging message is sent to a gNB in a tracking area associated with the paged UE, the paging message can include an assistance data for paging information element (IE) that identifies which cells should and/or possibly should not be paged, para. 0122-0123, the core network node such as a mobility management function/AMF, can configure the allowed cell list per tracking area and/or per RAN Routing Area for each UE based UE capabilities, service level agreement requirements in terms of slice support and Tenant ID, the configured allowed cell lists may be included in initial context setup request message sent by the core network node at the time of a service request and/or tracking area update, para. 0127).
Sivavakeesar does not disclose broadcasting, by the access network device, the paging message in the first cell. Zhang discloses receiving, by a first user device within a wireless network, an indication that slice-specific grouped paging is supported for at least a first slice-specific paging group, wherein the first user device is a member of the first slice-specific paging group, para. 0006, the paging message directly includes data that is broadcast to UEs that are members of the first slice-specific paging group, para. 0036. Before the filing of the invention it would have been obvious to modify Sivavakeesar to include Zhang’s paging broadcast to first slice paging group. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so since network slicing may allow differentiated treatment depending on requirements of different UEs or groups of UEs, an operator can create networks for optimized solutions based on different service requirements, QoS (quality of service), functionality, performance, para. 0030.
Claim 17 is rejected under the same rationale.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Atarius et al. US 20240349218 in view of Mildh et al. US 20210282082.
Regarding claim 10, A communication method, comprising: receiving, by a mobility management network element, information about a cell in which a terminal device is located and a request message from the terminal device, wherein the request message carries a slice identifier of a first network slice (sending, by the UE device, Figure 7, to a MME, a registration request to register to a network slice, identified by S-NSSAI, in a mobile communication network, Figure 10, para. 0149), and sending, by the mobility management network element, a reject message in response to the request message (receiving, from an MME, a first response including an allowed set of network slices and a first indication such as the rejected NSSAI) that rejects registration to the network slice, para. 0149).
Atarius does not expressly disclose determining, by the mobility management network element based on the slice identifier, the information about the cell in which the terminal device is located, and restricted cell information of the first network slice, that the cell in which the terminal device is located is within a restricted cell range of the first network slice, wherein the restricted cell information indicates one or more restricted cells in which a service of the terminal device in the first network slice is restricted.
Mildh discloses a core network node to generate a mobility restriction list which is sent to another radio access node, the mobility restriction list may be based on information about which slices the UE is connected to or may access, and information about slice availability in other nodes and the mobility restriction list can then be used by the other node when controlling the mobility of the UE, para. 0293. Mildh discloses different core network nodes such as MMEs are configured with knowledge about which network slice they support, the information about which slices a node support is then exchanged with other nodes and then radio access nodes know which network slices each core network node supports and can be used for core network node selection when a UE enters the network and provides a slice ID to the RAN node and the information can be used for trigger UE handover to a specific cell based on the knowledge that the slice the UE is connected is support in the target RAN node/cell, para. 0249-0252, the incoming request from the UE for slice connectivity is rejected if the network slice is not supported in the RAN node the UE is communicating with, para. 0256. Before the filing of the invention it would have been obvious to modify Atarius to include Mildh’s mobility restriction list and core network nodes and radio access nodes having knowledge of network slice support information. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so to avoid that the UE goes to an area where a given slice is not supported, para. 0293.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-9, 11-14, 18-20 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MELANIE JAGANNATHAN whose telephone number is (571)272-3163. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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, Marcus Smith can be reached at 571-270-1096. 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.
/MELANIE JAGANNATHAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2468
Prosecution Insights