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 .
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-5, 10-13, 15 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Mitra et al. (US 2025/0048415A1, hereinafter “Mitra”).
Regarding claim 1:
Mitra discloses a device (e.g., 102 in Fig. 1), comprising:
a processing system including a processor; and a memory that stores executable instructions that, when executed by the processing system, facilitate performance of operations (e.g., [0005], [0151], [0152]), the operations comprising:
attaching a user equipment (UE) (e.g., 104 in Fig. 1, 1004 in Fig.10) to a radio access network (e.g., 106 in Fig. 1, 1016 in Fig. 10) at an access frequency (e.g., [0029], [0034], [0050], UE being connected to the base station, an access frequency is inherent);
receiving, from the UE, a request to access a selected service through the radio access network (e.g., 604 in Fig. 6, 704 in Fig. 7, 804 in Fig. 8, [0050], UEs that are already connected but have a new service request); and
assigning the UE to a selected frequency band for accessing the service, wherein the selected frequency band for accessing the service is selected based on the service (e.g., 610 in Fig. 6, 710 in Fig. 7, 808 in Fig. 8, [0020], [0039], [0053], [0098], determining a selected RAT based on the service request).
Regarding claim 2:
Mitra further discloses the device of claim 1, wherein the operations further comprise:
collecting network usage information for the UE and other user devices on the radio access network, forming first collected information (e.g., [0073], RAT power consumption, 514 in Fig. 5);
collecting UE network access information for the UE accessing the service on the radio access network, forming second collected information (e.g., [0073], RAT traffic load, 502 in Fig. 5);
providing the first collected information and the second collected information to an artificial intelligence or machine learning process (e.g., 512 in Fig. 5); determining from the artificial intelligence or machine learning process a recommended frequency band for the UE, the recommended frequency band being predicted by the artificial intelligence or machine learning process to provide improved quality of experience to the UE for accessing the service on the radio access network (e.g., 516 in Fig. 5); and reassigning the UE to the recommended frequency band (e.g., 612 in Fig. 6, 712 in Fig. 7, 810 in Fig. 8, [0075], [0076]).
Regarding claim 3:
Mitra further discloses the device of claim 1, wherein the receiving the request to access the selected service further comprises: receiving a request to access mission critical services through the radio access network (e.g., [0020], [0039], [0053], [0098], services requiring high throughput or low latency).
Regarding claim 4:
Mitra further discloses the device of claim 3, wherein the assigning the UE to a selected frequency band comprises: assigning the UE to a frequency band designated for mission critical communications (e.g., [0020], [0039], [0053], [0098], selected RAT is determined based on the requested quality of service).
Regarding claim 5:
Mitra further discloses the device of claim 1, wherein the assigning the UE to a selected frequency band comprise: assigning the UE to a preferred frequency band for access to the service (e.g., [0053], [0094], [0098], 610 in Fig. 6).
Regarding claim 10:
Mitra discloses a non-transitory machine-readable medium, comprising executable instructions that, when executed by a processing system including a processor, facilitate performance of operations (e.g., [0005], [0151], [0152]), the operations comprising:
attaching a user equipment (UE) to a radio access network (e.g., [0029], [0034], [0050], UE being connected to the base station, 104 and 106 in Fig. 1);
receiving capability information about a plurality of available infrastructure core networks accessible to the radio access network (e.g., 606/610 in Fig. 6, 706/710 in Fig. 7, 804 /808 in Fig. 8, [0073], [0095]-[0098]);
selecting, based on the capability information, a selected infrastructure network (e.g., 608 in Fig. 6, 708 in Fig. 7, 806 in Fig. 8); determining provisioning information for the selected infrastructure network (e.g., 610 in Fig. 6, 710 in Fig, 7, 808 in Fig. 8, [0095]-[0098]); reattaching the UE to the radio access network (e.g., 612 in Fig. 6, 712 in Fig. 7, 810 in Fig. 8, for UEs that are already connected but have a new service request); and attaching the UE to the selected infrastructure network based on the provisioning information for the selected infrastructure network (e.g., 612 in Fig. 6, 712 in Fig. 7, 810 in Fig. 8).
Regarding claim 11:
Mitra further discloses the non-transitory machine-readable medium of claim 10, wherein the selecting the selected infrastructure network comprises:
providing, to an artificial intelligence or machine learning process, the capability information (e.g., [0088], [0090], [0092], [0095]-[0098]);
providing, to the artificial intelligence or machine learning process, information about UE requirements of the UE (e.g., [0090], [0092], [0095]-[0098]);
providing, to the artificial intelligence or machine learning process, network usage information for the UE and other user devices on the radio access network (e.g., [0095]-[0098]),
receiving, from the artificial intelligence or machine learning process, a recommended infrastructure network, the recommended infrastructure network being predicted by the artificial intelligence or machine learning process to satisfy the UE requirements based on the network usage information (e.g., [0096]-[0098]); and
selecting the recommended infrastructure network as the selected infrastructure network (e.g., [0096]-[0098]).
Regarding claim 12:
Mitra further discloses the non-transitory machine-readable medium of claim 11, wherein the selecting the selected infrastructure network comprises: receiving a user selection from the UE (service request in Fig. 3) at a user portal of an orchestrator (e.g., 102 in Fig. 1, 300 in Fig. 3, [0051], [0052]), the orchestrator implementing the artificial intelligence or machine learning process.
Regarding claim 13:
Mitra further discloses the non-transitory machine-readable medium of claim 10, wherein the operations further comprise: verifying subscription information for the UE, the subscription information defining authorization for the UE to access plurality of available infrastructure core networks (e.g., [0155]).
Regarding claim 15:
Mitra further discloses wherein the receiving capability information about a plurality of available infrastructure core networks comprises: receiving information about Internet connectivity for a respective infrastructure core network; receiving information about connectivity to a private network for the respective infrastructure core network; receiving information about connectivity to mission critical services for the respective infrastructure core network; receiving information about low latency networking for the respective infrastructure core network; or receiving information about voice and video services for the respective infrastructure core network (e.g., [0039], strict performance guarantees relating to latency, [0073], RAT traffic load and energy consumption, [0097]-[0098], RAT traffic load and energy consumption can be considered the claimed “information about connectivity to mission critical services” and “information about low latency networking”, because the selected RAT must satisfy at least one of a requested quality-of-service metric, data rate, or a contract associated with the UE).
Regarding claim 16:
Mitra discloses a method, comprising:
attaching, by a processing system including a processor, a user equipment (UE) to a radio access network (e.g., [0029], [0034], [0050], UE being connected to the base station, 104 and 106 in Fig. 1);
receiving, by the processing system, capability information about a plurality of available service core networks accessible to the radio access network through an infrastructure core network, the plurality of available service core networks providing network services of interest (e.g., 606/610 in Fig. 6, 706/710 in Fig. 7, 804 /808 in Fig. 8, [0073], [0095]-[0098]);
selecting, by the processing system, a selected service network, wherein the selecting is based on the capability information (e.g., 608 in Fig. 6, 708 in Fig. 7, 806 in Fig. 8);
attaching, by the processing system, the UE to the selected service network, wherein the selecting is based on the capability information for the selected service network (e.g., 610-612 in Fig. 6, 710-712 in Fig. 7, 810 in Fig. 8); and
initiating, by the processing system, communication between the UE and the selected service network, including providing network services from the selected service network to the UE (e.g., 612 in Fig. 6, 712 in Fig. 7, 810 in Fig. 8).
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.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mitra in view of Akl et al.(US 2024/0022978 A1, hereinafter “Akl”).
Regarding claim 6:
Mitra is silent regarding communicating a radio access technology (RAT) frequency selection priority (RFSP) index value to the UE, the RFSP index value corresponding to the preferred frequency band.
Akl teaches communicating a radio access technology (RAT) frequency selection priority (RFSP) index value to a UE, the RFSP index value corresponding to a preferred frequency band (e.g., [0092]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system of Mitra based on the teaching from Akl to include the operation communicating a radio access technology (RAT) frequency selection priority (RFSP) index value to the UE, the RFSP index value corresponding to the preferred frequency band, in order to improve resource efficiency and enable prioritizing a RAT for handover for a requested service.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mitra.
Regarding claim 7:
Mitra is silent regarding receiving, from the UE, a request to access a web site associated with the selected service.
Official notice is taken by the Examiner the operation receiving from a UE a request to access a web site associated with a selected service is well known in the art.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system of Mitra to include the operation receiving, from the UE, a request to access a web site associated with the selected service, in order to satisfy user’s need to use web services and provide UE with the ability to access web sites.
Claims 8, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mitra in view of Truong Van et al. (US 2024/0064578 A1, hereinafter “Truong”).
Regarding claim 8:
Mitra further discloses the device of claim 1, wherein the operations further comprise: reattaching the UE to the radio access network at the selected frequency band (e.g., 614 in Fig. 6).
Mitra is silent regarding subsequently, determining that the UE is no longer accessing the service; reassigning the UE to a different frequency band not associated with the service; and instructing the UE to perform an inter-frequency handover to the different frequency band.
Truong teaches subsequently, determining a UE is no longer accessing a service, reassigning the UE to a different frequency band not associated with the service, and instructing the UE to perform an inter-frequency handover to the different frequency band (e.g., 680 and 690 in Fig. 6, [0087], [0088]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system of Mitra based on the teaching by Truong to include the operations subsequently, determining that the UE is no longer accessing the service, reassigning the UE to a different frequency band not associated with the service, and instructing the UE to perform an inter-frequency handover to the different frequency band, in order to reduce delay and prevent service interruption for user requested service.
Regarding claim 19:
Mitra is silent regarding determining, by the processing system, a network failure of a portion of a service network associated with the infrastructure core network; and reassigning, by the processing system, access to the portion of the service network to the selected service network for disaster recovery by the selected service network.
Truong teaches determining a network failure of a portion of a service network and reassigning access to the portion of the service network to the selected service network for disaster recovery by the selected service network (e.g., 640-680 in Fig. 6, [0081]-[0087]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system of Mitra based on the teaching by Truong to include the operations determining, by the processing system, a network failure of a portion of a service network associated with the infrastructure core network; and reassigning, by the processing system, access to the portion of the service network to the selected service network for disaster recovery by the selected service network, in order to reduce delay and prevent service interruption for user requested service.
Regarding claim 20:
Mitra is silent regarding determining, by the processing system, one or more services performed by the portion of the service network and affected by the network failure of the portion of the service network; and reassigning, by the processing system, access to the one or more services to the selected service network for disaster recovery of the one or more services by the selected service network.
Truong teaches determining one or more services performed by the portion of the service network and affected by the network failure of the portion of the service network, and reassigning access to the one or more services to the selected service network for disaster recovery of the one or more services by the selected service network (e.g., 640-680 in Fig. 6, [0081]-[0087]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system of Mitra based on the teaching by Truong to include the operations determining, by the processing system, one or more services performed by the portion of the service network and affected by the network failure of the portion of the service network; and reassigning, by the processing system, access to the one or more services to the selected service network for disaster recovery of the one or more services by the selected service network, in order to reduce delay and prevent service interruption for user requested service.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mitra in view of Suhh et al. (US 2025/0150954 A1, hereinafter “Suh”).
Regarding claim 9:
Mitra is silent regarding associating a radio access technology (RAT) frequency selection priority (RFSP) index value with the service for all UEs in the radio access network.
Suh teaches associating a radio access technology (RAT) frequency selection priority (RFSP) index value with a service for all UEs in a radio access network (e.g., [0064]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system of Mitra based on the teaching by Chun to include the operations associating a radio access technology (RAT) frequency selection priority (RFSP) index value with the service for all UEs in the radio access network, in order to allow the network to balance network traffic as well as update connection priorities more efficiently.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mitra in view of Chun et al. (US 12,684,652 B2, hereinafter “Chun”).
Regarding claim 14:
Mitra is silent regarding wherein the verifying subscription information for the UE comprises: generating a query at an access and mobility function (AMF) of the radio access network; conveying the query from the AMF to a unified data repository (UDR) of the radio access network; and receiving a response to the query at the AMF from the UDR, the response including the subscription information for the UE.
Chun teaches verifying subscription information for the UE comprises: generating a query at an access and mobility function (AMF) of the radio access network; conveying the query from the AMF to a unified data repository (UDR) of the radio access network; and receiving a response to the query at the AMF from the UDR, the response including the subscription information for the UE (e.g., Column 24, Lines 25-41).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system of Mitra based on the teaching from Chun to include the operations wherein the verifying subscription information for the UE comprises: generating a query at an access and mobility function (AMF) of the radio access network; conveying the query from the AMF to a unified data repository (UDR) of the radio access network; and receiving a response to the query at the AMF from the UDR, the response including the subscription information for the UE, in order to enable authentication of UE by the core network to improve security.
Claims 17 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mitra in view of Montero Bayo et al.(US 2025/0247745 A1, hereinafter “Montero”).
Regarding claim 17:
Mitra is silent regarding determining, by the processing system, backup requirements for a service network associated with the infrastructure core network; and selecting, by the processing system, the selected service network, wherein the selecting is based on an ability of the selected service network to satisfy the backup requirements for a service network.
Montero teaches backup requirements for a service network, and selecting a selected service network based on an ability of the selected service network to satisfy the backup requirements for a service network (e.g., [0005], [0026], redundancy requirements).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system of Mitra based on the teaching from Montero to include the operations determining, by the processing system, backup requirements for a service network associated with the infrastructure core network; and selecting, by the processing system, the selected service network, wherein the selecting is based on an ability of the selected service network to satisfy the backup requirements for a service network, in order to improve network performance for service critical applications.
Regarding claim 18:
Mitra is silent regarding selecting, by the processing system, a plurality of selected service networks, wherein a first selected service network of the plurality of selected service networks is provided by a first network operator and provides a first service for the UE and wherein a second selected service network of the plurality of selected service networks is provided by a second network operator and provides a second service for the UE.
Montero teaches selecting a plurality of selected service networks, wherein a first selected service network is provided by a first network operator and provides a first service for the UE and a second selected service network is provided by a second network operator and provides a second service for the UE (e.g., [0005], [0026], connecting UE to multiple mobile network operators (MNOs)).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system of Mitra based on the teaching from Montero to include the operations selecting, by the processing system, a plurality of selected service networks, wherein a first selected service network of the plurality of selected service networks is provided by a first network operator and provides a first service for the UE and wherein a second selected service network of the plurality of selected service networks is provided by a second network operator and provides a second service for the UE, in order to improve network performance for service critical applications.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Alvin ZHU whose telephone number is (571)270-1086. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 6am-9am and 2pm-7pm.
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, Gary Mui can be reached at 571-270-1420. 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.
/BO HUI A ZHU/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2465
Prosecution Insights