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 .
Response to Amendment
Receipt is acknowledged of the preliminary amendment filed 8/5/2024. Claims 1, 4, 5, 8, 10, 12 and 39-40 has been amended. Claims 14-38 have been cancelled. Claims 41-45 have been added. Claims 1-13 and 39-45 are pending and an action is as follows.
Claim Objections
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities:
The claim recites “an identifier (ID) of AI session” which seems to be missing the word “an”. As such the Examiner believes that the claims should read as “an identifier (ID) of an AI session” for proper grammar and syntax. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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) 1-3, 5, 39, 40, 44 and 45 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JIN et al. US 2023/0412513 (hereinafter JIN), in combination with LY et al. US 2023/0319533 (hereinafter LY).
Regarding claim 1, JIN teaches a method for updating an artificial intelligence (AI) session, the method comprising:
Sending an AI session update request to a radio access network (RAN) device; and
([JIN, Fig. 6A, ¶102] In step 601 of Fig. 6A, JIN teaches that the UE transmits a request to update an AI based session to the RAN shown as the gNB serving as the base station device of the Access Network (AN) of Fig. 6A as shown below.)
PNG
media_image1.png
546
778
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Receiving a session management (SM) context modification result of an AI session returned by the RAN device
([JIN, Fig. 6A] In step 601 of Fig. 6A, JIN depicts the exchange for the request to update an AI based session as a bidirectional exchange between the UE and the RAN and ultimately with the Access and Mobility Function (AMF) and Session Management Function (SMF) of the core network (CN). While JIN depicts that the exchange is bidirectional and involves sending the request from the UE to the SMF via the RAN and AMF [JIN, Fig. 6A, ¶102] which results in the SMF sending an AI based session update response back to the UE via the AMF and gNB of the RAN, [JIN, Fig. 6A, Steps 605-607, ¶605];
It does not teach that the session update response is explicitly an SM context modification result.
However, LY teaches wherein the response to a session update that was previously requested is received as a Session Update SM Context modification result as shown in step 3-5 of Fig. 6 [See LY, Fig. 6, Steps 3-5 and ¶97-¶101].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of JIN, indicating a AI based session update procedure which involves the RAN receiving an update for conveying a request for a session update, with the teachings of LY, indicating that a response may be received of a requested session update which is used to perform an SM context modification. The resulting benefits of the combination would have been the ability to inform the requestor of modification that take advantage of optimizations made to the communications system which are eligible for the requestor to directly benefit from [LY, ¶96-¶98].
Regarding claim 5, JIN teaches a method for updating an artificial intelligence (AI) session, the method comprising:
receiving an AI session update request sent by a terminal device;
([JIN, Fig. 6A, ¶102] The gNB of the Access Network (AN) receives an AI based session update request sent by the UE.)
sending the AI session update request to an access and mobility management function (AMF) device;
([JIN, Fig. 6A, Step 601] The gNB of the AN sends the AI based session update request to an AMF)
receiving a session management (SM) modification result of an AI session sent by the AMF device; and
([JIN, Fig. 6A, Step 606] The gNB receives an AI based session update response from the SMF in step 605 that forwarded by the AMF in step 606 to the gNB.)
transparently transmitting the SM modification result of the AI session to the terminal device.
([JIN, Figs. 6A and 20, ¶102] JIN teaches wherein the base station transmits using a forwarding step 607 of the result of the AI based session update, interpreted as the SM modification result of the AI session, to the UE terminal. [JIN, ¶283] The UE communicates data and/or signaling with the core network using over-the-top (OTT) connection, wherein the OTT connection is transparent to the participating communication device through which the OTT connection passes, which results in the gNB communicating the AI based session update (SM modification) result transparently.)
It does not teach that the session update response is explicitly an SM context modification result.
However, LY teaches wherein the response to a session update that was previously requested is received as a Session Update SM Context modification result as shown in step 3-5 of Fig. 6 [See LY, Fig. 6, Steps 3-5 and ¶97-¶101].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of JIN, indicating an AI based session update procedure which involves the RAN receiving an update for conveying a request for a session update, with the teachings of LY, indicating that a response may be received of a requested session update which is used to perform an SM context modification. The resulting benefits of the combination would have been the ability to inform the requestor of modification that take advantage of optimizations made to the communications system which are eligible for the requestor to directly benefit from [LY, ¶96-¶98].
Regarding claim 2, the combination of JIN, in view of LY teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the AI session update request comprises at least one of:
An identifier of AI session, a request type, or AI attribute information [JIN, ¶102 (The request type is specified as being an “update” request type).]
Regarding claim 3, the combination of JIN, in view of LY teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising:
in a case where the result of the AI session indicates completion, modifying one or more service parameters of the AI session; and
([JIN, Fig. 6A, Steps 602-605, ¶102-¶106] JIN discloses that the result of the AI session, as depicted in steps 602-605, indicates completion by including deployment information of the AI model and any of the respective AI model’s corresponding weights for implementation which serves to modify one or more service parameters of the AI session as claimed.)
sending an update confirmation response for the AI session to the RAN device.
(Sending an update confirmation response for the AI session to the RAN device as claimed is disclosed as forwarding a response (Steps 606-607 of Fig. 6A of JIN) comprising the parameters deployment information of the AI model’s session following the AI model session update of Steps 601-605.)
JIN does not explicitly disclose that the result is that of a SM context modification.
However, LY teaches wherein the response/result of a session update that was previously requested is received as a Session Update SM Context modification result as shown in step 3-5 of Fig. 6 [See LY, Fig. 6, Steps 3-5 and ¶97-¶101].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of JIN, indicating an AI based session update procedure which involves the RAN receiving an update for conveying a request for a session update and receiving a response as a result of the session update, with the teachings of LY, indicating that a response may be received of a requested session update which is used to perform an SM context modification, thus the update and any responses resulting therefrom correspond to the SM context modification. The resulting benefits of the combination would have been the ability to inform the requestor of modification that take advantage of optimizations made to the communications system which are eligible for the requestor to directly benefit from [LY, ¶96-¶98].
Regarding claim 39, the combination of JIN, in view of LY teaches a communication apparatus, comprising: one or more processors; and [JIN, Fig. 11, Processor 1103]
a memory, wherein the memory stores a computer program, and [JIN, Fig. 11, Memory 1105, ¶49, Memory storing computer program code]
wherein the computer program causes the one or more processors to collectively perform the method of claim 1. [JIN, Fig. 11, Processor 1103 and Memory 1105 operate to perform the method of claim 1 above as noted in ¶49]
Regarding claim 40, the combination of JIN, in view of LY teaches a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing instructions, the instructions when executed by a processor of a terminal device cause the terminal device to perform the method of claim 1 [JIN, Fig. 11, Processor 1103 and Memory 1105 (serving as the non-transitory computer-readable medium) operate for the UE terminal device to perform the method of claim 1 above as noted in ¶49].
Regarding claim 44, the combination of JIN, in view of LY teaches a communication apparatus, comprising: one or more processors; and [JIN, Fig. 12, Processor 1203, ¶51]
a memory, wherein the memory stores a computer program, and [JIN, Fig. 12, Memory 1205, ¶51, Memory storing computer program code]
wherein the computer program when executed by the one or more processors causes the one or more processors to perform the method of claim 5. [JIN, Fig. 12, Processor 1203 and Memory 1205 operate to perform the method of claim 5 above as noted in ¶51]
Regarding claim 45, the combination of JIN, in view of LY teaches a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing instructions, the instructions when executed by a processor of a radio network access (RAN) device cause the RAN device to perform the method of claim 5 [JIN, Fig. 12, Processor 1203 and Memory 1205 (serving as the non-transitory computer-readable medium) operate for the RAN node device 1200 to perform the method of claim 5 above as noted in ¶51].
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JIN, in view of LY and Navratil et al. US 2021/0076164 (hereinafter Nav).
Regarding claim 10, JIN teaches a method for updating an artificial intelligence (AI) session, the method comprising:
receiving an AI session update request sent by a radio access network (RAN) device;
([JIN, Fig. 6A, ¶102] The AMF receives an AI based session update request sent by the gNB of the Access Network (AN).)
sending the AI session update request to a session management function (SMF) device;
([JIN, Fig. 6A, Step 601] The AMF sends the AI based session update request to an SMF)
receiving a session management (SM) modification result of the AI session returned by the SMF device; and
([JIN, Fig. 6A, Step 606] The AMF receives an AI based session update response from the SMF in step 605 that forwarded by the SMF in step 605 to the AMF.)
sending the SM modification result of the AI session to the RAN device.
([JIN, Fig. 6A, Step 606] The AMF performs a forwarding step 606 to send the AI based session update response to the gNB of the access network (AN) which is interpreted as the RAN device as claimed.)
It does not teach that the session update response (result) is explicitly an SM context modification result; and wherein the update request comprises an identifier (ID) of a to-be-updated session
However, LY teaches wherein the response to a session update that was previously requested is received as a Session Update SM Context modification result as shown in step 3-5 of Fig. 6 [See LY, Fig. 6, Steps 3-5 and ¶97-¶101].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of JIN, indicating an AI based session update procedure which involves the RAN receiving an update for conveying a request for a session update, with the teachings of LY, indicating that a response may be received of a requested session update which is used to perform an SM context modification. The resulting benefits of the combination would have been the ability to inform the requestor of modification that take advantage of optimizations made to the communications system which are eligible for the requestor to directly benefit from [LY, ¶96-¶98].
It does not teach wherein the update request comprises an identifier (ID) of a to-be-updated session
Nav teaches that wherein the update request comprises an identifier (ID) of a to-be-updated AI session.
([Nav, ¶175]. In step 802, the AMF may sent a message to the SMF to cause an update. The message may be any suitable message and may be such as to invoke a context update. In one embodiment, the message may take the form of a Nsmf PDU Session Update SM Context (PDU Session ID, N1 SM container (PDU Session Modification Request)) to the SMF 509. Wherein JIN, Fig. 6A and ¶102 has previously be cited for teaching that the session is an AI based session as indicated above.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of JIN, in view of LY indicating a AI based session update procedure which involves the AMF receiving an AI based session update from the gNB for conveying a request for a session update to the SMF, with the teachings of Nav, indicating that a session update request comprises an session ID of the session to be updated. The resulting benefits of the combination would have been the ability to inform the requested network function of the particular session requiring modification/update in an efficient and direct manner [Nav, ¶175].
Claim(s) 4 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JIN, in view of LY as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of LUO et al. US 2025/0142398 (hereinafter LUO).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of JIN, in view of LY teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the sending the AI session update request to the RAN device, comprises:
sending, through a non-access stratum (NAS) message, the AI session update request to the RAN device.
([JIN, Fig. 6A, 601] JIN teaches wherein the AI based session update request is sent to the core network from the terminal via the RAN, shown as the gNB of the AN, serving as an intermediary), but neither JIN, nor LY teaches that the sending to the RAN device is through a NAS message.
However, LUO teaches wherein the session establishment request message is sent as a 5GSM message which is piggybacked in a 5GMM transport message as an uplink (UL) NAS transport message) from the UE to the core network functions via the RAN. [LUO, Fig. 4, step 410, ¶108]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of JIN, in view of LY, indicating an AI based session update procedure which involves the RAN receiving an update for conveying a request for a session update to the core network functions from the UE, with the teachings of LUO, indicating that a message may be sent from the UE to the core network function by being piggybacked onto a NAS message for transport from the UE to the network core via the RAN. The resulting benefit of placing the session request in the NAS transport message is that it allows for the message to be transparently and efficiently directly transported to the mobile network’s core functions from the UE via the RAN.
Regarding claim 8, the combination of JIN, in view of LY teaches the method of claim 5, wherein transparently transmitting the SM context modification result to the AI session to the terminal device comprises:
Transparently transmitting a container in the SM context modification result of the AI session to the terminal device.
([JIN, Figs. 6A and 20, ¶102] JIN teaches wherein the base station transmits using a forwarding step 607 of the result of the AI based session update, interpreted as the SM modification result of the AI session, to the UE terminal. [JIN, ¶283] The UE communicates data and/or signaling with the core network using over-the-top (OTT) connection, wherein the OTT connection is part of the container transparent to the participating communication device through which the OTT connection passes, which results in the gNB communicating the AI based session update (SM modification) result transparently. LY discloses the session update response is an SM context modification result as indicated in the rejection of claim 5 above. Same motivation and rationale of obviousness to combine JIN and LY is applied hereto as found in the rejection of claim 5.)
But it does not teach that the OTT connection related to the container is a second message container.
However, LUO teaches wherein the session establishment request message is sent as a 5GSM message which is piggybacked in a 5GMM transport message) from core network functions to the UE via the RAN. [LUO, Fig. 4, step 410, ¶108].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of JIN, in view of LY, indicating an AI based session update procedure which involves the gNB of the RAN receiving a session update result from the AMF core network function to convey to the UE using an OTT connection as a transparent container to the gNB of the RAN, with the teachings of LUO, indicating that a message may be sent to the UE from the core network function by being piggybacked onto a NAS message for transport from the UE to the network core via the RAN. The resulting benefit of placing the session request in the NAS transport message is that it allows for the message to be transparently and efficiently directly transported to the mobile network’s core functions from the UE via the RAN.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JIN, in view of LY and Nav as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of LY et al. US 2022/0210698 (LY2).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of JIN, in view of LY and Nav teaches the method of claim 10, further comprising:
wherein the update request comprises an identifier (ID) of a to-be-updated AI session.
([Nav, ¶175]. In step 802, the AMF may sent a message to the SMF to cause an update. The message may be any suitable message and may be such as to invoke a context update. In one embodiment, the message may take the form of a Nsmf PDU Session Update SM Context (PDU Session ID, N1 SM container (PDU Session Modification Request)) to the SMF 509. Wherein JIN, Fig. 6A and ¶102 has previously be cited for teaching that the session is an AI based session as indicated above.
And the resulting response of the session update request is sent from the SMF to the AMF, then forwarded by the AMF to the gNB of the AN (also referred to as the RAN) as noted by steps 605-607 in Fig. 6A of JIN.
The rationale of obviousness and motivation to combine the references is the same as that which was applied to the rejection of claim 10 above.)
but the combination of JIN, in view of LY and Nav does not teach returning, when determining that the ID of the to-be-updated AI session does not match any one of the IDs of established AI sessions, an AI session update failure message.
However, LY2 teaches returning, when determining that the ID of the to-be-updated AI session does not match any one of the IDs of established AI sessions, an AI session update failure message to the RAN device. ([LY2, ¶234] LY2 discloses that the SMF returns rejection of the request if the SMF is not able to obtain all context information required for each of the session IDs (this obtaining step is interpreted as matching procedure because the session ID lists are searched to determine if the session ID context information is already available to the SMF). The rejection is a result/response of the session request sent by the SMF to the AMF [LY2, ¶234], wherein as mentioned above in JIN Fig. 6A, Steps 605-607, that the result/response of the AI based session request from the SMF received by the AMF is forwarded to the AN’s gNB (RAN device) by the AMF)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of JIN, in view of LY and Nav, indicating an AI based session update procedure which involves the gNB of the RAN receiving a session update result from the SMF via the AMF core network function to convey to the UE using an OTT connection as a transparent container to the gNB of the RAN, with the teachings of LY2, indicating that a result of the session request may be a rejection when the all the context information is not obtained from the available session IDs available to the SMF. The resulting benefit of allowing PDU sessions to be organized and managed by the core network for so that all data is routed according to its appropriate session [LY2, ¶234].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 6, 7, 9, 12, 13, 41-43 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The Examiner has conducted a prior art search of the available Patent and Non-Patent Literature and was unable to find any prior art which teaches either solely or in combination with another reference the claimed features of “the method of claim 5, further comprising: in a case where the SM context modification result of the AI session indicates completion, updating a resource configuration for the AI session; sending a resource configuration update result of the AI session to the AMF device; and receiving an update result configuration message returned by the AMF device.”, “the method of claim 10, further comprising: receiving a resource configuration update result of the AI session sent by the RAN device; sending the resource configuration update result of the AI session to the SMF device; and receiving an update result reply sent by the SMF device.”, or “the method of claim 10, wherein the method is implemented by an access and mobility management function (AMF) device and the AMF device receives the SM context modification result of the AI session by: after the AMF device sends the AI session update request to the SMF device, updating, by the SMF device, an SM context for the AI session with the ID, sending the AI session update request to an AI network element device, receiving an update response for the AI session sent by the AI network element device, and sending the SM context modification result of the AI session to the AMF device.”, in combination with all the other claim limitations.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LONNIE V SWEET whose telephone number is (571)270-3622. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday.
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, Hassan Phillips can be reached at 571-272-3940. 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.
/LONNIE V SWEET/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2467
Prosecution Insights