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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 03/11/2025 and 09/15/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 18 is 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-5, 7-8, 10, 12, and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention recites a judicial exception, is directed to that judicial exception, an abstract idea, as it has not been integrated into a practical application and the claims do not recite significantly more than the judicial exception. The examiner has evaluated the claims under the framework provided in the 2019 Patent Eligibility Guidance published in the Federal Register 01/07/2019 and has provided such analysis below.
Step 1:
Claims 1-5, 7-8, 10, and 12 are directed to a method and fall within the statutory category of processes and claim 29 is directed to a system and fall within the statutory category of machines. Therefore, “Are the claims to a process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter?” Yes.
In order to evaluate the Step 2A inquiry “Is the claim directed to a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea?” we must determine, at Step 2A Prong 1, whether the claim recites a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea and further whether the claim recites additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Step 2A Prong 1:
Claims 1 and 29: The limitation “determining a first dynamic UE group based on grouping information”, as drafted, is a process that, but for the recitation of generic computing components, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind. For example, a person can think and observe, judge and evaluate grouping information and mentally determine, with or without the use of pen and paper, a first dynamic UE group. The limitation “configuring a handling rule for a User Plane Function (UPF) device or an Edge Application Server Discovery Function (EASDF) device based on the first dynamic UE group”, as drafted, is a process that, but for the recitation of generic computing components, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind. For example, a person can think and observe, judge and evaluate the first dynamic UE group and mentally configure, with or without the use of pen and paper, a handling rule for a User Plane Function (UPF) device or an Edge Application Server Discovery Function (EASDF) device.
Therefore, yes, claims 1 and 29 recite judicial exceptions.
Step 2A Prong 2:
Claims 1 and 29: The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, claim 1 recites the following additional elements –“a Session Management Function (SMF) device” and “wherein the handling rule is used to instruct each UE in the first dynamic UE group to access at least one of a common Edge Application Server (EAS), a common Data Network Access Identifier (DNAI), or a common Local Data Network (L-DN)”, which is a recitation of generic computing components and functions being used as a tool to apply the abstract idea (see MPEP § 2106.05(f)) and a recitation of field of use/technological environment (see MPEP § 2106.05(h)), respectively, which do not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application. Further, claim 29 recites the following additional elements (in addition to those above from claim 1) – “information processing device”, “Session Management Function (SMF) device”, “memory”, “transceiver”, and “processor”, which are merely recitations of generic computing components and functions being used as a tool to apply the abstract idea (see MPEP § 2106.05(f)), which does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application.
Therefore, “Do the claims recites additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application?” No, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea.
After evaluating the inquiries set forth in Steps 2A Prongs 1 and 2, it has been concluded that claims 1 and 29 not only recite a judicial exception but that the claims are directed to the judicial exception as the judicial exception has not been integrated into a practical application.
Step 2B:
Claims 1 and 29: The claims do not recite additional elements, alone or in combination, that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements amount to no more than generic computing components and mere instructions to apply an exception and field of use/technological environment which do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea.
Therefore, “Do the claims recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception?” No, these additional elements, alone or in combination, do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Having concluded analysis within the provided framework, claims 1 and 29 do not recite patent eligible subject matter under 35 USC 101.
With regard to claim 2, it recites the additional element of “wherein the grouping information comprises at least one of the followings: location information of the UE; application information associated with the UE; first time period information; or group identifier associated with the UE”, which is merely a recitation of field of use/technological environment (see MPEP § 2106.05(h)) which does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application. Further, claim 2 does not recite any further additional elements and for the same reasons as above with regard to integration into a practical application and whether additional elements amount to significantly more, claim 2 fails both Step 2A Prong 2 for being directed to a judicial exception that has not been integrated into a practical application and Step 2B for not amounting to significantly more. Therefore, claim 2 does not recite patent eligible subject matter under 35 USC 101.
With regard to claim 3, it recites the additional element of “wherein the handling rule indicates at least one of the followings: common EAS address set information; common Domain Name System (DNS) server address information; common Extended DNS (EDNS) client subnet option indication information; or common DNAI information”, which is merely a recitation of field of use/technological environment (see MPEP § 2106.05(h)) which does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application. Further, claim 3 does not recite any further additional elements and for the same reasons as above with regard to integration into a practical application and whether additional elements amount to significantly more, claim 3 fails both Step 2A Prong 2 for being directed to a judicial exception that has not been integrated into a practical application and Step 2B for not amounting to significantly more. Therefore, claim 3 does not recite patent eligible subject matter under 35 USC 101.
With regard to claim 4, the limitation “determining the grouping information based on grouping trigger information”, as drafted, is a process that, but for the recitation of generic computing components, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind. For example, a person can think and observe, judge and evaluate grouping trigger information and mentally determine, with or without the use of pen and paper, the grouping information. The limitation “determining the first dynamic UE group based on the grouping information”, as drafted, is a process that, but for the recitation of generic computing components, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind. For example, a person can think and observe, judge and evaluate the grouping information and mentally determine, with or without the use of pen and paper, the first dynamic UE group. Claim 4 does not recite any further additional elements and for the same reasons as above with regard to integration into a practical application and whether additional elements amount to significantly more, claim 4 fails both Step 2A Prong 2 for being directed to a judicial exception that has not been integrated into a practical application and Step 2B for not amounting to significantly more. Therefore, claim 4 does not recite patent eligible subject matter under 35 USC 101.
With regard to claim 5, it recites the additional element of “wherein the grouping trigger information comprises at least one of the followings: local policy information; or Policy and Charging Control (PCC) policy information provided by a Policy Control Function (PCF) device; or, the grouping trigger information comprises at least one of: indication information or the grouping information; wherein the indication information is used to instruct the SMF device to configure the handling rule for the UPF device or the EASDF device”, which is merely a recitation of field of use/technological environment (see MPEP § 2106.05(h)) which does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application. Further, claim 5 does not recite any further additional elements and for the same reasons as above with regard to integration into a practical application and whether additional elements amount to significantly more, claim 5 fails both Step 2A Prong 2 for being directed to a judicial exception that has not been integrated into a practical application and Step 2B for not amounting to significantly more. Therefore, claim 5 does not recite patent eligible subject matter under 35 USC 101.
With regard to claim 7, the limitation “in the case it is determined that the UPF or EAS address corresponding to at least one UE in the first dynamic UE group needs to be replaced”, as drafted, is a process that, but for the recitation of generic computing components, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind. For example, a person can think and observe, judge and evaluate the UPF or EAS address corresponding to at least one UE in the first dynamic UE group and mentally determine, with or without the use of pen and paper, the UPF or EAS address needs to be replaced. The limitation “configuring the handling rule for the UPF device or the EASDF device based on the first dynamic UE group”, as drafted, is a process that, but for the recitation of generic computing components, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind. For example, a person can think and observe, judge and evaluate the first dynamic UE group and mentally configure, with or without the use of pen and paper, the handling rule for the UPF or EASDF device. Further, claim 7 does not recite any further additional elements and for the same reasons as above with regard to integration into a practical application and whether additional elements amount to significantly more, claim 7 fails both Step 2A Prong 2 for being directed to a judicial exception that has not been integrated into a practical application and Step 2B for not amounting to significantly more. Therefore, claim 7 does not recite patent eligible subject matter under 35 USC 101.
With regard to claim 8, the limitation “generating a corresponding DNS message handling rule for the first dynamic UE group”, as drafted, is a process that, but for the recitation of generic computing components, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind. For example, a person can think and observe, judge and evaluate the first dynamic UE group and mentally determine, with or without the use of pen and paper, a corresponding DNS message handling rule. Claim 8 recites the following additional elements of “sending the DNS message handling rule to the EASDF device”, “obtaining at least one Fully Qualified Domain Name (FQDN)”, “updating the first dynamic UE group based on the at least one FQDN”, “updating the DNS message handling rule for an updated first dynamic UE group”, and “sending an updated DNS message handling rule to the EASDF device”, which are merely insignificant data gathering activities (see MPEP § 2106.05(g)) which does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application and is also well-understood, routine, and conventional (see MPEP § 2106.05(d)(II): “The courts have recognized the following computer functions as well-understood, routing, and conventional functions when they are claimed in a merely generic manner (e.g., at a high level of granularity) or as insignificant extra-solution activity (i. Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g., using the Internet to gather data)”. That is, in the instant claims, these limitations merely receive or transmit/provide data which is well-understood, routine, and conventional. Further, claim 8 recites the following additional elements of “wherein the DNS message handling rule is used to indicate: for at least one UE in the first dynamic UE group, a DNS query message initiated by the at least one UE is sent to a common local DNS server or target indication information is added through the EDNS client subnet option” and “the target indication information is used to indicate a target Internet Protocol (IP) range”, which are merely recitations of field of use/technological environment (see MPEP § 2106.05(h)) which does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application. Further, claim 8 does not recite any further additional elements and for the same reasons as above with regard to integration into a practical application and whether additional elements amount to significantly more, claim 8 fails both Step 2A Prong 2 for being directed to a judicial exception that has not been integrated into a practical application and Step 2B for not amounting to significantly more. Therefore, claim 8 does not recite patent eligible subject matter under 35 USC 101.
With regard to claim 12, the limitation “performing selection and/or insertion of at least one of an Uplink Classifier (UL CL) or Branching Point (BP), or a PDU session anchor UPF”, as drafted, is a process that, but for the recitation of generic computing components, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind. For example, a person can think and observe, judge and evaluate the handling rule and mentally select, with or without the use of pen and paper, at least one of an Uplink Classifier (UL CL) or Branching Point (BP), or a PDU session anchor UPF. The limitation “determining a DNS server”, as drafted, is a process that, but for the recitation of generic computing components, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind. For example, a person can think and observe, judge and evaluate the handling rule and mentally determine, with or without the use of pen and paper, a DNS server. The limitation “configuring a traffic routing rule to the UL CL or BP based on the handling rule”, as drafted, is a process that, but for the recitation of generic computing components, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind. For example, a person can think and observe, judge and evaluate the handling rule and mentally configure, with or without the use of pen and paper, a traffic routing rule to the UL CL or BP. Further, claim 12 recites the following additional elements of “wherein the traffic routing rule indicates that the UL CL is configured with common DNS server address, or the BP is configured with a same IP address prefix”, which is merely a recitation of field of use/technological environment (see MPEP § 2106.05(h)) which does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application. Further, claim 12 does not recite any further additional elements and for the same reasons as above with regard to integration into a practical application and whether additional elements amount to significantly more, claim 12 fails both Step 2A Prong 2 for being directed to a judicial exception that has not been integrated into a practical application and Step 2B for not amounting to significantly more. Therefore, claim 12 does not recite patent eligible subject matter under 35 USC 101.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5, 7-8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 21-22, 25-26, 29, 42, 49, and 53 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Tang (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2024/0187374, hereinafter “Tang”).
Claim 1:
Tang discloses an information processing method performed by a Session Management Function (SMF) device (§ 0031, Lines 3-4; A SMF may be overloaded for interactions to support a server discovery procedure), comprising:
determining a first dynamic UE group based on grouping information (§ 0031, Lines 9-14; The same related rules for handling DNS queries from the UE can apply to all UEs which are accessing the application with the same condition. Therefore, interactions for exchanging information for the server discovery procedure should be improved, to alleviate a system’s expense and load);
configuring a handling rule for a User Plane Function (UPF) device or an Edge Application Server Discovery Function (EASDF) device based on the first dynamic UE group (§ 0031, Lines 9-12; The same related rules for handling DNS queries from the UE can apply to all UEs which are accessing the application with the same condition) (§ 0032, Lines 19-21; A way for an EASDF requesting to handle DNS information based on a DNS query with a certain FQDN is clarified);
wherein the handling rule is used to instruct each UE in the first dynamic UE group to access at least one of a common Edge Application Server (EAS), a common Data Network Access Identifier (DNAI), or a common Local Data Network (L-DN) (§ 0027, Lines 29-34; Before an application or a UE starts to connect to the service, it is very important for the application or the UE to discover the IP address of a suitable EAS (e.g., the one closest to the UE), so that the traffic can be locally routed to the EAS, and service latency, traffic routing path and user service experience can be optimized).
Claims 2, 22, and 26:
Tang further discloses wherein the grouping information comprises at least one of the followings:
location information of the UE;
application information associated with the UE (§ 0031, Lines 9-12; The same related rules for handling DNS queries from the UE can apply to all UEs which are accessing the application with the same condition);
first time period information; or
group identifier associated with the UE.
Claim 3:
Tang further discloses wherein the handling rule indicates at least one of the followings:
common EAS address set information;
common Domain Name System (DNS) server address information;
common Extended DNS (EDNS) client subnet option indication information; or
common DNAI information (§ 0032, Lines 7-12; Rules for handling DNS queries can be associated with a service area of a DNS server, which may be one or more DNAIs or may be one or more identifiers different from a DNAI (e.g., a server area identifier identifying two or more DNAIs sharing the same DNS server for a DNS resolution)).
Claim 4:
Tang further discloses wherein determining the first dynamic UE group based on the grouping information comprises:
determining the grouping information based on grouping trigger information (“same condition”);
determining the first dynamic UE group based on the grouping information (§ 0031, Lines 9-12; The same related rules for handling DNS queries from the UE can apply to all UEs which are accessing the application with the same condition).
Claim 5:
Tang further discloses wherein the grouping trigger information comprises at least one of the followings:
local policy information; or
Policy and Charging Control (PCC) policy information provided by a Policy Control Function (PCF) device;
or,
the grouping trigger information comprises at least one of: indication information or the grouping information (§ 0031, Lines 9-12; The same related rules for handling DNS queries from the UE can apply to all UEs which are accessing the application with the same condition);
wherein the indication information is used to instruct the SMF device to configure the handling rule for the UPF device or the EASDF device (§ 0074, Lines 1-4; The SMF sends a DNS configuration request to the EASDF, to provision or remove the DNS configuration information corresponding to DNN(s)/S-NSSAI(s) and/or DNAI(s)) based on the first dynamic UE group (§ 0031, Lines 9-12; The same related rules for handling DNS queries from the UE can apply to all UEs which are accessing the application with the same condition) (§ 0032, Lines 19-21; A way for an EASDF requesting to handle DNS information based on a DNS query with a certain FQDN is clarified).
Claim 7:
Tang further discloses wherein configuring the handling rule for the UPF device or the EASDF device based on the first dynamic UE group comprises:
in the case it is determined that the UPF or EAS address corresponding to at least one UE in the first dynamic UE group needs to be replaced (§ 0030, Lines 12-16; The SMF may update the rules for handling DNS queries from the UE, which may be triggered by the UE’s mobility (e.g., when the UE moves to a new location) or by an insertion or a removal of a local PSA UPF), configuring the handling rule for the UPF device or the EASDF device based on the first dynamic UE group (§ 0031, Lines 9-14; The same related rules for handling DNS queries from the UE can apply to all UEs which are accessing the application with the same condition. Therefore, interactions for exchanging information for the server discovery procedure should be improved, to alleviate a system’s expense and load).
Claim 8:
Tang further discloses wherein configuring the handling rule for the UPF device or the EASDF device based on the first dynamic UE group comprises:
generating a corresponding DNS message handling rule for the first dynamic UE group (§ 0031, Lines 9-14; The same related rules for handling DNS queries from the UE can apply to all UEs which are accessing the application with the same condition. Therefore, interactions for exchanging information for the server discovery procedure should be improved, to alleviate a system’s expense and load);
sending the DNS message handling rule to the EASDF device (§ 0074, Lines 1-4; The SMF sends a DNS configuration request to the EASDF, to provision or remove the DNS configuration information corresponding to DNN(s)/S-NSSAI(s) and/or DNAI(s));
wherein the DNS message handling rule is used to indicate: for at least one UE in the first dynamic UE group, a DNS query message initiated by the at least one UE is sent to a common local DNS server or target indication information is added through the EDNS client subnet option (§ 0030, Lines 5-7; A SMF interacts with an EASDF and provides an EDNS client subnet (ECS) option or a local DNS server address, related to candidate DNAI(s) for that FQDN for the UE’s location);
the target indication information is used to indicate a target Internet Protocol (IP) range (See citation above. The FQDN indicates a range);
wherein configuring the handling rule for the UPF device or the EASDF device based on the first dynamic UE group further comprises:
obtaining at least one Fully Qualified Domain Name (FQDN) (§ 0030, Lines 12-16; The SMF may update the rules for handling DNS queries from the UE, which may be triggered by the UE’s mobility, by reporting by the EASDF of a DNS query with a certain FQDN);
updating the first dynamic UE group based on the at least one FQDN (See citation above);
updating the DNS message handling rule for an updated first dynamic UE group (§ 0031, Lines 9-14; The same related rules for handling DNS queries from the UE can apply to all UEs which are accessing the application with the same condition. Therefore, interactions for exchanging information for the server discovery procedure should be improved, to alleviate a system’s expense and load);
sending an updated DNS message handling rule to the EASDF device (§ 0078, Lines 1-4; The EASDF updates the DNS configuration information of DNN/S-NSSAI and/or DNAI(s) and/or application(s) according to a DNS configuration request message).
Claim 10:
Tang further discloses wherein configuring the handling rule for the UPF device or the EASDF device based on the first dynamic UE group comprises:
configuring the handling rule for the UPF device or the EASDF device based on first information of at least one UE in the first dynamic UE group;
wherein the first information comprises at least one of the followings:
EAS information; or
Protocol Data Unit (PDU) session information (§ 0032, Lines 22-28; Improve interactions for exchanging information for a server discovery procedure, in which DNS configuration information per a node (e.g., a network function) can be provisioned and serving DNS information for an individual PDU session for a UE can be informed to an EASDF in time for choosing information relating to the server discovery procedure) (§ 0002, Lines 21-24; Once a discovered EAS becomes non-optimized (e.g., after the UE moves far away), a new EAS may be discovered and used to replace the old one to serve the UE).
Claim 12:
Tang further discloses wherein after configuring the handling rule for the UPF device or the EASDF device based on the first dynamic UE group, the information processing method further comprises:
performing at least one of the following operations based on the handling rule:
performing selection and/or insertion of at least one of an Uplink Classifier (UL CL) or Branching Point (BP), or a PDU session anchor UPF (§ 0080, Lines 16-18; The ECS(s) option corresponding to the current PSA(s) of the PDU session may also be provided to the EASDF); or
determining a DNS server (§ 0080, Lines 13-16; A new identifier for DNS server accessing may correspond to a list of DNAI(s) which share the same DNS server information with the current accessing DNAI);
or,
wherein after configuring the handling rule for the UPF device or the EASDF device based on the first dynamic UE group, the information processing method further comprises:
configuring a traffic routing rule to the UL CL or BP based on the handling rule;
wherein the traffic routing rule indicates that the UL CL is configured with common DNS server address, or the BP is configured with a same IP address prefix.
Claim 14:
Tang discloses an information processing method performed by an Edge Application Server Discovery Function (EASDF) device, comprising:
receiving a handling rule sent by a Session Management Function (SMF) device (§ 0074, Lines 1-4; The SMF sends a DNS configuration request to the EASDF, to provision or remove the DNS configuration information corresponding to DNN(s)/S-NSSAI(s) and/or DNAI(s));
processing a Domain Name System (DNS) query message based on the handling rule (§ 0032, Lines 19-21; A way for an EASDF requesting to handle DNS information based on a DNS query with a certain FQDN is clarified);
wherein the handling rule is used to instruct each UE in the first dynamic UE group to access at least one of a common Edge Application Server (EAS), a common Data Network Access Identifier (DNAI), or a common Local Data Network (L-DN) (§ 0027, Lines 29-34; Before an application or a UE starts to connect to the service, it is very important for the application or the UE to discover the IP address of a suitable EAS (e.g., the one closest to the UE), so that the traffic can be locally routed to the EAS, and service latency, traffic routing path and user service experience can be optimized);
the handling rule is a rule configured for a User Plane Function (UPF) device or an EASDF device (§ 0032, Lines 19-21; A way for an EASDF requesting to handle DNS information based on a DNS query with a certain FQDN is clarified);
the first dynamic UE group is a UE group determined by the SMF device based on grouping information (§ 0031, Lines 9-14; The same related rules for handling DNS queries from the UE can apply to all UEs which are accessing the application with the same condition. Therefore, interactions for exchanging information for the server discovery procedure should be improved, to alleviate a system’s expense and load).
Claim 16:
Tang further discloses wherein receiving the handling rule sent by the SMF device comprises:
receiving a DNS message handling rule sent by the SMF device (§ 0074, Lines 1-4; The SMF sends a DNS configuration request to the EASDF, to provision or remove the DNS configuration information corresponding to DNN(s)/S-NSSAI(s) and/or DNAI(s));
wherein the DNS message handling rule is used to indicate: for at least one UE in the first dynamic UE group, a DNS query message initiated by the at least one UE is sent to a common local DNS server or target indication information is added through an Extended DNS (EDNS) client subnet option (§ 0030, Lines 5-7; A SMF interacts with an EASDF and provides an EDNS client subnet (ECS) option or a local DNS server address, related to candidate DNAI(s) for that FQDN for the UE’s location);
the target indication information is used to indicate a target Internet Protocol (IP) range (See citation above. The FQDN indicates a range);
or,
wherein receiving the handling rule sent by the SMF device further comprises:
receiving an updated DNS message handling rule sent by the SMF device (§ 0078, Lines 1-4; The EASDF updates the DNS configuration information of DNN/S-NSSAI and/or DNAI(s) and/or application(s) according to a DNS configuration request message).
Claim 21:
Tang discloses an information processing method performed by an Application Function (AF) device (§ 0166, Lines 1-3; The AF sends DNS configuration information for the associated EDN for any UE via a NEF), comprising:
sending information on dynamic group to a first device, wherein the first device is a Policy Control Function (PCF) device (§ 0029, Lines 15-19; The traffic routing information can be retrieved by a PCF during the PDU session establishment procedure (e.g., per SUPI) and sent to the SMF (e.g., per traffic or an application, if there is traffic for the application)) or a Network Exposure Function (NEF) device (§ 0166, Lines 1-3; The AF sends DNS configuration information for the associated EDN for any UE via a NEF);
wherein the information on dynamic group comprises at least one of indication information or grouping information (See citation above);
the indication information is used to instruct a Session Management Function (SMF) device (§ 0074, Lines 1-2; The SMF sends a DNS configuration request to the EASDF) to configure a handling rule for a User Plane Function (UPF) device or an Edge Application Server Discovery Function (EASDF) device based on a first dynamic UE group (§ 0031, Lines 9-12; The same related rules handling DNS queries from the UE can apply to all UEs which are accessing the application with the same condition) (§ 0032, Lines 19-21; A way for an EASDF requesting to handle DNS information based on a DNS query with a certain FQDN is clarified);
the handling rule is used to instruct each UE in the first dynamic UE group to access at least one of a common Edge Application Server (EAS), a common Data network Access Identifier (DNAI), or a common Local Data Network (L-DN) (§ 0027, Lines 29-34; Before an application or a UE starts to connect to the service, it is very important for the application or the UE to discover the IP address of a suitable EAS (e.g., the one closest to the UE), so that the traffic can be locally routed to the EAS, and service latency, traffic routing path and user service experience can be optimized);
the first dynamic UE group is a UE group determined by a SMF device based on the grouping information (§ 0031, Lines 9-14; The same related rules for handling DNS queries from the UE can apply to all UEs which are accessing the application with the same condition. Therefore, interactions for exchanging information for the server discovery procedure should be improved, to alleviate a system’s expense and load).
Claim 25:
Tang discloses an information processing method performed by a first device (§ 0167, Line 3; Apparatus 800), comprising:
receiving information on dynamic group sent by an Application Function (AF) device (§ 0029, Lines 1-4; An AF provides traffic routing information to a UDR via an AF influenced traffic routing procedure, including a list of data network access identifier(s) (DNAI(s)) per an application or per traffic);
obtaining Policy and Charging Control (PCC) policy information based on the information on dynamic group (§ 0029, Lines 8-11; The traffic routing information will be updated to a SMF as part of a pccRule, which is identified by flowInfos or appId as described in 3GPP TS29.512);
sending the PCC policy information to a Session Management Function (SMF) device (See citation above);
wherein the first device is a Policy Control Function (PCF) device or a Network Exposure Function (NEF) device (§ 0029, Lines 15-16; The traffic routing information can be retrieved by a PCF);
the information on dynamic group comprises at least one of indication information or grouping information (§ 0029, Lines 1-4; An AF provides traffic routing information to a UDR via an AF influenced traffic routing procedure, including a list of data network access identifier(s) (DNAI(s)) per an application or per traffic);
the indication information is used to instruct a SMF device (§ 0074, Lines 1-2; The SMF sends a DNS configuration request to the EASDF) to configure a handling rule for a User Plane Function (UPF) device or an Edge Application Server Discovery Function (EASDF) device based on the first dynamic UE group (§ 0031, Lines 9-12; The same related rules for handling DNS queries from the UE can apply to all UEs which are accessing the application with the same condition) (§ 0032, Lines 19-21; A way for an EASDF requesting to handle DNS information based on a DNS query with a certain FQDN is clarified);
the handling rule is used to instruct each UE in the first dynamic UE group to access at least one of a common Edge Application Server (EAS), a common Data Network Access Identifier (DNAI), or a common Local Data Network (L-DN) (§ 0027, Lines 29-34; Before an application or a UE starts to connect to the service, it is very important for the application or the UE to discover the IP address of a suitable EAS (e.g., the one closest to the UE), so that the traffic can be locally routed to the EAS, and service latency, traffic routing path and user service experience can be optimized);
the first dynamic UE group is a UE group determined by the SMF device based on the grouping information (§ 0031, Lines 9-14; The same related rules for handling DNS queries from the UE can apply to all UEs which are accessing the application with the same condition. Therefore, interactions for exchanging information for the server discovery procedure should be improved, to alleviate a system’s expense and load);
the PCC policy information comprises at least one of the indication information or the grouping information (§ 0029, Lines 8-11; The traffic routing information will be updated to a SMF as part of a pccRule, which is identified by flowInfos or appId as described in 3GPP TS29.512).
Claim 29:
Tang discloses an information processing device, wherein the information processing device is a Session Management Function (SMF) device (§ 0167, Lines 5-7; Apparatus 800 may be a network function of a network (e.g., a SMF)), and comprises a memory (§ 0168, Lines 8-9; Apparatus 800 may include a memory), a transceiver (§ 0167, Lines 3-5; Transceiver 802), and a processor (§ 0167, Lines 3-5; Processor 804);
the memory is configured to store a computer program (§ 0171, Lines 2-8); the transceiver is configured to receive and send data under the control of the processor (§ 0168, Lines 5-7); the processor is configured to read the computer program in the memory to implement the information processing method according to claim 1 (See the rejection of claim 1 above).
Claim 42:
Tang discloses an information processing device, the information processing device is an Edge Application Server Discovery Function (EASDF) device (§ 0169, Line 2; The apparatus 800 may be an EASDF of a network), comprising a memory (§ 0168, Lines 8-9; Apparatus 800 may include a memory), a transceiver (§ 0167, Lines 3-5; Transceiver 802), and a processor (§ 0167, Lines 3-5; Processor 804);
the memory is configured to store a computer program (§ 0171, Lines 2-8); the transceiver is configured to receive and send data under the control of the processor (§ 0168, Lines 5-7); the processor is configured to read the computer program in the memory to implement the information processing method according to claim 14 (See the rejection of claim 14 above).
Claim 49:
Tang discloses an information processing device, the information processing device is an Application Function (AF) device (§ 0167, Lines 5-8; The apparatus 800 may be a network function of a network (e.g., an EASDF or a SMF as illustrated and shown in any of Figs. 1B, 1C, and 2-7)), comprising a memory (§ 0168, Lines 8-9; Apparatus 800 may include a memory), a transceiver (§ 0167, Lines 3-5; Transceiver 802), and a processor (§ 0167, Lines 3-5; Processor 804);
the memory is configured to store a computer program(§ 0171, Lines 2-8); the transceiver is configured to receive and send data under the control of the processor (§ 0168, Lines 5-7); the processor is configured to read the computer program in the memory to implement the information processing method according to claim 25 (See the rejection of claim 21 above).
Claim 53:
Tang discloses an information processing device, the information processing device is a first device (§ 0167, Line 3; Apparatus 800), comprising a memory (§ 0168, Lines 8-9; Apparatus 800 may include a memory), a transceiver (§ 0167, Lines 3-5; Transceiver 802), and a processor (§ 0167, Lines 3-5; Processor 804);
the memory is configured to store a computer program (§ 0171, Lines 2-8); the transceiver is configured to receive and send data under the control of the processor (§ 0168, Lines 5-7); the processor is configured to read the computer program in the memory to implement the information processing method according to claim 25 (See the rejection of claim 25 above).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2024/0056321 (Xu et al.) – Techniques for handling dynamic group membership for an application group in a mobile communication system.
U.S. Patent No. 12506703 (Karampatsis et al.) – An actual performance of an edge application server in an edge network may be taken into account if an SMF constructs DNS message handling rules for the EASDF.
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2025/0016581 (Shen et al.) – A UE is provided with first and second DNS configurations and using feedback information, determine to stop maintaining a DNS handling rule corresponding to the second DNS configuration.
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2023/0403611 (Fu et al.) – Techniques to perform handover of a UE to an edge service node to avoid the problem of service interruption caused by mobility.
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0263788 (Lee et al.) – A UE having transferred a DNS request may identify the address of an EAS available in the UE’s position through a 5G system.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NAM T TRAN whose telephone number is (408)918-7553. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7AM-3PM EST.
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, Emmanuel Moise can be reached at 571-272-3865. 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.
/NAM T TRAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2455