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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
Claims 52, 58-60 and 75 have been amended.
Claims 1-51, 53, 56-57, 62-74 and 76-77 have been canceled.
Claims 52, 54-55, 58-61 and 75 are pending.
CLAIM REJECTIONS - 35 USC § 103
I. 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.
II. CLAIMS 52, 54-55, 58-61 AND 75 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over PARK et al (US 2023/0239680) in view of KEDALAGUDDE et al (US 2023/0199868).
Per claim 52, PARK et al teach an information obtaining method, performed by a first network function which is an application layer function (AF) or a network data analytics function (NWDAF), comprising:
obtaining first information [Abstract, paras 0018-20, 0130—receiving a subscription transfer request message including first subscription information]; and
wherein the first information includes at least one of UE location, UE status, subscription information, user plane information, wireless status and service quality monitoring information [paras 0018, 0020—first subscription information includes analytics such as UE location; paras 0051, 0077, 0116—data collected by the NWDAF include UE ID or location information, quality of service (QOS) data].
PARK et al teach the limitations, as applied above, along with collecting network data, resource status, throughput, QOS flow delay and bitrate data from an AMF, an SMF or a UPF [paras 0051-57, 0109, 0113]—yet fail to explicitly teach the claim limitation of “selecting a federated learning member according to the first information; wherein the method further includes: sending a subscription request to an access and mobility management function (AMF), wherein the obtaining first information includes: obtaining at least one of UE location, UE status and subscription information sent by the AMF according to the subscription request; or, sending a subscription request to a user plane function (UPF), wherein the obtaining first information includes: obtaining the user plane information sent by the UPF; wherein the user plane information includes at least one of throughput, session resource utilization, rate, delay, packet transmission and packet retransmission; or, sending a service quality monitoring request to a policy control function (PCF), wherein the obtaining first information includes: obtaining service quality monitoring information sent by the UPF; wherein the service quality monitoring information includes packet delay, the PCF sends the service quality monitoring request to the UPF through a session management function (SMF), and the UPF sends a service quality monitoring request response to the first network function according to the service quality monitoring request; the service quality monitoring request response includes packet delay”.
KEDALAGUDDE et al teach UEs selected for the group federated learning between two end points [paras 0023-24] and implementing a monitoring event used by PCF for reporting, resource management, creating request messages, QOS UL packet delay, UPF notification and requesting UPF subscription path [page 8, paras 0131-132, 0161, 0225-228] with selection of a UPF close to the UE and executing traffic steering from the UPF based on the UE subscription data, UE location and information provided by the AF [paras 0139-140].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed the invention to combine the teachings of PARK et al with KEDALAGUDDE et al for the purpose of allowing for the selection of a federated learning member according to the first analytics information including sending a request to obtain UE location, status and subscription information, which is well-known in the art for performing a federated learning model among selected application functions for distributing analytics and collecting UE information.
Claim 75 contains limitations that are substantially equivalent to the limitations of claim 52, and are therefore rejected under same basis.
Per claim 54, PARK et al with KEDALAGUDDE et al teach the method according to claim 52, PARK et al further teach wherein when the first network function is AF, the method further includes: sending a subscription request to the NWDAF; wherein the obtaining first information includes: obtaining wireless status sent by the NWDAF according to the subscription request; wherein the NWDAF obtains the wireless status by collecting data through an operation administration and maintenance (OAM), and the wireless status includes at least one of reference signal receiving power (RSRP), reference signal receiving quality (RSRQ), signal to interference plus noise ratio (SINR) and radio resource utilization ratio [paras 0018, 0052, page 4 Table 3—NWDAF entity in a wireless communication network collecting data through OAM, SS-RSRP, CSI-RSRP, RSRP, RSRQ, SS-SINR, CSI-SINR, E-UTRA ratio RS-SINR; KEDALAGUDDE et al: page 36—CSI-SINR, CSI-RSRP, CSI-RSRQ].
Per claim 55, PARK et al with KEDALAGUDDE et al teach the method according to claim 52, PARK et al further teach wherein when the first network function is NWDAF, the method further includes: obtaining wireless status by collecting data through an operation administration and maintenance (OAM); wherein the wireless status includes at least one of reference signal receiving power (RSRP), reference signal receiving quality (RSRQ), signal to interference plus noise ratio (SINR) and radio resource utilization ratio [paras 0018, 0052, 0128, page 4 Table 3—NWDAF entity in a wireless communication network collecting data through OAM, SS-RSRP, CSI-RSRP, RSRP, RSRQ, SS-SINR, CSI-SINR, E-UTRA ratio RS-SINR; KEDALAGUDDE et al: page 36—CSI-SINR, CSI-RSRP, CSI-RSRQ; paras 0180—wireless performance KPIs and model performance metrics].
Per claim 58, PARK et al with KEDALAGUDDE et al teach the method according to claim 52, KEDALAGUDDE et al further teach wherein when the first network function is AF, the UPF sends the service quality monitoring request response to AF in one of the following ways: sending the service quality monitoring request response to the AF; sending the service quality monitoring request response to the AF through network exposure function (NEF); sending the service quality monitoring request response to the AF through SMF and PCF; or, when the first network function is NWDAF, the UPF sends the service quality monitoring request response to NWDAF in one of the following ways: sending the service quality monitoring request response to the NWDAF; sending the service quality monitoring request response to the NWDAF through SMF and PCF [paras 0042-43, 0057-66, 0074—SMF updated Policy information for the PDU Session evaluated based on the information previously provided by the SMF, AF, CHF, UDR and NWDAF; NWDAF supporting data collection; QoS flow binding shall ensure that, when the PCF provisions the PCC rule in SMF which contains the AIML group performance container and AIML session indicator; QoS monitoring parameters].
Per claim 59, PARK et al with KEDALAGUDDE et al teach the method according to claim 52, KEDALAGUDDE et al further teach wherein the subscription request includes at least one of AOI of the requested UE, single network slice selection assistance information (S-NSSAI), UE identifier, UE list and UE group [paras 0029, 0063, 0087-91, 0095-97, 0133, 0209-211—request includes AOI, UE identifier, list and/or S-NSSAI].
Per claim 60, PARK et al with KEDALAGUDDE et al teach the method according to claim 52, KEDALAGUDDE et al further teach wherein the service quality monitoring request includes at least one of AOI of the requested UE, single network slice selection assistance information (S-NSSAI), UE identifier, UE list and UE group [paras 0029, 0063, 0087-91, 0095-97, 0133, 0209-211—request includes AOI, UE identifier, list, group ID and/or S-NSSAI].
Per claim 61, PARK et al with KEDALAGUDDE et al teach the method according to claim 52, KEDALAGUDDE et al further teach wherein when the first network function is NWDAF, the method further includes: obtaining a first request message sent by the AF; obtaining the first information according to the first request message; after selecting a federated learning member according to the first information, sending the selected federated learning member to the AF [paras 0020-24, 0077—AF group is federated learning application between AI Application Function in the cloud and numerous UEs constituting a group].
Conclusion
III. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: US 2024/0414063; US 2025/0203433; US 2023/0308930; US 2024/0373291.
IV. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
V. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KRISTIE D SHINGLES whose telephone number is (571)272-3888. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday 10am-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, Kamal Divecha can be reached on 571-272-5863. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/KRISTIE D SHINGLES/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2453
Prosecution Insights