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
1. This action is in response to the application filed on 27 September 2024.
Claims 1-3,5,7-13 and15-29 are presently pending for examination.
Information Disclosure Statement
2. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 09/27/2024, 10/29/2025 and 04/30/2026 have being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
3. 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 21-23 and 28-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim(s) recite(s):
Claim 21: a method performed by a second session management function (SMF), comprising: receiving from a first SMF third information about whether a resource is exclusively bound to a specific service instance in the first SMF; and obtaining fourth information about whether the second SMF supports a reselection of an alternative first SMF instance within an SMF set of the first SMF.
Claim 28: a second session management function (SMF), comprising: a processor; and a memory coupled to the processor, said memory containing instructions executable by said processor, whereby said second SMF is operative to: receive from a first SMF third information about whether a resource is exclusively bound to a specific service instance in the first SMF; and obtain fourth information about whether the second SMF supports a reselection of an alternative first SMF instance within an SMF set of the first SMF.
Claims 21 and 28 are directed towards certain methods of organizing human activity (in particular moving information from one part to another and making reselections based on information, all of which can be done within the human mind). Accordingly, the claims recite an abstract idea (step 2A prong 1).This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because second session management function (SMF), comprising: a processor; and a memory coupled to the processor are not sufficient to mount significantly more than the judicial exception nor does it improve the computing environment because the claims recite whether a resource is exclusively bound to a specific service instance in the first SMF and whether the second SMF supports a reselection of an alternative first SMF instance within an SMF set of the first SMF steps that link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. The recited limitations are not enough to add significantly more to the claimed method and is an attempt to limit the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment for which to apply the underlying abstract concept, which does not add significantly more. The use of generic computer elements described at a high level of generality and merely instructions to implement the abstract idea on a computer and/or use a computer as a tool the claim is not patent eligible and directed to an abstract idea MPEP 2106.05(f). (step 2A, prong 2). Since the additional element/limitations are drawn to limitations that attempts to limit the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use and/or use a computer as a tool, and includes well-understood, route, and conventional activities that amount to no more than implementing the abstract idea with a computerized system and/or includes insignificant extra-solution activity. Therefore, the claims are not patent eligible (Step 2B).
Claims 21-23 and 28-29 are rejected under 35 USC 101.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
4. 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, 3, 5, 7-9, 11-13, 15-17, 19-22, 24, 26-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Liang et al., U. S. Patent Publication No. 2022/0014944 A1.
Regarding claim 1, Liang discloses a method performed by an access and mobility function (AMF), comprising: obtaining third information about whether a resource is exclusively bound to a specific service instance in a first session management function (SMF) (see Liang, ¶ [0117]; information of SMF service instance is obtained); obtaining fourth information about whether a second SMF supports a reselection of an alternative first SMF instance within an SMF set of the first SMF (see Liang, ¶ [0126] and [0139]; specific and detailed information of SMF set is obtained); detecting that the first SMF is failed (see Liang, ¶ [0115] and [0118]; notification of failed SMF is received); and reselecting an alternative service instance within the SMF set of the first SMF based on the third information and the fourth information (see Liang, ¶ [0154] and [0156]; standby SMF service instance is selected).
Regarding claim 3, Liang discloses wherein obtaining the third information comprises: sending a network function (NF) discovery request to a Network Repository Function (NRF), and receiving a NF discovery response comprising the third information from the NRF; or receiving a service response message or a service request message including the third information from the first SMF (see Liang, ¶ [0140] and [0142]).
Regarding claim 5, Liang discloses wherein obtaining the fourth information comprises: sending a NF discovery request to an NRF, and receiving a NF discovery response comprising the fourth information from the NRF; or receiving an update session management (SM) Context Response message including the fourth information from the first SMF (see Liang, ¶ [0145]).
Regarding claim 7, Liang discloses wherein the reselecting an alternative service instance within the SMF set of the first SMF based on the third information and the fourth information comprises: when the third information indicates that the resource is not exclusively bound to the specific service instance in the first SMF, and the fourth information indicates that the second SMF supports the reselection of the alternative first SMF instance within the SMF set of the first SMF, reselecting the alternative V-SMF service instance within the SMF set of the first SMF (see Liang, ¶ [0117], [0139] and [0154]).
Regarding claim 8, Liang discloses wherein the reselecting an alternative service instance within the SMF set of the first SMF based on the third information and the fourth information comprises: when the third information indicates that the resource is not exclusively bound to the specific service instance in the first SMF, and the fourth information indicates that the second SMF doesn't support the reselection of the alternative first SMF instance within the SMF set of the first SMF, reselecting the alternative first SMF service instance within the SMF set of the first SMF; and sending a request for deleting at least one affected Protocol Data Unit (PDU) session toward a User Equipment (UE) to the alternative first SMF (see Liang, ¶ [0098], [0126] and [0156]).
Regarding claim 9, Liang discloses wherein the reselecting an alternative service instance within the SMF set of the first SMF based on the third information and the fourth information comprises: when the third information indicates that the resource is exclusively bound to the specific service instance in the first SMF, releasing at least one affected PDU session without reselecting the alternative first SMF service instance (see Liang, ¶ [0117] and [0222]-[0223]).
Regarding claim 11, Liang discloses further comprising: obtaining fifth information about whether a resource is exclusively bound to a specific service instance in the second SMF; and sending the fifth information to the first SMF (see Liang, ¶ [0126] and [0139]).
Regarding claim 12, Liang discloses a method performed by a first session management function (SMF), comprising: sending to an AMF third information about whether a resource is exclusively bound to a specific service instance in the first SMF (see Liang, ¶ [0117]; sent information of SMF service instance is received); sending to the AMF fourth information about whether a second SMF supports a reselection of an alternative first SMF instance within an SMF set of the first SMF (see Liang, ¶ [0126] and [0139]; specific and detailed information of SMF set is obtained); wherein the third information and the fourth information are used by the AMF to reselect an alternative service instance within the SMF set of the first SMF when the first SMF is failed (see Liang, ¶ [0115], [0126] and [0154]; detected failed SMF is replaced with standby one).
Regarding claim 13, Liang discloses the method further comprises: obtaining the fourth information; wherein the obtaining the fourth information comprises receiving the fourth information from the second SMF(see Liang, ¶ [0120]).
Regarding claim 15, Liang discloses further comprising: sending the third information to the second SMF (see Liang, ¶ [0117]).
Regarding claim 16, Liang discloses wherein the third information is included in a service request or response message (see Liang, ¶ [0155]).
Regarding claim 17, Liang discloses wherein the fourth information is included in an update SM context response message (see Liang, ¶ [0218]).
Regarding claim 19, Liang discloses the method further comprises: obtaining fifth information about whether a resource is exclusively bound to a specific service instance in the second SMF; and obtaining sixth information about whether the first SMF supports a reselection of an alternative second SMF instance within an SMF set of the second SMF (see Liang, ¶ [0118], [0126] and [0154]).
Regarding claim 20, Liang discloses wherein the fifth information is obtained from an access and mobility function (AMF) or the second SMF(see Liang, [0126] and [0140]).
Regarding claim 21, Liang discloses a method performed by a second session management function (SMF), comprising: receiving from a first SMF third information about whether a resource is exclusively bound to a specific service instance in the first SMF (see Liang, ¶ [0117]; information of SMF service instance is obtained); and obtaining fourth information about whether the second SMF supports a reselection of an alternative first SMF instance within an SMF set of the first SMF (see Liang, ¶ [0126] and [0139]; specific and detailed information of SMF set is obtained).
Regarding claim 22, Liang discloses further comprising: sending fifth information about whether a resource is exclusively bound to a specific service instance in the second SMF to the first SMF (see Liang, ¶ [0126] and [0139]).
Regarding claim 24, Liang discloses an access and mobility function (AMF), comprising: a processor; and a memory coupled to the processor, said memory containing instructions executable by said processor, whereby said AMF is operative to: obtain third information about whether a resource is exclusively bound to a specific service instance in a first session management function (SMF) (see Liang, ¶ [0117]; information of SMF service instance is obtained); obtain fourth information about whether a second SMF supports a reselection of an alternative first SMF instance within an SMF set of the first SMF (see Liang, ¶ [0126] and [0139]; specific and detailed information of SMF set is obtained); detect that the first SMF is failed (see Liang, ¶ [0115] and [0118]; notification of failed SMF is received); and reselect an alternative service instance within the SMF set of the first SMF based on the third information and the fourth information (see Liang, ¶ [0154] and [0156]; standby SMF service instance is selected).
Regarding claim 26, Liang discloses a first session management function (SMF), comprising: a processor; and a memory coupled to the processor, said memory containing instructions executable by said processor, whereby said first SMF is operative to: send to an AMF third information about whether a resource is exclusively bound to a specific service instance in the first SMF (see Liang, ¶ [0117]; sent information of SMF service instance is received); send to the AMF fourth information about whether a second SMF supports a reselection of an alternative first SMF instance within an SMF set of the first SMF (see Liang, ¶ [0126] and [0139]; specific and detailed information of SMF set is obtained); wherein the third information and the fourth information are used by the AMF to reselect an alternative service instance within the SMF set of the first SMF when the first SMF is failed (see Liang, ¶ [0115], [0126] and [0154]; detected failed SMF is replaced with standby one).
Regarding claim 27, Liang discloses wherein: the third information is included in a service request or response message; and/or the fourth information is included in an update SM context response message (see Liang, ¶ [0155] and [0218]).
Regarding claim 28, Liang discloses a second session management function (SMF), comprising: a processor; and a memory coupled to the processor, said memory containing instructions executable by said processor, whereby said second SMF is operative to: receive from a first SMF third information about whether a resource is exclusively bound to a specific service instance in the first SMF (see Liang, ¶ [0117]; information of SMF service instance is obtained); and obtain fourth information about whether the second SMF supports a reselection of an alternative first SMF instance within an SMF set of the first SMF (see Liang, ¶ [0126] and [0139]; specific and detailed information of SMF set is obtained).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. 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(s) 10, 18 ,23, 25 and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liang in view of Landais, U. S. Patent Publication No. 2021/0306211.
Regarding claim 10, although Liang discloses the invention substantially as claimed, it does not explicitly disclose wherein the first SMF is a visited SMF and the second SMF is a home SMF or the first SMF is an intermediate SMF and the second SMF is an anchor SMF.
Landais teaches wherein the first SMF is a visited SMF and the second SMF is a home SMF or the first SMF is an intermediate SMF and the second SMF is an anchor SMF (see Landais, ¶ [0025] and [0042]). It would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Landais with that of Liang in order to efficiently distinguish first SMF from the alternative standby SMF.
Regarding claim 18, Liang-Landais teaches wherein the first SMF is a visited SMF and the second SMF is a home SMF or the first SMF is an intermediate SMF and the second SMF is an anchor SMF (see Landais, ¶ [0025] and [0042]). Same motivation utilized in claim 10 applies equally as well to claim 18.
Regarding claim 23, Liang-Landais teaches wherein the first SMF is a visited SMF and the second SMF is a home SMF or the first SMF is an intermediate SMF and the second SMF is an anchor SMF (see Landais, ¶ [0025] and [0042]). Same motivation utilized in claim 10 applies equally as well to claim 23.
Regarding claim 25, Liang discloses wherein the AMF is further operative to reselect an alternative service instance within the SMF set of the first SMF based on the third information and the fourth information by: when the third information indicates that the resource is not exclusively bound to the specific service instance in the first SMF (see Liang, ¶ [0115] and [0117]), and the fourth information indicates that the second SMF supports the reselection of the alternative first SMF instance within the SMF set of the first SMF, reselecting the alternative service instance within the SMF set of the first SMF (see Liang, ¶ [0118] and [0139]); or when the third information indicates that the resource is not exclusively bound to the specific service instance in the first SMF, and the fourth information indicates that the second SMF doesn't support the reselection of the alternative first SMF instance within the SMF set of the first SMF, reselecting the alternative first SMF service instance within the SMF set of the first SMF, and sending a request for deleting at least one affected Protocol Data Unit (PDU) session toward a User Equipment (UE) to the alternative first SMF (see Liang, ¶ [0117] and [0126]); or when the third information indicates that the resource is exclusively bound to the specific service instance in the first SMF, releasing at least one affected PDU session without reselecting the alternative first SMF service instance (see Liang, ¶ [0117] and [0154]).
Although Liang discloses the invention substantially as claimed, it does not explicitly disclose the alternative SMF is V-SMF.
Landais teaches wherein alternative SMF is V-SMF (see Landais, ¶ [0044]). It would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Landais with that of Liang in order to efficiently identify the alternative standby SMF to be a V-SMF.
Regarding claim 29, Liang-Landais teaches wherein the first SMF is a visited SMF and the second SMF is a home SMF or the first SMF is an intermediate SMF and the second SMF is an anchor SMF (see Landais, ¶ [0025] and [0042]). Same motivation utilized in claim 10 applies equally as well to claim 29.
6. Claim(s) 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liang in view of Yan et al., U. S. Patent No. 11039019.
Although Liang discloses the invention substantially as claimed, it does not explicitly disclose wherein the third information is a Boolean and/or the fourth information is a Boolean.
Yan teaches wherein the third information is a Boolean and/or the fourth information is a Boolean (see Yan, col. 6 lines 38-42). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Yan with that of Liang in order to minimize message size as well as processing overhead.
Prior Art of Record
7. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. Please refer to form PTO-892 (Notice of Reference Cited) for a list of relevant prior art.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMED IBRAHIM whose telephone number is (571)270-1132. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday from 9:30AM to 6:00PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, John Follansbee can be reached on 571-272-3964. 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.
/Mohamed Ibrahim/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2444
Prosecution Insights