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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 9/27/2024 was filed in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 11-13, 15, 21, 22, 27, 32, 36, and 37 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by D1 ERICSSON: "KI #1, Sol #12: Updates to the solution", 3GPP DRAFT; S2-2007856, 3RD GENERATION PARTNERSHIP PROJECT (3GPP), MOBILE COMPETENCE CENTRE ; 650, ROUTE DES LUCIOLES ; F-06921 SOPHIA-ANTIPOLIS CEDEX ; FRANCE, vol. SA WG2, no. Electronic meeting; 20201012 - 20201023 25 October 2020 (2020-10-25), XP051948112 (provided by applicant, hereafter referred to as Ericsson).
Regarding claim 11, Ericsson teaches A method performed by a user equipment, UE, in a wireless communication system for service continuity between a client application of the UE and a server, the connection comprising an edge application server and the connection further comprising a first local user plane function and a first proxy and a user plane tunnel connection between the UE based client and the first proxy and user plane function, the user plane tunnel connection further comprising a first source internet protocol, IP, address (see at least section 2 Proposal, sub-section 6.12.1 and sub-section 6.12.2 and in particular sub-section 6.12.2.1 EAS discovery triggered re-anchoring without change of SMF), the method comprising:
performing a path change procedure after a connection to a second user plane function has been established (see at least section 2 Proposal, sub-section 6.12.1 and sub-section 6.12.2 and in particular sub-section 6.12.2.1 EAS discovery triggered re-anchoring without change of SMF and Fig. 6.12.2.1-1 disclosing the UPF2);
triggering a discovery procedure to enable the connection of a second proxy associated with the second user plane function, based on the path change procedure (see at least section 2 Proposal, sub-section 6.12.1 and sub-section 6.12.2 and in particular sub-section 6.12.2.1 EAS discovery triggered re-anchoring without change of SMF and Fig. 6.12.2.1-1 disclosing the decision to re-anchor and the selection of UPF2); and
establishing a tunnel connection to the second proxy between the UE and the second proxy wherein UL data packets are routed from the second proxy to the server and bypassing the first proxy (see at least section 2 Proposal, sub-section 6.12.1 and sub-section 6.12.2 and in particular sub-section 6.12.2.1 EAS discovery triggered re-anchoring without change of SMF and Fig. 6.12.2.1-1 disclosing packets bypassing the UPF1).
Regarding claim 12, Ericsson teaches the method of claim 11. In addition, Ericsson teaches wherein the second user plane function is configured to forward UL packets to the first proxy function with a second source IP address, different to the first source IP address (see at least section 2 Proposal, sub-section 6.12.1 and sub-section 6.12.2 and in particular sub-section 6.12.2.1 EAS discovery triggered re-anchoring without change of SMF and Fig. 6.12.2.1-1 disclosing a central AS IP being the first IP address and an EAS IP being the second IP address).
Regarding claim 13, Ericsson teaches the method of claim 11. In addition, Ericsson teaches wherein the triggering a discovery procedure comprises providing reachability information for the second proxy local to the second user plane function (see at least section 2 Proposal, sub-section 6.12.1 and sub-section 6.12.2 and in particular sub-section 6.12.2.1 EAS discovery triggered re-anchoring without change of SMF and Fig. 6.12.2.1-1 disclosing a central AS IP being the first IP address and an EAS IP being the second IP address).
Regarding claim 15, Ericsson teaches the method of claim 12. In addition, Ericsson teaches wherein the second user plane function is configured to forward UL packets to the first proxy function with a second source IP address, different to the first source IP address, further comprising:
establishing a tunnel connection to the second proxy (see at least section 2 Proposal, sub-section 6.12.1 and sub-section 6.12.2 and in particular sub-section 6.12.2.1 EAS discovery triggered re-anchoring without change of SMF and Fig. 6.12.2.1-1 disclosing the re-anchoring and the path discovery procedure).
Regarding claim 21, Ericsson teaches A method performed by a first proxy function, in a wireless communication system for service continuity between a UE-based client application and a server, the connection comprising an edge application server and the connection further comprising a first local user plane function associated with the first proxy function and a user plane tunnel connection between the UE based client and the first proxy and user plane function, the user plane tunnel connection further comprising a first source internet protocol, IP, address (see at least section 2 Proposal, sub-section 6.12.1 and sub-section 6.12.2 and in particular sub-section 6.12.2.1 EAS discovery triggered re-anchoring without change of SMF), the method comprising:
receiving UL data packets from a second user plane function (see at least section 2 Proposal, sub-section 6.12.1 and sub-section 6.12.2 and in particular sub-section 6.12.2.1 EAS discovery triggered re-anchoring without change of SMF and Fig. 6.12.2.1-1);
detecting a change to a second IP address;
in response to detecting, performing a path change procedure after a connection to a second user plane function has been established (see at least section 2 Proposal, sub-section 6.12.1 and sub-section 6.12.2 and in particular sub-section 6.12.2.1 EAS discovery triggered re-anchoring without change of SMF and Fig. 6.12.2.1-1 disclosing the UPF2);
receiving UL data packets from a second user plane function (see at least section 2 Proposal, sub-section 6.12.1 and sub-section 6.12.2 and in particular sub-section 6.12.2.1 EAS discovery triggered re-anchoring without change of SMF and Fig. 6.12.2.1-1 disclosing packets bypassing the UPF1).
Regarding claim 22, Ericsson teaches the method of claim 21. In addition, Ericsson teaches wherein the second user plane function is configured to forward UL packets to the first proxy function with a second source IP address, different to the first source IP address and the performing a path change is performed in response to detecting the change of source IP address (see at least section 2 Proposal, sub-section 6.12.1 and sub-section 6.12.2 and in particular sub-section 6.12.2.1 EAS discovery triggered re-anchoring without change of SMF and Fig. 6.12.2.1-1 disclosing a central AS IP being the first IP address and an EAS IP being the second IP address).
Regarding claim 27, Ericsson teaches the method of Claim 21. In addition, Ericsson teaches wherein the path change procedure comprises sending a message comprising reachability information for the second proxy (see at least section 2 Proposal, sub-section 6.12.1 and sub-section 6.12.2 and in particular sub-section 6.12.2.1 EAS discovery triggered re-anchoring without change of SMF and Fig. 6.12.2.1-1 disclosing a central AS IP being the first IP address and an EAS IP being the second IP address).
Regarding claim 32, Ericsson teaches A user equipment, UE, comprising a client application wherein the client application is connected to a server, the connection comprising an edge application server and the connection further comprising a first local user plane function and a first proxy and a user plane tunnel connection between the UE based client and a first proxy and user plane function, the user plane tunnel connection further comprising a first source internet protocol, IP, address (see at least section 2 Proposal, sub-section 6.12.1 and sub-section 6.12.2 and in particular sub-section 6.12.2.1 EAS discovery triggered re-anchoring without change of SMF), the UE configured to:
perform a path change procedure in response to a connection being established to a second user plane function configured to forward UL packets to the first proxy function with a second source IP address, different to the first source IP address (see at least section 2 Proposal, sub-section 6.12.1 and sub-section 6.12.2 and in particular sub-section 6.12.2.1 EAS discovery triggered re-anchoring without change of SMF and Fig. 6.12.2.1-1 disclosing the UPF2); and,
trigger a discovery procedure to enable the connection of a second proxy associated with the second user plane function, based on the path change procedure (see at least section 2 Proposal, sub-section 6.12.1 and sub-section 6.12.2 and in particular sub-section 6.12.2.1 EAS discovery triggered re-anchoring without change of SMF and Fig. 6.12.2.1-1 disclosing the decision to re-anchor and the selection of UPF2)
establish a tunnel connection to the second proxy between the UE and the second proxy wherein UL data packets are routed from the second proxy to the server and bypassing the first proxy (see at least section 2 Proposal, sub-section 6.12.1 and sub-section 6.12.2 and in particular sub-section 6.12.2.1 EAS discovery triggered re-anchoring without change of SMF and Fig. 6.12.2.1-1 disclosing packets bypassing the UPF1).
Regarding claim 36, Ericsson teaches A second proxy function in a wireless communication system for service continuity between a UE-based client application and a server, the connection comprising an edge application server and the connection further comprising a first local user plane function associated with a first proxy function and a user plane tunnel connection between a UE based client and the first proxy and user plane function, the user plane tunnel connection further comprising a first source internet protocol, IP, address, the second proxy function configured to:
establish a second user plane function connection between the UE based client and the first user plane connection (see at least section 2 Proposal, sub-section 6.12.1 and sub-section 6.12.2 and in particular sub-section 6.12.2.1 EAS discovery triggered re-anchoring without change of SMF and Fig. 6.12.2.1-1 disclosing a central AS IP being the first IP address and an EAS IP being the second IP address);
obtain a second source IP address for UL data packets, wherein the second source IP is different from the first IP address; forward UL data packets from the second user plane function to the first user plane proxy function, wherein the first IP address is replaced with the second IP address (see at least section 2 Proposal, sub-section 6.12.1 and sub-section 6.12.2 and in particular sub-section 6.12.2.1 EAS discovery triggered re-anchoring without change of SMF and Fig. 6.12.2.1-1 disclosing a central AS IP being the first IP address and an EAS IP being the second IP address).
Regarding claim 37, Ericsson teaches A program product or carrier comprising a computer program, the computer program comprising instructions which when executed on a processor circuit, cause the processor to perform the method of Claim 11 (see rejection above of claim 11).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
7. 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.
8. 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.
9. 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.
10. Claim(s) 25 and 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ericsson as applied to claim 21 above, in view of US 2022/0030468 A1 by Stephan et al. (hereafter referred to as Stephan).
Regarding claim 25, Ericsson teaches the method of Claim 21.
Ericsson does not appear to specifically teach wherein the path change procedure comprises a Quick UDP Internet Connection, QUIC, protocol PATH_CHALLENGE message.
In the same field of endeavor, Stephan teaches wherein the path change procedure comprises a Quick UDP Internet Connection, QUIC, protocol PATH_CHALLENGE message (see at least ¶ [0088]; PATH_CHALLENGE).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Ericsson with Stephan in order to validate path properties.
Regarding claim 26, Ericsson teaches the method of Claim 21.
Ericsson does not appear to specifically teach wherein the path change procedure comprises a Quick UDP Internet Connection, QUIC, protocol PATH_RESPONSE message, in response to a PATH_CHALLENGE message received from the UE based client.
In the same field of endeavor, Stephan teaches wherein the path change procedure comprises a Quick UDP Internet Connection, QUIC, protocol PATH_RESPONSE message, in response to a PATH_CHALLENGE message received from the UE based client (see at least ¶ [0088]; PATH_RESPONSE).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Ericsson with Stephan in order to validate path properties.
Conclusion
11. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATASHA W COSME whose telephone number is (571)270-7225. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-4.
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, Ayman Abaza can be reached at 571-270-0422. 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.
/NATASHA W COSME/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2465
Prosecution Insights