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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1, 3-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takeda et al. (US 20230142231 A1, hereinafter Takeda) in view of MIKLÓS et al. (US 20210359926 A1, hereinafter Miklos)
Regarding Claim 1, Takeda teaches
A network node comprising: a reception unit configured to receive a registration request of a terminal;
(Takeda [0074] FIG. 8 is a diagram illustrating an example of a functional configuration of the network node 10. As illustrated in FIG. 8, the network node 10 includes a transmission unit 110, a reception unit 120, a configuration unit 130, and a control unit 140. [0030, line As illustrated in FIG. 2, a system including a core network in an embodiment of the present invention consists of a UE, which is a terminal 20, and a plurality of network nodes 10. Hereafter, one network node 10 corresponds to each function.)
(Note: Fig 2 illustrates AMF receiving registration request form the terminal (i.e. UE in the reference).
a control unit configured to obtain registration information of a network node that performs controlling of registrations of terminals belonging to a group including the terminal
(Takeda [FIG. 2] illustrates a control unit AMF.)
(Note: 5G Standalone (SA) networks — the Access and Mobility Management Function (AMF) is the control unit responsible for obtaining and managing registration information for User Equipment (UE))
However, Takeda does not specifically teach
determine whether or not a master node used for relaying the registration request is a master node different from that of another terminal belonging to the group, based on the registration information;
transmission unit configured to transmit a registration request including an identifier used for identifying the master node in a case of a master node different from that of another terminal belonging to the group.
However, in a similar endeavor, Miklos teaches
determine whether or not a master node used for relaying the registration request is a master node different from that of another terminal belonging to the group, based on the registration information;
(Miklos [0071, line 2] Instead of a reliability group, the UEs may provide the device ID in steps 1 and 5 of the procedure. As an alternative, the device ID may also be derived in the network from other parameters. Instead of the reliability group, it may thus be the device ID which is provided to the RAN in steps 2 and 6. After step 6, gNB1 may detect that two UEs are connected from the same device.)
transmission unit configured to transmit a registration request including an identifier used for identifying the master node in a case of a master node different from that of another terminal belonging to the group.
(Miklos [0070, line 10] a device ID may be provided either by the UE or by the network, wherein the device ID is the same for both UEs of the device. The device ID may be provided to a gNB of the RAN, which can use it to check whether the UEs having the same device ID are connected to the network. If so, the gNB may select one of the UEs to perform a handover. In handover decisions, the gNB may check that handover targets to which the other UE of the same device is connected are avoided.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the examined application to have modified Takeda and by incorporating Miklos to have reception unit, control unit and transmission unit to drive redundancy-aware selection, network visibility into other terminals and distinguishes which MN is handling the terminal.
The motivation of doing so would have enabled the system to make the network aware of which master node and/or AMF is already serving other terminals in the same group, and then avoid reusing that same node for the current terminal. This is to improve reliability, efficiency and uninterrupted service.
Regarding Claim 3, Takeda and Miklos teach all of Claim 1 but Takeda does not specifically teach
wherein the control unit selects, as a network node of a reallocation destination, a network node that is not used by another terminal belonging to the group, based on the registration information.
However, in a similar endeavor, Miklos specifically teaches
wherein the control unit selects, as a network node of a reallocation destination, a network node that is not used by another terminal belonging to the group, based on the registration information.
(Miklos [0074, line 4] it may be conceivable to provide redundancy status notifications for gateway nodes of the cellular network, such as UPF nodes in a 5G network. An SMF may provide notifications based on whether or not a UPF could be allocated according to a requested level of redundancy.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the examined application to have modified Takeda and by incorporating Miklos to have a control system to reallocate resources to select a destination where a note belonging to other group is not being used.
The motivation of doing so would have enabled the system to have best usage of the resources for an uninterrupted service and transmission.
Regarding Claim 4, Takeda and Miklos teach all of Claim 1 but Takeda does not specifically teach
wherein the reception unit receives a handover request triggered by a movement of a terminal
(Miklos [0063, line 13] In order to establish full redundancy in the RAN, gNB1 may then initiate a handover of UE2 to gNB2.)
the control unit selects, as a destination network node, a network node that is not used by another terminal belonging to the group, based on the registration information.
(Miklos [0056, line 14] the first gNB may attempt to implement the redundancy scheme, e.g., by applying the cell selection parameters. This may involve Dual Connectivity (DC) establishment or handover decisions, for example, optionally considering idle or inactive mode cell selection parameter settings. In step 4, which may only be performed when redundancy needs to be established among the gNBs of the RAN, a second gNB (gNB2) may be selected (e.g., in a corresponding cell selection procedure), leading to a gNB change from the first gNB to the second gNB and providing redundancy for the redundant communication paths.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the examined application to have modified Takeda and by incorporating Miklos to have a control system for non-overlapping node selection for handover/reallocation.
The motivation of doing so would have enabled the system to have best usage of the resources for an uninterrupted service and transmission.
Regarding Claim 5, Takeda teaches
A wireless communication system including: a plurality of network nodes that perform control of registration of a terminal;
(Takeda [0030, line 5] and FIG. 2 a plurality of network nodes 10)
wherein each of the plurality of network nodes includes: a reception unit configured to receive a registration request of the terminal;
(Takeda [0074] FIG. 8 is a diagram illustrating an example of a functional configuration of the network node 10. As illustrated in FIG. 8, the network node 10 includes a transmission unit 110, a reception unit 120, a configuration unit 130, and a control unit 140. [0030, line As illustrated in FIG. 2, a system including a core network in an embodiment of the present invention consists of a UE, which is a terminal 20, and a plurality of network nodes 10. Hereafter, one network node 10 corresponds to each function. (Note: Fig 2 illustrates AMF receiving registration request form the terminal (i.e. UE in the reference))
a control unit configured to obtain registration information of a network node that performs controlling of registrations of terminals belonging to a group including the terminal,
(Takeda [FIG. 2] illustrates a control unit AMF.)
(Note: 5G Standalone (SA) networks — the Access and Mobility Management Function (AMF) is the control unit responsible for obtaining and managing registration information for User Equipment (UE))
However, Takeda does not specifically teach
a plurality of master nodes that perform wireless communication with the terminal
determine whether or not a master node used for relaying the registration request is a master node different from that of another terminal belonging to the group, based on the registration information;
a transmission unit configured to transmit a registration request including an identifier used for identifying the master node in a case of a master node different from that of another terminal belonging to the group.
However, in a similar endeavor, Miklos teaches
a plurality of master nodes that perform wireless communication with the terminal,
(Miklos [0045, lines 4] in the CN may relate to the redundant provision of nodes along the redundant communication paths in the CN and may particularly relate to the redundant provision of gateway nodes (e.g., UPFs in a 5G network))
determine whether or not a master node used for relaying the registration request is a master node different from that of another terminal belonging to the group, based on the registration information;
(Miklos [0071, line 2] Instead of a reliability group, the UEs may provide the device ID in steps 1 and 5 of the procedure. As an alternative, the device ID may also be derived in the network from other parameters. Instead of the reliability group, it may thus be the device ID which is provided to the RAN in steps 2 and 6. After step 6, gNB1 may detect that two UEs are connected from the same device.)
a transmission unit configured to transmit a registration request including an identifier used for identifying the master node in a case of a master node different from that of another terminal belonging to the group.
(Miklos [0070, line 10] a device ID may be provided either by the UE or by the network, wherein the device ID is the same for both UEs of the device. The device ID may be provided to a gNB of the RAN, which can use it to check whether the UEs having the same device ID are connected to the network. If so, the gNB may select one of the UEs to perform a handover. In handover decisions, the gNB may check that handover targets to which the other UE of the same device is connected are avoided.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the examined application to have modified Takeda and by incorporating Miklos to have reception unit, control unit and transmission unit to drive redundancy-aware selection, network visibility into other terminals and distinguishes which MN is handling the terminal.
The motivation of doing so would have enabled the system to make the network aware of which master node and/or AMF is already serving other terminals in the same group, and then avoid reusing that same node for the current terminal. This is to improve reliability, efficiency and uninterrupted service.
Regarding Claim 6, Takeda teaches
A communication method performed by a terminal, the communication method comprising: receiving a registration request of a terminal;
(Takeda [0074] FIG. 8 is a diagram illustrating an example of a functional configuration of the network node 10. As illustrated in FIG. 8, the network node 10 includes a transmission unit 110, a reception unit 120, a configuration unit 130, and a control unit 140. [0030, line As illustrated in FIG. 2, a system including a core network in an embodiment of the present invention consists of a UE, which is a terminal 20, and a plurality of network nodes 10. Hereafter, one network node 10 corresponds to each function.)
(Note: Fig 2 illustrates AMF receiving registration request form the terminal (i.e. UE in the reference).
But Takeda does not specifically teach
obtaining registration information of a network node that performs controlling of registrations of terminals belonging to a group including the terminal
determining whether or not a master node used for relaying the registration request is a master node different from that of another terminal belonging to the group, based on the registration information;
transmitting a registration request including an identifier used for identifying the master node in a case of a master node different from that of another terminal belonging to the group.
However, in a similar endeavor, Miklos teach
obtaining registration information of a network node that performs controlling of registrations of terminals belonging to a group including the terminal
(Takeda [FIG. 2] illustrates a control unit AMF.)
(Note: 5G Standalone (SA) networks — the Access and Mobility Management Function (AMF) is the control unit responsible for obtaining and managing registration information for User Equipment (UE))
determining whether or not a master node used for relaying the registration request is a master node different from that of another terminal belonging to the group, based on the registration information;
(Miklos [0071, line 2] Instead of a reliability group, the UEs may provide the device ID in steps 1 and 5 of the procedure. As an alternative, the device ID may also be derived in the network from other parameters. Instead of the reliability group, it may thus be the device ID which is provided to the RAN in steps 2 and 6. After step 6, gNB1 may detect that two UEs are connected from the same device.)
transmitting a registration request including an identifier used for identifying the master node in a case of a master node different from that of another terminal belonging to the group.
(Miklos [0070, line 10] a device ID may be provided either by the UE or by the network, wherein the device ID is the same for both UEs of the device. The device ID may be provided to a gNB of the RAN, which can use it to check whether the UEs having the same device ID are connected to the network. If so, the gNB may select one of the UEs to perform a handover. In handover decisions, the gNB may check that handover targets to which the other UE of the same device is connected are avoided.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the examined application to have modified Takeda and by incorporating Miklos to have reception unit, control unit and transmission unit to drive redundancy-aware selection, network visibility into other terminals and distinguishes which MN is handling the terminal.
The motivation of doing so would have enabled the system to make the network aware of which master node and/or AMF is already serving other terminals in the same group, and then avoid reusing that same node for the current terminal. This is to improve reliability, efficiency and uninterrupted service.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takeda et al. (US 20230142231 A1, hereinafter Takeda) in view of 3GPP TS 23.501 V17.2.0, as cited by applicant.
Regarding Claim 2, Takeda and Miklos teach all of Claim 1 but fail to teach
wherein the transmission unit transmits a subscription request for an indication of receiving a registration request of another terminal belonging to the group to a network node that manages a subscriber of another terminal belonging to the group
the reception unit receives registration information indicating a registered network node from the network node that manages a subscriber of another terminal belonging to the group, based on the subscription.
However, in a similar endeavor, 3GPP TS 23.501 V17.2.0 discloses
wherein the transmission unit transmits a subscription request for an indication of receiving a registration request of another terminal belonging to the group to a network node that manages a subscriber of another terminal belonging to the group
(3GPP [Section 5.6.2, page 119]The AMF reports the reachability of the UE based on a subscription from the SMF, including: The UE location information with respect to the arca of interest indicated by the SMF.)
the reception unit receives registration information indicating a registered network node from the network node that manages a subscriber of another terminal belonging to the group, based on the subscription.
(3GPP [Section 5.6.3, page 121] The SMF in HPLMN is responsible to check the UE request with regard to the user subscription and to possibly reject the UE request in the case of mismatch. The SMF in HPLMN obtains subscription data directly from the UDM.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the examined application to have modified Takeda and by incorporating 3GPP TS 23.501 V17.2.0 for the system to have non-overlapping node selection for handover/reallocation
The motivation of doing so would have enabled the prevention of group terminals from converging on one node.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RANA HASSAN MAHMUD whose telephone number is (571)272-8939. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Friday.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kathy Wang-Hurst can be reached at 5712705371. 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.
/RANA H MAHMUD/Examiner, Art Unit 2644
/KATHY W WANG-HURST/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2644
Prosecution Insights