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 .
Priority
An attempt by the Office to electronically retrieve, under the priority document exchange program, the foreign application 2314449.6 to which priority is claimed has FAILED on 02/03/2025. Please see the associated communication mailed 02/03/2025 titled “Document indicating retrieval was unsuccessful” for additional details.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1, 5-6, 10-11 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gao (US 2023/0054288 A1) in view of Säily (US 2022/0053399 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Gao discloses the below limitation(s): at least one memory configured to store computer-readable program code; and at least one processing circuitry configured to access the at least one memory (Gao [0292] wireless device comprise memory and processor(s)), and execute the computer-readable program code to cause the apparatus to at least:
provide a radio network service to at least one user equipment by a serving radio access node having context information in association with the at least one user equipment (Fig 1 and [0057] teaches a base station providing the service(s) of, for example, eMBB, QoS, and charge management);
determine to shut down the radio network service ([0058] handover procedure can be triggered due to new radio conditions, load balancing, due to specific service, etc., which is interpreted shutting down the radio network service at a first RAN and handover to a candidate RAN);
forward the context information by the serving radio access node to a plurality of radio access nodes within reach, via a signaling procedure defined as a non-acknowledgement message procedure, for the plurality of radio access nodes to store the context information for enabling a continued radio network service to the at least one user equipment ([0057] in the event that the UE moves from the airport slice (i.e. serving RAN) to normal eMBB slice (i.e. candidate RAN), the service continuity can be supported; Fig 6 block 604 hand over a network service for a terminal from the first network node to a target network node using the slice remapping assistance information or initiate a terminal context retrieve procedure, wherein examiner is interpreting the or as both service handover and context retrieval occurring as required by the instant invention); and
inform a mobility management function of the determined shut down along (Fig 3 and [0062] source RAN node sends handover required message (i.e. determined shut down) to the core network (CN) node (e.g. AMF 308 i.e. mobility management function)) …;
Gao does not disclose the below limitation(s): with an indication of the plurality of radio access nodes for the mobility management function informing at least one candidate node for providing the continued radio network service of the plurality of radio access nodes.
In the same field of endeavor of enabling for continuity of service during handover, Säily does disclose the below limitation(s): with an indication of the plurality of radio access nodes for the mobility management function informing at least one candidate node for providing the continued radio network service of the plurality of radio access nodes (Säily Fig 2-4 and [0141] teaches a plurality of candidate gNBs (i.e. radio access nodes) for handover that are communicated to the core network (e.g. AMF) by the source gNB (i.e. serving radio access node) and wherein one of the plurality is chosen for handover).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the teaching of Gao to include selecting the target node (i.e. RAN or gNB) from a plurality of possible nodes as taught by Säily. The suggestion/motivation to do so would have been to select the best node for providing service from among a plurality of possible nodes to better serve the UE. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Gao and Säily to obtain the invention, as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding Claim 5, Gao and Säily disclose the limitation(s) of Claim 1.
Gao does not disclose the below limitation(s): wherein the at least one candidate node comprises at least one of the plurality of radio access nodes.
In the same field of endeavor of enabling for continuity of service during handover, Säily does disclose the below limitation(s): wherein the at least one candidate node comprises at least one of the plurality of radio access nodes (Säily Fig 2-4 and [0141] teaches a plurality of candidate gNBs (i.e. radio access nodes) for handover that are communicated to the core network (e.g. AMF) by the source gNB (i.e. serving radio access node) and wherein one of the plurality is chosen for handover).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the aforementioned apparatus/method to include selecting the target node (i.e. RAN or gNB) from a plurality of possible nodes as taught by Säily. The suggestion/motivation to do so would have been to select the best node for providing service from among a plurality of possible nodes to better serve the UE. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Gao and Säily to obtain the invention, as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding Claim 6, Gao discloses the below limitation(s): providing a radio network service to at least one user equipment by a serving radio access node having context information in association with the at least one user equipment (Gao Fig 1 and [0057] teaches a base station providing the service(s) of, for example, eMBB, QoS, and charge management);
determining to shut down the radio network service ([0058] handover procedure can be triggered due to new radio conditions, load balancing, due to specific service, etc., which is interpreted shutting down the radio network service at a first RAN and handover to a candidate RAN);
forwarding the context information by the serving radio access node to a plurality of radio access nodes within reach, via a signaling procedure defined as a non-acknowledgement message procedure, for the plurality of radio access nodes to store the context information for enabling a continued radio network service to the at least one user equipment ([0057] in the event that the UE moves from the airport slice (i.e. serving RAN) to normal eMBB slice (i.e. candidate RAN), the service continuity can be supported; Fig 6 block 604 hand over a network service for a terminal from the first network node to a target network node using the slice remapping assistance information or initiate a terminal context retrieve procedure, wherein examiner is interpreting the or as both service handover and context retrieval occurring as required by the instant invention); and
informing a mobility management function of the determined shut down along (Fig 3 and [0062] source RAN node sends handover required message (i.e. determined shut down) to the core network (CN) node (e.g. AMF 308 i.e. mobility management function)) …;
Gao does not disclose the below limitation(s): with an indication of the plurality of radio access nodes for the mobility management function informing at least one candidate node for providing the continued radio network service of the plurality of radio access nodes.
In the same field of endeavor of enabling for continuity of service during handover, Säily does disclose the below limitation(s): with an indication of the plurality of radio access nodes for the mobility management function informing at least one candidate node for providing the continued radio network service of the plurality of radio access nodes (Säily Fig 2-4 and [0141] teaches a plurality of candidate gNBs (i.e. radio access nodes) for handover that are communicated to the core network (e.g. AMF) by the source gNB (i.e. serving radio access node)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the teaching of Gao to include selecting the target node (i.e. RAN or gNB) from a plurality of possible nodes as taught by Säily. The suggestion/motivation to do so would have been to select the best node for providing service from among a plurality of possible nodes to better serve the UE. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Gao and Säily to obtain the invention, as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding Claim 10, Gao and Säily disclose the limitation(s) of Claim 6.
Gao does not disclose the below limitation(s): wherein the at least one candidate node comprises at least one of the plurality of radio access nodes.
In the same field of endeavor of enabling for continuity of service during handover, Säily does disclose the below limitation(s): wherein the at least one candidate node comprises at least one of the plurality of radio access nodes (Säily Fig 2-4 and [0141] teaches a plurality of candidate gNBs (i.e. radio access nodes) for handover that are communicated to the core network (e.g. AMF) by the source gNB (i.e. serving radio access node) and wherein one of the plurality is chosen for handover).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the aforementioned apparatus/method to include selecting the target node (i.e. RAN or gNB) from a plurality of possible nodes as taught by Säily. The suggestion/motivation to do so would have been to select the best node for providing service from among a plurality of possible nodes to better serve the UE. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Gao and Säily to obtain the invention, as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding Claim 11, Gao discloses the below limitation(s): at least one memory configured to store computer-readable program code; and at least one processing circuitry configured to access the at least one memory (Gao [0292] wireless device comprise memory and processor(s)), and execute the computer-readable program code to cause the apparatus to at least:
when a radio network service shut down is carried out by a serving radio access node ([0058] handover procedure can be triggered due to new radio conditions, load balancing, due to specific service, etc., which is interpreted shutting down the radio network service at a first RAN and handover to a candidate RAN);
receive a request from at least some of the at least one user equipment to provide the continued radio network service, wherein the request comprises an identifier of the serving radio access node (Fig 3 block 310 and associated [0062] handover required message transmitted to initiate a handover from the serving gNB to a target gNB);
retrieve, based on the identifier, the context information from at least one of the plurality of radio access nodes ([0057] in the event that the UE moves from the airport slice (i.e. serving RAN) to normal eMBB slice (i.e. candidate RAN), the service continuity can be supported; Fig 6 block 604 hand over a network service for a terminal from the first network node to a target network node using the slice remapping assistance information or initiate a terminal context retrieve procedure, wherein examiner is interpreting the or as both service handover and context retrieval occurring as required by the instant invention), and
provide the continued radio network service to the at least some of the at least one user equipment (Fig 3 and [0062] source RAN node sends handover required message (i.e. determined shut down) to the core network (CN) node (e.g. AMF 308 i.e. mobility management function)).
Gao does not disclose the below limitation(s): receive information, via a signaling procedure defined as a non-acknowledgement message procedure, indicating a plurality of radio access nodes storing context information in association with at least one user equipment for enabling a continued radio network service for the at least one user equipment
In the same field of endeavor of enabling for continuity of service during handover, Säily does disclose the below limitation(s): receive information, via a signaling procedure defined as a non-acknowledgement message procedure, indicating a plurality of radio access nodes storing context information in association with at least one user equipment for enabling a continued radio network service for the at least one user equipment (Säily Fig 2-4 and [0141] teaches a plurality of candidate gNBs (i.e. radio access nodes) for handover that are communicated to the core network (e.g. AMF) by the source gNB (i.e. serving radio access node)) …;
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the teaching of Gao to include selecting the target node (i.e. RAN or gNB) from a plurality of possible nodes as taught by Säily. The suggestion/motivation to do so would have been to select the best node for providing service from among a plurality of possible nodes to better serve the UE. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Gao and Säily to obtain the invention, as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding Claim 15, Gao discloses the below limitation(s): when a radio network service shut down is carried out by a serving radio access node (Gao [0058] handover procedure can be triggered due to new radio conditions, load balancing, due to specific service, etc., which is interpreted shutting down the radio network service at a first RAN and handover to a candidate RAN);
receiving a request from at least some of the at least one user equipment to provide the continued radio network service, wherein the request comprises an identifier of the serving radio access node (Fig 3 block 310 and associated [0062] handover required message transmitted to initiate a handover from the serving gNB to a target gNB);
retrieving, based on the identifier, the context information from at least one of the plurality of radio access nodes ([0057] in the event that the UE moves from the airport slice (i.e. serving RAN) to normal eMBB slice (i.e. candidate RAN), the service continuity can be supported; Fig 6 block 604 hand over a network service for a terminal from the first network node to a target network node using the slice remapping assistance information or initiate a terminal context retrieve procedure, wherein examiner is interpreting the or as both service handover and context retrieval occurring as required by the instant invention); and
providing the continued radio network service to the at least some of the at least one user equipment (Fig 3 and [0062] source RAN node sends handover required message (i.e. determined shut down) to the core network (CN) node (e.g. AMF 308 i.e. mobility management function)).
Gao does not disclose the below limitation(s): receiving information, via a signaling procedure defined as a non-acknowledgement message procedure, indicating a plurality of radio access nodes storing context information in association with at least one user equipment for enabling a continued radio network service for the at least one user equipment
In the same field of endeavor of enabling for continuity of service during handover, Säily does disclose the below limitation(s): receiving information, via a signaling procedure defined as a non-acknowledgement message procedure, indicating a plurality of radio access nodes storing context information in association with at least one user equipment for enabling a continued radio network service for the at least one user equipment (Säily Fig 2-4 and [0141] teaches a plurality of candidate gNBs (i.e. radio access nodes) for handover that are communicated to the core network (e.g. AMF) by the source gNB (i.e. serving radio access node)) …;
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the teaching of Gao to include selecting the target node (i.e. RAN or gNB) from a plurality of possible nodes as taught by Säily. The suggestion/motivation to do so would have been to select the best node for providing service from among a plurality of possible nodes to better serve the UE. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Gao and Säily to obtain the invention, as specified in the instant claim.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-4, 8-9, 12-14 and 16-18 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: a thorough and complete search has been conducted and no prior art has been found that solely, or in any reasonable combination, reads on each element of the indicated claim(s).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHAWN D MILLER whose telephone number is (571)272-8599. The examiner can normally be reached M-TR 8-5.
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, Charles C Jiang can be reached at (571) 270-7191. 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.
/SHAWN D MILLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2412
Prosecution Insights