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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 10/23/2024, 05/12/2025, and 11/13/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 10-11, 13, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bor Yaliniz et al. (US 2019/0223055 A1; “Bor Yaliniz”) in view of Yu et al. (US 2022/0210669 A1; “Yu”).
Regarding claim 1, BOR YALINIZ teaches a first network entity [BOR YALINIZ ¶ 0318, Fig. 27: NSMF 1201] performing communication in a wireless communication system supporting a network slice, comprising:
a memory storing instructions; a transceiver; and at least one processor operatively connected to the memory and the transceiver [BOR YALINIZ ¶ 0071, Fig. 1: processor 54; ¶ 0072: memory storing executable programs; ¶ 0073: wireless network interface], wherein the at least one processor is configured to execute the instructions to cause the first network entity to:
receive, from a second network entity, a request to activate or deactivate a network slice instance (NSI) [BOR YALINIZ ¶ 0320, Fig. 27: slice activation is initiated by a trigger 2710 that is received, e.g., as a request 2712 from the 3GPP entity 2101 (i.e. second network entity) to activate the NSI, which may in some examples, be an ActivateNsiRequest( ) with an nsiID as a parameter];
search for a list comprising at least one of: at least one network slice subnet instance (NSSI), or at least one network slice subnet management entity function (NSSMF); and send a request to a third network entity to activate or deactivate an NSSI [BOR YALINIZ ¶ 0321, Fig. 27: NSMF 1201 (i.e. first network entity) identifies any inactive NSSIs associated with the NSI (here, the first network entity would implicitly need to compare the requested NSI to a “list” of active/inactive NSSI associated with the requested NSI in order to identify any inactive NSSI) and sends messages 2721 to the NSSMF 1202 (i.e. third network entity) to have the NSSMF 1202 activate the NSSI].
However, BOR YALINIZ does not explicitly disclose he NSI associated with a first geographical coverage area; wherein the at least one NSSI and the at least one NSSMF each support at least one of: the first geographical coverage area, or an area code list mapped to the first geographical coverage area, and wherein the NSSI is mapped to at least one of: the first geographical coverage area, or the area code list.
However, in a similar field of endeavor, YU teaches the NSI associated with a first geographical coverage area; wherein the at least one NSSI and the at least one NSSMF each support at least one of: the first geographical coverage area, or an area code list mapped to the first geographical coverage area, and wherein the NSSI is mapped to at least one of: the first geographical coverage area, or the area code list [YU ¶ 0034: an NSMF 120 deployed in area A is responsible for the NSI (i.e. NSI is associated with a geographical coverage area); an NSSMF 122 deployed in area A is responsible for the NSSI (i.e. NSSFM and NSSI associated with a first geographical coverage area), conversely, an NSMF 120 deployed in area B is responsible for the NSI; an NSSMF 122 deployed in area B is responsible for the NSSI].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the method of receiving a request to activate an NSI, determining inactive NSSI of the NSI, and requesting activation of the identified inactive NSSI from an NSSMF as taught by BOR YALINIZ, with the method of providing network slice functionality wherein a NSSMF with associated NSSI is associated with a coverage area as taught by YU. The motivation to combine these references would be improve slice management efficiency [YU ¶ 0005].
Regarding claim 3, BOR YALINIZ in view of YU teaches the first network entity of claim 1, wherein the second network entity comprises: a user device; a communication service management function (CSMF) entity; an operations support systems (OSS); or a business support systems (BSS) [BOR YALINIZ ¶ 0320, Fig. 27: activation request 2712 from the 3GPP entity 2101 (i.e. second network entity); ¶ 0282: 3GPP entity 2101 may be CSMF; Examiner’s Note: the limitations are written in the alternative, therefore, it is only necessary that one of the alternative limitations be taught by the applied references].
Regarding claim 10, BOR YALINIZ in view of YU teaches the first network entity of claim 1, wherein the second network entity is a network slice management entity function (NSMF), wherein the third network entity is an NSSMF, and wherein the second network entity and the third network entity are included in a network slice system [BOR YALINIZ ¶ , Fig. 19: request 1912 from the 3GPP entity 1301 (i.e. second network entity; see ¶ 0158: 3GPP Entity 1301 may be NSMF) to de-activate the NSSI is sent to NSSMF 1202 (first network entity), wherein NSSMF 1202 sends requests 1931 to other NSSMF(s) (i.e. third network entity) 1302 to deactivate the identified NSSI(s); Fig. 19 shows NSSMF 1202 and NSSMF 1302 as belonging to a same 3GPP slice management system].
Regarding claim 11, BOR YALINIZ teaches a method performed by a first network entity [BOR YALINIZ ¶ 0318, Fig. 27: NSMF 1201] in a wireless communication system supporting a network slice, the method comprising:
receiving, from a second network entity, a request to activate or deactivate a network slice instance (NSI) [BOR YALINIZ ¶ 0320, Fig. 27: slice activation is initiated by a trigger 2710 that is received, e.g., as a request 2712 from the 3GPP entity 2101 (i.e. second network entity) to activate the NSI, which may in some examples, be an ActivateNsiRequest( ) with an nsiID as a parameter];
searching for a list including at least one of at least one network slice subnet instance (NSSI) or at least one network slice subnet management entity function (NSSMF); and sending a request to a third network entity to activate or deactivate an NSSI [BOR YALINIZ ¶ 0321, Fig. 27: NSMF 1201 (i.e. first network entity) identifies any inactive NSSIs associated with the NSI (here, the first network entity would implicitly need to compare the requested NSI to a “list” of active/inactive NSSI associated with the requested NSI in order to identify any inactive NSSI) and sends messages 2721 to the NSSMF 1202 (i.e. third network entity) to have the NSSMF 1202 activate the NSSI].
However, BOR YALINIZ does not explicitly disclose he NSI associated with a first geographical coverage area; wherein the at least one NSSI and the at least one NSSMF each support at least one of: the first geographical coverage area, or an area code list mapped to the first geographical coverage area, and wherein the NSSI is mapped to at least one of: the first geographical coverage area, or the area code list.
However, in a similar field of endeavor, YU teaches the NSI associated with a first geographical coverage area; wherein the at least one NSSI and the at least one NSSMF each support at least one of: the first geographical coverage area, or an area code list mapped to the first geographical coverage area, and wherein the NSSI is mapped to at least one of: the first geographical coverage area, or the area code list [YU ¶ 0034: an NSMF 120 deployed in area A is responsible for the NSI (i.e. NSI is associated with a geographical coverage area); an NSSMF 122 deployed in area A is responsible for the NSSI (i.e. NSSFM and NSSI associated with a first geographical coverage area), conversely, an NSMF 120 deployed in area B is responsible for the NSI; an NSSMF 122 deployed in area B is responsible for the NSSI].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the method of receiving a request to activate an NSI, determining inactive NSSI of the NSI, and requesting activation of the identified inactive NSSI from an NSSMF as taught by BOR YALINIZ, with the method of providing network slice functionality wherein a NSSMF with associated NSSI is associated with a coverage area as taught by YU. The motivation to combine these references would be improve slice management efficiency [YU ¶ 0005].
Regarding claim 13, BOR YALINIZ in view of YU teaches the method of claim 11, wherein the second network entity includes one of a user device, a communication service management function (CSMF) entity, an operations support systems (OSS), or a business support systems (BSS) [BOR YALINIZ ¶ 0320, Fig. 27: activation request 2712 from the 3GPP entity 2101 (i.e. second network entity); ¶ 0282: 3GPP entity 2101 may be CSMF; Examiner’s Note: the limitations are written in the alternative, therefore, it is only necessary that one of the alternative limitations be taught by the applied references].
Regarding claim 20, BOR YALINIZ in view of YU teaches the method of claim 11, wherein the second network entity is a network slice management entity function (NSMF), wherein the third network entity is an NSSMF, and wherein the second network entity and the third network entity are included in a network slice system [BOR YALINIZ ¶ , Fig. 19: request 1912 from the 3GPP entity 1301 (i.e. second network entity; see ¶ 0158: 3GPP Entity 1301 may be NSMF) to de-activate the NSSI is sent to NSSMF 1202 (first network entity), wherein NSSMF 1202 sends requests 1931 to other NSSMF(s) (i.e. third network entity) 1302 to deactivate the identified NSSI(s); Fig. 19 shows NSSMF 1202 and NSSMF 1302 as belonging to a same 3GPP slice management system].
Claim(s) 2 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BOR YALINIZ in view of YU in view of Himanen et al. (US 2022/0217620 A1; “HIMANEN”).
Regarding claim 2, BOR YALINIZ in view of YU teaches the first network entity of claim 1, however, does not explicitly disclose wherein the NSI comprises a plurality of geographical coverage areas comprising the first geographical coverage area.
However, in a similar field of endeavor, HIMANEN teaches wherein the NSI comprises a plurality of geographical coverage areas comprising the first geographical coverage area [HIMANEN ¶ 0056: the geographical area covered by a network slice is not necessarily a single continuous area but may also be comprised of more than one separate geographical areas in one or more tracking areas].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the method of receiving a request to activate an NSI, determining inactive NSSI of the NSI, and requesting activation of the identified inactive NSSI from an NSSMF as taught by BOR YALINIZ, with the method of defining a NSI as a plurality of geographical coverage areas as taught by HIMANEN. The motivation to combine these references would be to provide finer granularity of position based network slice management [HIMANEN ¶ 0044].
Regarding claim 12, BOR YALINIZ in view of YU teaches the method of claim 11, however, does not explicitly disclose wherein the NSI comprises a plurality of geographical coverage areas comprising the first geographical coverage area.
However, in a similar field of endeavor, HIMANEN teaches wherein the NSI comprises a plurality of geographical coverage areas comprising the first geographical coverage area [HIMANEN ¶ 0056: the geographical area covered by a network slice is not necessarily a single continuous area but may also be comprised of more than one separate geographical areas in one or more tracking areas].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the method of receiving a request to activate an NSI, determining inactive NSSI of the NSI, and requesting activation of the identified inactive NSSI from an NSSMF as taught by BOR YALINIZ, with the method of defining a NSI as a plurality of geographical coverage areas as taught by HIMANEN. The motivation to combine these references would be to provide finer granularity of position based network slice management [HIMANEN ¶ 0044].
Claim(s) 4 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BOR YALINIZ in view of YU in view of Osborn et al. (US 2023/0379785 A1; “OSBORN”).
Regarding claim 4, BOR YALINIZ in view of YU teaches the first network entity of claim 1, however, does not explicitly disclose herein the request from the second network entity comprises at least one of an area code mapped to the first geographical coverage area, a geographical coordinate of the first geographical coverage area, a geographical name of the first geographical coverage area, a postal code of the first geographical coverage area, or a network function list of the first geographical coverage area.
However, in a similar field of endeavor, OSBORN teaches wherein the request from the second network entity comprises at least one of an area code mapped to the first geographical coverage area, a geographical coordinate of the first geographical coverage area, a geographical name of the first geographical coverage area, a postal code of the first geographical coverage area, or a network function list of the first geographical coverage area [OSBORN ¶ 0033: In conjunction with the establishment of the PDU session, the expandable network slice identified by S-NSSAI 2 is activated on the first gNB1 204 if not already activated, via OAM of the 5GS, or explicit signaling, indicating to the RAN and CN to activate the expandable network slice identified by S-NSSAI 2, with possible area information associated with the expandable network slice (i.e. slice activation request includes area information)].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the method of receiving a request to activate an NSI, determining inactive NSSI of the NSI, and requesting activation of the identified inactive NSSI from an NSSMF as taught by BOR YALINIZ, with the method of indicating coverage area information with a request to activate a network slice as taught by OSBORN. The motivation to combine these references would be to provide efficient deployment of network slices thereby improving flexibility and resources usage in a wireless telecommunication network [OSBORN ¶ 0001].
Regarding claim 14, BOR YALINIZ in view of YU teaches the method of claim 11, however, does not explicitly disclose herein the request from the second network entity comprises at least one of an area code mapped to the first geographical coverage area, a geographical coordinate of the first geographical coverage area, a geographical name of the first geographical coverage area, a postal code of the first geographical coverage area, or a network function list of the first geographical coverage area.
However, in a similar field of endeavor, OSBORN teaches wherein the request from the second network entity comprises at least one of an area code mapped to the first geographical coverage area, a geographical coordinate of the first geographical coverage area, a geographical name of the first geographical coverage area, a postal code of the first geographical coverage area, or a network function list of the first geographical coverage area [OSBORN ¶ 0033: In conjunction with the establishment of the PDU session, the expandable network slice identified by S-NSSAI 2 is activated on the first gNB1 204 if not already activated, via OAM of the 5GS, or explicit signaling, indicating to the RAN and CN to activate the expandable network slice identified by S-NSSAI 2, with possible area information associated with the expandable network slice (i.e. slice activation request includes area information)].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the method of receiving a request to activate an NSI, determining inactive NSSI of the NSI, and requesting activation of the identified inactive NSSI from an NSSMF as taught by BOR YALINIZ, with the method of indicating coverage area information with a request to activate a network slice as taught by OSBORN. The motivation to combine these references would be to provide efficient deployment of network slices thereby improving flexibility and resources usage in a wireless telecommunication network [OSBORN ¶ 0001].
Claim(s) 7-9 and 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BOR YALINIZ in view of YU in view of Nokia et al., “Add provisioning procedure for slice activation and deactivation using administrative state”, 3GPP TSG-SA5 Meeting #145-e, S5-225091, e-meeting, 15-24 August 2022 (“NOKIA”).
Regarding claim 7, BOR YALINIZ in view of YU teaches the first network entity of claim 1, however, does not explicitly disclose wherein the at least one processor is configured to execute the instructions to cause the first network entity to: apply an update to a state of the NSI based on sending the request to the third network entity.
However, in a similar field of endeavor, NOKIA teaches wherein the at least one processor is configured to execute the instructions to cause the first network entity to: apply an update to a state of the NSI based on sending the request to the third network entity [NOKIA p. 2, sec. 7.x1-7.x: the administrative state of the NSI is unlocked (for activation) and locked (for inactivation) following a NSSI activation procedure with NSSMS_P (i.e. following request to third entity)].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the method of receiving a request to activate an NSI, determining inactive NSSI of the NSI, and requesting activation of the identified inactive NSSI from an NSSMF as taught by BOR YALINIZ, with the method of locking or unlocking an administrative state associated with NSI activation or deactivation as taught by NOKIA. The motivation to combine these references would be to provide provisioning mechanisms for NSI and NSSI activation and deactivation [NOKIA p. 1: Reasons for change].
Regarding claim 8, BOR YALINIZ in view of YU in view of NOKIA teaches the first network entity of claim 7, however, BOR YALINIZ does not explicitly disclose wherein the update to the state comprises a first update to at least one of: an NSI administrativeState, an NSI operationalState, an NSI coverageArea administrativeState, or an NSI coverageAre operationState.
However, NOKIA teaches wherein the update to the state comprises a first update to at least one of: an NSI administrativeState, an NSI operationalState, an NSI coverageArea administrativeState, or an NSI coverageAre operationState [NOKIA p. 2, sec. 7.x1-7.x: the administrative state of the NSI is unlocked (for activation) and locked (for inactivation) following a NSSI activation procedure with NSSMS_P (i.e. following request to third entity); Examiner’s Note: the limitations are written in the alternative, therefore, it is only necessary that one of the alternative limitations be taught by the applied references].
The motivation to combine these references is illustrated in the rejection of claim 7 above.
Regarding claim 9, BOR YALINIZ in view of YU in view of NOKIA teaches the first network entity of claim 7, however, BOR YALINIZ does not explicitly disclose wherein the at least one processor is configured to execute the instructions to cause the first network entity to: send the request to the third network entity to activate or deactivate a plurality of NSSIs; and apply the update to the state of the NSI with respect to the plurality of NSSIs.
However, NOKIA teaches wherein the at least one processor is configured to execute the instructions to cause the first network entity to: send the request to the third network entity to activate or deactivate a plurality of NSSIs; and apply the update to the state of the NSI with respect to the plurality of NSSIs [NOKIA p. 2, sec. 7.x1-7.x: the administrative state of the NSI is unlocked (for activation) and locked (for inactivation) following a NSSI activation procedure with NSSMS_P (i.e. following request to third entity)].
The motivation to combine these references is illustrated in the rejection of claim 7 above.
Regarding claim 17, BOR YALINIZ in view of YU teaches the method of claim 11, however, does not explicitly disclose further comprising applying an update to a state of the NSI based on sending the request to the third network entity.
However, in a similar field of endeavor, NOKIA teaches applying an update to a state of the NSI based on sending the request to the third network entity [NOKIA p. 2, sec. 7.x1-7.x: the administrative state of the NSI is unlocked (for activation) and locked (for inactivation) following a NSSI activation procedure with NSSMS_P (i.e. following request to third entity)].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the method of receiving a request to activate an NSI, determining inactive NSSI of the NSI, and requesting activation of the identified inactive NSSI from an NSSMF as taught by BOR YALINIZ, with the method of locking or unlocking an administrative state associated with NSI activation or deactivation as taught by NOKIA. The motivation to combine these references would be to provide provisioning mechanisms for NSI and NSSI activation and deactivation [NOKIA p. 1: Reasons for change].
Regarding claim 18, BOR YALINIZ in view of YU in view of NOKIA teaches the method of claim 17, however, BOR YALINIZ does not explicitly disclose wherein the applying the update to the state comprises a first update to at least one of an NSI administrativeState, an NSI operationalState, an NSI coverageArea administrativeState, or an NSI coverageAre operationState.
However. Nokia teaches wherein the applying the update to the state comprises a first update to at least one of an NSI administrativeState, an NSI operationalState, an NSI coverageArea administrativeState, or an NSI coverageAre operationState [NOKIA p. 2, sec. 7.x1-7.x: the administrative state of the NSI is unlocked (for activation) and locked (for inactivation) following a NSSI activation procedure with NSSMS_P (i.e. following request to third entity); Examiner’s Note: the limitations are written in the alternative, therefore, it is only necessary that one of the alternative limitations be taught by the applied references].
The motivation to combine these references is illustrated in the rejection of claim 17 above.
Regarding claim 19, BOR YALINIZ in view of YU in view of NOKIA teaches the method of claim 17, however, BOR YALINIZ does not explicitly disclose wherein the sending the request to the third network entity is to activate or deactivate a plurality of NSSIs, and wherein the applying the update to the state of the NSI is performed with respect to the plurality of NSSIs.
However, NOKIA teaches wherein the sending the request to the third network entity is to activate or deactivate a plurality of NSSIs, and wherein the applying the update to the state of the NSI is performed with respect to the plurality of NSSIs [NOKIA p. 2, sec. 7.x1-7.x: the administrative state of the NSI is unlocked (for activation) and locked (for inactivation) following a NSSI activation procedure with NSSMS_P (i.e. following request to third entity)].
The motivation to combine these references is illustrated in the rejection of claim 17 above.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-6 and 15-16 are 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN P COX whose telephone number is (571)272-2728. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00AM-4PM EST.
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, Michael Thier can be reached at 5712722832. 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.
/BRIAN P COX/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2474
Prosecution Insights