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 .
This office action is in response to application filed on 11/11/2024.
Claims 1-20 are pending and rejected.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/04/2024 and 07/24/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
The use of the term "Bluetooth," which is a trade name or a mark used in commerce, has been noted in this application. The term should be accompanied by the generic terminology; furthermore, the term should be capitalized wherever it appears or, where appropriate, include a proper symbol indicating use in commerce such as ™, SM , or ® following the term.
Although the use of trade names and marks used in commerce (i.e., trademarks, service marks, certification marks, and collective marks) are permissible in patent applications, the proprietary nature of the marks should be respected and every effort made to prevent their use in any manner which might adversely affect their validity as commercial marks.
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)(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.
Claims 1, 5, and 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Ly et al (US20230056442A1) (hereinafter "Ly").
Regarding claim 1, Ly discloses a method comprising:
receiving, by a wireless communication device from a core network, a route selection policy including a first indication that the wireless communication device establishes a plurality of access paths to connect with the core network, the plurality of access paths including two access paths that are cellular-based; and ([0154] The NWDAF 205 may use the data from the UE 201 to develop an analytics prediction confidence level for an analytics ID relating to the UE 201. Then using network performance and system load metrics, the NWDAF 205 can then assign splitting percentages between 3GPP and non-3GPP accesses. … The UE 201 or UPF 206 may use a rule, or formula, to determine what access a packet, or flow, should use. The NWDAF 205 may send the rule to the UPF 206 via the SMF 207 or alternatively, the rule may be provided as an operator policy, from another NF, or locally configured. The NDWAF 205 may send the rule to the UE 201 via the SMF 207 and NAS messaging as an ATSSS rule. [0158] Another ATSSS steering mode may be defined to support multi-USIM UEs to take advantage of connecting to both 3GPP and non-3GPP accesses or between two 3GPP accesses such as between two 5G accesses in a time demultiplex manner.)
determining, by the wireless communication device according to the first indication, to establish the two cellular-based access paths ([0020] The PCF decides whether the MA PDU session is allowed or not based on operator policy and subscription data. [0021] From the received PCC rules, the SMF derives (a) ATSSS rules, which will be sent to UE for controlling the traffic steering, switching and splitting in the uplink direction, and (b) N4 rules, which will be sent to UPF for controlling the traffic steering, switching and splitting in the downlink direction. [0022] In the remaining steps of FIG. 3, the SMF establishes the user-plane resources over the 3GPP access, e.g., over the access where the PDU Session Establishment Request was sent on: [0023] In step 10, the N4 rules derived by SMF for the MA PDU session are sent to UPF and two N3 UL CN tunnels info are allocated by the SMF or by the UPF. If the ATSSS Capability for the MA PDU Session indicates “ATSSS-LL Capability”, the SMF may include information for measurement into the N4 rule to instruct the UPF to initiate performance measurement for this MA PDU Session. [0025] In step 13, the UE receives a PDU Session Establishment Accept message, which indicates to UE that the requested MA PDU session was successfully established. This message includes the ATSSS rules for the MA PDU session, which were derived by SMF. [0026] After step 18, if the SMF was informed in step 2 that the UE is registered over both accesses, then the SMF initiates the establishment of user-plane resources over non-3GPP access too. … After this step, the two N3 tunnels between the PSA and RAN/AN are established. [0148] In addition, this new steering mode can also support when a multi-USIM UE 201 connects with multiple 3GPP RATs, such as simultaneously between 5G systems or between 5G and LTE systems with interworking support for ATSSS).
Regarding claim 5, Ly discloses the method, comprising:
determining, by the wireless communication device, that the first traffic is of the first type; and ([0027] When creating an MA PDU session, a UE specifies the steering functionality that it supports, whether it is ATSSS-LL or MPTCP, or both. The steering functionality determines how data traffic is sent along the protocol stack of the UE 201. FIG. 4 shows an example of a UE model with both the ATSSS-LL and MPTCP steering functionalities. The ATSSS-LL is a lower layer steering function that supports all traffic types, such as TCP, UDP, Ethernet, etc.)
determining, by the wireless communication device responsive to the first traffic being of the first type, that the traffic routing rule applies to the first traffic ([0028] A steering mode is specified in each ATSSS rule to inform the UE how to distribute UL traffic over 3GPP and non-3GPP accesses. [0031] Load-Balancing: It is used to split a SDF across both accesses if both accesses are available. It includes the percentage of the SDF traffic that should be sent over 3GPP access and over non-3GPP access. [0032] Priority-based: It is used to steer all the traffic of an SDF to the high priority access, until this access is determined to be congested. In this case, the traffic of the SDF is sent also to the low priority access, e.g., the SDF traffic is split over the two accesses.).
Regarding claim 15, Ly discloses the method, comprising receiving the route selection policy or the traffic routing rule via the connection established to the network function, using a protocol comprising at least one of ([0152] Similarly, the UE 201 may take advantage of this steering mode if the SMF 207 creates ATSSS rules incorporating the Analytics Driven steering mode as shown in Table 4 when MA PDU sessions are established or modified. In this case, the UE 201 uses data it has of UL re-transmissions, possibly signal strengths of the access networks, and other metrics to adapt traffic splitting between 3GPP and non-3GPP accesses.):
performance measurement function protocol (PMFP) (The examiner does not select this because of the "or" statement.),
multipath transmission control protocol (MPTCP) (TABLE 4 Structure of ATSSS Rules with disclose Analytics Driven indicator: Steering Functionality; Identifies whether the MPTCP functionality or the ATSSS-LL functionality should be applied for the matching traffic.),
datagram congestion control protocol (DCCP) (The examiner does not select this because of the "or" statement.),
multipath quick user plane function internet connection (MPQUIC) (The examiner does not select this because of the "or" statement.),
simple two-way active measurement protocol (STAMP), or (The examiner does not select this because of the "or" statement.)
two-way active measurement protocol (TWAMP) (The examiner does not select this because of the "or" statement.).
Regarding claim 16, Ly discloses a method, , comprising:
sending, by a core network to a wireless communication device, a route selection policy including a first indication to the wireless communication device, to establish a plurality of access paths to connect with the core network, the plurality of access paths including two access paths that are cellular-based; and ([0154] The NWDAF 205 may use the data from the UE 201 to develop an analytics prediction confidence level for an analytics ID relating to the UE 201. Then using network performance and system load metrics, the NWDAF 205 can then assign splitting percentages between 3GPP and non-3GPP accesses. … The UE 201 or UPF 206 may use a rule, or formula, to determine what access a packet, or flow, should use. The NWDAF 205 may send the rule to the UPF 206 via the SMF 207 or alternatively, the rule may be provided as an operator policy, from another NF, or locally configured. The NDWAF 205 may send the rule to the UE 201 via the SMF 207 and NAS messaging as an ATSSS rule. [0158] Another ATSSS steering mode may be defined to support multi-USIM UEs to take advantage of connecting to both 3GPP and non-3GPP accesses or between two 3GPP accesses such as between two 5G accesses in a time demultiplex manner.)
causing the wireless communication device to establish the two cellular-based access paths according to the first indication ([0020] The PCF decides whether the MA PDU session is allowed or not based on operator policy and subscription data. [0021] From the received PCC rules, the SMF derives (a) ATSSS rules, which will be sent to UE for controlling the traffic steering, switching and splitting in the uplink direction, and (b) N4 rules, which will be sent to UPF for controlling the traffic steering, switching and splitting in the downlink direction. [0022] In the remaining steps of FIG. 3, the SMF establishes the user-plane resources over the 3GPP access, e.g., over the access where the PDU Session Establishment Request was sent on: [0023] In step 10, the N4 rules derived by SMF for the MA PDU session are sent to UPF and two N3 UL CN tunnels info are allocated by the SMF or by the UPF. If the ATSSS Capability for the MA PDU Session indicates “ATSSS-LL Capability”, the SMF may include information for measurement into the N4 rule to instruct the UPF to initiate performance measurement for this MA PDU Session. [0025] In step 13, the UE receives a PDU Session Establishment Accept message, which indicates to UE that the requested MA PDU session was successfully established. This message includes the ATSSS rules for the MA PDU session, which were derived by SMF. [0026] After step 18, if the SMF was informed in step 2 that the UE is registered over both accesses, then the SMF initiates the establishment of user-plane resources over non-3GPP access too. … After this step, the two N3 tunnels between the PSA and RAN/AN are established. [0148] In addition, this new steering mode can also support when a multi-USIM UE 201 connects with multiple 3GPP RATs, such as simultaneously between 5G systems or between 5G and LTE systems with interworking support for ATSSS).
Regarding claim 17, Ly discloses a wireless communication device, comprising:
at least one processor configured to ([0344] The processor 118 may receive power from the power source 134 and may be configured to distribute or control the power to the other components in the WTRU 102.):
receive, via a receiver from a core network, a route selection policy including a first indication that the wireless communication device establishes a plurality of access paths to connect with the core network, the plurality of access paths including two access paths that are cellular-based; and ([0154] The NWDAF 205 may use the data from the UE 201 to develop an analytics prediction confidence level for an analytics ID relating to the UE 201. Then using network performance and system load metrics, the NWDAF 205 can then assign splitting percentages between 3GPP and non-3GPP accesses. … The UE 201 or UPF 206 may use a rule, or formula, to determine what access a packet, or flow, should use. The NWDAF 205 may send the rule to the UPF 206 via the SMF 207 or alternatively, the rule may be provided as an operator policy, from another NF, or locally configured. The NDWAF 205 may send the rule to the UE 201 via the SMF 207 and NAS messaging as an ATSSS rule. [0158] Another ATSSS steering mode may be defined to support multi-USIM UEs to take advantage of connecting to both 3GPP and non-3GPP accesses or between two 3GPP accesses such as between two 5G accesses in a time demultiplex manner.)
determine, according to the first indication, to establish the two cellular-based access paths ([0020] The PCF decides whether the MA PDU session is allowed or not based on operator policy and subscription data. [0021] From the received PCC rules, the SMF derives (a) ATSSS rules, which will be sent to UE for controlling the traffic steering, switching and splitting in the uplink direction, and (b) N4 rules, which will be sent to UPF for controlling the traffic steering, switching and splitting in the downlink direction. [0022] In the remaining steps of FIG. 3, the SMF establishes the user-plane resources over the 3GPP access, e.g., over the access where the PDU Session Establishment Request was sent on: [0023] In step 10, the N4 rules derived by SMF for the MA PDU session are sent to UPF and two N3 UL CN tunnels info are allocated by the SMF or by the UPF. If the ATSSS Capability for the MA PDU Session indicates “ATSSS-LL Capability”, the SMF may include information for measurement into the N4 rule to instruct the UPF to initiate performance measurement for this MA PDU Session. [0025] In step 13, the UE receives a PDU Session Establishment Accept message, which indicates to UE that the requested MA PDU session was successfully established. This message includes the ATSSS rules for the MA PDU session, which were derived by SMF. [0026] After step 18, if the SMF was informed in step 2 that the UE is registered over both accesses, then the SMF initiates the establishment of user-plane resources over non-3GPP access too. … After this step, the two N3 tunnels between the PSA and RAN/AN are established. [0148] In addition, this new steering mode can also support when a multi-USIM UE 201 connects with multiple 3GPP RATs, such as simultaneously between 5G systems or between 5G and LTE systems with interworking support for ATSSS).
Regarding claim 18, Ly discloses a core network node, comprising:
at least one processor configured to ([0344] The processor 118 may receive power from the power source 134 and may be configured to distribute or control the power to the other components in the WTRU 102.):
send, via a transmitter to a wireless communication device, a route selection policy including a first indication to the wireless communication device, to establish a plurality of access paths to connect with the core network, the plurality of access paths including two access paths that are cellular-based; and ([0154] The NWDAF 205 may use the data from the UE 201 to develop an analytics prediction confidence level for an analytics ID relating to the UE 201. Then using network performance and system load metrics, the NWDAF 205 can then assign splitting percentages between 3GPP and non-3GPP accesses. … The UE 201 or UPF 206 may use a rule, or formula, to determine what access a packet, or flow, should use. The NWDAF 205 may send the rule to the UPF 206 via the SMF 207 or alternatively, the rule may be provided as an operator policy, from another NF, or locally configured. The NDWAF 205 may send the rule to the UE 201 via the SMF 207 and NAS messaging as an ATSSS rule. [0158] Another ATSSS steering mode may be defined to support multi-USIM UEs to take advantage of connecting to both 3GPP and non-3GPP accesses or between two 3GPP accesses such as between two 5G accesses in a time demultiplex manner.)
cause the wireless communication device to establish the two cellular-based access paths according to the first indication ([0020] The PCF decides whether the MA PDU session is allowed or not based on operator policy and subscription data. [0021] From the received PCC rules, the SMF derives (a) ATSSS rules, which will be sent to UE for controlling the traffic steering, switching and splitting in the uplink direction, and (b) N4 rules, which will be sent to UPF for controlling the traffic steering, switching and splitting in the downlink direction. [0022] In the remaining steps of FIG. 3, the SMF establishes the user-plane resources over the 3GPP access, e.g., over the access where the PDU Session Establishment Request was sent on: [0023] In step 10, the N4 rules derived by SMF for the MA PDU session are sent to UPF and two N3 UL CN tunnels info are allocated by the SMF or by the UPF. If the ATSSS Capability for the MA PDU Session indicates “ATSSS-LL Capability”, the SMF may include information for measurement into the N4 rule to instruct the UPF to initiate performance measurement for this MA PDU Session. [0025] In step 13, the UE receives a PDU Session Establishment Accept message, which indicates to UE that the requested MA PDU session was successfully established. This message includes the ATSSS rules for the MA PDU session, which were derived by SMF. [0026] After step 18, if the SMF was informed in step 2 that the UE is registered over both accesses, then the SMF initiates the establishment of user-plane resources over non-3GPP access too. … After this step, the two N3 tunnels between the PSA and RAN/AN are established. [0148] In addition, this new steering mode can also support when a multi-USIM UE 201 connects with multiple 3GPP RATs, such as simultaneously between 5G systems or between 5G and LTE systems with interworking support for ATSSS).
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 non-obviousness.
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.
Claims 2, 3, 7, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ly in view of Mukherjee et al (US20220210699A1) (hereinafter "Mukherjee").
Regarding claim 2, Ly fails to disclose the method, wherein the first indication includes a list of access paths from the plurality of access paths.
However, Mukherjee discloses the method, wherein the first indication includes a list of access paths from the plurality of access paths ([0091] In selecting a path or route to destination IAB node, an IAB donor node in some embodiments evaluates the priority of various routes based on one or more of the following characteristics of a route: (i) route or path where all IAB donor nodes are 3GPP RAT capable (e.g., only New Radio RAT), and (ii) route where some IAB donor nodes are multi-RAT capable (e.g., RAT 1/2/3 are New Radio, 802.11 ad/ay, and 802.11 ac/ax).).
Ly and Mukherjee are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of methods for multi-radio access.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of Ly with Mukherjee to create the method, wherein the first indication includes a list of access paths from the plurality of access paths.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to select a route by evaluating route priorities based on radio access technology capabilities.
Regarding claim 3, Ly fails to disclose the method, wherein the first indication indicates a first access path of the plurality of access paths, via at least one of: an indication of a type of radio access technology (RAT), or an identification (ID) of a network.
However, Mukherjee discloses the method, wherein the first indication indicates a first access path of the plurality of access paths, via at least one of: an indication of a type of radio access technology (RAT), or an identification (ID) of a network ([0091] In selecting a path or route to destination IAB node, an IAB donor node in some embodiments evaluates the priority of various routes based on one or more of the following characteristics of a route: (i) route or path where all IAB donor nodes are 3GPP RAT capable (e.g., only New Radio RAT), and (ii) route where some IAB donor nodes are multi-RAT capable (e.g., RAT 1/2/3 are New Radio, 802.11 ad/ay, and 802.11 ac/ax).).
Ly and Mukherjee are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of methods for multi-radio access.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of Ly with Mukherjee to create the method, wherein the first indication indicates a first access path of the plurality of access paths, via at least one of: an indication of a type of radio access technology (RAT), or an identification (ID) of a network.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to select a route by evaluating route priorities based on radio access technology capabilities.
Regarding claim 7, Ly fails to disclose the method, wherein the type of RAT includes one of: whether the first access path is cellular-based; or long term evolution (LTE), new radio (NR), wireless locate area network (WLAN), bluetooth, or non-terrestrial network (NTN).
However, Mukherjee discloses the method, wherein the type of RAT includes one of:
whether the first access path is cellular-based; or (The examiner does not select this because of the "or" statement.)
long term evolution (LTE), new radio (NR), wireless locate area network (WLAN), bluetooth, or non-terrestrial network (NTN) ([0091] In selecting a path or route to destination IAB node, an IAB donor node in some embodiments evaluates the priority of various routes based on one or more of the following characteristics of a route: (i) route or path where all IAB donor nodes are 3GPP RAT capable (e.g., only New Radio RAT), and (ii) route where some IAB donor nodes are multi-RAT capable (e.g., RAT 1/2/3 are New Radio, 802.11 ad/ay, and 802.11 ac/ax).).
Ly and Mukherjee are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of methods for multi-radio access.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of Ly with Mukherjee to create the method, wherein the type of RAT includes one of: whether the first access path is cellular-based; or long term evolution (LTE), new radio (NR), wireless locate area network (WLAN), bluetooth, or non-terrestrial network (NTN).
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to select a route by evaluating route priorities based on radio access technology capabilities.
Regarding claim 19, Ly fails to disclose the core network node, wherein the first indication includes a list of access paths from the plurality of access paths.
However, Mukherjee discloses the core network node, wherein the first indication includes a list of access paths from the plurality of access paths ([0091] In selecting a path or route to destination IAB node, an IAB donor node in some embodiments evaluates the priority of various routes based on one or more of the following characteristics of a route: (i) route or path where all IAB donor nodes are 3GPP RAT capable (e.g., only New Radio RAT), and (ii) route where some IAB donor nodes are multi-RAT capable (e.g., RAT 1/2/3 are New Radio, 802.11 ad/ay, and 802.11 ac/ax).).
Ly and Mukherjee are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of methods for multi-radio access.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of Ly with Mukherjee to create the core network node, wherein the first indication includes a list of access paths from the plurality of access paths.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to select a route by evaluating route priorities based on radio access technology capabilities.
Regarding claim 20, Ly fails to disclose the core network node, wherein the first indication indicates a first access path of the plurality of access paths, via at least one of: an indication of a type of radio access technology (RAT), or an identification (ID) of a network.
However, Mukherjee discloses the core network node, wherein the first indication indicates a first access path of the plurality of access paths, via at least one of: an indication of a type of radio access technology (RAT), or an identification (ID) of a network ([0091] In selecting a path or route to destination IAB node, an IAB donor node in some embodiments evaluates the priority of various routes based on one or more of the following characteristics of a route: (i) route or path where all IAB donor nodes are 3GPP RAT capable (e.g., only New Radio RAT), and (ii) route where some IAB donor nodes are multi-RAT capable (e.g., RAT 1/2/3 are New Radio, 802.11 ad/ay, and 802.11 ac/ax).).
Ly and Mukherjee are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of methods for multi-radio access.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of Ly with Mukherjee to create the core network node, wherein the first indication indicates a first access path of the plurality of access paths, via at least one of: an indication of a type of radio access technology (RAT), or an identification (ID) of a network.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to select a route by evaluating route priorities based on radio access technology capabilities.
Claims 4 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ly in view of Karampatsis et al (US20250168108A1) (hereinafter "Karampatsis").
Regarding claim 4, Ly fails to disclose the method, comprising:
receiving, by the wireless communication device from the core network, a traffic routing rule including a second indication that the wireless communication is to route a first type of traffic via at least one specified access path of the plurality of access paths; and determining, by the wireless communication device according to the second indication, to route first traffic of the first type via the at least one specified access path.
However, Karampatsis discloses the method, comprising:
receiving, by the wireless communication device from the core network, a traffic routing rule including a second indication that the wireless communication is to route a first type of traffic via at least one specified access path of the plurality of access paths; and ([0135] Upon reception of the URSP rules including PLMN validity conditions, the UE 910 enforces the URSP rules as follows: [0136] When the UE finds that application traffic matches traffic descriptor of a URSP rules the UE checks the list of Route Selection Descriptors of the matched URSP rule. [0137] If an RSD in the list of RSDs contains PLMN validity conditions the UE checks if the PLMN identity within the validity conditions matches the PLMN identify of the registered PLMN or an equivalent PLMN of the registered PLMN. [0138] If there is match the UE considers the RSD valid and routes the application traffic according to the contents of the route selection descriptor.)
determining, by the wireless communication device according to the second indication, to route first traffic of the first type via the at least one specified access path ([0135] Upon reception of the URSP rules including PLMN validity conditions, the UE 910 enforces the URSP rules as follows: [0136] When the UE finds that application traffic matches traffic descriptor of a URSP rules the UE checks the list of Route Selection Descriptors of the matched URSP rule. [0137] If an RSD in the list of RSDs contains PLMN validity conditions the UE checks if the PLMN identity within the validity conditions matches the PLMN identify of the registered PLMN or an equivalent PLMN of the registered PLMN. [0138] If there is match the UE considers the RSD valid and routes the application traffic according to the contents of the route selection descriptor.).
Ly and Karampatsis are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of implementing route selection policy rules for different networks.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of Ly with Karampatsis to create the method, comprising: receiving, by the wireless communication device from the core network, a traffic routing rule including a second indication that the wireless communication is to route a first type of traffic via at least one specified access path of the plurality of access paths; and determining, by the wireless communication device according to the second indication, to route first traffic of the first type via the at least one specified access path.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to direct certain types of data traffic through a chosen network paths based on priority.
Regarding claim 6, Ly fails to disclose the method, wherein the second indication indicates the specified access path via at least one of: an indication of a type of radio access technology (RAT), or an identification (ID) of a network.
However, Karampatsis discloses the method, wherein the second indication indicates the specified access path via at least one of: an indication of a type of radio access technology (RAT), or an identification (ID) of a network ([0135] Upon reception of the URSP rules including PLMN validity conditions, the UE 910 enforces the URSP rules as follows: [0136] When the UE finds that application traffic matches traffic descriptor of a URSP rules the UE checks the list of Route Selection Descriptors of the matched URSP rule. [0137] If an RSD in the list of RSDs contains PLMN validity conditions the UE checks if the PLMN identity within the validity conditions matches the PLMN identify of the registered PLMN or an equivalent PLMN of the registered PLMN. [0138] If there is match the UE considers the RSD valid and routes the application traffic according to the contents of the route selection descriptor.).
Ly and Karampatsis are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of implementing route selection policy rules for different networks.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of Ly with Karampatsis to create the method, herein the second indication indicates the specified access path via at least one of: an indication of a type of radio access technology (RAT), or an identification (ID) of a network.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to direct certain types of data traffic through a chosen network paths based on priority.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ly in view of Jung et al (US20260189999A1) (hereinafter "Jung").
Regarding claim 8, Ly fails to disclose the method, comprising: wherein the ID of the network comprises: an ID of a public land mobile network (PLMN), or a ID of a non-public network (NPN).
However, Jung discloses the method, wherein the ID of the network comprises:
an ID of a public land mobile network (PLMN), or ([0124] The PLMN-ID of that PLMN is broadcast by the cell with no associated CAG-IDs and CAG- only indication in the UE for that PLMN (TS 23.501 [10]) is absent or false; -Allowed CAG list in the UE for that PLMN (TS 23.501 [10]) includes a CAG-ID broadcast by the cell for that PLMN;)
a ID of a non-public network (NPN) (The examiner does not select this because of the "or" statement.).
Ly and Jung are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of techniques for route selection for multi-link operation over multiple radio access technologies.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of Ly with Jung to create the method, comprising: wherein the ID of the network comprises: an ID of a public land mobile network (PLMN), or a ID of a non-public network (NPN).
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to determine network access based on broadcasted PLMN-IDs, CAG cell broadcasts, and allowed CAG lists.
Claims 9-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ly in view of Gundavelli et al (US20240007395A1) (hereinafter "Gundavelli").
Regarding claim 9, Ly fails to disclose the method, wherein the at least one specified access path includes at least one of: at least one of the two cellular-based access paths, or an access path that is not cellular-based.
However, Gundavelli discloses the method, wherein the at least one specified access path includes at least one of:
at least one of the two cellular-based access paths, or (The examiner does not select this because of the "or" statement.)
an access path that is not cellular-based ([0056] According to some examples, when UE 302 is in coverage of Wi-Fi network 306, UE 302 can establish an association with single or multi-links of Wi-Fi network 306 per URSP application policy. As follows, application traffic can be exchanged per URSP policy on different links (e.g., a single path of 6 Ghz/5 Ghz or multi-path). [0062] At step 422, UE 302 starts App X, which would trigger a URSP action. For example, UE 302 can start a new application whose URSP policy needs a redundant link. … As follows, at step 428, a new Link-2 is set up between UE 302 and wireless LAN controller 306 (i.e., wireless network), and therefore, traffic flow can be established over existing Link-1 and new Link-2. [0083] For example, network controller 308 as illustrated in FIGS. 3 and 4 can update the URSP based on the performance data associated with the link. The updated URSP can include moving some applications from one link to another link (e.g., from 5 Ghz to 6 Ghz) or vice versa or enabling multi-links.).
Ly and Gundavelli are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of traffic management across multi-link cellular and Wi-Fi connections.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of Ly with Gundavelli to create the method, wherein the at least one specified access path includes at least one of: at least one of the two cellular-based access paths, or an access path that is not cellular-based.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to establish redundant links for improved reliability/performance or to shift traffic between multiple links based on network conditions.
Regarding claim 10, Ly fails to disclose the method, wherein the at least one specified access path includes a first plurality of access paths, and the second indication indicates that a specific portion of traffic of the first type is to be routed via a corresponding one of the first plurality of access paths.
However, Gundavelli discloses the method, wherein the at least one specified access path includes a first plurality of access paths, and the second indication indicates that a specific portion of traffic of the first type is to be routed via a corresponding one of the first plurality of access paths ([0052] In some instances, network controller 308 can determine a URSP application policy per UE. The URSP application policy can define how application traffic is exchanged over a 5G link. Further, the URSP application policy can cover Wi-Fi access, more specifically Wi-Fi multi-link. Examples of URSP policies can include routing protocols regarding applications over P5G, applications over Wi-Fi links (e.g., single path application and multi-path application), multi-path links setup and termination rules, and multi-path links redundant traffic rules.).
Ly and Gundavelli are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of traffic management across multi-link cellular and Wi-Fi connections.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of Ly with Gundavelli to create the method, wherein the at least one specified access path includes a first plurality of access paths, and the second indication indicates that a specific portion of traffic of the first type is to be routed via a corresponding one of the first plurality of access paths.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to establish redundant links for improved reliability/performance or to shift traffic between multiple links based on network conditions.
Regarding claim 11, Ly fails to disclose the method, comprising: establishing, by the wireless communication device, a connection to the core network via a first access path and a second access path, to access a same data service; and establishing, by the wireless communication device, a connection to a network function (NF) via at least one of the first access path or the second access path.
However, Gundavelli discloses the method, comprising:
establishing, by the wireless communication device, a connection to the core network via a first access path and a second access path, to access a same data service; and ([0051] According to some examples, UE 302 has the capability to connect to the 5G network and Wi-Fi 7. In particular, when UE 302 attaches to cellular network 304 (e.g., 5G network), UE 302 can exchange its Wi-Fi capability to cellular network 304 to obtain identical service on both cellular network 304 and Wi-Fi network 306.)
establishing, by the wireless communication device, a connection to a network function (NF) via at least one of the first access path or the second access path ([0042] Core Network 230 contains a plurality of Network Functions (NFs), shown here as NF 232, NF 234 . . . NF n. [0050] Cellular network 304 and Wi-Fi network 306 may provide multiple access technologies for a single or multiple different enterprise networks. While FIG. 3 illustrates just one example UE 302, network environment 300 can include more than one UE 302. Similarly, while a single cellular network and Wi-Fi network that may be forming a private enterprise network are shown in FIG. 3, network environment 300 can also include any number of enterprise (private) or public networks with multiple access technologies.).
Ly and Gundavelli are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of traffic management across multi-link cellular and Wi-Fi connections.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of Ly with Gundavelli to create the method, comprising: establishing, by the wireless communication device, a connection to the core network via a first access path and a second access path, to access a same data service; and establishing, by the wireless communication device, a connection to a network function (NF) via at least one of the first access path or the second access path.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to establish redundant links for improved reliability/performance or to shift traffic between multiple links based on network conditions.
Regarding claim 12, Ly fails to disclose the method, comprising: receiving, by the wireless communication device via at least one of the first access path or the second access path, the route selection policy.
However, Gundavelli discloses the method, comprising:
receiving, by the wireless communication device via at least one of the first access path or the second access path, the route selection policy ([0052] In some instances, network controller 308 can determine a URSP application policy per UE. The URSP application policy can define how application traffic is exchanged over a 5G link. Further, the URSP application policy can cover Wi-Fi access, more specifically Wi-Fi multi-link. Examples of URSP policies can include routing protocols regarding applications over P5G, applications over Wi-Fi links (e.g., single path application and multi-path application), multi-path links setup and termination rules, and multi-path links redundant traffic rules. [0053] In some examples, network controller 308 can deliver the URSP application (e.g., on a per UE capability basis) to UE 302 over 5G or Wi-Fi access (e.g., AP of cellular network 304 or AP of Wi-Fi network 306).).
Ly and Gundavelli are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of traffic management across multi-link cellular and Wi-Fi connections.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of Ly with Gundavelli to create the method, comprising: receiving, by the wireless communication device via at least one of the first access path or the second access path, the route selection policy.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to establish redundant links for improved reliability/performance or to shift traffic between multiple links based on network conditions.
Regarding claim 13, Ly fails to disclose the method, comprising: receiving, by the wireless communication device via at least one of the first access path or the second access path, the traffic routing rule.
However, Gundavelli discloses the method, comprising:
receiving, by the wireless communication device via at least one of the first access path or the second access path, the traffic routing rule ([0018] In one aspect, a method of defining a URSP based on Wi-Fi multi-link operation includes identifying a user device connected to an enterprise network, the enterprise network providing network connectivity to user devices over multiple radio access technologies; receiving network capability information indicating that the user device is capable of a multi-link operation over a Wi-Fi network, the Wi-Fi network being one of the multiple radio access technologies; determining a user equipment route selection policy (URSP) for the user device, wherein the URSP is a singular route selection policy for the user device to send and receive data over the multiple radio access technologies and defines, in part, a per-application traffic routing rule for routing a portion of traffic for an application used on the user device, over one of multiple links available on the Wi-Fi network; and transmitting the URSP to the user device.).
Ly and Gundavelli are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of traffic management across multi-link cellular and Wi-Fi connections.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of Ly with Gundavelli to create the method, comprising: receiving, by the wireless communication device via at least one of the first access path or the second access path, the traffic routing rule.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to establish redundant links for improved reliability/performance or to shift traffic between multiple links based on network conditions.
Regarding claim 14, Ly fails to disclose the method, wherein the connection established to the network function comprises a user plane connection.
However, Gundavelli discloses the method, wherein the connection established to the network function comprises a user plane connection ([0044] The same is true of the remaining NFs of core network 230, which can be shared amongst one or more network slices or provided as a unique instance specific to a single one of the plurality of network slices 252. In addition to NFs comprising an AMF/MME as discussed above, the plurality of NFs of the core network 230 can additionally include one or more of the following: User Plane Functions (UPFs))
Ly and Gundavelli are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the same endeavor of traffic management across multi-link cellular and Wi-Fi connections.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a motivation to combine the teachings of Ly with Gundavelli to create the method, wherein the connection established to the network function comprises a user plane connection.
The motivation to combine both references would come from the need to establish redundant links for improved reliability/performance or to shift traffic between multiple links based on network conditions.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Atarius et al (US20240276360A1) discloses a method for selecting an access network using a selection policy rule that contains network slice selection assistance information.
Batardière et al (US20200267076A1) discloses techniques for data routing using link aggregation, for establishing a single multipath connection between two computing devices.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to D LITTLE whose telephone number is (571)272-5748. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8-6 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, Nishant Divecha can be reached on 571-270-3125. 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.
/D LITTLE/Examiner, Art Unit 2419
/Nishant Divecha/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2419
Prosecution Insights