CTNF 18/992,597 CTNF 79365 Detailed Action 1. This Office Action is responsive to the Preliminary Amendment filed 01/09/2025. Claims 1-3, 5-6, 8, 11-16, 18-19 and 28 have been amended. Claims 20-27 and 29-32 have been cancelled. Claims 1-19 and 28 are presented for examination. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Priority 2. Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, or 365(c) is acknowledged. Information Disclosure Statement 3. The information disclosure statements (IDSes) submitted on 01/09/2025 and 12/23/2025 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 § 101 07-04-01 AIA 07-04 4. 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows: Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. 5. Claims 1, 15 and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. Claims 1 and 28 recite “receiving, from a second NF, control information for controlling non-access stratum, NAS, traffic that is to be processed by the first NF, wherein the control information instructs the first NF to perform a predetermined action on the NAS traffic when the NAS traffic satisfies a predetermined condition” and “sending, to the second NF, a response to the control information” ; and claim 15 recites “sending to a first NF, control information for controlling non-access stratum, NAS, traffic that is to be processed by the first NF, wherein the control information instructs the first NF to perform a predetermined action on the NAS traffic when the NAS traffic satisfies a predetermined condition” and “receiving, from the first NF, a response to the control information” , are directed to generic computer module interfacing. The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception as follows: The limitations of “receiving/sending control information for controlling non-access stratum, NAS, traffic that is to be processed by the first NF” and “sending/receiving a response to the control information” of claims 1, 15 and 28, as drafted, are processes that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, cover performance of the limitations in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components (input and output between associated devices/services). That is, other than reciting “a first NF and a second NF” (in claims 1, 15 and 28) and “at least one processor” and “at least one memory containing instructions executable by the at least one processor”, nothing in the claim elements precludes the steps from practically being performed in the mind. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claims 1 and 12 recite an abstract idea. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claims 1, 15 and 28 only recite using “a first/second NF” and “at least one processor/memory” to perform both the receiving and sending steps. The first/second NF and at least one processor/memory are recited at a high-level of generality such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Accordingly, this additional element does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea. The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of using a first/second NF and at least one processor/memory to perform the receiving and sending steps amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. The claims are not patent eligible. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 6. 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. 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. 07-15 AIA 7. Claim s 1-5, 7-9, 12, 15-18 and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by KAWASAKI et al. (US 2022/0015158 A1), hereinafter "KAWASAKI" . 8. As to claim 1, KAWASAKI teaches a method performed by a first network function, NF, comprising: receiving, from a second NF, control information for controlling non-access stratum, NAS, traffic that is to be processed by the first NF, wherein the control information instructs the first NF to perform a predetermined action on the NAS traffic when the NAS traffic satisfies a predetermined condition ( [0171] : the UE initiates the registration procedure by transmitting to the AMF a registration request message (a NAS message); [0179-0185] : If the AMF receives the registration request message, then the AMF can perform first condition determination. The so-called first condition determination is for determining whether the network (or AMF) accepts the request of UE) ; and sending, to the second NF, a response to the control information ( [0185] : Then, the AMF transmits a registration accept message (a NAS message) to the UE as a response message to the registration request message) . 9. As to claim 2, KAWASAKI teaches the method according to claim 1, further comprising: when the NAS traffic satisfies the predetermined condition, performing the predetermined action on the NAS traffic according to the control information ( [0181-0185] : if the registration request message includes the SM message, then the fourth condition determination may be true, if not then the fourth condition determination may be false. If the fourth condition determination is true then the AMF selects an SMF, and receives and transmits an SM message from/to the selected SMF; conversely, if the fourth condition determination is false, then the AMF does not receive and transmit the SM message) . 10. As to claim 3, KAWASAKI teaches the method according to claim 1, further comprising: sending, to the second NF, assistance information usable for determining the control information ( [0177] : the UE may also include an SM message (used in the fourth condition determination) in the registration request and then transmit the same, or may transmit the SM message together with the registration request message so as to initiate a PDU session establishment procedure in the registration procedure) . 11. As to claim 4, KAWASAKI teaches the method according to claim 3, wherein the assistance information comprises one or more of : at least one key performance indicator, KPI, related to the NAS traffic; at least one counter for checking health status of the first network function; a log of events occurring at the first network function; and the NAS traffic processed by the first network function ( [0093] : the SM message (also referred as a Non-Access-Stratum (NAS) SM message) may be a NAS message used by a procedure for SM, and may also be a control message received and transmitted between the UE and an SMF via an AMF. The SM message may also include a PDU session establishment or modification request message, a PDU session establishment or modification accept/reject/complete/response message, etc.) . 12. As to claim 5, KAWASAKI teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the predetermined action is one of : accepting the NAS traffic; rejecting the NAS traffic; and ignoring the NAS traffic ( [0179-0185] : If the AMF receives the registration request message, then the AMF can perform first condition determination. The so-called first condition determination is for determining whether the network (or AMF) accepts the request of UE) . 13. As to claim 7, KAWASAKI teaches the method according to claim 6, wherein the control information further comprises one or more of: a second ID identifying the control information; and a third indicator indicating a validity time of the control information ( [0151-0153] : The 14-th identification information is information indicating a valid period of the LADN service area. The 14-th identification may also be information indicating whether the LADN service area is currently valid) . 14. As to claim 8, KAWASAKI teaches the method according to claim 6, wherein the at least one rule comprises one or more of : a first rule indicating that the control should be applied to the NAS traffic of any terminal device; a second rule indicating that the control should be applied to the NAS traffic of a specific terminal device; a third rule indicating that the control should be applied in one or more specific events; a fourth rule indicating that the control should be applied to the NAS traffic related to a specific data network name, DNA; a fifth rule indicating that the control should be applied to the NAS traffic related to a specific protocol data unit, PDU, session; a sixth rule indicating that the control should be applied to the NAS traffic of one or more terminal devices at a specific location; and a seventh rule indicating that the control should be applied to the NAS traffic having a specific traffic pattern ([0116], [0128-0135] and [0173-0176]) . 15. As to claim 9, KAWASAKI teaches the method according to claim 8, wherein the NAS traffic having the specific traffic pattern is an NAS traffic whose payload is an Internet protocol, IP, based packet having a specific feature in content ( [0093] : the Session Management (SM) message (also referred to as a Non-Access-Stratum (NAS) SM message) may be a NAS message used by a procedure for SM, and may also be a control message received and transmitted between the UE a1nd an SMF via an AFM. The SM message may also include a PDU session message; [0106] : the PDU session type refers to the type of the PDU session, including IPv4, IPv6, Ethernet and Unstructured) . 16. As to claim 11, KAWASAKI teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the response indicates that the control applied to the NAS traffic is initiated; or wherein the response indicates why the control applied to the NAS traffic cannot be initiated ( [0185] : the AMF transmits a registration accept message (a NAS message) to the UE as a response message to the registration request message; [0186] : the AMF may also transmit these pieces of identification information to indicate that the network supports various functions or to indicate that the request of the UE is accepted) . 17. As to claim 12, KAWASAKI teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the first NF is one of : an access and mobility management function, AMF; a session management function, SMF; a network exposure function, NEF; and a short message service function, SMSF ( [0171] : the UE initiates the registration procedure by transmitting to the AMF a registration request message (a NAS message); [0179-0185] : If the AMF receives the registration request message, then the AMF can perform first condition determination. The so-called first condition determination is for determining whether the network (or AMF) accepts the request of UE) . 18. As to claims 15-18, claims 15-18 recite similar limitations as of method claims 1 and 3-5 and do not contain any additional limitations with respect to novelty and/or inventive steps; therefore, they are rejected under the same rationale. 19. As to claim 28, claim 28 is a corresponding apparatus claim that recites similar limitations as of method claim 1 and does not contain any additional limitations with respect to novelty and/or inventive steps; therefore, it is rejected under the same rationale . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 20. 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. 07-21-aia AIA 21. Claim s 6, 13-14 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KAWASAKI, in view of WANG et al. (US 2023/0037031 A1), hereinafter “WANG” . 22. As to claim 6, KAWASAKI teaches the method according to claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose “the control information comprises: a first identifier, ID, identifying a target NF for which the control is applied to the NAS traffic; a first indicator indicating at least one rule for defining the predetermined condition; and a second indicator indicating the predetermined action”. In an analogous art, WANG discloses the policy (i.e., control) information comprises: Target-NF = “AMF, SMF, UPF”, NFD-Condition = “An IoT device communicates with an edge application using control plane”, and NFD-Action = “Generate a NFD trigger for distributing all NFs on the control plane to the edge network where the edge application resides & send the NFD trigger to NFDM” ([0347-0351]) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of KAWASAKI and WANG to achieve the claimed invention to generate a network function distributing policy specifying the conditions for triggering to distribute one or more network functions from core network to one or more edge data networks (WANG, [0278]) . 23. As to claim 13, KAWASAKI teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the second NF is one of: a network data analytics function, NWDAF; and an operation and maintenance, O&M ( [0109-0113] and [0352] : after receiving data analytics results from NWDAF about a specific NF, NRF generates an NFD trigger by comparing the received data analytics results against NFD-Condition) . 24. As to claim 14, KAWASAKI-WANG teaches the method according to claim 6, wherein the target NF is one of : an SMF; an NEF; a unified data management, UDM; a policy control function, PCF; and an application function, AF ( WANG, [0351] : Target-NF = “AMF, SMF, UPF”) . 25. As to claim 19, claim 19 recites similar limitations as of method claim 6 and does not contain any additional limitations with respect to novelty and/or inventive steps; therefore, it is rejected under the same rationale . 07-21-aia AIA 26. Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KAWASAKI, in view of PAYYAPPILLY et al. (US 2022/0377538 A1), hereinafter “PAYYAPPILLY” . 27. As to claim 10, KAWASAKI teaches the method according to claim 9, but does not explicitly disclose “the IP based packet comprises one or more of : an Internet control message protocol, ICMP, packet; a transmission control protocol, TCP, packet; a user datagram protocol, UDP, packet; and a stream control transmission protocol, SCTP, packet”. In an analogous art, PAYYAPPILLY discloses “the IP based packet comprises a TCP packet” ([0075]: the abstraction layer may pass NAS messages to the Internet Key Exchange (IKE) for encryption and to the TCP/UDP/IP stack for encoding before providing the NAS messages to the applications processor. As used herein, “encoding using TCP” may refer to one or more of dividing the NAS messages into TCP segments, adding TCP headers, and/or encapsulating into IP datagrams) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of KAWASAKI and PAYYAPPILLY to achieve the claimed invention to encode/encapsulate the NAS messages using TCP, a well-known technique in encoding/encapsulating data packets in to IP diagrams, for performing network communications. 28. Further references of interest are cited on Form PTO-892, which is an attachment to this Office Action. 29. A shortened statutory period for reply to this action is set to expire THREE (3) months from the mailing date of this communication. See 37 CFR 1.134. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to QUANG N NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571) 272-3886. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, KAMAL B. DIVECHA, can be reached at (571) 272-5863. The fax phone number for the organization is (571) 273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /QUANG N NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2441 Application/Control Number: 18/992,597 Page 2 Art Unit: 2441 Application/Control Number: 18/992,597 Page 3 Art Unit: 2441 Application/Control Number: 18/992,597 Page 4 Art Unit: 2441 Application/Control Number: 18/992,597 Page 5 Art Unit: 2441 Application/Control Number: 18/992,597 Page 6 Art Unit: 2441 Application/Control Number: 18/992,597 Page 7 Art Unit: 2441 Application/Control Number: 18/992,597 Page 8 Art Unit: 2441 Application/Control Number: 18/992,597 Page 9 Art Unit: 2441 Application/Control Number: 18/992,597 Page 10 Art Unit: 2441 Application/Control Number: 18/992,597 Page 11 Art Unit: 2441 Application/Control Number: 18/992,597 Page 12 Art Unit: 2441 Application/Control Number: 18/992,597 Page 13 Art Unit: 2441
Prosecution Insights