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 .
Status of Claims:
Claims 20-31 are pending in Instant Application.
Examiner notes claims 1-19 were cancelled and new claims 20-31 were added by preliminary amendment filed 02/06/2025.
Priority
Examiner acknowledges Applicant’s claim to priority benefits of Division of Application No. 17/266,147 filed 02/05/2021.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 02/06/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) are being considered if signed and initialed by the Examiner.
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 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 20-22, 24-28, and 30-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dao et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2017/0317894) [Applicant’s IDS], in view of Parkvall et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2017/0331670) [Applicant’s IDS], and further in view of ETSI (“ETSI TS 129 244 V.15.2.0”, 3GPP 5G Global Initiative, 07/2018) [Applicant’s IDS].
As per claim 20, Dao teaches a system (Dao: paragraph 0002; a system for enabling a communication network to provide its quality of service capabilities to entities outside of the network) comprising:
a first apparatus configured to implement a session management function of a core network of a communication network system, the session management function operating in a control plane (Dao: fig. 3 and paragraph 0086; CP functions including EBR estimator…fig. 4B and paragraph 0093; PCF or SMF are control units in the control plane…paragraphs 0003, 0069, and 0083; core network of a communication network system), the first apparatus comprising:
at least one processor; and at least one memory storing instructions that, when executed with the at least one processor (Dao: paragraph 0208; processor coupled to memory containing code), cause the first apparatus at least to perform:
deriving a network instance mapped to transport resources (A network instance will be taught later. First see Dao: paragraph 0082; system determines an effective bit rate as a QoS parameter to provide the optimal service for an application…fig. 3, paragraph 0086; EBR estimator in control plane calculates effective rates for an application) for a user plane (Dao: fig. 3, paragraph 0086; effective rates are sent to resource management in user plane) from a network slice identifier of a packet data unit session relating to logical network resources, of the packet data unit session, between a user equipment and a data network (A network slice identifier and logical network resources will be taught later. Dao: paragraph 0104; CN-GW 2 205 is a user plane function (UPF) and may optionally provide a packet data unit (PDU) session anchor function…paragraphs 0075-0078, 0083; system dynamically adjusts required effective bit rate during a session between a user equipment and an application server based upon QoE reports);
providing an information element of the network instance to a user plane function of the core network and requesting the user plane function of the core network to exchange user plane traffic for the packet data unit session based on the network instance (Dao: figs. 4B, 7, paragraphs 0126-0127; QoS information is sent to CN-UP functions, which exist in the user plane, in order to apply QoS settings or new transport protocol parameters to the UE/App Server session. See also paragraph 0183-0187; Control Plane functions in the core signal QoS policy to CAF-Core in the UP Functions, which uses the policy to set transport QoS targets for the session); and
providing the information element of the network instance to a first control unit of an access network of the communication network system, wherein the access network, comprising a radio access network, provides access for the user equipment to the communication network system (Dao: fig. 3, paragraphs 0084-0086; EBR can be provided to access control in a RAN for making admission control decisions. Paragraphs 0064-0065; radio access network), wherein the first control unit comprises a central unit of the radio access network that operates in the control plane (Dao: fig. 3, paragraphs 0084-0086; EBR provided to access control 66 which is in control plane. Paragraph 0104; centralized unit within a RAN);
the system further comprising a second apparatus configured to implement the user plane function that operates in the user plane and that derives the transport resources for the packet data unit session based on the information element of the network instance (Dao: fig. 4B, 7, paragraphs 0126-0127; QoS information is sent to CN-UP functions, which exist in the user plane, in order to apply QoS settings or new transport protocol parameters to the UE/App Server session. See also paragraphs 0183-0187; Control Plane functions in the core signal QoS policy to CAF-Core in the UP Functions, which uses the policy to set transport QoS targets for the session).
However Dao does not explicitly teach relating to logical network resources.
However Parkvall teaches:
a network instance (First see Dao: paragraph 0081; reservation of resources to provide EBR as a QoS parameter. Then see Parkvall: paragraphs 0403, 1947; A network slice identifier identifies a set of network resources constituting a logical network. It may potentially be used to direct user plane and control plane traffic to the resources of the network slice it pertains to…paragraph 1126; slices using different CN instances, which suggests different parameters for the instances. Therefore, a slice identifier identifies resources, and resources are reserved to provide QoS such as EBR. Therefore the slice identifier allows for the derivation of EBR as a network instance parameter because different identifiers point to different instances of resources for providing parameters);
a network slice identifier (Parkvall: paragraph 0403; A network slice identifier identifies a set of network resources constituting a logical network);
identification relating to logical network resources (Parkvall: paragraph 0403; A network slice identifier identifies a set of network resources constituting a logical network. It may potentially be used to direct user plane and control plane traffic to the resources of the network slice it pertains to).
Therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in Parkvall with the teachings as in Dao. The motivation for doing so would have been in order to handle migrations in the service mix (Parkvall: paragraph 0537).
However Dao and Parkvall do not explicitly teach forwarding action rules.
However ETSI teaches:
wherein the user plane function uses the information element of the network instance in combination with at least one of: a forwarding action rule, or a packet detection rule to determine interface settings for forwarding of traffic (ETSI: page 13; PDR and FAR…page 18; CP provisions a PDR in the UP function by providing parameters the packets must match, including Network Instance parameter…page 26; forwarding access rule handling. The CP uses the FAR to instruct the UP function on how to process packets matching PDR, such as dropping or forwarding the packets, which are interface settings).
Therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in Parkvall with the teachings as in Dao and Parkvall. The motivation for doing so would have been in order to control traffic forwarding (ETSI: page 16).
As per claim 21, the modified Dao teaches the system of claim 20, further comprising a third apparatus configured to implement an access and mobility management function of the core network and configured to forward the information element of the network instance in the control plane in a container from the session management function of the core network to the first control unit of the access network, wherein the access and mobility management function of the core network is configured to operate in the control plane (The information being sent from the first function to the first control unit was already taught. Parkvall: Paragraphs 0420-0426; system integrates control-plane functions by using containers…paragraph 0329; RRC performs control-plane functions. For an access and mobility function, see Dao, Fig. 4b, paragraph 0093; PCF or SMF which are both control units in the control plane. Fig. 6C, 6D, paragraphs 0044, 0117-0118, 0124; AMF works with SMF to control capability…paragraphs 0116, 0126-0127; PCF and SMF select handling procedure for the session. Therefore the information is forwarded to a third function in the control plane), wherein the container is passed over a first interface between the access and mobility management function of the core network and the first control unit of the access network transparently for the access and mobility management function of the core network (Parkvall: paragraphs 0420-0426; containers may be transparent. Further see also Dao, fig. 3, paragraph 0086; parameters pass from CP functions 62 in CN to Access functions 66 in the RAN, which is a transfer over an interface).
The same motivation to combine as the independent claim applies here.
As per claim 22, the modified Dao teaches the system of claim 21, wherein the access and mobility management function comprises a control plane control unit (Dao: Fig. 4B, paragraph 0093; PCF or SMF which are both control units in the control plane. Figs. 6C, 6D, paragraphs 0044, 0117-0118, 0124; AMF works with SMF to control capability).
As per claim 24, the modified Dao teaches the system of claim 20, wherein the information element of the network instance is provided in the control plane together with other information of user plane resources to be used for the packet data unit session (Parkvall: paragraph 0403; network slice identifier that identifies network resources, which is other information).
The same motivation to combine as the independent claim applies here.
As per claim 25, the modified Dao teaches the system of claim 20, wherein the network slice identifier comprises a slice identification of a physical data unit session (Parkvall: paragraphs 0403, 1947; slice id).
The same motivation to combine as the independent claim applies here.
With respect to claim 26, it is substantially similar to claim 20 and is rejected in the same manner, the same art and reasoning applying. Further, Dao also teaches a method (Dao: paragraph 0006; a method of communicating network capability information).
The same motivation to combine as Claim 20 applies here.
Regarding claims 27-28 and 30-31, they are substantially similar to claims 21-22 and 24-25, respectively, and are rejected in the same manner, the same arts and reasoning applying.
Claims 23 and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dao et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2017/0317894) [Applicant’s IDS], in view of Parkvall et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2017/0331670) [Applicant’s IDS], in view of ETSI (“ETSI TS 129 244 V.15.2.0”, 3GPP 5G Global Initiative, 07/2018) [Applicant’s IDS], and further in view of Bae et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2019/0053117).
As per claim 23, the modified Dao teaches the system of claim 20.
However the modified Dao does not explicitly mention N4 interface and N3 interface.
However Bae teaches:
wherein the first apparatus is configured to provide the information element of the network instance to the user plane function over an N4 interface (Bae: paragraph 0085; the SMF may transmit an N4 session establishment request to the new additional anchor UPF at step 705a. The N4 session establishment request may include information for identifying the PDU session as well as information on N4 session context to be installed in the UPF), wherein the second apparatus is configured to derive the transport resources of an N3 interface (Bae: paragraph 0087; The N4 session setup procedure may include step 706a in which the SMF transmits N4 session establishment request signaling including an identification address of the target BS, an identification address of the anchor UPF, and tunnel identification information required for the N9 tunnel setup to the intermediate UPF and step 706b in which the intermediate UPF transmits N4 session establishment response signaling including an identification address of the intermediate UPF and tunnel identification information required by the intermediate UPF for the N9 tunnel setup with the anchor UPF and an identification address of the intermediate UPF and tunnel identification information required for the N3 tunnel setup with the target BS to the SMF).
Therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in Bae with the teachings as in Dao. The motivation for doing so would have been in order to install the session context in the UPF and establish the N3 user plane tunnel between the UPF and the target base station (Bae: paragraphs 0085-0088).
Regarding claim 29, it is substantially similar to claim 23, and is rejected in the same manner, the same arts and reasoning applying.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KARINA J. GARCIA-CHING whose telephone number is (571)270-7159. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Wednesday (9:00 AM - 5:00 PM).
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, Vivek Srivastava can be reached at (571) 272-7304. 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.
/KARINA J GARCIA-CHING/Examiner, Art Unit 2449
/VIVEK SRIVASTAVA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2449
Prosecution Insights