DETAILED ACTION
Status of Application: Claims 1-15 are present for examination at this time.
Claims 1,3-6, 8-11, and 13-15 are rejected.
Please refer to any PTO Forms 892 of record in this application and/or submitted IDSes to resolve any possible discrepancies in the listed reference numbers
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 statement submitted on 3/21/2025 has been considered by the Examiner and made of record in the application file.
Priority
Applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 is acknowledged.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 7, and 12 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. The conjunctiveness of all the specific message elements in combination with the independent claims was found to be outside the prior art.
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 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(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
In considering patentability of the claims under 35 U.S.C. 103(a), the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned at the time any inventions covered therein were made absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and invention dates of each claim that was not commonly owned at the time a later invention was made in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 103(c)
and potential 35 U.S.C. 102(e), (f) or (g) prior art under 35 U.S.C. 103(a).
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(a) 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 1, and 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over “Methods And Systems For Restricted Service Access Between Network Functions In Wireless Network” by Rohini et al., WO2022/173259A1 (Rohini).
PNG
media_image1.png
380
774
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Rohini Figure 6
With respect to Claim 1, while Rohini discloses a method performed by an Access and Mobility Management Function (AMF) for providing Non-Terrestrial Network (NTN) support function information (Rohini at ¶4 where the techniques therein are for use inter alia, in an NTN system) in a wireless communication system (Rohini at Fig 6 and ¶¶211-218 describing the figure “FIG. 6 illustrates the procedure in which the target AMF (400) requests for the restricted service access from initial AMF (300) in case of mobility registration, wherein the initial AMF (300) authorizes the target AMF (400) before sending the restricted services parameters in the response message.”), the method comprising: registering NTN support information including NTN support functions by the AMF to a Network Repository Function (NRF) through a Service Based Interface (SBI) (Rohini at ¶215 where the AMF sends a request for token registration based on the local, i.e., support, configuration);
Rohini does not explicitly state in the same embodiment, that which is disclosed in the previous embodiment in Rohini:
enabling another Network Function (NF) to search for the AMF including NTN support functions from the NRF through the SBI (Rohini at ¶183 “Alternatively, the initial AMF (300) first determines which services are supported by the old AMF (500) by querying the NRF (600). It then sends a service-access request to authorization server requesting access to the old AMF's services which provide UE context transfer service.”).
Reasons to cross embodiments/modify: Figure 5 and Figure 6 are very similar as described in Rohini. Their description is almost the same word for word.
“FIG. 5 illustrates the procedure in which the target AMF (400) requests for the restricted service access from the initial AMF (300) in case of mobility registration, wherein the initial AMF (300) authorizes the target AMF (400) before sending the restricted services parameters in the response message.
FIG. 6 illustrates the procedure in which the target AMF (400) requests for the restricted service access from initial AMF (300) in case of mobility registration, wherein the initial AMF (300) authorizes the target AMF (400) before sending the restricted services parameters in the response message.”
Rohini at ¶266 provides general motivation for crossing embodiments. Rohini at ¶183 states an advantage of searching for the initial AMF so that the same functions provided there can hopefully be provided at the new AMF allowing for proper UE Context. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the clamed invention to cross embodiments of Rohini to provide a smooth transfer between AMFs without loss of functionality for the benefit of seamless service.
With respect to Claim 4, Rohini discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the step of the NF searching for the AMF includes transmitting a network function discovery request (Nnrf NFDiscovery Request) to the NRF, and specifying NTN support functions as query parameters (Rohini at ¶183 “Alternatively, upon receiving initial registration request via the NAS re-route, the target AMF (400) first determines which services are supported by the initial AMF (300) by querying the NRF entity (600). It then sends a service-access request to authorization server requesting access to the initial AMF's services which provide UE context transfer service.”.)
With respect to Claim 5, Rohini discloses the method of claim 4, wherein the query parameters of the network function discovery request include an identifier indicating that the network function type is AMF (NFType=AMF) and the NTN support information (Rohini at ¶ 182 where the message sent along with the support information includes that the
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over “Methods And Systems For Restricted Service Access Between Network Functions In Wireless Network” by Rohini et al., WO2022/173259A1 (Rohini) in view of “Communication Method And Communication Apparatus” WO2023130992A1.
With respect to Claim 3, while Rohini discloses the method of claim 1, Rohini does not explicitly state that which is known in the art as taught by WO2023130992A1. discloses wherein the step of the AMF registering the NTN support information uses NRF network function management registration request (NnrfNFManagementRegister Request) or NRF network function management update request (Nnrf NFManagement Update Request) service “Optionally, the first message may also be a network function management registration request for creating or registering information about the first device, where the first message carries identification information of the first device and/or reference area information of the first device.”
Reasons to Combine/Modify: Both Rohini and WO2023130992A1 are analogous to the claimed invention in that they are from the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, using NRF to provide network services. WO2023130992A states: “It should be understood that the access management network element in this embodiment of the present application may be an access and mobility management function network element, and the network storage network element may be a network storage library function network element NRF. In future 5G or 6G networks, it can also be other names, which are not limited in this application.” Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, in order to have interoperability between systems regardless of the specific label being used for a message in that system to combine Rohini with WO2023130992A1.
Claims 6, 9, 10, and 11, 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over “Methods And Systems For Restricted Service Access Between Network Functions In Wireless Network” by Rohini et al., WO2022/173259A1 (Rohini) in view of “Method And Apparatus For Multi-Modality Service In Wireless Communication System” by Baek US2024/0114445A1 (“Baek”)
PNG
media_image2.png
596
772
media_image2.png
Greyscale
With respect to Claim 6, while Rohini discloses the method performed …for providing Non- Terrestrial Network support function information in a wireless communication system (Rohini at ¶4 where the techniques therein are for use inter alia, in an NTN system) , the method comprising: registering NTN (Non-Terrestrial Network) support information by the …MF to a Network Repository Function (NRF) through a Service Based Interface (SBI) (Rohini at Fig 6 and ¶¶211-218 describing the figure “FIG. 6 illustrates the procedure in which the target AMF (400) requests for the restricted service access from initial AMF (300) in case of mobility registration, wherein the initial AMF (300) authorizes the target AMF (400) before sending the restricted services parameters in the response message.”); and enabling a Network Function (NF) to search for the …MF having the NTN support information from the NRF through the SBI (Rohini at ¶183 “Alternatively, the initial AMF (300) first determines which services are supported by the old AMF (500) by querying the NRF (600). It then sends a service-access request to authorization server requesting access to the old AMF's services which provide UE context transfer service.”)..
Rohini does not explicitly state that which is known in the art as taught by . discloses [that the method is performed] “by a Session Management Function (SMF)” (Baek at Figure 3 and ¶¶80,82 where the SMF works in concert with the AMF and NRF to register the UE.)
Reasons to Combine/Modify: Both Rohini and Baek are analogous to the claimed invention in that they are from the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, using NRF to provide network services. Baek at ¶¶11, 13 provides that it can be advantageous to provide multi-modalilty for a network slice. This would allow for transceiving diversity. This would be dependent on the specific type of session, therefore the process would invoke the Session Management Function. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, in order to have multi-modality where two types of networks are present to combine Rohini with Baek to register using the SMF over the AMF.
With respect to Claim 9, Rohini in view of Baek discloses method of claim 6, wherein the step of the NF searching for the SMF includes transmitting a network function discovery request (Nnrf NFDiscovery Request) to the NRF, and specifying the NTN support functions as query parameters (Rohini at ¶183 “Alternatively, upon receiving initial registration request via the NAS re-route, the target AMF (400) first determines which services are supported by the initial AMF (300) by querying the NRF entity (600). It then sends a service-access request to authorization server requesting access to the initial AMF's services which provide UE context transfer service.”.).
With respect to Claim 10, Rohini in view of Baek method of claim 9, wherein the query parameters of the networkfunction discovery request (Nnrf NFDiscovery Request) include an identifier indicating that the network function type is SMF and the NTN support information (Rohini at ¶ 182 where the message sent along with the support information includes that the function being requested is AMF reallocation and Baek at ¶86 modifying the information in Rohini to be SMF instead of AMF).
With respect to Claim 11, Rohini in view of Baek discloses a method performed …for providing Non- Terrestrial Network support function information in a wireless communication system (Rohini at ¶4 where the techniques therein are for use inter alia, in an NTN system) , the method comprising: registering NTN (Non-Terrestrial Network) support information by the …MF to a Network Repository Function (NRF) through a Service Based Interface (SBI) (Rohini at Fig 6 and ¶¶211-218 describing the figure “FIG. 6 illustrates the procedure in which the target AMF (400) requests for the restricted service access from initial AMF (300) in case of mobility registration, wherein the initial AMF (300) authorizes the target AMF (400) before sending the restricted services parameters in the response message.”); and enabling a Network Function (NF) to search for the …MF having the NTN support information from the NRF through the SBI (Rohini at ¶183 “Alternatively, the initial AMF (300) first determines which services are supported by the old AMF (500) by querying the NRF (600). It then sends a service-access request to authorization server requesting access to the old AMF's services which provide UE context transfer service.”)..
Rohini does not explicitly state that which is known in the art as taught by . discloses [that the method is performed] “by a User Plane Function (UPF)” (Baek at Figure 3 and ¶¶51, 53 where the UPF works with the SMF and ¶¶80,82 where the SMF works in concert with the AMF and NRF to register the UE.)
Reasons to Combine/Modify: Both Rohini and Baek are analogous to the claimed invention in that they are from the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, using NRF to provide network services. Baek at ¶¶11, 13 provides that it can be advantageous to provide multi-modalilty for a network slice. Baek at ¶52 discloses that the UPF helps facilitate this by maintaining a tunnel to the NG-RAN. This would allow for transceiving diversity. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, in order to have multi-modality where two types of networks are present to combine Rohini with Baek to register using the UPF.
With respect to Claim 14, Rohini in view of Baek method of claim 11, wherein the step of the NF searching for the UPF includes transmitting a network function discovery request (Nnrf NFDiscovery Request) to the NRF, and specifying the NTN support functions as query parameters NFDiscovery Request) to the NRF, and specifying the NTN support functions as query parameters (Rohini at ¶183 “Alternatively, upon receiving initial registration request via the NAS re-route, the target AMF (400) first determines which services are supported by the initial AMF (300) by querying the NRF entity (600). It then sends a service-access request to authorization server requesting access to the initial AMF's services which provide UE context transfer service.”.)
With respect to Claim 15, Rohini in view of Baek method of claim 14, wherein the query parameters of the network function discovery request (Nnrf NFDiscovery Request) include an identifier indicating that the network function type is UPF and supported packet forwarding control protocol features (supportedPfcpFeatures) (Baek at ¶53 “[0053] The UPF 240 may serve to process user data (e.g., XR data) of the UE, and serve to process XR data so that the UE may transmit the generated XR data to the AF/AS 300 or transmit data received from the AF/AS 300 to the UE. For example, the UPF 240 may perform NF such as serving as an anchor between radio access technologies (RATs), providing a connection between a PDU session and the AF/AS 300, packet routing and forwarding, packet inspection, applying user plane policy, generating traffic usage reports, buffering, etc.”).
Claims 8 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over “Methods And Systems For Restricted Service Access Between Network Functions In Wireless Network” by Rohini et al., WO2022/173259A1 (Rohini) in view of “Method And Apparatus For Multi-Modality Service In Wireless Communication System” by Baek US2024/0114445A1 (“Baek”) and further in view of WO2023130992A1.
With respect to Claim 8, while Rohini discloses the method of claim 6, Rohini does not explicitly state that which is known in the art as taught by WO2023130992A1. WO2023130992A1 discloses wherein the step of the SMF registering the NTN support information uses NRF network function management registration request (NnrfNFManagementRegister Request) or NRF network function management update request (Nnrf NFManagement Update Request) service “Optionally, the first message may also be a network function management registration request for creating or registering information about the first device, where the first message carries identification information of the first device and/or reference area information of the first device.”
Reasons to Combine/Modify: Rohini, Baek, and WO2023130992A1 are analogous to the claimed invention in that they are from the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, using NRF to provide network services. WO2023130992A states: “It should be understood that the access management network element in this embodiment of the present application may be an access and mobility management function network element, and the network storage network element may be a network storage library function network element NRF. In future 5G or 6G networks, it can also be other names, which are not limited in this application.” Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, in order to have interoperability between systems regardless of the specific label being used for a message in that system to combine Rohini and Baek with WO2023130992A1.
With respect to Claim 13, while Rohini discloses the method of claim 11, Rohini does not explicitly state that which is known in the art as taught by WO2023130992A1. WO2023130992A1 discloses wherein the step of the UPF registering the NTN support information uses NRF network function management registration request (NnrfNFManagementRegister Request) or NRF network function management update request (Nnrf NFManagement Update Request) service “Optionally, the first message may also be a network function management registration request for creating or registering information about the first device, where the first message carries identification information of the first device and/or reference area information of the first device.”
Reasons to Combine/Modify: Rohini, Baek, and WO2023130992A1 are analogous to the claimed invention in that they are from the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, using NRF to provide network services. WO2023130992A states: “It should be understood that the access management network element in this embodiment of the present application may be an access and mobility management function network element, and the network storage network element may be a network storage library function network element NRF. In future 5G or 6G networks, it can also be other names, which are not limited in this application.” Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, in order to have interoperability between systems regardless of the specific label being used for a message in that system to combine Rohini and Baek with WO2023130992A1.
Conclusion
Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSHUA L SCHWARTZ whose telephone number is (571)270-7494. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 10a-6p.
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, Yuwen “Kevin” Pan can be reached on 571-272-7855. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned 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.
/JOSHUA L SCHWARTZ/ Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2649
Prosecution Insights