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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendments filed on September 22, 2026, have been entered. Claims 1, 3-8, 10, 13-17, 19, and 20 have been amended. Claims 2 and 11 have been cancelled. New Claims 21-23 have been added. Claims 1, 3-10, and 12-23 remain pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on September 22, 2026, in response to the Non-Final Office Action dated June 22, 2026, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues, in pages 8-9 of the Remarks, “In rejecting claim 1, the Office Action maps Liu's UPF to the claimed first network function device. See NFOA, pp. 3-4. Liu states that "SMF configures the ATSSS policy and operation command to the UPF." Liu, [0061]. Liu further states that "Step 6. UE performs path performance measurement, e.g. the data loss rate, latency, the radio signal quality and reports the results to the SMF based on the configured report condition. Step 7. SMF update the ATSSS policy based on UE feedback; alternatively, SMF transfer the feedback in step 6 to UPF." Liu, [0061]. Liu goes on to state that "Step 8 a. SMF sends the update ATSSS policy to the UPF.... Step 9. UPF adjusts the path, e.g. switching the path from one access to another one or start/stop splitting operation for the downlink data based on the updated ATSSS rule; or based on the feedback from UE." Liu, [0061]. Thus, Liu at best relates to using the UE feedback alone or using an updated ATSSS rule to perform the asserted access traffic controlling. Liu does disclose using both the same ATSSS rule as the one received from Step 3 and the UE feedback to perform the asserted access traffic controlling.”.
In response, as indicated by Fig, 7, step 4, the UPF applies ATSSS rule to steer the traffic. As explained, in paragraph 0061, the UPF can receive either updated ATSSS rule or UE feedback. In case of receiving UE feedback, the UPF applies the same ATSSS rule to steer the traffic.
Applicant argues, in page 9 of the Remarks, “Nevertheless, solely for the purpose of advancing prosecution, Applicant has amended claim 1 to incorporate claim 2 and some features of claim 3 with additional changes. As shown above in the cited sections of Liu, Liu's asserted network performance data is from the UE, not from a network function device capable of conducting data analytic functionality. Applicant notes that, in rejecting claim 3, the Office Action acknowledges that Liu does not disclose the claimed "wherein the third network function device is a network data analytic function (NWDAF) device" and relies on Ly. See NFOA, p. 8.”.
In response, SMF receive data performance data from the UE and forward it to the UPF. Paragraph 0033 discloses SMF can update ATSSS rule. Therefore, SMF is capable of data analysis.
Applicant argues, in page 9 of the Remarks, “However, the cited section of Ly does not describe how the NWDAF analytics are used at the UPF or what rule governs the UPF's traffic controlling. The following [0150]-[0151] of Ly provide further detail and make clear that the rule used together with NWDAF analytics at the UPF is a MAR rule, not an ATSSS rule. Ly states that "[a]n example of the use of this new steering mode is shown in Table 3 for Multi-Access Rule (MAR) where the Analytics Driven steering mode indicates to the UPF 206 to use analytics from NWDAF 205 to assist in steering traffic over 3GPP or non-3GPP accesses." Ly, [0150]. Ly further states that "[t]he split percentages may be specified as the weight of the Forwarding Action on a per-access basis within the structure of the MAR rules." Ly, [0151]. Ly itself distinguishes MAR rules from ATSSS rules: "the steering rules are ATSSS rule for the UE 201 and Multi-Access Rule for the UPF." Ly, [0113]. Ly consistently uses the ATSSS rule exclusively for the UE to control uplink traffic, stating that "[a] steering mode is specified in each ATSSS rule to inform the UE how to distribute UL traffic over 3GPP and non-3GPP accesses." Ly, [0028]. Ly does not disclose a first network function device receiving an ATSSS rule and performing access traffic controlling in accordance with both its ATSSS rule and the asserted performance data.”.
In response, paragraph 0150 of Ly discloses UPF receives data analysis from NWDAF for traffic steering as stated “An example of the use of this new steering mode is shown in Table 3 for Multi-Access Rule (MAR) where the Analytics Driven steering mode indicates to the UPF 206 to use analytics from NWDAF 205 to assist in steering traffic over 3GPP or non-3GPP accesses”. Liu discloses receiving ATSSS rule from PCF. Therefore, the UPF can use the ATSSS rules for traffic steering based on the data analysis received from the NWDAF.
Examiner’s Note about the Format of 35 U.S.C. 102/103 Rejections
Generally, limitations of a claim are reproduced identically and followed by examiner’s explanation with citation from prior art in Italic enclosed by a parenthesis, (), for each limitation. In examiner’s explanation, the mapping of the key elements of a limitation to the disclosed elements of prior art is shown by stating the disclosed element immediately followed by the claimed element inside a parenthesis. Specific quotation from prior art is delineated with quotation mark, ““. If primary art fails to teach a limitation or part of the limitation, the limitation or the part of the limitation is placed inside double square brackets, [[ ]], for better understandability, and appropriate secondary art(s) is/are applied later addressing the deficiency of the primary art.
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)(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.
Claims 1, 3-5, 7-10, 12-14, and 16-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Liu (US PGPUB No. US 20210014734 A1), hereinafter, Liu.
Regarding claim 1:
Liu teaches:
A method, comprising:
receiving, by a first network function device from a second network function device, an access traffic rule for a multi-access protocol data unit (MA PDU) session of a user equipment (UE), wherein the access traffic rule is an access traffic steering, switching, and splitting (ATSSS) rule and defines information on how to handle a traffic flow associated with the MA PDU session over multiple data paths corresponding to different access networks (Fig. 7, step 1, establishing a multi-access PDU session of UE. Fig. 7, step 3a, shows receiving, by a UPF (first network function device) from a SMF, ATSSS policy (access traffic rule) as explained in paragraph 0061. Paragraph 0049 discloses PCF (second network function) defines the ATSSS rule and delivers to the UPF via SMF as shown in Fig. 4. Fig. 7, step 1, shows a UE establishes a PDU session over 3GPP and non-3GPP access networks. Paragraph 0047 discloses multi-access PDU session);
receiving, by the first network function device from a third network function device, network performance data related to the access traffic rule, wherein the third network function device is a network function device capable of conducting data analytic functionality (paragraph 0061 discloses receiving by the UPF performance measurement from SMF (third network function device) as stated “Step 6. UE performs path performance measurement, e.g. the data loss rate, latency, the radio signal quality and reports the results to the SMF based on the configured report condition. Step 7. SMF update the ATSSS policy based on UE feedback; alternatively, SMF transfer the feedback in step 6 to UPF”. Paragraph 0033 discloses SMF can update ATSSS rule. Therefore, SMF is capable of data analysis); and
performing, by the first network function device, access traffic controlling of the traffic flow over the multiple data paths in accordance with the access traffic rule and the network performance data (as indicated by Fig, 7, step 4, the UPF applies ATSSS rule to steer the traffic. As explained, in paragraph 0061, the UPF can receive either updated ATSSS rule or UE feedback. In case of receiving UE feedback, the UPF applies the same ATSSS rule to steer the traffic).
As to claim 3, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Liu teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as shown above.
Liu further teaches wherein the first network function device is a user plane function (UPF) device, the second network function device is a policy configuration function (PCF) device or a home network device, and (Fig. 7 shows UPF receiving ATSSS rule. Paragraph 0049 discloses PCF defines the ATSSS rule and delivers to the UPF via SMF as shown in Fig. 4).
As to claim 4, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Liu teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as shown above.
Liu further teaches wherein the ATSSS rule comprises ATSSS rule timer information indicating a periodic interval which the ATSSS rule needs to be checked and executed; and the method further comprises: setting, by the first network function device, an ATSSS rule timer in accordance with the ATSSS rule timer information (paragraphs 0068 and 0069 discloses interval of sending performance measurement based on which the ATSSS rule are updated).
As to claim 5, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Liu teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as shown above.
Liu further teaches wherein the ATSSS rule comprises at least one of: access type information indicating an access type of an access network, network type information indicating a network type of a network to which the ATSSS rule will be applied, or network identifier information indicating an identifier of a network associated with the ATSSS rule (paragraph 0050 discloses ATSSS include access network type like whether 3GPP or non-3GPP ).
As to claim 7, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Liu teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as shown above.
Liu further teaches wherein the ATSSS rule comprises at least one of a dual access connectivity time restriction or a dual access connectivity location restriction (paragraph 0051 disclose dual access connectivity restriction based on the user location).
As to claim 8, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Liu teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as shown above.
Liu further teaches wherein the ATSSS rule comprises at least one of: a location-based steer mode in which a traffic controlling decision is made based on a location of the UE or based on a predicted UE location; a time-based steer mode in which different traffic control rules are provided for use based on different time windows; a customized-performance-based steer mode in which a traffic controlling decision is made based on a home operator who owns a subscription of the UE, can define its own performance criteria defined by the home operator; or an ultra reliable low latency communication (URLLC) steer mode for URLLC traffic in which a traffic controlling decision is made based on a performance metric of combining a delay and a reliability (paragraph 0051 discloses the ATSSS rule includes traffic controlling based on user location whether the user is at home or office).
As to claim 9, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Liu teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as shown above.
Liu further teaches the method further comprising: obtaining, by the first network function device, at least one of statistics information or prediction information; and sending, by the first network function device to the UE, the at least one of: the statistics information or the prediction information for UE uplink traffic controlling over the multiple data paths corresponding to the different access networks (paragraph 0063 discloses UPF receives performance data and reports to SMF to sends the feedback to the UE for controlling uplink data over the different access network as stated “Step 5. UE sends the uplink data to the UPF via the selected access path. Step 6. UPF performs path performance measurement, e.g., the data loss rate, latency, the radio signal quality, and reports the results to the SMF based on the configured report condition. Steps 7a, 7b, and 8. SMF updates the ATSSS policy based on UPF feedback; alternatively, SMF transfer the feedback in step 6 to UE. Step 9. UE adjusts the path, e.g., switching the path from one access to another one or start/stop splitting operation for the uplink data based on the updated ATSSS rule; or based on the feedback from UE. Step 10. UE sends the uplink data to the UPF via the adjusted access path.” ).
Regarding claim 10:
Liu teaches:
A method performed by a user equipment (UE), comprising:
establishing, by the UE, a multi-access protocol data unit (MA PDU) session with a first network function device over multiple data paths corresponding to different access networks (Fig. 8, step 1, shows a UE establishes a PDU session with UPF (first network function) over 3GPP and non-3GPP access networks. Paragraph 0047 discloses multi-access PDU session);
receiving, by the UE from a second network function device, an access traffic rule that is an access traffic steering, switching, and splitting (ATSSS) rule and defines information on how to handle a traffic flow for the MA PDU session over the multiple data paths corresponding to the different access networks (Fig. 8, step 3, shows receiving, by the UE from a SMF , ATSSS policy (traffic rule) as explained in paragraph 0063. Paragraph 0049 discloses PCF (second network function device) defines the ATSSS rule and delivers to the UPF via SMF as shown in Fig. 4.);
receiving, by the UE from a third network function device or via the first network function device from the third network function device, performance data related to the access traffic rule, wherein the third network function device is a network function device capable of conducting data analytic functionality (paragraph 0063 discloses receiving, by the UE, performance data as stated “Step 6. UPF performs path performance measurement, e.g., the data loss rate, latency, the radio signal quality, and reports the results to the SMF based on the configured report condition. Steps 7a, 7b, and 8. SMF updates the ATSSS policy based on UPF feedback; alternatively, SMF (third network function) transfer the feedback in step 6 to UE.”. Paragraph 0033 discloses SMF can update ATSSS rule. Therefore, SMF is capable of data analysis); and
transmitting, by the UE, traffic data of the traffic flow over the multiple data paths in accordance with the access traffic rule and the performance data (as indicated by Fig, 8, step 4, the UE applies ATSSS rule to steer the traffic. As explained, in paragraph 0063, the UE can receive either updated ATSSS rule or UPF feedback. In case of receiving UPF feedback, the UE applies the same ATSSS rule to steer the traffic).
Claim 12 recites limitations similar to claim 3. Accordingly, it is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 13 recites limitations similar to claim 4. Accordingly, it is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 14 recites limitations similar to claim 5. Accordingly, it is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 16 recites limitations similar to claim 7. Accordingly, it is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 17 recites limitations similar to claim 8. Accordingly, it is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 18 recites limitations similar to claim 9. Accordingly, it is rejected under similar rationale.
Regarding claim 19:
Claim 19 is directed towards an apparatus performing the method of claim 1. Accordingly, it is rejected under similar rationale.
Regarding claim 20:
Claim 20 is directed towards an apparatus performing the method of claim 10. Accordingly, it is rejected under similar rationale.
As to claim 21, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Liu teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as shown above.
Liu further teaches the performing the access traffic controlling comprising: determining a traffic split ratio over the multiple data paths in accordance with the access traffic rule and the network performance data (as indicated by Fig, 7, step 4, the UPF applies ATSSS rule to steer the traffic. As explained, in paragraph 0061, the UPF can receive either updated ATSSS rule or UE feedback. In case of receiving UE feedback, the UPF applies the same ATSSS rule to steer the traffic).
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, 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.
Claims 6 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view of Wong et al. (US PGPUB No. US 20230308971 A1), hereinafter, Wong.
As to claim 6, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Liu teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as shown above.
Liu does not teach further comprising: sending, by the first network function device to the UE, an ATSSS indication indicating an ATSSS capability supported by at least one of the different access networks.
Wong teaches further comprising: sending, by the first network function device to the UE, an ATSSS indication indicating an ATSSS capability supported by at least one of the different access networks (paragraph 0038 disclose rule include the indication whether ATSSS capability is supported by access network ).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Liu to incorporate the teaching of Wong about ATSSS capability supported by at least one of the different access networks. One would be motivated to do that to implement ATSSS using different access networks (see paragraphs 0001-0004 of Wong).
Claim 15 recites limitations similar to claim 6. Accordingly, it is rejected under similar rationale.
Claims 22 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view of Ly et al. (US PGPUB No. US 20230056442 A1), hereinafter, Ly.
As to claim 22, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Liu teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as shown above.
Liu further does not teach wherein the third network function device comprises at least one of a network data analytic function (NWDAF) device or an artificial intelligence (AI) function device.
Ly teaches wherein the third network function device comprises at least one of a network data analytic function (NWDAF) device or an artificial intelligence (AI) function device (paragraph 0150 discloses UPF receives data analysis from NWDAF for traffic steering as stated “An example of the use of this new steering mode is shown in Table 3 for Multi-Access Rule (MAR) where the Analytics Driven steering mode indicates to the UPF 206 to use analytics from NWDAF 205 to assist in steering traffic over 3GPP or non-3GPP accesses”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Liu to incorporate the teaching of Ly about using NWDAF for data analysis for ATSSS. One would be motivated to do that to use dedicated data analytics to collect data from relevant NFs and to provide a holistic approach for traffic steering (see paragraphs 0149 and 0150 of Ly).
Claim 23 recites limitations similar to claim 22. Accordingly, it is rejected under similar rationale.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KAMAL M HOSSAIN whose telephone number is (571)270-3070. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00-5:00 M-F.
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, John Follansbee can be reached at (571)272-3964. 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.
October 9, 2026
/KAMAL M HOSSAIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2444
