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 .
Priority
Applicant is reminded that in order for a patent issuing on the instant application to obtain priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d) or (f), 365(a) or (b), or 386(a) or (b), based on priority papers filed in a parent or related Application No. 18/018,937 (to which the present application claims the benefit under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) or is a reissue application of a patent issued on the related application), a claim for such foreign priority must be timely made in this application. To satisfy the requirement of 37 CFR 1.55 for a certified copy of the foreign application, applicant may simply identify the parent nonprovisional application or patent for which reissue is sought containing the certified copy.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The term “and/or” in claim 3 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “and/or” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The claim is considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
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 1, 4, and 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bykampadi et al. (WO 2020254925 A1), hereinafter Bykampadi-1, in view of Zhao (US 20220052989 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Bykampadi-1 discloses “a method for handling a service request in a network, wherein a first network function (NF) node of a service consumer connects to a second NF node of a service producer via a first Service Communication Proxy (SCP) node, the method being performed by the SCP and comprising: receiving a second request that is a subsequent request for the second NF node to provide a first service, the second request comprising access token parameters” ([Page 10, lines 18-22] Intermediate NF routing control plane messages between the two NFs of the consumer and the producer corresponds to the SCP listed both in the Applicant's application and in Bykampadi-1. [Page 11, lines 11-14] Model D, NF consumer selects an NF instance, and may be a specific NF instance, and then sends a request to the SCP containing an address of selected NF Service Provider pointing to an NF service instance or a set of NF service instance. [Page 11, lines 23-27] Fig. 4, Model D communication model 400 shows an NF Service Consumer 402 that provides a service request, discovery, and selection parameters to an SCP, or Service Communication Proxy, 406. The SCP 406 uses the parameters provided to communicate with an NRF 408 to select and route a request from the NF Service Consumer 402 to NF Service Producer 404 instance.),
“obtaining a valid access token using the access token parameters from the second message” ([Page 12, lines 15-18] In Model D, SCP node is the entity that obtains the access tokens after receiving the selection parameters from the NF Service Consumer node described in Fig. 4, and uses the parameters in the access token to select a producer NF node),
“initiating transmission to the second NF node of a sixth request for service provision” ([Page 11, lines 23-27] Fig. 4, Model D communication model 400 shows an NF Service Consumer 402 that provides a service request, discovery, and selection parameters to an SCP, or Service Communication Proxy),
“and receiving a response from the second NF node, and initiating transmission to the first NF node” ([Page 17, lines 29-31] Where the service response from the second NF node goes to the first NF via the SCP to provide the service. [Page 11, lines 27-28] Subsequent requests contain the same properties that the first request contained.).
Bykampadi-1 describes the limitation of “obtaining a valid access token using the access token parameters from the second message”, and while it does not fully teach the limitations of, Zhao recites the aspect of “second request comprising access token request parameters”, and “access token request parameters from the second message” ([0010] Token request may carry an identifier of the service consumer, where the identifier can consist of an NF instance identifier, or NF Instance ID, of the consumer. [0012] NRF generates the token based on a request of the service consumer, and the token includes an NF set identifier or NF service set identifier of service producer, and allows for the token to be generated to be associated with a service producer and consumer. [0190]-[0192] Identifier of the service consumer and the service identifier are the access token request parameters for the first request.);
Bykampadi-1 describes the limitation of “initiating transmission to the second NF node of a sixth request for service provision”, and while it does not fully teach the limitations of, Zhao recites the aspect of “the sixth request including the valid access token” ([0010] Token request carries an identifier of service consumer, and the identifier can be an NF instance identifier, NF instance ID, of the service consumer. [0012] NRF generates token based on a request of the service consumer, and the token includes an NF set identifier or NF service set identifier of the service producer, in which this process allows for the token to be generated to be associated with a service producer and consumer. [0213]-[0214] Fig. 4, step 404, wherein service consumer_A sends a service request to an SCP, wherein the service request corresponds to the sixth request with the access token included in the request, and the access token is newly obtained.).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teachings of Bykampadi-1 and Zhao before them, to include Zhao’s “second request comprising access token request parameters”, and “access token request parameters from the second message” and “the sixth request including the valid access token” in Bykampadi-1’s “obtaining a valid access token using the access token parameters from the second message”, and “initiating transmission to the second NF node of a sixth request for service provision”, respectively. One would have been motivated to make such a combination to increase efficiency by using the identifiers in the token request such that the ‘NRF receives the token request from the service consumer_A, and the NRF performs service authorization on the service consumer_A and generates a token’, as taught by Zhao [0267], as well as increase security, as a "service producer receives a service request sent by a service communication proxy (SCP), where the service request carries a token, and the token includes a NF set identifier of the service producer; the service producer verifies the token; and the service producer sends a response to the service request", as the service producer knows that the consumer is verified both through the token and an authentication step, as taught by Zhao [0049].
Regarding claim 4, Bykampadi-1 in view of Zhao teaches the limitations present in the method of claim 1 above. Bykampadi-1 also discloses “wherein the step of acquiring service producer NF node profiles comprises: initiating transmission, to a Network Repository Function (NRF) node, of a fourth request using the discovery parameters from the first request for service producer NF node profiles, and receiving a first response from the NRF node, or retrieving stored service producer NF node profiles” ([Page 11, lines 29-30] "FIG. 5 illustrates the Model C communication model 500, where a NF Service Consumer 502 sends a discovery request to NRF 508 and receives NF profiles", Fig. 5, Model C communication model 500, where an NF service consumer 502 sends a discovery request to NRF 508 and receives NF profiles, where the discovery parameter in the request to retrieves the NF profiles, while the receiving of the NF profiles corresponds to the first response from the NRF node).
Regarding claim 6, Bykampadi-1 in view of Zhao teaches the limitations present in the method of claim 1 above. Bykampadi-1 also discloses “a first SCP node comprising: processing circuitry, and at least one memory for storing NF profiles, tokens and instructions which, when executed by the processing circuitry, cause the first SCP node to carry out the method of claim 1” ([Page 8, lines 5-7] Second NF node can also represent an SCP node, and in section [Page 8, lines 17-20], the SCP can contain a processor 222 coupled to memory 226 and interface circuitry 220. [Page 2, lines 22-25] First network function of Bykampadi-1 corresponds to the further/producer NF node, while the second NF node of Bykampadi-1 corresponds to the first/consumer NF node.).
Regarding claim 7, Bykampadi-1 in view of Zhao teaches the limitations present in the method of claim 1 above. Bykampadi-1 also discloses “a non-transitory computer program product, embodied on a non-transitory machine- readable medium, comprising instructions that are executable by processing circuitry to cause the processing circuitry to perform the method according to claim 1” ([Page 8, line 17-18] Network element 204, which is an NF consumer, comprises a processor 222 coupled to memory 226, and as disclosed in section [Page 9, lines 7-10], executable code contained in a memory can be executed by a processor to perform the processes of the invention.).
Regarding claim 8, Bykampadi-1 in view of Zhao teaches the limitations present in the method of claim 1 above. Bykampadi-1 also discloses “a system comprising a first NF node and a first SCP node, the first SCP node comprising processing circuitry configured to operate in accordance with claim 1” ([Page 2, lines 22-25] First network function of Bykampadi-1 corresponds to the further/producer NF node of the Applicant, while the second NF node of Bykampadi-1 corresponds to the first/consumer NF node.).
Claims 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bykampadi-1 in view of Zhao as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Fu et al. (US 9979545 B2), hereinafter Fu.
Regarding claim 2, Bykampadi-1 in view of Zhao teaches the limitations present in the method of claim 1 above. Bykampadi-1 also discloses “receiving a first request for provision of a first service by second NF node, the first request comprising discovery parameters and access token parameters” ([Page 11, lines 23-27] Fig. 4, Model D communication model 400 shows an NF Service Consumer 402 that provides a service request, discovery, and selection parameters to an SCP, or Service Communication Proxy, 406. The SCP 406 uses the parameters provided to communicate with an NRF 408 to select and route a request from the NF Service Consumer 402 to NF Service Producer 404 instance.),
“acquiring service producer NF node profiles” ([Page 11, line 29-Page 12, line 1] Fig. 5, Model C communication model 500, where an NF service consumer 502 sends a discovery request to NRF 508 and receives NF profiles, and utilizes NF profiles to generate an NF service request that is provided to SCP 506, where the SCP routes the service request to NF service producer 504.),
“selecting the second NF node using the acquired service producer NF node profiles” ([Page 12, lines 15-18] OAuth Client or NFc, NF consumer, obtains an access token from the NRF once the NFc discovers and selects which target NFp, NF producer, it uses to obtains a desired service. Model D allows for discovery and selection of target NFp, wherein the process is delegated to the SCP node, and the SCP node is the entity that obtains the access tokens after receiving the selection parameters from the NF Service Consumer node described in Fig. 4.),
“initiating transmission to the second NF node of a third request for the second NF node to provide a service” ([Page 11, line 32-Page 12, line 2] In Fig. 5, SCP 506 routes service request to NF service producer 504. In Fig. 4, responses and subsequent requests may then be passed between NF service consumer 402 and NF service producer 404 via an SCP 406. [Page 11, lines 27-28] Subsequent requests are allowed to pass through the consumer and the producer NF nodes, which includes the third request of the Applicant),
“and receiving a response from the second NF node and initiating transmission to the first NF node” ([Page 17, lines 29-31] Service response from the second NF node goes to the first NF via the SCP to provide the service.).
Bykampadi-1 describes the limitation of “initiating transmission to the second NF node of a third request for the second NF node to provide a service”, and while it does not fully teach the limitations of, Zhao recites the aspect of “the third request including the acquired access token” ([0010] Token request carries an identifier of service consumer, and the identifier can be an NF instance identifier, NF instance ID, of the service consumer.);
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teachings of Bykampadi-1, Zhao, and Fu before them, to include Zhao’s “the third request including the acquired access token” in Bykampadi-1’s “initiating transmission to the second NF node of a third request for the second NF node to provide a service”. One would have been motivated to make such a combination to increase security, such that the "service producer receives a service request sent by a service communication proxy (SCP), where the service request carries a token, and the token includes a NF set identifier of the service producer; the service producer verifies the token; and the service producer sends a response to the service request", as the service producer knows that the consumer is verified both through the token and an authentication step, as taught by Zhao [0049].
Bykampadi-1 in view of Zhao does not appear to suggest, but Fu teaches “acquiring an access token using the access token parameters from the first request” ([Col. 7, line 66-Col. 8, line 2] Fig. 2, user token is used to obtain a first service, the agent 134 of service 110, which acts as a node in between the client and service nodes, allows for the authentication service 120 to store the token, and in some embodiments, the user token is retained by service 110 for the lifetime of the token and is used to authenticate further messages that include the token, where the service 110 with an agent 134 corresponds to the SCP in section [Col. 8, lines 6-9]. [Col. 7, lines 60-67] Fig. 2, if credentials succeed, success message 231 is returned. Success message can include a user token, which is used by first user to obtain service from a set of one or more network services for a predetermined time interval, such as four hours. In other embodiments, the user token is stored by the service 110 for its lifetime, as stated in [Col. 8, lines 6-9].).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teachings of Bykampadi-1, Zhao, and Fu before them, to include Fu’s “acquiring an access token using the access token parameters from the first request” in Bykampadi-1’s “method for handling a service request in a network”. One would have been motivated to make such a combination to increase efficiency, in which the agent uses the tokens that it has stored such that "if it is determined, in step 831, that a next service request message is received, then in step 833 it is determined if the token is valid. For example, it is determined that the token is among those stored by the agent and has not expired; and is therefore valid", as taught by Fu [Col. 19, lines 62-66].
Regarding claim 3, Bykampadi-1 in view of Zhao teaches the limitations present in the method of claim 1 above. Bykampadi-1 in view of Zhao does not appear to suggest, but Fu teaches “further comprising, by the first SCP node: storing the service producer NF node profiles, and/or storing the access token” ([Col. 7, line 66-Col. 8, line 2] Fig. 2, user token is used to obtain a first service, the agent 134 of service 110, which acts as a node in between the client and service nodes, allows for the authentication service 120 to store the token, with authentication service corresponding to the SCP. [Col. 7, lines 60-67] Fig. 2, if credentials succeed, success message 231 is returned. Success message can include a user token, and in some embodiments, the user token is retained by service 110 for the lifetime of the token and is used to authenticate further messages that include the token, where the service 110 with an agent 134 corresponds to the SCP in section [Col. 8, lines 6-9].).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teachings of Bykampadi-1, Zhao, and Fu before them, to include Fu’s “acquiring an access token using the access token parameters from the first request” in Bykampadi-1’s “method for handling a service request in a network”. One would have been motivated to make such a combination to increase efficiency, in which the agent uses the tokens that it has stored such that "if it is determined, in step 831, that a next service request message is received, then in step 833 it is determined if the token is valid. For example, it is determined that the token is among those stored by the agent and has not expired; and is therefore valid", as taught by Fu [Col. 19, lines 62-66].
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bykampadi-1 in view of Zhao as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Bykampadi (WO 2021094349 A1), hereinafter Bykampadi-2.
Regarding claim 5, Bykampadi-1 in view of Zhao teaches the limitations present in the method of claim 1 above. Bykampadi-1 in view of Zhao does not appear to suggest, but Bykampadi-2 teaches “wherein the step of acquiring access tokens comprises: initiating transmission to the NRF node of a fifth request for a access token using the access token request parameters from the first request, and receiving a second response from the NRF node comprising an access token, or retrieving a stored access token” ([Page 18, lines 20-22] "Step 604: NFc 508 sends an Access Token Request including an NF type of target NFp and its own NFc instance Id toward NRF 502. The NFc 508 then receives an Access Token Response with an access token from NRF 502", Fig. 6A, step 604 has NFc, or NF consumer node, 508 sends an Access Token Request including an NF type of target NFp, or NF producer, and its own NFc instance Id towards NRF (Network Repository Function) 502. The NFc 508 receives an Access Token Response with an access token from NRF 502, wherein the request including an NF type of target NFp corresponds to the access token request parameters within the request in Bykampadi-1 reference.).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teachings of Bykampadi-1, Zhao, Fu, and Bykampadi-2 before them, to include Bykampadi-2’s “wherein the step of acquiring access tokens comprises: initiating transmission to the NRF node of a fifth request for a access token using the access token request parameters from the first request, and receiving a second response from the NRF node comprising an access token, or retrieving a stored access token” in Bykampadi-1’s “method for handling a service request in a network”. One would have been motivated to make such a combination to increase efficiency by having the “OAuth client (NFc) directly obtains the access token from the NRF, which plays the role of the OAuth Authorization server, once it discovers and selects which target NF producer(s) (NFp) it uses to obtain the desired service” for a faster operation and still manage to authenticate with a node to ensure security, as taught by Bykampadi-3 [Page 13, lines 6-10].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Rajput et al. (US 20220360447 A1, "METHODS, SYSTEMS, AND COMPUTER READABLE MEDIA FOR SINGLE-USE AUTHENTICATION MESSAGES")
Nair et al. (US 20210234706 A1, "NETWORK FUNCTION AUTHENTICATION BASED ON PUBLIC KEY BINDING IN ACCESS TOKEN IN A COMMUNICATION SYSTEM")
Landais et al. (US 12041139 B2, "Apparatus, Method And Computer Readable Medium For Ranking Network Function Service Producers")
Petrenko (NPL, "Finite Capabilities of Cybersecurity Technologies", 2018)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TOMMY MARTINEZ whose telephone number is (703)756-5651. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday 8AM-4PM ET.
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, Jorge L. Ortiz-Criado can be reached at (571) 272-7624. 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.
/T.M./ Examiner, Art Unit 2496
/JORGE L ORTIZ CRIADO/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2496
