DETAILED ACTION
In response to communications filed 12/10/2025.
Claims 1, 3-11 and 13-20 are pending for examination.
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 .
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 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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 3, 5-11, 13 and 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Karakoc et al. (US 2024/0064510 A1) in view Wu et al. (US 2022/0174063 A1) hereinafter “Karakoc” and “Wu” respectively.
Regarding Claim 1, Karakoc teaches A method of a network entity (Karakoc: paragraph 0115 & Fig. 4, network exposure function (NEF)) in a wireless communication system (Karakoc: paragraphs 0173-0174 & Figs. 4-6, wireless communication network), the method comprising:
receiving, from a server (Karakoc: paragraph 0116 & Figs. 5-6, Application Function (AF)), a user equipment (UE) external identifier (ID) request message (Karakoc: paragraph 0116 & Fig. 6 step 2, Get Request message including indicator to request a UE identifier) including an application function (AF) ID (Karakoc: paragraphs 0111, 0119 & Figs. 4-6, Get Request message including Application Function identifier (AF_ID));
obtaining a UE external ID based on a subscription permanent identifier (SUPI) (Karakoc: paragraphs 0112, 0116 & Fig. 6, determine UE identifier to be sent based on SUPI (UE identifier (UE_ID) is SUPI of the UE)) and the AF ID (Karakoc: paragraphs 0111, 0116 & Figs. 5-6, derive (KAF) including expiration time and UE identifier (UE_ID) from AF_ID included in Get Request message); and
transmitting, to the server (Karakoc: paragraph 0116 & Figs. 5-6, said Application Function (AF)), a response message including the obtained UE external ID (Karakoc: paragraphs 0112, 0117 & Figs. 5-6 step 4, transmit Get Response message to AF including KAF and UE identifier (UE_ID)).
Karakoc fails to explicitly teach obtaining a UE external ID specific to the server and the SUPI being obtained based on the IP address of the UE. However, Wu from an analogous art similarly teaches obtaining a key Kakma for the AMKA service of a terminal device to allocate an AKMA temporary identifier to the terminal device in which the AAuF may generate, based on the Kakma and an identifier of the AKMA application function network element, a communication key for communication between the AKMA application function network element and the terminal device (Wu: paragraphs 0089-0092 & Fig. 2) therefore teaching each obtaining temporary identifier or UE external ID is specific to each AMKA service or server. Wu additionally teaches the AKMA temporary identifier or key Kakma for an AKMA service is obtained based on received SUPI based on the home network identifier or routing indicator of the terminal device (Wu: paragraph 0089-0090 & 0113).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Karakoc to teach obtaining or generating a temporary identifier specific to an AKMA service based on received SUPI/home network identifier information as taught by Wu so as to efficiently configure a temporary UE identifier for services available for a subscriber UE in the mobile communication.
Regarding Claim 3, Karakoc-Wu teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further teaches transmitting, to a binding support function (BSF) entity (Wu: paragraph 0086, policy control function), the IP address of the UE (Wu: paragraph 0089-0090 & 0113, said home network identifier or routing indicator of the terminal device); and
receiving, from the BSF entity, the SUPI corresponding to the IP address of the UE (Wu: paragraph 0089-0090, SUPI of the terminal device). Examiner recites same reasoning to combine Karakoc-Wu as presented in rejected claim 1.
Regarding Claim 5, Karakoc-Wu teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further teaches receiving, from the server, an authentication and key management for applications (AKMA) key request message including an AKMA key identifier (A-KID) and the AF ID for an AKMA authentication procedure (Karakoc: paragraph 0116 & Fig. 6 step 2, Get Request message including A-KID and AF_ID); and
transmitting, to the server, the UE external ID based on the A-KID and the AF ID (Karakoc: paragraphs 0112, 0117 & Figs. 5-6 step 4, transmit Get Response message to AF based on Get Request message including said A-KID and AF_ID). Examiner recites same reasoning to combine Karakoc-Wu to teach a UE external ID specific to the server as presented in rejected claim 1.
Regarding Claim 6, Karakoc-Wu teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further teaches transmitting, to a unified data management (UDM) entity, at least one of the obtained UE external ID, the AF ID, or an application port ID (Karakoc: paragraphs 0106, 0116 & Figs. 4-6. transmitting get request message to UDM/AAnF).
Regarding Claim 7, Karakoc-Wu teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further teaches wherein the UE external ID is a temporary UE external ID (Karakoc: paragraph 0112 & Figs. 5-6, expiration time for KAF and UE_ID, thus teaching the generated information is temporary). Examiner recites same reasoning to combine Karakoc-Wu to teach a UE external ID specific to the server as presented in rejected claim 1.
Regarding Claim 8, Karakoc-Wu teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further teaches obtaining a SUPI of the UE based on the IP address of the UE (Karakoc: paragraphs 0112, 0116 & Figs. 4-6, UE identifier may be SUPI of the UE);
transmitting the SUPI to an AKMA anchor function (AAnF) entity (Karakoc: paragraphs 0111, 0116 & Figs. 4-6, transmit message including SUPI to AAnF);
receiving, from the AAnF entity, an A-KID corresponding to the SUPI (Karakoc: paragraph 0110, Application Establishment Request including the A-KID from UE); and
generating the UE external ID based on at least one of the A-KID or the AF ID (Karakoc: paragraphs 0111, 0116 & Figs. 5-6, EEC ID based on obtained A-KID and KAF). Examiner recites same reasoning to combine Karakoc-Wu to teach a UE external ID specific to the server as presented in rejected claim 1.
Regarding Claim 9, Karakoc-Wu teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further teaches mapping and storing the A-KID corresponding to the SUPI and the IP address included in the UE external ID request message (Karakoc: paragraphs 0098 & 0106, key request includes identifier (A-KID) of a security key (KAKMA) associated with the UE).
Regarding Claim 10, Karakoc-Wu teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further teaches wherein the network entity is a network exposure function (NEF) entity (Karakoc: paragraph 0115 & Fig. 4, network exposure function (NEF)).
Regarding Claim 11, Karakoc teaches A network entity (Karakoc: paragraph 0115 & Fig. 4, network exposure function (NEF)) in a wireless communication system (Karakoc: paragraphs 0173-0174 & Figs. 4-6, wireless communication network), the network entity comprising:
a transceiver (Karakoc: paragraph 0183 & Fig. 13, transceiver circuitry of network node (i.e. NEF)); and
at least one processor (Karakoc: paragraph 0181 & Fig. 13, processing circuitry of NEF) configured to:
receive, from a server (Karakoc: paragraph 0116 & Figs. 5-6, Application Function (AF)), via the transceiver, a user equipment (UE) external identifier (ID) request message (Karakoc: paragraph 0116 & Fig. 6 step 2, Get Request message including indicator to request a UE identifier) including an application function (AF) ID (Karakoc: paragraphs 0111, 0119 & Figs. 4-6, Get Request message including Application Function identifier (AF_ID)),
obtain a UE external ID based on a subscription permanent identifier (SUPI) (Karakoc: paragraphs 0112, 0116 & Fig. 6, determine UE identifier to be sent based on SUPI (UE identifier (UE_ID) is SUPI of the UE)) and the AF identifier (Karakoc: paragraphs 0111, 0116 & Figs. 5-6, derive (KAF) including expiration time and UE identifier (UE_ID) from AF_ID included in Get Request message); and
transmit, to the server via the transceiver (Karakoc: paragraph 0116 & Figs. 5-6, said Application Function (AF)), a response message including the generated UE external ID (Karakoc: paragraphs 0112, 0117 & Figs. 5-6 step 4, transmit Get Response message to AF including KAF and UE identifier (UE_ID)).
Karakoc fails to explicitly teach obtaining a UE external ID specific to the server and the SUPI being obtained based on the IP address of the UE. However, Wu from an analogous art similarly teaches obtaining a key Kakma for the AMKA service of a terminal device to allocate an AKMA temporary identifier to the terminal device in which the AAuF may generate, based on the Kakma and an identifier of the AKMA application function network element, a communication key for communication between the AKMA application function network element and the terminal device (Wu: paragraphs 0089-0092 & Fig. 2) therefore teaching each obtaining temporary identifier or UE external ID is specific to each AMKA service or server. Wu additionally teaches the AKMA temporary identifier or key Kakma for an AKMA service is obtained based on received SUPI based on the home network identifier or routing indicator of the terminal device (Wu: paragraph 0089-0090 & 0113).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Karakoc to teach obtaining or generating a temporary identifier specific to an AKMA service based on received SUPI/home network identifier information as taught by Wu so as to efficiently configure a temporary UE identifier for services available for a subscriber UE in the mobile communication.
Regarding Claim 13, Karakoc-Wu teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further teaches transmitting, to a binding support function (BSF) entity, the IP address of the UE (Wu: paragraph 0086, policy control function), the IP address of the UE (Wu: paragraph 0089-0090 & 0113, said home network identifier or routing indicator of the terminal device); and
receiving, from the BSF entity, the SUPI corresponding to the IP address of the UE (Wu: paragraph 0089-0090, SUPI of the terminal device). Examiner recites same reasoning to combine Karakoc-Wu as presented in rejected claim 11.
Regarding Claim 15, Karakoc-Wu teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further teaches receive, from the server via the transceiver, an authentication and key management for applications (AKMA) key request message including an AKMA key identifier (A-KID) and the AF ID, for an AKMA authentication procedure (Karakoc: paragraph 0116 & Fig. 6 step 2, Get Request message including A-KID and AF_ID); and
transmit, to the server via the transceiver, the UE external ID based on the A-KID and the AF ID (Karakoc: paragraphs 0112, 0117 & Figs. 5-6 step 4, transmit Get Response message to AF based on Get Request message including said A-KID and AF_ID). Examiner recites same reasoning to combine Karakoc-Wu to teach a UE external ID specific to the server as presented in rejected claim 11.
Regarding Claim 16, Karakoc-Wu teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further teaches transmit, to a unified data management (UDM) entity via the transceiver, at least one of the obtained UE external ID, the AF ID, or an application port ID (Karakoc: paragraphs 0106, 0116 & Figs. 4-6. transmitting get request message to UDM/AAnF).
Regarding Claim 17, Karakoc-Wu teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further teaches wherein the UE external ID is a temporary UE external ID (Karakoc: paragraph 0112 & Figs. 5-6, expiration time for KAF and UE_ID, thus teaching the generated information is temporary). Examiner recites same reasoning to combine Karakoc-Wu to teach a UE external ID specific to the server as presented in rejected claim 11.
Regarding Claim 18, Karakoc-Wu teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further teaches transmit, via the transceiver, the SUPI to an AKMA anchor function (AAnF) entity (Karakoc: paragraphs 0111, 0116 & Figs. 4-6, transmit message including SUPI to AAnF);
receive, from the AAnF entity via the transceiver, an A-KID corresponding to the SUPI (Karakoc: paragraph 0110, Application Establishment Request including the A-KID from UE); and
generate the UE external ID based on at least one of the A-KID or the AF ID (Karakoc: paragraphs 0111, 0116 & Figs. 5-6, EEC ID based on obtained A-KID and KAF). Examiner recites same reasoning to combine Karakoc-Wu to teach a UE external ID specific to the server as presented in rejected claim 11.
Regarding Claim 19, Karakoc-Wu teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further teaches map and store the A-KID corresponding to the SUPI and the IP address included in the UE external ID request message (Karakoc: paragraphs 0098 & 0106, key request includes identifier (A-KID) of a security key (KAKMA) associated with the UE).
Regarding Claim 20, Karakoc-Wu teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further teaches wherein the network entity is a network exposure function (NEF) entity (Karakoc: paragraph 0115 & Fig. 4, network exposure function (NEF)).
Claims 4 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Karakoc- Wu in view of Ge et al. (US 2020/0374352 A1) hereinafter “Ge.”
Regarding Claim 4, Karakoc-Wu teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above however fails to explicitly teach the UE external ID request message further includes an application port ID. However Ge in an analogous art teaches an NEF receiving a device trigger request message including UE identifier information and an application port ID used to trigger an addressing function on a terminal (Ge: paragraphs 0274 & 0279). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the UE ID request message of Karakoc-Wu to include an application port ID taught by Ge so as to identify an application receiving a service from an EAS (application server) in the UE.
Regarding Claim 14, Karakoc-Wu teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above however fails to explicitly teach the UE external ID request message further includes an application port ID. However Ge in an analogous art teaches an NEF receiving a device trigger request message including UE identifier information and an application port ID used to trigger an addressing function on a terminal (Ge: paragraphs 0274 & 0279). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the UE ID request message of Karakoc-Wu to include an application port ID taught by Ge so as to identify an application receiving a service from an EAS (application server) in the UE.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to amended claims have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 NAJEEB ANSARI whose telephone number is (571)270-5446. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10am to 2pm.
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, ASAD NAWAZ can be reached at 469-295-9193. 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.
/NAJEEB ANSARI/ Examiner, Art Unit 2463
/ASAD M NAWAZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2463
Prosecution Insights