Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/670,343

METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR HANDLING REGISTRATION OF USER EQUIPMENT FOR DISASTER ROAMING SERVICE IN WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Feb 11, 2022
Examiner
YEUNG, MANG HANG
Art Unit
2417
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
OA Round
5 (Non-Final)
87%
Grant Probability
Favorable
5-6
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 87% — above average
87%
Career Allow Rate
643 granted / 739 resolved
+29.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+12.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
23 currently pending
Career history
762
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
9.1%
-30.9% vs TC avg
§103
34.9%
-5.1% vs TC avg
§102
28.9%
-11.1% vs TC avg
§112
18.4%
-21.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 739 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION The instant application having Application No. 18/475861 filed on 02/11/2022 is presented for examination by the examiner. Claims 1, 3, 11, 14, 23-25, 28, 31-33, 36 are pending. Claims 2, 4-10, 12-13, 15-22, 26-27, 29-30, 34-35 were cancelled. 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 . 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. Continued Examination under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 10/20/2025 has been entered. Examiner’s Remark The Notice of Allowance (06/25/2025) is withdrawn. A new group of rejection is entered in view of new prior arts. 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. Claims 1, 3, 23, 24, 28, 11, 14, 31, 32, 36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. (US 2023/0254733 A1) in view of Chen et al. (US 2023/0388957 A1). As per claim 1, Park discloses “A method performed by an access and mobility management function (AMF) entity in a wireless communication system, the method comprising: receiving, from a user equipment (UE), a registration request message associated with a disaster roaming service, wherein the registration request message includes information on a public land mobile network (PLMN);” [(par. 0261), The UE detects that a disaster condition applies to a first PLMN providing services in a specific area. (par. 0262), The UE performs registration with a second PLMN providing services in the specific area. (par. 0282), the method comprises receiving a registration request message from a UE.] “in response to determining that the UE is allowed to register for the disaster roaming service, transmitting, to the UE, a first registration accept message including first information indicating that the UE is allowed to register for the disaster roaming service;” [(par. 0263), The UE receives, via the at least one transceiver, a message from a network in the second PLMN. The message includes (i) information informing that the UE is subject to congestion control in the second PLMN based on application of the disaster condition in the first PLMN, and (ii) timer information related to the congestion control. (par. 0306), The second PLMN may check the PLMN ID included in the GUTI (e.g., 5G-GUTI) and/or SUPI of the UE that sent the 5G MM request. If the corresponding PLMN ID is the same as that of the first PLMN, the second PLMN may know that the corresponding UE is a disaster inbound roamer that accesses/registers to receive disaster roaming service from the second PLMN due to the occurrence of a disaster in the first PLMN. Alternatively, the second PLMN may know that the corresponding UE is a disaster inbound roamer through a separate indicator (e.g., registration type). Accordingly, the second PLMN may determine application of disaster roaming congestion control to the corresponding UE. (par. 0283), the method comprises transmitting a message to the UE. (par. 0284), The message includes (i) information informing that the UE is subject to congestion control in the second PLMN based on application of a disaster condition in a first PLMN, and (ii) timer information related to the congestion control.] “wherein the PLMN is deleted from a forbidden PLMN (FPLMN) list,” [(par. 0234), If a successful registration is achieved on a PLMN in the Forbidden PLMN list, the corresponding PLMN may be deleted from the list. However, if successful registration is achieved on a PLMN in the Forbidden PLMN list while Disaster Condition applies, the PLMN may not be deleted from Forbidden PLMN list.] “and wherein the normal service includes a roaming service except the disaster roaming service” [(par. 0306), Accordingly, the second PLMN may determine application of disaster roaming congestion control to the corresponding UE. If the corresponding PLMN ID is not the ID of the first PLMN but the ID of the second PLMN (i.e., the corresponding UE is a subscriber of the second PLMN) and/or the ID of another PLMN (i.e., normal roaming, not disaster roaming), the second PLMN may determine application of general congestion control and/or suspend application of congestion control to the corresponding UE.] Park does not explicitly disclose “in response to determining that the UE is allowed to register for a normal service, transmitting, to the UE, a second registration accept message including second information indicating that the UE is allowed to register for the normal service,”. However, Chen discloses “in response to determining that the UE is allowed to register for a normal service, transmitting, to the UE, a second registration accept message including second information indicating that the UE is allowed to register for the normal service,” as [(par. 0085), 201: A UE sends a registration request message to an AMF, where the registration request message includes indication information, and the indication information indicates whether a disaster scenario exists. (par. 0089), When the indication information is a second value, the indication information indicates that the disaster scenario does not exist. (par. 0098), the AMF sends a registration response message to the UE based on the indication information and a load status. Correspondingly, the UE receives the registration response message. (par. 0100), For another example, if the indication information indicates that the disaster scenario does not exist, the threshold is a second threshold (which may also be referred to as a non-disaster load threshold or the like).] Park et al. (US 2023/0254733 A1) and Chen et al. (US 2023/0388957 A1) are analogous art because they are the same field of endeavor of network communication. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Chen’s teaching into Park’s teaching. The motivation for making the above modification would be to provide the network with flexibility to determine roaming service for a disaster scenario. (Chen, par. 0085, 0089, 0098) As per claim 3, Park discloses “A method performed by a user equipment (UE) in a wireless communication system, the method comprising: detecting a disaster condition; transmitting, to an access and mobility management function (AMF) entity, a registration request message associated with a disaster roaming service,” as [(par. 0261), The UE detects that a disaster condition applies to a first PLMN providing services in a specific area. (par. 0262), The UE performs registration with a second PLMN providing services in the specific area. (par. 0282), the method comprises receiving a registration request message from a UE.] “wherein the registration request message includes information on a public land mobile network (PLMN) providing a disaster roaming service;” (par. 0249), In step S710, the method comprises performing registration with a second PLMN providing services in the specific area.] “in response to determining that the UE is allowed to register for the disaster roaming service, receiving, from the AMF entity, a first registration accept message including first information indicating that the UE is allowed to register for the disaster roaming service;” [(par. 0263), The UE receives, via the at least one transceiver, a message from a network in the second PLMN. The message includes (i) information informing that the UE is subject to congestion control in the second PLMN based on application of the disaster condition in the first PLMN, and (ii) timer information related to the congestion control. (par. 0306), The second PLMN may check the PLMN ID included in the GUTI (e.g., 5G-GUTI) and/or SUPI of the UE that sent the 5G MM request. If the corresponding PLMN ID is the same as that of the first PLMN, the second PLMN may know that the corresponding UE is a disaster inbound roamer that accesses/registers to receive disaster roaming service from the second PLMN due to the occurrence of a disaster in the first PLMN. Alternatively, the second PLMN may know that the corresponding UE is a disaster inbound roamer through a separate indicator (e.g., registration type). Accordingly, the second PLMN may determine application of disaster roaming congestion control to the corresponding UE. (par. 0283), the method comprises transmitting a message to the UE. (par. 0284), The message includes (i) information informing that the UE is subject to congestion control in the second PLMN based on application of a disaster condition in a first PLMN, and (ii) timer information related to the congestion control.] “and in response to determining that the UE is allowed to register for a normal service, deleting the PLMN from a forbidden PLMN (FPLMN) list, wherein the normal service includes a roaming service except the disaster roaming service” [(par. 0306), Accordingly, the second PLMN may determine application of disaster roaming congestion control to the corresponding UE. If the corresponding PLMN ID is not the ID of the first PLMN but the ID of the second PLMN (i.e., the corresponding UE is a subscriber of the second PLMN) and/or the ID of another PLMN (i.e., normal roaming, not disaster roaming), the second PLMN may determine application of general congestion control and/or suspend application of congestion control to the corresponding UE.] Park does not explicitly disclose “receiving, from the AMF entity, a second registration accept message including second information indicating that the UE is allowed to register for the normal service”. However, Chen discloses “receiving, from the AMF entity, a second registration accept message including second information indicating that the UE is allowed to register for the normal service” as [(par. 0085), 201: A UE sends a registration request message to an AMF, where the registration request message includes indication information, and the indication information indicates whether a disaster scenario exists. (par. 0089), When the indication information is a second value, the indication information indicates that the disaster scenario does not exist. (par. 0098), the AMF sends a registration response message to the UE based on the indication information and a load status. Correspondingly, the UE receives the registration response message. (par. 0100), For another example, if the indication information indicates that the disaster scenario does not exist, the threshold is a second threshold (which may also be referred to as a non-disaster load threshold or the like).] Park et al. (US 2023/0254733 A1) and Chen et al. (US 2023/0388957 A1) are analogous art because they are the same field of endeavor of network communication. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Chen’s teaching into Park’s teaching. The motivation for making the above modification would be to provide the network with flexibility to determine roaming service for a disaster scenario. (Chen, par. 0085, 0089, 0098) As per claim 23, Park in view of Chen discloses “The method of claim 1,” as [see rejection of claim 1.] Park discloses “wherein the first information is included in a 5th generation system (5GS) registration result information element (IE)” as [(par. 0283), the method comprises transmitting a message to the UE. (par. 0284), The message includes (i) information informing that the UE is subject to congestion control in the second PLMN based on application of a disaster condition in a first PLMN, and (ii) timer information related to the congestion control.] Park does not explicitly disclose “wherein the second information is included in a 5th generation system (5GS) registration result information element (IE)”. However, Chen discloses “wherein the second information is included in a 5th generation system (5GS) registration result information element (IE)” as [(par. 0085), 201: A UE sends a registration request message to an AMF, where the registration request message includes indication information, and the indication information indicates whether a disaster scenario exists. (par. 0089), When the indication information is a second value, the indication information indicates that the disaster scenario does not exist. (par. 0098), the AMF sends a registration response message to the UE based on the indication information and a load status. Correspondingly, the UE receives the registration response message. (par. 0100), For another example, if the indication information indicates that the disaster scenario does not exist, the threshold is a second threshold (which may also be referred to as a non-disaster load threshold or the like).] Park et al. (US 2023/0254733 A1) and Chen et al. (US 2023/0388957 A1) are analogous art because they are the same field of endeavor of network communication. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Chen’s teaching into Park’s teaching. The motivation for making the above modification would be to provide the network with flexibility to determine roaming service for a disaster scenario. (Chen, par. 0085, 0089, 0098) As per claim 24, Park in view of Chen discloses “The method of claim 1,” as [see rejection of claim 1.] Park discloses “wherein, in response to determining that the PLMN does not support for the disaster roaming service, a registration reject message is transmitted to the UE, and wherein the registration reject message includes information on a reject cause indicating that the disaster roaming service is not supported” [(par. 0309), The second PLMN may respond with a reject message to the UE's 5G MM request (e.g., registration request, service request, etc.). In this case, the reject message may include information for disaster roaming congestion control.] As per claim 28, Park in view of Chen discloses “The method of claim 3,” as [see rejection of claim 3.] Park discloses “further comprising: identifying whether the FPLMN list is stored at the UE; identifying that one of the FPLMN is offering the disaster roaming service; and selecting the PLMN from the FPLMN list responsive to determining that the FPLMN list is stored at the UE” [(par. 0234), If a successful registration is achieved on a PLMN in the Forbidden PLMN list, the corresponding PLMN may be deleted from the list. However, if successful registration is achieved on a PLMN in the Forbidden PLMN list while Disaster Condition applies, the PLMN may not be deleted.] As per claims 11, 14, 31, 32, 36, as [see rejection of claims 1, 3, 23, 24, 28.] Claims 25, 33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. (US 2023/0254733 A1) in view of Chen et al. (US 2023/0388957 A1) in view of Kim (US 2022/0182854 A1). As per claim 25, Park in view of Chen discloses “The method of claim 1,” as [see rejection of claim 1.] Park in view of Chen does not explicitly disclose “wherein information on a disaster related indication for indicating a PLMN with a disaster condition is broadcast by an available cell of the PLMN which is associated with the AMF entity”. However, Kim discloses “wherein information on a disaster related indication for indicating a PLMN with a disaster condition is broadcast by an available cell of the PLMN which is associated with the AMF entity” as [(par. 0168), Meanwhile, suppose that a failure has occurred in the first PLMN of the first operator. In this case, the second PLMN of the second operator transmits a System Information Block (SIB) message including information on the first PLMN to cope with the failure of the first PLMN of the first operator.] Park et al. (US 2023/0254733 A1) and Kim et al. (US 2022/0182854 A1) are analogous art because they are the same field of endeavor of network communication. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Kim’s teaching into Park’s teaching. The motivation for making the above modification would be to provide services for subscribers of the first operator on behalf of the first operator when a failure occurs in the first PLMN by the first operator. (Kim, par. 0059) As per claim 25, as [see rejection of claim 33.] Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MANG HANG YEUNG whose telephone number is (571)270-7319. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:00 am to 5:00 pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Rebecca Song can be reached on (571) 270-3667. 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. /MANG HANG YEUNG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2463
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 11, 2022
Application Filed
Dec 12, 2022
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 13, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jun 18, 2024
Response Filed
Jun 27, 2024
Final Rejection — §103
Sep 03, 2024
Examiner Interview Summary
Sep 03, 2024
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Oct 02, 2024
Request for Continued Examination
Oct 09, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 05, 2024
Examiner Interview (Telephonic)
Dec 10, 2024
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Dec 10, 2024
Examiner Interview Summary
Dec 12, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Mar 17, 2025
Response Filed
Mar 24, 2025
Examiner Interview (Telephonic)
Apr 04, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Jun 09, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Oct 20, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Oct 26, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 16, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12592806
MEASUREMENT AND REPORTING OF CROSS-LINK INTERFERENCE IMPACT ON DOWNLINK PERFORMANCE FOR FULL-DUPLEX NETWORKS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12556343
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR HARQ-ACK FEEDBACK IN WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12542642
Information Transmission Method and Communication Apparatus
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026
Patent 12542643
COMMUNICATION METHOD AND APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026
Patent 12538273
METHODS FOR COMMUNICATION, TERMINAL DEVICE, NETWORK DEVICE, AND COMPUTER READABLE MEDIA
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
87%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+12.2%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 739 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month