Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/792,409

USER EQUIPMENT, NON-PUBLIC NETWORK AUTHENTICATION-AUTHORIZATION-ACCOUNTING SERVER, AUTHENTICATION SERVER FUNCTION ENTITY

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jul 13, 2022
Examiner
ANDERSON, MICHAEL D
Art Unit
2433
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Sony Group Corporation
OA Round
5 (Non-Final)
80%
Grant Probability
Favorable
5-6
OA Rounds
3y 6m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 80% — above average
80%
Career Allow Rate
559 granted / 700 resolved
+21.9% vs TC avg
Strong +16% interview lift
Without
With
+15.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 6m
Avg Prosecution
33 currently pending
Career history
733
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
7.3%
-32.7% vs TC avg
§103
58.5%
+18.5% vs TC avg
§102
21.6%
-18.4% vs TC avg
§112
8.3%
-31.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 700 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 1. Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in37 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1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicants’ submission filed on 1/06/2026 has been entered. 2. Pending claims for reconsideration are claims 1-17, and 25-27. Claims 1-16, and 26 have been amended. Claims 18-24, and 28-32 have been cancelled. Allowable Subject Matter 3. Claims 1-17, and 26-27 are allowed. claims 1-16, and 26 have been amended. Claims 18-24, and 28-32 have been cancelled. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: The closest prior art issued to Patent No.: US 10,505,718 B1 to Suthar et al(hereafter referenced as Suthar) in view of Pub.No.: US 2022/0159460 A1 to Ben Henda et al (hereafter referenced as Ben Henda) fails to teach or suggest “the circuitry of the user equipment is configured to provide an authentication interface between the non-public network authentication-authorization-accounting server and an authentication server function entity in the mobile telecommunications system for authentication of at least another user equipment; the circuitry of the user equipment is configured to receive, via the authentication interface provided by the user equipment between the non-public network authentication-authorization-accounting server and the authentication server function entity, an authentication request from the at least another user equipment via the authentication server function entity; and the circuitry of the user equipment is configured to transmit, via the authentication interface provided by the user equipment between the non-public network authentication-authorization-accounting server and the authentication server function entity, the authentication request received from the at least another user equipment to the non-public network authentication-authorization-accounting server; and wherein the authentication interface that is provided by the user equipment for the authentication of the at least another user equipment is logically located between the non-public network authentication-authorization-accounting server and the authentication server function entity and provides a secure logical and physical channel between the non-public network authentication-authorization-accounting server and the authentication server function entity.” Suthar in view of Ben Henda simply offers a user equipment that provides authentication via a core network node of a core network of a wireless communication system for authenticating a user equipment (UE) to the core network which includes receiving a first authentication request to authenticate the UE to the core network and network function ( NF ) entity in a communication network that determines a user equipment ( UE ) supporting a blockchain authentication procedure which exchanges authentication messages with a blockchain authentication, but does not address explicitly disclose “the circuitry of the user equipment is configured to provide an authentication interface between the non-public network authentication-authorization-accounting server and an authentication server function entity in the mobile telecommunications system for authentication of at least another user equipment; the circuitry of the user equipment is configured to receive, via the authentication interface provided by the user equipment between the non-public network authentication-authorization-accounting server and the authentication server function entity, an authentication request from the at least another user equipment via the authentication server function entity; and the circuitry of the user equipment is configured to transmit, via the authentication interface provided by the user equipment between the non-public network authentication-authorization-accounting server and the authentication server function entity, the authentication request received from the at least another user equipment to the non-public network authentication-authorization-accounting server; and wherein the authentication interface that is provided by the user equipment for the authentication of the at least another user equipment is logically located between the non-public network authentication-authorization-accounting server and the authentication server function entity and provides a secure logical and physical channel between the non-public network authentication-authorization-accounting server and the authentication server function entity” as cited in the amended claims. Response to Arguments 4. With regards to claim 25, applicant's arguments filed 1/06/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. In the remarks, applicant argues in substance: That- claim 25 requires that the circuitry of the non-public network authentication-authorization-accounting server be configured to "obtain a predetermined secret key stored in a secure memory. in advance" and to "generate and encrypt an extended master session key based on the predetermined secret key. Ben Henda does not disclose or suggest obtaining a predetermined secret key to encrypt an EMSK for transfer. Instead, Ben Henda relies on standard 5G AKA credentials (such as the "K" value) to generate a different key, the MSK, for deriving subsequent keys in the hierarchy. Because Ben Henda explicitly teaches away from the transfer of the EMSK and fails to disclose generating and encrypting an EMSK based on a predetermined secret key, the cited art fails to disclose or suggest the features of claim 25 In response to applicants’ argument – It is the combination of Suthar and Ben Henda that teaches the claimed language, neither Suthar nor Ben Henda alone. In its broadest most reasonable interpretation Ben Henda discloses "obtain a predetermined secret key stored in a secure memory. in advance" via an authentication architecture for non-public networks in which long-term subscription credentials and secret key material are provisioned and stored prior to session establishment (see, e.g. Abstract; Fig’s 2-4 in which sections describing storage of authentication credentials in AUSF/AAA functions). During authentication, the server retrieves this pre-provisioned secret material to perform key derivation. This teaches obtaining a predetermined secret key stored in secure memory in advance. Ben Henda further discloses “Generate…an extended master key session key(EMSK) based on the predetermined secret key” by describing an EAP/5G-AKA-based hierarchical key derivation in which master session keys, including EMSK, are derived from the underlying long term secret credentials, because the EMSK is cryptographically derived from the stored long-term secret, Ben Henda teaches generating an EMSK based on predetermined secret key. While Ben Henda focuses on key derivation within the authentication framework, Suthar expressly teaches protecting and securely transmitting derived authentication keys between network entities using encryption or cryptographic wrapping. Accordingly, Ben Henda(as to storage and derivation) in combination with Suthar (as to encrypted key transfer) teaches or renders obvious each claim limitation of claim 25. 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. 5. Claim 25 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Patent No.: US 10,505,718 B1 to Suthar et al(hereafter referenced as Suthar) in view of Pub.No.: US 2022/0159460 A1 to Ben Henda et al (hereafter referenced as Ben Henda) see provisional ap filed 2/27/2019. Regarding claim 25, Suthar discloses “A non-public network authentication-authorization-accounting server” (i.e., mobile communications system [Fig 1] also see Authentication Server Function (AUSF) entity [Fig.2]). Suthar does not explicitly disclose “comprising circuitry wherein the circuitry of the non-public network authentication -authorization -accounting server is configured to obtain a predetermined secret key stored in a secure memory in the non-public network authentication-authorization-accounting server in advance; the non-public network authentication -authorization -accounting server is configured to generate and encrypt an extended master session key based on the predetermined secret key; the non-public network authentication -authorization -accounting server is configured to transfer the generated and encrypted extended master session key to an authentication server function entity via a wired interface” However, Ben Henda in an analogous art discloses “comprising circuitry wherein the circuitry of the non-public network authentication -authorization -accounting server is (AAA server on an non-public network Ben Henda[Fig.7]) configured to obtain a predetermined secret key stored in a secure memory in the non-public network authentication-authorization-accounting server in advance; the non-public network authentication -authorization -accounting server(AAA server on an non-public network Ben Henda[Fig.7]) is configured to generate and encrypt an extended master session key based on the predetermined secret key; the non-public network authentication -authorization -accounting server (AAA server on an non-public network Ben Henda[Fig.7]) is configured to transfer the generated and encrypted extended master session key to an authentication server function entity via a wired interface” (core network node includes a Authentication Server Function , AUSF , node , the master key includes a master session key , MSK , and the first key includes an AUSF security key , KAUSF Ben Henda [par.0019] also see AAA Ben Henda [Fig.7]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Suthar’s registration procedure within a wireless network with Ben Henda’s Non-Public network authentication process. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to combine because Suthar teaches user equipment for mobile system that utilizes a registration process, Ben Henda discloses a non-public network authentication process within a mobile system, and both are from the same field of endeavor. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL D ANDERSON whose telephone number is (571)270-5159. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9am-6pm. 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, Jeffrey Pwu can be reached at (571) 272-6798. 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. /MICHAEL D ANDERSON/ Examiner, Art Unit 2433 /JEFFREY C PWU/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2433
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 13, 2022
Application Filed
Jul 12, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Sep 09, 2024
Interview Requested
Sep 18, 2024
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Sep 18, 2024
Examiner Interview Summary
Oct 16, 2024
Response Filed
Dec 27, 2024
Final Rejection — §103
Jan 21, 2025
Interview Requested
Jan 29, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Jan 29, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Feb 28, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Apr 02, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Apr 09, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
May 15, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jul 07, 2025
Interview Requested
Jul 17, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Jul 17, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Aug 18, 2025
Response Filed
Nov 06, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Jan 06, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 10, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 23, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 04, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603865
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR REMOTE ACCESS LATENCY REDUCTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12581295
TECHNIQUES TO GENERATE WIRELESS LOCAL AREA ACCESS NETWORK FAST TRANSITION KEY MATERIAL BASED ON AUTHENTICATION TO A PRIVATE WIRELESS WIDE AREA ACCESS NETWORK
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12579228
METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR INVESTIGATING RESILIENCY OF A SOFTWARE APPLICATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12568367
ROUTING INDICATOR RETRIVAL FOR AKMA
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12547679
ENFORCING EULA VERSION AWARE APPLICATION RESPONSE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 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
80%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+15.7%)
3y 6m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 700 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