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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDSs) submitted on December 16, 2025 were filed in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. All references were considered except were stricken. U.S. Publication No. 2021/014822 (Gurumoorthy) was considered—although it was misnumbered in the IDSs. The NPL listed in both IDSs was not considered because the MediaTek document was not provided and the Chinese Office Action was not provided with an English translation.
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed March 29, 2026 has been entered. Claims 1, 3-10, and 12-20 are pending in the application. Applicant has submitted amendments to the claims along with other remarks. Claims 1, 3-10, and 12-20 are still rejected by prior art references, refer to the following rejection for details.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments and amendments, see pp. 7-12 of the response, filed March 29, 2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1, 3-10, and 12-20 under § 103 have been fully considered but are not persuasive, please see the rejection for details.
Regarding claim 1, the amendments raise some uncertainty as to the scope of the claims. For example, the claim first recites “a pending downlink signaling message” and then “a downlink signaling message.” The claim then recites, with an antecedent basis article, “the pending downlink signaling message.”
It is not entirely clear how many messages are required by the claim. In the case of two messages, Luetzenkirchen teaches separate paging restriction messages ([0068] the UE optionally includes paging restriction information) that are separate from the pending downlink signaling ([0064] These scenarios include, for example, when: the network has downlink signaling pending over 3GPP access and the UE is in 5GMM-IDLE mode over 3GPP access; the network has downlink signaling pending over non-3GPP access).
Watfa also similarly teaches in [0061] that “the NG-RAN should provide the Voice Service Indication in the RAN Paging message only when there is Paging Cause Indication for Voice Service indication in the UE context and detects the downlink data which triggers the RAN Paging message is related to voice service based on the Paging Policy Indicator, in the header of the received downlink data, as specified in clause 5.4.3.2.”
For these reasons, the rejection is maintained.
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.
The factual inquiries 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.
Claim(s) 1, 4, 6, 8, 10, 13, 15, 17, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Publication No. 2022/0272660 (hereinafter "Luetzenkirchen") in view of U.S. Publication No. 2023/0080113 (hereinafter "Hong_1") and further in view of U.S. Publication No. 2023/0040747 (hereinafter "Watfa") and further in view of U.S. Publication No. 2024/0334392 (hereinafter “Hong_2”).
Regarding claim 1, ---Luetzenkirchen teaches: A method (FIG. 3A-4C), comprising: receiving a request message from a user equipment (UE) (UE 101, UE 102) by a network entity in an evolved packet system (EPS) wireless communication network (FIG. 1A, CN 120 [0030] “In aspects, the CN 120 may be an evolved packet core (EPC) network, a NextGen Packet Core (NPC) network, or some other type of CN (e.g., as illustrated in reference to FIGS. 1B-1C).”), wherein the request message comprises paging restriction information for the UE, ([0062] “ . . . UE requests to the network for connection release, paging restrictions, and reject paging”; [0068] “the UE optionally includes paging restriction information); or xz) the MUSIM-capable UE in 5GMM-IDLE mode when responding to paging requests the network to reject paging due to activity on another USIM (the UE optionally includes paging restriction information)”) wherein the restriction information indicates at least one of all services being restricted, and one or more services with paging restriction exception ([0126]); transmitting an accept message to the UE (FIGs. 3A, 4A, [0070-0133]), determining, for a pending downlink signaling message whether a downlink signaling message is subject to paging restriction based on the paging restriction information ([0064],[0067]) by determining whether the pending downlink signaling message is associated with a service of the one or more services with paging restriction exception indicated by the paging restriction information ([0064], [0068]); and sending the downlink signaling message to the UE when a paging restriction exception applies to the downlink signaling message (e.g., [0126] “0 0 1 0 All paging is restricted, except paging for voice service (IMS voice) 0 0 1 1 All paging is restricted, except for certain PDU Session(s) 0 1 0 0 All paging is restricted, except paging for voice service (IMS voice) and certain PDU session(s)”).
Luetzenkirchen does teach the transmission of an accept message as discussed above. Luetzenkirchen does not explicitly show the details of “wherein the accept message indicates that the network accepts the paging restriction information”.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Hong_1 teaches: transmitting an accept message to the UE, wherein the accept message indicates that the network accepts the paging restriction information ([0147] . . . the assistance information may include information for limiting or allowing the transmission, by the base station or the core network control plane entity, of the paging message to the UE for a predetermined time preset. [0148] According to an embodiment, the information for limiting or allowing paging message transmission may include at least one piece of i) information for instructing that only voice data be paged, ii) information for instructing paging restriction, . . . [0178] . . . As still another example, the UE may request allocation of a new UE identifier (e.g., 5G-S-TMSI or 5G-GUTI) from the base station through any uplink RRC message (e.g., UE assistance information message). [0179] Further, the AMF may include the newly allocated UE identifier in a REGISTRATION ACCEPT message and transmit it.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Luetzenkirchen to include the feature of Hong_1 and a combination of Luetzenkirchen with Hong_1 renders the claim prima facie obvious within the described scope of the prior art and any indicated differences within the level of one of ordinary skill in the art (e.g., telecommunications engineer) according to a combination of known prior art elements with known methods to yield predictable results. MPEP 2143(I)(A) (e.g., transmitting a message indicative of acceptance of the paging restriction information).
Indeed, the combination of Luetzenkirchen and Hong_1 could be prompted by design incentives or market forces movements between 4G/LTE networks and 5G networks (see Luetzenkirchen [0003] and [0016]) which would have prompted adaptation of the known device, method, or product (4G/LTE networks). As shown above, the combination of Luetzenkirchen and Hong_1 are known variations or principles known in the prior art and in view of the identified design incentives or other market forces a person of skill in the art could have implemented the claimed variation of the prior art, and the claimed variation would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art.
The combination of Luetzenkirchen and Hong_1 teaches sending downlink signaling to the UE with paging restriction exceptions (e.g., [0126] “0 0 1 0 All paging is restricted, except paging for voice service (IMS voice) 0 0 1 1 All paging is restricted, except for certain PDU Session(s) 0 1 0 0 All paging is restricted, except paging for voice service (IMS voice) and certain PDU session(s)”), the combination fails to explicitly teach the details of “sending the downlink signaling message to the UE when a paging restriction exception applies to the downlink signaling message.”
However, in the same field of endeavor, Watfa teaches: sending the downlink signaling message to the UE when a paging restriction exception applies to the downlink signaling message ([0061] 5.38.3 Paging Cause Indication for Voice Service . . . For a UE in RRC-Inactive, the NG-RAN should provide the Voice Service Indication in the RAN Paging message only when there is Paging Cause Indication for Voice Service indication in the UE context and detects the downlink data which triggers the RAN Paging message is related to voice service based on the Paging Policy Indicator, in the header of the received downlink data, as specified in clause 5.4.3.2.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Luetzenkirchen to include the feature of Watfa and a combination of Luetzenkirchen and Hong_1 with Watfa renders the claim prima facie obvious within the described scope of the prior art and any indicated differences within the level of one of ordinary skill in the art (e.g., telecommunications engineer) according to a combination of known prior art elements with known methods to yield predictable results. MPEP 2143(I)(A) (e.g., sending the downlink signaling when the exception applies to the paging restriction).
Indeed, the combination of Luetzenkirchen, Hong_1, and Watfa could be prompted by design incentives or market forces movements between 4G/LTE networks and 5G networks (see Luetzenkirchen [0003] and [0016]) which would have prompted adaptation of the known device, method, or product (4G/LTE networks). As shown above, the combination of Luetzenkirchen and Watfa are known variations or principles known in the prior art and in view of the identified design incentives or other market forces a person of skill in the art could have implemented the claimed variation of the prior art, and the claimed variation would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art.
The combination of Luetzenkirchen and Hong_1 teaches that the request message is related to registration of the UE on the network ([0178] . . . As still another example, the UE may request allocation of a new UE identifier (e.g., 5G-S-TMSI or 5G-GUTI) from the base station through any uplink RRC message (e.g., UE assistance information message). [0179] Further, the AMF may include the newly allocated UE identifier in a REGISTRATION ACCEPT message and transmit it.). The combination fails to explicitly teach wherein the request message is a TRACKING AREA UPDATE REQUEST message, an EXTENDED SERVICE REQUEST message, or a CONTROL PLANE SERVICE REQUEST message.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Hong_2 teaches: wherein the request message is a TRACKING AREA UPDATE REQUEST message, an EXTENDED SERVICE REQUEST message, or a CONTROL PLANE SERVICE REQUEST message ([0052] In one embodiment, the network-side device includes a 4G core network, such as a core network in an evolved UMTS terrestrial radio access network (E-UTRAN) system, where network elements of the core network are mobility management entity (MME), the paging restriction information being carried in at least one of: [0053] service request (Service Request) message, extended service request (Extended Service Request) message, tracking area update request (Tracking Area Update Request) signaling, attach request (Attach Request) signaling. [0149] In one embodiment, the network-side device includes a 4G core network, and the paging restriction information is carried in at least one of: [0150] a service request message, an extended service request message, a tracking area update request signaling, or an attach request signaling.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Luetzenkirchen to include the feature of Hong_2 and a combination of Luetzenkirchen, Hong_1, and Watfa with Hong_2 renders the claim prima facie obvious within the described scope of the prior art and any indicated differences within the level of one of ordinary skill in the art (e.g., telecommunications engineer) according to a combination of known prior art elements with known methods to yield predictable results. MPEP 2143(I)(A) (e.g., sending the downlink signaling when the exception applies to the paging restriction).
Regarding claim 4, Luetzenkirchen teaches: wherein the paging restriction information indicates that all paging is restricted except for voice service ([0126] “0 0 1 0 All paging is restricted, except paging for voice service (IMS voice)”).
Regarding claim 6, Luetzenkirchen teaches: wherein the paging restriction information indicates that all paging is restricted except for specified PDN connections ([0126] “0 0 1 1 All paging is restricted, except for certain PDU Session(s)”).
Regarding claim 8, Luetzenkirchen teaches: wherein the paging restriction information indicates that all paging is restricted except for voice service and except for specified PDU sessions ([0126] “0 1 0 0 All paging is restricted, except paging for voice service (IMS voice) and certain PDU session(s)”).
Regarding claim 10, --- Luetzenkirchen teaches: A network entity (FIG. 1A, CN (EPC) 120), comprising: a receiver (220 Network Interface Device) that receives a request message from a user equipment (UE) (UE 101, UE 102) in an evolved packet system (EPS) wireless communication network (FIG. 1A, CN 120 [0030] “In aspects, the CN 120 may be an evolved packet core (EPC) network, a NextGen Packet Core (NPC) network, or some other type of CN (e.g., as illustrated in reference to FIGS. 1B-1C).”), wherein the request message comprises paging restriction information for the UE ([0062] “ . . . UE requests to the network for connection release, paging restrictions, and reject paging”; [0068] “the UE optionally includes paging restriction information); or xz) the MUSIM-capable UE in 5GMM-IDLE mode when responding to paging requests the network to reject paging due to activity on another USIM (the UE optionally includes paging restriction information)”) wherein the restriction information indicates at least one of all services being restricted, and one or more services with paging restriction exception ([0126]); a transmitter that transmits an accept message to the UE (FIGs. 3A, 4A, [0070-0133]); and a paging handling circuit that determines, for a pending downlink signaling message whether a downlink signaling message is subject to paging restriction based on the paging restriction information ([0064],[0067]) by determining whether the pending downlink signaling message is associated with a service of the one or more services with paging restriction exception indicated by the paging restriction information ([0064], [0068]), wherein the network entity sends the downlink signaling message to the UE when a paging restriction exception applies to the downlink signaling message (e.g., [0126] “0 0 1 0 All paging is restricted, except paging for voice service (IMS voice) 0 0 1 1 All paging is restricted, except for certain PDU Session(s) 0 1 0 0 All paging is restricted, except paging for voice service (IMS voice) and certain PDU session(s)”).
Luetzenkirchen does teach the transmission of an accept message as discussed above by a transmitter (220 Network Interface Device), Luetzenkirchen does not explicitly show the details of “wherein the accept message indicates that the network accepts the paging restriction information”.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Hong_1 teaches: a transmitter that transmits an accept message to the UE, wherein the accept message indicates that the network accepts the paging restriction information ([0147] . . . the assistance information may include information for limiting or allowing the transmission, by the base station or the core network control plane entity, of the paging message to the UE for a predetermined time preset. [0148] According to an embodiment, the information for limiting or allowing paging message transmission may include at least one piece of i) information for instructing that only voice data be paged, ii) information for instructing paging restriction, . . . [0178] . . . As still another example, the UE may request allocation of a new UE identifier (e.g., 5G-S-TMSI or 5G-GUTI) from the base station through any uplink RRC message (e.g., UE assistance information message). [0179] Further, the AMF may include the newly allocated UE identifier in a REGISTRATION ACCEPT message and transmit it.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Luetzenkirchen to include the feature of Hong_1 and a combination of Luetzenkirchen with Hong_1 renders the claim prima facie obvious within the described scope of the prior art and any indicated differences within the level of one of ordinary skill in the art (e.g., telecommunications engineer) according to a combination of known prior art elements with known methods to yield predictable results. MPEP 2143(I)(A) (e.g., transmitting a message indicative of acceptance of the paging restriction information).
Indeed, the combination of Luetzenkirchen and Hong_1 could be prompted by design incentives or market forces movements between 4G/LTE networks and 5G networks (see Luetzenkirchen [0003] and [0016]) which would have prompted adaptation of the known device, method, or product (4G/LTE networks). As shown above, the combination of Luetzenkirchen and Hong_1 are known variations or principles known in the prior art and in view of the identified design incentives or other market forces a person of skill in the art could have implemented the claimed variation of the prior art, and the claimed variation would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art.
The combination of Luetzenkirchen and Hong_1 teaches sending downlink signaling to the UE with paging restriction exceptions (e.g., [0126] “0 0 1 0 All paging is restricted, except paging for voice service (IMS voice) 0 0 1 1 All paging is restricted, except for certain PDU Session(s) 0 1 0 0 All paging is restricted, except paging for voice service (IMS voice) and certain PDU session(s)”), the combination fails to explicitly teach the details of “sending the downlink signaling message to the UE when a paging restriction exception applies to the downlink signaling message.”
However, in the same field of endeavor, Watfa teaches: wherein the network entity sends the downlink signaling message to the UE when a paging restriction exception applies to the downlink signaling message ([0061] 5.38.3 Paging Cause Indication for Voice Service . . . For a UE in RRC-Inactive, the NG-RAN should provide the Voice Service Indication in the RAN Paging message only when there is Paging Cause Indication for Voice Service indication in the UE context and detects the downlink data which triggers the RAN Paging message is related to voice service based on the Paging Policy Indicator, in the header of the received downlink data, as specified in clause 5.4.3.2.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Luetzenkirchen to include the feature of Watfa and a combination of Luetzenkirchen and Hong_1 with Watfa renders the claim prima facie obvious within the described scope of the prior art and any indicated differences within the level of one of ordinary skill in the art (e.g., telecommunications engineer) according to a combination of known prior art elements with known methods to yield predictable results. MPEP 2143(I)(A) (e.g., sending the downlink signaling when the exception applies to the paging restriction).
Indeed, the combination of Luetzenkirchen, Hong_1, and Watfa could be prompted by design incentives or market forces movements between 4G/LTE networks and 5G networks (see Luetzenkirchen [0003] and [0016]) which would have prompted adaptation of the known device, method, or product (4G/LTE networks). As shown above, the combination of Luetzenkirchen and Watfa are known variations or principles known in the prior art and in view of the identified design incentives or other market forces a person of skill in the art could have implemented the claimed variation of the prior art, and the claimed variation would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art.
The combination of Luetzenkirchen and Hong_1 teaches that the request message is related to registration of the UE on the network ([0178] . . . As still another example, the UE may request allocation of a new UE identifier (e.g., 5G-S-TMSI or 5G-GUTI) from the base station through any uplink RRC message (e.g., UE assistance information message). [0179] Further, the AMF may include the newly allocated UE identifier in a REGISTRATION ACCEPT message and transmit it.). The combination fails to explicitly teach wherein the request message is a TRACKING AREA UPDATE REQUEST message, an EXTENDED SERVICE REQUEST message, or a CONTROL PLANE SERVICE REQUEST message.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Hong_2 teaches: wherein the request message is a TRACKING AREA UPDATE REQUEST message, an EXTENDED SERVICE REQUEST message, or a CONTROL PLANE SERVICE REQUEST message ([0052] In one embodiment, the network-side device includes a 4G core network, such as a core network in an evolved UMTS terrestrial radio access network (E-UTRAN) system, where network elements of the core network are mobility management entity (MME), the paging restriction information being carried in at least one of: [0053] service request (Service Request) message, extended service request (Extended Service Request) message, tracking area update request (Tracking Area Update Request) signaling, attach request (Attach Request) signaling. [0149] In one embodiment, the network-side device includes a 4G core network, and the paging restriction information is carried in at least one of: [0150] a service request message, an extended service request message, a tracking area update request signaling, or an attach request signaling.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Luetzenkirchen to include the feature of Hong_2 and a combination of Luetzenkirchen, Hong_1, and Watfa with Hong_2 renders the claim prima facie obvious within the described scope of the prior art and any indicated differences within the level of one of ordinary skill in the art (e.g., telecommunications engineer) according to a combination of known prior art elements with known methods to yield predictable results. MPEP 2143(I)(A) (e.g., sending the downlink signaling when the exception applies to the paging restriction).
Regarding claim 13, Luetzenkirchen teaches: wherein the paging restriction information indicates that all paging is restricted except for voice service ([0126] “0 0 1 0 All paging is restricted, except paging for voice service (IMS voice)”).
Regarding claim 15, Luetzenkirchen teaches: wherein the paging restriction information indicates that all paging is restricted except for specified PDN connections ([0126] “0 0 1 1 All paging is restricted, except for certain PDU Session(s)”).
Regarding claim 17, Luetzenkirchen teaches: wherein the paging restriction information indicates that all paging is restricted except for voice service and except for specified PDU sessions ([0126] “0 1 0 0 All paging is restricted, except paging for voice service (IMS voice) and certain PDU session(s)”).
Regarding claim 19, --- Luetzenkirchen teaches: A method, comprising: transmitting a request message from a user equipment (UE) (UE 101, UE 102) to a network entity in an evolved packet system (EPS) wireless communication network (FIG. 1A, CN 120 [0030] “In aspects, the CN 120 may be an evolved packet core (EPC) network, a NextGen Packet Core (NPC) network, or some other type of CN (e.g., as illustrated in reference to FIGS. 1B-1C).”), wherein the UE supports multiple universal subscriber identity module (MUSIM) (Abstract), and wherein the request message comprises paging restriction information for the UE ([0062] “ . . . UE requests to the network for connection release, paging restrictions, and reject paging”; [0068] “the UE optionally includes paging restriction information); or xz) the MUSIM-capable UE in 5GMM-IDLE mode when responding to paging requests the network to reject paging due to activity on another USIM (the UE optionally includes paging restriction information)”) wherein the restriction information indicates at least one of all services being restricted, and one or more services with paging restriction exception ([0126]); receiving an accept message by the UE (FIGs. 3A, 4A, [0070-0133]), and receiving a downlink signaling message when a paging restriction exception applies to the downlink signaling message determined based on the paging restriction information (e.g., [0126] “0 0 1 0 All paging is restricted, except paging for voice service (IMS voice) 0 0 1 1 All paging is restricted, except for certain PDU Session(s) 0 1 0 0 All paging is restricted, except paging for voice service (IMS voice) and certain PDU session(s)”), and wherein the received downlink signaling message is associated with a service of the one or more services with paging restriction exception indicated by the paging restriction information ([0064], [0068]).
Luetzenkirchen does teach the transmission of an accept message as discussed above, Luetzenkirchen does not explicitly show the details of “wherein the accept message indicates that the network accepts the paging restriction information”.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Hong_1 teaches: receiving an accept message by the UE, wherein the accept message indicates that the network accepts and stores the paging restriction information ([0147] . . . the assistance information may include information for limiting or allowing the transmission, by the base station or the core network control plane entity, of the paging message to the UE for a predetermined time preset. [0148] According to an embodiment, the information for limiting or allowing paging message transmission may include at least one piece of i) information for instructing that only voice data be paged, ii) information for instructing paging restriction, . . . [0178] . . . As still another example, the UE may request allocation of a new UE identifier (e.g., 5G-S-TMSI or 5G-GUTI) from the base station through any uplink RRC message (e.g., UE assistance information message). [0179] Further, the AMF may include the newly allocated UE identifier in a REGISTRATION ACCEPT message and transmit it.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Luetzenkirchen to include the feature of Hong_1 and a combination of Luetzenkirchen with Hong_1 renders the claim prima facie obvious within the described scope of the prior art and any indicated differences within the level of one of ordinary skill in the art (e.g., telecommunications engineer) according to a combination of known prior art elements with known methods to yield predictable results. MPEP 2143(I)(A) (e.g., transmitting a message indicative of acceptance of the paging restriction information).
Indeed, the combination of Luetzenkirchen and Hong_1 could be prompted by design incentives or market forces movements between 4G/LTE networks and 5G networks (see Luetzenkirchen [0003] and [0016]) which would have prompted adaptation of the known device, method, or product (4G/LTE networks). As shown above, the combination of Luetzenkirchen and Hong_1 are known variations or principles known in the prior art and in view of the identified design incentives or other market forces a person of skill in the art could have implemented the claimed variation of the prior art, and the claimed variation would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art.
The combination of Luetzenkirchen and Hong_1 teaches sending downlink signaling to the UE with paging restriction exceptions (e.g., [0126] “0 0 1 0 All paging is restricted, except paging for voice service (IMS voice) 0 0 1 1 All paging is restricted, except for certain PDU Session(s) 0 1 0 0 All paging is restricted, except paging for voice service (IMS voice) and certain PDU session(s)”), the combination fails to explicitly teach the details of “sending the downlink signaling message to the UE when a paging restriction exception applies to the downlink signaling message.”
However, in the same field of endeavor, Watfa teaches: receiving a downlink signaling message when a paging restriction exception applies to the downlink signaling message determined based on the paging restriction information ([0061] 5.38.3 Paging Cause Indication for Voice Service . . . For a UE in RRC-Inactive, the NG-RAN should provide the Voice Service Indication in the RAN Paging message only when there is Paging Cause Indication for Voice Service indication in the UE context and detects the downlink data which triggers the RAN Paging message is related to voice service based on the Paging Policy Indicator, in the header of the received downlink data, as specified in clause 5.4.3.2.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Luetzenkirchen to include the feature of Watfa and a combination of Luetzenkirchen and Hong_1 with Watfa renders the claim prima facie obvious within the described scope of the prior art and any indicated differences within the level of one of ordinary skill in the art (e.g., telecommunications engineer) according to a combination of known prior art elements with known methods to yield predictable results. MPEP 2143(I)(A) (e.g., sending the downlink signaling when the exception applies to the paging restriction).
Indeed, the combination of Luetzenkirchen, Hong_1, and Watfa could be prompted by design incentives or market forces movements between 4G/LTE networks and 5G networks (see Luetzenkirchen [0003] and [0016]) which would have prompted adaptation of the known device, method, or product (4G/LTE networks). As shown above, the combination of Luetzenkirchen and Watfa are known variations or principles known in the prior art and in view of the identified design incentives or other market forces a person of skill in the art could have implemented the claimed variation of the prior art, and the claimed variation would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art.
The combination of Luetzenkirchen and Hong_1 teaches that the request message is related to registration of the UE on the network ([0178] . . . As still another example, the UE may request allocation of a new UE identifier (e.g., 5G-S-TMSI or 5G-GUTI) from the base station through any uplink RRC message (e.g., UE assistance information message). [0179] Further, the AMF may include the newly allocated UE identifier in a REGISTRATION ACCEPT message and transmit it.). The combination fails to explicitly teach wherein the request message is a TRACKING AREA UPDATE REQUEST message, an EXTENDED SERVICE REQUEST message, or a CONTROL PLANE SERVICE REQUEST message.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Hong_2 teaches: wherein the request message is a TRACKING AREA UPDATE REQUEST message, an EXTENDED SERVICE REQUEST message, or a CONTROL PLANE SERVICE REQUEST message ([0052] In one embodiment, the network-side device includes a 4G core network, such as a core network in an evolved UMTS terrestrial radio access network (E-UTRAN) system, where network elements of the core network are mobility management entity (MME), the paging restriction information being carried in at least one of: [0053] service request (Service Request) message, extended service request (Extended Service Request) message, tracking area update request (Tracking Area Update Request) signaling, attach request (Attach Request) signaling. [0149] In one embodiment, the network-side device includes a 4G core network, and the paging restriction information is carried in at least one of: [0150] a service request message, an extended service request message, a tracking area update request signaling, or an attach request signaling.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Luetzenkirchen to include the feature of Hong_2 and a combination of Luetzenkirchen, Hong_1, and Watfa with Hong_2 renders the claim prima facie obvious within the described scope of the prior art and any indicated differences within the level of one of ordinary skill in the art (e.g., telecommunications engineer) according to a combination of known prior art elements with known methods to yield predictable results. MPEP 2143(I)(A) (e.g., sending the downlink signaling when the exception applies to the paging restriction).
Regarding claim 20, Luetzenkirchen teaches: wherein the paging restriction information is provided by the UE to restrict paging on a first USIM (Abstract, “the MUSIM UE transmits a service request message . . . contain[ing] a paging restriction that restrict paging to: all paging, all paging except for paging for voice service, all paging except for packet data unit (PDU) session(s), and all paging except for voice service and PDU session(s).”).
Claims 3 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Luetzenkirchen in view of Hong_1, Watfa, and Hong_2 and further in view of U.S. Publication No. 2017/0048747 (hereinafter “Tiwari”).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Luetzenkirchen, Hong_1, Watfa, and Hong_2 teaches that the accept message is related to registration of the UE on the network ([0178] . . . As still another example, the UE may request allocation of a new UE identifier (e.g., 5G-S-TMSI or 5G-GUTI) from the base station through any uplink RRC message (e.g., UE assistance information message). [0179] Further, the AMF may include the newly allocated UE identifier in a REGISTRATION ACCEPT message and transmit it.). The combination fails to explicitly teach wherein the accept message is a TAU ACCEPT message, or a SERVICE ACCEPT message with a Paging restriction decision set to "paging restriction is accepted".
However, in the same field of endeavor, Tiwari teaches: wherein the accept message is a TAU ACCEPT message, or a SERVICE ACCEPT message with a Paging restriction decision set to "paging restriction is accepted" ([0037] “The UE may transmit a tracking area update request message to the registered PLMN, may receive a tracking area update accept message in response to the tracking area update request message from the registered PLMN, and may transmit the tracking area update complete message to the registered PLMN.” See also [0054]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Luetzenkirchen, Hong_1, Watfa, and Hong_2 to include the feature of Tiwari and a combination of the combination of Luetzenkirchen, Hong_1, Watfa, and Hong_2 with Tiwari renders the claim prima facie obvious within the described scope of the prior art and any indicated differences within the level of one of ordinary skill in the art (e.g., telecommunications engineer) according to a combination of known prior art elements with known methods to yield predictable results. MPEP 2143(I)(A) (e.g., sending the downlink signaling when the exception applies to the paging restriction).
Indeed, the combination of the combination of Luetzenkirchen, Hong_1, Watfa, and Hong_2, and Tiwari could be prompted by design incentives or market forces movements between 4G/LTE networks and 5G networks (see Luetzenkirchen [0003] and [0016]) which would have prompted adaptation of the known device, method, or product (4G/LTE networks). As shown above, the combination of Luetzenkirchen and Tiwari are known variations or principles known in the prior art and in view of the identified design incentives or other market forces a person of skill in the art could have implemented the claimed variation of the prior art, and the claimed variation would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Luetzenkirchen, Hong_1, Watfa, and Hong_2 teaches that the accept message is related to registration of the UE on the network ([0178] . . . As still another example, the UE may request allocation of a new UE identifier (e.g., 5G-S-TMSI or 5G-GUTI) from the base station through any uplink RRC message (e.g., UE assistance information message). [0179] Further, the AMF may include the newly allocated UE identifier in a REGISTRATION ACCEPT message and transmit it.). The combination fails to explicitly teach wherein the accept message is a TAU ACCEPT message, or a SERVICE ACCEPT message with a Paging restriction decision set to "paging restriction is accepted".
However, in the same field of endeavor, Tiwari teaches: wherein the accept message is a TAU ACCEPT message, or a SERVICE ACCEPT message with a Paging restriction decision set to "paging restriction is accepted" ([0037] “The UE may transmit a tracking area update request message to the registered PLMN, may receive a tracking area update accept message in response to the tracking area update request message from the registered PLMN, and may transmit the tracking area update complete message to the registered PLMN.” See also [0054]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Luetzenkirchen, Hong_1, Watfa, and Hong_2 to include the feature of Tiwari and a combination of the combination of Luetzenkirchen, Hong_1, Watfa, and Hong_2 with Tiwari renders the claim prima facie obvious within the described scope of the prior art and any indicated differences within the level of one of ordinary skill in the art (e.g., telecommunications engineer) according to a combination of known prior art elements with known methods to yield predictable results. MPEP 2143(I)(A) (e.g., sending the downlink signaling when the exception applies to the paging restriction).
Indeed, the combination of the combination of Luetzenkirchen, Hong_1, Watfa, and Hong_2, and Tiwari could be prompted by design incentives or market forces movements between 4G/LTE networks and 5G networks (see Luetzenkirchen [0003] and [0016]) which would have prompted adaptation of the known device, method, or product (4G/LTE networks). As shown above, the combination of Luetzenkirchen and Tiwari are known variations or principles known in the prior art and in view of the identified design incentives or other market forces a person of skill in the art could have implemented the claimed variation of the prior art, and the claimed variation would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Claims 5, 7, 9, and 14, 16, 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Luetzenkirchen in view of Hong_1, Watfa, and Hong_2 and further in view of U.S. Publication No. 2014/0106742 (hereinafter “Landais”).
Regarding claim 5, although inherent, the combination of Luetzenkirchen, Hong_1, Watfa, and Hong_2 fails to explicitly teach: wherein the network initiates a paging procedure for EPS services using S-TMSI with CN domain indicator set to PS for the UE when the DL signaling message is an EMM signaling message or an ESM signaling message of a PDN connection for voice service.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Landais teaches: wherein the network initiates a paging procedure for EPS services using S-TMSI with CN domain indicator set to PS for the UE when the DL signaling message is an EMM signaling message or an ESM signaling message of a PDN connection for voice service ([0048], [0049] “(and CN domain indicator set to “PS”) to force UEs (in idle mode) to re-attach to EPC. This would lead the UE to re-attach to any MME in the pool (not necessarily the same MME), which would lead to restore an SGs association between likely (but not necessarily either) the same MSC and the new MME. From that point in time, subsequent SMS will succeed. The on-going SMS transfer will fail (paging timer will expire in the original MSC), but the existing SMS procedures (SMS alert) allows to resume the SMS transfer after the new combined attach procedure.”, See also ETSI TS 24.301 pp. 184-185 “This procedure is used when: - the network has downlink signalling pending;” “The UE shall invoke the service request procedure when: a) the UE in EMM-IDLE mode receives a paging request using S-TMSI with CN domain indicator set to "PS" from the network;).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Luetzenkirchen to include the paging features of Landais and a combination of Luetzenkirchen, Hong_1, and Watfa with Landais renders the claim prima facie obvious within the described scope of the prior art and any indicated differences within the level of one of ordinary skill in the art (e.g., telecommunications engineer) according to a combination of known prior art elements with known methods to yield predictable results. MPEP 2143(I)(A) (e.g., provide paging using the S-TMSI with the CN domain indicator set to PS).
Indeed, the combination of Luetzenkirchen, Hong_1, Watfa, Hong_2, and Landais could be prompted by design incentives or market forces movements to improve cellular networks (see Luetzenkirchen [0003] and [0016]) which would have prompted adaptation of the known device, method, or product (4G/LTE networks). As shown above, the combination of Luetzenkirchen and Tiwari are known variations or principles known in the prior art and in view of the identified design incentives or other market forces a person of skill in the art could have implemented the claimed variation of the prior art, and the claimed variation would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Luetzenkirchen, Hong_1, Watfa, and Hong_2 does not teach: wherein the network initiates a paging procedure for EPS services using S-TMSI with CN domain indicator set to PS for the UE when the DL signaling message is an EMM signaling message or an ESM signaling message of a specified PDN connection that is not restricted.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Landais teaches: wherein the network initiates a paging procedure for EPS services using S-TMSI with CN domain indicator set to PS for the UE when the DL signaling message is an EMM signaling message or an ESM signaling message of a specified PDN connection that is not restricted ([0048], [0049] “(and CN domain indicator set to “PS”) to force UEs (in idle mode) to re-attach to EPC. This would lead the UE to re-attach to any MME in the pool (not necessarily the same MME), which would lead to restore an SGs association between likely (but not necessarily either) the same MSC and the new MME. From that point in time, subsequent SMS will succeed. The on-going SMS transfer will fail (paging timer will expire in the original MSC), but the existing SMS procedures (SMS alert) allows to resume the SMS transfer after the new combined attach procedure.”, See also ETSI TS 24.301 pp. 184-185 “This procedure is used when: - the network has downlink signalling pending;” “The UE shall invoke the service request procedure when: a) the UE in EMM-IDLE mode receives a paging request using S-TMSI with CN domain indicator set to "PS" from the network;).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Luetzenkirchen to include the paging features of Landais and a combination of Luetzenkirchen, Hong_1, and Watfa with Landais renders the claim prima facie obvious within the described scope of the prior art and any indicated differences within the level of one of ordinary skill in the art (e.g., telecommunications engineer) according to a combination of known prior art elements with known methods to yield predictable results. MPEP 2143(I)(A) (e.g., provide paging using the S-TMSI with the CN domain indicator set to PS).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Luetzenkirchen, Hong_1, Watfa, and Hong_2 does not teach: wherein the network initiates a paging procedure for EPS services using S-TMSI with CN domain indicator set to PS for the UE when the DL signaling message is a DL EMM signaling message, a DL ESM signaling of a PDN connection of voice service, or a DL ESM signaling message of a specified PDN connection that is not restricted
However, in the same field of endeavor, Landais teaches: wherein the network initiates a paging procedure for EPS services using S-TMSI with CN domain indicator set to PS for the UE when the DL signaling message is a DL EMM signaling message, a DL ESM signaling of a PDN connection of voice service, or a DL ESM signaling message of a specified PDN connection that is not restricted ([0048], [0049] “(and CN domain indicator set to “PS”) to force UEs (in idle mode) to re-attach to EPC. This would lead the UE to re-attach to any MME in the pool (not necessarily the same MME), which would lead to restore an SGs association between likely (but not necessarily either) the same MSC and the new MME. From that point in time, subsequent SMS will succeed. The on-going SMS transfer will fail (paging timer will expire in the original MSC), but the existing SMS procedures (SMS alert) allows to resume the SMS transfer after the new combined attach procedure.”, See also ETSI TS 24.301 pp. 184-185 “This procedure is used when: - the network has downlink signalling pending;” ““The UE shall invoke the service request procedure when: a) the UE in EMM-IDLE mode receives a paging request using S-TMSI with CN domain indicator set to "PS" from the network;).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Luetzenkirchen to include the paging features of Landais and a combination of Luetzenkirchen, Hong_1, and Watfa with Landais renders the claim prima facie obvious within the described scope of the prior art and any indicated differences within the level of one of ordinary skill in the art (e.g., telecommunications engineer) according to a combination of known prior art elements with known methods to yield predictable results. MPEP 2143(I)(A) (e.g., provide paging using the S-TMSI with the CN domain indicator set to PS).
Regarding claim 14, although inherent, the combination of Luetzenkirchen, Hong_1, Watfa, and Hong_2 fails to explicitly teach: wherein the network initiates a paging procedure for EPS services using S-TMSI with CN domain indicator set to PS for the UE when the DL signaling message is an EMM signaling message or an ESM signaling message of a PDN connection for voice service.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Landais teaches: wherein the network initiates a paging procedure for EPS services using S-TMSI with CN domain indicator set to PS for the UE when the DL signaling message is an EMM signaling message or an ESM signaling message of a PDN connection for voice service ([0048], [0049] “(and CN domain indicator set to “PS”) to force UEs (in idle mode) to re-attach to EPC. This would lead the UE to re-attach to any MME in the pool (not necessarily the same MME), which would lead to restore an SGs association between likely (but not necessarily either) the same MSC and the new MME. From that point in time, subsequent SMS will succeed. The on-going SMS transfer will fail (paging timer will expire in the original MSC), but the existing SMS procedures (SMS alert) allows to resume the SMS transfer after the new combined attach procedure.”, See also ETSI TS 24.301 pp. 184-185 “This procedure is used when: - the network has downlink signalling pending;” “The UE shall invoke the service request procedure when: a) the UE in EMM-IDLE mode receives a paging request using S-TMSI with CN domain indicator set to "PS" from the network;).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Luetzenkirchen to include the paging features of Landais and a combination of Luetzenkirchen, Hong_1, Watfa, and Hong_2 with Landais renders the claim prima facie obvious within the described scope of the prior art and any indicated differences within the level of one of ordinary skill in the art (e.g., telecommunications engineer) according to a combination of known prior art elements with known methods to yield predictable results. MPEP 2143(I)(A) (e.g., provide paging using the S-TMSI with the CN domain indicator set to PS).
Indeed, the combination of Luetzenkirchen, Hong_1, Watfa, and Hong_2 with Landais could be prompted by design incentives or market forces movements to improve cellular networks (see Luetzenkirchen [0003] and [0016]) which would have prompted adaptation of the known device, method, or product (4G/LTE networks). As shown above, the combination of Luetzenkirchen and Tiwari are known variations or principles known in the prior art and in view of the identified design incentives or other market forces a person of skill in the art could have implemented the claimed variation of the prior art, and the claimed variation would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Luetzenkirchen, Hong_1, Watfa, and Hong_2 does not teach: wherein the network initiates a paging procedure for EPS services using S-TMSI with CN domain indicator set to PS for the UE when the DL signaling message is an EMM signaling message or an ESM signaling message of a specified PDN connection that is not restricted.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Landais teaches: wherein the network initiates a paging procedure for EPS services using S-TMSI with CN domain indicator set to PS for the UE when the DL signaling message is an EMM signaling message or an ESM signaling message of a specified PDN connection that is not restricted ([0048], [0049] “(and CN domain indicator set to “PS”) to force UEs (in idle mode) to re-attach to EPC. This would lead the UE to re-attach to any MME in the pool (not necessarily the same MME), which would lead to restore an SGs association between likely (but not necessarily either) the same MSC and the new MME. From that point in time, subsequent SMS will succeed. The on-going SMS transfer will fail (paging timer will expire in the original MSC), but the existing SMS procedures (SMS alert) allows to resume the SMS transfer after the new combined attach procedure.”, See also ETSI TS 24.301 pp. 184-185 “This procedure is used when: - the network has downlink signalling pending;” “The UE shall invoke the service request procedure when: a) the UE in EMM-IDLE mode receives a paging request using S-TMSI with CN domain indicator set to "PS" from the network;).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Luetzenkirchen to include the paging features of Landais and a combination of Luetzenkirchen, Hong_1, Watfa, and Hong_2 with Landais renders the claim prima facie obvious within the described scope of the prior art and any indicated differences within the level of one of ordinary skill in the art (e.g., telecommunications engineer) according to a combination of known prior art elements with known methods to yield predictable results. MPEP 2143(I)(A) (e.g., provide paging using the S-TMSI with the CN domain indicator set to PS).
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Luetzenkirchen, Hong_1, Watfa, and Hong_2 does not teach: wherein the network initiates a paging procedure for EPS services using S-TMSI with CN domain indicator set to PS for the UE when the DL signaling message is a DL EMM signaling message, a DL ESM signaling of a PDN connection of voice service, or a DL ESM signaling message of a specified PDN connection that is not restricted.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Landais teaches: wherein the network initiates a paging procedure for EPS services using S-TMSI with CN domain indicator set to PS for the UE when the DL signaling message is a DL EMM signaling message, a DL ESM signaling of a PDN connection of voice service, or a DL ESM signaling message of a specified PDN connection that is not restricted ([0048], [0049] “(and CN domain indicator set to “PS”) to force UEs (in idle mode) to re-attach to EPC. This would lead the UE to re-attach to any MME in the pool (not necessarily the same MME), which would lead to restore an SGs association between likely (but not necessarily either) the same MSC and the new MME. From that point in time, subsequent SMS will succeed. The on-going SMS transfer will fail (paging timer will expire in the original MSC), but the existing SMS procedures (SMS alert) allows to resume the SMS transfer after the new combined attach procedure.”, See also ETSI TS 24.301 pp. 184-185 “This procedure is used when: - the network has downlink signalling pending;” ““The UE shall invoke the service request procedure when: a) the UE in EMM-IDLE mode receives a paging request using S-TMSI with CN domain indicator set to "PS" from the network;).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Luetzenkirchen to include the paging features of Landais and a combination of Luetzenkirchen, Hong_1, Watfa, and Hong_2 with Landais renders the claim prima facie obvious within the described scope of the prior art and any indicated differences within the level of one of ordinary skill in the art (e.g., telecommunications engineer) according to a combination of known prior art elements with known methods to yield predictable results. MPEP 2143(I)(A) (e.g., provide paging using the S-TMSI with the CN domain indicator set to PS).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Publication No. 2022/0346060 (Kumar) related to a METHOD AND SYSTEM TO DETERMINE SERVICE IN INCOMING MESSAGE ([0075])
U.S. Publication No. 2023/0379877 (Kumar) related to SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR MANAGING PAGING COLLISION AND PAGING FILTERS IN A USER EQUIPMENT ([0060])
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 JUSTIN BARRY whose telephone number is (571)272-0201. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00am EST to 5:00pm EST.
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, Jinsong HU can be reached at (571) 272-3965. 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.
/YUWEN PAN/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2649
Prosecution Insights