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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of 31-38 and 45-50 in the reply filed on 06/13/2025 is acknowledged. Claims 39-44 are withdrawn. The applicant is reminded to file the claims with the correct status in the next response. Claims have not been filed with the response to restriction showing the proper claim status.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/17/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant asserts that independent claims 31 and 45 require (1) a first operation performed when a first cause value is received, and (2) a second, different operation when a second, different cause values is received. Applicant argues that Liu “applies uniform retry restriction to its listed causes” and “does not differentiate retry behaviors based on distinct cause value types”
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Liu clearly discloses multiple distinct cause values including, “service option not supported”, “requested service option not subscribed”, “message type non-existent or not implemented”, etc. These are distinct cause values, each representing a different network-determined reason for rejecting the UE’s request. Applicant’s assertion that Liu applies “uniform retry restrictions” is contradicted by flow charts in figures 3A and 3B. Liu discloses in figure 3A: S310, the reject message can contain any of the cause values, e.g. “service option not supported” or “requested service option not subscribed” or “message type non-existent or not implemented” without a timer value; and Liu discloses in figure 3B: S312 the reject message can contain any of the cause values, e.g. “service option not supported” or “requested service option not subscribed” or “message type non-existent or not implemented” with a timer value. Thus, Liu discloses different values in either figure and the different values are tied to a particular connection rejection. Liu discloses two different UE operations depending on the reject message content (which is tied to the cause value and rejection condition. Liu discloses a first operation in figure 3A: S315, “NO RETRY SAME ESM MESSAGE UNTIL THERE IS A RETRY TRIGGEREING EVENT.”; this operation applies when the reject message does not include a wait time. Liu discloses a second operation in figure 3B: S317-S322 “START TIMER T3487…RETRY AFTER TIMER EXPIRES”. Thus, the claim requirement of the first and second operations being different is satisfied. Both the operations lead establishing communications the communication link and satisfying the claim requirement.
Thus, all argued and claimed limitations have been met.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 31-35 and 45-49 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 20150181639 A1 herein Liu.
Claim 31, Liu discloses A communication method implemented by a terminal device (Abstract), wherein the communication method comprises:
sending, to a network device, a user plane resource establishment request message (0005-0007, establishing a new packet data session);
receiving, from the network device in response to the user plane resource establishment request message, a feedback message comprising a received cause value of a user plane resource establishment failure (0005, rejection message and cause value; 0097-0104, sending another resource establishment message after starting a different timer or a detecting a triggering event);
performing a first operation when the received cause value is a first cause value (0005, various reject values; 0097-0105, sending another resource establishment message after starting a different timer or a detecting a triggering event); and
performing a second operation when the received cause value is a second cause value (0005, various reject values; 0097-0105, sending another resource establishment message after starting a different timer or a detecting a triggering event),
wherein the first cause value is different from the second cause value, wherein the first operation is different from the second operation (0005, different cause values; and different timers, thus difference in first and second operations), and
wherein each of the first operation and the second operation establishes a communication link between the terminal device and the network device (0005; 0097-0105).
Claim 32, Liu discloses The communication method of claim 31, wherein the each of the first operation and second operation comprises at least one of updating a communication link route configuration; re-sending, to the network device, the user plane resource establishment request message; releasing a communication session resource and sending, to the network device, a session establishment request message; sending, to the network device, a first deregistration request message to cancel registration with a first communications network and sending, to the network device, a first registration request message for the first communications network to establish the communication link using the first communications network; enabling an offline mode and disabling the offline mode; and sending, to the network device, a second deregistration request message to cancel registration with a third communications network and sending, to the network device, a second registration request message for a second communications network to establish the communication link using the second communications network (0097-0105).
Claim 33, Claim 33 further limits an alternative of claim 32. Since Liu discloses resending an establishment request message, all the claim limitations of claim 33 have been met.
Claim 34, Claim 34 further limits an alternative of claim 32. Since Liu discloses resending an establishment request message, all the claim limitations of claim 34 have been met.
Claim 35, Claim 35 further limits an alternative of claim 32. Since Liu discloses resending an establishment request message, all the claim limitations of claim 35 have been met.
Claim 45, as analyzed with respect to the limitations as discussed in claim 31.
Claim 46, as analyzed with respect to the limitations as discussed in claim 32.
Claim 47, Claim 47 further limits an alternative of claim 46. Since Liu discloses resending an establishment request message, all the claim limitations of claim 47 have been met.
Claim 48, Claim 48 further limits an alternative of claim 46. Since Liu discloses resending an establishment request message, all the claim limitations of claim 47 have been met.
Claim 49, Claim 49 further limits an alternative of claim 46. Since Liu discloses resending an establishment request message, all the claim limitations of claim 47 have been met.
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) 36-38 and 50 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view of 3GPP TS 24.008 V16.3.0 (2019-12) Technical Specification 3rd Generation Partnership Project; Technical Specification Group Core Network and Terminals; Mobile radio interface Layer 3 specification; Core network protocols; Stage 3 (Release 16) herein 3gpp.
Claim 36, Liu discloses The communication method of claim 31. Liu may not explicitly disclose wherein the first operation comprises K sub-operations, wherein the K sub-operations are in a one-to-one correspondence with K priorities, and wherein the communication method further comprises performing, based on the K priorities, the K sub-operations.
3gpp discloses wherein the first operation comprises K sub-operations, wherein the K sub-operations are in a one-to-one correspondence with K priorities (Pg. 170-173, priorities with actions after receiving cause codes), and wherein the communication method further comprises performing, based on the K priorities, the K sub-operations (Pg. 170-173, performing actions based on priority). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Liu to include other cause values as taught by so as to adhere to well established standards.
Claim 37, Liu discloses The communication method of claim 31. Liu may not explicitly disclose wherein the first operation comprises cyclically performing a target sub-operation M times, wherein the second operation comprises cyclically performing the target sub-operation N times, wherein both M and N are positive integers, and wherein M is not equal to N.
3gpp discloses wherein the first operation comprises cyclically performing a target sub-operation M times (Pg. 170-173, performing actions while the timer is active), wherein the second operation comprises cyclically performing the target sub-operation N times, wherein both M and N are positive integers, and wherein M is not equal to N (Pg. 170-173, performing actions while the timer is active). ). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Liu to include other cause values as taught by so as to adhere to well established standards.
Claim 38, Liu discloses The communication method of claim 31, wherein the second cause value belongs to a second cause value type, and wherein the second cause value type comprises one or more of a cause value #95, a cause value #96, a cause value #97, a cause value #100, or a cause value #101 (0005); and performing a first operation when the received cause value belongs to the first cause value type (0097-0105); and performing a second operation when the received cause value belongs to the second cause value type (0097-0105).
Liu may not explicitly disclose wherein the first cause value belongs to a first cause value type, wherein the first cause value type comprises one or more of a cause value #65, a cause value #67, a cause value #69, or a cause value #92.
3gpp discloses wherein the first cause value belongs to a first cause value type, wherein the first cause value type comprises one or more of a cause value #65, a cause value #67, a cause value #69, or a cause value #92 (Pg. 297-298, 333, various cause values). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Liu to include other cause values as taught by so as to adhere to well established standards.
Claim 50, as analyzed with respect to the limitations as discussed in claim 36.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 20190254089 A1 - Aspects of the disclosure can provide an apparatus and method for communicating with core network of a fifth generation system. The method includes transmitting, by a processing circuitry of a user equipment, a non-access stratum transport message to the core network to initiate a non-access stratum transport procedure with the core network, and receiving an indication message from the core network when a network function of the core network is unable to process the non-access stratum transport message, wherein the indication message includes at least one of a payload type, a cause value, and timer information. When the payload type of the indication message is a fifth generation system session management message, a short message service message or a long term evolution positioning protocol message, the processing circuitry of the user equipment performs at least one of: re-initiating a non-access stratum transport procedure based on timer information, aborting the non-access stratum transport procedure, and releasing a protocol data unit session.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 Mehmood B. Khan whose telephone number is (571)272-9277. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30 am-6:30 pm.
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, Nishant Divecha can be reached at (571) 270-3125. 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.
/Mehmood B. Khan/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2419
Prosecution Insights