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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 01/16/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 13 and 19 have been considered but are moot because the claims have been amended with new limitations therefore, it necessitates new grounds of rejection as shown in the followings.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-17 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bucknell et al. (Publication No. US 2022/0086747) and further in views of Alonso-Rubio et al. (Publication No. US 2013/0189988) and Klingenbrunn et al. (Pub. No. US 2012/0302241).
Regarding claim 1. (Currently Amended) Bucknell teaches a user equipment (UE) (Bucknell, the Abstract), comprising:
one or more transceivers configured to enable the UE to wirelessly communicate in a first Radio Access Technology (RAT) and a second RAT (Bucknell, Fig. 4, pp [136]-[138]; Fig. 9, pp [183]-[185]); and
a processor communicatively coupled to the one or more transceivers (Bucknell, Fig. 9, pp [183]-[185]) and configured to:
determine that the UE camps on the first RAT for service by a first public land mobile network (PLMN) (Bucknell, Fig. 1, pp [25]; Fig. 4, pp [136]-[138]);
store information about the first RAT for the first PLMN (Bucknell, Fig. 1, pp [25]);
in response to a determination that there is the trigger event, determine whether a cell in the first RAT for the first PLMN is available for the UE to camp on (Bucknell, Fig. 1, pp [25]); and
in response to a determination that a cell in the first RAT for the first PLMN is available, select the available cell in the first RAT to register the UE with the first PLMN (Bucknell, Fig. 1, pp [25]).
Bucknell does not teach “determining, in response to service in the first RAT being interrupted, that the UE camps on the second RAT for service by a second PLMN; determine whether there is a trigger event to enable the UE to switch back from the second RAT to the first RAT, wherein the first RAT is more advanced than the second RAT.”
Alonso-Rubio teaches “determining, in response to service in the first RAT being interrupted, that the UE camps on the second RAT for service by a second PLMN; determine whether there is a trigger event to enable the UE to switch back from the second RAT to the first RAT, wherein the first RAT is more advanced than the second RAT.” (Alonso-Rubio, Fig. 6, pp [71]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the affective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify Bucknell by incorporating teachings of Alonso-Rubio, method and system for detecting inter-radio access technology IRAT handover triggering wherein the method provides that the mobile device is configured to detect and determine to handover from a source RAT to a target RAT and when there is a trigger occurs that causes the device to determine to handover back to the source RAT accordingly in an efficient and effective manner without long delays and making the most useful resource for the sufficient handover process.
Bucknell as modified by Alonso-Rubio, does not teach “based on the stored information about the first PLMN, performing a search of an available cell of the first PLMN without searching for an available PLMN”.
Klingenbrunn teaches “based on the stored information about the first PLMN, performing a search of an available cell of the first PLMN without searching for an available PLMN” (Klingenbrunn, Fig. 4, pp [37]-[39]: the UE detects an available cell of the only PLMN without searching for any available PLMN but only available cells within the only PLMN to camp on and the available cells can be LTE or 2G/3G service cells).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the affective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify Bucknell, as modified by Alonso-Rubio, by incorporating teachings of Klingenbrunn, method and system for re-selection by an idle mobile device between multiple radio access technologies (RATs) within a PLMN wherein a user equipment (UE) enters idle mode while camped to a first RAT network, it initiates an out of service search procedure that causes the UE to search for other RATs within a same public land mobile network (PLMN). If another RAT network is detected, the UE determines whether the priority of the detected RAT is higher than the priority of the first RAT. When the detected RAT has a higher priority than the first RAT, the UE re-selects and camps to that detected RAT network. If the detected RAT does not have a higher priority or no other RAT is detected within the PLMN, the UE re-camps to the first RAT network. Thus the method provides quick and robust selection of a best serving RAT among a plurality of RATs within a PLMN while the UE is roaming from cell to cell in a seamless and sufficient manner.
Regarding claim 13. (Currently Amended) Bucknell teaches a method performed by a user equipment (UE) (Bucknell, the Abstract), comprising:
determining that the UE camps on a first Radio Access Technology (RAT) for service by a first public land mobile network (PLMN) (Bucknell, Fig. 1, pp [25]; Fig. 4, pp [136]-[138]);
storing information about the first RAT for the first PLMN (Bucknell, Fig. 1, pp [25]);
in response to a determination that there is the trigger event, determining whether a cell in the first RAT for the first PLMN is available for the UE to camp on (Bucknell, Fig. 1, pp [25]); and
in response to a determination that a cell in the first RAT for the first PLMN is available, selecting the available cell in the first RAT to register the UE with the first PLMN (Bucknell, Fig. 1, pp [25]).
Bucknell does not teach “determining, in response to service in the first RAT being interrupted, that the UE camps on the second RAT for service by a second PLMN; determine whether there is a trigger event to enable the UE to switch back from the second RAT to the first RAT, wherein the first RAT is more advanced than the second RAT.”
Alonso-Rubio teaches “determining, in response to service in the first RAT being interrupted, that the UE camps on the second RAT for service by a second PLMN; determine whether there is a trigger event to enable the UE to switch back from the second RAT to the first RAT, wherein the first RAT is more advanced than the second RAT.” (Alonso-Rubio, Fig. 6, pp [71]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the affective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify Bucknell by incorporating teachings of Alonso-Rubio, method and system for detecting inter-radio access technology IRAT handover triggering wherein the method provides that the mobile device is configured to detect and determine to handover from a source RAT to a target RAT and when there is a trigger occurs that causes the device to determine to handover back to the source RAT accordingly in an efficient and effective manner without long delays and making the most useful resource for the sufficient handover process.
Bucknell as modified by Alonso-Rubio, does not teach “based on the stored information about the first PLMN, performing a search of an available cell of the first PLMN without searching for an available PLMN”.
Klingenbrunn teaches “based on the stored information about the first PLMN, performing a search of an available cell of the first PLMN without searching for an available PLMN” (Klingenbrunn, Fig. 4, pp [37]-[39]: the UE detects an available cell of the only PLMN without searching for any available PLMN but only available cells within the only PLMN to camp on and the available cells can be LTE or 2G/3G service cells).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the affective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify Bucknell, as modified by Alonso-Rubio, by incorporating teachings of Klingenbrunn, method and system for re-selection by an idle mobile device between multiple radio access technologies (RATs) within a PLMN wherein a user equipment (UE) enters idle mode while camped to a first RAT network, it initiates an out of service search procedure that causes the UE to search for other RATs within a same public land mobile network (PLMN). If another RAT network is detected, the UE determines whether the priority of the detected RAT is higher than the priority of the first RAT. When the detected RAT has a higher priority than the first RAT, the UE re-selects and camps to that detected RAT network. If the detected RAT does not have a higher priority or no other RAT is detected within the PLMN, the UE re-camps to the first RAT network. Thus the method provides quick and robust selection of a best serving RAT among a plurality of RATs within a PLMN while the UE is roaming from cell to cell in a seamless and sufficient manner.
Regarding claim 19. (Currently Amended) Bucknell teaches a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing instructions that, when executed by a processor of a user equipment (UE), cause the UE to perform operations (Bucknell, the Abstract), the operations comprising:
determining that the UE camps on a first Radio Access Technology (RAT) for service by a first public land mobile network (PLMN) (Bucknell, Fig. 1, pp [25]; Fig. 4, pp [136]-[138]);
storing information about the first RAT for the first PLMN (Bucknell, Fig. 1, pp [25]);
in response to a determination that there is the trigger event, determining whether a cell in the first RAT for the first PLMN is available for the UE to camp on (Bucknell, Fig. 1, pp [25]); and
in response to a determination that a cell in the first RAT for the first PLMN is available, selecting the available cell in the first RAT to register the UE with the first PLMN (Bucknell, Fig. 1, pp [25]).
Bucknell does not teach “determining, in response to service in the first RAT being interrupted, that the UE camps on the second RAT for service by a second PLMN; determine whether there is a trigger event to enable the UE to switch back from the second RAT to the first RAT, wherein the first RAT is more advanced than the second RAT.”
Alonso-Rubio teaches “determining, in response to service in the first RAT being interrupted, that the UE camps on the second RAT for service by a second PLMN; determine whether there is a trigger event to enable the UE to switch back from the second RAT to the first RAT, wherein the first RAT is more advanced than the second RAT.” (Alonso-Rubio, Fig. 6, pp [71]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the affective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify Bucknell by incorporating teachings of Alonso-Rubio, method and system for detecting inter-radio access technology IRAT handover triggering wherein the method provides that the mobile device is configured to detect and determine to handover from a source RAT to a target RAT and when there is a trigger occurs that causes the device to determine to handover back to the source RAT accordingly in an efficient and effective manner without long delays and making the most useful resource for the sufficient handover process.
Bucknell as modified by Alonso-Rubio, does not teach “based on the stored information about the first PLMN, performing a search of an available cell of the first PLMN without searching for an available PLMN”.
Klingenbrunn teaches “based on the stored information about the first PLMN, performing a search of an available cell of the first PLMN without searching for an available PLMN” (Klingenbrunn, Fig. 4, pp [37]-[39]: the UE detects an available cell of the only PLMN without searching for any available PLMN but only available cells within the only PLMN to camp on and the available cells can be LTE or 2G/3G service cells).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the affective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify Bucknell, as modified by Alonso-Rubio, by incorporating teachings of Klingenbrunn, method and system for re-selection by an idle mobile device between multiple radio access technologies (RATs) within a PLMN wherein a user equipment (UE) enters idle mode while camped to a first RAT network, it initiates an out of service search procedure that causes the UE to search for other RATs within a same public land mobile network (PLMN). If another RAT network is detected, the UE determines whether the priority of the detected RAT is higher than the priority of the first RAT. When the detected RAT has a higher priority than the first RAT, the UE re-selects and camps to that detected RAT network. If the detected RAT does not have a higher priority or no other RAT is detected within the PLMN, the UE re-camps to the first RAT network. Thus the method provides quick and robust selection of a best serving RAT among a plurality of RATs within a PLMN while the UE is roaming from cell to cell in a seamless and sufficient manner.
Regarding claim 2. (Original) Bucknell, as modified by Alonso-Rubio and Klingenbrunn, teaches the UE of claim 1, wherein the second PLMN is same as the first PLMN or an equivalent PLMN to the first PLMN (Bucknell, pp [22]).
Regarding claim 4. (Original) Bucknell, as modified by Alonso-Rubio and Klingenbrunn, teaches the UE of claim 1, wherein the processor is configured to determine that the UE camps on the first RAT for service by the first PLMN by a non-access stratum (NAS) layer of a protocol stack operated on the UE (Bucknell, pp [36]-[37]).
Regarding claim 5. (Original) Bucknell, as modified by Alonso-Rubio and Klingenbrunn, teaches the UE of claim 1, wherein the processor is configured to fetch an access point assisted data provided by an access point to determine whether a cell in the first RAT for the first PLMN is available (Bucknell, Fig. 1, pp [25]).
Regarding claim 6. (Original) Bucknell, as modified by Alonso-Rubio and Klingenbrunn, teaches the UE of claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to:
in response to a determination that that there is no cell of the first PLMN available, start a timer with a predetermined duration (Bucknell, pp [48], [68]-[78], [83]-[91]);
upon an expiration of the timer with the predetermined duration, search for the first PLMN to determine whether the first PLMN is available (Bucknell, pp [48], [68]-[78], [83]-[91]);
in response to a determination the first PLMN is available, determine whether a cell in the first RAT for the first PLMN is available for the UE to camp on (Bucknell, pp [48], [68]-[78], [83]-[91]); and
in response to a determination that a cell in the first RAT for the first PLMN is available, select the available cell in the first RAT to register the UE with the first PLMN (Bucknell, pp [48], [68]-[78], [83]-[91]).
Regarding claim 7. (Original) Bucknell, as modified by Alonso-Rubio and Klingenbrunn, teaches the UE of claim 6, wherein the timer is a first timer, and the processor is further configured to:
in response to the determination that the first PLMN is available and a determination that that there is no cell in the first RAT for the first PLMN available, start a second timer with a second predetermined duration (Bucknell, pp [48], [68]-[78], [83]-[91]);
upon an expiration of the second timer with the second predetermined duration, search for the first PLMN to determine whether the first PLMN is available (Bucknell, pp [48], [68]-[78], [83]-[91]);
in response to a determination the first PLMN is available, determine whether a cell in the first RAT of the first PLMN is available for the UE to camp on (Bucknell, pp [48], [68]-[78], [83]-[91]); and
in response to a determination that a cell in the first RAT for the first PLMN is available, select the available cell in the first RAT to register the UE with the first PLMN (Bucknell, pp [48], [68]-[78], [83]-[91]).
Regarding claim 8. (Original) Bucknell, as modified by Alonso-Rubio and Klingenbrunn, teaches the UE of claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to register the UE with the first RAT in the available cell based on the stored information about the first RAT (Bucknell, Fig. 1, pp [25]).
Regarding claim 9. (Original) Bucknell, as modified by Alonso-Rubio and Klingenbrunn, teaches the UE of claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to:
in response to a determination that there is no trigger event, start a timer with a predetermined duration, wherein the predetermined duration is based on a configurable predetermined value or a progressively increased offset (Bucknell, pp [48], [68]-[78], [83]-[91]);
upon an expiration of the timer with the predetermined duration, search for the first PLMN to determine whether the first PLMN is available (Bucknell, pp [48], [68]-[78], [83]-[91]);
in response to a determination the first PLMN is available, determine whether a cell in the first RAT for the first PLMN is available for the UE to camp on (Bucknell, pp [48], [68]-[78], [83]-[91]); and
in response to a determination that the cell in the first RAT of the first PLMN is available, select the available cell in the first RAT to register the UE with the first PLMN (Bucknell, pp [48], [68]-[78], [83]-[91]).
Regarding claim 10. (Original) Bucknell, as modified by Alonso-Rubio and Klingenbrunn, teaches the UE of claim 9, wherein the timer is a first timer, and the processor is further configured to:
in response to the determination that there is no trigger event, and a determination that the first PLMN is not available, start a second timer with a second predetermined duration, wherein the second predetermined duration is based on a configurable predetermined value or a progressively increased offset (Bucknell, pp [48], [68]-[78], [83]-[91]);
upon an expiration of the second timer with the second predetermined duration, search for the first PLMN to determine whether the first PLMN is available (Bucknell, pp [48], [68]-[78], [83]-[91]);
in response to a determination the first PLMN is available, determine whether a cell in the first RAT for the first PLMN is available for the UE to camp on (Bucknell, pp [48], [68]-[78], [83]-[91]); and
in response to a determination that a cell in the first RAT of the first PLMN is available, select the available cell in the first RAT to register the UE with the first PLMN (Bucknell, pp [48], [68]-[78], [83]-[91]).
Regarding claim 11. (Original) Bucknell, as modified by Alonso-Rubio and Klingenbrunn, teaches the UE of claim 1, wherein the first RAT includes new radio (NR) next generation Radio Access Network (NG-RAN) (Bucknell, pp [9], [12]).
Regarding claim 12. (Original) Bucknell teaches the UE of claim 11 and Klingenbrunn, wherein the second RAT includes Universal Mobile Telecommunications System (UMTS) Terrestrial Radio Access Network (UTRAN), a Global System for Mobiles (GSM) Edge Radio Access Network (GERAN), or a long- term evolution (LTE) evolved UTRAN (E-UTRAN) (Bucknell, pp [21]).
Regarding claim 14. (Original) Bucknell, as modified by Alonso-Rubio and Klingenbrunn, teaches the method of claim 13, wherein the processor is further configured to:
in response to a determination that that there is no cell of the first PLMN available, starting a timer with a predetermined duration (Bucknell, pp [48], [68]-[78], [83]-[91]);
upon an expiration of the timer with the predetermined duration, searching for the first PLMN to determine whether the first PLMN is available (Bucknell, pp [48], [68]-[78], [83]-[91]);
in response to a determination the first PLMN is available, determining whether a cell in the first RAT for the first PLMN is available for the UE to camp on (Bucknell, pp [48], [68]-[78], [83]-[91]); and
in response to a determination that a cell in the first RAT for the first PLMN is available, selecting the available cell in the first RAT to register the UE with the first PLMN (Bucknell, pp [48], [68]-[78], [83]-[91]).
Regarding claim 15. (Original) Bucknell, as modified by Alonso-Rubio and Klingenbrunn, teaches the method of claim 14, wherein the timer is a first timer, and the method further comprises:
in response to the determination that the first PLMN is available and a determination that that there is no cell in the first RAT for the first PLMN available, starting a second timer with a second predetermined duration (Bucknell, pp [48], [68]-[78], [83]-[91]);
upon an expiration of the second timer with the second predetermined duration, searching for the first PLMN to determine whether the first PLMN is available (Bucknell, pp [48], [68]-[78], [83]-[91]);
in response to a determination the first PLMN is available, determining whether a cell in the first RAT of the first PLMN is available for the UE to camp on (Bucknell, pp [48], [68]-[78], [83]-[91]); and
in response to a determination that a cell in the first RAT for the first PLMN is available, selecting the available cell in the first RAT to register the UE with the first PLMN (Bucknell, pp [48], [68]-[78], [83]-[91]).
Regarding claim 16. (Original) Bucknell, as modified by Alonso-Rubio and Klingenbrunn, teaches the method of claim 13, further comprising:
in response to a determination that there is no trigger event, starting a timer with a predetermined duration (Bucknell, pp [48], [68]-[78], [83]-[91]);
upon an expiration of the timer with the predetermined duration, searching for the first PLMN to determine whether the first PLMN is available (Bucknell, pp [48], [68]-[78], [83]-[91]);
in response to a determination the first PLMN is available, determining whether a cell in the first RAT for the first PLMN is available for the UE to camp on (Bucknell, pp [48], [68]-[78], [83]-[91]); and
in response to a determination that the cell in the first RAT of the first PLMN is available, selecting the cell in the first RAT to register the UE with the first PLMN (Bucknell, pp [48], [68]-[78], [83]-[91]).
Regarding claim 17. (Original) Bucknell, as modified by Alonso-Rubio and Klingenbrunn, teaches the method of claim 16, wherein the timer is a first timer, and the method further comprises:
in response to the determination that there is no trigger event, and a determination that the first PLMN is not available, starting a second timer with a second predetermined duration (Bucknell, pp [48], [68]-[78], [83]-[91]);
upon an expiration of the second timer with the second predetermined duration, searching for the first PLMN to determine whether the first PLMN is available (Bucknell, pp [48], [68]-[78], [83]-[91]);
in response to a determination the first PLMN is available, determining whether a cell in the first RAT for the first PLMN is available for the UE to camp on (Bucknell, pp [48], [68]-[78], [83]-[91]); and
in response to a determination that a cell in the first RAT of the first PLMN is available, selecting the available cell in the first RAT to register the UE with the first PLMN (Bucknell, pp [48], [68]-[78], [83]-[91]).
Claim(s) 3, 18 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bucknell et al. (Publication No. US 2022/0086747) in views of Alonso-Rubio et al. (Publication No. US 2013/0189988), Klingenbrunn et al. (Pub. No. US 2012/0302241) and further in view of Jung et al. (Publication No. US 2018/0041935).
Regarding claim 3. (Original) Bucknell, as modified by Alonso-Rubio and Klingenbrunn, does not teach the UE of claim 1, wherein the information about the first RAT for the first PLMN includes a specific mobile country code (MCC) for the first PLMN and a specific mobile network code (MNC) for the first PLMN.
Jung teaches “the information about the first RAT for the first PLMN includes a specific mobile country code (MCC) for the first PLMN and a specific mobile network code (MNC) for the first PLMN.” (Jung, pp [98]-[100]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the affective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify Bucknell and Alonso-Rubio, by incorporating teachings of Jung, a method for communicating carried out by a terminal in a wireless communication system supporting a multiple access network, wherein the method comprises receiving from a first access network and a second access network service information, determining whether traffic processing through the second access network is allowed based on the second access network service information, and processing all or a portion of the traffic on the first access network through the second access network. The selection of PLMN and RATs for communication also provides essential information for identity each PLMN such as a mobile country code (MCC) and a mobile network code (MNC) for the PLMN thus guaranteeing the successful completion of network connections effectively when a mobile terminal roams in a multiple access network.
Regarding claim 18. (Original) Bucknell, as modified by Alonso-Rubio and Klingenbrunn, teaches the method of claim 13, wherein the second PLMN is same as the first PLMN or an equivalent PLMN to the first PLMN (Bucknell, pp [22]).
Bucknell, as modified by Alonso-Rubio, does not teach “the information about the first RAT for the first PLMN includes a specific mobile country code (MCC) for the first PLMN and a specific mobile network code (MNC) for the first PLMN”.
Jung teaches “the information about the first RAT for the first PLMN includes a specific mobile country code (MCC) for the first PLMN and a specific mobile network code (MNC) for the first PLMN” (Jung, pp [98]-[100]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the affective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify Bucknell and Alonso-Rubio, by incorporating teachings of Jung, a method for communicating carried out by a terminal in a wireless communication system supporting a multiple access network, wherein the method comprises receiving from a first access network and a second access network service information, determining whether traffic processing through the second access network is allowed based on the second access network service information, and processing all or a portion of the traffic on the first access network through the second access network. The selection of PLMN and RATs for communication also provides essential information for identity each PLMN such as a mobile country code (MCC) and a mobile network code (MNC) for the PLMN thus guaranteeing the successful completion of network connections effectively when a mobile terminal roams in a multiple access network.
Regarding claim 20. (Original) Bucknell, as modified by Alonso-Rubio and Klingenbrunn, teaches the non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 19, wherein the second PLMN is same as the first PLMN or an equivalent PLMN to the first PLMN (Bucknell, pp [22]).
Bucknell, as modified by Alonso-Rubio, does not teach “the information about the first RAT for the first PLMN includes a specific mobile country code (MCC) for the first PLMN and a specific mobile network code (MNC) for the first PLMN”.
Jung teaches “the information about the first RAT for the first PLMN includes a specific mobile country code (MCC) for the first PLMN and a specific mobile network code (MNC) for the first PLMN” (Jung, pp [98]-[100]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the affective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify Bucknell and Alonso-Rubio, by incorporating teachings of Jung, a method for communicating carried out by a terminal in a wireless communication system supporting a multiple access network, wherein the method comprises receiving from a first access network and a second access network service information, determining whether traffic processing through the second access network is allowed based on the second access network service information, and processing all or a portion of the traffic on the first access network through the second access network. The selection of PLMN and RATs for communication also provides essential information for identity each PLMN such as a mobile country code (MCC) and a mobile network code (MNC) for the PLMN thus guaranteeing the successful completion of network connections effectively when a mobile terminal roams in a multiple access network.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HUY C HO whose telephone number is (571)270-1108. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8AM-5PM.
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, KATHY WANG-HURST can be reached at (571)270-5371. 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.
/HUY C HO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2644