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 allowance or after an Office action under Ex Parte Quayle, 25 USPQ 74, 453 O.G. 213 (Comm'r Pat. 1935). 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, prosecution in this application has been reopened pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 03/11/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 8 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
Claims 1, 4, 8, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
VENKATARAMAN et al. (US 2020/0008167) in view of 3GPP TSG-CT WG1 Meeting #130-e (C1-213271), Electronic Meeting, 20-28 May 2021.
Regarding claim 1, Venkataraman discloses a method, comprising:
(a) registering to a public land mobile network or a standalone non-public network (PLMN/SNPN) by a user equipment (UE) in a 5G network, wherein the UE is registered to the same PLMN/SNPN over a first access type and a second access type (p. [0107]; a device may register to a single PLMN via both cellular (e.g., 3GPP) access and non-cellular (e.g., non-3GPP) access);
(c) performing a first UE-initiated de-registration over the first access type and a separate second UE-initiated de-registration over the second access type (p. [0107]; once registered, the device may initiate de-registration procedure when certain events; p. [0162]- [0164]; the UE may initiate a first de-registration procedure for a first access type and a second de-registration procedure for the second access type).
But, Venkataraman does not particularly disclose (b) determining that a condition for triggering re-registration is satisfied; and (d) after both the first de-registration and the second de-registration in (c) are completed, performing a first registration over the first access or a second registration over the second access type or both.
However, 3GPP TSG-CT WG1 Meeting #130-e (C1-213271) teaches (b) determining that a condition for triggering re-registration is satisfied (page 4, lines 33-34; Upon receiving the DEREGISTRATION REQUEST message, if the DEREGISTRATION REQUEST message indicates "re-registration required"); and (d) after both the first de-registration and the second de-registration in (c) are completed, performing a first registration over the first access or a second registration over the second access type or both (page 4, lines 33-41; Upon receiving the DEREGISTRATION REQUEST message, if the DEREGISTRATION REQUEST message indicates "re-registration required" and the de-registration request is for both 3GPP access and non-3GPP access when the UE is registered in the same PLMN for both accesses, the UE shall perform a local release of the PDU sessions over both 3GPP access and non-3GPP access, if any.. Furthermore, the UE shall, after the completion of the de-registration procedure, and the release of the existing NAS signalling connection, initiate an initial registration over both 3GPP access and non-3GPP access). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Venkataraman with the teachings of 3GPP TSG-CT WG1 Meeting #130-e (C1-213271), in order to provide an explicit indication to trigger the UE to initiate an initial registrations procedures on the particular access types; and further, completing de-registration procedures on both access types prior to initial registration would allow the UE to release of the existing NAS signalling connections associated with each access type, thus ensuring that the UE start completely new connections.
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Venkataraman and 3GPP TSG-CT WG1 Meeting #130-e (C1-213271) disclose the method of Claim 1, Venkataraman discloses wherein the first access type is 3GPP access and the second access type is non-3GPP access, or wherein the first access type is non-3GPP access and the second access type is 3GPP access (p. [0107]).
Regarding claim 8, Venkataraman discloses a User Equipment (UE), comprising:
a registration handling circuit that registers to a public land mobile network or a standalone non-public network (PLMN/SNPN) in a 5G network, wherein the UE is registered to the same PLMN/SNPM over a first access type and a second access type (p. [0107]; a device may register to a single PLMN via both cellular (e.g., 3GPP) access and non-cellular (e.g., non-3GPP) access);
a de-registration handling circuit that performs a first UE-initiated de-registration over the first access type and a separate second UE-initiated de- registration over the second access type (p. [0107]; once registered, the device may initiate de-registration procedure when certain events; p. [0162]- [0164]; the UE may initiate a first de-registration procedure for a first access type and a second de-registration procedure for the second access type).
But, Venkataraman does not particularly disclose a control circuit that determines that a condition for triggering re-registration is satisfied; and wherein after both the first de-registration and the second de-registration are completed, the UE performs a first registration over the first access or a second registration over the second access type or both.
However, 3GPP TSG-CT WG1 Meeting #130-e (C1-213271) teaches a control circuit that determines that a condition for triggering re-registration is satisfied (page 4, lines 33-34; Upon receiving the DEREGISTRATION REQUEST message, if the DEREGISTRATION REQUEST message indicates "re-registration required"); and wherein after both the first de-registration and the second de-registration are completed, the UE performs a first registration over the first access or a second registration over the second access type or both (page 4, lines 33-41; Upon receiving the DEREGISTRATION REQUEST message, if the DEREGISTRATION REQUEST message indicates "re-registration required" and the de-registration request is for both 3GPP access and non-3GPP access when the UE is registered in the same PLMN for both accesses, the UE shall perform a local release of the PDU sessions over both 3GPP access and non-3GPP access, if any.. Furthermore, the UE shall, after the completion of the de-registration procedure, and the release of the existing NAS signalling connection, initiate an initial registration over both 3GPP access and non-3GPP access). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Venkataraman with the teachings of 3GPP TSG-CT WG1 Meeting #130-e (C1-213271), in order to provide an explicit indication to trigger the UE to initiate an initial registrations procedures on the particular access types; and further, completing de-registration procedures on both access types prior to initial registration would allow the UE to release of the existing NAS signalling connections associated with each access type, thus ensuring that the UE start completely new connections.
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Venkataraman and 3GPP TSG-CT WG1 Meeting #130-e (C1-213271) disclose the UE of Claim 8, Venkataraman discloses wherein the first access type is 3GPP access and the second access type is non-3GPP access, or wherein the first access type is non-3GPP access and the second access type is 3GPP access (p. [0107]).
6. Claims 2, 3, 9, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over VENKATARAMAN et al. (US 2020/0008167) in view of 3GPP TSG-CT WG1 Meeting #130-e (C1-213271), Electronic Meeting, 20-28 May 2021, and WON (US 2021/0250890).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Venkataraman and 3GPP TSG-CT WG1 Meeting #130-e (C1-213271) disclose the method of Claim 1, but does not particularly disclose teaches wherein the UE receives a downlink NAS TRANSPORT message comprising a UE-parameters update header.
However, Won teaches wherein the UE receives a downlink NAS TRANSPORT message comprising a UE-parameters update header (p. [0651]; the ME can receive UE parameters update header in the UE transparent container IE is set to “re-registration” requested). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Venkataraman and 3GPP TSG-CT WG1 Meeting #130-e (C1-213271) with the teachings of Won, since such a modification would allow the network to trigger a re-registration by the UE with the use of network standard messages (i.e., NAS TRANSPORT message comprising a UE-parameters update header).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Venkataraman and 3GPP TSG-CT WG1 Meeting #130-e (C1-213271) disclose the method of Claim 2, but does not particularly disclose wherein the triggering condition is satisfied when the UE receives a REFRESH COMMAND, and the UE-parameters-—update header indicates re-registration requested.
However, Won discloses wherein the triggering condition is satisfied when the UE receives a REFRESH COMMAND, and the UE-parameters-—update header indicates re-registration requested (p. [0651]; the ME can receive UE parameters update header in the UE transparent container IE is set to “re-registration” requested). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the combination of Venkataraman and 3GPP TSG-CT WG1 Meeting #130-e (C1-213271) with the teachings of Won, since such a modification would allow the network to trigger a re-registration by the UE with the use of network standard messages (i.e., NAS TRANSPORT message comprising a UE-parameters update header).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Venkataraman and 3GPP TSG-CT WG1 Meeting #130-e (C1-213271) disclose the UE of Claim 8, but does not particularly disclose wherein the UE receives a downlink NAS TRANSPORT message comprising a UE-parameters update header.
However, Won teaches wherein the UE receives a downlink NAS TRANSPORT message comprising a UE-parameters update header (p. [0651]; the ME can receive UE parameters update header in the UE transparent container IE is set to “re-registration” requested). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Venkataraman and 3GPP TSG-CT WG1 Meeting #130-e (C1-213271) with the teachings of Won, since such a modification would allow the network to trigger a re-registration by the UE with the use of network standard messages (i.e., NAS TRANSPORT message comprising a UE-parameters update header).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Venkataraman and 3GPP TSG-CT WG1 Meeting #130-e (C1-213271) disclose the UE of Claim 9, but does not particularly disclose wherein the triggering condition is satisfied when the UE receives a REFRESH COMMAND, and the UE-parameters-—update header indicates re-registration requested.
However, Won discloses wherein the triggering condition is satisfied when the UE receives a REFRESH COMMAND, and the UE-parameters-—update header indicates re-registration requested (p. [0651]; the ME can receive UE parameters update header in the UE transparent container IE is set to “re-registration” requested). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the combination of Venkataraman and 3GPP TSG-CT WG1 Meeting #130-e (C1-213271) with the teachings of Won, since such a modification would allow the network to trigger a re-registration by the UE with the use of network standard messages (i.e., NAS TRANSPORT message comprising a UE-parameters update header).
Claims 5 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
VENKATARAMAN et al. in views of 3GPP TSG-CT WG1, and KIM et al. (US 2019/0007992).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Venkataraman and 3GPP TSG-CT WG1 disclose the method of Claim 1, but does not particularly disclose wherein the UE maintains a first common 5G globally unique temporary identity (5G-GUTI) after the registration to the PLMN/SNPN in (a)
However, Kim teaches wherein the UE maintains a first common 5G globally unique temporary identity (5G-GUTI) after the registration to the PLMN/SNPN in (a) (p. [0151]; the UE is assigned a single 5G-GUTI (i.e., common 5G-GUTI) that is used over the 3GPP access and the non-3GPP access, once the initial access is performed over the non-3GPP access or over the 3GPP access, the UE provides the 5G-GUTI received in response to the earlier successful registration over any access of the same PLMN or equivalent PLMN, thus the UE maintains the common 5G-GUTI). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the combination of Venkataraman and 3GPP TSG-CT WG1 with the teachings of Kim, since such a modification would enable the access network AN to select an AMF device that maintains a UE context created at a previous registration procedure and enables the AMF to correlate the UE request to the existing UE context (Kim – p. [0151], last sentence).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Venkataraman and 3GPP TSG-CT WG1 disclose the UE of Claim 8, but does not particularly disclose wherein the UE maintains a first common 5G globally unique temporary identity (5G-GUTI) after the registration to the PLMN/SNPN in (a).
However, Kim teaches wherein the UE maintains a first common 5G globally unique temporary identity (5G-GUTI) after the registration to the PLMN/SNPN in (a) (p. [0151]; the UE is assigned a single 5G-GUTI (i.e., common 5G-GUTI) that is used over the 3GPP access and the non-3GPP access, once the initial access is performed over the non-3GPP access or over the 3GPP access, the UE provides the 5G-GUTI received in response to the earlier successful registration over any access of the same PLMN or equivalent PLMN, thus the UE maintains the common 5G-GUTI). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the combination of Venkataraman and 3GPP TSG-CT WG1 with the teachings of Kim, since such a modification would enable the access network AN to select an AMF device that maintains a UE context created at a previous registration procedure and enables the AMF to correlate the UE request to the existing UE context (Kim – p. [0151], last sentence).
Claims 7 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
VENKATARAMAN et al. in views of 3GPP TSG-CT WG1, KIM et al., and WON.
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Venkataraman, 3GPP TSG-CT WG1, and Kim disclose the method of Claim 5, but does not particularly disclose wherein the UE performs the first registration or the second registration or both, in (d) after the UE deletes the first common 5G-GUTI.
However, Won teaches wherein the UE performs the first registration or the second registration or both, in (d) after the UE deletes the first common 5G-GUTI (p. [0651]-[0653]; after the UE performs a de-registration procedure and delete its 5G-GUTI, the UE initiate a registration procedure for initial registration, note that Kim teaches a UE that is assigned a single 5G-GUTI for 3gpp and non-3gpp access and the combination would result in the UE deleting the single/common 5G-GUTI). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the combination of Venkataraman, 3GPP TSG-CT WG1, and Kim with the teachings of Won, since such a modification would allow the UE to clear the assigned 5G-GUTI during a previous registration procedure in order to initiate an initial registration procedure based on the requested “reregistration”.
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Venkataraman, 3GPP TSG-CT WG1, and Kim disclose the UE of Claim 12, but does not particularly disclose wherein the UE performs the first registration or the second registration or both, in (d) after the UE deletes the first common 5G-GUTI.
However, Won teaches wherein the UE performs the first registration or the second registration or both, in (d) after the UE deletes the first common 5G-GUTI (p. [0651]-[0653]; after the UE performs a de-registration procedure and delete its 5G-GUTI, the UE initiate a registration procedure for initial registration, note that Kim teaches a UE that is assigned a single 5G-GUTI for 3gpp and non-3gpp access and the combination would result in the UE deleting the single/common 5G-GUTI). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the combination of Venkataraman, 3GPP TSG-CT WG1, and Kim with the teachings of Won, since such a modification would allow the UE to clear the assigned 5G-GUTI during a previous registration procedure in order to initiate an initial registration procedure based on the requested “reregistration”.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 15-18 are allowed. The claims are allowed in view of Applicant’s arguments filed
on 09/17/2025, see pages 8-9 of Applicant’s arguments.
Claims 6 and 13 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would
be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARISOL FIGUEROA whose telephone number is (571)272-7840. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 8:00am-4:30pm.
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.
/MARISOL FIGUEROA/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2643