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 .
Response to Amendment
This Office Action is in response to applicant’s amendment submitted on January 29, 2026.
Claims, 1, 21, 28 and 29 are now currently pending in the present application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 1 and 28, has been amended and Examiners claimed objection has been withdrawn.
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 non-obviousness.
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.
Claims 1 and 28 are rejected under U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over 3GPP
TS 23.501 V17.1.0 (2021-06) (hereinafter 3GPP) in view of Kim et al. (US PGPUB 2023/0189132 A1, hereinafter Kim)
Consider Claim 1, 3GPP discloses an access and mobility management function (AMF) entity in a mobile communication system, the AMF entity comprising:
receive, from a network data analytics function (NWDAF) entity, analytic information for verifying a location of a user equipment (UE) for satellite access, (Section: 5.6.5, Page 124, paragraph 3. SMF may make use of UE mobility analytics provided by NWDAF. Section: 5.6.15, Page 142 paragraph 1. Triggers for the SMF to request for or subscribe to the analytics information from the NWDAF are internal logic. Section 5.4.11.4 page 110 paragraph 1, In order to ensure that the regulatory requirements are met, the network may be configured to enforce that the selected PLMN is allowed to operate in the country of the UE location by verifying the UE location during Mobility Management and Session Management procedures. In this case, when the AMF receives a NGAP message containing User Location Information for a UE using NR satellite access, the AMF may decide to verify the UE location).
verify the location of the UE based on the analytic information including UE mobility analytics and location information estimated by a location management function (LMF) entity. wherein the UE is in a radio resource control (RRC) connected state, identify that the UE is not allowed to operate in the location based on the verification. (Section: 5.4.11.4, Page 110, paragraph 1. User Location Information for a UE using NR satellite access, the AMF may decide to verify the UE location. The analytic information includes UE mobility analytics. section 5.4.11.4 page 110 paragraph 2, in this case, when the AMF receives a NGAP message containing User Location Information for a UE using NR satellite access, the AMF may decide to verify the UE location. If the AMF determines based on the Selected PLMN ID and ULI (including Cell ID) received from the gNB that it is not allowed to operate at the present UE location the AMF should reject the request and inform the UE of the country of the UE location. Section 5.3.3.2.3, Page 84, paragraph 1, A UE in CM-CONNECTED state has a NAS signaling connection with the AMF over N1. A NAS signaling connection uses an RRC Connection between the UE and the NG-RAN and an NGAP UE association between the AN and the AMF for 3GPP access. A UE can be in CM-CONNECTED state with an NGAP UE association that is not bound to any TNLA between the AN and the AMF. Section 7.2.16 page 453, the NLMF_location service allows NFs to request the current geodetic location, wherein geodesy is the science of measuring (or estimating) Earth's geometric shape, orientation in space, and gravitational field(see Table 7.2.16-1: NF Services provided by LMF))
transmit, to the UE for satellite access, a message including a cause value for indicating that the location of the UE is not supported, and (section 5.4.11.4 page 110 paragraph 3, in case of a NAS procedure, the AMF should either reject any NAS request targeted towards a PLMN that is not allowed to operate at the known UE location and indicate a suitable Cause value and, if known in AMF, the country of the UE location, or accept the NAS procedure and later deregister the UE once the UE location is known).
transmit, to a base station of the satellite access, a UE context release message including cause information for releasing the UE from the satellite access, wherein the cause information indicates that the releasing is due to the UE not being in a supported area, wherein the analytic information and the location information are associated with location services of the UE. (section 5.4.1.3 page 96 paragraph 2, when the AMF indicates MICO mode to a UE, the AMF considers the UE always unreachable while the UE CM state in the AMF is CM-IDLE. The AMF rejects any request for downlink data delivery for UE in MICO mode and whose UE CM state in the AMF is CM-IDLE with an appropriate cause. Section 5.21.2.2.1 page 274, paragraph 11, If the new AMF is aware of a different AMF serving the UE (by implementation specific means) it forwards the uplink N2 signaling of the UE to that AMF directly if necessary, the 5G-AN shall be able to receive the message from a different AMF, or it rejects the transaction from the peer CP NFs with a cause to indicate that new AMF has been selected, the peer CP NFs resend the transaction to the new AMF. Section 5.4.11.4 page 110 paragraph 1, User Location Information for a UE using NR satellite access, the AMF may decide to verify the UE location. If the AMF determines based on the Selected PLMN ID and ULI (including Cell ID) received from the gNB that it is not allowed to operate at the present UE location the AMF should reject the request and inform the UE of the country of the UE location).
3GPP discloses the claimed invention but fails to teach a transceiver; and a controller coupled with the transceiver, and configured to:
However, Kim teaches a transceiver and a controller coupled with the transceiver (paragraph 523, read as one or more processors 1020a or 1020b control one or more memories 1010a or 1010b and one or more transceivers 1031a or 1031b, and may perform the operation of the network node (e.g., AMF, New NF, NWDAF, SMF, UPF, AUSF, UDM, PCF, AAA, etc.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teachings of Kim method by which UE performs communication related to a network slice into the Technical Specification Group Services and System Aspects System architecture for the 5G System of 3GPP. The motivation to do so would to provide a more efficient mobile communications and increase the flexibility in the provision of various 5G industries/services.
Consider Claim 28, 3GPP discloses a method performed by an access and mobility management function (AMF) entity in a mobile communication system, the method comprising:
receiving, from a network data analytics function (NWDAF) entity, analytic information for verifying a location of a user equipment (UE) for satellite access, (Section: 5.6.5, Page 124, paragraph 3. SMF may make use of UE mobility analytics provided by NWDAF. Section: 5.6.15, Page 142 paragraph 1. Triggers for the SMF to request for or subscribe to the analytics information from the NWDAF are internal logic. Section 5.4.11.4 page 110 paragraph 1, In order to ensure that the regulatory requirements are met, the network may be configured to enforce that the selected PLMN is allowed to operate in the country of the UE location by verifying the UE location during Mobility Management and Session Management procedures. In this case, when the AMF receives a NGAP message containing User Location Information for a UE using NR satellite access, the AMF may decide to verify the UE location).
verifying the location of the UE based on the analytic information including UE mobility analytics and location information estimated by a location management function (LMF) entity. wherein the UE is in a radio resource control (RRC) connected state, identify that the UE is not allowed to operate in the location based on the verification. (Section: 5.4.11.4, Page 110, paragraph 1. User Location Information for a UE using NR satellite access, the AMF may decide to verify the UE location. The analytic information includes UE mobility analytics. section 5.4.11.4 page 110 paragraph 2, in this case, when the AMF receives a NGAP message containing User Location Information for a UE using NR satellite access, the AMF may decide to verify the UE location. If the AMF determines based on the Selected PLMN ID and ULI (including Cell ID) received from the gNB that it is not allowed to operate at the present UE location the AMF should reject the request and inform the UE of the country of the UE location. Section 5.3.3.2.3, Page 84, paragraph 1, A UE in CM-CONNECTED state has a NAS signaling connection with the AMF over N1. A NAS signaling connection uses an RRC Connection between the UE and the NG-RAN and an NGAP UE association between the AN and the AMF for 3GPP access. A UE can be in CM-CONNECTED state with an NGAP UE association that is not bound to any TNLA between the AN and the AMF. Section 7.2.16 page 453, the NLMF_location service allows NFs to request the current geodetic location, wherein geodesy is the science of measuring (or estimating) Earth's geometric shape, orientation in space, and gravitational field(see Table 7.2.16-1: NF Services provided by LMF))
transmitting, to the UE for satellite access, a message including a cause value for indicating that the location of the UE is not supported, and (section 5.4.11.4 page 110 paragraph 3, in case of a NAS procedure, the AMF should either reject any NAS request targeted towards a PLMN that is not allowed to operate at the known UE location and indicate a suitable Cause value and, if known in AMF, the country of the UE location, or accept the NAS procedure and later deregister the UE once the UE location is known).
transmitting, to a base station of the satellite access, a UE context release message including cause information for releasing the UE from the satellite access, wherein the cause information indicates that the releasing is due to the UE not being in a supported area, wherein the analytic information and the location information are associated with location services of the UE. (section 5.4.1.3 page 96 paragraph 2, when the AMF indicates MICO mode to a UE, the AMF considers the UE always unreachable while the UE CM state in the AMF is CM-IDLE. The AMF rejects any request for downlink data delivery for UE in MICO mode and whose UE CM state in the AMF is CM-IDLE with an appropriate cause. Section 5.21.2.2.1 page 274, paragraph 11, If the new AMF is aware of a different AMF serving the UE (by implementation specific means) it forwards the uplink N2 signaling of the UE to that AMF directly if necessary, the 5G-AN shall be able to receive the message from a different AMF, or it rejects the transaction from the peer CP NFs with a cause to indicate that new AMF has been selected, the peer CP NFs resend the transaction to the new AMF. Section 5.4.11.4 page 110 paragraph 1, User Location Information for a UE using NR satellite access, the AMF may decide to verify the UE location. If the AMF determines based on the Selected PLMN ID and ULI (including Cell ID) received from the gNB that it is not allowed to operate at the present UE location the AMF should reject the request and inform the UE of the country of the UE location).
Claims 21, and 29 are rejected under U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over 3GPP TS 23.501 V17.1.0 (2021-06) (hereinafter 3GPP), Kim et al. (US PGPUB 2023/0189132 A1, hereinafter Kim), in view of Dao et al. (US PGPUB 2021/0274392 A1, hereinafter Dao).
Claims 21 and 29, 3GPP and Kim disclose the claimed invention but fail to teach wherein the UE mobility analytics include UE location statistics and UE location predictions.
However, Dao teaches wherein the UE mobility analytics includes UE location statics and UE location predictions (at least paragraphs 53, 59, read as the UE mobility information such as the UE mobility analytics, includes UE mobility statistics/UE mobility prediction).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teachings of Dao into the invention of 3GPP, Kim and JUNG in order to avoid frequent selection or re-selection of a NF service producer, and to optimize other requirements such as control information and/or packet transfer between the UE and application server, and between the control plane (CP) NFs and external entities (e.g. AF) supporting the data session between the UE and application server(s).
Conclusion
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 MICHELE CAMILLE DOUGLAS whose telephone number is (571)270-0458. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 6:30 am - 5:00 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, Matthew Anderson can be reached at 571-272-4177. 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.
/MICHELE C DOUGLAS/Examiner, Art Unit 2646
/MATTHEW D. ANDERSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2646
Prosecution Insights