DETAILED ACTION
In a communication received on 22 October 2025, amended claims 1, 8, and 15.
Claims 1-20 are pending.
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 Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 8, and 15 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.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 5-8, 10, 12-15 and 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Campo Trapero et al. (WO 2020/020473 A1) in view of Fandridi et al. (WO 2022/123384 A1), and further in view of Kasbekar (US 2016/0094581 A1).
With respect to claim 1, Campo Trapero discloses: a method of transmitting subscriber information via HTTPS, the method comprising:
establishing, at a gateway, a session with a user equipment (UE), wherein the gateway receives and stores subscriber information corresponding to a subscriber associated with the UE (i.e., trigger a session with end user device, the UPF/SMF downloads information corresponding to the end user including policy rules; UPF performs policy enforcement and data flow detection in Campo Trapero, page 2 lines 16-30; page 29 lines 13-16);
upon the UE making an HTTPS transaction to a web or application server (i.e., end user accessing an https URL from an application service provider or over the top application/service in Campo Trapero, page 4 lines 15-19),
reading, by the gateway, a server name indication (SNI) header within a Client Hello of the HTTPS transaction or a destination IP address of the web or application server (i.e., upon end user opening and accessing an application, content filtering based on server name identification in TLS client hello; UPF detects SNI upon end user opening and accessing an application in Campo Trapero, page 3 lines 31-34; page 25 lines 7-11);
determining that the SNI header or the destination IP address in the HTTPS transaction matches a pre-configured SNI or destination IP address in the gateway (i.e., provisioning the SNI corresponding to "vimeo.adult" to the PCF and the SNI is used to retrieve policy rules and implement the rules for the user in Campo Trapero, page 24 lines 10-34);
the subscriber information including the portion of the HTTPS message (i.e., forwarding the subscriber information, SNI, and the IP address of the user detected in the request in Campo Trapero, page 25 lines 8-11).
Campo Trapero discloses detecting SNI corresponding to a specific application and sending subscriber information of the suer (page 25 lines 7-11). Campo Trapero do(es) not explicitly disclose the following. Fandridi, in order to enrich communications with HTTPS secure protocol with subscriber information derived from the unencrypted handshake phase (page 2 lines 1-6), discloses:
based on determining that the SNI header or the destination IP address in the HTTPS transaction matches a pre-configured SNI or destination IP address in the gateway (i.e., enrichment of HTTPS communication with subscriber information including determining; based on matching a specific domain/IP address when visiting or requesting through the network, determining the subscriber information such as identifier to enhance requests to target servers in Fandridi, page 2 lines 1-6, page 1 lines 32-37),
reading and copying, by the gateway, a portion of an HTTPS message (i.e., "the enrichment information is one of the group of: a Mobile Station International Subscriber Directory Number (MSISDN), a User Equipment Internet Protocol Address (UE IP Address), an International Mobile Subscriber Identity (IMSI), an International Mobile Equipment Identity (IMEI), a User Location, an Internet Protocol (IP) Address, a timestamp, a Remote Access Terminal (RAT), an Access Point Name Network Identifier (APN-NI)" in Fandridi, page 6 lines 28-33)
corresponding to the HTTPS transaction (i.e., enrichment component extracts enrichment information from the Client Hello message, upon establishing the secured channel such as HTTPS the enrichment component intercepts and decrypts and adds enrichment data before routing to the web server in Fandridi, page 13 lines 17-36 to page 14 line 1 to 14, the enrichment handshake protocol).
Based on Campo Trapero in view of Fandridi, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings of Fandridi to improve upon those of Campo Trapero in order to enrich communications with HTTPS secure protocol with subscriber information derived from the unencrypted handshake phase.
Campo Trapero discloses provisioning the SNI corresponding to "vimeo.adult" to the PCF and the SNI is used to retrieve policy rules and implement the rules for the user (page 24 lines 10-34). Campo Trapero and Fandridi do(es) not explicitly disclose the following. Kasbekar, in order to enriching an ongoing HTTPS connection despite encryption via an out of band method for providing enrichment information (¶0035), discloses:
initiating, by the gateway, a new HTTPS connection to the web or application server, wherein the new HTTPS connection is distinct from the HTTPS transaction made by the UE (i.e., communicating enrichment information "out of band" through an ongoing HTTPS connection to the server in a separate connection in Kasbekar, ¶0035); and
forwarding, by the gateway utilizing the new HTTPS connection, the subscriber information to the web or application server (i.e., enriching a request with information such as MSISDN number of the device to identify the suer; sending the enrichment information to the server with an out of band separate HTTPS connection in Kasbekar, ¶0032, ¶0035).
Based on Campo Trapero in view of Fandridi, and further in view of Kasbekar, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings of Kasbekar to improve upon those of Campo Trapero in order to enriching an ongoing HTTPS connection despite encryption via an out of band method for providing enrichment information.
With respect to claim 3, Campo Trapero discloses provisioning the SNI corresponding to "vimeo.adult" to the PCF and the SNI is used to retrieve policy rules and implement the rules for the user (page 24 lines 10-34). Campo Trapero and Fandridi do(es) not explicitly disclose the following. Kasbekar, in order to enriching an ongoing HTTPS connection despite encryption via an out of band method for providing enrichment information (¶0035), discloses: the method of claim 1,wherein the portion comprises one or more of:
a Transport Layer Security (TLS) session identification (ID) (i.e., send TLS-AUX record containing session-id from the TLS connection establishment in Kasbekar, ¶0086),
a TLS random number, or an IP tuple (i.e., sending the server IP address and corresponding data in Kasbekar, ¶0035).
Based on Campo Trapero in view of Fandridi, and further in view of Kasbekar, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings of Kasbekar to improve upon those of Campo Trapero in order to enriching an ongoing HTTPS connection despite encryption via an out of band method for providing enrichment information.
With respect to claim 5, Campo Trapero discloses: the method of claim 1, further comprising comparing the portion of the HTTPS message to the HTTPS transaction made by the UE (i.e., compare the SNI of the request to the SNI and subscriber information corresponding to parental control and category database in Campo Trapero, page 25 lines 5-11).
With respect to claim 6, Campo Trapero discloses: the method of claim 5, further comprising, based on the comparing, correlating the subscriber information to the HTTPS transaction made by the UE (i.e., the PCF correlates subscriber information and SNI from the request to determine parental control activation based on matching the SNI of the category database to the SNI corresponding to the initial request in Campo Trapero, page 25 lines 5-11).
With respect to claim 7, Campo Trapero discloses: the method of claim 6, further comprising, upon successfully correlating the subscriber information to the original HTTPS transaction made by the UE, receiving an acknowledgement, at the gateway that the HTPPS transaction is successful (i.e., transmitting to the SMF/UPF that the result of determining allowance of the flow by correlating the SNI and the subscriber information to the category and policy databases in Campo Trapero, page 25 lines 12-25; page 27 lines 15-24).
With respect to claim 8, the limitation(s) of claim 8 are similar to those of claim(s) 1. Therefore, claim 8 is rejected with the same reasoning as claim(s) 1.
With respect to claim 10, the limitation(s) of claim 10 are similar to those of claim(s) 3. Therefore, claim 10 is rejected with the same reasoning as claim(s) 3.
With respect to claim 12, the limitation(s) of claim 12 are similar to those of claim(s) 5. Therefore, claim 12 is rejected with the same reasoning as claim(s) 5.
With respect to claim 13, the limitation(s) of claim 13 are similar to those of claim(s) 6. Therefore, claim 13 is rejected with the same reasoning as claim(s) 6.
With respect to claim 14, the limitation(s) of claim 14 are similar to those of claim(s) 7. Therefore, claim 14 is rejected with the same reasoning as claim(s) 7.
With respect to claim 15, the limitation(s) of claim 15 are similar to those of claim(s) 1. Therefore, claim 15 is rejected with the same reasoning as claim(s) 1.
Campo Trapero discloses: a system for transmitting subscriber information via HTTPS, the system comprising:
one or more UEs (i.e., user equipment including a wireless communication device such as a mobile phone in Campo Trapero, page 9 lines 15-27); and
a node configured to wirelessly communicate with the one or more UEs (i.e., operator network with nodes of various network functions in Campo Trapero, page 9 lines 29-33).
With respect to claim 17, the limitation(s) of claim 17 are similar to those of claim(s) 5. Therefore, claim 17 is rejected with the same reasoning as claim(s) 5.
With respect to claim 18, the limitation(s) of claim 18 are similar to those of claim(s) 6. Therefore, claim 18 is rejected with the same reasoning as claim(s) 6.
With respect to claim 19, the limitation(s) of claim 19 are similar to those of claim(s) 7. Therefore, claim 19 is rejected with the same reasoning as claim(s) 7.
Claim(s) 2, 4, 9, 11, 16, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Campo Trapero et al. (WO 2020/020473 A1) in view of Fandridi et al. (WO 2022/123384 A1) and Kasbekar (US 2016/0094581 A1), and further in view of Spiers et al. (US 2012/0266231 A1).
With respect to claim 2, Campo Trapero discloses the application servers to securely expose interfaces of an application server (page 2 lines 1-10). Campo Trapero, Fandridi and Kasbekar do(es) not explicitly disclose the following. Spiers, in order to in order to facilitate provisioning of machines to create a trusted environment for sharing confidential information (¶0010), discloses: the method of claim 1, further comprising initiating, by the gateway, a secured connection to the web or application server via HTTPS (i.e., the component establishing a secure channel with HTTPS SSL/TLS with a trusted server; the server is configured to be trusted in order for loaded machines to establish a secure channel for transmitting confidential information in Spiers, ¶0010).
Based on Campo Trapero in view of Fandridi and Kasbekar, and further in view of Spiers, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings of Spiers to improve upon those of Campo Trapero in order to in order to facilitate provisioning of machines to create a trusted environment for sharing confidential information.
With respect to claim 4, Campo Trapero discloses the application servers to securely expose interfaces of an application server (page 2 lines 1-10). Campo Trapero, Fandridi, and Kasbekar do(es) not explicitly disclose the following. Spiers, in order to in order to facilitate provisioning of machines to create a trusted environment for sharing confidential information (¶0010), discloses: the method of claim 1, wherein the web or application server is pre-configured to accept HTTPS transactions from the gateway (i.e., the component establishing a secure channel with HTTPS SSL/TLS with a trusted server; the server is configured to be trusted in order for loaded machines to establish a secure channel for transmitting confidential information in Spiers, ¶0010).
Based on Campo Trapero in view of Fandridi and Kasbekar, and further in view of Spiers, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings of Spiers to improve upon those of Campo Trapero in order to in order to facilitate provisioning of machines to create a trusted environment for sharing confidential information.
With respect to claim 9, the limitation(s) of claim 9 are similar to those of claim(s) 2. Therefore, claim 9 is rejected with the same reasoning as claim(s) 2.
With respect to claim 11, the limitation(s) of claim 11 are similar to those of claim(s) 4. Therefore, claim 11 is rejected with the same reasoning as claim(s) 4.
With respect to claim 16, the limitation(s) of claim 16 are similar to those of claim(s) 2. Therefore, claim 16 is rejected with the same reasoning as claim(s) 2.
With respect to claim 20, the limitation(s) of claim 20 are similar to those of claim(s) 4. Therefore, claim 20 is rejected with the same reasoning as claim(s) 4.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHERMAN L LIN whose telephone number is (571)270-7446. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM (Eastern).
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, Joon Hwang can be reached on 571-272-4036. 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.
Sherman Lin
1/8/2026
/S. L./Examiner, Art Unit 2447
/JOON H HWANG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2447