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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 February 13, 2026 has been entered.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on January 21, 2026 was filed after the mailing date of the Final Office Action on November 17, 2025. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed February 13, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The Applicant amends claim to overcome previous rejection by adding “wherein, in a case where the failure related to the radio link is detected before the CONFIGURATION UPDATE COMPLETE message is received, the AMF continues running the timer.” However, Reference A as cited in previous Office Action still reads on this newly added limitation.
The Applicant points out on page 6 of Remarks that Reference A discloses on pages 4 and 5, two abnormal cases on the network side: 1) expiry of timer T3555, and ii) lower layer failure before the CONFIGURATION UPDAT COMPLETE message is received.
With respect to the expiry of timer T3555, this teaching of Reference A reads on the newly added limitation because Reference A discloses that the network shall, on the first expiry of the timer T3555, retransmit the CONFIGURATION UPDATE COMMAND message and shall reset and start timer T3555. This retransmission is repeated four times, i.e., on the fifth expiry of timer T3555, the procedure shall be aborted. In other words, the timer T3555 keeps running until the timer T3555 is expired, then the network retransmits the CONFIGURATION UPDATE COMMAND message. The timer T3555 is reset again and continues to run until the timer T3555 is expired for the second time. This process continues for four times before the timer T3555 is aborted. The fact that the timer T3555 waits until it is expired, it clearly means that the timer T3555 continues to run, in which it reads on the claim limitation “the AMF continues running the timer”.
More importantly, this teaching of Reference A is also consistent with the Applicant’s own disclosure. That is, Figure 2 of the instant application shows that the T3555 is started after the CONFIGURATION UPDATE COMMAND in step 5 is transmitted, and another CONFIGURATION UPDATE COMMAND in step 7 is transmitted after the T3555 is expired. Similarly, Reference A discloses that the network waits for the T3555 to be expired before retransmitting another CONFIGURATION UPDATE COMMAND message.
Based on the above discussion, it should be clear to the Applicant that the combination of Reference A and Sugawara still reads on the amended claim.
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, and 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over “5G MM – PCF originated policies configuration” as cited in IDS dated March 17, 2023 (hereinafter “Reference A”) in view of Sugawara (US 2020/0120751).
Regarding claim 1, Reference A discloses a method of an Access and Mobility Management Function (AMF), the method comprising:
sending a CONFIGURATION UPDATE COMMAND message (i.e., sending a CONFIGURATION UPDATE COMMAND message as shown in Fig. 5.4.4.1.1 on page 2),
wherein the CONFIGURATION UPDATE COMMAND message includes Allowed Network Slice Selection Assistance Information (NSSAI) or Rejected NSSAI (i.e., the CONFIGURATION UPDATE COMMAND includes allowed NSSAI as described in section 5.4.4.2 on page 2);
starting a timer in a case where the CONFIGURATION UPDATE COMMAND message is sent (i.e., starting a timer T3555 as described in section a) on page 5); and
retransmitting the CONFIGURATION UPDATE COMMAND message on expiry of the timer, and resetting and starting the timer (i.e., retransmitting CONFIGURATION UPDATE COMMAND message when the timer 3555 is expired, reset and start timer as described in section a) on page 5); and
wherein, in a case where the failure related to the radio link is detected before the CONFIGURATION UPDATE COMPLETE message is received, the AMF continues running the timer (i.e., the network shall, on the first expiry of the timer T3555, retransmit the CONFIGURATION UPDATE COMMAND message, and shell reset and start timer T3555, and repeats four time as described in section 5.4.4.6 section a) Expiry of timer T3555. In other words, the timer continues to run as the network waits for the timer to be expired before retransmitting the CONFIGURATION UPDATE COMMAND).
Reference A, however, does not expressly disclose:
repeating the retransmission a predetermined of times in a case where failure related to a radio link is detected before a CONFIGURATION UPDATE COMPLETE message is received.
In a similar endeavor, Sugawara discloses a user equipment. Sugawara also discloses:
repeating the retransmission a predetermined of times in a case where failure related to a radio link is detected before a CONFIGURATION UPDATE COMPLETE message is received (i.e., in a case that the AMF cannot receive the UE Configuration Update Complete message from the UE, the AMF repeats the retransmission by a predetermined number of times as described in paragraph 0388).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art to modify the teachings of the cited references, and arrive at the present invention.
The motivation/suggestion for doing so would have been to ensure that the UE could receive the update command and change the configuration accordingly.
With further regard to claim 3, since this claim recites a different statutory class and include similar features to those of recited within claim 1. Therefore, the Examiner also rejects this claim at least for the same reasons discussed above. In addition, it is obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that Access and Mobility Management Function (AMF) comprising: at least one memory; and at least one hardware processor coupled to the at least one memory.
Claim(s) 5-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference A in view of Sugawara, and further in view of Shrestha et al. (hereinafter “Shrestha”, US 2024/0107335).
Regarding claims 5, and 7, Reference A and Sugawara disclose all limitations recited within claims as described above, but do not expressly disclose features of this claim.
In a similar endeavor, Shrestha discloses configuration and reporting of location information in conjunction with MDT. Shrestha also discloses detecting the failure related to the radio link based on a Next Generation Application Protocol (NGAP) message (i.e., NG-RAN initiates the failure indication message based on NGAP as described in paragraphs 0012-0018).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art to modify the teachings of the cited references, and arrive at the present invention.
The motivation/suggestion for doing so would have been to communicate the connection status between the base station and the core network.
Regarding claims 6, and 8, Reference A, Sugawara, and Shrestha disclose all limitations recited within claims as described above. Shrestha also discloses receiving the NGAP message from a radio access network (i.e., NGAP as described in paragraphs 0012-0018).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WAYNE CAI whose telephone number is (571)272-7798. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday, 7:00 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, KATHY WANG-HURST can be reached on (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.
/Wayne H Cai/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2644
Prosecution Insights