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 .
Claims 1-20 are currently pending.
This paper is responsive to the Appeal Brief filed December 23, 2025
In view of the appeal brief filed on December 23, 2025 PROSECUTION IS HEREBY REOPENED. New grounds of rejection are set forth below.
To avoid abandonment of the application, appellant must exercise one of the following two options:
(1) file a reply under 37 CFR 1.111 (if this Office action is non-final) or a reply under 37 CFR 1.113 (if this Office action is final); or,
(2) initiate a new appeal by filing a notice of appeal under 37 CFR 41.31 followed by an appeal brief under 37 CFR 41.37. The previously paid notice of appeal fee and appeal brief fee can be applied to the new appeal. If, however, the appeal fees set forth in 37 CFR 41.20 have been increased since they were previously paid, then appellant must pay the difference between the increased fees and the amount previously paid.
A Supervisory Patent Examiner (SPE) has approved of reopening prosecution by signing below
/CHARLES C JIANG/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2412
Response to Arguments on Appeal
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-20 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 § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-4, 15-16 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US Pat. Pub. US20240089727 to Carlos Jesus Bernardos et al. (hereinafter Bernardos).
Regarding claim 1, Bernardos teaches A method for conducting a call between a user equipment (UE) and a first cellular network via a second cellular network, (Bernardos teaches in para. [0074]-[0075] teaches a WTRU having access to a N3IWF that is an interface between non-3GPP access and the 3GPP 5G Core Network such as an interface towards 3GPP RAN over an Xn interface.) the method comprising:
implementing a network slice between the UE and the second cellular network, the network slice having at least one quality of service (QoS) capability suitable for supporting the call; (Bernardos para. [0078] teaches WTRUs may obtain information about available network slices across distinct Access Networks (e.g., to provide awareness of network slice availability on 3GPP access while connected to a non-3GPP access and/or vice versa).)
establishing a network tunnel between the UE and the first cellular network via the network slice; (Bernardos para. [0074]-[0086] teaches that a WTRU may establish a tunnel access a NextGen Core via non-3GPP access via “IPsec tunnel establishment with a WTRU (e.g., N3IWF may terminate IKEv2/IPsec protocols with a WTRU over NWu and may relay over N2 information to authenticate a WTRU and authorize its access to a 5G Core Network)” . The WTRU may send a message to an N3IWF to determine what slices are available in the 3GPP access network or receive slicing advertising from 3GPP networks. FIG. 2 illustrates using a slice to register with a 3GPP RAN from non-3GPP access:
PNG
media_image1.png
721
733
media_image1.png
Greyscale
and
communicating data packets for the call between the UE and the first cellular network via the network tunnel while the network slice is established between the UE and the second cellular network. (Bernardos Fig. 2 and para. [0086]-[0094] illustrates registering with a 3GPP RAN via network slicing from a non-3GPP access point and at step 202 retrieves slicing information, and at 203 establishes an IPsec tunnel with N3IWF to encapsulate slicing information, therefore, after establishing an IPsec tunnel, the WTRU may connect with a “vendor-specific” procedure to connect to a slice that is available to the WTRU, for example, when “a desirable network slice may not be available” . As shown in Fig. 2 step 207, and para. [0096], a WTRU initiates a registration process for a subset of an available NSSAI that include slices that fit requirements better and at step 207 provides the slice NSSAI to the network. As shown in Fig. 2, the slice initiation occurs after the tunnel between the core network and the WTRU is established.)
Regarding claim 2, Bernardos teaches The method of claim 1, further comprising: selecting the network slice from a plurality of network slices available from the second cellular network for use by the UE. (Bernardos teaches in para. [0060] that the core network may provide customized support via network slicing, and para. [0076] teaches that the WTRU may request different types of slices from a 3GPP 5G network via “cross-RAT network slicing capability advertisement” of available slices. Therefore, a WTRU selects from the plurality of advertised slices available via the core network which is a second cellular network.)
Regarding claim 3, Bernardos teaches selecting the network slice comprises selecting the network slice at the UE based on a list of available network slices provided by the second cellular network. (Bernardos teaches Fig. 2 and paras. [0085]-[0086] “notification of available slices” as an advertisement via an AMF, wherein an N3IWF conveys information via IPsec tunnel to the WTRU through a non-3GPP access to enable the WTRU to register with a 3GPP RAN based on network slicing provide through advertising taught in para. [0088] as “a set of one or more S-NSSAI for slices that are available” mapped to “a list of available network slices provided by the second cellular network”.)
Regarding claim 4, Bernardos teaches selecting the network slice further comprises selecting the network slice based on a comparison of a QoS parameter for the call with a corresponding QoS capability of one or more available network slices. (Bernardos teaches in para. [0088] that the network slices provided as a “set of one or more S-NSSAI for slices that are available” include “slicing capabilities available via the IPsec tunnel. Bernardos para. [0092] – [0093] teaches that the relaying of capability information may be dependent on events that are QoS parameters such as battery reaching a threshold or that WIFI traffic may reach a certain threshold. Further, para. [0060] teaches that the core network may further offer slices that provide “ultra-reliable low latency (URLLC) access” which requires a specific QoS.)
Regarding claim 6, Bernardos teaches receiving, at the UE, an indication of the network slice to be implemented from the second cellular network in response to at least one of:
transmission of an indication of at least one QoS requirement for the call to the second cellular network;
or
transmission of an indication that the call is to be supported by the first cellular network via the second cellular network. (Bernardos Fig. 2 illustrates in step 205 registration including a slice choice. Bernardos paras. [0075]-[0076] teach that the WTRU may request different types of slices from a 3GPP 5G network that “provide inter-working or coordination between cellular network and other RATS, e.g. 3GPP and non3GPP”... “Cross-RATs network slicing capability advertisement (e.g. notification of available slices) may be implemented, for example, with coordination between 3GPP and non-3GPP access technologies.”)
Regarding claim 16, Bernardos teaches A user equipment (UE) (Fig. 1 WTRU 102a-d) comprising:
an application processor; (Bernardos Fig. 1B, processor 118)
a radio frequency (RF) modem coupled to the application processor; (Bernardos Fig. 1B transciever 120)
at least one antenna array coupled to the RF modem; (Bernardos Fig. 1B antenna 122
and
at least one memory to store instructions, (Bernardos Fig. 1B memory 130 and 132) the instructions configured to manipulate one or both of the application processor or the RF modem to:
implement a network slice between the UE and a first cellular network, the network slice having at least one quality of service (QoS) capability suitable for supporting a call between the UE and a second cellular network via the first cellular network; (Bernardos para. [0078] teaches WTRUs may obtain information about available network slices across distinct Access Networks (e.g., to provide awareness of network slice availability on 3GPP access while connected to a non-3GPP access and/or vice versa). Para. [0067] teaches that each slice may be associated with network capabilities and characteristics that may cater to requirements and use cases and services, which Examiner interprets as QoS capability.)
establish a network tunnel between the UE and the second cellular network via the network slice; and communicate data packets for the call between the UE and the second cellular network via the network tunnel while the network slice is established between the UE and the second cellular network. (Bernardos para. [0074]-[0086] teaches that a WTRU may establish a tunnel access a NextGen Core via non-3GPP access via “IPsec tunnel establishment with a WTRU (e.g., N3IWF may terminate IKEv2/IPsec protocols with a WTRU over NWu and may relay over N2 information to authenticate a WTRU and authorize its access to a 5G Core Network)” . The WTRU may send a message to an N3IWF to determine what slices are available in the 3GPP access network or receive slicing advertising from 3GPP networks. FIG. 2 illustrates using a slice to register with a 3GPP RAN from non-3GPP access:
PNG
media_image1.png
721
733
media_image1.png
Greyscale
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.
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.
Claims 10, 15 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bernardos in view of US Pat. Pub. 20210136849 to Srinivasan Nimmala et al. (hereinafter Nimmala).
Regarding claim 10, Bernardos does NOT teach The method of claim 1, further comprising:
initiating the call at the UE by a user software application executing at the UE;
and
providing a data interface for use for the call to the UE responsive to establishing the network tunnel.
In the analogous art of 3GPP 5G wireless communications, Nimmala teaches initiating the call at the UE by a user software application executing at the UE; ((Nimmala para. [0038]-[0039] teaches that a UE with multi-SIM may include software/firmware on a SIM and “the multi-SIM/eSIM wireless device 102 can appear as two distinct devices (each associated with a different number, user, and/or subscription)” and connect accordingly.)
providing a data interface for use for the call to the UE responsive to establishing the network tunnel. (Nimmala teaches in para. [0043] that a tunneled Protocol Data Unit (PDU) session for SIM1 using SIM2. Fig. 3 step 332 teaches that a multi-SIM wireless device 102 is able to originate or receive voice or video connections with either SIM. Examiner interprets a tunneled PDU session as a data interface for a call.)
It would have been obvious to one of skill in the art prior to the effective date of the invention to combine Bernardos with Nimmala. Each of Bernardos and Nimmala are in the field of wireless communications. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Bernardos with Nimmala in order to achieve flexibility and convenience to access a broader variety of services by a wireless device as taught in Nimmala para. [0028].
Regarding claim 15, Bernardos does NOT teach The method of claim 1, wherein the call comprises one of a voice call or a video call.
In the analogous art of 3GPP 5G wireless communications, Nimmala teaches wherein the call comprises one of a voice call or a video call (Nimmala teaches that a call can be both a voice call or a video call in para. [0043].)
It would have been obvious to one of skill in the art prior to the effective date of the invention to combine Bernardos with Nimmala. Each of Bernardos and Nimmala are in the field of wireless communications. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Bernardos with Nimmala in order to achieve flexibility and convenience to access a broader variety of services by a wireless device as taught in Nimmala para. [0028].
Regarding claim 20, Bernardos does NOT teach The UE of claim 16, wherein the instructions further are configured to manipulate one or both of the application processor or the RF modem to:
initiate the call at the UE by a user software application executing at the UE; and
provide a data interface for use for the call to the UE responsive to establishing the network tunnel.
In the analogous art of 3GPP 5G wireless communications, Nimmala teaches initiate the call at the UE by a user software application executing at the UE; ((Nimmala para. [0038]-[0039] teaches that a UE with multi-SIM may include software/firmware on a SIM and “the multi-SIM/eSIM wireless device 102 can appear as two distinct devices (each associated with a different number, user, and/or subscription)” and connect accordingly.)
and
provide a data interface for use for the call to the UE responsive to establishing the network tunnel. (Nimmala teaches in para. [0043] that a tunneled Protocol Data Unit (PDU) session for SIM1 using SIM2. Fig. 3 step 332 teaches that a multi-SIM wireless device 102 is able to originate or receive voice or video connections with either SIM. Examiner interprets a tunneled PDU session as a data interface for a call.)
It would have been obvious to one of skill in the art prior to the effective date of the invention to combine Bernardos with Nimmala. Each of Bernardos and Nimmala are in the field of wireless communications. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Bernardos with Nimmala in order to achieve flexibility and convenience to access a broader variety of services by a wireless device as taught in Nimmala para. [0028].
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bernardos in view of Nimmala further in view of US. Pat. Pub. 20230396982 to Byungho Hong, Yoseob Kwak, and Jungmin Oh (hereinafter Hong).
Regarding claim 5, Bernardos does NOT specifically teach The method of claim 2, wherein:
establishing the network tunnel comprises establishing the network tunnel based on a first subscriber identity of the UE that is associated with the first cellular network; (Although Bernardos teaches establishing an IPSec Tunnel via a Wi-Fi___33 non-3GPP network, and that the WTRU may include a SIM card as removable memory 132 in Fig. 1, Bernardos does not teach that the SIM is associated with a tunnel.)
However in the analogous art of 3GPP 5G wireless communications, Nimmala teaches establishing the network tunnel comprises establishing the network tunnel based on a first subscriber identity of the UE that is associated with the first cellular network; (Nimmala teaches in Fig. 4A establishing a network tunnel based on a first SIM associated with a first RAN using a tunneled PMS Session:
PNG
media_image2.png
820
1119
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of skill in the art prior to the effective date of the invention to combine Bernardos with Nimmala. Each of Bernardos and Nimmala are in the field of wireless communications. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Bernardos with Nimmala in order to achieve flexibility and convenience to access a broader variety of services by a wireless device as taught in Nimmala para. [0028].
and
Bernardos also does NOT teach the plurality of network slices available from the second cellular network for use by the UE is based on a second subscriber identity of the UE that is associated with the second cellular network.
In the analogous art of 3GPP 5G wireless communications, Hong teaches the plurality of network slices available from the second cellular network for use by the UE is based on a second subscriber identity of the UE that is associated with the second cellular network. (Hong Table 3 illustrates a plurality of network slices available from other cellular networks based on SIM2:
PNG
media_image3.png
264
797
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Table 3 illustrates a SIM2 and a SIM1 subscriber identity within a UE and available networks.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective date of the invention to have combined Bernardos with Hong. Each of Bernardos and Hong are in the field of wireless communications. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Hong with Bernardos to reduce latency and reduce delays of data transmission and reception as taught in Hong para. [0130].
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bernardos in view of U.S. Pat. Pub. 20190098487 to David Boettger (hereinafter Boettger).
Regarding claim 7, Bernardos does NOT teach The method of claims 1, wherein:
establishing the network tunnel comprises establishing the network tunnel based on a first subscriber identity of the UE that is associated with the first cellular network;
In the analogous field of 3GPP 4G wireless communication networks, Boettger teaches establishing the network tunnel comprises establishing the network tunnel based on a first subscriber identity of the UE that is associated with the first cellular network. (Boettger teaches a dual SIM in para. [0022] “establishing a data connection context, … for a primary SIM during association with the wireless network of the primary SIM/eSIM. Using a data connection, e.g., a secure tunnel, to the ePDG of the wireless network associated with the secondary SIM/eSIM, the wireless communication device can register for … voice connections and/or SMS, with an IP Multimedia Subsystem (IMS) server …. Associated with the secondary SIM.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective date of the invention to combine Bernardos with Boettger. Each of Bernardos and Boettger are in the field of wireless communications. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Boettger with Bernardos to enable dual SIM services for both wireless networks simultaneously without requiring complex switching or dual transceivers as taught in para. Boettger [0023].
and
Bernardos does NOT teach implementing the network slice comprises implementing the network slice based on a second subscriber identity of the UE that is associated with the second cellular network and different from the first subscriber identity.
In the analogous art of 3GPP 5G wireless communications, Hong teaches implementing the network slice comprises implementing the network slice based on a second subscriber identity of the UE that is associated with the second cellular network and different from the first subscriber identity. (Hong teaches in Fig. 3 and para. [0101] multiple network slices that can be configured NSSAI based on subscription information. Hong para. [0105] teaches that second SIM 112 is a SIM subscribing to the MNO of the second communication network.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective date of the invention to combine Bernardos with Hong. Each of Bernardos and Hong are in the field of wireless communications. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Hong and Bernardos to reduce latency and reduce delays of data transmission and reception as taught in Hong para. [0130].
Claim 8 is rejected as being obvious under 35 USC 103 over Bernardos in view of Boettger and Hong further in view of Nimmala.
Regarding claim 8, Bernardos does NOT teach The method of claim 7, wherein:
the first subscriber identity is stored by a first subscriber identity module (SIM) of the UE; () and
the second subscriber identity is stored by a second SIM of the UE. (”)
In the analogous art of 3GPP 5G wireless communications, Nimmala teaches the first subscriber identity is stored by a first subscriber identity module (SIM) of the UE; (Nimmala teaches in para. [0038] a multi-SIM device 102 with an embedded UICC with “at least one subscriber identity module embodied as a software/firmware program. Nimmala para. [0059] teaches that In some embodiments, the information for the first SIM includes one or more identifiers for the first SIM.)
and
the second subscriber identity is stored by a second SIM of the UE. (Nimmala further teaches in para. [0059] that the second SIM may have its own and “separate logical channel identifiers (LCIDs) including a first LCID assigned for the second SIM to carry its own traffic and a second LCID for the second SIM to carry the data traffic tunneled for the first SIM” and “access network separates the multiplexed data packets into separate streams based at least in part on identifiers for the respective SIMs”).
It would have been obvious to one of skill in the art prior to the effective date of the invention to combine Bernardos with Nimmala. Each of Bernardos and Nimmala are in the field of wireless communications. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Bernardos with Nimmala in order to achieve flexibility and convenience to access a broader variety of services by a wireless device as taught in Nimmala para. [0028].
Claims 9 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bernardos in view of Boettger.
Regarding claim 9, Bernardos does NOT teach The method of claim 1, wherein establishing the network tunnel comprises establishing the network tunnel between the UE and an Internet Protocol multimedia services (IMS) server of the first cellular network.
However, in the analogous field of 5G wireless communications, Boettger teaches establishing the network tunnel comprises establishing the network tunnel between the UE and an Internet Protocol multimedia services (IMS) server of the first cellular network. (Boettger teaches in para. [0021] an IMS server associated with a SIM in a dual SIM UE which, according to para. [0004] “The wireless device registers for wireless services with an Internet Protocol Multimedia Subsystem (IMS) server via the tunneled connection with the ePDG of the second cellular wireless network.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective date of the invention to combine Bernardos with Boettger. Each of Bernardos and Boettger are in the field of wireless communications . One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Boettger with Bernardos to enable dual SIM services for both wireless networks simultaneously without requiring complex switching or dual transceivers as taught in para. Boettger [0023].
Regarding claim 14, Bernardos does NOT teach The method of claim 1, wherein the network tunnel comprises an evolved packet data gateway (ePDG) tunnel.
However, in the analogous field of 5G wireless communications, Boettger teaches the network tunnel comprises an evolved packet data gateway (ePDG) tunnel. (Boettger para. [0021] teaches that “In some embodiments, the second SIM's (or eSIM's) cellular wireless network includes an evolved Packet Data Network Gateway (ePDG) through which services of the core network of the second SIM' s cellular wireless network can be accessed from an IP network connection.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective date of the invention to combine Bernardos with Boettger. Each of Bernardos and Boettger are in the field of wireless communications . One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Boettger with Bernardos to enable dual SIM services for both wireless networks simultaneously without requiring complex switching or dual transceivers as taught in para. Boettger [0023].
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bernardos further in view Hong.
Regarding claim 17, Bernardos does NOT teach The UE of claim 16, wherein the instructions further are configured to manipulate one or both of the application processor or the RF modem to:
select the network slice from a list of available network slices provided by the first cellular network and based on a comparison of a QoS parameter for the call with a corresponding QoS capability of one or more available network slices.
However, in the analogous art of LTE and new radio (NR) mobile communications, Hong teaches wherein the instructions further are configured to manipulate one or both of the application processor or the RF modem to:
select the network slice from a list of available network slices provided by the first cellular network and based on a comparison of a QoS parameter for the call with a corresponding QoS capability of one or more available network slices.
(Hong Table 3 illustrates a plurality of network slices available from other cellular networks:
PNG
media_image3.png
264
797
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Table 3 illustrates a SIM2 and a SIM1 subscriber identity within a UE and available networks and different 5QI quality of service levels and downlink and uplink speeds and the like. The column S-NSSAI provides a list of available network slices and corresponding QoS capability in the 5QI column.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective date of the invention to have combined Bernardos with Hong. Each of Bernardos and Hong are in the field of wireless communications. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Hong with Bernardos to reduce latency and reduce delays of data transmission and reception as taught in Hong para. [0130].
Claims 18 and 19 are rejected as being obvious under 35 USC 103 over Bernardos in view of Hong and Boettger.
Regarding claim 18, Bernardos does NOT teach The UE of claim 17, wherein:
the network tunnel is established based on a first subscriber identity of the UE that is associated with the second cellular network;
However, Boettger, in the analogous field of 4G LTE wireless communication networks, teaches the network tunnel is established based on a first subscriber identity of the UE that is associated with the second cellular network; (Boettger para. [0004] teaches a tunnel for a primary SIM to receive voice calls of the second cellular wireless network “using the tunneled data connection through the first cellular wireless network”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective date of the invention to combine Bernardos with Boettger Each of Bernardos and Boettger are in the field of wireless communications. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Boettger with Bernardos to enable dual SIM services for both wireless networks simultaneously without requiring complex switching or dual transceivers as taught in para. Boettger [0023].
Bernardos does NOT teach the list of available network slices from the first cellular network for use by the UE is based on a second subscriber identity of the UE that is associated with the first cellular network.
However, in the analogous art of LTE and new radio (NR) mobile communications, Hong teaches the list of available network slices from the first cellular network for use by the UE is based on a second subscriber identity of the UE that is associated with the first cellular network. (Hong Table 3, above illustrates that the list of available network slices is available to both SIM 1 and SIM2. As shown in Table 3 and para. [0150] an electronic device may select a SIM corresponding to an identified data network name (DNN), such as “having a larger AMBR in accordance with the corresponding DNN on the basis of the QoS table of Table 3.” As shown, the list includes DNN of both the SIM 1 and SIM 2 and lists slices for each of SIM 1 and SIM 2 and therefore all are “associated.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective date of the invention to combine Bernardos with Hong. Each of Bernardos and Hong are in the field of wireless communications . One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Hong and Bernardos to reduce latency and reduce delays of data transmission and reception as taught in Hong para. [0130].
Regarding claim 19, Bernardos does NOT teach The UE of claim 16, wherein:
the network tunnel is established based on a first subscriber identity of the UE that is associated with the second cellular network;
However, in the analogous field of 4G LTE wireless communication networks, Boettger teaches the network tunnel is established based on a first subscriber identity of the UE that is associated with the second cellular network; (Boettger para. [0004] teaches a tunnel for a primary SIM to receive voice calls of the second cellular wireless network “using the tunneled data connection through the first cellular wireless network”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective date of the invention to combine Bernardos with Boettger. Each of Bernardos and Boettger are in the field of wireless communications. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Boettger with Bernardos to enable dual SIM services for both wireless networks simultaneously without requiring complex switching or dual transceivers as taught in Boettger para. [0023].
and
Bernardos does NOT teach the network slice is implemented based on a second subscriber identity of the UE that is associated with the first cellular network and different from the first subscriber identity.
However, Hong, in the analogous field of 4G LTE and New Radio (NR) wireless communication networks, teaches the network slice is implemented based on a second subscriber identity of the UE that is associated with the first cellular network and different from the first subscriber identity. . (Hong Table 3, above illustrates that the list of available network slices is available to both SIM 1 and SIM2. As taught in Hong para. [0118] a selection module 603 may identify a second SIM 112 because it has a delay budge of 5QI and lower than a packet delay budget of 5QI of first SIM 111 and implement the network slice of SIM 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective date of the invention to combine Bernardos with Hong. Each of Bernardos and Hong are in the field of wireless communications . One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Hong and Bernardos to reduce latency and reduce delays of data transmission and reception as taught in Hong para. [0130].
Claim 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pat. Pub. 20220240222 to Myungjune Youn et al. (hereinafter Youn) in view of Hong.
Regarding claim 11, Youn teaches A method comprising:
conducting a cross-subscriber identity module (cross-SIM) call between a user equipment (UE) and a first cellular network via a network tunnel between the UE and the first cellular network that,
(Youn teaches in Fig. 10 and paras. [0387]-[0396] a cross-SIM call between a UE in a first cellular network PLMN1 and PLMN2, with a tunnel shown in Fig. 10. Youn para. [0390] teaches that the UE may transmit multiple SIM registration indication information to the UPF of PLMN 1, and the UPF of PLMN1 may transmit SIM indication to PLMN2. Youn Fig. 12C illustrates the registration using PDU session tunnel 16a “Registration request PLMN1 via PLMN2 PDU Session (Multi SIM indication)”.
PNG
media_image4.png
887
1226
media_image4.png
Greyscale
utilizes a network slice established between the UE and a second cellular network (Youn para. [0133]-[0144] teach the registration procedure for registering to a network, which includes a registration request including an NSSAI. Youn para. [0164] teaches that in case network slicing is used the AMF obtains allowed NSSAI based on “UE subscription and local policy” otherwise the registration request is re-routed.” the network slice being selected so as to provide at least one quality of service (QoS) capability in support of the cross-SIM call. (Youn para. [0267] teaches a QoS associated with the PDU session, but does NOT teach that the network slice is being selected so as to provide at least one quality of service (QoS) capability in support of the cross-SIM call.)
However, in the analogous art of 3GPP 5G wireless communications, Hong teaches the network slice being selected so as to provide at least one quality of service (QoS) capability in support of the cross-SIM call. (Hong teaches in para. [0114] that “when a network slice type corresponding to the application as eMBB, the electronic device 101 may select the first SIM…” according to Table 3 which illustrates a list of available network slices according to quality of service capability to support a cross-SIM call:
PNG
media_image3.png
264
797
media_image3.png
Greyscale
As shown, Table 3 the third column lists the network slices, the 5QI column provides a quality of service as does the uplink and downlink speed of columns 5 and 6. Hong para. [0114] teaches that “For example, when a network slice type corresponding to the application is URLLC, the electronic device 101 may select the first SIM as a SIM for the application on the basis of information indicating that a packet delay budget of 5QI corresponding to a DNN of “ims” corresponding to the first SIM 111 is smaller than a packet delay budget of 5QI of the second SIM 112.” Thus, the QoS supports a cross-SIM call.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify PDU session of Youn to incorporate the network slices and quality of service choices provided by Hong, such a modification would allow low-latency voice and “provide the best QoS from among a plurality of SIMs to establish a PDU session connection” as taught in Hong para. [0007].
Regarding claim 12, Youn in view of Hong teaches The method of claim 11, wherein the second cellular network selects the network slice based on the UE attempting to conduct the cross-SIM call. (Youn teaches in Fig. 12A, above, cross-SIM calling in terms of registration for each network. As part of the registration for each network, Hong para. [0083] and Table 3 teach cross-SIM calls according to Table 3 with a network slice selection assistance information (NSSAI), and para. [0101] teaches that each slice may have a slice ID.)
Regarding claim 13, Youn does NOT teach The method of claim 11, wherein the UE selects the network slice from a list of network slices available from the second cellular network based on QoS capabilities supported by the network slices of the list.
In the analogous art of analogous art of 3GPP 5G wireless communications, Hong teaches wherein the UE selects the network slice from a list of network slices available from the second cellular network based on QoS capabilities supported by the network slices of the list (Hong teaches in para. [0114] that “when a network slice type corresponding to the application as eMBB, the electronic device 101 may select the first SIM…” according to Table 3 which illustrates a list of available network slices according to quality of service capability to support a cross-SIM call:
PNG
media_image3.png
264
797
media_image3.png
Greyscale
As shown, Table 3 the third column lists the network slices, the 5QI column provides a quality of service as does the uplink and downlink speed of columns 5 and 6.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify the PDU session of Youn to incorporate the network slice quality of service choices provided by Hong, such a modification would allow low-latency voice and “provide the best QoS from among a plurality of SIMs to establish a PDU session connection” as taught in Hong para. [0007].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARGARET MARIE ANDERSON whose telephone number is (703)756-1068. The examiner can normally be reached M-F.
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, CHARLES JIANG can be reached at 571-270-7191. 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.
/MARGARET MARIE ANDERSON/Examiner, Art Unit 2412 /CHARLES C JIANG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2412