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 .
Remarks
The present Office Action is based upon the Applicant’s amendment filed on Sept. 22, 2026. Claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, 10, 11, 13, 14, 16 and 17 are now pending in the present application. This action is made FINAL.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement submitted on Aug. 17, 2026, has been considered by the Examiner and made of record in the application file.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, 10, 11, 13, 14, 16 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 1, 7 and 13 recite, “re-registering in the second PS domain, and sending the first call request message through the second PS domain to refresh an electronic device call parameter and a network call parameter, wherein the re-registering in the second PS domain comprises refreshing a registration through detaching and attaching in the second PS domain”. However, it is not clear when the initial registering with the second PS domain occurred then to re-register second PS domain.
Claims 1, 7 and 13 further recite, “wherein after the sending a first call request message through a first PS domain, before the first call initiation anomaly occurs, the method further comprises: based on a second call initiation anomaly, different from the first call initiation anomaly, occurring, falling back to a second core network from a first core network device, and sending the first call request message through the second PS domain…” However, it is not clear when a second call is initiated then a second call initiation anomaly occurring. It is not clear why the second call initiation anomaly occurring “after the sending a first call request message through a first PS domain, before the first call initiation anomaly occurs”. Furthermore, it is not clear which of the calls (the first call or the second call) falls back to the second core.
Claim(s) 2, 4, 5; 8, 10, 11; and 14, 16, 17 is/are also rejected by the virtue of it/their dependency on claims 1, 7, 13.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim(s) 4, 5, 10, 11, 16 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 4, 10 and 16 recite, “performing a second operation based on a third call initiation anomaly occurring after the performing the first operation, wherein the third call initiation anomaly indicates that sending the first call request message through the second PS domain has failed…” However, the current specification does not support the (emphasized) limitation.
Claim(s) 5; 11; and 17 is/are also rejected by the virtue of it/their dependency on claims 4, 10, 16.
Applicant is welcomed to point out to the portion(s) of the specification that provides support for the limitation(s).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 7 and 13 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed Sept. 22, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On page 10 of the Applicant’s remarks, Applicant asserts, “Paragraph [0048] of the description already recites that "registering again" is detaching and attaching. The feature "registering again" does not rely on the time when the electronic device registers for the first time. Replacing "registering again" with "re-register" eliminates reliance on the time of the registration for the first time and render claim 1 clearer.” Examiner respectfully disagrees. It is still not clear when the first registration with the second PS occurred then to re-register in the second PS domain. Paragraph [0048] does not show when the first time registering with the second PS domain happened, further the paragraph does not show anything regarding “re-registration”.
On pages 10 and 11 of the Applicant’s remarks, Applicant asserts, “As recited in the paragraphs [0064] and [0084], the first call initiation anomaly is different from the second call initiation anomaly. The second call initiation anomaly occurs prior to the first call initiation anomaly. The first call initiation anomaly and the second call initiation anomaly are independent from each other, and they occur independently.” Examiner respectfully disagrees. The second call initiation anomaly happens “after the sending a first call request message through a first PS domain, before the first call initiation anomaly occurs”. The relation between a first call request message through a first PS domain and the second call initiation anomaly is not clear. If the first call initiation anomaly and the second call initiation anomaly are independent then it is not clear why the first call request message is sending through the second PS domain, and then the first call initiation anomaly occurred. Paragraph [0084] does not show why the second call initiation anomaly occurring “after the sending a first call request message through a first PS domain, before the first call initiation anomaly occurs”. Furthermore, it is not clear when the second call was initiated then second call initiation anomaly occurs; and it is not clear which of the calls (the first call or the second call) falls back to the second core.
On page 11 of the Applicant’s remarks, Applicant asserts, “claim 4 is amended to include "after the performing the first operation, wherein the third call initiation anomaly indicates that sending the first call request message through the second PS domain has failed'. The amendment is supported by paragraph [0081] …” Examiner respectfully traverses since the current specification and paragraph [0081] do not support the limitation(s).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant’s disclosure.
BALASUBRAMANIAN et al. -US 20190373515 A1- disclose Call Setup Time In Loaded IMS Networks.
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 ALLAHYAR KASRAIA N whose telephone number is (571)270-1772. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:00 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, RAFAEL PEREZ-GUTIERREZ can be reached at (571)272-7915. 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.
/ALLAHYAR KASRAIA N/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2642
