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 .
This office action is in response to the amendment filed on 08/21/2025.
Claims 1, 3, 9-10. 12 and 18-19 have been amended.
Claims 2 and 11 have been cancelled.
Claims 1, 3-10 and 12-20 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 08/21/2025 has been considered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the 35 U.S.C 103 rejection(s) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Livanos US 11,050,788.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “based on the stored at least a portion of the SEPP profile of the first roaming hub SEPP” lacks clarity with redundant phrasing that make the claim difficult to understand.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. 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.
6. Claims 1, 3-10, 12- 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jayaramachar et al. (US 2023/0110286 A1 and hereinafter referred to as Jayaramachar et al.) in view of Khare et al. (US 2023/0099468 A1 hereinafter referred to as Khare et al.) and in further view of Krishan (US 2023/0179681 A1 hereinafter referred to as Krishan) in view of Livanos et a. (US 11,050,788).
As for claim 1, the combination of Jayaramachar et al., Khare et al., and Krishan discloses a method for providing a security edge protection proxy (SEPP) router for routing messages (Jayaramachar et al. teaches using a SEPP to route inter-PLMN messages (i.e. SEPP router) [Section [0001]]), the method comprising:
at an SEPP router, the registering comprising: (Jayaramachar et al. teaches a SEPP routing subscription request of inter-PLMN from registered network function repositories [Section [0055], [0004]])
storing, by the SEPP router, at least a portion of the NF profile; (Jayaramachar et al. teaches a SEPP (i.e. SEPP router) storing a mapping between a subscription identifier and an identifier associated with a NRF that created the subscription [Section [0070]])
receiving, at the SEPP router, message (Jayaramachar et al. teaches a SEPP receiving an inter-PLMN message [Section [0019]])
determining, by the SEPP router, a public land mobile network (PLMN) as an intended destination and (Jayaramachar et al. teaches insufficient information in a subscription message deterring a PLMN as a destination [Section [0007]])
routing, by the SEPP router, the SBI request message to the first roaming hub SEPP based on the stored at least a portion of the NF profile of the first roaming hub SEPP and the determination of the PLMN as the intended destination for the SBI request message. (Jayaramachar et al. teaches using a SEPP (i.e. SEPP router) to route subscription request messages of an inter-PLMN and determine a network function repository (NRF) as a destination for forwarding the request messages. The NRF is a repository for NF profiles [Sections [0070], [0044]])
Jayaramachar et al. and Krishan do not disclose:
between roaming hub SEPPs
registering a first roaming hub SEPP
an NFRegister request from the first roaming hub SEPP, the NFRegister request including an NF profile of the first roaming hub SEPP
from a second roaming hub SEPP
However, Khare et al. does disclose:
between roaming hub SEPPs (Khare et al. teaches identifying networks through reaching one or more roaming hubs and/or SEPPs [Sections [0001], [0006])
registering a first roaming hub SEPP (Khare et al. teaches a SEPP from a first network is registered with a roaming hub agreement [Section [0177]])
an NFRegister request from the first roaming hub SEPP, the NFRegister request including an NF profile of the first roaming hub SEPP (Khare et al. teaches a SEPP of a first network sending a request and in response the SEPP profile information is sent back [Sections [0193], [0196]])
from a second roaming hub SEPP; (Khare et al. teaches returning a request from a roaming hub and/or SEPP [Sections [0197], [0198]])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combined invention of Jayaramachar et al. and Krishan with the teachings of Khare et al. for registering a first roaming hub SEPP, an NFRegister request including an NF profile of the first roaming hub SEPP, and a second roaming hub SEPP to increase efficiency with routing traffic between multiple roaming hub SEPPs.
Jayaramachar et al. and Khare et al. do not disclose:
a service-based interface (SBI) request message
routing the SBI request message stored at least a portion of the NF profile
However, Krishan does disclose:
a service-based interface (SBI) request message (Krishan teaches receiving a service based interface (SBI) request [Section [0009]])
routing the SBI request message stored at least a portion of the NF profile (Krishan teaches a SBI request that includes identifying an NF profile [Section [0009]])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combined invention of Jayaramachar et al. and Khare et al. with the teachings of Krishan for routing a SBI request message with a portion of a NF profile to increase efficiency distributing SBI request messages.
Jayarmachar in view Khare in view of Kishan does not explicitly disclose, however, Livanos discloses implementing an NFReqister interface at the SEPP router, wherein implementing the NFRegister interface includes providing an interface at the SEPP router through which roaming hub SEPPs can register, using NFRegister request messages, their SEPP profiles with the roaming hub SEPP, the SEPP registration manager for registering, at the SEPP router and via the NFReqister interface, a first roaming hub SEPP, the registering comprising: receiving, at the SEPP router and via the NFRegister interface, an NFRegister request message from the first roaming hub SEPP, the NFRegister request including an SEPP profile of the first roaming hub SEPP ([Fig. 3A, vNRF 116 and vSEPP 112, Col. 4, lines 8-31, a consumer in the hPLMN (hConsumer) sends a discovery request (Nnrf-NFDiscovery) to the vNRF 116. At 236, the vNRF 116 determines the hNRF for the hConsumer 234. Next, at 238, the vNRF 116 forwards the discovery request to the vSEPP 112. The vSEPP 112, at 240, forwards the discovery request to the hSEPP 122… Col. 5, lines 43-65, SEPP Registration with the NRF and the SEPP is added to the list of consumer NFs for the Nnrf_NFManagement-Register and Nnrf_NFDiscovery Request services). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combined invention of Jayaramachar et al. and Krishan and Khar with the teachings of Livanos in order to provide/deploy one or more visited security edge protection proxies for the visited network that reside at a border between the visited network and the home network and home security edge protection proxies are for the home network that reside at a border between the home network and the visited network (Livanos, Col. 1, lines 62-65).
Independent claims 10 and 19 recite substantially similar subject matter to claim 1 and are therefore rejected for similar reasons as applied to claim 1 above.
As for claim 3, the combination of Jayaramachar et al., Khare et al., and Krishan and Livanos discloses the method of claim 1 wherein storing the at least a portion of the SEPP profile includes storing the at least a portion of the SEPP profile in an SEPP registration database at the SEPP router. (Jayaramachar et al. teaches storing a subscriptionID from a request of a network repository function (NRF) (that registers SEPP profiles) in a mapping database that is accessible to a SEPP (i.e. SEPP router) that routes messages of the NRF. [Sections [0064], [0004], [0070]]).
Dependent claim 12 recite substantially similar subject matter to claim 3 and is therefore rejected for similar reasons as applied to claim 3 above.
As for claim 4, the combination of Jayaramachar et al., Khare et al., and Krishan and Livanos discloses the method of claim 1 comprising: receiving, at the SEPP router, a plurality of SBI request messages from a plurality of roaming hub SEPPs; and filtering, using a security database in the SEPP router, the plurality of SBI request messages. (Jayaramachar et al. teaches a SEPP (i.e. SEPP router) that filters incoming traffic (i.e. messages) from another PLMN, also the SEPP receives and processes (i.e. filtering) inter-PLMN request by accessing a database [Section [0049], [0006], [0069]])
Jayaramachar et al. and Krishan do not disclose:
A plurality of messages from a plurality of roaming hub SEPPs
However, Khare et al. does disclose:
A plurality of messages from a plurality of roaming hub SEPPs (Khare et al. teaches one or more roaming hubs and/or SEPPs of a first network exchanging request messages with a second network [Sections [0140], [0162], [0204])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combined invention of Jayaramachar et al. and Krishan with the teachings of Khare et al. for a plurality of messages from a plurality of roaming hub SEPPs to increase efficiency of message transmission by a SEPP router.
Jayaramachar et al. and Khare et al do not disclose:
A plurality of SBI request messages
However, Krishan does disclose:
A plurality of SBI request messages (Krishan teaches a network node of SEPP to route SBI request messages [Section [0099]])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combined invention of Jayaramachar et al. and Khare et al and Livanos with the teachings of Krishan for a plurality of SBI request messages to enhance communication requests distributed by a SEPP router.
Dependent claims 13 and 20 recite substantially similar subject matter to claim 4 and are therefore rejected for similar reasons as applied to claim 4 above.
As to claim 5, the combination of Jayaramachar et al., Khare et al., and Krishan and Livanos discloses the method of claim 1 comprising prioritizing, by the SEPP router, traffic among roaming hub SEPPs. (Jayaramachar et al. teaches a SEPP (i.e. SEPP router) filtering incoming traffic from another PLMN [Section [0049])
Jayaramachar et al. and Krishan do not disclose:
Prioritizing, traffic among roaming hub SEPPs
However, Khare et al. does disclose:
Prioritizing, traffic among roaming hub SEPPs (Khare et al. teaches information identifying one or more SEPPS and/or roaming hubs including a priority parameter that give preference (i.e. priority) to SEPPS and/or roaming hubs communications (i.e. traffic) [Section [0203])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combined invention of Jayaramachar et al. and Krishan with the teachings of Khare et al. for prioritizing traffic among roaming hub SEPPs to increase efficiency for routing traffic for roaming hub SEPPs.
Dependent claim 14 recite substantially similar subject matter to claim 5 and is therefore rejected for similar reasons as applied to claim 5 above.
As to claim 6, the combination of Jayaramachar et al., Khare et al., and Krishan and Livanos discloses the method of claim 1 comprising receiving, at a configuration interface of the SEPP router, user input for registering roaming hub SEPPs. (Jayaramachar et al. teaches a SEPP that forwards traffic (i.e. SEPP router) and configures traffic for all API messages between PLMNs [Section [0006]])
Jayaramachar et al. and Krishan do not disclose:
Receiving user input for registering roaming hub SEPPs
However, Khare et al. does disclose:
Receiving user input for registering roaming hub SEPPs (Khare et al. teaches using any device capable of user input and sending radio signals over a network that implements a SEPP which registers one or more roaming hubs and/or SEPPs [Sections [0126], [0129], [0130], [0189]])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combined invention of Jayaramachar et al. and Krishan with the teachings of Khare et al. for receiving user input for registering roaming hub SEPPs to increase efficiency for registering roaming hub SEPPs into a SEPP router.
Dependent claim 15 recite substantially similar subject matter to claim 6 and is therefore rejected for similar reasons as applied to claim 6 above.
As to claim 7, the combination of Jayaramachar et al., Khare et al., and Krishan and Livanos discloses the method of claim 1 comprising performing, by the SEPP router, load balancing among roaming hub SEPPs. (Jayaramachar et al. teaches a SEPP (i.e. SEPP router) as an intermediate proxy that forwards and filters traffic (i.e. load balancing) between PLMNs [Section [0001], [0006]])
Jayaramachar et al. and Krishan do not disclose:
Roaming hub SEPPs
However, Khare et al. does disclose:
Roaming hub SEPPs (Khare et al. teaches a first network with one or more roaming hubs and/or SEPPs [Section [0007]])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combined invention of Jayaramachar et al. and Krishan with the teachings of Khare et al. for roaming hub SEPPs to increase transmission efficiency by a SEPP router for roaming hub SEPPS.
Dependent claim 16 recite substantially similar subject matter to claim 7 and is therefore rejected for similar reasons as applied to claim 7 above.
As to claim 8, the combination of Jayaramachar et al., Khare et al., and Krishan and Livanos discloses the method of claim 1 comprising applying network topology hiding to the SBI request message. (Jayaramachar et al. teaches a SEPP filtering incoming traffic and performing topology hiding for that traffic [Section [0049]])
Jayaramachar et al. and Khare et al. do not disclose:
SBI request message
However, Krishan does disclose:
SBI request message (Krishan teaches a SEPP routing SBI request messages [Section [0099]])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combined invention of Jayaramachar et al. and Khare et al. with the teachings of Krishan for SBI request messages to increase security for transmitting SBI request messages.
Dependent claim 17 recite substantially similar subject matter to claim 8 and is therefore rejected for similar reasons as applied to claim 8 above.
As to claim 9, the combination of Jayaramachar et al., Khare et al., and Krishan and Livanos discloses the method of claim 1 comprising verifying, by the SEPP router, registration of an SEPP profile of the second roaming hub SEPP. (Jayaramachar et al. teaches a home SEPP (i.e. SEPP router) verifying a targeting NRF which registers the SEPP profiles [Section [0062], [0004])
Jayaramachar et al. and Krishan do not disclose:
Registration of profile of the second roaming hub SEPP
However, Khare et al. does disclose:
Registration of profile of the second roaming hub SEPP (Khare et al. teaches one or more roaming hubs and/or SEPPs in a second network registering its profile in a network repository function [Sections [0189] [0124]])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combined invention of Jayaramachar et al. and Krishan with the teachings of Khare et al. for registering the profile of a second roaming hub SEPPs to increase security in verifying roaming hub SEPPs.
Dependent claim 18 recite substantially similar subject matter to claim 9 and is therefore rejected for similar reasons as applied to claim 9 above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Rajput et al. (US 20220104112) directed to mitigating spoofing attacks on an SEPP inter-PLMN forwarding interface includes obtaining, by a responding SEPP, a first SEPP identifier and/or a first PLMN identifier from at least one message received over an inter-PLMN control interface.
Pulipati et al. (US 12267679) directed to initiating establishment of an N32-c transport layer security connection with an entity, the apparatus located in a first public land mobile network and the entity located in a second public land mobile network; sending from the apparatus to the entity on the N32-c transport layer security connection an N32-c handshake signaling message comprising domain name information of the apparatus to be used by the entity for establishing an N32-f transport layer security connection towards the apparatus; receiving a reply from the entity, the reply comprising domain name information of the entity to be used by the apparatus for establishing the N32-f transport layer security connection towards the entity; and using the domain name information received in the reply to establish the N32-f transport layer security connection towards the entity.
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 Shewaye Gelagay whose telephone number is (571)272-4219. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 8 A.M. - 4 P.M..
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, Amy C. Johnson can be reached at (571) 272-2238. 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.
/SHEWAYE GELAGAY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2436
Prosecution Insights