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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 12/27/2025 has been accepted and entered. Accordingly, Claims 1 and 7 have been amended.
Claims 1-12 are pending in this application.
Regarding the 112b rejection of claims 1 and 7, the rejection has been cured by the amendments. Therefore, the rejections have been withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/27/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Argument: The combination of references does not form a valid 103 rejection. There is no teaching of “after the UE is switched on; determining that the second PLMN is a most preferred home network and a cell of the second PLMN is available; and initiating a Manual Network Selection Mode Procedure by presenting available PLMNs and CAGs when a predefined condition is met.” The cited prior art reference of TS23.122 teaches away from claim 1. TS23.122 teaches that when the “most preferred home network” is found at switch-on, the UE should bypass the manual network selection mode procedure and automatically attempt registration. The express purpose of this rule in the standard is to prioritize connectivity to the Home Network without requiring user intervention. In direct contrast, Claim 1 requires that the UE does not automatically register on the “most preferred home network” and instead, the claimed invention requires the UE to “initiate a Manual Network Selection Mode Procedure.” Therefore, a person of ordinary skill in the art, following the guidance of TS 23.122, would be led to implement automatic registration in this scenario. They would be discouraged from “initiating a Manual Network Selection Mode Procedure,” as doing so would violate the “Exception” rule explicitly defined in the standard to optimize user experience. (Remarks Pg. 6-8)
Response: Examiner respectfully disagrees. In the previous rejection, TS 23.122 was used for teaching the limitation of determining that a second PLMN is a most preferred home network and is available, while the primary reference Won teaches “a network selection circuit that initiates a Manual Network Selection Mode Procedure by presenting available PLMNs and CAGs when a predefined condition is met.” Although the cited portion of TS 23.122 stating “At switch on, if the MS is in manual mode and neither registered PLMN nor PLMN that is equivalent to it is available but EHPLMN is available, then instead of performing the manual network selection mode procedure of clause 4.4.3.1.2 the MS may select and attempt registration on the highest priority EHPLMN.” contains an option for automatically connecting to the EHPLMN, the reference also contains other portions that teach determining a second PLMN is available and not bypassing the manual network selection mode procedure as cited in Pg. 15 Section 2 Ln. 4-7. In the previous Office Action, Pg. 15 Section 2 Ln. 4-7 was cited for disclosing “The MS looks for a suitable cell of the chosen PLMN or SNPN and chooses that cell to provide available services.”, which is in reference to the preceding lines 1-3 that state “When an MS is switched on, it attempts to make contact with a public land mobile network (PLMN) or stand-alone non-public network (SNPN). The particular PLMN or SNPN to be contacted may be selected either automatically or manually.” This describes that the “chosen PLMN” of the citation is determined as the most preferred home network. In this selection is either automatically OR manually after the device is switched on. Additionally, looking further to TS 23.211, it also discloses at Pg. 42 Section 4.4.3.1.2 Manual Network Selection Mode Procedure; “The MS indicates whether there are any PLMNs, which are available using all supported access technologies. If displayed, PLMNs meeting the criteria above are presented in the following order: i)- either the HPLMN (if the EHPLMN list is not present or is empty) or, if one or more of the EHPLMNs are available then based on an optional data field on the SIM either only the highest priority available EHPLMN is to be presented to the user or all available EHPLMNs are presented to the user in priority order. If the data field is not present on the SIM, then only the highest priority available EHPLMN is presented;” These further citations show that in a Manual Network Selection Mode Procedure, which as described on Pg. 15 of the reference takes place after switch on, has an option of only the highest priority available EHPLMN being presented to the user for manual selection. Taking these further portions of the reference into account, the citation that describes bypassing this manual network selection mode procedure is merely one implementation, and not representative of the overall teaching in the secondary reference. Therefore, the reference does not teach away from claim 1, and is combinable with the primary reference to reject claim limitations, “after the UE is switched on; determining that the second PLMN is a most preferred home network and a cell of the second PLMN is available; and initiating a Manual Network Selection Mode Procedure by presenting available PLMNs and CAGs when a predefined condition is met.”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Won et al. (US 2021/0136673 A1), hereinafter referred to as Won, and in view of 3GPP TS 23.122 V17.6.0 Release 17 (2022-03), hereinafter referred to as TS 23.122.
Claims 1-6 are directed to method claims that recite similar limitations to device claims 7-12. Therefore, the rejections for claims 1-6 are the same as the rejections put forth for claims 7-12.
Re. Claim 7, Won teaches:
A User Equipment (UE), (¶0007 For each public land mobile network identity, there may be an indication that the user equipment is only allowed to access a 5G system via closed access group cells & ¶0049 Fig. 3 illustrates an example of a terminal 300, such as the terminal illustrated on FIG. 1. The terminal 300 may be a user equipment)
comprising: a Closed Access Group (CAG) information handling circuit that maintains a CAG related configuration for network selection, (¶0054 In some cases, manual CAG selection may be permitted. In manual CAG selection, a user may be allowed to manually choose a CAG ID that is not in an allowed CAG list. & ¶0065 if the UE supports the CAG feature, and the allowed CAG list comprises at least one entry [i.e. a CAG related configuration used for network selection], then for each PLMN/radio access technology combination of NG-RAN access technology, the UE may display the PLMN/radio access technology combination and a list of one or more CAG identifiers (IDs), & ¶0078 embodiments of the present invention may be implemented as circuitry [i.e. circuitry for CAG information handling])
wherein the UE is registered in a first PLMN using a Manual Network Selection Mode, (¶0002 The present disclosure relates to… an apparatus, methods and computer programs for manually selecting a network. & ¶0074 If the UE has initiated the registration procedure due to manual CAG selection and receives a REGISTRATION ACCEPT message and the UE has initiated the registration procedure in a CAG cell, then the UE may add the selected CAG-ID in the allowed CAG list for the current PLMN (if not already included) [i.e. current PLMN is a first PLMN where UE is registered using a manual network selection mode].)
and a network selection circuit that initiates a Manual Network Selection Mode Procedure by presenting available PLMNs and CAGs when a predefined condition is met. (¶0058-¶0059 At step 602, the method comprises displaying the public land mobile network identity to a user. At step 604, the method comprises receiving user input selecting the public land mobile network identity. [i.e. describes a manual network selection mode procedure] & ¶0065 if the UE supports the CAG feature, and the allowed CAG list comprises at least one entry [i.e. a predefined condition is met], then for each PLMN/radio access technology combination of NG-RAN access technology, the UE may display the PLMN/radio access technology combination and a list of one or more CAG identifiers (IDs) [i.e. displays available PLMNs and CAGs as part of a manual network selection procedure being initiated when the condition is met] & ¶0078 embodiments of the present invention may be implemented as circuitry [i.e. circuitry for network selection])
Yet, Won does not teach: and wherein the CAG related configuration comprises an Allowed CAG list of a second PLMN; a control circuit that determines that the first PLMN is not available after the UE is switched on, and the control circuit further determines that the second PLMN is a most preferred home network and a cell of the second PLMN is available;
However, in the analogous art, TS 23.122 teaches such limitations:
and wherein the CAG related configuration comprises an Allowed CAG list of a second PLMN; (Pg. 29 Section 3.8 CAG selection (n1 mode only): The MS may support CAG… the MS can be provisioned by the network with a “CAG information list” [i.e. CAG related configuration], consisting of zero or more entries, each containing: a) a PLMN ID; [i.e. a second PLMN, which is implied by an ID indicating any of multiple potential PLMNs] b) an “Allowed CAG list”. [i.e. an allowed CAG list of a second PLMN, or any of the multiple potential PLMNs] The “Allowed CAG list” contains zero or more CAG-IDs…)
a control circuit that determines that the first PLMN is not available after the UE is switched on, (Pg. 37 Section 4.4.3.1 At switch-on or recovery from lack of coverage… & bottom of page, 4th EXCEPTION: At switch on, [i.e. after MS/UE is switched on] if the MS is in manual mode and neither registered PLMN nor PLMN that is equivalent to it is available [i.e. MS/UE which implicitly contains control circuitry determines the first PLMN is not available after being switched on])
and the control circuit further determines that the second PLMN is a most preferred home network and a cell of the second PLMN is available; (Pg. 15 Section 2 Ln. 4-7 The MS looks for a suitable cell of the chosen PLMN or SNPN and chooses that cell to provide available services… This choosing is known as “camping on the cell”. & Pg. 36 Section 4.4.2 Registration on a PLMN In both automatic and manual modes, the concept of registration on a PLMN is used. An MS successfully registers on a PLMN if: a) the MS has found a suitable cell of the PLMN to camp on; [i.e. choosing the PLMN involves determining a suitable cell of the available PLMN] & Pg. 37 Section 4.4.3.1 At switch-on or recovery from lack of coverage… & bottom of page, 4th EXCEPTION: At switch on, if the MS is in manual mode and neither registered PLMN nor PLMN that is equivalent to it is available but EHPLMN is available [i.e. the second PLMN is available, therefore the suitable cell chosen is also being determined as available] the MS may select and attempt registration on the highest priority EHPLMN [i.e. second PLMN being selected for attempted registration interpreted as being determined as the most preferred home network].)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Won’s invention of a method and apparatus for manually selecting a network to include 3GPP TS 23.122’s teaching of the CAG related configuration comprising an allowed CAG list of a second PLMN, because it would enable the system to determine if a CAG is allowed based on PLMN ID information, and store such information in memory for future reference. (see Pg. 29-30 Section 3.8: CAG selection)
Re. Claim 8, Won combined with TS 23.122 teaches the UE of Claim 7.
TS 23.122 further teaches:
wherein the most preferred home network is an equivalent home PLMN (EHPLMN) with a highest priority when an EHPLMN list configuration is available. (Pg. 37 Section 4.4.3.1 At switch-on or recovery from lack of coverage: at bottom of page, 4th EXCEPTION: At switch on, if the MS is in manual mode and neither registered PLMN nor PLMN that is equivalent to it is available but EHPLMN is available [i.e. in this context “available” is referring to the list being available, as below it refers to an EHPLMN list not being available as the alternative to this scenario], then instead of performing the manual network selection mode procedure of clause 4.4.3.1.2 the MS may select and attempt registration on the highest priority EHPLMN [i.e. second PLMN being highest priority interpreted as being determined as the most preferred home network].)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Won’s invention of a method and apparatus for manually selecting a network to include 3GPP TS 23.122’s teaching of the most preferred home network being a highest priority EHPLMN when the list configuration is available, because it the device to choose between multiple options for recovering from lack of coverage or at switch-on. (see TS 23.122 Pg. 37 section 4.4.3.1 4th exception)
Re. Claim 9, Won combined with TS 23.122 teaches the UE of Claim 7.
TS 23.122 further teaches:
wherein the most preferred home network is a home PLMN (HPLMN) when an equivalent home PLMN (EHPLMN) list is empty or not available. (Pg. 37 Section 4.4.3.1 At switch-on or recovery from lack of coverage: at bottom of page, 4th EXCEPTION: At switch on, if the MS is in manual mode and neither registered PLMN nor PLMN that is equivalent to it is available but EHPLMN is available, then instead of performing the manual network selection mode procedure of clause 4.4.3.1.2 the MS may select and attempt registration on the highest priority EHPLMN. If the EHPLMN list is not available or is empty and the HPLMN is available, then the MS may select and attempt registration on the HPLMN. [i.e. HPLMN becomes the most preferred when the EHPLMN is not available] The MS shall remain in manual mode.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Won’s invention of a method and apparatus for manually selecting a network to include 3GPP TS 23.122’s teaching of the most preferred home network being an HPLMN when the EHPLMN list configuration is not available, because it the device to choose between multiple options for recovering from lack of coverage or at switch-on. (see TS 23.122 Pg. 37 section 4.4.3.1 4th exception)
Re. Claim 10, Won combined with TS 23.122 teaches the UE of Claim 7.
TS 23.122 further teaches:
wherein the cell of the second PLMN is a non-CAG cell, (Pg. 43 Ln. 8-9, 20-21 if the MS supports CAG, for each PLMN/access technology combination of NG-RAN access technology [i.e. if MS supports CAG for each PLMN, as in first and second PLMN], the MS shall present to the user: b) the PLMN/access technology combination without a list of CAG-IDs, if there is an available NG-RAN cell which is not a CAG cell for the PLMN. [i.e. available cell is a non-CAG cell])
and the CAG related configuration contains an indication that the UE is only allowed to access 5GS via CAG cells. (Pg. 43 Ln. 21-23 If there exists an entry for the presented PLMN in the "CAG information list" [i.e. CAG related configuration] and the entry includes an "indication that the MS is only allowed to access 5GS via CAG cells", the MS may indicate to the user that the MS is only allowed to access the PLMN via CAG cells.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Won’s invention of a method and apparatus for manually selecting a network to include 3GPP TS 23.122’s teaching of the CAG related configuration containing an indication that the UE is only allowed to access 5GS via CAG cells, because it would enable the device to use CAG cells exclusively to connect to the network for limited service state scenarios. (see TS 23.122 Pg. 28 section 3.5 i-k)
Re. Claim 11, Won combined with TS 23.122 teaches the UE of Claim 7.
TS 23.122 further teaches:
wherein the cell of the second PLMN is a CAG cell broadcasting a CAG-ID for the second PLMN, (Pg. 43 Ln. 8-11 if the MS supports CAG, for each PLMN/access technology combination of NG-RAN access technology [i.e. if MS supports CAG for each PLMN, as in first and second PLMN], the MS shall present to the user: a) the PLMN/access technology combination and a list of CAG-IDs composed of one or more CAG-ID: [i.e. a CAG-ID for the second PLMN])
and the CAG-ID is not included in the allowed CAG list. (Pg. 43 Ln. 18-19 For each of the presented CAG-ID, the MS may indicate to the user whether the CAG-ID is present in the "Allowed CAG list" [i.e. indicating whether is present or not implies there is a scenario in which the CAG-ID is not included in the allowed CAG list] stored in the UE;)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Won’s invention of a method and apparatus for manually selecting a network to include 3GPP TS 23.122’s teaching of the most preferred home network being a highest priority EHPLMN when the list configuration is available, because it would enable the device to use CAG cells to connect to the network for limited service state scenarios. (see TS 23.122 Pg. 28 section 3.5 i-k)
Re. Claim 12, Won combined with TS 23.122 teaches the UE of Claim 7.
TS 23.122 further teaches:
wherein the cell also broadcasts an indication that the second PLMN allows manually selection of the CAG-ID. (Pg. 43 Ln. 8-11, 16-17 if the MS supports CAG, for each PLMN/access technology combination of NG-RAN access technology [i.e. if MS supports CAG for each PLMN, as in first and second PLMN], the MS shall present to the user: the available CAG cell broadcasting the CAG-ID for the PLMN also broadcasts that the PLMN allows a user to manually select the CAG-ID. [i.e. indicating that the second PLMN allows manual selection of the CAG-ID])
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Won’s invention of a method and apparatus for manually selecting a network to include 3GPP TS 23.122’s teaching of an indication that the PLMN allows manual selection of the CAG-ID, because it would enable the device to use CAG cells to connect to the network for limited service state scenarios. (see TS 23.122 Pg. 28 section 3.5 i-k)
Conclusion
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 GARY A MILLER whose telephone number is (571)272-4423. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8 to 5.
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, Rebecca Song can be reached at 571-270-3667. 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.
/G.A.M./Examiner, Art Unit 2417
/REBECCA E SONG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2417