DETAILED ACTION
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office Action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 05/18/2026 has been entered and made of record.
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 .
Claim Status
Claims 1, 4, 6-7, 10-11, 14, 16-17 and 21-22 are amended.
Claims 2, 5, 12 and 15 are cancelled.
Claims 23-26 are added.
Claims 1, 4, 6-11, 14 and 16-26 are pending for examination.
Applicant Argument
Applicant’s arguments (remark pages 8-13), filed on 05/18/2026, with respect to claims 1, 4, 6-11, 14 and 16-26 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground of rejection below which better address the claimed invention as amended.
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, 4, 6-10, 11, 14 and 16-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Velev et al. (US 20200045767 A1), hereinafter “Velev”, in view of Da Silva et al. (US 20220159518 A1), hereinafter “Silva”, in view of Kim et al. (US 20190313333 A1), hereinafter “Kim”, and in view of Fu et al. (US 20230276521 A1), hereinafter “Fu”.
Per claim 1, 6, 11 and 16:
Regarding claim 11, Velev teaches ‘An apparatus’ (Velev: [FIG.2]: “Remote Unit”; [0042]: “FIG. 2 depicts one embodiment of an apparatus”); ‘comprising: at least one processor’ (Velev: [FIG.2]: “Processor”); ‘at least one memory’ (Velev: [FIG.2]: “Memory”); ‘storing instructions’ (this is implied); ‘wherein the instructions are executed by the at least one processor to cause the apparatus to perform operations of’ (Velev: [0043]: “The processor … capable of executing computer-readable instructions and/or capable of performing logical operations”);
‘resuming at least one dedicated signaling radio bearer based on a stored context’ (Velev: [0060]: “the UE sends an RRC resume request message, and activates an SRB (e.g., SRB1)”; [0067]: “as a result of the UE 402 receiving the RRCResume message, only the secure RRC signaling connection (e.g., SRB1 and/or SRB2) may be activated”, resume dedicated SRB). However, Velev fails to expressly teach based on a stored context;
‘sending a first message to a first radio access network device, wherein the first message comprises first non-access stratum (NAS) signaling sent by the apparatus to a core network device’ (Velev: [0060]: “a UE's AS layer performs a resume procedure to send an NAS message (e.g., TAU request, RR with an indication of a UE radio capability update) carrying information about a radio capability change to an MME and/or AMF”);
‘the first NAS signaling is carried in one of the at least one dedicated signaling radio bearer’ (Velev: [0068]: “the UE 402 doesn't consider the suspended DRBs … Therefore, only transmission of RRC signaling is possible (e.g., using SRB1 or SRB2 signaling radio bearers)”, only resume SRB to carry the NAS message);
‘wherein the apparatus is in an inactive state during the resuming and the sending’ (Velev: [0057]: “a UE does not transition from an inactive state to an idle state to perform a UE radio capability change procedure, but performs the UE radio capability change procedure from the inactive state (e.g., “ECM-IDLE state with suspend indication” or “CM CONNECTED mode with RRC inactive indication”). In such an embodiment, the UE sends a NAS update message toward a CN serving node (e.g., MME or AMF) without going to an idle state”, stay in an inactive state during the resuming and the sending).
‘wherein the first message further comprises a radio resource control (RRC) resume request message carried in a common signaling radio bearer SRB 0’ (Velev: [0060]: “the UE sends an RRC resume request message, and activates an SRB (e.g., SRB1)”). However, Velev fails to expressly teaches the first message contains both RRC resume request and the first NAS message, and ‘carried in a common signaling radio bearer SRB 0’.
However, Silva in the same field of endeavor teaches resume a RRC connection based on a stored context (Silva: [FIG.4]; [0078]-[0081]: “The UE shall set the contents of RRCResumeRequest or RRCResumeRequest1 message as follows … set the resumeIdentity to the stored fulll-RNTI value”) and RRCResumeRequest and NAS message in a same message (Silva: [FIG.2]: “UE IN RRC_INACTIVE”; step 200: “UE” -> “gNB”: “RRCResumeRequest”, “RNA UPDATE” (NAS message)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Silva’s teaching with that of Velev in order to support resume request with the stored full-RNTI value (see reference quotes in element above).
Combination of Velev and Silva does not expressly teach ‘carried in a common signaling radio bearer SRB 0’.
However, Kim in the same field of endeavor teaches UE, in case that without performing ciphering and integrity protection, can immediately start connection resume procedure over SRB0 (Kim: [0150]: “the UE does not suspend the SRB0 so as to immediately start the connection resume procedure through the SRB0”; [0161]: “when sending the RRC message is to send the RRC resume request message to SRB0 without performing ciphering and integrity protection”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Kim’s teaching with that of combination of Velev and Silva for the first message to comprise a radio resource control (RRC) resume request message carried in a common signaling radio bearer SRB 0 in order to immediately resume the connection (see reference quotes in element above).
Combination of Velev, Silva and Kim does not expressly teach, but Fu in the same field of endeavor teaches ‘receiving a second message sent by the first radio access network device’ (FU: [FIG.4]: step 403: “RAN node”-> “UE”: “feedback”; receive a response from RAN device);
‘wherein the second message comprises second NAS signaling sent by the core network device to the first terminal device, and the second message is a response message for the first message’ (Fu: [0105]: “the RRC response message includes an NAS message responded by the core network, and the NAS message includes the LPP message”; [FIG.4]: step 403: “feedback” is a response to step 401: “RRC message”);
‘wherein the first NAS signaling comprises a positioning protocol message’ (Fu: [0097]: “Step 401: determining, by the AS layer of the UE, that the LPP message is to be transmitted through directly transmitting the UL message. At this time, the RRC message is transmitted by the UE to a Radio Access Network (RAN) node through the CCCH. The RRC message includes: (1) an NAS message in which the to-be-transmitted LPP message is packaged; and (2) the cause for RRC connection setup or connection resume”; [0098]: “When the UE is a UE in the RRC_INACTIVE state, the RRC message further includes an I-RNTI and a resume MAC-I”; the RRC message including a NAS message with LPP messages (positioning protocol message));
‘the second NAS signaling comprises a positioning protocol message’ (Fu: [0105]: “the RRC response message includes an NAS message responded by the core network, and the NAS message includes the LPP message”, the response including a LPP message (positioning protocol message)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Fu’s teaching with that of combination of Velev, Silva and Kim in order to reduce delay by positioning UE without switching the UE to an RRC-connected state (Fu: [0038]: “the first message is reported to the network device when the UE is in the non-connected state, so as to position the UE. As a result, it is able to transmit the first message even without switching the UE to be in an RRC connected state, thereby to reduce the delay”).
Regarding claim 1, claim 1 recites the method implemented by the apparatus according to claim 11 (see rejection of claim 11 above).
Regarding claim 16, Velev teaches ‘An apparatus’ (Velev: [FIG.3]: “Network Unit”; [0050]: “FIG. 3 depicts one embodiment of an apparatus”); ‘comprising: at least one processor’ (Velev: [FIG.3]: “Processor”); ‘at least one memory’ (Velev: [FIG.3]: “Memory”); ‘storing instructions’ (this is implied); ‘wherein the instructions are executed by the at least one processor to cause the apparatus to perform operations of’ (Velev: [0043]: “The processor … capable of executing computer-readable instructions and/or capable of performing logical operations);
‘receiving a first message sent by a first terminal device’ (Velev: [FIG.4]: step 412: “UE”->”RAN”; [0060]: “the UE sends an RRC resume request message”, receive RRC resume request from UE);
‘wherein the first message comprises first non-access stratum (NAS) signaling sent by the first terminal device to a core network device’ (Velev: [0060]: “a UE's AS layer performs a resume procedure to send an NAS message (e.g., TAU request, RR with an indication of a UE radio capability update) carrying information about a radio capability change to an MME and/or AMF”);
‘the first terminal device is in an inactive state when the apparatus receives the first message’ (Velev: [0057]: “a UE does not transition from an inactive state to an idle state to perform a UE radio capability change procedure, but performs the UE radio capability change procedure from the inactive state (e.g., “ECM-IDLE state with suspend indication” or “CM CONNECTED mode with RRC inactive indication”). In such an embodiment, the UE sends a NAS update message toward a CN serving node (e.g., MME or AMF) without going to an idle state”, UE stays in in inactive state);
‘the first NAS signaling is sent by the first terminal device using at least one dedicated signaling radio bearer that is resumed based on a stored context’ (Velev: [0060]: “the UE sends an RRC resume request message, and activates an SRB (e.g., SRB1)”; [0067]: “as a result of the UE 402 receiving the RRCResume message, only the secure RRC signaling connection (e.g., SRB1 and/or SRB2) may be activated”, resume dedicated SRB to send a NAS message using a dedicated SRB). However, Velev fails to expressly teach based on a stored context;
‘sending a third message, wherein the third message comprises the first NAS signaling’ (Velev: [FIG.4]: step 422: “RAN”->”MME/AMF”; [0071]: “the RAN 404 sends the message (e.g., RRC message #5) carrying the NAS MM message to the MME/AMF 406”);
‘wherein the first message further comprises a radio resource control (RRC) resume request message carried in a common signaling radio bearer SRB 0’ (Velev: [0060]: “the UE sends an RRC resume request message, and activates an SRB (e.g., SRB1)”). However, Velev fails to expressly teaches the first message contains both RRC resume request and the first NAS message, and ‘carried in a common signaling radio bearer SRB 0’.
However, Silva in the same field of endeavor reaches resume a RRC connection based on a stored context (Silva: [FIG.4]; [0078]-[0081]: “The UE shall set the contents of RRCResumeRequest or RRCResumeRequest1 message as follows … set the resumeIdentity to the stored fulll-RNTI value”) and RRCResumeRequest and NAS message in a same message (Silva: [FIG.2]: “UE IN RRC_INACTIVE”; step 200: “UE” -> “gNB”: “RRCResumeRequest”, “RNA UPDATE” (NAS message)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Silva’s teaching with that of Velev in order to support resume request with the stored full-RNTI value.
Combination of Velev and Silva does not expressly teach ‘carried in a common signaling radio bearer SRB 0’.
However, Kim teaches UE, in case that without performing ciphering and integrity protection, can immediately start connection resume procedure over SRB0 (Kim: [0150]: “the UE does not suspend the SRB0 so as to immediately start the connection resume procedure through the SRB0”; [0161]: “when sending the RRC message is to send the RRC resume request message to SRB0 without performing ciphering and integrity protection”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Kim’s teaching with that of combination of Velev and Silva for the first message to comprise a radio resource control (RRC) resume request message carried in a common signaling radio bearer SRB 0 in order to immediately resume the connection (see reference quotes in element above).
Combination of Velev, Silva and Kim does not expressly teach, but Fu teaches ‘receiving a fourth message, wherein the fourth message comprises second NAS signaling sent by the core network device to the first terminal device’ (Fu: [0105]: “the RRC response message includes an NAS message responded by the core network, and the NAS message includes the LPP message”, receive NAS signaling from core network);
‘wherein the first NAS signaling comprises a positioning protocol message’ (Fu: [0097]: “Step 401: determining, by the AS layer of the UE, that the LPP message is to be transmitted through directly transmitting the UL message. At this time, the RRC message is transmitted by the UE to a Radio Access Network (RAN) node through the CCCH. The RRC message includes: (1) an NAS message in which the to-be-transmitted LPP message is packaged; and (2) the cause for RRC connection setup or connection resume”; [0098]: “When the UE is a UE in the RRC_INACTIVE state, the RRC message further includes an I-RNTI and a resume MAC-I”; the RRC message including a NAS message with LPP messages (positioning protocol message));
‘the second NAS signaling comprises a positioning protocol message’ (Fu: [0105]: “the RRC response message includes an NAS message responded by the core network, and the NAS message includes the LPP message”, the response including a LPP message (positioning protocol message)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Fu’s teaching with that of combination of Velev, Silva and Kim in order to reduce delay by positioning UE without switching the UE to an RRC-connected state (Fu: [0038]: “the first message is reported to the network device when the UE is in the non-connected state, so as to position the UE. As a result, it is able to transmit the first message even without switching the UE to be in an RRC connected state, thereby to reduce the delay”).
Regarding claim 6, claim 6 recites the method implemented by the apparatus according to claim 16 (see rejection of claim 16 above).
Per claim 4 and 14:
Regarding claim 14, combination of Velev, Silva, Kim and Fu teaches the apparatus according to claim 11 (discussed above).
Velev teaches ‘wherein the second message comprises an RRC resume message’ (Velev: [0067]: “the RAN 404 sends a resume message (e.g., RRC resume message) to the UE”).
Regarding claim 4, claim 4 recites the method implemented by the apparatus according to claim 14 (see rejection of claim 14 above).
Per claim 7 and 17:
Regarding claim 17, combination of Velev, Silva, Kim and Fu teaches the apparatus according to claim 16 (discussed above).
Velev teaches ‘sending a second message to the first terminal device’ (Velev: [FIG.4]: step 403: “RAN”<->”UE”);
‘wherein the second message comprises the second NAS signaling’ (Velev: [0075]: “the RAN 404 uses an existing RRC signaling connection to perform inquiry of the new UE 402 radio capabilities. For example, the UE 402 radio capability inquiry may be performed over the an SRB (e.g., SRB1 or SRB2) via RRC procedures”);
‘the second message is a response message for the first message’ (Velev: [0005]: “receiving a second message in response to transmitting the first message”, RAN sending a second message to UE in response to receiving the first message).
Regarding claim 7, claim 7 recites the method implemented by the apparatus according to claim 17 (see rejection of claim 17 above).
Per claim 8 and 18:
Regarding claim 18, combination of Velev, Silva, Kim and Fu teaches the apparatus according to claim 17 (discussed above).
Velev teaches ‘sending the third message to the core network device’ (Velev: [FIG.4]: step 422: “RAN”->”MME/AMF”);
‘the receiving a fourth message comprises: receiving the fourth message sent by the core network device’ (Velev: [FIG.4]: step 426: “MME/AMF”->”RAN”).
Regarding claim 8, claim 8 recites the method implemented by the apparatus according to claim 18 (see rejection of claim 18 above).
Per claim 9 and 19:
Regarding claim 19, combination of Velev, Silva, Kim and Fu teaches the apparatus according to claim 17 (discussed above).
Velev does not expressly teach, but Silva teaches ‘wherein the third message comprises a path switch request message’ (Silva: [FIG.2]: step 208: “gNB”->”AMF”: “PATH SWITCH REQUEST”);
‘the fourth message comprises a path switch response message’ (Silva: [FIG.2]: step 210: “AMF”->”gNB”: “PATH SWITCH REQUEST RESPONSE”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Silva’s teaching with that of Velev in order to support resume request followed by release and redirect (Silva: [Abstract]: “Methods and systems for resume request followed by release and redirect”).
Regarding claim 9, claim 9 recites the method implemented by the apparatus according to claim 19 (see rejection of claim 19 above).
Per claim 10 and 20:
Regarding claim 20, combination of Velev, Silva, Kim and Fu teaches the apparatus according to claim 17 (discussed above).
Velev does not expressly teach, but Silva teaches ‘sending the third message to a second radio access network device’ (Silva: [FIG.2]: step 202: “gNB”->”LAST SERVING gNB”, send message to another gNB);
‘receiving the fourth message sent by the second radio access network device’ (Silva: [FIG.2]: step 204: “LAST SERVING gNB”->”gNB”, receive message from another gNB).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Silva’s teaching with that of Velev in order to support resume request followed by release and redirect (Silva: [Abstract]: “Methods and systems for resume request followed by release and redirect”).
Regarding claim 10, claim 10 recites the method implemented by the apparatus according to claim 20 (see rejection of claim 20 above).
Per claim 21 and 22:
Regarding claim 22, combination of Velev, Silva, Kim and Fu teaches the apparatus according to claim 11 (discussed above).
Velev teaches ‘wherein the second message comprises an RRC release message’ (Velev: [0101]: “the RAN 604 may send in the second communication 614 a release message (e.g., RRCRelease message without suspendConfig) to the UE 602 instead of the resume message”).
Regarding claim 21, claim 21 recites the method implemented by the apparatus according to claim 22 (see rejection of claim 22 above).
Per claim 23 and 26:
Regarding claim 26, combination of Velev, Silva, Kim and Fu teaches the apparatus according to claim 11 (discussed above).
Velev does not expressly teach, but combination of Silva, Kim and Fu teaches ‘after resuming the at least one dedicated signaling radio bearer, deriving a new key, wherein the first NAS signaling carried in the dedicated signaling radio bearer is encrypted using the new key’ (Silva: [0196]: “resume SRB2 … if the uppler provides NAS PDU, set the dedicatedNAS-Message to include the information received from upper layer”. Kim: [0127]: “the message may include security information for updating the security setup that is necessary when the UE performs an RRC connection resume procedure. For example, a NextHopChainingCount (NCC) may be pre-allocated, and using this, a new security key KeNB* or KgNB* may be calculated and configured”, derive a new security key; [0132]: “After the procedure of sending the RRCConnectionResume message, the RRC message and data may be ciphered by the new security key”; Fu:[0097]: “Step 401: determining, by the AS layer of the UE, that the LPP message is to be transmitted through directly transmitting the UL message. At this time, the RRC message is transmitted by the UE to a Radio Access Network (RAN) node through the CCCH. The RRC message includes: (1) an NAS message in which the to-be-transmitted LPP message is packaged; and (2) the cause for RRC connection setup or connection resume”, upper layer providing NAS PDU with LPP message; after resume SRB2, NAS PDU with LPP message is encrypted using the new security key).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of combination of Silva, Kim and Fu with that of Velev in order to transfer the NAS message with a new security context.
Regarding claim 23, claim 23 recited the method implemented by the apparatus according to claim 26 (see rejection of claim 26 above).
Per claim 24 and 25:
Regarding claim 24, combination of Velev, Silva, Kim and Fu teaches the apparatus according to claim 11 (discussed above).
Velev does not expressly teach, but combination of Silva and Fu teaches ‘wherein the first NAS signaling is carried in a signaling radio bearer SRB 2’ (Silva: [0196]: “resume SRB2 … if the uppler provides NAS PDU, set the dedicatedNAS-Message to include the information received from upper layer”, resume SRB2 to carry NAS PDU. Fu:[0097]: “Step 401: determining, by the AS layer of the UE, that the LPP message is to be transmitted through directly transmitting the UL message. At this time, the RRC message is transmitted by the UE to a Radio Access Network (RAN) node through the CCCH. The RRC message includes: (1) an NAS message in which the to-be-transmitted LPP message is packaged; and (2) the cause for RRC connection setup or connection resume”, upper layer providing NAS PDU with LPP message).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of combination of Silva and Fu with that of Velev in order to transfer the NAS message with a security context.
Regarding claim 25, claim 25 recited the method implemented by the apparatus according to claim 24 (see rejection of claim 24 above).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GUOXING FAN whose telephone number is (703)756-1310. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00 am - 5:30 pm ET.
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, Yemane Mesfin can be reached at (571)272-3927. 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.F./Examiner, Art Unit 2462
/PETER CHEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2462
Prosecution Insights