DETAILED ACTION
This Action is in response to Applicant’s amendment filed on 3/19/2026. Claims 1, 4-10, 13-19, and 21-25 are still pending in the present application. This Action is made FINAL.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 4-10, 13-19, and 21-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Rajput et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0104112)
Referring to Claims 1, 10, and 19, Rajput et al. disclose a first device (pars 58-65, responding SEPP), comprising: at least one processor; and at least one memory including computer program code; wherein the at least one memory and the computer program code are configured to, with the at least one processor; a method; and a non-transitory computer readable medium comprising program instructions for causing an apparatus to cause the first device to/perform: receive, from a second device, a request for establishment of a connection between the first device and the second device (pars 58-65, N32-f connection message), the connection being associated with a first set of security parameters, the request comprising the first set of security parameters (pars 58-65, N32-f connection message, security, certificates); determine whether the first set of security parameters is identical to a second set of security parameters in a context which was created between the first device and the second device for a previous connection completed between the first device and the second device (pars 58-65, N32-c, match), perform the establishment of the connection; in accordance with a determination that the first set of security parameters associated with the connection is identical to the second set of security parameters in the context associated with the previous connection completed between the first device and the second device, perform the establishment of the connection (pars 58-65, cross-validation/look up of identifier, N32-c, match, allow messages).
Referring to Claims 4, 13, and 21 as applied to claims 1, 10, and 19 above, Rajput et al. disclose the first device, method, and non-transitory medium, wherein the connection is used for management of a communication interface between the first device and the second device (pars 58-65, N32-f).
Referring to Claims 5, 14, and 22 as applied to claims 1, 10, and 19 above, Rajput et al. disclose the first device, method, and non-transitory medium, wherein the connection is used for transmission of protected messages between the first device and the second device (pars 58-65, security, certificates).
Referring to Claims 6, 15, and 23 as applied to claims 1, 10, and 19 above, Rajput et al. disclose the first device, method, and non-transitory medium, Rajput et al. disclose the first device and method, wherein each of the first and second sets of security parameters comprises at least one of the following: a Public Land Mobile Network identity of the second device, a Standalone Non-Public Network identity of the second device, or a Fully Qualified Domain Name of the second device (pars 58-65, PLMN identifier).
Referring to Claims 7, 16, and 24 as applied to claims 1, 10, and 19 above, Rajput et al. disclose the first device, method, and non-transitory medium, wherein each of the first and second devices comprises a Security Edge Protection Proxy (SEPP) device (pars 58-65, SEPP).
Referring to Claims 8, 17, and 25 as applied to claims 1, 10, and 19 above, Rajput et al. disclose the first device, method, and non-transitory medium, Rajput et al. disclose the first device and method, wherein the connection is a transport layer security connection (pars 58-65, TLS).
Referring to Claims 9 and 18 as applied to claims 2 and 11 above, Rajput et al. disclose the first device and method, wherein the certificate is a transport layer security certificate (pars 58-65, TLS, certificate).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 3/19/2026 have been fully considered but are
not persuasive.
Applicant argues on page 6 of the Remarks that Rajput et al. do not disclose context for previously completed connection. The context, related to N32-c is interpreted as for the previous connection, as shown in pars 58-65 and also par 67, because N32-c communications/process occurs prior to N32-f communication..
Applicant argues on page 7 of the Remarks that Rajput et al. do not disclose establishment of connection as it is not same as allowing messages. Examiner would like to point out that as shown in pars 58-65 of Rajput et al., messages are allowed based on the cross-validation/identifier look up, and that is an indication that the connection establishment has been performed.
Conclusion
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 extension fee 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 SUHAIL KHAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7187. The examiner can normally be reached on M-TH 8:30am-6:30pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Rafael Perez-Gutierrez can be reached on 5712727915. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. 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.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Suhail Khan/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2642