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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12/9/2025 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
This Office action is in response to amendment filed 12/9/2025.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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 1-2, 9-10 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Palle Venkata et al. (US 2022/0312298 A1, hereinafter Palle Venkata) in view of Hill et al. (US 2024/0073675 A1, hereinafter Hill) and Li et al. (US 2018/0317218 A1, hereinafter Li).
Regarding claim 1, Palle Venkata discloses a method comprising: maintaining, in a memory device operating within a wireless network, a user equipment (UE) capability repository storing information correlating identifying characteristics of UEs with capabilities of the UEs ([0023] and [0033], the cellular core network may be considered to be the interconnected set of components that manages the operation and traffic of the cellular network and memory arrangement within gNB may be a hardware component configured to store data related to operations performed by the UEs); in response to a connection request from a particular UE, the connection request including UE identifying characteristics for the particular UE, searching the UE capability repository for UE capabilities correlated with the UE identifying characteristics for the particular UE ([0043], UE performs a random access channel (RACH) procedure to attach/camp on the gNB, and the network determines whether or not the core network has the capabilities of the UE stored); and upon finding the UE capabilities correlated with the UE identifying characteristics, providing an access node with the UE capabilities, thereby avoiding sending of a UE capability enquiry message by the access node ([0043], if the core network has the capabilities of the UE stored, then these capabilities are retrieved from the core network). Palle Venkata differs from the claimed invention in not specifically teaching the steps of determining that the particular UE has not previously connected to the wireless network; and in response to determining that the particular UE has not previously connected to the network, storing and associating the UE identifying characteristics for the particular UE with the correlated UE capabilities at the access node and a core network. However, it is well known in the art of initial access process, for example see Hill (figure 5, figure 8, [0049]-[0050] and [0061]-[0062], determining whether previous store capabilities, i.e., UE, that has not previously connected to the network, should has no previous store capabilities, if it is determined no previous stored capabilities, the minimum set of capabilities associated with the RedCap type will be allocated and store at the access node (figure 8, 120) and a core network (figure 8, 111) in order to provide reduced signaling of conveying and selecting the profile ([0077]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Palle Venkata in having the steps of determining that the particular UE has not previously connected to the wireless network; and in response to determining that the particular UE has not previously connected to the network, storing and associating the UE identifying characteristics for the particular UE with the correlated UE capabilities at the access node and a core network, as per teaching of Hill, in order to provide reduced signaling of conveying and selecting the profile. The combination of Palle Venkata and Hill differs from the claimed invention in not specifically storing and associating the UE identifying characteristics for the particular UE and a globally unique temporary identifier (GUTI) for the particular UE with the correlated UE capabilities at the access node and a core network. However, Li teaches base station adds the identification information for identifying the UE by the core network to the UE capability information obtaining request when sending the UE capability information obtaining request to the core network, wherein the context information that is of the UE and that is stored in the core network, and the identification information for identifying the UE by the core network may be a globally unique temporary UE identity, such as Globally Unique Temporary UE Identity, GUTI ([0170]). Therefore, 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 combination of Palle Venkata and Hill in storing and associating the UE identifying characteristics for the particular UE and a globally unique temporary identifier (GUTI) for the particular UE with the correlated UE capabilities at the access node and a core network, as per teaching of Li, in order to increase resource utilization.
Regarding claim 2, Palle Venkata discloses upon failure to find the UE capabilities correlating with the UE identifying characteristics; triggering sending of a UE capability information message to the access node from the particular UE; receiving the UE capability information message; and updating the UE capability repository with capabilities contained in the UE capability information message ([0043], if the capabilities of the UE are not stored on the core network, the gNB requests the UE capabilities from the UE, the UE transmits its capability information to the gNB, and the capability information of the UE is stored in the core network for future use).
Regarding claim 9, Palle Venkata discloses a system comprising; a memory device storing a user equipment (UE) capability repository correlating identifying characteristics of user equipment with capabilities of UEs ([0023] and [0033], the cellular core network may be considered to be the interconnected set of components that manages the operation and traffic of the cellular network and memory arrangement within gNB may be a hardware component configured to store data related to operations performed by the UEs); and a processor device (figure 3, 305) operating within a wireless network, the processing device performing operations including in response to a connection request from a particular UE, the connection request including UE identifying characteristics for the particular UE, searching the UE capability repository for capabilities correlated with the identifying UE characteristics for the particular UE ([0043], UE performs a random access channel (RACH) procedure to attach/camp on the gNB, and the network determines whether or not the core network has the capabilities of the UE stored); upon finding the capabilities correlated with the UE identifying characteristics, providing an access node with the capabilities ([0043], if the core network has the capabilities of the UE stored, then these capabilities are retrieved from the core network); and upon failure to find the capabilities correlating with the identifying characteristics, triggering sending of a UE capability information message to the access node from the particular UE, receiving the UE capability information message , and updating the UE capability repository with the capabilities contained in the UE capability information message ([0043], if the capabilities of the UE are not stored on the core network, the gNB requests the UE capabilities from the UE, the UE transmits its capability information to the gNB, and the capability information of the UE is stored in the core network for future use). Palle Venkata differs from the claimed invention in not specifically teaching the steps of determining that the particular UE has not previously connected to the wireless network; and in response to determining that the particular UE has not previously connected to the network, storing and associating the UE identifying characteristics for the particular UE with the correlated UE capabilities at the access node and a core network. However, it is well known in the art of initial access process, for example see Hill (figure 5, figure 8, [0049]-[0050] and [0061]-[0062], determining whether previous store capabilities, i.e., UE, that has not previously connected to the network, should has no previous store capabilities, if it is determined no previous stored capabilities, the minimum set of capabilities associated with the RedCap type will be allocated and store at the access node (figure 8, 120) and a core network (figure 8, 111) in order to provide reduced signaling of conveying and selecting the profile ([0077]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Palle Venkata in having the steps of determining that the particular UE has not previously connected to the wireless network; and in response to determining that the particular UE has not previously connected to the network, storing and associating the UE identifying characteristics for the particular UE with the correlated UE capabilities at the access node and a core network, as per teaching of Hill, in order to provide reduced signaling of conveying and selecting the profile. The combination of Palle Venkata and Hill differs from the claimed invention in not specifically storing and associating the UE identifying characteristics for the particular UE and a globally unique temporary identifier (GUTI) for the particular UE with the correlated UE capabilities at the access node and a core network. However, Li teaches base station adds the identification information for identifying the UE by the core network to the UE capability information obtaining request when sending the UE capability information obtaining request to the core network, wherein the context information that is of the UE and that is stored in the core network, and the identification information for identifying the UE by the core network may be a globally unique temporary UE identity, such as Globally Unique Temporary UE Identity, GUTI ([0170]). Therefore, 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 combination of Palle Venkata and Hill in storing and associating the UE identifying characteristics for the particular UE and a globally unique temporary identifier (GUTI) for the particular UE with the correlated UE capabilities at the access node and a core network, as per teaching of Li, in order to increase resource utilization.
Regarding claim 10, Palle Venkata discloses that the system is located in the access node (figures 1 and 4).
Regarding claim 18, the limitations of the claim are rejected as the same reasons as set forth in claim 9.
Claims 3 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Palle Venkata et al. (US 2022/0312298 A1, hereinafter Palle Venkata) in view of in view of Hill et al. (US 2024/0073675 A1, hereinafter Hill) and Li et al. (US 2018/0317218 A1, hereinafter Li) as applied in claims above, and further in view of Rahman et al. (WO 2012/178055, hereinafter Rahman).
Regarding claim 3, Palle Venkata discloses if the capabilities of the UE are not stored on the core network, the gNB requests the UE capabilities from the UE, the UE transmits its capability information to the gNB, and the capability information of the UE is stored in the core network for future use ([0043]) such that Palle Venkata teaches to instruct access node to send a UE capability enquiry. The combination of Palle Venkata, Hill and Li differs from the claimed invention in not explicitly disclosing to trigger the sending of the UE capability information message by returning a NULL value to a core network and to the access node instructing the access node to send a UE capability enquiry. However, it is old and notoriously well known in the art of returning a NULL value or response to core network when the functionality is not supported to confirm the process status, for example see Rahman ([0074]). Therefore, 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 combination of Palle Venkata, Hill and Li to trigger the sending of the UE capability information message by returning a NULL value to a core network and to the access node instructing the access node to send a UE capability enquiry, as per teaching of Rahman, in order to confirm the process status.
Regarding claim 13, the limitations of the claim are rejected as the same reasons as set forth in claim 3.
Claims 4-6, 11-12, 14-16 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Palle Venkata et al. (US 2022/0312298 A1, hereinafter Palle Venkata) in view of in view of Hill et al. (US 2024/0073675 A1, hereinafter Hill) and Li et al. (US 2018/0317218 A1, hereinafter Li) as applied in claims above, and further in view of Palat et al. (CN 112840687A, hereinafter Palat).
Regarding claims 4-6, the combination of Palle Venkata, Hill, and Li differs from the claimed invention in not specifically teaching that the UE identifying characteristics include a make and model of the UE, a software version of the UE and identifying UE using an international mobile equipment identity (IEI) number and an IMEI software version (SV) number. However, it is old and notoriously well known in the art of utilizing model identification (ID) of the type allocation code (TAC) part from the international mobile device identity (IMEISV) can reflect the ability of all the UE manufactured and distributed by the TAC in order to reduce core network storage requirement (see Palat, page 9, first paragraph). Therefore, 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 combination of Palle Venkata, Hill and Li in identifying characteristics include a make and model of the UE and a software version of the UE and identifying UE using an international mobile equipment identity (IEI) number and an IMEI software version (SV) number, as per teaching of Palat, to reduce core network storage requirement.
Regarding claims 14-16, the limitations of the claims are rejected as the same reasons as set forth in claims 4-6.
Regarding claim 19, the limitations of the claims are rejected as the same reasons as set forth in claims 4-6.
Regarding claims 11-12, the combination of Palle Venkata, Hill and Li differs from the claimed invention in not specifically teaching that the system is located within a mobility management entity (MME) or access and mobility function (AMF) of a core network, wherein the system is disposed within a processing node communicating with the access node and an AMF or MME of a core network. However, Palat teaches UE can only provide the ID and the core network (CN) searches the capability corresponding to the ID, wherein the network element such as MME or AMF can provide the information (page 9, third paragraph) to provide an effective solution to the system. Therefore, 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 combination of Palle Venkata, Hill and Li in having that the system is located within a mobility management entity (MME) or access and mobility function (AMF) of a core network, wherein the system is disposed within a processing node communicating with the access node and an AMF or MME of a core network, as per teaching of Palat, in order to provide an effective solution to the system.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Palle Venkata et al. (US 2022/0312298 A1, hereinafter Palle Venkata) in view of in view of Hill et al. (US 2024/0073675 A1, hereinafter Hill), Li et al. (US 2018/0317218 A1, hereinafter Li) and Palat et al. (CN 112840687A, hereinafter, Palat) as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Chen et al. (US 9,094,829 B2, hereinafter Chen).
Regarding claim 7, Palat teaches utilizing model identification (ID) of the type allocation code (TAC) part from the international mobile device identity (IMEISV) can reflect the ability of all the UE manufactured and distributed by the TAC (see Palat, page 9, first paragraph). The combination of Palle Venkata, Hill, Li and Palat differs from the claimed invention in not specifically disclosing to compare a type allocation code (TAC) within the IMEI to a stored TAC in the UE capability repository to determine that the UE identifying characteristics for the particular UE match UE identifying characteristics stored in the UE capability repository. However, it is old and notoriously well known in the art of comparing the user identifier, the user device class, and the enhanced type allocation code identifier with the user identifiers, the enhanced type allocation code identifiers, and the user device class information, to determine whether a user device class is obtained (see Chen. figures 6A-6B and claim 1). Therefore, 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 combination of Palle Venkata, Hill, Li and Palat, to compare a type allocation code (TAC) within the IMEI to a stored TAC in the UE capability repository to determine that the UE identifying characteristics for the particular UE match UE identifying characteristics stored in the UE capability repository, as per teaching of Chen, in order to simple authentication and/or authorization procedures.
Claims 8, 17 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Palle Venkata et al. (US 2022/0312298 A1, hereinafter Palle Venkata) in view of in view of Hill et al. (US 2024/0073675 A1, hereinafter Hill), Li et al. (US 2018/0317218 A1, hereinafter Li) and Palat et al. (CN 112840687A, hereinafter Palat) as applied to claims 6, 16 and 19 above, and further in view of Cao et al. (CN 101384057A, hereinafter Cao).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Palle Venkata, Hill, Li and Palat differs from the claimed invention in not specifically disclosing to receive the IMEI and IMEI_SV with the connection request. However, Cao teaches connection request comprises the mobile terminal model information, the model information for the model number of the mobile terminal, software version number and IMEI number so that it enhances connection process (page 6, last paragraph and page 7, first paragraph). Therefore, 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 combination of Palle Venkata, Hill, Li and Palat to receive the IMEI and IMEI_SV with the connection request, as per teaching of Cao, to enhance connection process.
Regarding claims 17 and 20, the limitations of the claims are rejected as the same reasons as set forth in claim 8.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kawasaki et al. (US 10,567,995 B2) discloses information elements of the MME context stored for each UE includes an IMSI, an IMSI-unauthenticated-indicator, an MSISDN, an MM State, a GUTI, an ME Identity, a Tracking Area List, a TAI of last TAU, an E-UTRAN Cell Global Identity (ECGI), an E-UTRAN Cell Identity Age, a CSG ID, a CSG membership, an Access mode, an Authentication Vector, a UE Radio Access Capability, an MS Classmark 2, an MS Classmark 3, Supported Codecs, a UE Network Capability, an MS Network Capability, UE Specific DRX Parameters, a Selected NAS Algorithm, an eKSI, a K_ASME, NAS Keys and COUNT, a Selected CN operator ID, a Recovery, an Access Restriction, an ODB for PS parameters, an APN-OI Replacement, an MME IP address for S11, etc. (figure 7b).
Casati (US 2020/0351646 A1) discloses the AMF may proactively update the UE with a new UE radio capability ID without waiting for the next UE registration, using a UE configuration update message in the 5G system (5GS) or in a GUTI reallocation command message in the EPS, and/or some other type of non-access-stratum signaling message initiated from the core network and received by the UE in the 5GS and/or EPS when the AMF detects in the UE context ([0056]).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GEORGE ENG whose telephone number is (571)272-7495. The examiner can normally be reached Flex M to F, 7 am to 3 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, Alford Kindred can be reached at 571-272-4037. 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.
/GEORGE ENG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2699