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 .
1. Claims 30-49 are pending. Claims 1-29 are cancelled.
Response to Arguments
2. The objection to the drawings is withdrawn and the new drawings are entered.
3. Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 01/28/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 30-31, 40-41, and 45 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou et al, US 2023/0060429 in view of Belling, US 2020/0404106 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 Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn.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 of35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou et al, US 2023/0060429 in view of Belling, US 2020/0404106 and further in view of Baek et al, US 12,225,626 hereafter Beak. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action.
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.
4. Claim(s) 30-31, 40-41, and 45-46 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou et al, US 2023/0060429 hereafter Zhou in view of Belling, US 2020/0404106 hereafter Belling and further in view of Baek et al, US 12,225,626 hereafter Beak.
As for claim 30, Zhou disclose:
A method implemented by a first network node (Zhou, Fig. 2, [0134]-[0135], The UDM) in a wireless communication system, comprising:
receiving a first subscription for subscribing to a UE reachability event (Zhou, [0143], the event monitoring type information is used to indicate a plurality of types including user equipment reachability (UE reachability)) from an event subscriber, wherein the first subscription is configured to indicate the UE reachability event shall be reported to the event subscriber via the first network node (Zhou, Fig. 12, 1002, [0449]-[0454], Receiving, from the NEF (event subscriber), a monitoring event subscription request message (first subscription) for an event reported via the UDM (a first node));
sending, to the second network node, a second subscription for subscribing to the UE reachability event, which is configured on the basis of the first subscription (Zhou, Fig. 12, 1003a, [0455]-[0459], The UDM sends a monitoring event subscription request message (second subscription) to the AMF including information based on the monitoring event subscription request message (first subscription) received from the NEF (event subscriber)).
Zhou does not explicitly disclose in response to the first subscription being configured to indicate the UE reachability event shall be reported via the first network node, sending, to the event subscriber, a first UE report that the UE reachability event occurs in response to the occurrence of the UE reachability event detected at the first network node.
However, Belling discloses in response to the first subscription being configured to indicate the UE reachability event shall be reported via the first network node, sending, to the event subscriber, a first UE reachability report that the UE reachability event occurs in response to the occurrence of the UE reachability event detected at the first network node or reported by the second network node (Belling, Fig. 2, step 2, step 6a, [0037], [0040], In response to the NEF subscription indicating the UE event should be reported by the UDM (Fig. 2, step 2), the UDM depending on detecting that the event occurs then sends the event report to the NEF (Fig. 2, step 6a))
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 teachings of Zhou with in response to the first subscription being configured to indicate the UE reachability event shall be reported via the first network node, sending, to the event subscriber, a first UE reachability report that the UE reachability event occurs in response to the occurrence of the UE reachability event detected at the first network node or reported by the second network node as taught by Belling to improve throughput, latency, and/or processing speed of network nodes (Belling, [0116]).
The combination of Zhou and Belling does not explicitly disclose wherein the subscription is configured to indicate whether the UE reachability event shall be reported to the event subscriber indirectly via the first network node or directly via a second network node.
However, Baek discloses wherein the subscription is configured to indicate whether the UE reachability event shall be reported to the event subscriber indirectly via the first network node (Baek, column 12 lines 65-67, column 13 lines 1-7, column 13 lines 25-49, The Namf_EventExposure_unsubscribe request message indicates whether the AMF 522 should forward a processing result of the Namf_EventExposure_unsubscribe request to the NEF 521 through a Namf_EventExposure_unsubscribe response message) or directly via a second network node. (Baek, column 14 lines 15-27, the AF 510 directly exchanges the Namf_EventExposure_subscribe request/response messages with the AMF 522 instead of passing through the NEF 521)
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 combination of the teachings of Zhou and Belling with wherein the subscription is configured to indicate whether the UE reachability event shall be reported to the event subscriber indirectly via the first network node or directly via a second network node as taught by Baek to provide more efficient event subscription registration. (Baek, column 2 lines 47-51)
As for claim 31, Belling discloses:
the first network node is implemented by a UDM node, the second network node is implemented by one of an AMF node and an HSS node, and the event subscriber is implemented by one selected from a group consisting of a GMLC node, an IP-SM-GW node, an EF node and an AF node (Zhou, Fig. 12, [0441]-[0459], The UDM, AMF and AF).
As for claim 40, Zhou discloses:
A method implemented by a second network node in a wireless communication system, comprising:
receiving, from a first network node, a second subscription for subscribing to a UE reachability event (Zhou, Fig. 12, 1003a, [0455]-[0459], Receiving, from the UDM (first network node), a monitoring event subscription request message to the AMF including information from the monitoring event subscription request message (first subscription) received from the NEF (event subscriber)), wherein the second subscription is configured to indicate the UE reachability event shall be reported to an event subscriber via the first network node or the second network node on the basis of a first subscription received from the event subscriber by the first network node (Zhou, Fig. 12, 1003a, [0455]-[0459], The UDM sends a monitoring event subscription request message (second subscription) to the AMF including information based on the monitoring event subscription request message (first subscription) received from the NEF (event subscriber)).
Zhou does not explicitly disclose determining whether the UE reachability event occurs on the basis of UE activity; and in response to the second subscription being configured to indicate the UE reachability event shall be reported to the event subscriber via the first network node, otherwise, notifying the event subscriber of the occurrence of the UE reachability event.
However, Belling discloses determining whether the UE reachability event occurs on the basis of UE activity (Belling, Fig. 3, step 13, step 14, [0051], the AMF may detect the UE is reachable again); and in response to the second subscription being configured to indicate the UE reachability event shall be reported to the event subscriber via the first network node, otherwise, notifying the event subscriber of the occurrence of the UE reachability event (Belling, Fig. 3, step 13, step 14, [0051], in response to detecting the UE is reachable again…the AMF sends Namf_EventExposure_Notify message(s) to the NEF/AF (event subscriber)).
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 teachings of Zhou with determining whether the UE reachability event occurs on the basis of UE activity; and in response to the second subscription being configured to indicate the UE reachability event shall be reported to the event subscriber via the first network node, otherwise, notifying the event subscriber of the occurrence of the UE reachability event as taught by Belling to improve throughput, latency, and/or processing speed of network nodes (Belling, [0116]).
The combination of Zhou and Belling does not explicitly disclose in response to the second subscription being configured to indicate the UE reachability event shall be reported to the event subscriber directly via the second network node, notifying the event subscriber of the occurrence of the UE reachability event.
However, Baek discloses in response to the second subscription being configured to indicate the UE reachability event shall be reported to the event subscriber directly via the second network node, notifying the event subscriber of the occurrence of the UE reachability event (Baek, column 14 lines 15-27, in response to the subscription indication, the AF 510 directly exchanges the Namf_EventExposure_subscribe request/response messages with the AMF 522 instead of passing through the NEF 521)
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 combination of the teachings of Zhou and Belling with in response to the second subscription being configured to indicate the UE reachability event shall be reported to the event subscriber directly via the second network node, notifying the event subscriber of the occurrence of the UE reachability event as taught by Baek to provide more efficient event subscription registration. (Baek, column 2 lines 47-51)
As for claim 41, Belling discloses:
the first network node is implemented by a UDM node, the second network node is implemented by one of an AMF node and an HSS node, and the event subscriber is implemented by one selected from a group consisting of a GMLC node, an IP-SM-GW node, an EF node and an AF node (Zhou, Fig. 12, [0441]-[0459], The UDM, AMF and AF).
As for claim 45, Zhou discloses:
A method implemented by an event subscriber in a wireless communication system, comprising:
sending a first subscription for subscribing to a UE reachability event to a first network node, wherein the first subscription is configured to indicate the UE reachability event shall be reported to the event subscriber via the first network node or a second network node (Zhou, Fig. 12, 1002, [0449]-[0454], Sending, from the NEF (event subscriber), a monitoring event subscription request message (first subscription) for an event reported via the UDM (a first node)).
Zhou does not explicitly disclose receiving either a first UE reachability report that the UE reachability event occurs from the first network node, or a second UE reachability report that the UE reachability event occurs from the second network node .
However, Belling discloses receiving either a first UE reachability report that the UE reachability event occurs from the first network node, or a second UE reachability report that the UE reachability event occurs from the second network node (Belling, Fig. 2, step 2, step 6a, [0037], [0040], In response to the NEF subscription indicating the UE event should be reported by the UDM (Fig. 2, step 2), the UDM depending on detecting that the event occurs then sends the event report to the NEF (Fig. 2, step 6a)).
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 teachings of Zhou with receiving either a first UE reachability report that the UE reachability event occurs from the first network node, or a second UE reachability report that the UE reachability event occurs from the second network node as taught by Belling to improve throughput, latency, and/or processing speed of network nodes (Belling, [0116]).
The combination of Zhou and Belling does not explicitly disclose wherein the first subscription is configured to indicate whether the UE reachability event shall be reported to the event subscriber indirectly via the first network node or directly via a second network node.
However, Baek discloses wherein the first subscription is configured to indicate whether the UE reachability event shall be reported to the event subscriber indirectly via the first network node (Baek, column 12 lines 65-67, column 13 lines 1-7, column 13 lines 25-49, The Namf_EventExposure_unsubscribe request message indicates whether the AMF 522 should forward a processing result of the Namf_EventExposure_unsubscribe request to the NEF 521 through a Namf_EventExposure_unsubscribe response message) or directly via a second network node. (Baek, column 14 lines 15-27, the AF 510 directly exchanges the Namf_EventExposure_subscribe request/response messages with the AMF 522 instead of passing through the NEF 521)
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 combination of the teachings of Zhou and Belling with wherein the first subscription is configured to indicate whether the UE reachability event shall be reported to the event subscriber indirectly via the first network node or directly via a second network node as taught by Baek to provide more efficient event subscription registration. (Baek, column 2 lines 47-51)
As for claim 46, Belling discloses:
the first network node is implemented by a UDM node, the second network node is implemented by one of an AMF node and an HSS node, the event subscriber is implemented by one selected from a group consisting of a GMLC node, an IP-SM-GW node, an EF node and an AF node (Zhou, Fig. 12, [0441]-[0459], The UDM, AMF and AF).
5. Claim(s) 32, 34-35, and 42-43 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou et al, US 2023/0060429 in view of Belling, US 2020/0404106 in view of Baek et al, US 12,225,626, as applied to claim 30 above, and further in view of Tiwari et al, US 2025/009787 hereafter Tiwari.
As for claim 32, the combination of Zhou, Belling, and Baek does not explicitly disclose the UE reachability event comprises at least one of an event on UE reachability for data and an event on UE reachability for SMS.
Tiwari discloses the UE reachability event comprises at least one of an event on UE reachability for data and an event on UE reachability for SMS (Tiwari, Fig. 2, [0041]-[0042], When all conditions are met, i.e. UE supports SMS over NAS and the UE has indicated the “SMS Request” and the SMS over NAS subscription has been updated to “SMS over NAS is allowed”).
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 combination of the teachings of Zhou, Belling, and Baek with the UE reachability event comprises at least one of an event on UE reachability for data and an event on UE reachability for SMS as taught by Tiwari to reduce/eliminate unnecessary signaling which provides more efficient bandwidth usage (Tiwari, [0012]).
As for claim 34, the combination of Zhou, Belling and Baek discloses in response to the first subscription being configured to indicate the UE reachability event shall be reported to the event subscriber indirectly by the first network node (Belling, Fig. 2, step 2, step 6a, [0037], [0040], In response to the NEF subscription indicating the UE event should be reported by the UDM (Fig. 2, step 2), the UDM depending on detecting that the event occurs then sends the event report to the NEF (Fig. 2, step 6a)), the step of sending the second subscription comprises: in response to an AMF node being registered in the first network node (Zhou, [0212]-[0215], in response to the UDM determines an AMF or an SMF that is serving a user in the user group), sending the second subscription to the AMF node registered in the first network node (Zhou, [0212]-[0215], the UDM sends the monitoring event subscription request message to the AMF, to indicate the AMF to perform event monitoring on the member user in the user group.)
As for claim 35, Zhou does not explicitly disclose the step of sending the first UE reachability report comprises: in response an event exposure notification that UE activity is detected, which is received from the AMF node registered in the first network node, sending the first UE reachability report to the event subscriber.
However, Belling discloses the step of sending the first UE reachability report comprises: in response an event exposure notification that UE activity is detected, which is received from the AMF node registered in the first network node, sending the first UE reachability report to the event subscriber (Belling, Fig. 3, step 13, step 14, [0051], the AMF may detect the UE is reachable again…the AMF sends Namf_EventExposure_Notify message(s) to the NEF which is forwarded to the AF).
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 teachings of Zhou with the step of sending the first UE reachability report comprises: in response an event exposure notification that UE activity is detected, which is received from the AMF node registered in the first network node, sending the first UE reachability report to the event subscriber as taught by Belling to improve throughput, latency, and/or processing speed of network nodes (Belling, [0116]).
As for claim 42, the combination of Zhou, Belling, and Baek does not explicitly disclose the UE reachability event comprises at least one of an event on UE reachability for SMS.
Tiwari discloses the UE reachability event comprises at least one of an event on UE reachability for SMS (Tiwari, Fig. 2, [0041]-[0042], When all conditions are met, i.e. UE supports SMS over NAS and the UE has indicated the “SMS Request” and the SMS over NAS subscription has been updated to “SMS over NAS is allowed”).
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 combination of the teachings of Zhou, Belling, and Baek with the UE reachability event comprises at least one of an event on UE reachability for SMS as taught by Tiwari to reduce/eliminate unnecessary signaling which provides more efficient bandwidth usage (Tiwari, [0012]).
As for claim 43, Tiwari discloses the step of determining whether the UE reachability event occurs is performed by detecting at least one selected from a group consisting of NAS signaling from a UE (Tiwari, [0043],-[0045] After the NAS signaling connection is established, the UE will send the NAS message and executes the procedure), UE notification (Tiwari, [0015]-[0016], the UE initiates the Registration procedure as described in the FIG. 1.).
6. Claim(s) 37-38 and 47-49 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou et al, US 2023/0060429 in view of Belling, US 2020/0404106, in view of Baek et al, US 12,225,626 in view of Tiwari et al, US 2025/0097874, as applied to claims 32 and 46 above, and further in view of Lim, US 2015/0319588 hereafter Lim.
As for claim 37, Tiwari discloses:
The UE reachability for SMS comprises UE reachability for SMS over NAS (Tiwari, Fig. 2, [0041]-[0042], When all conditions are met, i.e. UE supports SMS over NAS and the UE has indicated the “SMS Request” and the SMS over NAS subscription has been updated to “SMS over NAS is allowed”).
The combination of Zhou, Belling, Baek and Tiwari does not explicitly disclose UE reachability for SMS over IP.
However, Lim discloses UE reachability for SMS over IP (Lim, Fig. 3, [0001[-[0002], [0023]-[0024], device for processing the SMS at an IP-SM-GW (Internet Protocol-Short Message-GateWay) which is one of ASs (Application Servers) for processing SMS over IP in the IMS network… SMS over IP capability information received through notification about the register to the S-CSCF).
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 combination of the teachings of Zhou, Belling, Baek, and Tiwari with UE reachability for SMS over IP as taught by Lim to avoid data loss (Lim, [0007]-[0008]).
As for claim 38, Tiwari discloses:
the first subscription is configured to further indicate the UE reachability for SMS is the SMS over IP, and the step of sending the first UE reachability report comprises: in response to the occurrence of the UE reachability event detected at the first network node or reported by the second network node, determining whether the SMS over NAS is available; configuring the first UE reachability report to indicate whether the SMS over NAS is available (Tiwari, Fig. 2, [0004]-[0006], [0041]-[0042], When all conditions are met, i.e. UE supports SMS over NAS and the UE has indicated the “SMS Request” and the SMS over NAS subscription has been updated to “SMS over NAS is allowed”).
As for claim 47, the combination of Zhou, Belling, and Baek does not explicitly disclose the UE reachability event comprises at least one of an event on UE reachability for data and an event on UE reachability for SMS and wherein the UE reachability for SMS comprises UE reachability for SMS over NAS and UE reachability for SMS over IP.
However, Tiwari discloses the UE reachability event comprises at least one of an event on UE reachability for data and an event on UE reachability for SMS and wherein the UE reachability for SMS comprises UE reachability for SMS over NAS (Tiwari, Fig. 2, [0041]-[0042], When all conditions are met, i.e. UE supports SMS over NAS and the UE has indicated the “SMS Request” and the SMS over NAS subscription has been updated to “SMS over NAS is allowed”)
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 combination of the teachings of Zhou, Belling, and Baek with the UE reachability event comprises at least one of an event on UE reachability for data and an event on UE reachability for SMS and wherein the UE reachability for SMS comprises UE reachability for SMS over NAS as taught by Tiwari to reduce/eliminate unnecessary signaling which provides more efficient bandwidth usage (Tiwari, [0012]).
The combination of Zhou, Belling, Baek and Tiwari does not explicitly disclose UE reachability for SMS over IP.
However, Lim discloses UE reachability for SMS over IP (Lim, Fig. 3, [0001[-[0002], [0023]-[0024], device for processing the SMS at an IP-SM-GW (Internet Protocol-Short Message-GateWay) which is one of ASs (Application Servers) for processing SMS over IP in the IMS network… SMS over IP capability information received through notification about the register to the S-CSCF).
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 combination of Zhou, Belling, Baek, and Tiwari with UE reachability for SMS over IP as taught by Lim to avoid data loss (Lim, [0007]-[0008]).
As for claim 48,
the first subscription is configured to further indicate the UE reachability for SMS is the SMS over IP (Lim, Fig. 3, [0001[-[0002], [0023]-[0024], device for processing the SMS at an IP-SM-GW (Internet Protocol-Short Message-GateWay) which is one of ASs (Application Servers) for processing SMS over IP in the IMS network… SMS over IP capability information received through notification about the register to the S-CSCF), the first UE reachability report is configured to indicate whether the SMS over NAS is available (Tiwari, Fig. 2, [0041]-[0042], When all conditions are met, i.e. UE supports SMS over NAS and the UE has indicated the “SMS Request” and the SMS over NAS subscription has been updated to “SMS over NAS is allowed”).
As for claim 49, Tiwari discloses determining a SMS delivery policy on the basis of indication on whether the SMS over NAS is available in the first UE reachability report (Tiwari, Fig. 2, [0041]-[0042], When all conditions are met, i.e. UE supports SMS over NAS and the UE has indicated the “SMS Request” and the SMS over NAS subscription has been updated to “SMS over NAS is allowed”).
7. Claim(s) 39 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou et al, US 2023/0060429 in view of Belling, US 2020/0404106 in view of Baek et al, US 12,225,626, as applied to claim 31 above, and further in view of Ryu et al, US 2019/0373581 hereafter Ryu.
As for claim 39, the combination of Zhou, Belling, and Baek does not explicitly disclose
setting a UE reachability request parameter to make the second network node to report the occurrence of the UE reachability event in one of the following modes: one-time UE reachability event reporting, continuous UE reachability event reporting and periodic UE reachability event reporting.
However, Ryu discloses setting a UE reachability request parameter to make the second network node to report the occurrence of the UE reachability event in one of the following modes: one-time UE reachability event reporting (Ryu, Fig. 18, [0474], [0505], [0533], A maximum number of reports: a one-time report), continuous UE reachability event reporting (Ryu, Fig. 18, Monitoring configuration set to continuous reporting of UE reachability) and periodic UE reachability event reporting (Ryu, [0497], the monitoring request message may include a subscribed periodic RAU/TAU timer (if it is adjusted), a maximum response time (if it is provided) and/or immediate delivery required (if it is provided).
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 teachings of combination of Zhou, Belling, and Baek with setting a UE reachability request parameter to make the second network node to report the occurrence of the UE reachability event in one of the following modes: one-time UE reachability event reporting, continuous UE reachability event reporting and periodic UE reachability event reporting as taught by Ryu to provide power saving for the UE. (Ryu, [0004]).
8. Claim(s) 44 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou et al, US 2023/0060429 in view of Belling, US 2020/0404106 in view of Baek et al, US 12,225,626, in view of Tiwari et al, US 2025/0097874, as applied to claim 42 above, and further in view of Ryu et al, US 2019/0373581 hereafter Ryu.
As for claim 44, the combination of Zhou, Belling, Baek, and Tiwari does not explicitly disclose setting a UE reachability request parameter to make the second network node to report the occurrence of the UE reachability event in one of the following modes: one-time UE reachability event reporting, continuous UE reachability event reporting and periodic UE reachability event reporting.
However, Ryu discloses setting a UE reachability request parameter to make the second network node to report the occurrence of the UE reachability event in one of the following modes: one-time UE reachability event reporting (Ryu, Fig. 18, [0474], [0505], [0533], A maximum number of reports: a one-time report), continuous UE reachability event reporting (Ryu, Fig. 18, Monitoring configuration set to continuous reporting of UE reachability) and periodic UE reachability event reporting (Ryu, [0497], the monitoring request message may include a subscribed periodic RAU/TAU timer (if it is adjusted), a maximum response time (if it is provided) and/or immediate delivery required (if it is provided).
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 combination of the teachings of Zhou, Belling, Baek, and Tiwari with setting a UE reachability request parameter to make the second network node to report the occurrence of the UE reachability event in one of the following modes: one-time UE reachability event reporting, continuous UE reachability event reporting and periodic UE reachability event reporting as taught by Ryu to provide power saving for the UE. (Ryu, [0004]).
Allowable Subject Matter
9. Claims 33 and 36 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
10. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Chen et al, US 2020/0163009 [0080] If the initial AMF, based on local policy and subscription information, determines to forward the NAS message to the target AMF directly, the initial AMF sends a Reroute NAS message to the target AMF 20-2.
11. 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.
12. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JENEE HOLLAND whose telephone number is (571)270-7196. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 AM - 5:00 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, IAN MOORE can be reached at (571)272-3085. 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.
JENEE HOLLAND
Examiner
Art Unit 2469
/JENEE HOLLAND/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2469