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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 July 28, 2026, has been entered.
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 (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 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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4, 6-7, 9-11, 13-14, 16, 18-19, 21-23, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/102(a)(2) as being anticipated by 3GPP, CATT, “Consideration on SNPN with subscription or Credentials by a Separate Entity”, R2-2100277 (herein referred to as R1).
Regarding claims 1, 6, 13 and 18, R1 discloses a method performed by a radio network node for handling communication in a wireless communications network (see fig. 6.1.1-1), the method comprising:
transmitting system information (SI), comprising an association parameter associating a group identity (GID), with two or more networks in the SI (see R1, for instance highlighted part (2) Optionally, supported Group IDs (GIDs) that reads, "In the solution#2, the network needs to broadcast a list of supported Home SP (Group) IDs. From the description of SA2 specification, A SNPN can be accessed by both UEs using an external PLMN subscription and UEs using an external SNPN subscription, if a Home SP Group ID in the list in UE configuration matches a Home SP Group ID broadcast by an available SNPN, then the UE selects that SNPN, that is, the UE selects an available and allowable Stand-alone Non-Public Network (SNPN) (from among a number of SNPN implicitly implied, that is two or more networks).
Therefore, for each SNPN broadcasted in the SIB, an optional supported Group IDs (GIDs) could be enhanced to indicate which Home SP Group could be used for subscription or credentials, based on the support of “access using credentials from a separate entity” for each SNPN. Proposal 2: The supported Group IDs (GIDs) could be optionally broadcasted per SNPN, if the SNPN is supported to be accessed using credentials from a separate entity." (section 2.1.1, page 3). The same reasoning identically applies to the subject-matter of the corresponding independent claims 6, 13, 18 and 25, 26. Claim 6 is related to a method performed by a UE, which mirrors the method of claim 1 in terms of a sender-to-receiver relationship. Claim 13 relates to a radio network node configured to perform the method of claim 1. Claim 18 relates to a user equipment configured to perform the method of claim 6. Claims 25 and 26 relate to a computer program product and a computer- readable storage medium, respectively, comprising instructions for performing the methods of claims 1 and 6.
Regarding claims 2, 7, 14, 19, R1 discloses configuring (401) a user equipment, UE, (10) with one or more GIDs and/or one or more association parameters (Optionally, supported Group IDs (GIDs)": "... if a Home SP Group ID in the list in UE configuration ...") (section 2, subsection 2.2.1, Enhancement of broadcast, page 2).
Regarding claims 4, 9, 16, 21, R1 discloses wherein the two or more networks comprises two or more stand-alone non-public networks (SNPNs) and the association parameter indicates that the SNPNs supports several different GIDs (SNPN supports several GIDs (see R1, section 2.2.1 Enhancement of broadcast in Section 2) "Optionally, supported Group IDs (GIDs)": "... The supported Group IDs (GIDs) could be optionally broadcasted per the SNPNs ...") (see claim 1 for the two or more SNPN).
Regarding claims 10, 11, 22, 23, R1 discloses using the association parameter to access a network ( …… a SNPN can be accessed by both UEs using an external PLMN subscription and UEs using an external SNPN subscription, if a Home SP Group ID in the list in UE configuration matches a Home SP Group ID broadcast by an available SNPN, then the UE selects that SNPN. …. ) (chapter 2.2.1 Enhancement of broadcast, section 2, page 3).
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.
Claim(s) 3, 8, 15, 20, 25, 26, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over 3GPP, CATT, “Consideration on SNPN with subscription or Credentials by a Separate Entity”, R2-2100277 (identified herein as R1) in view of Sirotkin et al (hereinafter Sirotkin) (US 2013/0215742).
Regarding claims 3, 8, 15, 20, R1 discloses all limitation of the claim 1 above, except wherein the association parameter comprises a bitmap. Expressing an association by a bitmap is considered to be generally known technique in the relevant art, unless it provides for some unexpected technical effect, for instance, Sirotkin discloses technique for signaling of an action to a node wherein the Extended access barring (EAB) parameters can include a barring bitmap where each bit corresponds to an access class (AC) (paras. 0020, 0027), a known technique for a person of skill in the art to make use of.
Regarding claim 25, R1 discloses limitation to claim 1, 6, noted above, except a computer program product comprising a non-transitory storage medium program comprising instructions, which, when executed on at least one processor, perform the method. Sirotkin, however, discloses method may be executed as instructions on a machine, where the instructions are included on at least one non-transitory computer readable medium or one non-transitory machine readable storage medium carryout the instructions (paras. 0076, 0081). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teaching of Sirotkin with R1 for the benefit of provide practicing the various process techniques.
Regarding claim 26, R1 discloses all limitation noted above with claims 1, 6, 13, 18, above, except, a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, having stored there on a computer program product comprising instructions which, when executed on at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to carry out the method according to claim 6, as performed by the UE. Sirotkin, however, discloses method may be executed as instructions on a machine, where the instructions are included on at least one non-transitory computer storage medium carry out the instructions (para. 0092). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teaching of Sirotkin with R1 for the benefit of provide practicing the various process techniques.
Claim(s) 5, 12, 17, 24, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over 3GPP, CATT, “Consideration on SNPN with subscription or Credentials by a Separate Entity”, R2-2100277 (identified herein as R1) in view of 3GPP, CMCC, “support SNPN along with credentials owned by an entity separate from the SNPN”, R2-2101717 (Identified herein as R2).
Regarding claims 5, 12, 17, 24, R1 discloses all limitation noted above with claim 1. R1 does not disclose broadcasting a list of GIDs together with a list of Human Readable Group Names (HRGN), for the GIDs in a same system information block or separately from the GID. R2 however, discloses via proposal 3, which includes “…. Optionally, supported Group IDs (GIDs)’s Human Readable Network Name … “ (R2, Chapter 3.2 SIB structure proposal, page 4).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to QUTBUDDIN GHULAMALI whose telephone number is (571) 272-3014. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30am to 4:00pm.
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, Chieh Fan can be reached at 571 272 3042. 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.
/QUTBUDDIN GHULAMALI/
Primary Examiner,
Art Unit 2632.
Prosecution Insights