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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 5-10 and 15-16 in the reply filed on 12/13/2025 is acknowledged.
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.
Claims 5, 8, and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Venkataraman et al (US 2021/0,368,421; hereinafter Venkataraman) in view of Bae et al (US 2016/0,261,600; hereinafter Bae).
Regarding claim 5 and 8, Venkataraman disclose a method performed by a network node (e.g. AMF 712, NSQ 714) in a home network for a wireless transmit/receive unit (e.g. UE) (para. [0113]), and a network node (e.g. AMF 712, NSQ 714) comprising: memory storing processor-executable instructions (para. [0059]); and a processor configured to execute the instructions (paras. [0062], [0197]) to:
receiving from the WTRU a registration request message (registration request 520) comprising information indicating that the WTRU requests registration to the home network (paras. [0095]-[0096]);
determining a range of time values comprising a maximum value, wherein the maximum value is calculated from a number of subscribers to the home network in proximity to a hosting network and a capability of the home network to handle simultaneous registration requests (the network node is configured to manage quotas for respective network slices of a home PLMN, available quota and used quota for a given network slice are complementary in the sense that their sum is equal to the maximum number of UEs allowed on the given network slice, a quota for a network slice may be interpreted as a maximum number of user equipment devices that are allowed to access the network slice, the network is said to implement a network slice quota function, the capability of the home PLMN to handle the simultaneous registration requests by accommodating multiple registration request attempts and determining whether a maximum allowed number of PDU sessions on the network slice has been reached; paras. [0006], [0093], [0098]-[0099], [0173]-[0174]); and
sending to the WTRU the registration reject message comprising information indicating a rejection cause and a time value selected in the range of time values (the network node may send a registration reject message 528A to the UE, the registration reject message indicates that the UE is not allowed to use the requested network slice(s), the registration reject message may include the identification for a network slice, i.e. S-NSSAI value(s), of the network slice(s), an indication of the cause of rejection (e.g., reject_cause = “max number of UEs on network slice reached”), and a back-off timer value; paras. [0095], [0098]). Venkataraman do not explicitly disclose the registration request indicates that the WTRU requests re-registration to the home network in which the network node is located. In the same field of endeavor, Bae disclose the registration request indicates that the WTRU requests re-registration to the home network in which the network node is located (paras. [0047], [0050]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to do so in order for the user device to return to the original home network and register again with the home network for strengthened security in the registration procedure (Bae; ¶ [0012]).
Regarding claim 15, Venkataraman and Bae disclose the method of claim 5, wherein the range of time values further comprises a minimum value (Venkataraman; backoff timer value may indicate a minimum amount of time the UE should wait before attempting, e.g. after receipt of the registration reject message, another registration request; ¶ [0098]).
Regarding claim 16, Venkataraman and Bae disclose the network node of claim 8, wherein the range of time values further comprises a minimum value (Venkataraman; backoff timer value may indicate a minimum amount of time the UE should wait before attempting another registration request; ¶ [0098]).
Claims 6 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Venkataraman et al (US 2021/0,368,421) in view of Bae et al (US 2016/0,261,600) further in view of Won (US 2021/0,258,857).
Regarding claim 6 and 9, Venkataraman and Bae disclose the method and network node of claim 5 and 8 respectively, wherein they do not disclose the rejection cause indicates that the rejection message is related to hosting network-specific congestion. In the same field of endeavor, Won disclose the rejection cause indicates that the rejection message is related to hosting network-specific congestion (the registration rejection indicates a rejection cause as general NAS level mobility management congestion control by the network; ¶ [0137]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to do so in order for the network node to provide the reason of the registration rejection to the UE with an appropriate cause value, e.g. congestion, in the registration reject message (Won; ¶ [0137]).
Claim 7 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Venkataraman et al (US 2021/0,368,421) in view of Bae et al (US 2016/0,261,600) further in view of Kim (US 2023/0,189,132).
Regarding claim 7 and 10, Venkataraman and Bae disclose the method and network node of claim 5 and 8 respectively, wherein they do not disclose the registration request message further comprises information indicating that the WTRU is temporarily connected to a hosting network. In the same field of endeavor, Kim disclose the registration request message further comprises information indicating that the WTRU is temporarily connected to a hosting network (registration request message comprise a temporary user ID indicating the last serving network, e.g. AMF, that the UE is temporarily connected to; paras. [0138]-[0140]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LANA N LE whose telephone number is (571) 272-7891. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30am-4:30pm.
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, Wesley Kim, can be reached at (571) 272-7867. 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.
/LANA N LE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2648
Prosecution Insights