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 .
Response to Arguments
Following response to arguments is based on Applicant’s arguments filed on 09 October 2025.
Regarding Previous Rejection Under 35 USC § 112
Previous rejection of claims 1-20 has been withdrawn in view of the amendment to the rejected claims.
Regarding Previous Rejection Under 35 USC § 102
Applicant’s arguments [Pages 12-14] with respect to rejection of claims 1, 16, 20, 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 Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn.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 of newly found prior art reference(s).
Regarding claim 1, on page 9 Applicant argues that prior art of record fails to teach “receiving, by the electronic device, the target wireless network information from the AMF network element, wherein the target wireless network information is obtained by the AMF network element from a base station according to the category information”.
Newly found reference Li discloses a system [Fig. 2] where UE also performs the functions of Fig. 8, thus being configured to received network information that was firstly shared by base station to corresponding AMF [Paragraphs 31-32, 235, 248]; thus, a person having ordinary skills in the art would recognize that the UE in Talebi’s would also be receiving the network information from AMF and BS.
Regarding claims 16 and 20, these claims have been amended to incorporate similar limitations to those set forth in independent claim 1, and are rejected based on similar reasoning.
Therefore, in view of the above reasons, the Examiner maintains the rejections.
Claim Status
Claims 1, 16, 20 have been amended. Thus, claims 1-20 are presented for examination.
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 of this title, 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 1, 13-14, 16, 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Talebi et al. (US Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0389835) in view of Li et al. (US Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0127255).
Regarding claim 1, Talebi teaches a network information exposure method, performed by an electronic device (Fig. 1-3), the method comprising:
receiving, [(network info exposure request is received by UE 100 from AF comprising category info associated to a target network [Paragraphs 56, 61, 83, 160, 241-242, 247, 272, 274]);
transmitting, [(the category info is transmitted to AMF [Paragraphs 46-48, 58, 73]);
receiving, [(base station receives the target network info from the AMF [Paragraphs 228, 237, 256, 266]); and
transmitting, [information to the AF network element (target network info is then shared to the AF [Paragraphs 106, 223, 265, 286-287]).
However, Talebi does not explicitly mention: by the electronic device… obtained by the AMF network element from a base station.
Li teaches, in a similar field of endeavor of communication systems, the following:
by the electronic device… obtained by the AMF network element from a base station (Li discloses a system [Fig. 2] where UE also performs the functions of Fig. 8, thus being configured to received network information that was firstly shared by base station to corresponding AMF [Paragraphs 31-32, 235, 248]; thus, a person having ordinary skills in the art would recognize that the UE in Talebi’s would also be receiving the network information from AMF and BS).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the communication system (as taught by Talebi) by having the UE to receive the network information (as taught by Li) for the purpose of reducing signaling overheads (Li – Paragraph 4).
Regarding claim 13, Talebi further teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the receiving of the target wireless network information comprises receiving a radio access network (RAN) exposure information container from the AMF network element ([Paragraphs 46, 49, 62]), the RAN exposure information container comprising the target wireless network information ([Paragraphs 70, 73-74]), and wherein the transmitting of the target wireless network information to the AF network element comprises forwarding the RAN exposure information container to the AF network element ([Paragraphs 104, 106, 114-115, 193, 227]).
Regarding claim 14, Talebi further teaches the method according to claim 13, wherein the target wireless network information is encapsulated in the RAN exposure information container in a data exchange format or in a code stream manner ([Paragraphs 137, 159, 177, 193-194]).
Regarding claims 16 and 19, these claims are rejected as applied to claims 1 and 13.
Regarding claim 20, this claim is rejected as applied to claim 1.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Talebi et al. (US Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0389835) in view of Pan et al. (US Patent Application Publication No. 2024/0031870) and further in view of Li et al. (US Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0127255).
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Talebi and Li teaches all the limitations recited in claim 1.
However, the combination of Talebi and Li does not explicitly mention: wherein the category information comprises at least one of packet error ratio (PER) information, access cell information, and average data bit rate information.
Pan teaches, in a similar field of endeavor of communication systems, the following:
wherein the category information comprises at least one of packet error ratio (PER) information, access cell information, and average data bit rate information ([Paragraphs 100, 126]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the communication system (as taught by Talebi) by having the UE to receive the network information (as taught by Li) by defining category information (as taught by Pan) for the purpose of improving quality of service (Pan – Paragraph 4).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-12 and 17-18 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
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FABRICIO R MURILLO GARCIA whose telephone number is (571)270-5708. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5pm.
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, Sam K Ahn can be reached at 5712723044. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
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.
January 17, 2026
/FABRICIO R MURILLO GARCIA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2633