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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 1/19/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 1/19/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With regard to claims 1, 6, 11 and 16, applicant argues that Sethi fails to teach wherein the information on the priority of the available VPLMN includes a priority indicator instructing a VPLMN selection for the UE based on an extent to which the available VPLMN provides the service to the UE. Examiner respectfully traverses this argument.
Examiner notes in particular column 17, lines 56-61 which teaches, with respect to steps 418-424 of figure 4, that even when being rejected by the roaming network 450 (~first VPLM+AMF), the UE may still receive the operator list (~available VPLMs for network slice and associated priorities) during that rejection. Subsequent steps 426-436 would utilize that operator list in the same manner as when the roaming network 450 accepts the registration request. While some of the VPLMs in that list may be forbidden, Sethi anticipates that more than one VPLM that is not forbidden could be in that list. Examiner believes this to read on wherein the information on the priority of the available VPLMN includes a priority indicator instructing a VPLMN selection for the UE.
Examiner further notes column 8, lines 54-56, which teaches that the operator list may be prioritized on the basis of interference levels. Examiner believes this to read on based on an extent to which the available VPLMN provides the service to the UE.
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.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 10,779,230 (Sethi et al.) in view of US 2022/0330006 (Zhu et al.).
As to claims 1 and 11, Sethi teaches a UE (102, fig 4) in a wireless communication system, the UE comprising: a transceiver; and a controller coupled with the transceiver (see figures 2 and 3) and configured to:
transmit, to a first access and mobility management function (AMF) entity of a first visited public land mobile network (VPLMN), a first registration request message (see step 416, fig 4 and column 12, lines 52-62),
receive, from the first AMF entity of the first VPLMN, a registration reject message including information on an available network slice, information on an available VPLMN for the available network slice and information on a priority of the available VPLMN (see column 12, lines 52-62, column 13, lines 22-24 and column 17, lines 7-14 and 56-61, operator list~information on a priority of available VPLMN), wherein the information on the priority of the available VPLMN includes a priority indicator instructing a VPLMN selection for the UE based on an extent to which the available VPLMN provides the service to the UE (see column 8, lines 54-56, operator list may be prioritized on the basis of interference levels [~based on an extent to which the available VPLMN provides the service to the UE]);
transmit, to a second AMF entity of a second VPLMN, a second registration request message, wherein the second VPLMN is determined based on the information on the available VPLMN for the available network slice and the information on the priority of the available VPLMN included in the registration reject message (see step 430, fig 4 and column 13, lines 58-62 and column 17, lines 56-61), and
receive, from the second AMF entity of the second VPLMN, a registration accept message as a response to the second registration request message (see step 436, fig 4 and column 13, line 58-column 14, line 12).
What is lacking from Sethi is the first registration request message including information on a network slice for a service.
In analogous art, Zhu teaches a registration request message to an AMF comprising an NSSAI (see Zhu, paragraph 126).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply this teaching to Sethi, so as to maximize network resources and enhance the quality of service to the user through the use of network slicing.
As to claims 6 and 16, Sethi teaches a first access and mobility management function (AMF) (450, fig 4 and column 12, lines 52-65) entity of a first visited public land mobile network (VPLMN) in a wireless communication system, the first AMF entity comprising: a transceiver; and a controller coupled with the transceiver and configured to:
receive, from a UE, a first registration request message (see step 416, fig 4 and column 12, lines 52-62), and
transmit, to the UE, a registration reject message including information on an available network slice, information on an available VPLMN for the available network slice and information on a priority of the available VPLMN (see column 12, lines 52-62, column 13, lines 22-24 and column 17, lines 7-14 and 56-61, operator list~information on a priority of available VPLMN), wherein the information on the priority of the available VPLMN includes a priority indicator instructing a VPLMN selection for the UE based on an extent to which the available VPLMN provides the service to the UE (see column 8, lines 54-56, operator list may be prioritized on the basis of interference levels [~based on an extent to which the available VPLMN provides the service to the UE]);
wherein a second registration request message is transmitted to a second AMF entity of a second VPLMN which is based on the information on the available VPLMN for the available network slice and the information on the priority of the available VPLMN included in the registration reject message (see step 430, fig 4 and column 13, line 58-column 14, line 12 and column 17, lines 56-61).
What is lacking from Sethi is the first registration request message including information on a network slice for a service.
In analogous art, Zhu teaches a registration request message to an AMF comprising an NSSAI (see Zhu, paragraph 126).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply this teaching to Sethi, so as to maximize network resources and enhance the quality of service to the user through the use of network slicing.
As to claims 2 and 12, Sethi further teaches wherein at least one of the information on the available network slice, the information on the available VPLMN for the available network slice, or the information on the priority of the available VPLMN is obtained from a user data management (UDM) entity or a policy control function (PCF) entity of a home public land mobile network (HPLMN) (see column 12, lines 60-62).
As to claims 3, 8, 13 and 18, Sethi further teaches wherein the available VPLMN includes one or more VPLMNs which are prioritized by the UDM entity or the PCF entity of the HPLMN (see column 12, lines 60-62 and column 17, lines 7-14 and 56-61).
As to claims 4, 9, 14 and 19, Sethi further teaches wherein the available VPLMN includes one or more VPLMNs, and the second VPLMN is selected from the available VPLMN based on the priority of the available VPLMN (see column 12, lines 60-62 and column 17, lines 7-14 and 56-61).
As to claims 5, 10, 15 and 20, what is further lacking from Sethi is wherein the registration reject message further includes first cause information indicating that the first VPLMN is not allowed for the service or second cause information indicating that the network slice for the service is not allowed for the first VPLMN.
Zhu further teaches a registration reject message to an AMF comprising a cause indicating that the VPLMN is not allowed (see Zhu, paragraph 128).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply this teaching to Sethi, so as to allow the UE to better analyze its current network situation.
As to claims 7 and 17, Sethi further teaches wherein the controller is further configured to: receive, from a user data management (UDM) entity or a policy control function (PCF) entity of a home public land mobile network (HPLMN), at least one of the information on the available network slice, the information on the available VPLMN for the available network slice, or the information on the priority of the available VPLMN (see column 12, lines 60-62).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAZDA SABOURI whose telephone number is (571)272-8892. The examiner can normally be reached 10 am-7 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, Charles Appiah can be reached at 571-272-7904. 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.
/MAZDA SABOURI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2641