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 .
Applicant’s amendment filed 4/14/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 20, 24, 25, 27, 29, 30, and 34-37 are amended.
Claims 28 and 38 are canceled.
Claims 39 and 40 are newly added.
Response to Amendment
Amendments filed on 4/14/2026 are entered for prosecution. Claims 20-27, 29-37, 39, and 40 remain pending in the application.
Applicant’s amendments to claims 20, 24, 25, 30, and 34-36 have overcome the objection to claims 20, 24, 25, 30, and 34-36 previously set forth in the Non-Final Action mailed on 1/15/2026.
Claim Objections
Claims 20, 29, and 30 are objected because of the following informalities:
In claim 30, it is suggested to replace “whether“ with “that” to read “determine that a user equipment (UE) is of a first type, …” (in line 4) for clarity and consistency with similar limitation in claims 20 and 29.
In claims 20, 29, and 30, it is suggested to amend the limitations as suggested below for clarity:
“… in response to [[a]]the determination that the UE is of the first type, … a user entry corresponding to the UE to a first fixed network device, wherein:
the first fixed network device corresponds to a first base station accessed by the UE[[,]];
the first type corresponds to UEs that communicate with a destination network via the first fixed network device[[,]];
…[[,]]; and
the first fixed network device is different from the first base station.”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 20-27, 29-37, 39, and 40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding claims 20, 29, and 30:
Claims 20, 29, and 30 recite a limitation “the user entry refers to a protocol data unit (PDU) session table or a user session table” and render the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the claimed “user entry” is an entry, a pointer, a record, or the entire table. An “entry” is typically a record within a table, while a “PDU session table” is itself a table. Note that paragraph [0128] of the Specification provides some support for the claim language, but it does not teach the concept particularly clearly, and it actually highlights the same ambiguity that would support a §112(b) rejection.
Regarding claims 21-27, 31-37, 39, and 40:
Claims 21-27, 31-37, 39, and 40 are also rejected because they are directly or indirectly dependent upon the rejected claim, as set forth above.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 20-27, 29-37, 39, and 40 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112(pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JI-HAE YEA whose telephone number is (571) 270-3310. The examiner can normally be reached on MON-FRI, 7am-3pm, ET.
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, SUJOY K KUNDU can be reached on (571) 272-8586. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JI-HAE YEA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2471
Prosecution Insights