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 .
Double Patenting
A rejection based on double patenting of the “same invention” type finds its support in the language of 35 U.S.C. 101 which states that “whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process... may obtain a patent therefor...” (Emphasis added). Thus, the term “same invention,” in this context, means an invention drawn to identical subject matter. See Miller v. Eagle Mfg. Co., 151 U.S. 186 (1894); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Ockert, 245 F.2d 467, 114 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1957).
A statutory type (35 U.S.C. 101) double patenting rejection can be overcome by canceling or amending the claims that are directed to the same invention so they are no longer coextensive in scope. The filing of a terminal disclaimer cannot overcome a double patenting rejection based upon 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claims 24-43 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as claiming the same invention as that of claims 1-23 of prior U.S. Patent No. US11818793. This is a statutory double patenting rejection.
Application No 18387615
Patent No. US11818793
Regarding claim 24, A method, comprising:
generating a configuration update message that indicates one or more Transport Network Link (TNL) associations in a list of TNL associations to add
and address information associated with the one or more TNL associations;
and transmitting the configuration update message indicating the address information to a base station.
Regarding claim 25, wherein the configuration update message comprises one or more information elements (IEs) with the address information in the list of TNL associations to add.
Regarding claim 26, wherein the one or more IEs comprise at least an Access and Mobility Management Function (AMF) Transport Layer Associations to Remove IE.
Regarding claim 27, wherein the one or more IEs comprise at least an Access and Mobility Management Function (AMF) Transport Layer Associations to Add IE.
Regarding claim 28, wherein the address information comprises Internet Protocol (IP) address information.
Regarding claim 29, wherein the address information is indicated via the list of TNL associations to add.
Regarding claim 30, wherein the one or more TNL associations in the list of TNL associations to add comprise a plurality of TNL associations.
Regarding claim 31, wherein the configuration update message comprises an Access and Mobility Management Function (AMF) configuration update message.
Regarding claim 32, wherein the configuration update message further comprises a list of TNL associations to remove.
Regarding claim 16, A method, comprising: a core network device,
generating an Access and Mobility Management Function (AMF) configuration update message including a plurality of Transport Network Link (TNL) associations, the AMF configuration update message comprising at least one of a list of TNL associations to add
and a list of TNL associations to remove, wherein the list of TNL associations to add includes one or more information elements (IEs) with Internet Protocol (IP) address information;
and initiating transmission of the AMF configuration update message indicating address information to a Next Generation (NG) Radio Access Network (NG-RAN) node via the list of TNL associations to add.
Regarding claim 16,… wherein the list of TNL associations to add includes one or more information elements (IEs)
Regarding claim 18, wherein the one or more IEs comprise at least an AMF Transport Layer Associations To Remove IE.
Regarding claim 17, wherein the one or more IEs comprise at least an AMF Transport Layer Associations To Add IE.
Regarding claim 16, … with Internet Protocol (IP) address information;
Regarding claim 16, wherein the list of TNL associations to add includes one or more information elements (IEs) with Internet Protocol (IP) address information;
Regarding claim 16, configuration update message including a plurality of Transport Network Link (TNL) associations, the AMF configuration update message comprising at least one of a list of TNL associations to add
Regarding claim 16, generating an Access and Mobility Management Function (AMF) configuration update message .
Regarding claim 16, … and a list of TNL associations to remove
Claims 34-43 are rejected similarly as above.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 24, 29, 32, 33, 38, 41, 42 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Zee et al. (US20190208563).
Regarding claim 24, Zee teaches A method, comprising: generating a configuration update message that indicates one or more Transport Network Link (TNL) associations in a list of TNL associations to add and address information associated with the one or more TNL associations ([0106] “, the MME will provide a parameter “MME TNL2 address.” The MME TNL2 address may include an MME address for an alternative TNL channel, for example in the S1 SETUP CONFIRM message and/or MME Configuration Update message. In certain embodiments, a request to setup a new channel from the eNB will be sent to this address. Examples of these additional parameters, with MME S1AP Configuration ID and eNB S1AP Configuration ID value range between 1 and 232-1, and with eNB TNL address”);
and transmitting the configuration update message indicating the address information to a base station ([0106] “In order for an eNB to create an alternative TNL channel for single S1AP message transmission, the MME will provide a parameter “MME TNL2 address.” The MME TNL2 address may include an MME address for an alternative TNL channel, for example in the S1 SETUP CONFIRM message and/or MME Configuration Update message, (Examiner’s Note: MME is providing TNL address information to the eNB using an MME configuration update message).
Regarding claim 29, Zee wherein the address information is indicated via the list of TNL associations to add ([0106] “In order for an eNB to create an alternative TNL channel for single S1AP message transmission, the MME will provide a parameter “MME TNL2 address.” The MME TNL2 address may include an MME address for an alternative TNL channel, for example in the S1 SETUP CONFIRM message and/or MME Configuration Update message, [0022] “Modification of addresses after SCTP establishment can be done with an INIT message and a new address list parameter).
Regarding claim 32, Zee teaches wherein the configuration update message further comprises a list of TNL associations to remove ([0026] “When Endpoint A 802 receives the SHUTDOWN-ACK chunk transmitted by Endpoint Z 804, Endpoint A 802 will remove all record of the association, and, at step 810, transmit a SHUTDOWN-COMPLETE chunk to Endpoint Z 804. When Endpoint Z 804 receives SHUTDOWN-COMPLETE chunk transmitted by Endpoint A 802, Endpoint Z 804 will remove all record of the association”).
Regarding claim 33, Zee teaches A method, comprising: receiving a configuration update message indicating one or more Transport Network Link (TNL) associations in a list of TNL associations to add and address information associated with the one or more TNL associations ([0106] “, the MME will provide a parameter “MME TNL2 address.” The MME TNL2 address may include an MME address for an alternative TNL channel, for example in the S1 SETUP CONFIRM message and/or MME Configuration Update message. In certain embodiments, a request to setup a new channel from the eNB will be sent to this address. Examples of these additional parameters, with MME S1AP Configuration ID and eNB S1AP Configuration ID value range between 1 and 232-1, and with eNB TNL address”).
Regarding claim 38, Zee wherein the address information is indicated via the list of TNL associations to add ([0106] “In order for an eNB to create an alternative TNL channel for single S1AP message transmission, the MME will provide a parameter “MME TNL2 address.” The MME TNL2 address may include an MME address for an alternative TNL channel, for example in the S1 SETUP CONFIRM message and/or MME Configuration Update message, [0022] “Modification of addresses after SCTP establishment can be done with an INIT message and a new address list parameter).
Regarding claim 41, Zee teaches wherein the configuration update message further comprises a list of TNL associations to remove ([0026] “When Endpoint A 802 receives the SHUTDOWN-ACK chunk transmitted by Endpoint Z 804, Endpoint A 802 will remove all record of the association, and, at step 810, transmit a SHUTDOWN-COMPLETE chunk to Endpoint Z 804. When Endpoint Z 804 receives SHUTDOWN-COMPLETE chunk transmitted by Endpoint A 802, Endpoint Z 804 will remove all record of the association”).
Regarding claim 42, Zee teaches A core network device, comprising: a memory; and processing circuitry in communication with the memory and configured to cause the core network device ([0151] “may include one or more of transceiver 2310, processing circuitry 2320, memory 2330, and network interface 2340. In some embodiments, transceiver 2310 facilitates transmitting wireless signals to and receiving wireless signals from wireless device 110 (e.g., via antenna 2350), processing circuitry 2320 executes instructions to provide some or all of the functionality described above as being provided by a network node 115, memory 2330 stores the instructions executed by processing circuitry 2320”) to:
generate a configuration update message that indicates one or more Transport Network Link (TNL) associations in a list of TNL associations to add and address information associated with the one or more TNL associations ([0106] “, the MME will provide a parameter “MME TNL2 address.” The MME TNL2 address may include an MME address for an alternative TNL channel, for example in the S1 SETUP CONFIRM message and/or MME Configuration Update message. In certain embodiments, a request to setup a new channel from the eNB will be sent to this address. Examples of these additional parameters, with MME S1AP Configuration ID and eNB S1AP Configuration ID value range between 1 and 232-1, and with eNB TNL address”);
and transmit the configuration update message indicating the address information to a base station ([0106] “In order for an eNB to create an alternative TNL channel for single S1AP message transmission, the MME will provide a parameter “MME TNL2 address.” The MME TNL2 address may include an MME address for an alternative TNL channel, for example in the S1 SETUP CONFIRM message and/or MME Configuration Update message, (Examiner’s Note: MME is providing TNL address information to the eNB using an MME configuration update message).
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) 25-28, 31, 34-37, 40, 43 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zee et al. (US20190208563) in view of "Vodafone, Thoughts on virtualisation / stickiness on N2 and flexibility on N11/N16/N9”, 03/ 31/2017, 3GPP, s2 172292, pg. 1-5".
Regarding claim 25, 43, Zee does not explicitly teach wherein the configuration update message comprises one or more information elements (IEs) with the address information in the list of TNL associations to add.
Vodafone teaches wherein the configuration update message comprises one or more information elements (IEs) with the address information in the list of TNL associations to add (page 3 lines 15-20 “the (N2 equivalent of the) S1-Setup-Response / S1-MME-Configuration Update message is extended to carry multiple IP addresses/port numbers/IDs or SCTP TNL identifiers per MME/AMF CODE, with an indication as to which shall /shall not be used for “Initial UE messages”… the recipient of the “Initial UE message” can then (c.f. say, in a new information element in the existing message that returns the MME UE S1 AP ID to the eNB) inform the gNB which TNL link / IP address/port to use for that RRC connection”, page 4 lines 17-20 “The MME sends a S1-MME-Configuration Update to the eNB to add the TNL link to that MME Code, and indicates whether it is / is not to be used for “Initial UE messages”, For NGCN, the above can be re-written with “AMF” replacing “MME”).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Zee to incorporate the teachings of Vodafone. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to improve the efficiency of the system.
Regarding claim 26, Zee does not teach wherein the one or more IEs comprise at least an Access and Mobility Management Function (AMF) Transport Layer Associations to Remove IE.
Vodafone teaches wherein the one or more IEs comprise at least an Access and Mobility Management Function (AMF) Transport Layer Associations to Remove IE (page 3 lines 15-20 “the (N2 equivalent of the) S1-Setup-Response / S1-MME-Configuration Update message is extended to carry multiple IP addresses/port numbers/IDs or SCTP TNL identifiers per MME/AMF CODE, with an indication as to which shall /shall not be used for “Initial UE messages”… the recipient of the “Initial UE message” can then (c.f. say, in a new information element in the existing message that returns the MME UE S1 AP ID to the eNB) inform the gNB which TNL link / IP address/port to use for that RRC connection”, page 4 lines 15-26 “e) the MME sends a S1-MME-Configuration Update to the eNB to remove the TNL link from that MME Code.
For NGCN, the above can be re-written with “AMF” replacing “MME”.”).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Zee to incorporate the teachings of Vodafone. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to improve the efficiency of the system.
Regarding claim 27, Zee does not teach wherein the one or more IEs comprise at least an Access and Mobility Management Function (AMF) Transport Layer Associations to Add IE.
Vodafone teaches wherein the one or more IEs comprise at least an Access and Mobility Management Function (AMF) Transport Layer Associations to Add IE (page 3 lines 15-20 “the (N2 equivalent of the) S1-Setup-Response / S1-MME-Configuration Update message is extended to carry multiple IP addresses/port numbers/IDs or SCTP TNL identifiers per MME/AMF CODE, with an indication as to which shall /shall not be used for “Initial UE messages”… the recipient of the “Initial UE message” can then (c.f. say, in a new information element in the existing message that returns the MME UE S1 AP ID to the eNB) inform the gNB which TNL link / IP address/port to use for that RRC connection”, page 4 lines 17-20 “The MME sends a S1-MME-Configuration Update to the eNB to add the TNL link to that MME Code, and indicates whether it is / is not to be used for “Initial UE messages”).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Zee to incorporate the teachings of Vodafone. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to improve the efficiency of the system.
Regarding claim 28, Zee teaches Internet Protocol (IP) ([0006] “In the example of FIG. 3, the transport network layer 306 is based on IP transport. On top of IP layer 306, SCTP layer 308 is added for reliable transport of signaling messages”).
Zee does not explicitly teach wherein the address information comprises Internet Protocol (IP) address information.
Vodafone teaches wherein the address information comprises Internet Protocol (IP) address information (page 3 lines 15-20 “the (N2 equivalent of the) S1-Setup-Response / S1-MME-Configuration Update message is extended to carry multiple IP addresses/port numbers/IDs).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Zee to incorporate the teachings of Vodafone. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to improve the efficiency of the system.
Regarding claim 31, Zee does not teach wherein the configuration update message comprises an Access and Mobility Management Function (AMF) configuration update message.
Vodafone teaches wherein the configuration update message comprises an Access and Mobility Management Function (AMF) configuration update message page 4 lines 17-20 “The MME sends a S1-MME-Configuration Update to the eNB to add the TNL link to that MME Code, and indicates whether it is / is not to be used for “Initial UE messages”, For NGCN, the above can be re-written with “AMF” replacing “MME”).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Zee to incorporate the teachings of Vodafone. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to improve the efficiency of the system.
Regarding claim 34, Zee does not teach wherein the configuration update message comprises one or more information elements (IEs) with the address information in the list of TNL associations to add.
Vodafone teaches wherein the configuration update message comprises one or more information elements (IEs) with the address information in the list of TNL associations to add(page 3 lines 15-20 “the (N2 equivalent of the) S1-Setup-Response / S1-MME-Configuration Update message is extended to carry multiple IP addresses/port numbers/IDs or SCTP TNL identifiers per MME/AMF CODE, with an indication as to which shall /shall not be used for “Initial UE messages”… the recipient of the “Initial UE message” can then (c.f. say, in a new information element in the existing message that returns the MME UE S1 AP ID to the eNB) inform the gNB which TNL link / IP address/port to use for that RRC connection”, page 4 lines 17-20 “The MME sends a S1-MME-Configuration Update to the eNB to add the TNL link to that MME Code, and indicates whether it is / is not to be used for “Initial UE messages”, For NGCN, the above can be re-written with “AMF” replacing “MME”).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Zee to incorporate the teachings of Vodafone. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to improve the efficiency of the system.
Regarding claim 35, Zee does not teach wherein the one or more IEs comprise at least an Access and Mobility Management Function (AMF) Transport Layer Associations to Remove IE.
Vodafone teaches wherein the one or more IEs comprise at least an Access and Mobility Management Function (AMF) Transport Layer Associations to Remove IE (page 3 lines 15-20 “the (N2 equivalent of the) S1-Setup-Response / S1-MME-Configuration Update message is extended to carry multiple IP addresses/port numbers/IDs or SCTP TNL identifiers per MME/AMF CODE, with an indication as to which shall /shall not be used for “Initial UE messages”… the recipient of the “Initial UE message” can then (c.f. say, in a new information element in the existing message that returns the MME UE S1 AP ID to the eNB) inform the gNB which TNL link / IP address/port to use for that RRC connection”, page 4 lines 15-26 “e) the MME sends a S1-MME-Configuration Update to the eNB to remove the TNL link from that MME Code.
For NGCN, the above can be re-written with “AMF” replacing “MME”.”).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Zee to incorporate the teachings of Vodafone. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to improve the efficiency of the system.
Regarding claim 36, Zee does not teach wherein the one or more IEs comprise at least an Access and Mobility Management Function (AMF) Transport Layer Associations to Add IE.
Vodafone teaches (page 3 lines 15-20 “the (N2 equivalent of the) S1-Setup-Response / S1-MME-Configuration Update message is extended to carry multiple IP addresses/port numbers/IDs or SCTP TNL identifiers per MME/AMF CODE, with an indication as to which shall /shall not be used for “Initial UE messages”… the recipient of the “Initial UE message” can then (c.f. say, in a new information element in the existing message that returns the MME UE S1 AP ID to the eNB) inform the gNB which TNL link / IP address/port to use for that RRC connection”, page 4 lines 17-20 “The MME sends a S1-MME-Configuration Update to the eNB to add the TNL link to that MME Code, and indicates whether it is / is not to be used for “Initial UE messages”).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Zee to incorporate the teachings of Vodafone. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to improve the efficiency of the system.
Regarding claim 37, Zee teaches Internet Protocol (IP) ([0006] “In the example of FIG. 3, the transport network layer 306 is based on IP transport. On top of IP layer 306, SCTP layer 308 is added for reliable transport of signaling messages”).
Zee does not explicitly teach wherein the address information comprises Internet Protocol (IP) address information.
Vodafone teaches wherein the address information comprises Internet Protocol (IP) address information (page 3 lines 15-20 “the (N2 equivalent of the) S1-Setup-Response / S1-MME-Configuration Update message is extended to carry multiple IP addresses/port numbers/IDs).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Zee to incorporate the teachings of Vodafone. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to improve the efficiency of the system.
Regarding claim 40, Zee does not teach wherein the configuration update message comprises an Access and Mobility Management Function (AMF) configuration update message.
Vodafone teaches wherein the configuration update message comprises an Access and Mobility Management Function (AMF) configuration update message page 4 lines 17-20 “The MME sends a S1-MME-Configuration Update to the eNB to add the TNL link to that MME Code, and indicates whether it is / is not to be used for “Initial UE messages”, For NGCN, the above can be re-written with “AMF” replacing “MME”).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Zee to incorporate the teachings of Vodafone. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to improve the efficiency of the system.
Claim(s) 30, 39 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zee in view of Serravalle (US20100142407).
Regarding claim 30, Zee does not teach wherein the one or more TNL associations in the list of TNL associations to add comprise a plurality of TNL associations.
Serravalle teaches wherein the one or more TNL associations in the list of TNL associations to add comprise a plurality of TNL associations ([0187] “ [0187] Add a new IE representing a logical identifier related to TNL identifiers”).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Zee to incorporate the teachings of Serravalee. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to the system to handle a plurality of connections.
Regarding claim 39, Zee does not teach wherein the one or more TNL associations in the list of TNL associations to add comprise a plurality of TNL associations.
Serravalle teaches wherein the one or more TNL associations in the list of TNL associations to add comprise a plurality of TNL associations ([0187] “ [0187] Add a new IE representing a logical identifier related to TNL identifiers”).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Zee to incorporate the teachings of Serravalee. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to the system to handle a plurality of connections.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 03/31/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s Argument 1
In particular, claim 16 of the '793 patent recites generating an Access and Mobility Management Function (AMF) configuration update message including a plurality of Transport Network Link (TNL) associations, wherein the message comprises at least one of a list of TNL associations to add and a list of TNL associations to remove, and wherein the list of TNL associations to add includes one or more information elements (IEs) with Internet Protocol (IP) address information, and further recites initiating transmission of the message via the list of TNL associations to add. By contrast, claim 24 recites generating a configuration update message that indicates one or more TNL associations in a list of TNL associations to add and address information associated with the one or more TNL associations, and transmitting the message to a base station.
Accordingly, the scope of claim 24 encompasses embodiments that would not fall within the scope of claim 16.
The same distinction applies to the dependent claims. While certain individual elements of the dependent claims may appear in claim 16, the patented claims require those elements in a particular combination, whereas the pending claims recite different and broader combinations of those features. As a result, the claims are not identical in scope.
Examiner’s Response 1
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Claim 24 of this instant application is more broad and can be interpreted as having the same scope. Applicant argues that for example claim 24 calls for a configuration update which cannot be interpreted as an AMF configuration update and thus does not have the same scope. Yet dependent claim 31 further defines this configuration update as an AMF configuration update. Examiner is confused what applicant is trying to argue when the claims are significantly more broad and patent US11818793 claims could be interpreted in the same scope and thus not distinct.
Applicant’s Argument 2
However, these disclosures relate at most to providing an address parameter (or, in the case of paragraph [0022], a transport-layer address list parameter) associated with establishing or modifying a transport channel. Zee does not disclose, or otherwise suggest, a configuration update message that indicates one or more TNL associations in a list of TNL associations to add.
In particular, the claimed "list of TNL associations to add" requires a structured set of one or more TNL associations that are explicitly indicated as being added. Zee does not disclose any such list, nor does it disclose "to add" semantics associated with TNL associations. Instead, Zee describes providing a single address parameter for an alternative TNL channel. A standalone address parameter for an alternative channel is fundamentally different from, and does not disclose, a list of TNL associations to add as required by claim 24.
Examiner’s Response 2
Examiner respectfully disagrees. The claim calls for “one or more Transport Network Link (TNL) associations in a list of TNL associations to add”. A list could be broadly interpreted as a single element further more applicant claim language states one or more. Further more in applicant specification a TNL association is equated to an address in [0040]. Zee shows ([0106] “, the MME will provide a parameter “MME TNL2 address.” The MME TNL2 address may include an MME address for an alternative TNL channel, for example in the S1 SETUP CONFIRM message and/or MME Configuration Update message. In certain embodiments, a request to setup a new channel from the eNB will be sent to this address. Examples of these additional parameters, with MME S1AP Configuration ID and eNB S1AP Configuration ID value range between 1 and 232-1, and with eNB TNL address”). Zee is setting up a new channel using MME TNL2 address is equivalent adding an TNL association.
In addition, in [0106] “with MME S1AP Configuration ID and eNB S1AP Configuration ID value range between 1 and 232-1, and with eNB TNL address, eNB TNL2 address and MME TNL2 address, are provided in Tables 3 and 4 belo” shows multiple addresses.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 KEITH TRAN-DANH FOLLANSBEE whose telephone number is (571)272-3071. The examiner can normally be reached 10am -6 pm M-Th.
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, Derrick Ferris can be reached at 571-272-3123. 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.
/K.T.F./Examiner, Art Unit 2411
/DERRICK W FERRIS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2411
Prosecution Insights