CTFR 18/416,016 CTFR 80103 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 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 07-37 AIA Applicant's arguments filed 03/26/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Please see discussion below . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. 07-15 AIA Claim s 1-11, 14-16 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by Samuelsson et al (US 9692533) . Regarding claim 1, Samuelsson discloses an apparatus for wireless communication at a first user equipment (UE) ( Figure 2, 104 user equipment ), comprising: one or more memories; and one or more processors ( UE 104, processing 151 ), coupled to the one or more memories ( The user equipment 104 may comprise a lot more components, for example a memory or storage, see col. 6, ll. 21-25 ), configured to cause the first UE to: receive, at a first time and from a network node ( in step 11, the user equipment 104 may receive a first warning indication from the base station 101 ., col. 6, ll. 38-47), a wireless message that indicates an alerting event ( in step 11, the user equipment 104 may receive a first warning indication from the base station 101 . For example, the wireless communication network 100 may inform the user equipment 104 via a paging message instructing it to read system information (in LTE systems) or via a cell broadcast (in UMTS/GSM)., see col. 6, ll. 38-47), wherein the first UE has a first location at the first time (a further embodiment an age of the warning information is determined. The age indicates a time period between the first time the warning information was indicated by the wireless communication network and the time the warning information was determined by the user equipment based on the first warning indication. E.g., when a specific warning is issue the first time, col. 3, ll. 56-64); and transmit, via a sidelink interface ( i.e., D2D ) and at a second time that occurs after the first time ( In step 13 the user equipment determines, if a forwarding of the warning information is required or allowed. This is to avoid that warning information is forwarded several times by the same user equipment resulting in loops or flooding the other user equipment(s) with the same warning information again and again , see col. 6, ll. 47-53 ), the wireless message to a second UE ( the user equipment 104 sends in step 14 a second warning indication comprising the warning information to another user equipment, for example to user equipment 105. For example, if the user equipment 104 has a device-to-device connection established, it conveys the information from the public warning system to the connected device-to-device user equipment. See col. 6, ll. 54-61) in accordance with a store-and-forward operation ( a time of reception of the first warning indication is stored in the user equipment and a time of reception of the third warning indication is compared with the time of reception of the first warning indication. The fourth warning indication is sent to the other user equipment via the device to device communication based on the time comparison, col. col. 3, ll. 32-46 ), wherein the first UE has a second location at the second time, the first location is different from the second location, and no wireless network coverage is present at the second location ( User equipment 104 is located within the coverage 102 of the wireless communication network 100 , whereas user equipment’s 105 to 110 are located outside the coverage 102 . Therefore, a direct communication between the base station 101 and the user equipment 104 is possible, whereas a direct communication between the base station 101 and the user equipment’s 105 to 110 is not possible, col. 5, ll. 52-58 ).) and( Upon receiving the first warning indication the user equipment determines the warning information and extracts the time, stamp. Then, the user equipment may compare the time stamp with the current time and may determine the age of the warning information. The second warning indication is sent via the device-to-device communication to the other user equipment based on the age. For example, the second warning indication may only be sent, if the warning information is younger than 30 minutes or an hour, col. 3, ll. 64-67-col. 4, ll. 1-6 . The POSITA would understand this as a disclosure first user is at a different location at a second time, and the first location is different from a second location, and there might not be wireless coverage at the second location). Regarding claim 2, Samuelsson discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the wireless message is a wireless emergency alert (WEA) message ( the user equipment may receive the warning indication as a public warning notification from a public warning system (PWS), col. 2, ll. 66-67-col. 3, ll. 1-6 ). Regarding claim 3, Samuelsson discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the alerting event comprises one or more of: a natural disaster ( like e.g. a tsunami or a hurricane, the public warning system 103 may issue a warning, see col. 6,, ll. 30-33), a man-made disaster, or a loss of coverage to a wireless network. Regarding claim 4, Samuelsson discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are configured to cause the first UE to: transmit the wireless message to the second UE when the second UE is in a target area for the wireless message ( for communicating directly with another user equipment within a transmission range of the user equipment 104 via a device-to-device communication, see col. 6, ll. 4-8 ). Regarding claim 5, Samuelsson discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are configured to cause the first UE to: receive the wireless message from a network node via a broadcast ( the wireless communication network 100 may inform the user equipment 104 via a paging message instructing it to read system information (in LTE systems) or via a cell broadcast (in UMTS/GSM), see col. 6, ll.40-43 ). Regarding claim 6, Samuelsson discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are configured to cause the first UE to: receive the wireless message from a third UE via the sidelink interface ( warning information or transmitting the warning indication via a device-to-device transmission connection (i.e., sidelink interface) established between the user equipment and the other user equipment, see col. 2, ll. 34-37 ). Regarding claim 7, Samuelsson discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are configured to cause the first UE to: receive the wireless message and transmit the wireless message using a same radio access technology (RAT) ( Upon receiving the public warning notification, the user equipment may retrieve the detailed warning information by reading system information in an LTE system, or via cell broadcast in GSM/UMTS col. 3, ll. 2-6 ). Regarding claim 8, Samuelsson discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are configured to cause the first UE to: receive the wireless message and transmit the wireless message using different radio access technologies (RATs) ( the user equipment may retrieve the detailed warning information by reading system information in an LTE system, or via cell broadcast in GSM/UMTS col. 3, ll. 2-6 ). (Claim 9 Cancelled) Regarding claim 10, Samuelsson discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the wireless message is associated with an indication for the first UE to convey the wireless message to other UEs, and wherein the indication and the wireless message are included in a system information block (SIB) transmitted by a network node via a broadcast channel ( receiving the first warning indication comprises receiving a system information block (SIB) which comprises the first warning indication, col. 4, ll. 42-45; via cell broadcast in GSM/UMTS, col. 3, ll. 3-6 ) or in sidelink communication from a third UE. Regarding claim 11, Samuelsson discloses the apparatus of claim 10, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the first UE to: include the indication with the wireless message transmitted to the second UE ( the user equipment 104 sends in step 14 a second warning indication comprising the warning information to another user equipment, for example to user equipment 105, See col. 6, ll. 54-61 ). Regarding claim 14, Samuelsson discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the first UE is in-coverage with a network node ( User equipment’s within the coverage 102 of the base station 101 may be served by the base station 101 and user equipment’s located outside the coverage 102 may not be reachable and may therefore not be served by the base station 101, col. 5, ll. 41-45 ), and the second UE is out-of-coverage with any network node. Regarding claim 15, Samuelsson discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the wireless message is a public safety message ( e.g., critical alert or advisory; the user equipment may receive the warning indication as a public warning notification from a public warning system, col. 2, ll. 66-67-col. 3, ll. 1-6 ). Regarding claim 16, Samuelsson discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the first UE and the second UE are associated with a closed group of UEs ( The purpose of ProSe/D2D is to enable direct communication between user equipment in proximity, col. 2, ll. 12-14 ). Claim 21 contains subject matter similar to claim 1, and thus, is rejected under similar rationale . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA 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. 07-20-02-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 12-13 and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Samuelsson et al (US 9692533) in view of Edge (US 20250240604) . Regarding claim 12, Samuelsson does not expressly disclose wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the first UE to: transmit, to the second UE, a discovery initiation message that indicates a purpose of the discovery initiation message is to forward the wireless message; and receive, from the second UE, a response to the discovery initiation message, wherein the one or more processors are configured to cause the first UE to transmit the wireless message to the second UE based at least in part on the response. However, in similar endeavor of messaging communication, Edge discloses at a first User Equipment (UE) tr ansmitting an Emergency Services (ES) request comprising first discovery information using a communication service based on a Peer-to-Peer (P2P) service, receiving, from the second UE, an Emergency Services (ES) request comprising second discovery information for the second UE, wherein the ES request is received using a communication service, Peer-to-Peer (P2P) service, and transmitting a response to the ES request, the response comprising first discovery information for the first UE ( Edge, [0013], [0014], [0015] ). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the mechanism of Samuelsson with the mechanisms of Edge that includes the teachings of indicates a purpose of the discovery initiation message is to forward the wireless message; and receive, from the second UE, a response to the discovery initiation message as taught by Edge in order to assist an emergency situation at the second UE. Regarding claim 13, Samuelsson does not expressly disclose apparatus of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the first UE to: receive, from the second UE, a discovery request message that indicates a purpose of the discovery request message is to receive the wireless message, wherein the one or more processors are configured to cause the first UE to transmit the wireless message to the second UE based at least in part on the discovery request message. Edge further discloses receiving, from the second UE, an Emergency Services (ES) request comprising second discovery information for the second UE, wherein the ES request is received using a communication service comprising a Peer-to-Peer (P2P) service and transmitting a response to the ES request, the response comprising first discovery information for the first UE, and establishing, based on at least one of the first discovery information and the second discovery information, a first secure communication session between the first UE and the second UE using the communication service. ( Edge, [0014], [0015] ). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Samuelsson with the teachings of Edge in order to assist with an emergency situation at the second UE. Regarding claim 17, Samuelsson does not expressly disclose wherein the one or more processors are configured to cause the first UE to: send authentication information along with the wireless message to the second UE, wherein the authentication information enables the second UE to authenticate the wireless message, wherein the authentication information comprises a public authentication key, a certificate for the public authentication key, a digital signature, or some combination of these. However, in similar endeavor of messaging communication, Edge discloses at a Following ESR broadcast at stage 318, UE 120 may discover UE 125 at stage 320 and subsequently may interact with UE 125, e.g. authenticate UE 125, be authenticated by UE 125 and/or provide UE 120 location information to UE 125, ( Edge, [0093]) ; [0094] As described above for signaling flow 300, UE 120 may receive a token and/or other information from a PSAP 244 or 248 (or an entity in an i3 ESInet 242 or IMS 260) while establishing or after having established as ES call with the PSAP, ( Edge, [0094]); The first UE (e.g. UE 120 initiating the ES request) may send the token, or part of the token, to the second UE (e.g. UE 125) during communication. The token (or part of the token) received by the second UE from the first UE may be compared with a token (or part of a token) received by the second UE (e.g. UE 125) from a PSAP (e.g. PSAP 244/248) to help identify and/or authenticate the first UE, ( Edge, [0094] ). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the mechanism of Samuelsson with the mechanisms of Edge that includes the teachings of send authentication information along with the wireless message to the second UE, wherein the authentication information enables the second UE to authenticate the wireless message as taught by Edge in order to provide an indication to an ES responder associated with UE 125 that the emergency has been verified (e.g. by the PSAP and/or another authority) and may facilitate emergency related communication between UEs 120 and 125, see Edge, [0095]. Regarding claim 18, in the obvious combination, Edge further discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are configured to cause the first UE to: receive authentication information along with the wireless message from a network node via a broadcast ( The term “token” is used herein to refer to a portion of the information conveyed by a PSAP to UE 120. The token may comprise a unique identifier for UE 120 assigned by the PSAP (e.g. PSAP 244/248), see [0094]. Regarding claim 19, in the obvious combination, Edge further discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are configured to cause the first UE to: receive authentication information along with the wireless message from a third UE via the sidelink interface ( the token or part of the token may be sent by UE 120 during a WiFi Direct, or P2P discovery related ESR broadcast at stage 318, [0095]). Regarding claim 20, in the obvious combination, Edge further discloses apparatus of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are configured to cause the first UE to: authenticate the wireless message using authentication information prior to transmitting the wireless message to the second UE ( The first UE (e.g. UE 120 initiating the ES request) may send the token, or part of the token, to the second UE (e.g. UE 125 ) during communication, [0094]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the mechanism of Samuelsson with the mechanisms of Edge that includes the teachings of authenticating the wireless message using authentication information prior to transmitting the wireless message to the second UE in order to provide the wireless message securely and efficiently to the appropriate user equipment. Conclusion 07-39 AIA 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 JULIO R PEREZ whose telephone number is (571)272-7846. The examiner can normally be reached 10Am - 6PM EST M-F. 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, Kathy Wang-Hurst can be reached at 5712705371. 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. /JULIO R PEREZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2644 Application/Control Number: 18/416,016 Page 2 Art Unit: 2644 Application/Control Number: 18/416,016 Page 3 Art Unit: 2644 Application/Control Number: 18/416,016 Page 4 Art Unit: 2644 Application/Control Number: 18/416,016 Page 5 Art Unit: 2644 Application/Control Number: 18/416,016 Page 6 Art Unit: 2644 Application/Control Number: 18/416,016 Page 7 Art Unit: 2644 Application/Control Number: 18/416,016 Page 8 Art Unit: 2644 Application/Control Number: 18/416,016 Page 9 Art Unit: 2644 Application/Control Number: 18/416,016 Page 10 Art Unit: 2644 Application/Control Number: 18/416,016 Page 11 Art Unit: 2644 Application/Control Number: 18/416,016 Page 12 Art Unit: 2644 Application/Control Number: 18/416,016 Page 13 Art Unit: 2644 Application/Control Number: 18/416,016 Page 14 Art Unit: 2644
Prosecution Insights