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 .
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, 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 1-5, 7-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over NAM et al. (US 2024/0214881) in view of Balasubramanian et al. (US 2021/0250725).
Regarding claim 1, NAM teaches a computer-implemented method executed by data processing hardware that causes the data processing hardware to perform operations (figs. 2, 3, 5, and 7-12) comprising: transmitting a first wireless communication from a user device via a first cellular network, the first wireless communication including a current geographic location of the user device, the first cellular network comprising an authorized cellular network that the user device is authorized to use for wireless communications, and the user device maintaining a forbidden list identifying one or more cellular networks that the user device is not authorized to use for wireless communications (i.e., the first communication processor 212 may establish a communication channel of a band to be used for wireless communication with the first cellular network 292, and may support legacy network communication via the established communication channel. According to certain embodiments, the first network may be a legacy network. The second communication processor 214 may establish a communication channel corresponding to a designated band (e.g., approximately 6 GHz to 60 GHz) among bands to be used for wireless communication with the second cellular network 294, and may support 5G network communication via the established channel ([0061]-[0062], [0069], [0094], [0096]), tracking area update for UE current location and determining forbidden FPLMN to identify network, authenticate UE for handover ([0013]-[0016], [0053], [0078], and figs. 7-9); determining, based on the current geographic location of the user device, that the user device is in a geographic boundary between a first network coverage area of the first cellular network and a second network coverage area of a second cellular network, the second cellular network identified on the forbidden list (i.e., the particular service may include tracking area update (TAU) by which the location of the electronic device 101 registered in the cellular network 500 is updatable… According to an embodiment, the particular service may include location registration that is a service by which the electronic device 101 is registered in the cellular network 500 according to the movement of the electronic device 101 [0148]); based on the determination that the user device is requesting a particular according to the movement of the UE ([0192]-[0195], [0216]), removing the second cellular network from the forbidden list (i.e., the communication processor 620 may determine to perform handover to the second node 520, and remove the identification information of the second node 520 from the FPLMN list. When the identification information of the second node 520 is removed from the FPLMN list, the electronic device 101 may be able to perform handover to the second node 520 [0152], [0254]); and with the second cellular network removed from the forbidden list and based on the user device entering the second network coverage area, transmitting a second wireless communication from the user device via the second cellular network, the second wireless communication including an updated geographic location of the user device (i.e., the communication processor 620 may determine to perform handover to the second node 520, and remove the identification information of the second node 520 from the FPLMN list. When the identification information of the second node 520 is removed from the FPLMN list, the electronic device 101 may be able to perform handover to the second node 520 [0151]-[0152], [0253]-[0254]).
NAM does not specifically that the user device is approaching a geofence, the geofence comprising a geographic boundary between a first network coverage area of the first cellular network and a second network coverage area of a second cellular network, the second cellular network identified on the forbidden list.
However, the preceding limitation is known in the art of communication. Balasubramanian teaches the UE performs EHPLMN scans for higher priority EHPLMNs in the EHPLMN list only when identified to be within the GEO fenced area (meeting entrance criteria). When no GEO fencing entity is associated with an EHPLMN in the EHPLMN list, the behavior is dictated by the HPPLMN timer setting. In some embodiments, the GEO fencing is used for both entering and leaving the enterprise network. If there are failures in accessing the GEO fenced information, scanning for a network associated with that PLMN may be disabled. changes to the priority level of each PLMN within a prioritized list of PLMNs, such as the EHPLMN list, can be made based on the particular geographic location (geolocation/GPS coordinates) of a UE. In some such embodiments, the location of the UE is determined by whether the UE is inside or outside a particular GEO fence. Accordingly, the priority order of PLMNs within the particular prioritized lists in a UE may be dependent upon in which GEO fence(s) the UE is presently located ([0088]-[0092]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the invention, to have implemented the geofencing features taught by Balasubramania within the system of NAM in order to use such geofencing features that allow flexibility for the enterprise deployments to independently learn and manage the required GEO fences that are regulated geographically as the network deployments grow and change.
Regarding claim 2, NAM in view of Balasubramanian teaches all the limitations above. NAM further teaches with the second cellular network removed from the forbidden list, receiving an operational instruction at the user device, the operational instruction transmitted to the user device from a central system remote from the user device via the second cellular network, an operational parameter of the user device adjusted based on the operational instruction (i.e., the operation method of the electronic device may include identifying whether the second node is included in an FPLMN list including a node to which access of the electronic device is blocked, based on system information which is broadcast by the second node and includes information of multiple public land mobile networks (PLMNs). The operation method of the electronic device may include, in case that the second node is included in the FPLMN list, transmitting a TAU request signal to the second node. The operation method of the electronic device may include connecting to the second node according to reception of an accept message corresponding to the TAU request signal [0014]-[0016], [0061], [0094], [0096]).
Regarding claim 3, NAM in view of Balasubramanian teaches all the limitations above. NAM further teaches removing the second cellular network from the forbidden list comprises transmitting instructions from a central system via the first cellular network for the user device to clear the forbidden list, the central system remote from the user device (i.e., the communication processor 620 may determine to perform handover to the second node 520, and remove the identification information of the second node 520 from the FPLMN list. When the identification information of the second node 520 is removed from the FPLMN list, the electronic device 101 may be able to perform handover to the second node 520 [0152]-[0153]).
Regarding claim 4, NAM in view of Balasubramanian teaches all the limitations above. NAM further teaches with the second cellular network identified on the forbidden list and based on the user device entering the second network coverage area, attempting to transmit the second wireless communication from the user device via at least one of the group consisting of the first cellular network and the second cellular network (i.e., the operation method of the electronic device may include identifying whether the second node is included in an FPLMN list including a node to which access of the electronic device is blocked, based on system information which is broadcast by the second node and includes information of multiple public land mobile networks (PLMNs). The operation method of the electronic device may include, in case that the second node is included in the FPLMN list, transmitting a TAU request signal to the second node. The operation method of the electronic device may include connecting to the second node according to reception of an accept message corresponding to the TAU request signal [0014]-[0016], [0061], [0094], [0096]).
Regarding claim 5, NAM in view of Balasubramanian teaches all the limitations above. “attempting to transmit the second wireless communication from the user device comprises a threshold waiting period between respective attempts to transmit the second wireless communication, the threshold waiting period reduced based on a tracking state associated with the user device could have been derived by one of ordinary skill in the art from Balasubramanian’s reference which discloses a UE has an HPPLMN timer that determines the period of scans performed by the UE when looking for higher priority systems. That is, when a UE is receiving service from a MNO or enterprise network that is associated with an EHPLMN that is not the first (highest priority) entry on the EHPLMN list, the HPPLMN will determine how long the UE will wait between attempts to find an MNO or enterprise network that is associated with an EHPLMN that is higher on the EHPLMN list ([0075]-[0076]). Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art, could have easily conceived the invention in claim 5 from the combination of NAM in view of Balasubramanian.
Regarding claim 8, NAM teaches a system, the system comprising: data processing hardware (fig. 1); and memory hardware in communication with the data processing hardware (fig. 1), the memory hardware storing instructions executed on the data processing hardware that cause the data processing hardware ([0038]-[0040]) to perform operations comprising: transmitting a first wireless communication from a user device via a first cellular network, the first wireless communication including a current geographic location of the user device, the first cellular network comprising an authorized cellular network that the user device is authorized to use for wireless communications, and the user device maintaining a forbidden list identifying one or more cellular networks that the user device is not authorized to use for wireless communications (i.e., the first communication processor 212 may establish a communication channel of a band to be used for wireless communication with the first cellular network 292, and may support legacy network communication via the established communication channel. According to certain embodiments, the first network may be a legacy network. The second communication processor 214 may establish a communication channel corresponding to a designated band (e.g., approximately 6 GHz to 60 GHz) among bands to be used for wireless communication with the second cellular network 294, and may support 5G network communication via the established channel ([0061]-[0062], [0069], [0094], [0096]), tracking area update for UE current location and determining forbidden FPLMN to identify network, authenticate UE for handover ([0013]-[0016], [0053], [0078], and figs. 7-9); determining, based on the current geographic location of the user device, that the user device is in a geographic boundary between a first network coverage area of the first cellular network and a second network coverage area of a second cellular network, the second cellular network identified on the forbidden list (i.e., the particular service may include tracking area update (TAU) by which the location of the electronic device 101 registered in the cellular network 500 is updatable… According to an embodiment, the particular service may include location registration that is a service by which the electronic device 101 is registered in the cellular network 500 according to the movement of the electronic device 101 [0148]); based on the determination that the user device is requesting a particular according to the movement of the UE ([0192]-[0195], [0216]), removing the second cellular network from the forbidden list (i.e., the communication processor 620 may determine to perform handover to the second node 520, and remove the identification information of the second node 520 from the FPLMN list. When the identification information of the second node 520 is removed from the FPLMN list, the electronic device 101 may be able to perform handover to the second node 520 [0152], [0254]); and with the second cellular network removed from the forbidden list and based on the user device entering the second network coverage area, transmitting a second wireless communication from the user device via the second cellular network, the second wireless communication including an updated geographic location of the user device (i.e., the communication processor 620 may determine to perform handover to the second node 520, and remove the identification information of the second node 520 from the FPLMN list. When the identification information of the second node 520 is removed from the FPLMN list, the electronic device 101 may be able to perform handover to the second node 520 [0151]-[0152], [0253]-[0254]).
NAM does not specifically that the user device is approaching a geofence, the geofence comprising a geographic boundary between a first network coverage area of the first cellular network and a second network coverage area of a second cellular network, the second cellular network identified on the forbidden list.
However, the preceding limitation is known in the art of communication. Balasubramanian teaches the UE performs EHPLMN scans for higher priority EHPLMNs in the EHPLMN list only when identified to be within the GEO fenced area (meeting entrance criteria). When no GEO fencing entity is associated with an EHPLMN in the EHPLMN list, the behavior is dictated by the HPPLMN timer setting. In some embodiments, the GEO fencing is used for both entering and leaving the enterprise network. If there are failures in accessing the GEO fenced information, scanning for a network associated with that PLMN may be disabled. changes to the priority level of each PLMN within a prioritized list of PLMNs, such as the EHPLMN list, can be made based on the particular geographic location (geolocation/GPS coordinates) of a UE. In some such embodiments, the location of the UE is determined by whether the UE is inside or outside a particular GEO fence. Accordingly, the priority order of PLMNs within the particular prioritized lists in a UE may be dependent upon in which GEO fence(s) the UE is presently located ([0088]-[0092]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the invention, to have implemented the geofencing features taught by Balasubramanian within the system of NAM in order to use such geofencing features that allow flexibility for the enterprise deployments to independently learn and manage the required GEO fences that are regulated geographically as the network deployments grow and change.
Regarding claim 9, NAM in view of Balasubramanian teaches all the limitations above. NAM further teaches with the second cellular network removed from the forbidden list, receiving an operational instruction at the user device, the operational instruction transmitted to the user device from a central system remote from the user device via the second cellular network, an operational parameter of the user device adjusted based on the operational instruction (i.e., the operation method of the electronic device may include identifying whether the second node is included in an FPLMN list including a node to which access of the electronic device is blocked, based on system information which is broadcast by the second node and includes information of multiple public land mobile networks (PLMNs). The operation method of the electronic device may include, in case that the second node is included in the FPLMN list, transmitting a TAU request signal to the second node. The operation method of the electronic device may include connecting to the second node according to reception of an accept message corresponding to the TAU request signal [0014]-[0016], [0061], [0094], [0096]).
Regarding claim 10, NAM in view of Balasubramanian teaches all the limitations above. NAM further teaches removing the second cellular network from the forbidden list comprises transmitting instructions from a central system via the first cellular network for the user device to clear the forbidden list, the central system remote from the user device (i.e., the communication processor 620 may determine to perform handover to the second node 520, and remove the identification information of the second node 520 from the FPLMN list. When the identification information of the second node 520 is removed from the FPLMN list, the electronic device 101 may be able to perform handover to the second node 520 [0152]-[0153]).
Regarding claim 11, NAM in view of Balasubramanian teaches all the limitations above. NAM further teaches with the second cellular network identified on the forbidden list and based on the user device entering the second network coverage area, attempting to transmit the second wireless communication from the user device via at least one of the group consisting of the first cellular network and the second cellular network (i.e., the operation method of the electronic device may include identifying whether the second node is included in an FPLMN list including a node to which access of the electronic device is blocked, based on system information which is broadcast by the second node and includes information of multiple public land mobile networks (PLMNs). The operation method of the electronic device may include, in case that the second node is included in the FPLMN list, transmitting a TAU request signal to the second node. The operation method of the electronic device may include connecting to the second node according to reception of an accept message corresponding to the TAU request signal [0014]-[0016], [0061], [0094], [0096]).
Regarding claim 12, NAM in view of Balasubramanian teaches all the limitations above. “attempting to transmit the second wireless communication from the user device comprises a threshold waiting period between respective attempts to transmit the second wireless communication, the threshold waiting period reduced based on a tracking state associated with the user device’ could have been derived by one of ordinary skill in the art from Balasubramanian’s reference which discloses a UE has an HPPLMN timer that determines the period of scans performed by the UE when looking for higher priority systems. That is, when a UE is receiving service from a MNO or enterprise network that is associated with an EHPLMN that is not the first (highest priority) entry on the EHPLMN list, the HPPLMN will determine how long the UE will wait between attempts to find an MNO or enterprise network that is associated with an EHPLMN that is higher on the EHPLMN list ([0075]-[0076]). Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art, could have easily conceived the invention in claim 5 from the combination of NAM in view of Balasubramanian.
Claims 6-7, 13-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over NAM et al. (US 2024/0214881) in view of Balasubramanian et al. (US 2021/0250725) further in view of Borras et al. (US 2024/0169768).
Regarding claim 6, NAM in view of Balasubramanian teaches all the limitations above except determining that the user device is approaching the geofence is further based on at least one selected from the group consisting of: a distance between the user device and the geofence; a directional heading of the user device; and a velocity of the user device.
However, the preceding limitations are known in the art of communications. Borras further teaches responsive to comparing each new location to the geofence definition; determining that the vehicle is approaching a boundary of the geofenced definition; responsive to determining that the vehicle is approaching the boundary of the geofenced definition, the device requesting and receiving from the backend server a new geofenced definition for a region adjacent to the region of the geofenced definition; and using the new geofenced definition upon the vehicle entering the adjacent region ([0014], [claim 8]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the invention, to have implemented the technique of Borras within the system of NAM and Balasubramanian in order to determine the location and time where a vehicle was driven for the purpose of assessing a road usage charge using a distributed ledger while also maintaining the privacy of the users.
Regarding claim 7, NAM in view of Balasubramanian teaches all the limitations above except the user device comprises a vehicle. Borras further teaches determining the present location of the vehicle is performed by the device coupled to the OBD port, and transmitting the present location is performed by the device coupled to the OBD port first transmitting the present location to a cellular telephone device that is wirelessly coupled to the device coupled to the OBD port, and the cellular telephone device transmitting the present location to the backend server. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the invention, to have implemented the technique of Borras within the system of NAM and Balasubramanian in order to determine the location and time where a vehicle was driven for the purpose of assessing a road usage charge using a distributed ledger while also maintaining the privacy of the users.
Regarding claim 13, NAM in view of Balasubramanian teaches all the limitations above except determining that the user device is approaching the geofence is further based on at least one selected from the group consisting of: a distance between the user device and the geofence; a directional heading of the user device; and a velocity of the user device.
However, the preceding limitations are known in the art of communications. Borras further teaches responsive to comparing each new location to the geofence definition; determining that the vehicle is approaching a boundary of the geofenced definition; responsive to determining that the vehicle is approaching the boundary of the geofenced definition, the device requesting and receiving from the backend server a new geofenced definition for a region adjacent to the region of the geofenced definition; and using the new geofenced definition upon the vehicle entering the adjacent region ([0014], [claim 8]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the invention, to have implemented the technique of Borras within the system of NAM and Balasubramanian in order to determine the location and time where a vehicle was driven for the purpose of assessing a road usage charge using a distributed ledger while also maintaining the privacy of the users.
Regarding claim 14, NAM in view of Balasubramanian teaches all the limitations above except the user device comprises a vehicle. Borras further teaches determining the present location of the vehicle is performed by the device coupled to the OBD port, and transmitting the present location is performed by the device coupled to the OBD port first transmitting the present location to a cellular telephone device that is wirelessly coupled to the device coupled to the OBD port, and the cellular telephone device transmitting the present location to the backend server. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the invention, to have implemented the technique of Borras within the system of NAM and Balasubramanian in order to determine the location and time where a vehicle was driven for the purpose of assessing a road usage charge using a distributed ledger while also maintaining the privacy of the users.
Regarding claim 15, NAM teaches an electronic device (which can be coupled or integrated in a vehicle to form single device), the electronic device comprising: data processing hardware (fig. 1); and memory hardware in communication with the data processing hardware (fig. 1), the memory hardware storing instructions executed on the data processing hardware that cause the data processing hardware ([0038]-[0040]) to perform operations comprising: transmitting a first wireless communication from a user device via a first cellular network, the first wireless communication including a current geographic location of the electronic device, the first cellular network comprising an authorized cellular network that the user device is authorized to use for wireless communications, and the user device maintaining a forbidden list identifying one or more cellular networks that the user device is not authorized to use for wireless communications (i.e., the first communication processor 212 may establish a communication channel of a band to be used for wireless communication with the first cellular network 292, and may support legacy network communication via the established communication channel. According to certain embodiments, the first network may be a legacy network. The second communication processor 214 may establish a communication channel corresponding to a designated band (e.g., approximately 6 GHz to 60 GHz) among bands to be used for wireless communication with the second cellular network 294, and may support 5G network communication via the established channel ([0061]-[0062], [0069], [0094], [0096]), tracking area update for UE current location and determining forbidden FPLMN to identify network, authenticate UE for handover ([0013]-[0016], [0053], [0078], and figs. 7-9); determining, based on the current geographic location of the user device, that the user device is in a geographic boundary between a first network coverage area of the first cellular network and a second network coverage area of a second cellular network, the second cellular network identified on the forbidden list (i.e., the particular service may include tracking area update (TAU) by which the location of the electronic device 101 registered in the cellular network 500 is updatable… According to an embodiment, the particular service may include location registration that is a service by which the electronic device 101 is registered in the cellular network 500 according to the movement of the electronic device 101 [0148]); based on the determination that the user device is requesting a particular according to the movement of the UE ([0192]-[0195], [0216]), removing the second cellular network from the forbidden list (i.e., the communication processor 620 may determine to perform handover to the second node 520, and remove the identification information of the second node 520 from the FPLMN list. When the identification information of the second node 520 is removed from the FPLMN list, the electronic device 101 may be able to perform handover to the second node 520 [0152], [0254]); and with the second cellular network removed from the forbidden list and based on the user device entering the second network coverage area, transmitting a second wireless communication from the user device via the second cellular network, the second wireless communication including an updated geographic location of the electronic device (i.e., the communication processor 620 may determine to perform handover to the second node 520, and remove the identification information of the second node 520 from the FPLMN list. When the identification information of the second node 520 is removed from the FPLMN list, the electronic device 101 may be able to perform handover to the second node 520 [0151]-[0152], [0253]-[0254]).
NAM does not specifically that the user device is approaching a geofence, the geofence comprising a geographic boundary between a first network coverage area of the first cellular network and a second network coverage area of a second cellular network, the second cellular network identified on the forbidden list.
However, the preceding limitation is known in the art of communication. Balasubramanian teaches the UE performs EHPLMN scans for higher priority EHPLMNs in the EHPLMN list only when identified to be within the GEO fenced area (meeting entrance criteria). When no GEO fencing entity is associated with an EHPLMN in the EHPLMN list, the behavior is dictated by the HPPLMN timer setting. In some embodiments, the GEO fencing is used for both entering and leaving the enterprise network. If there are failures in accessing the GEO fenced information, scanning for a network associated with that PLMN may be disabled. changes to the priority level of each PLMN within a prioritized list of PLMNs, such as the EHPLMN list, can be made based on the particular geographic location (geolocation/GPS coordinates) of a UE. In some such embodiments, the location of the UE is determined by whether the UE is inside or outside a particular GEO fence. Accordingly, the priority order of PLMNs within the particular prioritized lists in a UE may be dependent upon in which GEO fence(s) the UE is presently located ([0088]-[0092]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the invention, to have implemented the geofencing features taught by Balasubramanian within the system of NAM in order to use such geofencing features that allow flexibility for the enterprise deployments to independently learn and manage the required GEO fences that are regulated geographically as the network deployments grow and change.
NAM in view of Balasubramanian does specifically describe that the electronic device is vehicle.
However, it is very well known in the art communications that a smartphone coupled to a vehicle is fundamentally a mobile device. For illustration purpose, Borras teaches the coupling of a vehicle with a smartphone wherein A smart contract 306 is then set up that corresponds to a particular vehicle 308. In order to verify the mileage on the vehicle at registration time, the user turns on the vehicle 308, which allows the user's mobile device to connect with the audio system of the vehicle using BlueTooth, for example. The application program, once it detects the connection to the vehicle's audio system, then prompts the user to take an image of the vehicle odometer while the connection is maintained. In more sophisticated vehicles, the vehicle will have a user-accessible computing interface that will allow the user to install application programs that can be run/executed by the vehicle computing system and directly obtain the mileage reading. In some embodiments the user's mobile device can interact with the vehicle computing system to obtain mileage information from the vehicle computing system. In some embodiments the vehicle will also have its own mobile communication system, obviating the need to use a handheld mobile device, and the vehicle computing system can directly communicate with the VMTPP 304 and conduct the registration. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the invention, to have implemented the technique of Borras within the system of NAM and Balasubramanian in order to determine the location and time where a vehicle was driven for the purpose of assessing a road usage charge using a distributed ledger while also maintaining the privacy of the users.
Regarding claim 16, NAM in view of Balasubramanian further in view of Borras teaches all the limitations above. NAM further teaches with the second cellular network removed from the forbidden list, receiving an operational instruction at the electronic device, the operational instruction transmitted to the electronic device from a central system remote from the electronic device via the second cellular network, an operational parameter of the electronic device adjusted based on the operational instruction (i.e., the operation method of the electronic device may include identifying whether the second node is included in an FPLMN list including a node to which access of the electronic device is blocked, based on system information which is broadcast by the second node and includes information of multiple public land mobile networks (PLMNs). The operation method of the electronic device may include, in case that the second node is included in the FPLMN list, transmitting a TAU request signal to the second node. The operation method of the electronic device may include connecting to the second node according to reception of an accept message corresponding to the TAU request signal [0014]-[0016], [0061], [0094], [0096]).
Regarding claim 17, NAM in view of Balasubramanian further in view of Borras teaches all the limitations above. NAM further teaches removing the second cellular network from the forbidden list comprises transmitting instructions from a central system via the first cellular network for the electronic device to clear the forbidden list, the central system remote from the electronic device (i.e., the communication processor 620 may determine to perform handover to the second node 520, and remove the identification information of the second node 520 from the FPLMN list. When the identification information of the second node 520 is removed from the FPLMN list, the electronic device 101 may be able to perform handover to the second node 520 [0152]-[0153]).
Regarding claim 18, NAM in view of Balasubramanian further in view of Borras teaches all the limitations above. NAM further teaches with the second cellular network identified on the forbidden list and based on the electronic device entering the second network coverage area, attempting to transmit the second wireless communication from the electronic device via at least one of the group consisting of the first cellular network and the second cellular network (i.e., the operation method of the electronic device may include identifying whether the second node is included in an FPLMN list including a node to which access of the electronic device is blocked, based on system information which is broadcast by the second node and includes information of multiple public land mobile networks (PLMNs). The operation method of the electronic device may include, in case that the second node is included in the FPLMN list, transmitting a TAU request signal to the second node. The operation method of the electronic device may include connecting to the second node according to reception of an accept message corresponding to the TAU request signal [0014]-[0016], [0061], [0094], [0096]).
Regarding claim 19, NAM in view of Balasubramanian teaches all the limitations above. “attempting to transmit the second wireless communication from the electronic device comprises a threshold waiting period between respective attempts to transmit the second wireless communication, the threshold waiting period reduced based on a tracking state associated with the electronic device could have been derived by one of ordinary skill in the art from Balasubramanian’s reference which discloses a UE has an HPPLMN timer that determines the period of scans performed by the UE when looking for higher priority systems. That is, when a UE is receiving service from a MNO or enterprise network that is associated with an EHPLMN that is not the first (highest priority) entry on the EHPLMN list, the HPPLMN will determine how long the UE will wait between attempts to find an MNO or enterprise network that is associated with an EHPLMN that is higher on the EHPLMN list ([0075]-[0076]). Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art, could have easily conceived the invention in claim 19 from the combination of NAM in view of Balasubramanian and Borras.
Regarding claim 20, NAM in view of Balasubramanian further in view of Borras teaches all the limitations above. Borras further determining that the user device is approaching the geofence is further based on at least one selected from the group consisting of: a distance between the user device and the geofence; a directional heading of the user device; and a velocity of the user device (i.e., responsive to comparing each new location to the geofence definition; determining that the vehicle is approaching a boundary of the geofenced definition; responsive to determining that the vehicle is approaching the boundary of the geofenced definition, the device requesting and receiving from the backend server a new geofenced definition for a region adjacent to the region of the geofenced definition; and using the new geofenced definition upon the vehicle entering the adjacent region ([0014], [claim 8]) in order to determine the location and time where a vehicle was driven for the purpose of assessing a road usage charge using a distributed ledger while also maintaining the privacy of the users).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEAN ALLAND GELIN whose telephone number is (571)272-7842. The examiner can normally be reached MON-FR 9-6 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, JINSONG HU can be reached at 571-272-3965. 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.
/JEAN A GELIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2643