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 § 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)(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.
(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.
Claims 21, 24, 29, 35, and 38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Publication No. 2021/0058784 to Kedalagudde et al. (“Kedalagudde”).
As to claim 21 (and similarly applied to claim 35), Kedalagudde discloses a method, comprising: obtaining, by a first core network device, a target credential and attribute information of the target credential (Fig. 3, step D2; ¶0095); sending, by the first core network device, the target credential to a terminal device (Fig. 3, step D3; ¶0096); and triggering, by the first core network device based on the attribute information of the target credential, the terminal device to perform a corresponding authentication procedure by using the target credential (Fig. 3, steps E-F; ¶¶0097-0099).
As to claim 24, Kedalagudde discloses the method according to claim 21, wherein the triggering, by the first core network device based on the attribute information of the target credential, the terminal device to perform the corresponding authentication procedure by using the target credential comprises: sending, by the first core network device, the attribute information corresponding to the target credential to the terminal device, so that the terminal device performs the corresponding authentication procedure by using the target credential based on the attribute information corresponding to the target credential (Fig. 3, steps E-F; ¶¶0097-0099).
As to claim 29 (and similarly applied to claim 38), Kedalagudde discloses a method, comprising: receiving, by a terminal device, a target credential sent by a first core network device or a service provision server; obtaining, by the terminal device, attribute information of the target credential (Fig. 3, steps D2-D3; ¶¶0095-0096); and performing, by the terminal device, a corresponding authentication procedure based on the attribute information of the target credential by using the target credential (Fig. 3, steps E-F; ¶¶0097-0099).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 22, 23, 25-27, 30-34, 36, 37, 39, and 40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kedalagudde in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2018/0317086 to Ben Henda et al. (“Ben Henda 1”).
As to claim 22 (and similarly applied to claim 36), Kedalagudde discloses the method according to claim 21, wherein the attribute information of the target credential comprises first attribute information (Fig. 3, step D2; ¶0095), and the obtaining, by the first core network device, the attribute information of the target credential comprises: obtaining, by the first core network device, the first attribute information from a service provision server or a second core network device (Fig. 3, step D2; ¶0095).
Kedalagudde does not disclose: the first attribute information indicates a type of the target credential.
However, Ben Henda 1 discloses: the first attribute information indicates a type of the target credential (¶0083, the channel related information can include "information related to the access type or core network type or the network slice related information" and "may be one of the following: access network type…core network type…or the network slice type or identifier…").
Kedalagudde and Ben Henda 1 are considered to be similar to the claimed invention because they are in one or more of the same fields of: security arrangements; authentication using credential vaults, certificates, or pre-shared keys; protecting application or service provisioning; and/or network architectures or network communication protocols for network security. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kedalagudde to incorporate the teachings of Ben Henda 1 to include: the first attribute information indicates a type of the target credential. Doing so would "support different types of credentials and authentication methods" (Ben Henda 1, ¶0022), which would increase security, compatibility, and convenience. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine the disclosure of Kedalagudde with the teachings of Ben Henda 1 to obtain the invention as specified as there is a reasonable expectation of success and/or because doing so merely combines prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
As to claim 23 (and similarly applied to claim 37), Kedalagudde in view of Ben Henda 1 discloses the method according to claim 22, wherein the attribute information of the target credential comprises second attribute information, the second attribute information indicates the corresponding authentication procedure corresponding to the target credential (Kedalagudde, Fig. 3, step D2; ¶0095), and the obtaining, by the first core network device, the attribute information of the target credential comprises: obtaining, by the first core network device, the second attribute information from the second core network device, wherein the second attribute information is generated by the second core network device based on the first attribute information after the second core network device obtains the first attribute information (Kedalagudde, Fig. 3, step D2; ¶0095); or after obtaining the first attribute information, generating, by the first core network device, the second attribute information based on first attribute information.
As to claim 25, Kedalagudde discloses the method according to claim 21, wherein the attribute information of the target credential comprises at least one of first attribute information or second attribute information (Fig. 3, steps D2-D3; ¶¶0095-0096), and the triggering, by the first core network device based on the attribute information of the target credential, the terminal device to perform the corresponding authentication procedure by using the target credential comprises: triggering, by the first core network device, a deregistration procedure, so that the terminal device performs the slice authentication procedure by using the target credential after the deregistration procedure is completed (Fig. 3, steps E-F; ¶¶0097-0099).
Kedalagudde does not disclose: the first attribute information indicates that a type of the target credential is a credential used to perform a slice authentication procedure, the second attribute information indicates that the corresponding authentication procedure corresponding to the target credential is the slice authentication procedure.
However, Ben Henda 1 discloses: the first attribute information indicates that a type of the target credential is a credential used to perform a slice authentication procedure, the second attribute information indicates that the corresponding authentication procedure corresponding to the target credential is the slice authentication procedure (Fig. 3 and ¶¶0081-0083, the channel related information can include "information related to the access type or core network type or the network slice related information" and "may be one of the following: access network type…core network type…or the network slice type or identifier…").
Kedalagudde and Ben Henda 1 are considered to be similar to the claimed invention because they are in one or more of the same fields of: security arrangements; authentication using credential vaults, certificates, or pre-shared keys; protecting application or service provisioning; and/or network architectures or network communication protocols for network security. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kedalagudde to incorporate the teachings of Ben Henda 1 to include: the first attribute information indicates that a type of the target credential is a credential used to perform a slice authentication procedure, the second attribute information indicates that the corresponding authentication procedure corresponding to the target credential is the slice authentication procedure. Doing so would "support different types of credentials and authentication methods" (Ben Henda 1, ¶0022), which would increase security, compatibility, and convenience. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine the disclosure of Kedalagudde with the teachings of Ben Henda 1 to obtain the invention as specified as there is a reasonable expectation of success and/or because doing so merely combines prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
As to claim 26, Kedalagudde discloses the method according to claim 21, wherein the attribute information of the target credential comprises at least one of first attribute information or second attribute information (Fig. 3, steps D2-D3; ¶¶0095-0096), and the triggering, by the first core network device based on the attribute information of the target credential, the terminal device to perform the corresponding authentication procedure by using the target credential comprises: triggering, by the first core network device, a session management procedure, so that the terminal device performs the secondary authentication procedure by using the target credential in a process of performing the session management procedure (Fig. 3, steps E-F; ¶¶0097-0099).
Kedalagudde does not disclose: the first attribute information indicates that a type of the target credential is a credential used to perform a secondary authentication procedure, the second attribute information indicates that the corresponding authentication procedure corresponding to the target credential is the secondary authentication procedure.
However, Ben Henda 1 discloses: the first attribute information indicates that a type of the target credential is a credential used to perform a secondary authentication procedure, the second attribute information indicates that the corresponding authentication procedure corresponding to the target credential is the secondary authentication procedure (Fig. 3 and ¶¶0081-0083).
Kedalagudde and Ben Henda 1 are considered to be similar to the claimed invention because they are in one or more of the same fields of: security arrangements; authentication using credential vaults, certificates, or pre-shared keys; protecting application or service provisioning; and/or network architectures or network communication protocols for network security. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kedalagudde to incorporate the teachings of Ben Henda 1 to include: the first attribute information indicates that a type of the target credential is a credential used to perform a secondary authentication procedure, the second attribute information indicates that the corresponding authentication procedure corresponding to the target credential is the secondary authentication procedure. Doing so would "support different types of credentials and authentication methods" (Ben Henda 1, ¶0022), which would increase security, compatibility, and convenience. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine the disclosure of Kedalagudde with the teachings of Ben Henda 1 to obtain the invention as specified as there is a reasonable expectation of success and/or because doing so merely combines prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
As to claim 27, Kedalagudde in view of Ben Henda 1 discloses the method according to claim 26, wherein the session management procedure is a session establishment procedure or a session modification procedure (Kedalagudde, Fig. 3, steps E-F; ¶¶0097-0099).
As to claim 30, Kedalagudde discloses the method according to claim 29, wherein the attribute information of the target credential comprises at least one of first attribute information or second attribute information (Fig. 3, step D2; ¶0095).
Kedalagudde does not disclose: the first attribute information indicates a type of the target credential, and the second attribute information indicates the corresponding authentication procedure corresponding to the target credential.
However, Ben Henda 1 discloses: the first attribute information indicates a type of the target credential, and the second attribute information indicates the corresponding authentication procedure corresponding to the target credential (¶0083, the channel related information can include "information related to the access type or core network type or the network slice related information" and "may be one of the following: access network type…core network type…or the network slice type or identifier…").
Kedalagudde and Ben Henda 1 are considered to be similar to the claimed invention because they are in one or more of the same fields of: security arrangements; authentication using credential vaults, certificates, or pre-shared keys; protecting application or service provisioning; and/or network architectures or network communication protocols for network security. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kedalagudde to incorporate the teachings of Ben Henda 1 to include: the first attribute information indicates a type of the target credential, and the second attribute information indicates the corresponding authentication procedure corresponding to the target credential. Doing so would "support different types of credentials and authentication methods" (Ben Henda 1, ¶0022), which would increase security, compatibility, and convenience. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine the disclosure of Kedalagudde with the teachings of Ben Henda 1 to obtain the invention as specified as there is a reasonable expectation of success and/or because doing so merely combines prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
As to claim 31 (and similarly applied to claim 39), Kedalagudde discloses the method according to claim 29, wherein the attribute information of the target credential comprises at least one of first attribute information or second attribute information (Fig. 3, step D2; ¶0095), and the performing, by the terminal device, the corresponding authentication procedure based on the attribute information of the target credential by using the target credential comprises: performing, by the terminal device, a registration procedure based on the attribute information of the target credential; and performing the slice authentication procedure by using the target credential in a process of performing the registration procedure (Fig. 3, steps E-F; ¶¶0097-0099).
Kedalagudde does not disclose: the first attribute information indicates that a type of the target credential is a credential used to perform a slice authentication procedure, the second attribute information indicates that the corresponding authentication procedure corresponding to the target credential is the slice authentication procedure.
However, Ben Henda 1 discloses: the first attribute information indicates that a type of the target credential is a credential used to perform a slice authentication procedure, the second attribute information indicates that the corresponding authentication procedure corresponding to the target credential is the slice authentication procedure (Fig. 3 and ¶¶0081-0083, the channel related information can include "information related to the access type or core network type or the network slice related information" and "may be one of the following: access network type…core network type…or the network slice type or identifier…").
Kedalagudde and Ben Henda 1 are considered to be similar to the claimed invention because they are in one or more of the same fields of: security arrangements; authentication using credential vaults, certificates, or pre-shared keys; protecting application or service provisioning; and/or network architectures or network communication protocols for network security. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kedalagudde to incorporate the teachings of Ben Henda 1 to include: the first attribute information indicates that a type of the target credential is a credential used to perform a slice authentication procedure, the second attribute information indicates that the corresponding authentication procedure corresponding to the target credential is the slice authentication procedure. Doing so would "support different types of credentials and authentication methods" (Ben Henda 1, ¶0022), which would increase security, compatibility, and convenience. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine the disclosure of Kedalagudde with the teachings of Ben Henda 1 to obtain the invention as specified as there is a reasonable expectation of success and/or because doing so merely combines prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
As to claim 32, Kedalagudde in view of Ben Henda 1 discloses the method according to claim 31, wherein the registration procedure is any one of an initial registration procedure, a mobile registration update procedure, a periodic registration update procedure, or an emergency registration procedure (Kedalagudde, Fig. 3, steps E-F; ¶¶0097-0099).
As to claim 33 (and similarly applied to claim 40), Kedalagudde discloses the method according to claim 29, wherein the attribute information of the target credential comprises at least one of first attribute information or second attribute information (Fig. 3, step D2; ¶0095), and the performing, by the terminal device, the corresponding authentication procedure based on the attribute information of the target credential by using the target credential comprises: performing, by the terminal device, a session management procedure based on the attribute information of the target credential; and performing the secondary authentication procedure by using the target credential in a process of performing the session management procedure (Fig. 3, steps E-F; ¶¶0097-0099).
Kedalagudde does not disclose: the first attribute information indicates that a type of the target credential is a credential used to perform a secondary authentication procedure, the second attribute information indicates that the corresponding authentication procedure corresponding to the target credential is the secondary authentication procedure.
However, Ben Henda 1 discloses: the first attribute information indicates that a type of the target credential is a credential used to perform a secondary authentication procedure, the second attribute information indicates that the corresponding authentication procedure corresponding to the target credential is the secondary authentication procedure (Fig. 3 and ¶¶0081-0083).
Kedalagudde and Ben Henda 1 are considered to be similar to the claimed invention because they are in one or more of the same fields of: security arrangements; authentication using credential vaults, certificates, or pre-shared keys; protecting application or service provisioning; and/or network architectures or network communication protocols for network security. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kedalagudde to incorporate the teachings of Ben Henda 1 to include: the first attribute information indicates that a type of the target credential is a credential used to perform a secondary authentication procedure, the second attribute information indicates that the corresponding authentication procedure corresponding to the target credential is the secondary authentication procedure. Doing so would "support different types of credentials and authentication methods" (Ben Henda 1, ¶0022), which would increase security, compatibility, and convenience. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine the disclosure of Kedalagudde with the teachings of Ben Henda 1 to obtain the invention as specified as there is a reasonable expectation of success and/or because doing so merely combines prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
As to claim 34, Kedalagudde in view of Ben Henda 1 discloses the method according to claim 33, wherein the session management procedure is a session establishment procedure or a session modification procedure (Kedalagudde, Fig. 3, steps E-F; ¶¶0097-0099).
Claim 28 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kedalagudde in view of Ben Henda 1 and further in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2024/0064129 to Ben Henda et al. (“Ben Henda 2”).
As to claim 28, Kedalagudde in view of Ben Henda 1 discloses the method according to claim 22.
Kedalagudde in view of Ben Henda 1 does not disclose: wherein the first core network device is one of a unified data management (UDM) network element and a mobility management function (AMF) network element, the second core network device is one of the UDM network element or the AMF network element, and, when the first core network device is the AMF network element, the second core network device is the UDM network element.
However, Ben Henda 2 discloses: wherein the first core network device is one of a unified data management (UDM) network element and a mobility management function (AMF) network element, the second core network device is one of the UDM network element or the AMF network element, and, when the first core network device is the AMF network element, the second core network device is the UDM network element (Fig. 3 and ¶¶0083-0087; UDM sends authentication credential information to AMF).
Kedalagudde, Ben Henda 1, and Ben Henda 2 are considered to be similar to the claimed invention because they are in one or more of the same fields of: security arrangements; authentication using credential vaults, certificates, or pre-shared keys; protecting application or service provisioning; and/or network architectures or network communication protocols for network security. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kedalagudde in view of Ben Henda 1 to incorporate the teachings of Ben Henda 2 to include: wherein the first core network device is one of a unified data management (UDM) network element and a mobility management function (AMF) network element, the second core network device is one of the UDM network element or the AMF network element, and, when the first core network device is the AMF network element, the second core network device is the UDM network element. Doing so would "provide confidentiality protection for a UPU procedure form an HPLM UDM to a UE" (Ben Henda 2, ¶0103), through the AMF, which would increase security and compatibility. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine the disclosure of Kedalagudde in view of Ben Henda 1 with the teachings of Ben Henda 2 to obtain the invention as specified as there is a reasonable expectation of success and/or because doing so merely combines prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
References Cited
Ben Henda 1, Noamen et al. (2018). Secondary authentication of a user equipment (US 2018/0317086 A1). Filed 2017-12-22.
Ben Henda 2, Noamen et al. (2024). A method and function for accessing a non-public network (US 2024/0064129 A1). Filed 2021-12-20.
Kedalagudde, Meghashree Dattatri et al. (2021). User equipment onboarding based on default manufacturer credentials unlicensed (US 2021/0058784 A1). Filed 2020-11-06.
Other Pertinent References
The following prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure:
Ben Henda, Noamen et al. (2019). Authentication for next generation systems (US 20190007830 A1). Filed 2017-10-25.
Ben Henda, Noamen et al. (2024). Fully qualified domain name handling for service interactions in 5g (US 20240121587 A1). Filed 2023-12-15.
Ding, Zongrui et al. (2024). Enhanced service function chaining in next generation cellular networks (US 20240187331 A1). Filed 2022-05-03.
Kunz, Andreas et al. (2020). Encrypting network slice credentials using a public key (US 20200280854 A1). Filed 2020-03-02.
Starsinic, Michael et al. (2024). Snpn onboarding and obtaining snpn services from a plmn (US 20240224163 A1). Filed 2021-03-23.
Ståhl, Per et al. (2024). Download of operational subscription profile (US 20240314538 A1). Filed 2021-02-05.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMUEL H LEONARD whose telephone number is (571)272-5720. The examiner can normally be reached Monday – Friday, 7am – 4pm (PT).
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant may 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, Yuwen (Kevin) Pan can be reached at (571)272-7855. 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.
/SAMUEL H. LEONARD/ Examiner, Art Unit 2649
/YUWEN PAN/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2649