DETAILED ACTION
This office action response the amendment application on 5/07/2026
Claims 1, 3-9, 11-15, and 17-20 are presented for examination.
Claims 2, 10, and 16 are cancelled.
Notice of 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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (lDSs) submitted on May 07, 2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
This is in response to the amendments filed on May 07, 2026. Claims 1, 9, and 15 have been amended. Claims 2, 10, and 16 have been withdrawn from consideration. Claims 1, 3-9, 11-15, and 17-20 are pending and have been considered below.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed May 7, 2026, have been fully considered but are not persuasive.
The Applicant argues (see page 2 of the Remarks) that Kweon et al. (US 2023/0097876 A1) (“Kweon”) in view of Kweon-Kisuk et al. (US 2023/0143200 A1) (“Kweon-Kisuk”) fails to disclose or suggest the limitation reciting:
“wherein the reporting detailed information includes at least one of the following: delay tolerance information (reporting urgency information) identified by the UPF on whether reporting delay is tolerable; or valid final reporting time information (reporting window information) applied to the result report for the UPF event” as recited in independent claims 1, 9, and 15.
Examiner respectfully disagrees.
At the outset, the Examiner notes that during examination, pending claims are given their broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) consistent with the specification as understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Morris, 127 F.3d 1048, 1054 (Fed. Cir. 1997); In re Am. Acad. of Sci. Tech Center, 367 F.3d 1359, 1364 (Fed. Cir. 2004). The claims do not require any particular format, protocol, or explicit nomenclature for the recited “delay tolerance information” or “valid final reporting time information.” Rather, under a reasonable interpretation, the limitation broadly encompasses information indicating whether event reporting may be delayed and information defining a timing constraint, reporting interval, waiting period, or deadline associated with such reporting.
The Applicant contends that the claimed invention allows the UPF to determine whether event reporting may be delayed and, if delay is permissible, to provide a reporting window or deadline that optimizes network resources and avoids congestion. However, the cited prior art need not disclose the claimed feature in identical words or for identical purposes. A reference is relevant for everything it reasonably teaches to one of ordinary skill in the art, including inferences and predictable uses thereof. See In re Fritch, 972 F.2d 1260, 1265 (Fed. Cir. 1992); KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 418 (2007).
Regarding the recited delay tolerance information (reporting urgency information), Kweon-Kisuk expressly discloses event reporting mechanisms that determine whether reports are transmitted immediately or deferred. Specifically, paragraph [0112] discloses that event reporting information may include an immediate reporting flag indicating whether reporting is to be immediately sent to the subscriber. By implication, when immediate reporting is not required, reporting may be delayed according to configured reporting conditions. Such information directly corresponds to the claimed concept of indicating whether reporting delay is tolerable. Under the broadest reasonable interpretation, information specifying whether a report must be transmitted immediately or may be deferred constitutes reporting urgency information and satisfies the claimed delay tolerance information.
Further, Kweon-Kisuk discloses that reporting may occur according to event-detection periods, periodic reporting intervals, or one-time reporting conditions. See paragraphs [0112], [0167], and [0221]. These disclosures demonstrate that reporting transmission is governed by configurable timing criteria rather than requiring immediate delivery in all circumstances. Therefore, the reference teaches the functional equivalent of informing the network whether reporting can be delayed and under what conditions.
With respect to the claimed valid final reporting time information (reporting window information), Kweon-Kisuk additionally discloses a minimum waiting time associated with reporting frequency. Paragraphs [0167] and [0221] explain that the reporting frequency may specify a time value that must elapse before the next report is transmitted following event detection. The disclosed waiting period defines a reporting interval or temporal boundary governing when reporting may occur. Under the broadest reasonable interpretation, such timing information constitutes reporting window information because it establishes an allowable timeframe for transmitting event reports.
The Applicant argues that the claimed invention permits the UPF to establish a reporting deadline for delayed reporting in order to alleviate network congestion. However, the claims do not require a specific congestion-control algorithm, a particular deadline format, or an explicit statement that congestion reduction is the objective. The Federal Circuit has repeatedly held that limitations from the specification cannot be imported into the claims. See SuperGuide Corp. v. DirecTV Enters., Inc., 358 F.3d 870, 875 (Fed. Cir. 2004); In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 1184 (Fed. Cir. 1993). The claims merely require information indicating reporting delay tolerance and/or information defining a reporting time window. Kweon-Kisuk’s disclosure of immediate reporting indicators, reporting frequencies, event-detection periods, and minimum waiting times reasonably meets these limitations.
Moreover, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that configuring reporting intervals and waiting times inherently serves to manage reporting traffic and reduce unnecessary signaling overhead caused by excessive event notifications. Kweon-Kisuk expressly states that the minimum waiting time is utilized to prevent frequent reports when events occur excessively often. See paragraphs [0167] and [0221]. Such functionality corresponds to the same general objective identified by Applicant—namely, controlling reporting behavior to improve network efficiency. Differences in terminology or degree of optimization do not render the teachings patentably distinct. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 425 (CCPA 1981) (“The test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference.”).
Accordingly, Kweon-Kisuk teaches reporting control information indicating whether immediate reporting is required and further teaches timing constraints governing deferred reporting through reporting periods and minimum waiting times. When considered in combination with Kweon, these teachings collectively disclose or at least render obvious the claimed “delay tolerance information” and “valid final reporting time information” recited in claims 1, 9, and 15.
Therefore, the combination of Kweon and Kweon-Kisuk teaches or suggests the disputed limitations under the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claims, and the Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive.
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 of this title, 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 1-6, 9-11, 13, 15-17, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KWEON et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20230097876), (“D1”, hereinafter), in view of KWEON-Kisuk et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20230143200 A1), (“D2”, hereinafter).
As per Claim 1, D1 discloses an operation method of apparatus of a session management function (SMF) for providing a user plane function (UPF) event exposure service in a wireless communication system ([see, [0002, 0033], and Fig. 3, the network requests a subscription to a service from a UPF via a session management function (SMF) for supporting a UPF event exposure service in a wireless communication system]), the operation method comprising:
obtaining a UPF event exposure service subscription request from a consumer network function (NF) of a UPF event ([see, [0056-0057], and Fig. 3:302-303a, a Nnef_EventExposure_Subscribe/Unsubscribe request message about a service subscription]),
wherein the UPF event exposure service subscription request includes reporting suggestion information ([see, [0057-0059, 0063], and Fig. 3, 302-303a, transmits a subscription or unsubscription request message including the following parameters event reporting information]); and
providing the reporting suggestion information to a UPF ([see, [0067], the target of event reporting provided to the event exposure service to a UPF]) on the basis of the UPF event exposure service subscription request ([see, [0067-0068, 0129-0130], and fig. 6, the target of event reporting provided to the event exposure service to a UPF based on transmits a Npcf_EventExposure_Subscribe/Unsubscribe request message]),
wherein the reporting suggestion information ([see, [0067], the event exposure service to a UPF]) includes reporting detailed information ([see, 0063], periodically perform event reporting, the maximum number of times event reporting]) corresponding to a result report for the UPF event ([see, [0059, 0067], wherein Target of event reporting, the target of event reporting in result of subscribe to the event exposure service to a UPF]).
D1 doesn’t appear explicitly disclose: wherein the reporting detailed information includes at least one of the following: delay tolerance information (reporting urgency information) identified by the UPF on whether reporting delay is tolerable; or valid final reporting time information (reporting window information) applied to the result report for the UPF event.
However, D2 discloses wherein the reporting detailed information includes at least one of the following: delay tolerance information (reporting urgency information) identified by the UPF on whether reporting delay is tolerable; or valid final reporting time information (reporting window information) applied to the result report for the UPF event ([see, [0046], a packet delay status service provided to a user plane function (UPF) event exposure service using a service-based interface (SBI)]).
In view of the above, having the system of D1 and then given the well-established teaching of D2, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the system of D1 as taught by D2. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide an operating method of a network exposure function (NEF) in a wireless communication system results improves 5th generation (5G) communication system or a pre-5G communication system to meet the increasing demand for wireless data traffic after commercialization of the 4G communication system (D2, [0003-0005]).
As per Claim 3, D1 and D2 disclose the operation method of claim 1, and D1 further discloses wherein the providing of the reporting suggestion information to the UPF on the basis of the UPF event exposure service subscription request ([see, [0057-0059, 0063], and Fig. 3, 302-303a, transmits a subscription or unsubscription request message including the following parameters event reporting nformation]). D1 appears to be silent to the instant claim, and D2 further discloses the UPF event exposure service subscription request comprises providing the reporting suggestion information through an SBI interface or an N4 interface ([see, [0046], a user plane function (UPF) event exposure service using a service-based interface (SBI)]). In view of the above, having the system of D1 and then given the well-established teaching of D2, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the system of D1 as taught by D2. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide an operating method of a network exposure function (NEF) in a wireless communication system results improves 5th generation (5G) communication system or a pre-5G communication system to meet the increasing demand for wireless data traffic after commercialization of the 4G communication system (D2, [0003-0005]).
As per Claim 4, D1 and D2 disclose the operation method of claim 3, and D1 appears to be silent to the instant claim, and D2 further discloses wherein the SBI interface is Nupf_EventExposure, and the N4 interface is a session report rule (SRR) within a packet forwarding control protocol (PFCP) ([see, [0057], Nupf, which is an SBI interface, is defined to the UPF 125]). In view of the above, having the system of D1 and then given the well-established teaching of D2, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the system of D1 as taught by D2. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide an operating method of a network exposure function (NEF) in a wireless communication system results improves 5th generation (5G) communication system or a pre-5G communication system to meet the increasing demand for wireless data traffic after commercialization of the 4G communication system (D2, [0003-0005]).
As per Claim 5, D1 and D2 disclose the operation method of claim 1, and D1 appears to be silent to the instant claim, and D2 further discloses wherein the obtaining of the UPF event exposure service subscription request from the consumer NF of the UPF event comprises obtaining the UPF event exposure service subscription request through an SBI interface ([see, [0057], Nupf, which is an SBI interface, is defined to the UPF 125]). In view of the above, having the system of D1 and then given the well-established teaching of D2, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the system of D1 as taught by D2. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide an operating method of a network exposure function (NEF) in a wireless communication system results improves 5th generation (5G) communication system or a pre-5G communication system to meet the increasing demand for wireless data traffic after commercialization of the 4G communication system (D2, [0003-0005]).
. As per Claim 6, D1 and D2 disclose the operation method of claim 5, and D1 appears to be silent to the instant claim, and D2 further discloses wherein the SBI interface is a Nsmf_EventExposure or Npcf_SMPolicyControl service interface ([see, [0064], and Fig. 2, Nnef_EventExposure_Subscribe/Unsubscribe request]).
In view of the above, having the system of D1 and then given the well-established teaching of D2, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the system of D1 as taught by D2. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide an operating method of a network exposure function (NEF) in a wireless communication system results improves 5th generation (5G) communication system or a pre-5G communication system to meet the increasing demand for wireless data traffic after commercialization of the 4G communication system (D2, [0003-0005]).
As per Claim 7, D1 and D2 disclose the operation method of claim 1, and D1 further discloses wherein the consumer NF includes at least one of an application function (AF), a network exposure function (NEF), a policy control function (PCF), a network data analysis function (NWDAF) ([see, [0040, 0056], an AF/NF 311, an NEF 312, and a policy control function (PCF) disclosed]).
As per Claim 9, D1 discloses an operation method of an apparatus of user plane function (UPF) for providing a UPF event exposure service in a wireless communication system([see, [0002, 0033], and Fig. 3, the network requests a subscription to a service from a UPF via a session management function (SMF) for supporting a UPF event exposure service in a wireless communication system]), the operation method comprising:
obtaining reporting suggestion information from a session management function (SMF) ([see, [0056-0057, 0072], and Fig. 3:302-303d, the SMF 315 transmits a Nupf_EventExposure_Subscribe/Unsubscribe request message about a service subscription or unsubscription request to the UPF]), wherein the reporting suggestion information is information included in a UPF event exposure service subscription request provided from a consumer network function (NF) ([see, [0056-0057, 0068], and Fig. 3:302, In operation 302, the NEF 312 transmits a Nudm_EventExposure_Subscribe/Unsubscribe request message about a service subscription or unsubscription request to the UDM314 in order to subscribe to or unsubscribe from the UPF event exposure service to the UPF through which the specific SDF]); and
providing, on the basis of the reporting suggestion information ([see, [0067], the target of event reporting provided to the event exposure service to a UPF]), result reporting information of the UPF event to the consumer NF ([see, [0076], In operations 306a/306b, after detecting the occurrence of an event, the UPF 316 transmits an event report along with a time stamp to the NEF 312 through a Nupf_EventExposure_Notify message in order to notify of the occurrence of the event]), wherein the reporting suggestion information includes reporting detailed information corresponding to a result report for the UPF event ([see, 0063, 0076], periodically perform event reporting, the maximum number of times event reporting]).
D1 doesn’t appear explicitly disclose: wherein the reporting detailed information includes at least one of the following: delay tolerance information (reporting urgency information) identified by the UPF on whether reporting delay is tolerable; or valid final reporting time information (reporting window information) applied to the result report for the UPF event.
However, D2 discloses wherein the reporting detailed information includes at least one of the following: delay tolerance information (reporting urgency information) identified by the UPF on whether reporting delay is tolerable; or valid final reporting time information (reporting window information) applied to the result report for the UPF event ([see, [0046], a packet delay status service provided to a user plane function (UPF) event exposure service using a service-based interface (SBI)]).
In view of the above, having the system of D1 and then given the well-established teaching of D2, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the system of D1 as taught by D2. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide an operating method of a network exposure function (NEF) in a wireless communication system results improves 5th generation (5G) communication system or a pre-5G communication system to meet the increasing demand for wireless data traffic after commercialization of the 4G communication system (D2, [0003-0005]).
As per Claim 15, D1 discloses a user plane function (UPF) ([see, [0069], and Fig. 3, UPF 316]) apparatus for providing a UPF event exposure service in a wireless communication system ([see, Fig. 3]),
the UPF apparatus comprising:
a transceiver; and at least one controller operably connected to the transceiver ([see, [0011], apparatus includes: a transceiver; and at least one processor]), wherein the at least one controller is configured to:
obtain reporting suggestion information from a session management function (SMF) ([see, [0056-0057, 0072], and Fig. 3:302-303d, the SMF 315 transmits a Nupf_EventExposure_Subscribe/Unsubscribe request message about a service subscription or unsubscription request to the UPF]), wherein the reporting suggestion information is information included in a UPF event exposure service subscription request provided from a consumer network function (NF) ([see, [0056-0057, 0068], and Fig. 3:302, In operation 302, the NEF 312 transmits a Nudm_EventExposure_Subscribe/Unsubscribe request message about a service subscription or unsubscription request to the UDM314 in order to subscribe to or unsubscribe from the UPF event exposure service to the UPF through which the specific SDF]); and
provide, on the basis of the reporting suggestion information ([see, [0067], the target of event reporting provided to the event exposure service to a UPF]), result reporting information of the UPF event to the consumer NF ([see, [0076], In operations 306a/306b, after detecting the occurrence of an event, the UPF 316 transmits an event report along with a time stamp to the NEF 312 through a Nupf_EventExposure_Notify message in order to notify of the occurrence of the event]), wherein the reporting suggestion information includes reporting detailed information corresponding to a result report for the UPF event ([see, 0063, 0076], periodically perform event reporting, the maximum number of times event reporting]).
D1 doesn’t appear explicitly disclose: wherein the reporting detailed information includes at least one of the following: delay tolerance information (reporting urgency information) identified by the UPF on whether reporting delay is tolerable; or valid final reporting time information (reporting window information) applied to the result report for the UPF event.
However, D2 discloses wherein the reporting detailed information includes at least one of the following: delay tolerance information (reporting urgency information) identified by the UPF on whether reporting delay is tolerable; or valid final reporting time information (reporting window information) applied to the result report for the UPF event ([see, [0046], a packet delay status service provided to a user plane function (UPF) event exposure service using a service-based interface (SBI)]).
In view of the above, having the system of D1 and then given the well-established teaching of D2, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the system of D1 as taught by D2. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide an operating method of a network exposure function (NEF) in a wireless communication system results improves 5th generation (5G) communication system or a pre-5G communication system to meet the increasing demand for wireless data traffic after commercialization of the 4G communication system (D2, [0003-0005]).
As per Claims 11, 17, D1 appears to be silent to the instant claim, and D2 further discloses further comprising: determining, on the basis of the reporting detailed information, whether the result report corresponding to the UPF event is allowed to be delayed ([see, [0046], a packet delay status service provided to a user plane function (UPF) event]); and withholding, depending on a result of determining that the result report is allowed to be delayed, the result report within a valid final reporting time point ([see, [0113-0116], packet delay of an N3 interface with the NG-RAN in order to measure the packet delay for a specific QoS flow, reporting transmit a Nnef_EventExposure_Subscribe/Unsubscribe response message before valid an expiry time]).
In view of the above, having the system of D1 and then given the well-established teaching of D2, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the system of D1 as taught by D2. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide an operating method of a network exposure function (NEF) in a wireless communication system results improves 5th generation (5G) communication system or a pre-5G communication system to meet the increasing demand for wireless data traffic after commercialization of the 4G communication system (D2, [0003-0005]).
As per Claims 13, 19, D1 appears to be silent to the instant claim, and D2 further discloses wherein the obtaining of the reporting suggestion information from the SMF([see, [0052], a session management function (SMF) 130]) comprises obtaining the reporting suggestion information through an SBI interface or an N4 interface ([see, [0046], a packet delay status service provided to a user plane function (UPF) event exposure service using a service-based interface (SBI)]).
In view of the above, having the system of D1 and then given the well-established teaching of D2, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the system of D1 as taught by D2. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide an operating method of a network exposure function (NEF) in a wireless communication system results improves 5th generation (5G) communication system or a pre-5G communication system to meet the increasing demand for wireless data traffic after commercialization of the 4G communication system (D2, [0003-0005]).
Claims 8, 14, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Claim*** rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1, in view of D2, and further in view of Talebi Fard et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20210385283), (“D3”, hereinafter).
As per Claim 8, D1 and D2 disclose the operation method of claim 1, and D1 further discloses regenerating, on the basis of the UPF event exposure service subscription request obtained from the consumer NF ([see, [0057-0059, 0063], and Fig. 3, 302-303a, transmits a subscription or unsubscription request message including the following parameters event reporting information]).
D1 doesn’t appear explicitly disclose:
information on an N4 Session ID, a QFI, and an event filter, and reporting suggestion information corresponding to a PDU session of a user equipment; and
providing the regenerated information to the UPF through an SBI interface or an N4 interface.
However, D3 discloses information on an N4 Session ID ([see, [0392], the N4 session ID with the PDU session]),
a QFI ([see, [0337-0338], the QFI disclosed]), and
an event filter ([see, [0231], filter for a session continuity may refer to continuity of a PDU session disclosed]), and
reporting suggestion information corresponding to a PDU session of a user equipment ([see, [0231], a PDU session disclosed]); and providing the regenerated information to the UPF through an SBI interface or an N4 interface ([see, [0392], N4 interface disclosed]).
In view of the above, having the system of D1 and then given the well-established teaching of D3, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the system of D1 as taught by D3. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide a PDU session establishment results enhance the system performance to improve the call and service setup performance (D3, [0003-0005]).
As per Claims 14, 20, D1 appears to be silent to the instant claim, and D2 further discloses wherein the SBI interface is Nupf_EventExposure ([see, [0046], a packet delay status service provided to a user plane function (UPF) event exposure service using a service-based interface (SBI)]).
In view of the above, having the system of D1 and then given the well-established teaching of D2, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the system of D1 as taught by D2. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide an operating method of a network exposure function (NEF) in a wireless communication system results improves 5th generation (5G) communication system or a pre-5G communication system to meet the increasing demand for wireless data traffic after commercialization of the 4G communication system (D2, [0003-0005]).
D1 doesn’t appear explicitly disclose: the N4 interface is a session report rule (SRR).
However, D3 discloses the N4 interface is a session report rule (SRR) ([see, [0392], the N4 session ID with the PDU session]).
In view of the above, having the system of D1 and then given the well-established teaching of D3, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the system of D1 as taught by D3. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide a PDU session establishment results enhance the system performance to improve the call and service setup performance (D3, [0003-0005]).
Claims 12 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1, in view of D2, and further in view of Long et al. ( (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20230016327), (“D4”, hereinafter).
As per Claims 12, 18, D1 doesn’t appear explicitly disclose:
wherein the providing of the result reporting information of the UPF event to the consumer NF on the basis of the reporting suggestion information comprises:
determining whether a withheld result report exists;
identifying, when the withheld result report exists, whether the first target consumer NF of the withheld result report is the same as the second target consumer NF of the result report for the UPF event; and
bundling, when the first target consumer NF and the second target consumer NF are the same, respective event result notifications into a bundle and providing it to the consumer NF through a single service operation.
However, D4 discloses determining whether a withheld result report exists ([see, [0105], he network for pending messages by the Namf_EventExposure_Notify interface]);
identifying, when the withheld result report exists, whether the first target consumer NF of the withheld result report is the same as the second target consumer NF of the result report for the UPF event ([see, [0103, 0107-0108], the network for pending messages that notifies the UDM by the Namf_EventExposure_Notify interface and event report from the AMF through Namf_EventExposure_Subscribe request disclosed]); and
bundling, when the first target consumer NF and the second target consumer NF are the same, respective event result notifications into a bundle and providing it to the consumer NF through a single service operation ([see, [0119-0122], and Fig. 11, the network for pending messages. At step 15, the AMF notifies the NEF by the Namf_EventExposure_Notify interface and the NEF notifies the AF by the Nnef_EventExposure_Notify interface disclosed])
In view of the above, having the system of D1 and then given the well-established teaching of D4, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the system of D1 as taught by D4. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide pending messages results improved solution for event reporting (D4, [0083]).
Conclusion
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 extension fee 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
Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BERHANU D BELETE whose telephone number is (571)272-3478. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 7:30am-5pm, Alt. Friday, and EDT.
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, JEONG, MOO R. can be reached on (571) 272-9617. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/BERHANU D BELETE/Examiner, Art Unit 2468
/WUTCHUNG CHU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2418
Prosecution Insights