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 .
Response to Amendment
This Action is in response to Applicant’s Amendment filed on April 15, 2026. Claims 1-20 are still pending in the present application. This Action is made NON-FINAL.
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.
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.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 7-13, 17 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Shah et al (US Pat. Pub. No. 2017/0019779) in view of Jonsson et al (US Pat. Pub. No. 2011/0090903).
Regarding claim 1, Shah et al discloses a method comprising: a cellular telecommunication system application server (AS) electronically obtaining a cellular network subscriber user equipment (UE) location information from a HLR of the cellular telecommunication system (abstract and paragraph 68 discloses that MMSC query HLR for current location and HLR to communicate the location of mobile device); and electronically supporting location-based services of the UE based on UE location information obtained from the HLR while the UE is on a home cellular network and while the UE is roaming (paragraph 68 discloses that MMSC to determine that mobile device is roaming).
Shah et al specifically does not disclose the UE location information for a cellular network subscriber UE obtained from the Home Subscriber Server (HSS). However, Jonsson et al from the same or similar fields of endeavor teaches the UE location information for a cellular network subscriber UE obtained from the Home Subscriber Server (HSS) (see at least paragraphs 13 and 42 discloses HSS sends query response which includes location information). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Shah et al with Jonsson et al as they both determines roaming; as HSS stores location information indicating an rea in which the user is roaming.
Regarding claim 2, Shah et al discloses the AS includes one or more of: a short message service center (SMSC) of the cellular telecommunication system and a Multimedia Messaging Service Center (MMSC) of the cellular telecommunication system (paragraph 68 discloses MMSC).
Regarding claim 7, Jonsson et al discloses the AS electronically obtaining the cellular network subscriber UE location information from the HSS includes: the AS requesting location information from the HSS with a User-Data-Request (UDR) command using a telecommunication network Sh interface between the AS and the HSS; and receiving from the HSS a User-Data-Answer (UDA) message from the HSS including the cellular network subscriber UE location information (see at least paragraphs 13 and 42 discloses HSS receives query and sends query response which includes location information). Same motivation as claim 1.
Regarding claim 8, Shah et al discloses the HLR is updated during registration of the UE by the HLR receiving Fifth Generation (5G) cellular telecommunications UE location data from a core network of the cellular telecommunication system (paragraph 45).
Shah et al specifically does not disclose HSS is updating and receiving location data. However, Jonsson et al from the same or similar fields of endeavor teaches HSS is updating and receiving location data (see at least paragraphs 13 HSS stores location information). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Shah et al with Jonsson et al as they both determines roaming; as HSS stores location information indicating an rea in which the user is roaming.
Regarding claim 9, Shah et al discloses the HLR receiving UE location data from the core network of the cellular telecommunication system includes the HLR receiving UE location data via a 5G Unified Data Management (UDM) network function and a 5G Access and Mobility Management Function (AMF) (paragraph 45).
Shah et al specifically does not disclose HSS is updating and receiving location data. However, Jonsson et al from the same or similar fields of endeavor teaches HSS is updating and receiving location data (see at least paragraphs 13 HSS stores location information). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Shah et al with Jonsson et al as they both determines roaming; as HSS stores location information indicating an rea in which the user is roaming.
Regarding claim 10, Shah et al discloses the HLR receiving the UE location data from the core network of the cellular telecommunication system includes the HSS receiving UE location data via a roaming network Mobility Management Entity (MME); and wherein the UDA message from the HSS includes a roaming location of the UE (paragraph 68).
Shah et al specifically does not disclose HSS is updating and receiving location data. However, Jonsson et al from the same or similar fields of endeavor teaches HSS is updating and receiving location data (see at least paragraphs 13 HSS stores location information). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Shah et al with Jonsson et al as they both determines roaming; as HSS stores location information indicating an rea in which the user is roaming.
Regarding claim 11, Shah et al discloses the HLR receiving UE location data via the roaming MME includes the HLR receiving the UE location data via an S6a cellular telecommunication interface between the HSS and roaming network MME (paragraph 68).
Shah et al specifically does not disclose HSS is updating and receiving location data. However, Jonsson et al from the same or similar fields of endeavor teaches HSS is updating and receiving location data (see at least paragraphs 13 HSS stores location information). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Shah et al with Jonsson et al as they both determines roaming; as HSS stores location information indicating an rea in which the user is roaming.
Regarding claim 12, Shah et al discloses a system comprising: at least one memory (inherent in the MMSC) that stores computer executable instructions; and at least one processor (inherent in the MMSC) that executes the computer executable instructions to cause operations to be performed, the operations including: a cellular telecommunication system application server (AS) electronically obtaining user equipment (UE) location information for a cellular network subscriber UE from a HLR of the cellular telecommunication system (abstract and paragraph 68 discloses that MMSC query HLR for current location and HLR to communicate the location of mobile device); and electronically supporting location-based services of the UE based on UE location information obtained from the HLR while the UE is on a home cellular network and while the UE is roaming (paragraph 68 discloses that MMSC to determine that mobile device is roaming).
Shah et al specifically does not disclose the UE location information for a cellular network subscriber UE obtained from the Home Subscriber Server (HSS). However, Jonsson et al from the same or similar fields of endeavor teaches the UE location information for a cellular network subscriber UE obtained from the Home Subscriber Server (HSS) (see at least paragraphs 13 and 42 discloses HSS sends query response which includes location information). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Shah et al with Jonsson et al as they both determines roaming; as HSS stores location information indicating an rea in which the user is roaming.
Regarding claim 13, Shah et al discloses the AS includes one or more of: a short message service center (SMSC) of the cellular telecommunication system and a Multimedia Messaging Service Center (MMSC) of the cellular telecommunication system (paragraph 68 discloses MMSC).
Regarding claim 17, Shah et al discloses a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium (inherent in the MMSC) having computer-executable instructions stored thereon that, when executed by at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to cause operations to be performed, the operations including: a cellular telecommunication system application server (AS) electronically obtaining user equipment (UE) location information for a cellular network subscriber UE from a HLR of the cellular telecommunication system (abstract and paragraph 68 discloses that MMSC query HLR for current location and HLR to communicate the location of mobile device); and electronically supporting location-based services of the UE based on UE location information obtained from the HLR while the UE is on a home cellular network and while the UE is roaming (paragraph 68 discloses that MMSC to determine that mobile device is roaming).
Shah et al specifically does not disclose the UE location information for a cellular network subscriber UE obtained from the Home Subscriber Server (HSS). However, Jonsson et al from the same or similar fields of endeavor teaches the UE location information for a cellular network subscriber UE obtained from the Home Subscriber Server (HSS) (see at least paragraphs 13 and 42 discloses HSS sends query response which includes location information). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Shah et al with Jonsson et al as they both determines roaming; as HSS stores location information indicating an rea in which the user is roaming.
Regarding claim 18, Shah et al discloses the AS includes one or more of: a short message service center (SMSC) of the cellular telecommunication system and a Multimedia Messaging Service Center (MMSC) of the cellular telecommunication system (paragraph 68 discloses MMSC).
Claims 3-6, 14-16, 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Shah et al (US Pat. Pub. No. 2017/0019779) in view of Jonsson et al (US Pat. Pub. No. 2011/0090903) further in view of Arends et al (US Pat. Pub. No. 2025/0008333).
Regarding claim 3, Shah et al and Jonsson et al specifically does not disclose the electronically supporting location-based services of the UE based on the UE location information obtained from the HSS while the UE is on a home cellular network and while the UE is roaming includes determining whether the cellular network subscriber UE is roaming based on the UE location information obtained from the HSS. However, Arends et al from the same or similar fields of endeavor teaches the electronically supporting location-based services of the UE based on the UE location information obtained from the HSS while the UE is on a home cellular network and while the UE is roaming includes determining whether the cellular network subscriber UE is roaming based on the UE location information obtained from the HSS (see at least paragraphs 73 discloses determining whether UE is roaming based on UE location). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Shah et al and Jonsson et al with Arends et al as they determine roaming.
Regarding claim 4, Shah et al and Jonsson et al specifically does not disclose electronically performing analytics on the UE location information obtained from the HSS and a result of the determining whether the UE is roaming to: determine how many messages are sent to and from the UE over a cellular home network of the UE; determine how many messages are sent to and from the UE over one or more particular cellular networks of roaming partners of the home network; and identify the one or more particular cellular networks of roaming partners over which messages are being sent to and from the UE. However, Arends et al from the same or similar fields of endeavor teaches electronically performing analytics on the UE location information obtained from the HSS and the determination whether the UE is roaming to: determine how many messages are sent to and from the UE over a cellular home network of the UE; determine how many messages are sent to and from the UE over one or more particular cellular networks of roaming partners of the home network; and identify the one or more particular cellular networks of roaming partners over which messages are being sent to and from the UE (see at least paragraphs 47). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Shah et al and Jonsson et al with Arends et al as they determine roaming.
Regarding claim 5, Shah et al discloses the determining whether the cellular network subscriber UE is roaming based on the UE location information obtained from the HSS includes: populating the UE location information obtained from the HSS into a call data record (CDR) of the UE; and determining whether the cellular network subscriber UE is roaming based on the location information obtained from the HSS populated into the CDR (paragraph 34). Same motivation as claim 4.
Regarding claim 6, Shah et al discloses facilitating mobile network operator billing for messaging based on whether the UE is roaming using the determination of how many messages are sent to and from the UE over the cellular home network of the UE and the determination of how many messages are sent to and from the UE over one or more particular cellular networks of roaming partners of the home network (paragraph 34). Same motivation as claim 4.
Regarding claims 14-16 and 19-20, see above rejection of claims 3-6.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments, filed on April 15, 2026, with respect to claims 1, 12 and 17 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LITON MIAH whose telephone number is (571)270-3124. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 7:30am -5:00pm.
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, Rafael Perez-Gutierrez can be reached on 571-272-7915. 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.
/LITON MIAH/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2642
Prosecution Insights