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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
1. Applicant's arguments, filed on 01/22/2026 with respect to claims 1-20 in the remarks, have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
2. 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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Sander et al. (US 2013/0279401), (hereinafter, Sander) in view of Haswarey et al., (US 2024/0224020), (hereinafter, Haswarey).
Regarding claims 1, 8 and 15 Sander discloses a system/method/ non-transient computer-readable storage medium configured for adjusting an IMS APN for a wireless device (= setting a parameter (“VIUA” or “VPAA”) in HSS to indicate if usage of IMS APN in a visiting networks PDN GW is allowed; and determining if the IMS APN shall be resolved to a PDN GW in home network 300h or visited network 300v, see [0067 and 0070]; whereby the setting of the parameter for IMS APN to indicate either PDN APN for home or visiting networks is being associated with the “adjusting an IMS APN”), the system comprising: one or more hardware processors configured by machine-readable instructions to:
receive an inbound roaming communication from a wireless device when the wireless device is outside of coverage provided by a home network, the inbound roaming communication to access a first IP multimedia core network subsystem (IMS) access point name (APN) (= user equipment 301 transmits an Attach message to the MME 310 in the visited network 300v; in LTE, the attach will give the user equipment 301 connectivity to the default APN, which is expected to be the IMS APN, see [0060-62]);
transmit an update-location-request (ULR) for the wireless device to home subscriber server of the home network of the wireless device (= MME 310 transmits an Update Location Request message to the HSS 303 in the home network 300h, see [0064]);
receive an update-location-answer (ULA) including a mobile country code (MCC) for the wireless device (= HSS 303 responds; and sends the parameters for the IMS APN, which is the default APN, see [0065]);
and in response to receiving ULA for the wireless device, adjust an IMS APN for the wireless device to the first IMS APN for wireless device (= setting a parameter (“VIUA”) in HSS to indicate if usage of IMS APN in a visiting networks PDN GW is allowed; and determining if the IMS APN shall be resolved to a PDN GW in home network 300h or visited network 300v, see [0067]; and MME 310 selects a SGW 308 and a PDN GW 305 using the IMS APN from HSS 303; since the VPAA and VIUA are not set, a PDN GW 305 in the home network 300h is selected, see [0070]; whereby the IMS APN for home network is being associated with the “first IMS APN”).
Sander explicitly fails to disclose the claimed limitations of: “update-location-answer (ULA) including a mobile country code (MCC)” and
“adjust an IMS APN for the wireless device to the first IMS APN for wireless device based on the ULA including the MCC for the wireless device”.
However, Haswarey, which is an analogous art equivalently discloses the claimed limitations of:
“update-location-answer (ULA) including a mobile country code (MCC)” and
“adjust an IMS APN for the wireless device to the first IMS APN for wireless device based on the ULA including the MCC for the wireless device” (see, [0023]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teaching of Haswarey with Sander for the benefit of achieving a communication system that maintains a roaming usage filter definition arising from agreement between a primary network operator and mobile virtual network operator.
Regarding claims 2, 9 and 16 as mentioned in claims 1, 8 and 15, Sander further discloses the system/method/ non-transient computer-readable storage medium where the ULA identifies a second IMS APN for the wireless device (= update location message comprises subscription data such as IMS, VPAA, VIUA; and setting “Visited IMS usage allowed”/ “VIUA” to true as an indication of usage of the IMS APN on PDN GW 305v/network 300v, see [0065 and 0067]; whereby the IMS APN for visiting network is being associated with the “second IMS APN”).
Regarding claims 3, 10 and 17 as mentioned in claims 2, 9 and 16, Sander further discloses the system/method/ non-transient computer-readable storage medium wherein adjusting an IMS APN may be modifying the second IMS APN to the first IMS APN for the wireless device (= update location message comprises subscription data such as IMS, VPAA, VIUA; setting “Visited IMS usage allowed”/ “VIUA” to false as an indication of usage of the IMS APN on PDN GW 305h/network 300h, see [0065 and 0067]).
Regarding claims 4, 11 and 18 as mentioned in claims 2, 9 and 16, Sander further discloses the system/method/ non-transient computer-readable storage medium wherein adjusting an IMS APN may be adding the first IMS APN for the wireless device (= update location message comprises subscription data such as IMS, VPAA, VIUA; setting “Visited IMS usage allowed”/ “VIUA” to false as an indication of usage of the IMS APN on PDN GW 305h/network 300h, see [0065 and 0067]).
Regarding claims 5, 12 and 19 as mentioned in claims 1, 8 and 15, Sander further discloses the system/method/ non-transient computer-readable storage medium wherein the response to the ULA does not identify an IMS APN for the wireless device (= update location message comprises subscription data such as IMS, VPAA, VIUA; setting “Visited IMS usage allowed”/ “VIUA” to false as an indication of usage of the IMS APN on PDN GW 305h/network 300h, see [0065, 0067 and 0072]).
Regarding claims 6, 13 and 20 as mentioned in claims 5, 12 and 19 Sander further discloses the system/method/ non-transient computer-readable storage medium wherein adjusting the IMS APN may be adding the first IMS APN for the wireless device
(= update location message comprises subscription data such as IMS, VPAA, VIUA; setting “Visited IMS usage allowed”/ “VIUA” to false as an indication of usage of the IMS APN on PDN GW 305h/network 300h, see [0065 and 0067]).
Regarding claims 7 and 14 as mentioned in claims 2 and 9, Sander discloses the system/method, wherein the first IMS APN is for a first mobile network operator
(= update location message comprises subscription data such as IMS, VPAA, VIUA; setting “Visited IMS usage allowed”/ “VIUA” to false as an indication of usage of the IMS APN on PDN GW 305h/network 300h, see [0065, 0067 and 0072]).
CONCLUSION
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office 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).
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 33the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Kwasi Karikari whose telephone number is
571-272-8566.The examiner can normally be reached on M-Sat (6am – 10pm).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Charles Appiah can be reached on 571-272-7904.
The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8566.
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).
/Kwasi Karikari/
Primary Examiner: Art Unit 2641.