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 .
Claims 1-4, 6-9, and 11-20 have been examined.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 05/06/2026 has been entered.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 04/13/2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
Claims 1, 16, and 19 have been amended.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 16, and 19 regarding the new limitations: “the PFCP includes PFCP session modification request/response messages and PFCP session deletion request/response messages, wherein the PFCP session modification request/response messages and the PFCP session deletion request/response messages include the meta information”, have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1-4 and 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 20210409375 to Burakovsky et al (hereinafter Burakovsky).
As per claims 1, 16, and 19, Burakovsky teaches:
A system, comprising:
a processor (Burakovsky: [0016]: processor) configured to:
monitor network traffic on a mobile network at a Security Platform to identify a new session, wherein the Security Platform is located at a perimeter of the mobile network (Burakovsky: [0035] Accordingly, new and improved security solutions that facilitate applying security (e.g., network-based security) using a security platform in a mobile network (e.g., a 4G/5G mobile network) on PFCP traffic are disclosed in accordance with some embodiments. At various 4G/5G network locations including …, a multi-access distributed edge location. [0036]: monitoring network traffic on a mobile network at a security platform to identify a Packet Forwarding Control Protocol (PFCP) message associated with a new session, in which the mobile network includes a 4G network or a 5G network);
determine meta information associated with the new session by extracting the meta information from the network traffic via one or more interfaces, wherein the network traffic includes a Packet Forwarding Control Protocol (PFCP) (Burakovsky: [0036]: extracting a plurality of parameters (e.g., a 5-tuple+Node ID related to a PFCP association as will be further described below) from the PFCP message at the security platform. [0037] For example, the security platform can parse the PFCP message to extract the following parameters (meta information): a source IP address, SEID 1, a destination IP address, SEID 2, and the protocol in use related to a PFCP association), wherein the PFCP includes PFCP session modification request/response messages and PFCP session deletion request/response messages, wherein the PFCP session modification request/response messages and the PFCP session deletion request/response messages include the meta information (Burakovsky: [0078] FIG. 3B is a protocol sequence diagram for a PFCP session modification procedure. [0087]: Specifically, the Security Platform can be configured with a security policy to monitor a PFCP association setup request, a PFCP session establishment request, and a PFCP session deletion request. [0100]. [0103]: the received data and conclude that the session requires an HTTP decoder 514. As another example, APP ID 512 can recognize PFCP session establishment/modification/release messages (e.g., N4 session establishment request/response messages, such as similarly described above with respect to FIGS. 3A-C) and conclude that the session requires a PFCP decoder (e.g., to extract information). Based on the determination made by APP ID 512, the packets are sent to an appropriate decoder 514. Decoder 514 is configured to assemble packets (e.g., which may be received out of order) into the correct order, perform tokenization, and extract out information); and
enforce a security policy on the new session at the Security Platform based on the meta information to apply context-based security in the mobile network (Burakovsky: [0036]: enforcing a security policy at the security platform on the new session based on one or more of the plurality of parameters to secure control and user plane separation in the mobile network); and
a memory coupled to the processor and configured to provide the processor with instructions (Burakovsky: [0016]: a processor configured to execute instructions stored on and/or provided by a memory coupled to the processor).
As per claims 2, 17, and 20, Burakovsky teaches:
The system recited in claim 1, wherein the Security Platform is configured to process PFCP messages to extract the meta information from the network traffic via the one or more interfaces (Burakovsky: [0109] At 604, extracting a plurality of parameters from the PFCP message at the security platform is performed. [0100]: extract out information (e.g., such to extract various information exchanged in the N4 session establishment related messages and/or various PFCP messages over N4/Sxa/Sxb/Sxc/other interfaces)).
As per claims 3 and 18, Burakovsky teaches:
The system recited in claim 1, wherein the Security Platform is located at the one or more interfaces at the perimeter of the mobile network (Burakovsky: [0035]: At various 4G/5G network locations including …, a multi-access distributed edge location).
As per claim 4, Burakovsky teaches:
The system recited in claim 1, wherein the Security Platform is located at the one or more interfaces at the perimeter of the mobile network selected from one or more of the following interfaces: SGi, Sxb, N4, and N6 (Burakovsky: [0058] Referring to FIG. 2A, network traffic communications can be monitored using Security Platforms 202a and 202b (e.g., which can be located in various locations to monitor Sxa, Sxb, and/or other communications)).
As per claim 14, Burakovsky teaches:
The system recited in claim 1, wherein the Security Platform is configured with a plurality of security policies to apply vulnerability protection, intrusion prevention, antivirus, antispyware, Domain Name System (DNS) security, denial of service (DoS) protection, and/or cloud-based security (Burakovsky: [0038] In an example implementation, the security platform is configured with a security policy to perform detection and prevention of Denial of Service (DoS) attacks).
As per claim 15, Burakovsky teaches:
The system recited in claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to: block the new session from accessing a resource based on the security policy (Burakovsky: claim 9: block the new session from accessing a resource based on the security policy).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 6-9, 12, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Burakovsky and prior art of record US 20200145432 to Verma et al (hereinafter Verma).
As per claim 6, Burakovsky does not teach the limitations of claim 6. However, Verma teaches:
wherein the meta information includes International Mobile Subscription Identity (IMSI) information (Verma: [0126]: the security platform parses Packet Forwarding Control Protocol (PFCP) Session Establishment Request and PFCP Session Establishment Response messages to extract the subscription and/or equipment identifier information, and wherein the subscription and/or equipment identifier information is identified by an International Mobile Subscription Identity (IMSI)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ the teachings of Verma in the invention of Burakovsky to include the above limitations. The motivation to do so would be to provide multi-access distributed edge security in mobile networks (Verma: [0120]).
As per claim 7, Burakovsky does not teach the limitations of claim 7. However, Verma teaches:
wherein the meta information includes Subscription Permanent Identifier (SUPI) information (Verma: [0065]: applying service-based security per Subscription Permanent Identifier (SUPI) that can be applied using a security platform by parsing HTTP/2 messages to extract SUPI information).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ the teachings of Verma in the invention of Burakovsky to include the above limitations. The motivation to do so would be to provide service-based security per Subscription Permanent Identifier (SUPI) (Verma: [0065]).
As per claim 8, Burakovsky does not teach the limitations of claim 8. However, Verma teaches:
wherein the meta information includes International Mobile Equipment Identity (IMEI)/Permanent Equipment Identifier (PEI) information (Verma: [0126]: the security platform parses Packet Forwarding Control Protocol (PFCP) Session Establishment Request and PFCP Session Establishment Response messages to extract the subscription and/or equipment identifier information, and wherein the subscription and/or equipment identifier information is identified by an International Mobile Equipment Identifier (IMEI)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ the teachings of Verma in the invention of Burakovsky to include the above limitations. The motivation to do so would be to provide multi-access distributed edge security in mobile networks (Verma: [0120]).
As per claim 9, Burakovsky does not teach the limitations of claim 9. However, Verma teaches:
wherein the meta information includes Single Network Slice Selection Assistance Information (S-NSSAI) (Verma: [0049]: based on the security platform deployment topology in a given 5G network, S-NSSAI information can be extracted using one or more of two options).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ the teachings of Verma in the invention of Burakovsky to include the above limitations. The motivation to do so would be to provide security platforms within service provider network environments for network slice-based security in mobile networks for service providers (Verma: [0044]).
As per claim 12, Burakovsky does not teach the limitations of claim 12. However, Verma teaches:
wherein the meta information includes user location information (Verma: [0112] In some embodiments, based on the security platform deployment topology in a 5G network, User Location information can be extracted using the following two options).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ the teachings of Verma in the invention of Burakovsky to include the above limitations. The motivation to do so would be to provide service-based security per User Location in mobile networks (Verma: [0114]).
As per claim 13, Burakovsky does not teach the limitations of claim 13. However, Verma teaches:
wherein the meta information includes International Mobile Subscription Identity (IMSI) / Subscription Permanent Identifier (SUPI), International Mobile Equipment Identity (IMEI)/Permanent Equipment Identifier (PEI), Single Network Slice Selection Assistance Information (S-NSSAI), and/or radio access technology (RAT) Type information (Verma: the security platform parses Packet Forwarding Control Protocol (PFCP) Session Establishment Request and PFCP Session Establishment Response messages to extract the subscription and/or equipment identifier information, and wherein the subscription and/or equipment identifier information is identified by an International Mobile Subscription Identity (IMSI), International Mobile Equipment Identifier (IMEI), and/or Mobile Subscriber ISDN (MSISDN) related information).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ the teachings of Verma in the invention of Burakovsky to include the above limitations. The motivation to do so would be to provide multi-access distributed edge security in mobile networks (Verma: [0120]).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Burakovsky and prior art of record US 20180367578 to Verma et al (hereinafter Verma’578).
As per claim 11, Burakovsky does not teach the limitations of claim 11. However, Verma’578 teaches:
wherein the meta information includes radio access technology (RAT) Type information (Verma’578: Abstract: monitoring network traffic on a service provider network at a security platform to identify a Radio Access Technology (RAT) type for a new session).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ the teachings of Verma’578 in the invention of Burakovsky to include the above limitations. The motivation to do so would be to perform RAT based security in mobile networks using a security platform that can implement security policies based on RAT information (e.g., RAT Types supported by GTPv2-C) (Verma’578: [0130]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
CN 115633359 A to Zhang et al: The invention claims a PFCP session security detection method, device, electronic device and storage medium, wherein the method comprises: obtaining the flow information of PFCP session; comparing the address information in the flow information with the white list, judging whether the flow information is a type of suspicious message; determining whether a kind of suspicious message is a kind of attack message according to the function of the network storage base; if a type of suspicious message is legal or address information in the white list, counting the occurrence frequency of the session information in the flow information, obtaining the statistical distribution of the occurrence frequency; comparing the statistical distribution of the frequency and the reasonable threshold interval, judging whether the corresponding flow information is two-type suspicious message; and determining whether two types of suspicious messages are two types of attack messages according to the policy control function. Through the invention, it solves the problem of lack of interface security between the 5G control surface and the user plane for detecting in the related technology.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MADHURI R HERZOG whose telephone number is (571)270-3359. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30AM-4:30PM.
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, Taghi Arani can be reached at (571)272-3787. 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.
MADHURI R. HERZOG
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2438
/MADHURI R HERZOG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2438
Prosecution Insights