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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 06/04/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 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.
Examiner’s Note: The Examiner has pointed out particular references contained in the prior art of record within the body of this action for the convenience of the Applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply. "The use of patents as references is not limited to what the patentees describe as their own inventions or to the problems with which they are concerned. They are part of the literature of the art, relevant for all they contain." In re Heck, 699 F.2d 1331, 1332-33,216 USPQ 1038, 1039 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (quoting In re Lemelson, 397 F.2d 1006, 1009, 158 USPQ 275,277 (CCPA 1968)). A reference may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill the art, including nonpreferred embodiments (see MPEP 2123). Therefore, Applicant, in preparing the response, must fully consider the entire disclosure of the cited references as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, including the context of the cited passages as taught by the prior art disclosed by the Examiner.
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 9-10, 11-12 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MIGUEL GRIOT ET AL (WG2#152E e-meeting)[sited by applicant] in view of Kim et al (20240196222).
Regarding claim 1, MIGUEL GRIOT ET AL discloses, a method, comprising:
determining, by a processor of an apparatus, whether the apparatus supports accessing a stand-alone non-public network (SNPN) providing access for localized services and a user enables to access localized services (page 6, fig. 6.10.2-1, page 2, the passage reading "SNPN selection for localized services is performed by a UE that supports access to localized services in SNPNs and that has been configured to access
localized services in SNPNs. We will call this UE an "SNPN-localized services enabled UE", and page 5 section 6.10.3.5 disclosing that the access to localized services is enabled by a user);
responsive to determining that the apparatus supports accessing an SNPN providing access for localized services and the user enables to access localized services (page 6, fig. 6.10.2-1, page 2, the passage reading "SNPN selection for localized services is performed by a UE that supports access to localized services in SNPNs and that has been configured to access localized services in SNPNs. We will call this UE an "SNPN-localized services enabled UE", and page 5 section 6.10.3.5 disclosing that the access to localized services is enabled by a user), performing, by the processor, operations comprising:
selecting an available SNPN with validity information in an event that both the apparatus and the selected SNPN support access using credentials from a credentials holder (CH) and the validity information is met (page 6, fig. 6.10.3.6-1 step 0b, and 1 making a direct reference to section 6.10.3.1, of the same document, disclosing, page 4 steps 2-3, that the UE selects an available and allowable, based on validity information, SNPN, see also fig. 6.10.3.6-1 step Oa disclosing the use of credentials from a credential holder); and
attempting a registration on the selected SNPN ( page 6, fig. 6.10.3.6-1 step 1 "Registration request").
MIGUEL GRIOT ET AL does not specifically disclose, selecting an available last registered SNPN without validity information or an available equivalent SNPN in an event that the selecting of an available SNPN with validity information fails.
In the same field of endeavor, Kim et al discloses, selecting an available last registered SNPN without validity information or an available equivalent SNPN in an event that the selecting of an available SNPN with validity information fails (¶ 0013, 0231, 0253, 0255). Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claim invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the device of MIGUEL GRIOT ET AL by specifically adding feature in order to enhance system performance to another SNPN is selected to efficiently perform SNPN selection as taught by Kim et al.
Regarding claims 2, 12, MIGUEL GRIOT ET AL discloses, wherein the selecting of an available SNPN with validity information is performed in the following order: selecting a last registered SNPN with validity information that is met or an available equivalent SNPN of the last registered SNPN; selecting an SNPN with validity information that is met from available SNPNs with validity information contained in a list of preferred SNPNs based on a priority order of the list of preferred SNPNs; or selecting an SNPN with validity information that is met from available SNPNs, each of which broadcasts a group identifier for network selection (GIN) with validity information contained in a list of preferred GINs, based on a priority order of the list of preferred GINs (page 2, section 6.10.2.1, the passage reading "SNPN-localized services-enabled UE" can be configured with a specific prioritized list of SNPNs for localized services" where the priority of the priority list implies to follow said priority for network selection).
Regarding claims 9, 19 MIGUEL GRIOT ET AL discloses, wherein the validity information is met when the validity information comprises at least one of time validity information and location validity information, the time validity information comprises at least one time period matching the apparatus' current time, and the location validity information comprises at least one geographical location or tracking area matching the apparatus' current location (page 3, the passage relating to the validity information, and disclosing that it contains at least "Validity time period and additional location information (TAI list or geographical information).
Regarding claims 10, 20, MIGUEL GRIOT ET AL discloses, wherein the selecting of an available SNPN with validity information is performed for automatic network selection (page 4, section 6.10.3.1 "Automatic discovery and selection of SNPNs for access to localized services").
Regarding claim 11, MIGUEL GRIOT ET AL discloses, an apparatus, comprising:
a transceiver which (UE, fig. 6.10.2-1, page 2), during operation, wirelessly communicates with one or more stand-alone non-public networks ((UE, fig. 6.10.2-1, page 2 step 1); and a processor communicatively coupled to the transceiver such that, during operation, the processor performs operations comprising:
determining whether the apparatus supports accessing an SNPN providing access for localized services and a user enables to access localized services (page 6, fig. 6.10.2-1, page 2, the passage reading "SNPN selection for localized services is performed by a UE that supports access to localized services in SNPNs and that has been configured to access localized services in SNPNs. We will call this UE an "SNPN-localized services enabled UE", and page 5 section 6.10.3.5 disclosing that the access to localized services is enabled by a user);
responsive to determining that the apparatus supports accessing an SNPN providing access for localized services and the user enables to access localized services (page 6, fig. 6.10.2-1, page 2, the passage reading "SNPN selection for localized services is performed by a UE that supports access to localized services in SNPNs and that has been configured to access localized services in SNPNs. We will call this UE an "SNPN-localized services enabled UE", and page 5 section 6.10.3.5 disclosing that the access to localized services is enabled by a user), performing the following:
selecting an available SNPN with validity information in an event that both the apparatus and the selected SNPN support access using credentials from a credentials holder (CH) and the validity information is met (page 6, fig. 6.10.3.6-1 step 0b, and 1 making a direct reference to section 6.10.3.1, of the same document, disclosing, page 4 steps 2-3, that the UE selects an available and allowable, based on validity information, SNPN, see also fig. 6.10.3.6-1 step Oa disclosing the use of credentials from a credential holder); and
attempting, via the transceiver, a registration on the selected SNPN ( page 6, fig. 6.10.3.6-1 step 1 "Registration request").
MIGUEL GRIOT ET AL does not specifically disclose, selecting an available last registered SNPN without validity information or an available equivalent SNPN in an event that the selecting of an available SNPN with validity information fails.
In the same field of endeavor, Kim et al discloses, selecting an available last registered SNPN without validity information or an available equivalent SNPN in an event that the selecting of an available SNPN with validity information fails (¶ 0013, 0231, 0253, 0255). Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claim invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the device of MIGUEL GRIOT ET AL by specifically adding feature in order to enhance system performance to another SNPN is selected to efficiently perform SNPN selection as taught by Kim et al.
Claim(s) 4-8, 14-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MIGUEL GRIOT ET AL (WG2#152E e-meeting)[sited by applicant] in view of Kim et al and 3GPP TS (23.122)( (Release 17)[ sited by applicant].
Regarding claims 4 and 14, MIGUEL GRIOT ET AL and Kim et al disclose in claim 1, further, MIGUEL GRIOT ET AL does not specifically disclose an available SNPN which broadcasts an indication that the SNPN allows registration attempts from user equipments (UEs) that are not configured to select the SNPN.
In the same field of endeavor, 3GPP TS discloses, wherein the operations further comprise: selecting an available last registered SNPN without validity information or an available equivalent SNPN in an event that the selecting of an available SNPN with validity information fails (page 61, first paragraph the passage reading "If there is no registered SNPN, or registration is not possible due to the SNPN being unavailable or registration failure, unless the MS needs to select an SNPN for onboarding services in SNPN, the MS follows the procedure in clause 4.9.3.1.1 or clause 4.9.3.1.2 depending on its SNPN selection mode", together with page 61 section 4.9.3.1.1). Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claim invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the device of MIGUEL GRIOT ET AL and Kim et al by specifically adding feature in order to enhance system performance to improving signaling overhead of identified by an SNPN identity contained in one of the users controlled prioritized lists of preferred SNPNs as taught by 3GPP TS.
Regarding claims 5, 8, 15, and 18, MIGUEL GRIOT ET AL and Kim et al disclose in claim 1, further, MIGUEL GRIOT ET AL does not specifically disclose an available SNPN which broadcasts an indication that the SNPN allows registration attempts from user equipments (UEs) that are not configured to select the SNPN.
In the same field of endeavor, 3GPP TS discloses, an available SNPN which broadcasts an indication that the SNPN allows registration attempts from user equipments (UEs) that are not configured to select the SNPN (page 62, section 4.9.3.1.2, "Manual SNPN selection mode procedure", and "each SNPN which is identified by an SNPN identity contained in one of the users controlled prioritized lists of preferred SNPNs configured in the MЕ"). Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claim invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the device of MIGUEL GRIOT ET AL and Kim et al by specifically adding feature in order to enhance system performance to improving signaling overhead of identified by an SNPN identity contained in one of the users controlled prioritized lists of preferred SNPNs as taught by 3GPP TS.
Regarding claims 6-7, 16-17, MIGUEL GRIOT ET AL and Kim et al disclose in claim 1, further, MIGUEL GRIOT ET AL does not specifically disclose responsive to determining that the apparatus does not support accessing an SNPN providing access for localized services or the user does not enable to access localized services, selecting, by the processor, an available SNPN without validity information and attempting a registration on the selected SNPN.
In the same field of endeavor, 3GPP TS discloses, responsive to determining that the apparatus does not support accessing an SNPN providing access for localized services or the user does not enable to access localized services, selecting, by the processor, an available SNPN without validity information and attempting a registration on the selected SNPN (page 61, section 4.9.3.1.1 "The MS selects an SNPN, if
available and allowable, in the following order: a) the SNPN with which the UE was last registered;"). Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claim invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the device of MIGUEL GRIOT ET AL and Kim et al by specifically adding feature in order to enhance system performance to improving signaling overhead of identified by an SNPN identity contained in one of the users controlled prioritized lists of preferred SNPNs as taught by 3GPP TS.
Claim(s) 1-2, 9-10, 11-12 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MIGUEL GRIOT ET AL (WG2#152E e-meeting)[sited by applicant] in view of Talebi et al (20230199632).
Regarding claim 1, MIGUEL GRIOT ET AL discloses, a method, comprising:
determining, by a processor of an apparatus, whether the apparatus supports accessing a stand-alone non-public network (SNPN) providing access for localized services and a user enables to access localized services (page 6, fig. 6.10.2-1, page 2, the passage reading "SNPN selection for localized services is performed by a UE that supports access to localized services in SNPNs and that has been configured to access
localized services in SNPNs. We will call this UE an "SNPN-localized services enabled UE", and page 5 section 6.10.3.5 disclosing that the access to localized services is enabled by a user);
responsive to determining that the apparatus supports accessing an SNPN providing access for localized services and the user enables to access localized services (page 6, fig. 6.10.2-1, page 2, the passage reading "SNPN selection for localized services is performed by a UE that supports access to localized services in SNPNs and that has been configured to access localized services in SNPNs. We will call this UE an "SNPN-localized services enabled UE", and page 5 section 6.10.3.5 disclosing that the access to localized services is enabled by a user), performing, by the processor, operations comprising:
selecting an available SNPN with validity information in an event that both the apparatus and the selected SNPN support access using credentials from a credentials holder (CH) and the validity information is met (page 6, fig. 6.10.3.6-1 step 0b, and 1 making a direct reference to section 6.10.3.1, of the same document, disclosing, page 4 steps 2-3, that the UE selects an available and allowable, based on validity information, SNPN, see also fig. 6.10.3.6-1 step Oa disclosing the use of credentials from a credential holder); and
attempting a registration on the selected SNPN ( page 6, fig. 6.10.3.6-1 step 1 "Registration request").
MIGUEL GRIOT ET AL does not specifically disclose, selecting an available last registered SNPN without validity information or an available equivalent SNPN in an event that the selecting of an available SNPN with validity information fails.
In the same field of endeavor, Talebi et al discloses, selecting an available last registered SNPN without validity information or an available equivalent SNPN in an event that the selecting of an available SNPN with validity information fails (¶ 0215, select a network that is available and supports onboarding functionalities. If the UE fails to complete the remote provisioning through the selected O-SNPN (e.g., the UE fails the authentication by the DCS), the UE may select another O-SNPN to try the process again). Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claim invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the device of MIGUEL GRIOT ET AL by specifically adding feature in order to enhance system performance to providing enhanced spectral efficiency, enhanced mobility, and/or enhanced user experience in a reliable manner as taught by Talebi et al.
Regarding claims 2, 12, MIGUEL GRIOT ET AL discloses, wherein the selecting of an available SNPN with validity information is performed in the following order: selecting a last registered SNPN with validity information that is met or an available equivalent SNPN of the last registered SNPN; selecting an SNPN with validity information that is met from available SNPNs with validity information contained in a list of preferred SNPNs based on a priority order of the list of preferred SNPNs; or selecting an SNPN with validity information that is met from available SNPNs, each of which broadcasts a group identifier for network selection (GIN) with validity information contained in a list of preferred GINs, based on a priority order of the list of preferred GINs (page 2, section 6.10.2.1, the passage reading "SNPN-localized services-enabled UE" can be configured with a specific prioritized list of SNPNs for localized services" where the priority of the priority list implies to follow said priority for network selection).
Regarding claims 9, 19 MIGUEL GRIOT ET AL discloses, wherein the validity information is met when the validity information comprises at least one of time validity information and location validity information, the time validity information comprises at least one time period matching the apparatus' current time, and the location validity information comprises at least one geographical location or tracking area matching the apparatus' current location (page 3, the passage relating to the validity information, and disclosing that it contains at least "Validity time period and additional location information (TAI list or geographical information).
Regarding claims 10, 20, MIGUEL GRIOT ET AL discloses, wherein the selecting of an available SNPN with validity information is performed for automatic network selection (page 4, section 6.10.3.1 "Automatic discovery and selection of SNPNs for access to localized services").
Regarding claim 11, MIGUEL GRIOT ET AL discloses, an apparatus, comprising:
a transceiver which (UE, fig. 6.10.2-1, page 2), during operation, wirelessly communicates with one or more stand-alone non-public networks ((UE, fig. 6.10.2-1, page 2 step 1); and a processor communicatively coupled to the transceiver such that, during operation, the processor performs operations comprising:
determining whether the apparatus supports accessing an SNPN providing access for localized services and a user enables to access localized services (page 6, fig. 6.10.2-1, page 2, the passage reading "SNPN selection for localized services is performed by a UE that supports access to localized services in SNPNs and that has been configured to access localized services in SNPNs. We will call this UE an "SNPN-localized services enabled UE", and page 5 section 6.10.3.5 disclosing that the access to localized services is enabled by a user);
responsive to determining that the apparatus supports accessing an SNPN providing access for localized services and the user enables to access localized services (page 6, fig. 6.10.2-1, page 2, the passage reading "SNPN selection for localized services is performed by a UE that supports access to localized services in SNPNs and that has been configured to access localized services in SNPNs. We will call this UE an "SNPN-localized services enabled UE", and page 5 section 6.10.3.5 disclosing that the access to localized services is enabled by a user), performing the following:
selecting an available SNPN with validity information in an event that both the apparatus and the selected SNPN support access using credentials from a credentials holder (CH) and the validity information is met (page 6, fig. 6.10.3.6-1 step 0b, and 1 making a direct reference to section 6.10.3.1, of the same document, disclosing, page 4 steps 2-3, that the UE selects an available and allowable, based on validity information, SNPN, see also fig. 6.10.3.6-1 step Oa disclosing the use of credentials from a credential holder); and
attempting, via the transceiver, a registration on the selected SNPN ( page 6, fig. 6.10.3.6-1 step 1 "Registration request").
MIGUEL GRIOT ET AL does not specifically disclose, selecting an available last registered SNPN without validity information or an available equivalent SNPN in an event that the selecting of an available SNPN with validity information fails.
In the same field of endeavor, Talebi et al discloses, selecting an available last registered SNPN without validity information or an available equivalent SNPN in an event that the selecting of an available SNPN with validity information fails (¶ 0215, select a network that is available and supports onboarding functionalities. If the UE fails to complete the remote provisioning through the selected O-SNPN (e.g., the UE fails the authentication by the DCS), the UE may select another O-SNPN to try the process again). Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claim invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the device of MIGUEL GRIOT ET AL by specifically adding feature in order to enhance system performance to providing enhanced spectral efficiency, enhanced mobility, and/or enhanced user experience in a reliable manner as taught by Talebi et al.
Claim(s) 4-8, 14-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MIGUEL GRIOT ET AL (WG2#152E e-meeting)[sited by applicant] in view of Talebi et al and 3GPP TS (23.122)( (Release 17)[ sited by applicant].
Regarding claims 4 and 14, MIGUEL GRIOT ET AL and Talebi et al disclose in claim 1, further, MIGUEL GRIOT ET AL does not specifically disclose an available SNPN which broadcasts an indication that the SNPN allows registration attempts from user equipments (UEs) that are not configured to select the SNPN.
In the same field of endeavor, 3GPP TS discloses, wherein the operations further comprise: selecting an available last registered SNPN without validity information or an available equivalent SNPN in an event that the selecting of an available SNPN with validity information fails (page 61, first paragraph the passage reading "If there is no registered SNPN, or registration is not possible due to the SNPN being unavailable or registration failure, unless the MS needs to select an SNPN for onboarding services in SNPN, the MS follows the procedure in clause 4.9.3.1.1 or clause 4.9.3.1.2 depending on its SNPN selection mode", together with page 61 section 4.9.3.1.1). Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claim invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the device of MIGUEL GRIOT ET AL and Talebi et al by specifically adding feature in order to enhance system performance to improving signaling overhead of identified by an SNPN identity contained in one of the users controlled prioritized lists of preferred SNPNs as taught by 3GPP TS.
Regarding claims 5, 8, 15, and 18, MIGUEL GRIOT ET AL and Talebi et al disclose in claim 1, further, MIGUEL GRIOT ET AL does not specifically disclose an available SNPN which broadcasts an indication that the SNPN allows registration attempts from user equipments (UEs) that are not configured to select the SNPN.
In the same field of endeavor, 3GPP TS discloses, an available SNPN which broadcasts an indication that the SNPN allows registration attempts from user equipments (UEs) that are not configured to select the SNPN (page 62, section 4.9.3.1.2, "Manual SNPN selection mode procedure", and "each SNPN which is identified by an SNPN identity contained in one of the users controlled prioritized lists of preferred SNPNs configured in the MЕ"). Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claim invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the device of MIGUEL GRIOT ET AL and Talebi et al by specifically adding feature in order to enhance system performance to improving signaling overhead of identified by an SNPN identity contained in one of the users controlled prioritized lists of preferred SNPNs as taught by 3GPP TS.
Regarding claims 6-7, 16-17, MIGUEL GRIOT ET AL and Talebi et al disclose in claim 1, further, MIGUEL GRIOT ET AL does not specifically disclose responsive to determining that the apparatus does not support accessing an SNPN providing access for localized services or the user does not enable to access localized services, selecting, by the processor, an available SNPN without validity information and attempting a registration on the selected SNPN.
In the same field of endeavor, 3GPP TS discloses, responsive to determining that the apparatus does not support accessing an SNPN providing access for localized services or the user does not enable to access localized services, selecting, by the processor, an available SNPN without validity information and attempting a registration on the selected SNPN (page 61, section 4.9.3.1.1 "The MS selects an SNPN, if
available and allowable, in the following order: a) the SNPN with which the UE was last registered;"). Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claim invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the device of MIGUEL GRIOT ET AL and Talebi et al by specifically adding feature in order to enhance system performance to improving signaling overhead of identified by an SNPN identity contained in one of the users controlled prioritized lists of preferred SNPNs as taught by 3GPP TS.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KHAWAR IQBAL whose telephone number is (571)272-7909. The examiner can normally be reached M-F.
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, Jinsong Hu can be reached at 5712723965. 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.
/KHAWAR IQBAL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2643
Prosecution Insights