DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Claims 1-19 are currently pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 3, 10, and all dependent thereon, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 3: there is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitations “the indicator values” and “the trusted Wi-Fi access points” (line 4, emphasis added). For purposes of examination, the said limitations are interpreted as one or more values and access points, respectively.
Regarding claim 10: there is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation “the PDU session request” (line 5). For purposes of examination, the said limitation is interpreted as “a [[the]] PDU session request.”
Examiner Note
Each of the claims makes reference to the term “Wi-Fi” (e.g. a “Wi-Fi access method,” “a trusted Wi-Fi access point,” “an accessible target Wi-Fi access point,” etc.). The Examiner respectfully notes that the term “Wi-Fi” is trademarked. However, it is understood that the term refers to a generic technical description rather than a defined product. More specifically, the Examiner interprets this term as “wireless local area network compliant” and/or “IEEE 802.11 compliant.” Therefore, the claims are not rejectable under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as indefinite for this reason. See MPEP 2173.05 (u).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 and 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 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 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.
7. 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.
8. 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.
9. 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.
10. Claims 1, 3, 13, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by U.S. Publication No. 2017/0223698 A1 (hereinafter “Niu”) or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over U.S. Publication No. 2019/0306068 A1 (hereinafter “Kiss”).
Regarding claim 1: Niu teaches a Wireless Fidelity (Wi-Fi) access method, applied to a terminal device, the Wi- Fi access method comprising:
in a state of accessing a mobile network, acquiring, in response to receiving a Wi-Fi measurement control instruction delivered by a network side through the mobile network, description information of a trusted Wi-Fi access point carried in the Wi-Fi measurement control instruction (see, e.g., figures 3A, 3B, [0040], [0040]-[0051]; WiFi AP information is received from the eNB);
performing network quality detection on a channel corresponding to the trusted Wi-Fi access point according to the description information of the trusted Wi-Fi access point to obtain an indicator value for evaluating network quality of the channel (see, e.g., figures 3A, 3B, [0040], [0040]-[0051]; AP channel measurement is performed and the corresponding values are obtained); and
determining an accessible target Wi-Fi access point according to the trusted Wi-Fi access point and the indicator value corresponding to the trusted Wi-Fi access point, and accessing the target Wi-Fi access point (see, e.g., figures 3A, 3B, [0040], [0040]-[0051]; an AP is selected for use by the UE).
Niu does not explicitly state wherein the indicated AP(s) is/are “trusted.” To the extent this feature is not inherent to the system of Niu, this feature is nevertheless taught in Kiss (see, e.g., [0083]; the cellular network assists with Wi-Fi AP selection by indicating trusted APs). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to incorporate features from the system of Kiss, such as the selection and/or signaling functionality, within the system of Niu, in order to enable secure communications.
The rationale set forth above regarding the method of claim 1 is applicable to the terminal and medium of claims 13 and 14, respectively.
Regarding claim 3: Niu alternatively modified by Kiss further teaches wherein determining an accessible target Wi-Fi access point according to the trusted Wi-Fi access point and the indicator value corresponding to the trusted Wi-Fi access point comprises: sending the indicator values corresponding to the trusted Wi-Fi access points to the network side through the mobile network, such that the network side determines one of the trusted Wi-Fi access points as the accessible target Wi-Fi access point according to the indicator values corresponding to the trusted Wi-Fi access points; receiving a target Wi-Fi access instruction delivered by the network side through the mobile network; and parsing the target Wi-Fi access instruction to obtain the accessible target Wi-Fi access point, and accessing the target Wi-Fi access point (see, e.g., figures 3A, 3B, [0049]; note UE reporting, as well as implementing information from the eNB response). The motivation for modification set forth above regarding claim 1 is applicable to claim 3.
11. Claims 2, 4-7, and 15-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Niu, alternatively in view of Kiss, and in further view of U.S. Publication No. 2019/0364497 A1 (hereinafter “Hu”).
Regarding claim 2: Niu alternatively modified by Kiss further teaches AP list generation and selection, but fails to explicitly state the selecting/determining basis on “whether a user has performed a selection operation.” Therefore, Niu alternatively modified by Kiss fails to explicitly state “wherein determining an accessible target Wi-Fi access point according to the trusted Wi-Fi access point and the indicator value corresponding to the trusted Wi-Fi access point comprises: generating an accessible Wi-Fi access point candidate list according to the trusted Wi-Fi access point and the indicator value corresponding to the trusted Wi-Fi access point; monitoring whether a user has performed a selection operation on any accessible Wi-Fi access point in the accessible Wi-Fi access point candidate list; and determining an accessible Wi-Fi access point selected by the user as the accessible target Wi-Fi access point and accessing the target Wi-Fi access point, in response to detecting the selection operation performed by the user on the accessible Wi-Fi access point in the accessible Wi-Fi access point candidate list.” However, Hu also teaches access point candidate list generation, as well as a basis on previously connected access points (see, e.g., [0007], [0009]; note also [0025]-[0029]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to incorporate features from the system of Hu, such as the signaling and/or connection functionality, within the system of Niu alternatively modified by Kiss, in order to improve network discovery.
Regarding claim 4: Niu alternatively modified by Kiss fails to explicitly state the selecting/determining basis on “whether a user has performed a selection operation.” Therefore, Niu alternatively modified by Kiss fails to explicitly state “wherein after parsing the target Wi-Fi access instruction to obtain the accessible target Wi-Fi access point, and before accessing the target Wi-Fi access point, the method further comprises: monitoring whether a user has performed a selection operation on the target Wi-Fi access point; and executing the operation of accessing the target Wi-Fi access point, in response to detecting the selection operation performed by the user on the target Wi-Fi access point.” However, Hu teaches a basis on previously connected access points (see, e.g., [0007], [0009]; note also [0025]-[0029]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to incorporate features from the system of Hu, such as the signaling and/or connection functionality, within the system of Niu alternatively modified by Kiss, in order to improve network discovery.
Regarding claim 5: Niu alternatively modified by Kiss further teaches AP and/or network connection/disconnection, but fails to explicitly state the selecting/determining basis on prior connections. Therefore, Niu alternatively modified by Kiss fails to explicitly state wherein “before accessing the target Wi-Fi access point, the method further comprises: detecting whether the terminal device has currently accessed a Wi-Fi network; executing the operation of accessing the target Wi-Fi access point, in response to a detection that the terminal device has not currently accessed a Wi-Fi network; and identifying whether the currently accessed Wi-Fi network is a Wi-Fi network corresponding to the target Wi-Fi access point, in response to a detection that the terminal device has currently accessed a Wi-Fi network; and disconnecting from the currently accessed Wi-Fi network and executing the operation of accessing the target Wi-Fi access point, in response to a detection that the currently accessed Wi- Fi network is not the Wi-Fi network corresponding to the target Wi-Fi access point.” However, Hu teaches a basis on previously connected access points (see, e.g., [0007], [0009]; note also [0025]-[0029]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to incorporate features from the system of Hu, such as the signaling and/or connection functionality, within the system of Niu alternatively modified by Kiss, in order to improve network discovery.
Regarding claim 6: Niu alternatively modified by Kiss and Hu further teaches wherein before disconnecting from the currently accessed Wi-Fi network and executing the operation of accessing the target Wi-Fi access point, the method further comprises: configuring the target Wi-Fi access point as a primary Wi-Fi access point, and configuring a Wi-Fi access point corresponding to the currently accessed Wi-Fi network as a secondary Wi-Fi access point, wherein an access priority of the primary Wi-Fi access point is higher than an access priority of the secondary Wi-Fi access point (see, e.g., Niu [0031], [0051]). The motivations for modification set forth above regarding claims 1 and 5 are applicable to claim 6.
Regarding claim 7: Niu alternatively modified by Kiss fails to explicitly state wherein after accessing the target Wi-Fi access point, the method further comprises: displaying a preset trusted Wi-Fi identifier on a user interface. However, Hu teaches this feature (see, e.g., [0007], [0009]; note also [0025]-[0029]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to incorporate features from the system of Hu, such as the signaling, displaying, and/or connection functionality, within the system of Niu alternatively modified by Kiss, in order to improve network discovery.
Regarding claim 15: Niu alternatively modified by Kiss and Hu further teaches wherein after accessing the target Wi-Fi access point, the method further comprises: displaying a preset trusted Wi-Fi identifier on a user interface (see, e.g., [0009]). The motivation for modification set forth above regarding claim 2 is applicable to claim 15.
Regarding claim 16: Niu alternatively modified by Kiss fails to explicitly state wherein after accessing the target Wi-Fi access point, the method further comprises: displaying a preset trusted Wi-Fi identifier on a user interface. However, Hu teaches this feature (see, e.g., [0007], [0009]; note also [0025]-[0029]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to incorporate features from the system of Hu, such as the signaling, displaying, and/or connection functionality, within the system of Niu alternatively modified by Kiss, in order to improve network discovery.
Regarding claim 17: Niu alternatively modified by Kiss and Hu further teaches wherein after accessing the target Wi-Fi access point, the method further comprises: displaying a preset trusted Wi-Fi identifier on a user interface (see, e.g., [0009]). The motivation for modification set forth above regarding claim 4 is applicable to claim 17.
Regarding claim 18: Niu alternatively modified by Kiss and Hu further teaches wherein after accessing the target Wi-Fi access point, the method further comprises: displaying a preset trusted Wi-Fi identifier on a user interface (see, e.g., [0009]). The motivation for modification set forth above regarding claim 5 is applicable to claim 18.
Regarding claim 19: Niu alternatively modified by Kiss and Hu further teaches wherein after accessing the target Wi-Fi access point, the method further comprises: displaying a preset trusted Wi-Fi identifier on a user interface (see, e.g., [0009]). The motivation for modification set forth above regarding claim 5 is applicable to claim 19.
12. Claims 8-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Niu, alternatively in view of Kiss, in further view of Hu, and in further view of U.S. Publication No. 2024/0259857 A1 (hereinafter “Zhu”).
Regarding claim 8: Niu alternatively modified by Kiss and Hu further teaches detection of ATSSS and Wi-Fi function support, as well as multi-access PDU session implementation (see, e.g., Kiss [0113], [0114]), but does not explicitly state reporting this support. Therefore, Niu alternatively modified by Kiss and Hu fails to explicitly state “wherein before acquiring, in response to receiving a Wi-Fi measurement control instruction delivered by a network side through the mobile network, description information of a trusted Wi-Fi access point carried in the Wi-Fi measurement control instruction, the method further comprises: in the state of accessing the mobile network, detecting whether the terminal device supports an Access Traffic Steering, Switching, and Splitting (ATSSS) function and a Wi-Fi function, in response to a requirement for initiating a Multi-Access (MA) Protocol Data Unit (PDU) session request to the network side; and reporting, in response to the terminal device supporting the ATSSS function and the Wi-Fi function, the support of the ATSSS function and the Wi-Fi function by the terminal device to the network side through the mobile network and triggering the network side to deliver the Wi-Fi measurement control instruction through the mobile network.” However, Zhu teaches ATSSS function indication (see, e.g., [0064]-[0068], [0070]-[0074]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to incorporate features from the system of Zhu, such as the ATSSS policy and/or indication functionality, within the system of Niu alternatively modified by Kiss and Hu, in order to improve throughput or QoS.
Regarding claim 9: Niu alternatively modified by Kiss, Hu, and Zhu further teaches wherein detecting whether the terminal device supports the ATSSS function comprises: acquiring an MA PDU session request initiated to the network side; parsing the MA PDU session request to extract an atsss_st field in the MA PDU session request; and determining that the terminal device supports the ATSSS function, in response to a field value which corresponds to the atsss_st field matching a preset threshold (see, e.g., Zhu [0064]-[0068], [0070]-[0074], [0101]-[0106]; [0205]-[0309]). The motivations for modification set forth above regarding claims 1 and 7 are applicable to claim 9.
Regarding claim 10: Niu alternatively modified by Kiss and Hu further teaches detection of ATSSS and Wi-Fi function support, as well as multi-access PDU session implementation (see, e.g., Kiss [0113], [0114]), but does not explicitly state wherein after determining an accessible target Wi-Fi access point according to the trusted Wi-Fi access point and the indicator value corresponding to the trusted Wi-Fi access point, and accessing the target Wi-Fi access point, the method further comprises: sending the PDU session request to the network side through the Wi-Fi network corresponding to the target Wi-Fi access point. However, Zhu teaches this feature (see, e.g., [0064]-[0068], [0070]-[0074]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to incorporate features from the system of Zhu, such as the ATSSS policy and/or indication functionality, within the system of Niu alternatively modified by Kiss and Hu, in order to improve throughput or QoS.
Regarding claim 11: Niu alternatively modified by Kiss and Hu further teaches detection of ATSSS and Wi-Fi function support, as well as multi-access PDU session implementation (see, e.g., Kiss [0113], [0114]), but does not explicitly state wherein before acquiring, in response to receiving a Wi-Fi measurement control instruction delivered by a network side through the mobile network, description information of a trusted Wi-Fi access point carried in the Wi-Fi measurement control instruction, the method further comprises: determining that the network side supports the ATSSS function. To the extent this feature is not inherent to the system of Niu alternatively modified by Kiss and Hu, it is nevertheless taught in Zhu (see, e.g., [0064]-[0068], [0070]-[0074]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to incorporate features from the system of Zhu, such as the ATSSS policy and/or indication functionality, within the system of Niu alternatively modified by Kiss and Hu, in order to improve throughput or QoS.
Regarding claim 12: Niu alternatively modified by Kiss, Hu, and Zhu further teaches wherein determining that the network side supports the ATSSS function comprises: acquiring a registration accept message delivered by the network side through the mobile network; parsing the registration accept message to extract an ats_ind field in the registration accept message; and determining that the network side supports the ATSSS function, in response to a field value which corresponds to the ats_ind field matching a preset threshold (see, e.g., Zhu [0064]-[0068], [0070]-[0074], [0101]-[0106]; [0205]-[0309]). The motivations for modification set forth above regarding claims 1 and 7 are applicable to claim 12.
Relevant Art
13. The following prior art not relied upon in this Office action is considered pertinent to Applicant's disclosure: See form PTO-892.
Conclusion
14. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICHOLAS SLOMS whose telephone number is (571)270-7520. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9AM-5PM EST.
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, Ayaz Sheikh can be reached at (571)272-3795. 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.
/NICHOLAS SLOMS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2476