Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/576,003

METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR OPERATING TERMINAL AND NETWORK IN WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jan 02, 2024
Examiner
PHAM, TIMOTHY X
Art Unit
3648
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
LG Electronics Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
86%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 86% — above average
86%
Career Allow Rate
814 granted / 946 resolved
+34.0% vs TC avg
Strong +17% interview lift
Without
With
+17.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
24 currently pending
Career history
970
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
8.6%
-31.4% vs TC avg
§103
52.3%
+12.3% vs TC avg
§102
17.6%
-22.4% vs TC avg
§112
10.3%
-29.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 946 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 01/02/2024 and 09/02/2025 have been considered by the examiner. 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. 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. Claim(s)1, 2, 12, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Majmundar et al. (US 2021/0105078) in view of Tsuda (US 2014/0155118). Regarding claims 1, 12, and 13, Majmundar discloses a method and a network for providing paging to a terminal supporting Multi-SIM in a wireless communication system (Fig. 2 SIM 201 and SIM 205), the method comprising: providing a service to the terminal based on a first SIM (paragraph [0048]; e.g., when a first SIM, in this example, SIM 201, is in an RRC connected state in an active data session); detecting occurrence of a voice service based on a second SIM of the terminal (paragraph [0048]; e.g., a voice call arrives on a second SIM 205); delivering paging with a paging cause to the terminal (paragraph [0048]; e.g., The data session on the first SIM 201 can be transitioned to an RRC inactive state (rather than an idle state) when a voice call arrives on the second SIM 205) and (paragraph [0049];e .g., enable a multi-SIM device such as UE 200, in which SIMs share a radio, to respond to a page received on an idle-state SIM while another SIM is actively using the radio, e.g., in an active data session or on an active voice call. Furthermore, a SIM need not fully suspend a data session while there is an active voice call on another SIM); and providing the voice service based on the second SIM (paragraphs [0047]-[0048]; e.g., This allows the UE 200 to continue to transact small amounts of data on the first SIM 201 even while the voice call is ongoing on the second SIM 205. This solution also enables a quicker transition of the first SIM 201 from the RRC inactive state to the RRC connected state when eventually the voice call on the second SIM 205 ends and the data session on first SIM 201 can be resumed). Majmundar discloses the UE switches back and forth of RRC operations modes between SIMs (paragraphs [0071], [0089]). Majmundar fails to specifically disclose the voice service is provided after switching the terminal from the first SIM to the second SIM. However, Tsuda discloses the voice service is provided after switching the terminal from the first SIM to the second SIM (paragraphs [0011], [0048], [0060];e .g., when the second SIM information is selected in the SIM switching unit 140, the communication unit 110 is connected to the second primary communication service provided by the communication control device 200b). Therefore, taking the teachings of Majmundar in combination of Tsuda as a whole, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention by applicant to provide the voice service after switching the terminal from the first SIM to the second SIM for advantages of opportunity to use the secondary communication service and utilize limited resources more efficiently, without giving excessive interference to the primary receiving station (Tsuda: paragraph [0113]). Regarding claim 2, Majmundar in combination with Tsuda discloses the method of claim 1, wherein an access and mobility management function (AMF) receives voice service indication information indicating the voice service occurring based on the second SIM of the terminal and a non-access stratum (NAS) message transmission request from a session management function (SMF) and delivers the paging with a paging cause indicating the voice service based on the voice service indication information to the terminal through a radio access network (RAN) (Majmundar: paragraphs [0063], [0065], [0072]). Claims 3-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Majmundar in combination with Tsuda, in view of Nuggehalli et al. (US 2023/0362862). Regarding claim 3, Majmundar in combination with Tsuda discloses the method of claim 2, fails to specifically disclose wherein a session initiation protocol (SIP) message for the voice service occurring based on the second SIM is transmitted from a serving-call session control function (S-CSCF) to a proxy call state control function (P-CSCF), and wherein, in case that transmission of the SIP message is failed, a P-CSCF restoration procedure is performed based on detection of P-CSCF failure. However, Nuggehalli discloses a session initiation protocol (SIP) message for the voice service occurring based on the second SIM is transmitted from a serving-call session control function (S-CSCF) to a proxy call state control function (P-CSCF) (paragraph [0042], [0053]; e.g., the UE 102 (e.g., IMS controller 206) can transmit IMS signaling messages (e.g., SIP messages) with the IMS 152 (e.g., P-CSCF 118)), and wherein, in case that transmission of the SIP message is failed, a P-CSCF restoration procedure is performed based on detection of P-CSCF failure (paragraphs [0024], [0053]). Therefore, taking the teachings of Majmundar in combination of Tsuda and Nuggehalli as a whole, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention by applicant to have the session initiation protocol (SIP) message for the voice service occurring based on the second SIM is transmitted from a serving-call session control function (S-CSCF) to a proxy call state control function (P-CSCF), and wherein, in case that transmission of the SIP message is failed, a P-CSCF restoration procedure is performed based on detection of P-CSCF failure for advantages of allowing the multi-USIM device to receive traffic from two RANs of two corresponding PLMNs simultaneously (Nuggehalli: paragraph [0004]). Regarding claim 4, Majmundar in combination with Tsuda and Nuggehalli discloses the method of claim 3, wherein, in case that the P-CSCF restoration procedure is performed, the AMF receives the voice service indication information and the NAS message transmission request from the SMF (Nuggehalli: paragraphs [0030], [0038]). Therefore, taking the teachings of Majmundar in combination of Tsuda and Nuggehalli as a whole, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention by applicant to perform the P-CSCF restoration procedure, the AMF receives the voice service indication information and the NAS message transmission request from the SMF for advantages of allowing the multi-USIM device to receive traffic from two RANs of two corresponding PLMNs simultaneously. Regarding claim 5, Majmundar in combination with Tsuda and Nuggehalli discloses the method of claim 4, wherein the voice service indication information is set based on a paging policy indicator (PPI) value (Majmundar: paragraphs [0057], [0087]; see while giving small windows 513 of opportunity to the first subscriber identity 500 to receive paging notifications). Regarding claim 6, Majmundar in combination with Tsuda and Nuggehalli discloses the method of claim 3, wherein, in case that the transmission of the SIP message is successful, the P-CSCF transmits the SIP message to a user plane function (UPF), the UPF indicates presence of downlink data to the SMF, and the SMF indicates the voice service based on the second SIM by delivering information indicating a user plane setup and a PPI value to the AMF (paragraphs [0022], [0042], [0053]). Therefore, taking the teachings of Majmundar in combination of Tsuda and Nuggehalli as a whole, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention by applicant in case that the transmission of the SIP message is successful, the P-CSCF transmits the SIP message to a user plane function (UPF), the UPF indicates presence of downlink data to the SMF, and the SMF indicates the voice service based on the second SIM by delivering information indicating a user plane setup and a PPI value to the AMF for advantages of allowing the multi-USIM device to receive traffic from two RANs of two corresponding PLMNs simultaneously. Regarding claim 7, Majmundar in combination with Tsuda discloses the method of claim 1, wherein, fails to specifically discloses in case that the AMF transmits a NAS message for an Internet protocol multimedia subsystem (IMS) protocol data unit (PDU), the AMF transmits the paging cause with the NAS message. However, Nuggehalli discloses in case that the AMF transmits a NAS message for an Internet protocol multimedia subsystem (IMS) protocol data unit (PDU), the AMF transmits the paging cause with the NAS message (paragraphs [0022], [0036], [0039]). Therefore, taking the teachings of Majmundar in combination of Tsuda and Nuggehalli as a whole, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention by applicant in case that the AMF transmits a NAS message for an Internet protocol multimedia subsystem (IMS) protocol data unit (PDU), the AMF transmits the paging cause with the NAS message for advantages of allowing the multi-USIM device to receive traffic from two RANs of two corresponding PLMNs simultaneously. Regarding claim 8, Majmundar in combination with Tsuda and Nuggehalli discloses the method of claim 7, wherein the AMF transmits the paging cause with the NAS message, irrespective of whether or not the voice service indication information is received from the SMF (Nuggehalli: paragraphs [0038], [0041]; e.g., the UE 102 can optionally provide to the first CN 112 (e.g., SMF 109, PCF 113) QoS requirements of the IP services intended to be established with the ePDG 116). Therefore, taking the teachings of Majmundar in combination of Tsuda and Nuggehalli as a whole, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention by applicant to have the AMF transmits the paging cause with the NAS message, irrespective of whether or not the voice service indication information is received from the SMF for advantages of allowing the multi-USIM device to receive traffic from two RANs of two corresponding PLMNs simultaneously. Regarding claim 9, Majmundar in combination with Tsuda discloses the method of claim 1, disclose wherein, in case that the terminal is in a radio resource control (RRC)-inactive state (Majmundar: paragraphs [0062], [0064]), fails to specifically disclose the AMF delivers a NAS message with paging cause transmission request information to the RAN. However, Nuggehalli discloses the AMF delivers a NAS message with paging cause transmission request information to the RAN (paragraphs [0037], [0041]). Therefore, taking the teachings of Majmundar in combination of Tsuda and Nuggehalli as a whole, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention by applicant to have the AMF delivers a NAS message with paging cause transmission request information to the RAN when the terminal is in a radio resource control (RRC)-inactive state in order to allow the multi-USIM device to receive traffic from two RANs of two corresponding PLMNs simultaneously. Regarding claim 10, Majmundar in combination with Tsuda and Nuggehalli discloses the method of claim 9, wherein the NAS message includes a paging cause, and wherein the AMF delivers the paging cause transmission request information to the RAN through the NAS message (Nuggehalli: paragraphs [0037], [0041], [0047]). Therefore, taking the teachings of Majmundar in combination of Tsuda and Nuggehalli as a whole, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention by applicant to have the NAS message includes a paging cause, and wherein the AMF delivers the paging cause transmission request information to the RAN through the NAS message in order to allow the multi-USIM device to receive traffic from two RANs of two corresponding PLMNs simultaneously. Regarding claim 11, Majmundar in combination with Tsuda and Nuggehalli discloses the method of claim 9, wherein the AMF delivers the paging cause transmission request information to the RAN based on a RAN paging priority information element (Nuggehalli: paragraphs [0037], [0041], [0047]). Therefore, taking the teachings of Majmundar in combination of Tsuda and Nuggehalli as a whole, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention by applicant to have the AMF delivers the paging cause transmission request information to the RAN based on a RAN paging priority information element in order to allow the multi-USIM device to receive traffic from two RANs of two corresponding PLMNs simultaneously. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TIMOTHY X PHAM whose telephone number is (571)270-7115. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 8:30-5:00. 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, Resha Desai can be reached at 571-270-7792. 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. /TIMOTHY X PHAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3648
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 02, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 27, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604222
COMMUNICATION ABNORMALITY DETERMINATION DEVICE, METHOD, STORAGE MEDIUM, AND VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12587969
APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR REDUCING POWER CONSUMPTION IN WIRELESS COMMUNICATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12585006
ENHANCED MULTIPATH COMPONENT REPORTING IN NEW RADIO
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12578451
PASSIVE RADAR SYSTEM FOR DETECTION OF LOW-PROFILE LOW ALTITUDE TARGETS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12574980
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PAIRING DEVICES IN A GYM ENVIRONMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
86%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+17.2%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 946 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month