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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Liu, US Pub. 2020/0177333 A1.
Regarding claims 1 and 4-5, Liu discloses method and system for generating a payload container information element. The system comprises at least one User Equipment (UE) and a gNB (fig. 1, 1a and 1b), wherein the gNB comprises: at least one processor (figures 1, 1a-b and 2: the gNB comprises a processor 222); and at least one memory storing instructions (fig. 2, the memory 226 stores executable instructions) which, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the apparatus at least to perform: receiving, by a first apparatus, a first message from a second apparatus, the first message including routing information associated with respective network functions of a plurality of network functions (fig. 1b, p. [0187]: from the Access and Mobility Management Function (AMF) of the gNB, the multiple payloads are generated by different network functions, such as the data network with respect to the user data, the SMF with respect to the SM message, the SMSF with respect to the SMS message and the like. The multiple payloads are bundled into a single NAS message and transmitted to the UE) and a plurality of containers associated with the respective network functions of the plurality of network functions, wherein each container of the plurality of containers includes a respective encrypted non access stratum (NAS) payload (fig. 1b, p. [0260] mobility management function generates a NAS message, which comprises a plurality of payloads (1 to n) associated with respective network functions: SM msg, user data, SMS…); and transmitting, by the first apparatus, each container to the associated network function based upon the routing information for that network function (fig. 1b and 3, UE transmits NAS message comprises a plurality of payloads (1 to n) based on the network functions) .
Regarding claim 2, Liu discloses wherein the second apparatus is a radio access network (RAN) (fig. 1, 1a-b: gNB).
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.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Cui et al (“Cui”), US Pub. 2019/0274086.
Regarding claim 3, Liu does not disclose wherein the routing information includes a serving temporary mobile subscriber identifier (S-TMSI) for an associated network function. Cui discloses a RAN access point comprising this feature at p. [0005]: The mobility management entity (MME) reads the NAS message, which include the UE S-TMSI of the UE. Then MME can map the S-TMSI to the UE true International Mobile Subscriber Identity (IMSI). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adapt the S-TMSI disclosed by Cui into Liu’s for mapping to protect user privacy of the NAS message.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See attached PTO-892 .
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THAI D HOANG whose telephone number is (571)272-3184. The examiner can normally be reached 10:30 am-18:30pm.
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, Asad Nawaz can be reached at (571) 272-3988. 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.
THAI HOANG D.
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2463
/THAI DINH HOANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2463
Prosecution Insights