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 .
DETAILED ACTION
1. This communication is a first office action, non-final rejection on the merits. Claims 1-18, as originally filed, are currently pending and have been considered below.
Priority
2. The application is filed on 03/22/2024 but claims the benefit of foreign application number IN 202321024801 filed on 2023-03-31 and IN 202321056743 filed on 2023-08-24.
Information Disclosure Statement
3. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/26/24 and 9/30/24 has been considered. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Form PTO-1449 is signed and attached hereto.
Double Patenting
4. Claims 1-18 of this application is patentably indistinct from claims 1-17 of Application No. 19/507648 and claims 1-10 of Application No. 19/473940. Pursuant to 37 CFR 1.78(e) or pre-AIA 37 CFR 1.78(b), when two or more applications filed by the same applicant contain patentably indistinct claims, elimination of such claims from all but one application may be required in the absence of good and sufficient reason for their retention during pendency in more than one application. Applicant is required to either cancel the patentably indistinct claims from all but one application or maintain a clear line of demarcation between the applications. See MPEP § 822.
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the claims at issue are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO internet Web site contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit http://www.uspto.gov/forms/. The filing date of the application will determine what form should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. 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 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 of this title, 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.
6. The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) 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.
7. 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.
8. Claims 1-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over EDGE (US 20230362704 A1) (hereinafter EDGE) in view of Niemi (US 20190357034
A1) (hereinafter Niemi).
Regarding claim 1, EDGE discloses a method for managing an unavailability period performed by a user equipment (UE) (Fig. 1, para 50, system configured to manage moving satellite beams (for LEO SVs) and associated mobility of UEs 115, para 36, UE to report generalized unavailability periods, allow the UE and network to prepare for the upcoming unavailability), the method comprising:
being registered in a network (para 06, sending at least one message to the UE, wherein the at least one message indicates a periodic registration timer or periodic) and choosing deregistered state when an unavailability period is activated by the UE using a deregistration procedure (para 299, Sessions To Be activated when UE is outside the area of availability, para 102, UE would use data and calculate whether there is satellite visibility (for L and T) and cell, para 404, UE to notify that the UE is deregistered from old AMF, para 511, UE, authenticated and authorized successfully by a PLMN and AMF execute the Network-initiated deregistration procedure).
EDGE specifically fails to disclose choosing a substate of a deregistered state when an unavailability period.
In analogous art, Niemi discloses choosing a substate of a deregistered state when an unavailability period (para 19, UE 110 choose and enter substate 5GMM-DEREGISTERED.NO-SUPI in an event that UE 110, para 20, 5GMM state machine would enter NO-CELL-AVAILABLE substate after PLMN search).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify teaching of UE send an unavailability period report to the network entity prior to the unavailability period and indicative of unavailability period disclosed by EDGE to perform registration or determining that the UE is registered to 5GS services over the non-3GPP access and detecting an absence of non-3GPP coverage; and entering UE into a no access point available substate responsive to the detecting as taught by Niemi to include 5GMM-DEREGISTERED.NO-SUPI so that it create a new substate and UE 110 choose and enter the substate 5GMM-DEREGISTERED.NO-SUPI in an event that UE 110 has no valid subscriber data available (e.g., due to no USIM/SIM being available or due to the USIM/SIM inserted being considered invalid by UE 110) [Niemi, paragraph 0019].
Regarding claim 2, EDGE discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the chosen substate of the deregistered state is a DEREGISTERED.NO-CELL-AVAILABLE substate (para 275, UE wants to perform an Initial Registration (i.e. the UE is in RM- DEREGISTERED state), a Mobility Registration Update).
Regarding claim 3, EDGE discloses the method of claim 1, wherein at the chosen substate of the deregistered state, the UE does not initiate any procedure except for a deactivation procedure of the unavailability period (para 203, 5GMM-REGISTERED.NO-COVERAGE state), deactivate AS Layer and reporting of an unavailability period, para 513, If an unavailability Period Duration is received from the UE and AMF triggers “Loss of Connectivity” monitoring event report and remaining values of the unavailability Period Duration ).
Regarding claim 4, EDGE discloses the method of claim 1, wherein at the chosen substate of the deregistered state after activation of the unavailability period, the UE does not initiate any procedure except for a procedure of cell and PLMN reselection (para 200, UE may transition to a dormant state and may not attempt to initiate a mobile originated (MO) service. The network may not attempt to initiate any mobile terminated (MT), using PLMNs, para 518, During unavailability period the AMF maintain UE context in a CM-IDLE or ECM-IDLE state).
Regarding claim 5, EDGE discloses the method of claim 1, wherein at the chosen substate of the deregistered state after activation of the unavailability period, the UE does not initiate any procedure except for a deactivation procedure of the unavailability period (para 204, UE 115 instead enters a dormant state during a no coverage state for the serving PLMN, in which UE 115 deactivates, para 203, NAS layer may enter a no coverage state (e.g., a 5GMM-REGISTERED.NO-COVERAGE state), may deactivates AS Layer).
Regarding claim 6, EDGE discloses the method of claim 1, the method further comprising deactivating the unavailability period by initiating an initial registration or mobile registration update procedure (para 349, f the UE has both emergency and non-emergency PDU Sessions and authentication fails, the AMF continues the Mobility Registration Update procedure and deactivates all the non-emergency PDU Sessions).
Regarding claim 7, EDGE discloses a method for managing an unavailability period performed by a user equipment (UE) (Fig. 1, para 50, configured to manage moving satellite beams (for LEO SVs) and associated mobility of UEs 115, para 36, UE to report generalized unavailability periods, allow the UE and network to prepare for the upcoming unavailability), the method comprising:
being registered in a network (para 06, sending at least one message to the UE, wherein the at least one message indicates a periodic registration timer or periodic) and choosing a registered state when an unavailability period is activated by UE using a registration procedure (para 299, Sessions To Be activated when UE is outside the area of availability, para 511, UE, authenticated and authorized successfully by a PLMN and AMF execute the Network-initiated deregistration procedure).
EDGE specifically fails to disclose choosing a substate of a registered state when an unavailability period is activated.
In analogous art, Niemi discloses choosing a substate of a registered state when an unavailability period is activated (para 298, Sessions To Be activated , the UE may indicate PDU Sessions only associated with the access the Registration Request, para 305, To Be activated , or the Registration type indicates the UE wants to perform an Emergency Registration).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify teaching of UE send an unavailability period report to the network entity prior to the unavailability period and indicative of unavailability period disclosed by EDGE to determining that 5GMM machine in UE 110 leave state 5GMM-REGISTERED NORMAL-SERVICE as taught by Niemi to include 5GMM-DEREGISTERED.NO-SUPI so that it create a new substate and UE 110 choose and enter substate 5GMM-DEREGISTERED.NO-SUPI in an event that UE 110 has no valid subscriber data available or due to being available or due to the USIM/SIM inserted being considered invalid by UE 110) [Niemi, paragraph 0043].
Regarding claim 8, EDGE discloses the method of claim 7, wherein the chosen substate of the registration state is a 5GMM-REGISTERED.NO-CELL-AVAILABLE substate (para 496, to be activated is not included in the Registration Request and the Registration procedure was not initiated in CM-CONNECTED state).
Regarding claim 9, EDGE discloses the method of claim 7, wherein at the chosen substate of the registration state, the UE does not initiate any procedure except for a deactivation procedure of the unavailability period (para 203, 5GMM-REGISTERED.NO-COVERAGE state), deactivate AS Layer and reporting of an unavailability period, para 526, UE 115 may send a NAS Registration Request message to AMF 122 sometime before unavailability starts, indicating the unavailability period and indicate an event or events causing the unavailability).
Regarding claim 10, EDGE discloses the method of claim 7, wherein at the chosen substate of the registration state after activation of the unavailability period, the UE does not initiate any procedure except for a procedure of cell and PLMN reselection (para 200, UE may transition to a dormant state and may not attempt to initiate a mobile originated (MO) service. The network may not attempt to initiate any mobile terminated (MT), using PLMNs, para 533, UE (e.g., UE 115 as in FIG. 14) for indicating a unavailability period to a wireless network (e.g., to public land mobile network (PLMN)).
Regarding claim 11, EDGE discloses the method of claim 7, wherein at the chosen substate of the registration state after activation of the unavailability period, the UE does not initiate any procedure except for a deactivation procedure of the unavailability period (para 204, UE 115 instead enters a dormant state during a no coverage state for the serving PLMN, in which UE 115 deactivates, para 203, NAS layer may enter a no coverage state (e.g., a 5GMM-REGISTERED.NO-COVERAGE state), may deactivates AS Layer).
Regarding claim 12, EDGE discloses the method of claim 7, the method further comprising deactivating the unavailability period by initiating an initial registration or mobile registration update procedure (para 349, f the UE has both emergency and non-emergency PDU Sessions and authentication fails, the AMF continues the Mobility Registration Update procedure and deactivates all PDU Sessions).
Regarding claim 13, EDGE discloses a user equipment (UE) comprises a processor, memory in electronic communication with the processor, and instructions stored in the memory (para 534, processors 1004 with dedicated hardware or implementing executable code or software instructions in memory 1016 and/or medium 1018, such as the PLMN access module 1022, in UE 1000 in FIG. 10),
wherein the instructions comprise registering the UE in a network and choosing a deregistered state for the UE when an unavailability period is activated by the UE using a deregistration procedure (para 245, memory 1016 may include an unavailability reporting module 1026 that when implemented by processors 1004 configures the one or more processors 1004 to report an upcoming unavailability period and/or the ending of an unavailability period, para 511, UE, authenticated and authorized successfully by a PLMN and AMF execute the Network-initiated deregistration procedure).
EDGE specifically fails to disclose choosing a substate of a deregistered state for the UE when an unavailability period.
In analogous art, Niemi discloses choosing a substate of a deregistered state for the UE when an unavailability period (para 19, UE 110 choose and enter substate 5GMM-DEREGISTERED.NO-SUPI in an event that UE 110, para 20, 5GMM state machine would enter the NO-CELL-AVAILABLE substate after an intensive Public Land Mobile Network (PLMN) search).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify teaching of UE send an unavailability period report to the network entity prior to the unavailability period and indicative of unavailability period disclosed by EDGE to perform registration or determining that the UE is registered to 5GS services over the non-3GPP access and detecting an absence of coverage; and entering UE into a no access point available substate responsive to the detecting as taught by Niemi to include 5GMM-DEREGISTERED.NO-SUPI so that it create a new substate and UE 110 choose and enter the substate 5GMM-DEREGISTERED.NO-SUPI in an event that UE 110 has no valid subscriber data available (e.g., due to no USIM/SIM being available or due to the USIM/SIM inserted being considered invalid by UE 110) [Niemi, paragraph 0019].
Regarding claim 14, EDGE discloses the UE of claim 13, wherein the chosen substate of the deregistered state is a DEREGISTERED.NO-CELL-AVAILABLE substate (para 275, UE wants to perform an Initial Registration (i.e. the UE is in RM- DEREGISTERED state), a Mobility Registration Update).
Regarding claim 15, EDGE discloses the UE of claim 13, wherein the instructions further comprises not initiating any procedure except for a deactivation procedure of the unavailability period when the UE is at the chosen substate of the deregistered state (para 203, 5GMM-REGISTERED.NO-COVERAGE state), deactivate AS Layer and reporting of an unavailability period, para 200, UE may transition to a dormant state and may not attempt to initiate a mobile originated (MO) service. The network may not attempt to initiate any mobile terminated (MT)).
Regarding claim 16, EDGE discloses the UE of claim 13, wherein the instructions further comprises not initiating any procedure except for a procedure of cell and PLMN reselection when the UE is at the chosen substate of the deregistered state after activation of the unavailability period (para 200, UE may transition to a dormant state and may not attempt to initiate a mobile originated (MO) service. The network may not attempt to initiate mobile terminated (MT), using PLMNs, para 533, UE (e.g., a UE 115 in FIG. 14 ) for indicating a generalized unavailability period to a wireless network (e.g., to public land mobile network (PLMN)).
.Regarding claim 17, EDGE discloses the UE of claim 13, wherein the instructions further comprises not initiating any procedure except for a deactivation procedure of the unavailability period when the UE is at the chosen substate of the deregistered state after activation of the unavailability period (para 07, UE is capable of reporting generalized unavailability periods to the wireless network for a plurality of different events, wherein the generalized unavailability period).
Regarding claim 18, EDGE discloses the UE of claim 13, wherein the instructions further comprises deactivating the unavailability period by initiating an initial registration or mobile registration update procedure for the UE (para 37, UE and network prepare for the unavailability period, performing tasks before and/or after the unavailability period, para 198, UE 115 performs a NAS registration with the AMF 122), para 203, 5GMM- REGISTERED.NO-COVERAGE state), may deactivate the AS Layer, and may start a timer that will expire at the time T2. At the time T2 (e.g. at the expiration of a timer for T2 which may occur at the resumption of a coverage state), the NAS layer may reactivate the AS layer)).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Mirza Alam whose telephone number is (469) 295-9286. The examiner can be reached on Monday-Thursday 7:30AM-6:00PM (EST).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Steven Lim can be reached on 571-270-1210. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for Published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MIRZA F ALAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2688