DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Request for Continued Examination (RCE) Under 37 CFR 1.114
2. 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 07/07/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
3. This office action is in response to the amendment filed on 07/07/2026. Claims 2-21 are pending in this application and have been considered below. Claim 1 is canceled by the applicant.
4. The allowability of the claimed invention of the last office action, mailed on 04/07/2026, is withdrawn because of the amendments. Claims 2-6, and 9-21 filed on 07/07/2026 are rejected under new ground of rejections. Claims 7-8 are objected. See below for details.
Claim Objections
5. Claims 2-10 and 20-21 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 20, line 2, please insert a colon “:” after the word “comprising”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
6. 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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
7. Claims 11-19 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.
(1) Claim 11 recites the limitation "the one or more mobile networks" in line 22. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. However, for the purpose of examination, the examiner interprets "the one or more mobile networks" to be "a second one or more mobile networks".
8. 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.
Please note: Examiner has cited particular columns, line numbers, and figures in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teaching of the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well.
Applicants are reminded that MPEP 2141.02 states: A prior art reference must be considered in its entirety, i.e., as a whole, including portions that would lead away from the claimed invention. W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc. v. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d 1540, 220 USPQ 303 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 851 (1984).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
9. 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.
10. Claims 2-3, 5-6, 9-13, 15-16 and 19-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by CATOVIC et al. (US 20230144323) (hereinafter CATOVIC).
Regarding claims 20 and 11:
As shown in figures 1-8, CATOVIC discloses a wireless transmit/receive unit (WTRU) (350 in figure 3, 502 in figure 5 and 602 in figure 6) comprising:
a first mobile termination (MT) (612 in figure 6);
a second MT (614 in figure 6); and
terminal equipment (TE) (602 in figure 6), wherein:
the TE (602 in figure 6) is to transmit a first request (628 in figure 6) to register the first MT (612 in figure 6) with a first mobile network (604 and 606 in figure 6) of a first one or more mobile networks (see plurality of network in figure 6) (par 0079-0083),
the second MT (614 in figure 6) is to select a second mobile network (608 and 610 in figure 6) from at least one candidate mobile network of the one or more mobile networks (see plurality of network in figure 6) (par 0079-0083), and
configuring the second MT (614 in figure 6) to connect with the second mobile network (608 and 610 in figure 6), wherein the TE (602 in figure 6) is to transmit a second request (644 in figure 6) to register the second MT with the second mobile network (608 and 610 in figure 6) (par 0079-0083).
Regarding claims 2 and 12:
CATOVIC further discloses wherein the first mobile network (604 and 606 in figure 6) and the second mobile network (608 and 610 in figure 6) are in common (figures 5-6 show first and second PLMN are in common).
Regarding claims 3 and 13:
CATOVIC further discloses wherein the first mobile network (604 and 606 in figure 6) and the second mobile network (608 and 610 in figure 6) are different (figures 5-6 show first and second PLMN are in different).
Regarding claims 5 and 15:
CATOVIC further discloses wherein: the first mobile network comprises a public land mobile network (PLMN) (606 in figure 6), and the WTRU (602 in figure 6) is to receive configuration information from the PLMN (see 636 and 640 in figure 6) to cause the second MT (614 in figure 6) to be configured to connect with the at least one candidate mobile network (610 in figure 6) (see 644 and 646 in figure 6, par 0079-0083).
Regarding claims 6 and 16:
CATOVIC further discloses wherein: the first MT (612 in figure 6) is to: determine to perform a registration update with the first mobile network (604 and 606 in figure 6) (par 0081), generate a message comprising third information (630 in figure 6) about the first MT (612 in figure 6) and about the second MT (614 in figure 6) based on determining to perform the registration update (par 0081), transmit the message (630 in figure 6) to the first mobile network (604 and 606 in figure 6), and receive from the first mobile network a response to the message indicative of the registration update being accepted (see 636 in figure 6) by the first mobile network (604 and 606 in figure 6) (par 0081); and the message comprises fourth information (644 in figure 6) for the second MT (614 in figure 6) (par 0079-0083).
Regarding claims 9 and 19:
CATOVIC further discloses wherein communications between the first MT and the second MT are performed using an inter-MT coordination function of the WTRU (figures 5-6 show communications between the first MT (612 in figure 6) and the second MT (614 in figure 6) are performed using an inter-MT coordination function of the WTRU (602 in figure 6)).
Regarding claim 21:
CATOVIC further discloses wherein selecting the second mobile network (608 and 610 in figure 6) is based on data indicative of the first MT's configuration (figure 6 shows selecting the second mobile network (608 and 610 in figure 6) is based on data indicative of the first MT's (612 in figure 6) configuration. See steps 628-646).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
11. 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.
12. 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.
13. Claims 4 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CATOVIC in view of Lovlekar et a. (US 20220240079) (hereinafter Lovlekar).
Regarding claims 4 and 14:
CATOVIC further discloses wherein: the first mobile network (see figure 6) comprises a first public land mobile network (PLMN) (606 in figure 6) and the second mobile network comprises a second PLMN (616 in figure 6).
CATOVIC discloses all of the subject matter as described above except for specifically teaching the first MT selects a first radio access technology (RAT) on the first PLMN, and the second MT selects a second RAT on the second PLMN based on the second information.
However, Lovlekar in the same field of endeavor teaches the first MT selects a first radio access technology (RAT) on the first PLMN, and the second MT selects a second RAT on the second PLMN based on the second information (par 0095, 0144, 0245). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use radio access technologies (RATs) as taught by Lovlekar to modify the system and method of CATOVIC in order to communicate over the transmission medium (par 0095) (See KSR Rationale: Combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results).
Allowable Subject Matter
14. Claims 7-8 and 17-18 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims and also overcome the above claimed objection and the above 35 USC 112(b) rejection.
15. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The prior art of record, CATOVIC does not teach or suggest wherein the first MT is to determine to perform the registration update based on a time period elapsing since a previous registration update was performed.
Conclusion
16. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to
applicant's disclosure.
Murakami et al. (US 20130121483) disclose a telephone that is capable of accessing a memory for storing subscription information that includes a phone number.
17. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KABIR A TIMORY whose telephone number is (571)270-1674. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:00 AM-3:00 PM.
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, Hannah S Wang can be reached at 571-272-9018. 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.
/KABIR A TIMORY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2631
Prosecution Insights