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 § 103
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.
Claims 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Kumar (2023/0012328) in view of Catovic (2023/0037983).
The applied reference has a common assignee with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2).
Regarding claim 1, Kumar discloses a method performed by a terminal (UE 100) in a wireless communication system (Figure 4), the method comprising: transmitting, to an access and mobility function (AMF) a message, identifying whether the terminal has included information on an unavailability (Figure 4, steps 1-3, para 133). Kumar further discloses in case the terminal has included unavailability information, starting a timer associated with releasing a non-access stratum (NAS) signaling connection (para 149 NAS signaling based on acceptance of unavailability as well as Figure 8, steps 804/806 – NAS deregistration procedure starts upon acceptance of the initial unavailability message; note the timer/duration of unavailability starts after UE indicates to the network para 135), wherein the information on unavailability indicates a reason for unavailability (para 135 and 137, use of timer based unavailability and geographic unavailability). Kumar discloses that the unavailability information could be geographic preferred versus timer oriented (para 139, can neglect time information), but Kumar doesn’t explicitly state the unavailability does not include information on a start of an unavailability period.
Catovic teaches in an analogous art, the use of unavailability information that does not include the start of an unavailability period in the message (para 121, the use of 5gMM-registered-nolocation-available messaging indicates that the UE 702 is unavailable and does not include a start of the unavailability period.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the invention to include the start of the unavailability period in order to provide accurate timing to reduce unnecessary signaling in the network.
Regarding claim 5, Kumar discloses a method performed by an access and mobility management function (AMF) in a wireless communications system,(Figure 4) the method comprising: receiving from a terminal (UE) 100, a message, identifying whether the terminal has included information on an unavailability (Figure 4, steps 1-3, para 133). Kumar further discloses in case the terminal has included unavailability information, starting a timer associated with releasing a non-access stratum (NAS) signaling connection (para 149 NAS signaling based on acceptance of unavailability as well as Figure 8, steps 804/806 – NAS deregistration procedure starts upon acceptance of the initial unavailability message; note the timer/duration of unavailability starts after UE indicates to the network para 135), wherein the information on unavailability indicates a reason for unavailability (para 135 and 137, use of timer based unavailability and geographic unavailability). Kumar discloses that the unavailability information could be geographic preferred versus timer oriented (para 139, can neglect time information), but Kumar doesn’t explicitly state the unavailability does not include information on a start of an unavailability period.
Catovic teaches in an analogous art, the use of unavailability information that does not include the start of an unavailability period in the message (para 121, the use of 5gMM-registered-nolocation-available messaging indicates that the UE 702 is unavailable and does not include a start of the unavailability period.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the invention to include the start of the unavailability period in order to provide accurate timing to reduce unnecessary signaling in the network.
Regarding claim 8, Kumar discloses a terminal (UE 100) in a wireless communication system (figure 4) the terminal comprising a transceiver (Figure 5, 120/communicator) and at least one processor (Figure 5, 110)coupled with the transceiver and configured to: transmit, to an access and mobility function (AMF) a message, identify whether the terminal has included information on an unavailability (Figure 4, steps 1-3, para 133). Kumar further discloses in case the terminal has included unavailability information, starting a timer associated with releasing a non-access stratum (NAS) signaling connection (para 149 NAS signaling based on acceptance of unavailability as well as Figure 8, steps 804/806 – NAS deregistration procedure starts upon acceptance of the initial unavailability message; note the timer/duration of unavailability starts after UE indicates to the network para 135), wherein the information on unavailability indicates a reason for unavailability (para 135 and 137, use of timer based unavailability and geographic unavailability). Kumar discloses that the unavailability information could be geographic preferred versus timer oriented (para 139, can neglect time information), but Kumar doesn’t explicitly state the unavailability does not include information on a start of an unavailability period.
Catovic teaches in an analogous art, the use of unavailability information that does not include the start of an unavailability period in the message (para 121, the use of 5gMM-registered-nolocation-available messaging indicates that the UE 702 is unavailable and does not include a start of the unavailability period.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the invention to include the start of the unavailability period in order to provide accurate timing to reduce unnecessary signaling in the network.
Regarding claim 12, Kumar discloses an access and mobility management function (AMF) in a wireless communications system,(Figure 4) comprising a transceiver (Figure 6, communicator 220) and at least one processor (Figure 6, 210) coupled with the transceiver and configured to: receive from a terminal (UE) 100, a message, identifying whether the terminal has included information on an unavailability (Figure 4, steps 1-3, para 133). Kumar further discloses in case the terminal has included unavailability information, starting a timer associated with releasing a non-access stratum (NAS) signaling connection (para 149 NAS signaling based on acceptance of unavailability as well as Figure 8, steps 804/806 – NAS deregistration procedure starts upon acceptance of the initial unavailability message; note the timer/duration of unavailability starts after UE indicates to the network para 135), wherein the information on unavailability indicates a reason for unavailability (para 135 and 137, use of timer based unavailability and geographic unavailability). Kumar discloses that the unavailability information could be geographic preferred versus timer oriented (para 139, can neglect time information), but Kumar doesn’t explicitly state the unavailability does not include information on a start of an unavailability period.
Catovic teaches in an analogous art, the use of unavailability information that does not include the start of an unavailability period in the message (para 121, the use of 5gMM-registered-nolocation-available messaging indicates that the UE 702 is unavailable and does not include a start of the unavailability period.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the invention to include the start of the unavailability period in order to provide accurate timing to reduce unnecessary signaling in the network.
Regarding claims 2-3, 6, 9-10,13-14, Kumar further discloses the message is a registration request message (para 133) and that the information on the unavailability includes a length of unavailability contents (para 133 – unavailability period parameter or configuration data includes duration, i.e.- length in para 135).
Regarding claims 4, 7, 11, 15, Kumar further discloses wherein, in the case the information indicating the presence of unavailability period duration indicates that he information on the unavailability period duration is present, the information further comprises the information on the unavailability period duration (para 135); and wherein the case the information indicating the presence of information on the start of the unavailability period, the unavailability information includes the information on the start of the unavailability period (para 134 – unavailability information can state a time slot (i.e. – start time).
This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C.102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B); or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement. See generally MPEP § 717.02.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Youn (2025/0212150) discloses UE unavailability for time based information.
Sethi (WO 2024/211529) discloses NAS level timers with respect to unavailability in a wireless system.
Gupta (2025/0212152) discloses UE unavailability information and operations that can be performed during the unavailable period.
Chen (11533708) discloses UE and AMF signaling with respect to inactive/unavailable states.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM GEORGE TROST IV whose telephone number is (571)272-7872. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7a-4p, Fridays 7a-2p.
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, Charles Appiah can be reached at 571-272-7904. 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.
WILLIAM GEORGE TROST IV
Primary Patent Examiner
Art Unit 2641
/WILLIAM G TROST IV/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2641
Prosecution Insights