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
Response to Amendment
This is a reply to the request for Continued Examination (RCE) filed on 2/26/2026, in which Claim(s) 1-6 and 9-10 are presented for examination.
Claim(s) 7-8 and 11-12 is/are cancelled.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 2/26/2026 has been entered.
Response to Argument
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 102 and 35 U.S.C. § 103:
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejection of claim(s) 1-6 and 9-10 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Applicant is encouraged to schedule an interview with the Examiner prior to the next communication to compact prosecution of the case.
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(s) 1-6 and 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nair (US 20180309575 A1) in view of Lim et al. (US 20240214902 A1; hereinafter Lim) further in view of Venkataraman et al. (US 20200008167 A1; hereinafter Venkataraman).
Regarding claims 1 and 9, Nair discloses a method of a communication apparatus comprising:
receiving a message, [[wherein the message includes a registration request message and an access type parameter indicating an access type]] (receives, at the mobility management node, a first NAS message from the given user equipment. The first NAS message indicates that the given user equipment has experienced an RLF with the source access node, and is protected using a cryptographic key (e.g., NAS integrity key) created during previous establishment of the NAS security context between the given user equipment and the mobility management node [Nair; ¶70-73; Figs. 4-5B and associated text]); and
performing an integrity check of the registration request message using a Non Access Stratum (NAS) security context include an NAS integrity key (verifies, at the mobility management node, the given user equipment using the cryptographic key, initiates, at the mobility management node, set up of a signaling interface (e.g., S1AP) with the target access node, and sends, from the mobility management node, a second NAS message to the given user equipment through the target access node. The second NAS message indicates an acknowledgment of the RLF, and is protected using the cryptographic key (e.g., NAS integrity key) created during previous establishment of the NAS security context between the given user equipment and the mobility management node. The second NAS message contains data associated with the data transfer. The data is previous buffered data and/or new data. The data is encrypted using another cryptographic key created during previous establishment of the NAS security context between the given user equipment and the mobility management node [Nair; ¶30-36, 70-73; Figs. 4-5B and associated text]). Nair teaches the NAS-SC usage during establishing of communication. Nair does not explicilty discloses the using a Non Access Stratum (NAS) security context to perform an integrity check related to a registration request message, however, in a related and analogous art, Lim teaches this feature.
In particular, Liam teaches if the registration request message (e.g., the AMF associated with the 5G-GUTI), a request message (e.g., Namf_Communication_UEContext Transfer message) for requesting the transfer of the UE context and the registration request message may include information for identifying the UE (e.g., 5G-GUTI or SUCI). In an embodiment, the registration request message may further include network slicing information (e.g., requested NSSAI(s)) indicating the network slice(s) [Lim; ¶65, 254]. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nair in view of Lim with the motivation to easier identifier and authenticate the UE.
Nair-Lim combination discloses a registration request message with integrity check using a NAS security context such as an integrity key. Nair-Lim combination discloses does not explicilty discloses wherein the message includes an access type parameter indicating an access type, wherein the access type is 3GPP access or Non-3GPP access, and wherein the NAS security context includes an uplink NAS COUNT value corresponding to the access type parameter; however, in a related and analogous art, Venkataraman teaches these features.
In particular, Venkataraman teaches a UE sending a message with access type parameter, the request for an access type “A” is transmitted over an access type “B” and indicating connection specific parameters include a pair of NAS COUNTs for uplink and downlink and unique NAS connection identifier, value of the unique NAS connection identifier shall be set to ‘0’ for 3GPP access and set to ‘1’ for non-3GPP access [Venkataraman; ¶120-130, 154; Figs. 9-10, 12 and associated texts]. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nair-Lim combination in view of Venkataraman MAS access type parameter with the motivation to avoid collisions between procedures associated with the first and second access types [Venkataraman; ¶10].
Regarding claim 2, Nair-Lim-Venkataraman combination discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the communication apparatus is an Access and Mobility Management Function (MME 106 [Nair; Fig. 2 and associated text], AMF 120 [Lim; Fig. 1 and associated text]). The motivation to easier identifier and authenticate the UE.
Regarding claim 3, Nair-Lim-Venkataraman discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the message is an Namf_Communication_UEContextTransfer message (a request message (e.g., Namf_Communication_UEContext Transfer message) [Lim; ¶65, 254]. The motivation to easier identifier and authenticate the UE.
Regarding claims 4 and 10, Nair discloses the method of a first communication apparatus comprising:
communicating with a second communication apparatus (receives, at the mobility management node, a first NAS message from the given user equipment. The first NAS message indicates that the given user equipment has experienced an RLF with the source access node, and is protected using a cryptographic key (e.g., NAS integrity key) created during previous establishment of the NAS security context between the given user equipment and the mobility management node [Nair; ¶70-73; Figs. 4-5B and associated text]); and
sending a message, [[wherein the message includes a registration request message and an access type parameter indicating an access type]] (verifies, at the mobility management node, the given user equipment using the cryptographic key, initiates, at the mobility management node, set up of a signaling interface (e.g., S1AP) with the target access node, and sends, from the mobility management node, a second NAS message to the given user equipment through the target access node. The second NAS message indicates an acknowledgment of the RLF, and is protected using the cryptographic key created during previous establishment of the NAS security context between the given user equipment and the mobility management node. The second NAS message contains data associated with the data transfer. The data is previous buffered data and/or new data. The data is encrypted using another cryptographic key created during previous establishment of the NAS security context between the given user equipment and the mobility management node [Nair; ¶70-73; Figs. 4-5B and associated text]);
performing an integrity check of the registration request message using a Non Access Stratum (NAS) security context include an NAS integrity key (verifies, at the mobility management node, the given user equipment using the cryptographic key, initiates, at the mobility management node, set up of a signaling interface (e.g., S1AP) with the target access node, and sends, from the mobility management node, a second NAS message to the given user equipment through the target access node. The second NAS message indicates an acknowledgment of the RLF, and is protected using the cryptographic key (e.g., NAS integrity key) created during previous establishment of the NAS security context between the given user equipment and the mobility management node. The second NAS message contains data associated with the data transfer. The data is previous buffered data and/or new data. The data is encrypted using another cryptographic key created during previous establishment of the NAS security context between the given user equipment and the mobility management node [Nair; ¶30-36, 70-73; Figs. 4-5B and associated text]). Nair teaches the NAS-SC usage during establishing of communication. Nair does not explicilty discloses the using a Non Access Stratum (NAS) security context to perform an integrity check related to a registration request message, however, in a related and analogous art, Lim teaches this feature.
In particular, Liam teaches if the registration request message (e.g., the AMF associated with the 5G-GUTI), a request message (e.g., Namf_Communication_UEContext Transfer message) for requesting the transfer of the UE context and the registration request message may include information for identifying the UE (e.g., 5G-GUTI or SUCI). In an embodiment, the registration request message may further include network slicing information (e.g., requested NSSAI(s)) indicating the network slice(s) [Lim; ¶65, 254]. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nair in view of Lim with the motivation to easier identifier and authenticate the UE.
Nair-Lim combination discloses a registration request message with integrity check using a NAS security context such as an integrity key. Nair-Lim combination discloses does not explicilty discloses wherein the message includes an access type parameter indicating an access type, wherein the access type is 3GPP access or Non-3GPP access, and wherein the NAS security context includes an uplink NAS COUNT value corresponding to the access type parameter; however, in a related and analogous art, Venkataraman teaches these features.
In particular, Venkataraman teaches a UE sending a message with access type parameter, the request for an access type “A” is transmitted over an access type “B” and indicating connection specific parameters include a pair of NAS COUNTs for uplink and downlink and unique NAS connection identifier, value of the unique NAS connection identifier shall be set to ‘0’ for 3GPP access and set to ‘1’ for non-3GPP access [Venkataraman; ¶120-130, 154; Figs. 9-10, 12 and associated texts]. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nair-Lim combination in view of Venkataraman MAS access type parameter with the motivation to avoid collisions between procedures associated with the first and second access types [Venkataraman; ¶10].
Regarding claim 5, Nair-Lim-Venkataraman combination discloses the method according to claim 4, wherein the communication apparatus is an Access and Mobility Management Function (MME 106 [Nair; Fig. 2 and associated text], AMF 120 [Lim; Fig. 1 and associated text]). The motivation to easier identifier and authenticate the UE.
Regarding claim 6, Nair-Lim-Venkataraman combination discloses the method according to claim 4, wherein the message is an Namf_Communication_UEContextTransfer message (a request message (e.g., Namf_Communication_UEContext Transfer message) [Lim; ¶65, 254]. The motivation to easier identifier and authenticate the UE.
Internet Communications
Applicant is encouraged to submit a written authorization for Internet communications (PTO/SB/439, http:ljwww.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/sb0439.pdf) in the instant patent application to authorize the examiner to communicate with the applicant via email. The authorization will allow the examiner to better practice compact prosecution. The written authorization can be submitted via one of the following methods only: (1) Central Fax which can be found in the Conclusion section of this Office action; (2) regular postal mail; (3) EFS WEB; or (4) the service window on the Alexandria campus. EFS web is the recommended way to submit the form since this allows the form to be entered into the file wrapper within the same day (system dependent). Written authorization submitted via other methods, such as direct fax to the examiner or email, will not be accepted. See MPEP § 502.03.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAO Q HO whose telephone number is (571)270-5998. The examiner can normally be reached on 7:00am - 5:00pm.
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, Jeffrey Nickerson can be reached on (469) 295-9235. 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 the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/DAO Q HO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2432