DETAILED ACTION
Response to Remark
This communication is considered fully responsive to the amendment filed on 07/09/26.
a. Independent claims have been amended.
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 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.
Claims 16-19, 23-25, 31, 32, 34, and 35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sahu et al. (US 2015/0230091, “Sahu”) in view of Cho et al. (US 2014/0146759, “Cho”) and further in view of Jen et al. (US 2010/0291939, “Jen”).
Regarding claim 16, Sahu discloses a method, applied to an electronic device, wherein the method comprises:
- detecting, by a modem of the electronic device (See Fig.8 and ¶.86, a modem may be implemented as part of the transceiver 801), a first quantity of junk data packets received within a first duration (See 210 Fig.2 and ¶.47, identify packets received from a malicious source; See 220 Fig.2 and ¶.48, when a number of packets identified as received from the malicious source reaches a threshold number within a monitoring period. Further to the aspect, malicious source identifying component may execute malicious packet counter to count a number of malicious packets received by wireless device);
- in response to determining that the first quantity of junk data packets received within the first duration meets a first relationship (See 220 Fig.2 and ¶.48, when a number of packets identified as received from the malicious source reaches a threshold number within a monitoring period), triggering the modem of the electronic device to re-register with a network (240 Fig.2, reconnecting wireless device to the PDN using a second IP address that is different from the first IP address after reaching a threshold number within a monitoring period),
- when the modem re-registers with the network, sending a first network connection request to a network device in the network, wherein the electronic device disconnects a previous network connection to the network device before sending the first network connection request to the network device (See ¶.2, such malicious sources may attempt to overwhelm a mobile device with unsolicited packets and the mobile devices disconnects its radio resources; See ¶.48, selectively disconnecting wireless device from a PDN by releasing a first IP address used to connect the wireless device to the PDN when a number of packets identified as received from the malicious source reaches a threshold number within a monitoring period; See 220 & 240 Fig.2, releasing a first IP address before reconnecting to the packet data network using a second IP address; See 540 & 550 Fig.5, disconnect from a packet data network when a determination is made that only a single application is using the first IP address, but maintain the current connection; Examiner’s Note: Jen further explicitly discloses the method of “disconnecting before sending RRC connection request”).
Sahu discloses the method of releasing a first IP address and reconnecting to a new network using a second IP address (Sahu, See 220 & 240 Fig.2), but does not explicitly disclose what Jen discloses “wherein the electronic device disconnects a previous network connection to the network device before sending the first network connection request to the network device” (Jen, See ¶.12, a RRC connection reestablishment request message is sent by the UE to initiate the RRC connection reestablishment procedure See ¶.45, when the definable RRC message is received, the mobile device may further release all the radio resources and configuration, which the mobile device uses before the sending of the RRC connection reestablishment request message).
Sahu does not explicitly disclose what Cho discloses,
- receiving, by the electronic device, a first paging message sent by the network device in response to the first network connection request (See 302 Fig.3, UE receives paging message from the network); and
- re-establishing, by the electronic device, a network connection to the network device based on the first paging message (See 310 Fig.3, set RRC connection between UE and the network after receiving the paging message).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to apply the method of “receiving, by the electronic device, a first paging message sent by the network device in response to the first network connection request; re-establishing, by the electronic device, a network connection to the network device based on the first paging message” as taught by Cho and “the electronic device disconnecting a previous network connection to the network device before sending the first network connection request to the network device” as taught by Jen into the system of Sahu, so that it provides a way of performing the RRC connection setup with the UE (Cho, See ¶.75) and releasing all the radio resources and configuration before sending of the RRC connection reestablishing request message (Jen, See ¶.45).
Regarding claim 17, Sahu discloses “when the first quantity of junk data packets received within the first duration is greater than a first preset value, determining, by the electronic device, that the first quantity meets the first relationship (See 220 Fig.2 and ¶.20, when a number of packets identified as received from the malicious source reaches a threshold number within a monitoring period).”
Regarding claim 18, Sahu discloses “wherein after the network connection to the network device is re-established, an internet protocol (IP) address used by the electronic device to communicate with the network device is different from a previous (IP) address used by the electronic device to communicate with the network device before re-establishing the network connection to the network device (See 240 Fig.2, using a second IP address that is different from the first IP address).”
Regarding claim 19, Sahu and Cho disclose “wherein the method further comprises: in response to the electronic device determines that the first quantity does not meet the first relationship, continuing, by the electronic device, to detect a second quantity of junk data packets received by the electronic device within the first duration (Sahu, See 220 Fig.2); and in response to determining that the second quantity of junk data packets received within the first duration is greater than the first preset value, disconnecting, by the electronic device, the network connection to the network device (Sahu, See 220 Fig.2), and sending a network connection request to the network device (Cho, See 304 Fig.3).” Therefore, this claim is rejected with the similar reasons and motivation set forth in the rejection of claim 16.
Regarding claims 23-25, they are claims corresponding to claims 18, 19, & 19, respectively and are therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of the claims.
Regarding claim 31, it is an electronic device claim corresponding to the method claim 16 and is therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of the claim.
Regarding claims 32, 34, and 35, they are claims corresponding to claims 17, 18, & 19, respectively and are therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of the claims.
Claims 20-22 and 33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sahu in view of Cho and Jen and further in view of Arora et al. (US 2018/0189488, “Arora”).
Regarding claim 20, Sahu, Cho, and Jen do not explicitly disclose what Arora discloses “when a ratio of the first quantity of junk data packets received within the first duration to a total quantity of data packets received by the electronic device within the first duration is greater than a second preset value, determining, by the electronic device, that the first quantity meets the first relationship (Arora, See 1110 Fig.11 and ¶.116, determine a ratio of malware related change entries over total number of change entries (e.g., malware entries/total entries) to confirm that a malware attack has occurred on client device. For example, if the ratio of malware change entries over total change entries exceeds a threshold value (e.g., 0.1, 0.3, etc.), then scanning module can confirm that a malware attack has occurred on client device; See ¶.59, When the number of messages received (e.g., number of suspicious change entries identified) within a period of time; See ¶.65, calculate the ratio by dividing the number of malware related additions by the number of content item deletions within the determined period of time. When the ratio is within a threshold percentage of one (1) (e.g., plus or minus 10%), then scanning module can determine that client device has been attacked by malware).”
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to apply “when a ratio of the first quantity of junk data packets received within the first duration to a total quantity of data packets received by the electronic device within the first duration is greater than a second preset value, determining, by the electronic device, that the first quantity meets the first relationship” as taught by Arora into the system of Sahu, Cho, and Jen, so that it provides a way of determining that client device has been attacked by malware (Arora, See ¶.65).
Regarding claims 21, 22, and 33, they are claims corresponding to claims 18, 19, & 20, respectively and are therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of the claims.
Claims 26-28 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cho et al. (US 2014/0146759, “Cho”) in view of Chen et al. (US 2014/0235284, “Chen”).
Regarding claim 26, Cho disclose a method, applied to an electronic device, wherein the method comprises:
- sending, by the electronic device, a network connection request to a network device (See 304 Fig.3, UE sends RRC connection request to a network);
- receiving, by the electronic device, a paging message sent by the network device in response to the network connection request (See 306 Fig.3, UE receives RRC connection setup message; See 302 Fig.3, UE receiving paging message from the network);
- parsing, by the electronic device, the paging message (See ¶.11, a paging message including temporary subscriber identity information, when receiving the paging message comprising the temporary subscriber identity information, determining whether the terminal is in an RRC connected mode, and if it is determined that the terminal is in the RRC connected mode, performing RRC connection reestablishment),
- determining a type of the paging message based on parsing the paging message (See ¶.5, a paging message for delivering Packet Switched (PS) data and CS voice includes System Architecture Evolution (SAE)-Temporary Mobile Station Identity (S-TMSI) information; See ¶.62-63, when it is determined that the UE is in the RRC connected mode and receives the paging message including the S-TMSI for the PS data or CS voice transport at operation 602, the eNB performs the RRC connection reestablishment of FIG. 4 with the UE at operation 604. [0063] When it is determined that the UE is in the RRC idle mode and receives the paging message including the S-TMSI for the PS data or CS voice transport at operation 602, the eNB performs the RRC connection setup of FIG. 3 with the UE at operation 606; Examiner’s Note: Chen discloses the limitation “determining a type of the paging message”);
- in response to determining that the type of paging message is a preset paging message (See ¶.13, when receiving the paging message comprising the temporary subscriber identity information, determine whether the terminal is in an RRC connected mode and to perform RRC connection reestablishment if it is determined that the terminal is in the RRC connected mode), determining, by the electronic device, whether the electronic device is in a preset state (¶.5, paging in the LTE communication system is conducted when there is packet data or Circuit Switched (CS) voice destined for the UE, and when System Information (SI) is changed. When the SI is changed, the paging is transmitted to the UE over the network in both an RRC idle mode and the RRC connected mode of the UE. A paging message for delivering Packet Switched (PS) data and CS voice includes System Architecture Evolution (SAE)-Temporary Mobile Station Identity (S-TMSI) information, which is sent when the UE is in the RRC idle mode; See ¶.6, when the paging message including the S-TMSI of the UE is sent over the network, the network can determine the UE in the RRC idle mode); and
- in response to determining that the electronic device is in the preset state, ignoring, by the electronic device, the paging message (See ¶.6, E-UTRAN standard of the 3GPP does not describe an exception when the UE receives the paging including its S-TMSI in the RRC connected mode. That is, when the paging message including the S-TMSI of the UE is sent over the network, the network can determine the UE in the RRC idle mode. At this time, when the UE stays in the RRC connected mode, the UE ignores the received paging message. In result, the UE cannot normally receive the PS data and the CS voice. When the UE triggers an uplink data transfer event, the RRC status mismatch between the UE and the network continues until a scheduling request is sent to the eNodeB and RRC connection reestablishment is conducted).
Cho discloses that “the UE cannot normally receive the PS data and the CS voice. When the UE triggers an uplink data transfer event, the RRC status mismatch between the UE and the network continues until a scheduling request is sent to the eNodeB and RRC connection reestablishment is conducted (See ¶.6),” but does not explicitly disclose what Chen discloses,
- in response to determining that the type of the paging message is not the preset paging message, establishing, by the electronic device, a network connection to the network device based on the paging message (Chen, See 5a Fig.3 and ¶.5, the SGSN sends a paging message carrying a CS domain indication to the terminal through the GERAN or UTRAN. The terminal executes a corresponding service according to the domain indication in the paging message; See ¶.6, in a scenario of the mobile terminated short message service, if the terminal is performing a PS service when receiving the paging message of the SGSN, the terminal suspends the ongoing PS service after receiving the paging message that carries the CS domain indication, and returns to a CS domain to receive a short message, thereby resulting in an interruption of the current PS service of the user).”
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to apply the method of “in response to determining that the type of the paging message is not the preset paging message, establishing, by the electronic device, a network connection to the network device based on the paging message” as taught by Chen into the system of Cho, so that it provides a way for the terminal to execute a corresponding service type according to the domain indication in the paging message (Chen, See ¶.5).
Regarding claim 27, Cho discloses “wherein the paging message is a packet switching (PS) paging message (See ¶.62, PS data or CS voice).”
Regarding claim 28, Cho discloses “wherein the preset state comprises: a data service switch off state of the electronic device; a voice over long term evolution (VOLTE) switch off state of the electronic device; a do-not-disturb switch on state of the electronic device; or an enterprise Wi-Fi connected state of the electronic device (See ¶.31, the UE cannot switch from the RRC connected mode to an RRC idle state by itself When receiving the paging message including the S-TMSI in the RRC connected mode because of a network fault, the UE adjusts the RRC status of the UE and the network to the RRC connected mode by setting a value Reestablishment Cause to a value other Failure and performing RRC connection reestablishment; See ¶.5, Paging in the LTE communication system is conducted when there is packet data or Circuit Switched (CS) voice destined for the UE).”
Regarding claim 30, Cho and Chen disclose “in response to determining that the type of the paging message is the preset paging message and the electronic device is not in the preset state, establishing, by the electronic device, the network connection to the network device based on the paging message (Cho, See ¶.6, when the paging message including the S-TMSI of the UE is sent over the network, the network can determine the UE in the RRC idle mode. At this time, when the UE stays in the RRC connected mode, the UE ignores the received paging message. In result, the UE cannot normally receive the PS data and the CS voice. When the UE triggers an uplink data transfer event, the RRC status mismatch between the UE and the network continues until a scheduling request is sent to the eNodeB and RRC connection reestablishment is conducted; Chen, See ¶.5-6 for service type indication as rejected in claim 26).” Therefore, this claim is rejected with the similar reasons and motivation set forth in the rejection of claim 26.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jung H Park whose telephone number is 571-272-8565. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 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, Derrick Ferris can be reached on 571-272-3123. 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.
/JUNG H PARK/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2411
Prosecution Insights