CTNF 18/710,906 CTNF 85621 Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 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 Priority This application is a National Stage application under 35 U.S.C. 371 of International Application No. PCT/IB2022/061350, filed 11/23/2022, and also claims foreign priority to Italian Application Number IT102021000029642, filed 11/23/2021. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statements (IDS) is submitted on 6/7/2024 and 6/17/2024 were filed in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. According, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner. Examiner Notes Examiner noticed there are two sets of Abstracts, Claims, Drawings and Specifications, however the Applicant has not indicated which set is the most recent version. It appears that both sets are the same, therefore, for the purpose of examination, Examiner chose the set that does not have “WO 2023/095031”. Examiner suggests Applicant clear the record. Specification The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details. The current version of abstract has more than 150 words. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b). Claim Objections 07-29-01 AIA Claim s 1-12 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claims 1-12 recites numbers in parentheses in bold font, Examiner suggests un-bold the numbers. Claim 1 recites “a Unified Data Management (UMD) for a 5G network” on line 6, and later recites “in the HSS or UDM node” on line 9. Examiner suggests either adding a phrase “node” in line 6, or remove the “node” from line 9. Similar issue on line 13. Claim 1 further recites “define groups of mobile devices” on line 10. Examiner suggests changing the limitation to “define the group of mobile devices”, or similar wording. Claim 1 additionally recites “two or more mobile private networks of said plurality”. Examiner suggests changing the limitation to “said plurality of two or more mobile private networks”, or similar wording. Claim 1 also recites “characterized in that it comprises” on line 17. Examiner suggests changing the limitation to “the method further comprising”, or similar wording to avoid the phrase “it”. Claims 4-12 are objected to under 37 CFR 1.75(c) as being in improper form because a multiple dependent claim cannot depend from any other multiple dependent claim. See MPEP § 608.01(n). Accordingly, the claims 4-12 have not been further treated on the merits . Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 07-04-01 AIA 07-04 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows: Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. Claims 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more such as an idea standing alone such as an instantiated concept, pan or scheme, as well as a mental process (thinking) that “can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper”, for example preparing a plurality of mobile private networks, preparing a plurality of mobile devices, registering a group of mobile devices with mobile private network, prepare central network, connect central network to mobile private network, forward registration to central network, and connect two mobile devices. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the generically recited computer elements do not add a meaningful limitation to the abstract idea because they amount to simply implementing the abstract idea on a computer. The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because he steps of the claimed invention can be done mentally and no additional features in the claims would preclude them from being performed as such. CLAIM ANALYSIS STEP 1: YES. The claims meet the statutory categories. Claims 1-12 fall within a statutory category of method. STEP 2A: PRONG ONE YES. The claims are directed to a judicial exception. Claims 1-12 recite a judicial exception being directed to an abstract idea. As a representative example, take Claim 1: A method for transmitting/receiving multimedia data between mobile devices, said method comprising the following steps: a) preparing a plurality of 4G and/or 5G mobile private networks each comprising a corresponding Home Subscriber Server (HSS) node (6) for a 4G network or a Unified Data Management (UDM) for a 5G network, the mobile private networks of said plurality being mutually isolated to each other; b) preparing a plurality of mobile devices (12) associated with users; c) registration of a group of mobile devices (12) in the HSS or UDM node (6) of a corresponding mobile private network to define groups of mobile devices (12) whose connectivity is provided by separate and isolated mobile private networks; d) preparing one or more central networks each comprising a corresponding HSS or UDM node (6′, 6″) and a corresponding Interrogating Call Section Control Function (I-CSCF) node; e) connecting said one or more central network to two or more mobile private networks of said plurality; characterized in that it comprises a step f) of forwarding to the HSS or UDM node (6′, 6″) of said one or more central networks the registration of each user's mobile device (12) already registered during execution of the step c); and a step f’) of connecting two mobile devices associated with different private networks, the connection between said users' mobile devices (12) associated with different private networks being carried out by the registration saved in the HSS or UDM node (6′, 6″) of said one or more central networks during execution of the step f). STEP 2A Prong Two: NO. Evaluating additional elements recited in the claim individually and in combination, the claim as a whole does not integrate the exception into a practical application. The additional elements in in claim 1 account for insignificant extra solution activity. The limitations merely define the intended environment (4G, 5G, HSS, UDM, mobile private networks, central network, I-CSCF) defined generally and are mere generic entities constitute mere data gathering and analysis recited at a high level of generality and amount to receiving or transmitting data generally, which is well-understood, routine, conventional activity. See MPEP 2106.05(d), subsection II. The limitations remain insignificant extra-solution activity even upon reconsideration. Even when considered in combination, the additional elements represent mere instructions to apply an exception and insignificant extra-solution activity, which cannot provide an inventive concept. STEP 2B: NO. Evaluating additional elements recited, the claim as a whole does not recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The analysis above in parts and re-evaluated again for the claims as a whole, the additional elements are mere generic entities such as (4G, 5G, HSS, UDM, mobile private networks, central network, I-CSCF) without any given implementation thus amount to data communication, gathering, analysis recited at a high level of generality and amount to analyzing information and outputting display, which is well-understood, routine, conventional activity. See MPEP 2106.05(d), subsection II. The limitations remain insignificant extra-solution activity even upon reconsideration. Even when considered in combination, the additional elements represent mere instructions to apply an exception and insignificant extra-solution activity, which cannot provide an inventive concept. ANALYSIS 2A Dependent Claims 2-12 Dependent claims recite additional elements: P-CSCF, I-CSCF, S-CSCF, as recited in claims 2-10 and 12; mobile private network in claim 11. The dependent claims further recite additional elements that are recited at a high level of generality and thus amount to intended environment descriptors. Thus, the claims are mere data gathering, analyzing and outputting recited at a high level of generality, and thus are insignificant extra-solution activity. See MPEP 2106.05(g) (“whether the limitation is significant”). In addition, all uses of the recited judicial exceptions require such data gathering and output, and, as such, these limitations do not impose any meaningful limits on the claim. These limitations amount to necessary data gathering, analyzing and outputting. See MPEP 2106.05. ANALYSIS 2B Dependent Claims 2-12 NO. Evaluating additional elements recited, the claim as a whole does not recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The analysis above in parts and re-evaluated again for the claims as a whole, the additional elements are mere data gathering, analyzing and outputting recited at a high level of generality and amount to receiving or transmitting data over a network, which is well-understood, routine, conventional activity. See MPEP 2106.05(d), subsection II. The limitations remain insignificant extra-solution activity even upon reconsideration. Even when considered in combination, the additional elements represent mere instructions to apply an exception and insignificant extra-solution activity, which cannot provide an inventive concept. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-15 AIA Claim s 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by 3GPP “3 rd Generation Partnership Project; Technical Specification Group Services and System Aspects; IP Multimedia Subsystem (IMS); Stage 2 (Release 17),” September 2021, 3GPP TS 23.228 V17.2.0, Technical Specification, 353 pages, hereinafter D1 . Regarding claim 1, D1 teaches a method for transmitting/receiving multimedia data between mobile devices (Figure 5.19h and Section 5.7a.2), said method comprising the following steps: a) preparing a plurality of 4G and/or 5G mobile private networks each comprising a corresponding Home Subscriber Server (HSS) node (6) for a 4G network or a Unified Data Management (UDM) for a 5G network, the mobile private networks of said plurality being mutually isolated to each other (Figure AB.1.2.1-1 and Pages 349 and 350; Annex AB describes deployment options for SNPNs with UDM to enable access to IMS services for SNPN [stand-alone Non-Public Network] subscribers. The SNPN deploys its own IMS used by subscribers with a SNPN 5GS subscription); b) preparing a plurality of mobile devices (12) associated with users (Section 5.7a.2 and Pages 142 and 143; UE #1 and UE #2); c) registration of a group of mobile devices (12) in the HSS or UDM node (6) of a corresponding mobile private network to define groups of mobile devices (12) whose connectivity is provided by separate and isolated mobile private networks (Section 5.7a.2 and Pages 142 and 143; UE #1 sends SIP INVITE request to P-CSCF. Figure AB.1.2.1-1 and Pages 349 and 350; Annex AB describes deployment options for SNPNs with UDM to enable access to IMS services for SNPN [stand-alone Non-Public Network] subscribers); d) preparing one or more central networks (Section 5.7a.2 and Pages 142 and 143; terminating home network) each comprising a corresponding HSS or UDM node (6′, 6″) (Section 5.7a.2 and Pages 142 and 143; I CSCF#2 performs Location Query procedure with the HSS to acquire the S CSCF address of the destination user (S CSCF#2)) and a corresponding Interrogating Call Section Control Function (I-CSCF) node (Section 5.7a.2 and Pages 142 and 143; I-CSCF #2) (Further in Section 5.11.5.6 and Figure 5.41; I-CSCF and HSS of network operator); e) connecting said one or more central network to two or more mobile private networks of said plurality (Section 5.7a.2 and Pages 142 and 143; originating network and terminating network, UEs accessing IMS service via SNPN); characterized in that it comprises a step f) of forwarding to the HSS or UDM node (6′, 6″) of said one or more central networks the registration of each user's mobile device (12) already registered during execution of the step c) (Section 5.7a.2 and Pages 142 and 143; Steps 6-10; S-CSCF #2 forwards the INVITE request to P-CSCF #2 along the path determined upon UE #2’s most recent registration procedure. P-CSCF #2 examines the media parameters within an IMS session (based on P-CSCF local policies); and a step f’) of connecting two mobile devices associated with different private networks, the connection between said users' mobile devices (12) associated with different private networks being carried out by the registration saved in the HSS or UDM node (6′, 6″) of said one or more central networks during execution of the step f) (Section 5.7a.2 and Pages 142-144; UE #2 may optionally generate a ringing message towards UE #1, UE #2 accepts the session with a 200 OK response, and establish sessions between UE #1 and UE #2). Regarding claim 2, D1 teaches all of the limitations of claim 1, as described above. Further, D1 teaches each mobile private network comprises at least a Proxy Call Section Control Function (P-CSCF) node (8), an Interrogating Call Section Control Function (I-CSCF) node (10) and a serving Call Section Control Function (S-CSCF) node (9) (Section 5.7a.2 and Pages 142-144; terminating network/ terminating home network comprises P-CSCF, I-CSCF and S-CSCF). Regarding claim 3, D1 teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 or claim 2, as described above. Further, D1 teaches e characterized in that each of said central network comprises an Interrogating Call Section Control Function (I-CSCF) node (10′) operatively connected to the HSS or UDM node (6′, 6″) (Section 5.11.5.6 and Figure 5.41; I-CSCF and HSS of network operator). Pertinent Art 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Mufti et al. (US 20160156783 A1) discloses fork incoming calls to a destination device, register multiple devices for IMS services, and notify each forked device of incoming calls. Castellanos Zamora et al. (US 20220408251 A1) discloses supporting authentication of a user equipment in an Internet Protocol Multimedia Subsystem comprising Unified Data Management and Home Subscriber Server through registration . Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jing Gao whose telephone number is (571)270-7226. The examiner can normally be reached on 9am - 6pm M-F. 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 Alison Slater can be reached on (571) 270-0375. 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. /Jing Gao/ Examiner, Art Unit 2647 Application/Control Number: 18/710,906 Page 2 Art Unit: 2647 Application/Control Number: 18/710,906 Page 3 Art Unit: 2647 Application/Control Number: 18/710,906 Page 4 Art Unit: 2647 Application/Control Number: 18/710,906 Page 5 Art Unit: 2647 Application/Control Number: 18/710,906 Page 6 Art Unit: 2647 Application/Control Number: 18/710,906 Page 7 Art Unit: 2647 Application/Control Number: 18/710,906 Page 8 Art Unit: 2647 Application/Control Number: 18/710,906 Page 9 Art Unit: 2647 Application/Control Number: 18/710,906 Page 10 Art Unit: 2647 Application/Control Number: 18/710,906 Page 11 Art Unit: 2647 Application/Control Number: 18/710,906 Page 12 Art Unit: 2647 Application/Control Number: 18/710,906 Page 13 Art Unit: 2647
Prosecution Insights