DETAILED ACTION
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 .
This action is in response to Applicant’s amendment filed on October 1, 2026. Claims 9, 14, 23, 42-56 are still pending in the present application. This action is made FINAL.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed October 1, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The argument features Edge does not disclose “if no control node belonging to the first core network of the first PLMN is selectable or available.”
The examiner respectfully disagrees with the applicant’s statement and asserts that it needs to be clear, in the independent claims, what the “access network node,” “control node belonging to a first core network of the first PLMN, ” and “donor control node” are. The “if” statement is a conditional statement that if not met makes this portion of the claim invalid. See MPEP 2111.04. Using the broadest reasonable interpretation, Edge discloses “…that the UE 1002/1102 is not located in a geographic location supported by the serving PLMN…” (par. 172, lines 5-8). So, there is no control node belonging to the first core network of the first PLMN that is selectable or available. It is known in the field of art for an access network node to receive data and forward the data to another component in a different core network. The applicant would need to further amend the independent claims to clearly identify the specific entities involved and include novel steps/limitations to indicate the patentable subject matter.
The argument features Edge does not disclose “sending a control message to an access network node specifying a donor control node belonging to a core network of a second PLMN different from the first PLMN.”
The examiner respectfully disagrees with the applicant’s statement and asserts that, as disclosed above, it would need to be clear what the “access network node,” “control node used in a core network of a first PLMN,” and “donor control node” are. Using the broadest reasonable interpretation, Edge discloses “…determine a second PLMN 1108 from the plurality of preferred PLMNs indicated by the UE 1102…forward the NAS message to the second PLMN (e.g. to an AMF 422 in the second PLMN)” (par. 172, lines 11-14). Edge discloses the NAS message and an indication of a plurality of preferred PLMNs including a preferred PLMN for each of multiple potential geographic locations of the UE that are sent. The PLMN component 199 may be configured to attempt to determine a current geographic location of the UE (par. 49, lines 4-9). It is well known in the field of art that each PLMN contains multiple nodes/components. It is also well known in the field of art for a node in a PLMN to send a message. Where does the control message come from? Why is the control message sent to an access network node? What else is involved other than just sending a message? The applicant would need to further amend the independent claims to clearly identify the specific entities involved and include novel steps/limitations to indicate the patentable subject matter.
The argument features Edge does not specify the destination control node in the control message.
The examiner respectfully disagrees with the applicant’s statement and asserts that, as disclosed above, it would need to be clear what the “access network node,” “control node used in a core network of a first PLMN,” and “donor control node” are. Using the broadest reasonable interpretation, Edge discloses “…determine a second PLMN 1108 from the plurality of preferred PLMNs indicated by the UE 1102…forward the NAS message to the second PLMN (e.g. to an AMF 422 in the second PLMN)” (par. 172, lines 11-14). Edge discloses the NAS message and an indication of a plurality of preferred PLMNs including a preferred PLMN for each of multiple potential geographic locations of the UE that are sent. The PLMN component 199 may be configured to attempt to determine a current geographic location of the UE (par. 49, lines 4-9). It is well known in the field of art that each PLMN contains multiple nodes/components.
The argument features Watfa does not teach or suggest store a list of one or more PLMNs to be used during a disaster condition; store a list of one or more network slice identifiers for disaster roaming associated with each PLMN in the PLMN list; select a PLMN for disaster roaming from the stored PLMN list; select a network slice identifier for disaster roaming from the list associated with the selected PLMN; and transmit a registration request message indicating both the selected PLMN and the selected network slice identifier.
The examiner respectfully disagrees with the applicant’s statement and asserts that, using the broadest reasonable interpretation, Watfa discloses saved lists, in par. 88-92, that are used to indicate what should be avoided during a disaster condition; Watfa discloses a UE that uses, in order to be used it is stored by the UE (par. 127, line 10), slice(s) that are prioritized during disaster congestion situation (par. 127, lines 1-7); PLMN-A is selected (par. 127, lines 7-10); a network slice identifier for a disaster situation is selected from the list associated with the selected PLMN (par. 127, lines 11-12); the UE makes a request for the slice(s) (par. 127, lines 11-12) that is associated with PLMN-A (par. 127, lines 7-10) this request is associated with a registration request (par. 117, lines 1-3). It is known in the field of art for a UE to store data, make a selection, and then transmit a message based on the selection. Where does the UE get the list from? Where does the UE get the network slice identifiers from? What specifically is the core network? What else is involved other than storing data, making a selection, and then transmitting a message based on the selection? The applicant will need to further amend the independent claims to clearly indicate the patentable subject matter.
The argument features Watfa does not disclose a stored list of PLMNs to be used during a disaster condition.
The examiner respectfully disagrees with the applicant’s statement and asserts that, using the broadest reasonable interpretation, Watfa discloses saved lists, in par. 88-92, that are used to indicate what should be avoided during a disaster condition.
The argument features Watfa does not disclose a stored list of disaster roaming network slice identifiers associated with each PLMN.
The examiner respectfully disagrees with the applicant’s statement and asserts that, using the broadest reasonable interpretation, Watfa discloses a UE that uses, in order to be used it is stored by the UE (par. 127, line 10), slice(s) that are prioritized during disaster congestion situation (par. 127, lines 1-7); PLMN-A is selected among other PLMNs such as PLMN-D, HPLMN (par. 127, lines 1-12).
The argument features Watfa does not disclose selecting a PLMN from such a stored PLMN list and then selecting a network slice identifier from a corresponding list associated with the selected PLMN.
The examiner respectfully disagrees with the applicant’s statement and asserts that, using the broadest reasonable interpretation, Watfa discloses the UE makes a request for the slice(s) (par. 127, lines 11-12) that is associated with PLMN-A (par. 127, lines 7-10), PLMN-A is selected among other PLMNs such as PLMN-D, HPLMN (par. 127, lines 1-12).
In view of the above, the rejection using Edge and Watfa is maintained as repeated below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 9, 14, 42-50 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being unpatentable by Edge (U.S. Patent Application Number: 2022/0338111).
Consider claim 9; Edge discloses a method performed by an access network node, the method comprising:
connecting to a first core network of a first Public Land Mobile Network (PLMN) and to a second core network of a second PLMN different from the first PLMN [“The CNs 410 may be public land mobile networks (PLMN)…” (par. 64, lines 36-37) “…various components within CN1 410-1 that may operate with the RAN 412. It should be understood that CN2 410-2 and other CNs may include identical, similar or different components and associated RANs…” (par. 64, lines 44-48)];
receiving a Non-Access Stratum message sent from a User Equipment (UE) and associated with the first PLMN [“…the base station 1004/1104 may receive, from the UE 1002/1102 via a communication satellite and a radio cell, a NAS message and an indication of a plurality of preferred PLMNs including a preferred PLMN for each of multiple potential geographic locations of the UE 1002/1102.” (par. 164, lines 14-19)]; and
if no control node belonging to the first core network of the first PLMN is selectable or available [“The CNs 410 may be public land mobile networks (PLMN)…” (par. 64, lines 36-37) “…the base station 1004/1104 may receive from the serving PLMN 1006/1106 an indication that the UE 1002/1102 is not located in a geographic location supported by the serving PLMN 1006/1106.” (par. 172, lines 5-8)], forwarding the Non-Access Stratum message to a donor control node belonging to the second core network of the second PLMN [“The base station may forward the NAS message to the second PLMN (e.g. to an AMF 422 in the second PLMN).” (par. 172, lines 12-14)].
Consider claim 14; Edge discloses a method performed by a control node used in a core network of a first Public Land Mobile Network (PLMN), the method comprising:
sending a control message to an access network node specifying a donor control node belonging to a core network of a second PLMN different from the first PLMN to which the control node belongs [“…the base station 1004/1104 may receive from the serving PLMN 1006/1106 an indication that the UE 1002/1102 is not located in a geographic location supported by the serving PLMN 1006/1106.” (par. 172, lines 5-8)], wherein
the control message causes the access network node to, if no control node belonging to the core network of the first PLMN is selectable or available [“The CNs 410 may be public land mobile networks (PLMN)…” (par. 64, lines 36-37) “…the base station 1004/1104 may receive from the serving PLMN 1006/1106 an indication that the UE 1002/1102 is not located in a geographic location supported by the serving PLMN 1006/1106.” (par. 172, lines 5-8)], forward to the donor control node of the second PLMN a Non-Access Stratum message that is transmitted from a User Equipment (UE) and is associated with the first PLMN [“The base station may forward the NAS message to the second PLMN (e.g. to an AMF 422 in the second PLMN).” (par. 172, lines 12-14)].
Consider claim 42; Edge discloses if a control node belonging to the first core network of the first PLMN is selected, forwarding the Non-Access Stratum message to the selected control node [“The UE may transmit, to a base station via a radio cell and a communication satellite, a non access stratum (NS) message and an indication of at least one preferred PLMN for each of the multiple potential geographic locations of the UE…The base station may then determine a serving PLMN. The base station may then forward a NAS message, received by the base station, from the UE, to the serving PLMN.” (par. 34, lines 3-11)].
Consider claim 43; Edge discloses receiving the Non-Access Stratum message via a Radio Resource Control message containing an identifier of the first PLMN and the Non-Access Stratum message [“…the UE 1002 may send an RRC Setup Complete message to the base station 1004 and may include a NAS message (e.g. a NAS Registration Request) in the RRC Setup Complete message. In the RRC Setup Complete message, the UE 1002 may also indicate to the base station 1004 the preferred PLMN selected at 1020 for each potential geographic location.” (par. 124, lines 1-7)].
Consider claim 44; Edge discloses a Home PLMN of the UE sending the Non-Access Stratum message is the first PLMN [“…the base station 1004 may receive a NAS response message from the serving PLMN 1006.” (par. 171, lines 4-6)].
Consider claim 45; Edge discloses receiving a control message from a control node belonging to the first core network specifying the donor control node belonging to the second core network [“…the serving PLMN 1106 (e.g., the AMF 422) may include the geographic location of the UE 1102 as determined at 1130.” (par. 150, lines 7-9) “…the base station 1104 may again determine the geographic location of the UE 1102, with the added benefit of the UE geographic location information received at 1132 from the serving PLMN at 1106…the base station 1104 may determine a second PLMN 1108 based on a correct geographic location of the UE 1102, as received at 1132 or determined or verified at 1134” (par. 151, lines 2-8)].
Consider claim 46; Edge discloses receiving the control message in a procedure for setting up or updating configuration data required for interoperation between the control node belonging to the first core network and the access network node [“…the base station 1104 may forward, in another NGAP initial UE message, the NAS message (e.g. the Nas Registration Request message) received at 1122 to the second PLMN 1108 determined at 1134 (e.g., to an AMF 422 in the second PLMN 1108).” (par. 152, lines 1-5)].
Consider claim 47; Edge discloses the procedure is an NG Setup procedure, a RAN Configuration Update procedure, or an AMF Configuration Update procedure [“…the base station 1104 may forward, in another NGAP initial UE message, the NAS message (e.g. the Nas Registration Request message) received at 1122 to the second PLMN 1108 determined at 1134 (e.g., to an AMF 422 in the second PLMN 1108).” (par. 152, lines 1-5)].
Consider claim 48; Edge discloses broadcasting information in a cell indicating a list of available one or more PLMNs [“…the base station 1104 may broadcast in SIBs (e.g. in a SIB1) via the communication satellite indications of supported PLMNs (e.g. an MCC-MNC combination for each PLMN) in the radio cell. The SIBs may indicate one or more PLMNs (referred to as supported PLMNs) supported by the base station 1104 in the radio cell.” (par. 139, lines 1-6)], wherein the list includes an identifier of the first PLMN but does not include an identifier of the second PLMN [“…the base station 1104 may broadcast in SIBs (e.g. in a SIB1) via the communication satellite indications of supported PLMNs (e.g. an MCC-MNC combination for each PLMN) in the radio cell. The SIBs may indicate one or more PLMNs (referred to as supported PLMNs) supported by the base station 1104 in the radio cell.” (par. 139, lines 1-6)].
Consider claim 49; Edge discloses sending the control message in a procedure for setting up or updating configuration data required for interoperation between the control node and the access network node [“…the base station 1104 may forward, in another NGAP initial UE message, the NAS message (e.g. the Nas Registration Request message) received at 1122 to the second PLMN 1108 determined at 1134 (e.g., to an AMF 422 in the second PLMN 1108).” (par. 152, lines 1-5)].
Consider claim 50; Edge discloses the procedure is an NG Setup procedure, a RAN Configuration Update procedure, or an AMF Configuration Update procedure [“…the base station 1104 may forward, in another NGAP initial UE message, the NAS message (e.g. the Nas Registration Request message) received at 1122 to the second PLMN 1108 determined at 1134 (e.g., to an AMF 422 in the second PLMN 1108).” (par. 152, lines 1-5)].
Claims 23, 53-56 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being unpatentable by Watfa et al. (U.S. Patent Application Number: 2022/0232363).
Consider claim 23; Watfa discloses a method performed by a User Equipment (UE), the method comprising:
storing in the at least one memory a list of one or more Public Land Mobile Networks (PLMNs) to be used during a disaster condition [“When a UE attempts to use a target PLMN due to a DC on a source PLMN, the UE may have saved any of the following lists corresponding to a PLMN…” (par. 88, lines 1-3)];
storing in the at least one memory a list of one or more network slice identifiers for disaster roaming associated with each PLMN in the list of one or more PLMNs [“To avoid congestion on the PLMN-A (the active PLMN which provides support during disaster situation of the PLMN-D), the PLMN-D (the PLMN experiencing the disaster situation) or HPLMN can indicate to the PLMN-A the PDU sessions… or slice(s) to be prioritized during the congestion situation.” (par. 127, lines 1-7) “The UE can be pre-configured with priority of PDU session(s) or slice(s) to be used during the congestion…” (par. 128, lines 1-2)];
selecting a PLMN for disaster roaming from the list of one or more PLMNs [“When a UE attempts to use a target PLMN due to a DC on a source PLMN…” (par. 88, lines 1-2)];
selecting at least one network slice identifier for disaster roaming from the list of one or more network slice identifiers for disaster roaming associated with the selected PLMN for disaster roaming [“To avoid congestion on the PLMN-A (the active PLMN which provides support during disaster situation of the PLMN-D), the PLMN-D (the PLMN experiencing the disaster situation) or HPLMN can indicate to the PLMN-A the PDU sessions…or slice(s) to be prioritized during the congestion situation.” (par. 127, lines 1-7) “The UE uses this information as described with respect to time.” (par. 127, lines 10-11) “The UE can be pre-configured with priority of PDU session(s) or slice(s) to be used during the congestion…” (par. 128, lines 1-2)]; and
transmitting a registration request message [“…the UE 110 sends a registration request to the AMF 220. At S2, the AMF 220 determines that the UE is registering following a DC.” (par. 64, lines 1-3)] indicating the selected PLMN for disaster roaming [“When a UE attempts to use a target PLMN due to a DC on a source PLMN, the UE may have saved any of the following lists corresponding to a PLMN…” (par. 88, lines 1-3)] and indicating the selected network slice identifier for disaster roaming [“To avoid congestion on the PLMN-A (the active PLMN which provides support during disaster situation of the PLMN-D), the PLMN-D (the PLMN experiencing the disaster situation) or HPLMN can indicate to the PLMN-A the PDU sessions…or slice(s) to be prioritized during the congestion situation.” (par. 127, lines 1-7) “The UE can be pre-configured with priority of PDU session(s) or slice(s) to be used during the congestion…” (par. 128, lines 1-2)] to a core network of the selected PLMN for disaster roaming [“…the UE 110 sends a registration request to the AMF 220. At S2, the AMF 220 determines that the UE is registering following a DC.” (par. 64, lines 1-3)].
Consider claim 53; Watfa discloses if a radio access network of one PLMN included in the stored list of one or more PLMNs broadcasts disaster-related information indicating that disaster roaming is offered [“To avoid congestion on the PLMN-A (the active PLMN which provides support during disaster situation of the PLMN-D), the PLMN-D (the PLMN experiencing the disaster situation) or HPLMN can indicate to the PLMN-A the PDU sessions…or slice(s) to be prioritized during the congestion situation.” (par. 127, lines 1-7) “The UE uses this information as described with respect to time.” (par. 127, lines 10-11)], and if the disaster-related information indicates at least one network slice identifier included in the stored list of one or more network slice identifiers for disaster roaming associated with the one PLMN [“To avoid congestion on the PLMN-A (the active PLMN which provides support during disaster situation of the PLMN-D), the PLMN-D (the PLMN experiencing the disaster situation) or HPLMN can indicate to the PLMN-A the PDU sessions…or slice(s) to be prioritized during the congestion situation.” (par. 127, lines 1-7)], selecting the one PLMN as the PLMN for disaster roaming [“The UE uses this information as described with respect to time.” (par. 127, lines 10-11)].
Consider claim 54; Watfa discloses the disaster-related information indicates that disaster roaming is offered for a Registered PLMN in which the UE is registered or for a Home PLMN of the UE [“To avoid congestion on the PLMN-A (the active PLMN which provides support during disaster situation of the PLMN-D), the PLMN-D (the PLMN experiencing the disaster situation) or HPLMN can indicate to the PLMN-A the PDU sessions… or slice(s) to be prioritized during the congestion situation.” (par. 127, lines 1-7)].
Consider claim 55; Watfa discloses receiving, from a Home PLMN of the UE or a Registered PLMN to which the UE is registered, the list of one or more PLMNs to be used during the disaster condition and the list of one or more network slice identifiers for disaster roaming associated with each PLMN in the list of one or more PLMNs [“To avoid congestion on the PLMN-A (the active PLMN which provides support during disaster situation of the PLMN-D), the PLMN-D (the PLMN experiencing the disaster situation) or HPLMN can indicate to the PLMN-A the PDU sessions…or slice(s) to be prioritized during the congestion situation.” (par. 127, lines 1-7) “The UE uses this information as described with respect to time.” (par. 127, lines 10-11)].
Consider claim 56; Watfa discloses receiving, from a Home PLMN of the UE or a Registered PLMN to which the UE is registered, a list of one or more combinations, each of which is a combination of a PLMN to be used during the disaster condition and one or more network slice identifiers for disaster roaming [“To avoid congestion on the PLMN-A (the active PLMN which provides support during disaster situation of the PLMN-D), the PLMN-D (the PLMN experiencing the disaster situation) or HPLMN can indicate to the PLMN-A the PDU sessions…or slice(s) to be prioritized during the congestion situation.” (par. 127, lines 1-7) “The UE uses this information as described with respect to time.” (par. 127, lines 10-11)].
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 51 and 52 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watfa et al. (U.S. Patent Application Number: 2022/0232363) in view of Qiao et al. (U.S. Patent Application Number: 2022/0030495).
Consider claim 51, as applied in claim 23; Watfa discloses the claimed invention except: transmitting, to a radio access network of the selected PLMN for disaster roaming, a Radio Resource Control message containing the registration request message and containing the selected network slice identifier for disaster roaming.
In an analogous art Qiao discloses transmitting [“…the UE 2 may send a message to the RAN 1.” (par. 286, lines 1-2)], to a radio access network of the selected PLMN for disaster roaming [“…the UE 2 may send a message to the RAN 1.” (par. 286, lines 1-2) “The disaster PLMN indication may indicate that the UE selects the first PLMN/serving PLMN during the disaster of the second PLMN/disaster PLMN.” (par. 286, lines 19-22)], a Radio Resource Control message containing the registration request message and containing the selected network slice identifier for disaster roaming [“…the UE 2 may send a message to the RAN 1. The AN message may comprise AN parameters and/or a registration request message. The AN parameters may include at least one of:…establishment cause.” (par. 286, lines 1-4, 8) “The establishment cause may indicate requesting establishment of an RRC connection to the serving PLMN (e.g. PLMN 1) during the disaster of home PLMN (e.g. PLMN 2). The registration request message may comprise at least one of:…requested NSSAI (par. 286, lines 8-12, 17) “The disaster PLMN indication may indicate that the UE selects the first PLMN/serving PLMN during the disaster of the second PLMN/disaster PLMN.” (par. 286, lines 19-22)].
It is an object of Watfa’s invention to provide a method for disaster roaming support. It is an object of Qiao’s invention to provide a method of handing disasters affecting networks. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Watfa by including an RRC for disaster roaming, as taught by Qiao, for the purpose of effectively providing services in a wireless network.
Consider claim 52, as applied in claim 51; Qiao discloses the Radio Resource Control message is an RRC setup complete message [“…the UE 2 may send a message to the RAN 1. The AN message may comprise AN parameters and/or a registration request message. The AN parameters may include at least one of:…establishment cause.” (par. 286, lines 1-4, 8) “The establishment cause may indicate requesting establishment of an RRC connection to the serving PLMN (e.g. PLMN 1) during the disaster of home PLMN (e.g. PLMN 2) (par. 286, lines 8-11) “In response to the AN message received, the (R)AN 1 may select an AMF (e.g. AMF 1) based on the AN message. For example, the (R)AN 1 may select an AMF based on the selected PLMN ID and/or the disaster PLMN indication and/or the identifier of the disaster PLMN and/or the establishment cause.” (par. 287, lines 1-6) “…the UE 100 may send to the new AMF 155 a registration complete message.” (par. 218, lines 43-45)].
Conclusion
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
extension fee 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
Examiner should be directed to Joel Ajayi whose telephone number is (571) 270-1091. The Examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday from 7:30am to 5:00pm and Friday 7:30am to 4:00 pm.
If attempts to reach the Examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner’s supervisor, Jeanette Parker can be reached on (571) 270-3647. 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) or 703-305-3028.
Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or proceeding should be directed to the receptionist/customer service whose telephone number is (571) 272-2600.
/JOEL AJAYI/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2646
