CTNF 18/729,919 CTNF 69003 DETAILED ACTION 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. Specification 06-31 AIA The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification. Drawings 06-36 AIA The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the request reception module, determination module, transmission module, response reception module, and the establishment module, reception module and their processors must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. 07-30-03-h AIA Claim Interpretation Under the broadest reasonable interpretation standard, the “ or” language, the condition would also not occur and the step or function claimed would never be realized, hence the claim does not require to perform the step or function. See Ex parte Katz, 2011 WL 514314, at 4-5 (BPAI Jan. 27, 2011, 2011 WL 1211248 at 2 (BPAI Mar. 25, 2011); see also In re Johnston, 435 f.3d 1381, 1384 (Fed. Cir. 2006)( " optional elements do not narrow the claim because they can always be omitted ”). “Or” conditions are not limitations against which prior art must be found. Under the broadest scenario, the steps or functions dependent on the “or” condition would not be invoked, and such, the Examiner is not required to find these limitations in the prior art in order to render the claim anticipated. In re Am. Acad. Of Sci. Tech Ctr., 367 f.3d 1359, 1359 (Fed. Cir. 2004). A ” module ” is each of a set of standardized parts or independent units that can be used to construct a more complex structure Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-01 AIA The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. 07-31-01 Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The specification does not originally support and/or inadequately describes the request reception module, determination module, transmission module, response reception module, and the establishment module, reception module having processors. According to the specification the only module is that has a processor is the control function module, #41, 43, paragraphs 61-63 of the specification. 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 AIA Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by United States Patent Application Publication 2021/0329716 ( Wong, et al ) . Wong, et al discloses a mobile network control method (figure 8, #700) executed by a computer (figure 7, #613). The mobile network control method comprising receiving, from a user terminal (#21) that has accessed a mobile network (#100, SERVING NETWORK), a request to communicate with a data processing device (#122) connected to an external network (#190) outside the mobile network (#100, 710). Determining whether or not a user (#108) of the user terminal (#121) is a registered user (#720, ¶124) and a in a case where a user (#108) of the user terminal (#121) is a registered user, transmitting information used to establish communication between a communication device (#121) in the mobile network (#100) and the data processing device (#122) to an external network control device (#142) that controls configured to control the external network (#142, 730, ¶125). The Examiner has cited particular columns and/or line/paragraphs numbers in the reference(s) applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. IN RE JUNG, No. 10-1019 (Fed. Cir. 2011) . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA 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. 07-20-02-aia AIA This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 1-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over United States Patent Application Publication 2021/0329716 ( Wong, et al ) in view of over United States Patent Application Publication 2005/0055551 ( Becker, et al ) . United States Patent Application Publication 2021/0329716 ( Wong, et al ) discloses all subject matter. A mobile network control device (figure 7, #141) comprising a request reception module that receives, configured to receive, from a user terminal that has accessed a mobile network, a request to communicate with a data processing device connected to an external network outside the mobile network (figures 1, 8, #108, SERVING NETWORK, REMOTE NETWORK, 142, 192, 700, 710, ¶6, 46-48, 122, 123) a determination module, configured to determine that determines whether or not a user of the user terminal is a registered user (figure 5, #613, 1-7, ¶95, 102, 108, 120, 124, etc.) and a transmission module, configured to in a case where a user of the user terminal is a registered user, transmits transmit information used to establish communication between a communication device in the mobile network and the data processing device to an external network control device that controls configured to control the external network (#617, 108, 121, 125, 730, 142, 141, SERVING NETWORK, HOME NETWORK, ¶125). Wong, et al does not disclose the request reception module, determination module, transmission module, response reception module, and the establishment module, reception module having processors. Modules having processor is over two decades old and well known in the art. The Examiner takes Official Notice as such and provides Becker, et al as evidence as such. Hence, it 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 to incorporate the request reception module, determination module, transmission module, response reception module, and the establishment module, reception module having processors in the mobile network control device of Wong, et al in order speed up processing speeds. Regarding claim 2, note #614, 142, 122, HOME NETWORK, 121, 613, in Wong, et al , which shows a response reception module, comprising one or more processors, configured to receive that receives, from the external network control device, a response indicating that communication between a communication device in the external network and the data processing device has been established; and an establishment module, comprising one or more processors, configured to, upon receipt of the response from the external network control device, establishes establish communication between the user terminal and the communication device in the mobile network. Regarding claim 3, Wong, et al shows an external network control device (figure 5, #142, 617, ¶47, 51, 56) comprising a reception module, configured to receive that receives, from a mobile network control device that controls configured to control a mobile network, information used to establish communication between a communication device in an external network outside the mobile network and a data processing device connected to the external network (#141, 100, 122, 142, HOME NETWORK, ¶48, 63, 64, etc.) and an establishment module that establishes configured to establish the communication between the communication device in the external network and the data processing device on the basis of the information received from the mobile network control device (figures 5, 6, #175, 122, 121, ¶73. The Examiner has cited particular columns and/or line/paragraphs numbers in the reference(s) applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. IN RE JUNG, No. 10-1019 (Fed. Cir. 2011) . 07-22-aia AIA Claim (s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over United States Patent Application Publication 2021/0329716 ( Wong, et al ) in view of over United States Patent Application Publication 2005/0055551 ( Becker, et al) as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of United States Patent Application Publication 2023/0371086 ( Watanabe ) . Wong, et al discloses all subject matter, note the above paragraphs, except converting the information received from the mobile network control device into a format suitable for the external network on the basis of a control policy of the external network and establishes establish the communication between the communication device in the external network and the data processing device on the basis of the converted information. Watanabe teaches the use of converting the information received from the mobile network control device into a format suitable for the external network on the basis of a control policy of the external network and establishes establish the communication between the communication device in the external network and the data processing device on the basis of the converted information for the purpose of increasing stably operating a 5G system, note ¶47. Hence, it 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 to incorporate the use of converting the information received from the mobile network control device into a format suitable for the external network on the basis of a control policy of the external network and establishes establish the communication between the communication device in the external network and the data processing device on the basis of the converted information for the purpose of increasing stably operating a 5G system, as taught by Watanabe , in the external network control device of Becker, et al in order to determine whether to authenticate a terminal in response to a connection request from the terminal. The Examiner has cited particular columns and/or line/paragraphs numbers in the reference(s) applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. IN RE JUNG, No. 10-1019 (Fed. Cir. 2011). Conclusion If applicants wish to request for an interview, an "Applicant Initiated Interview Request" form (PTOL-413A) should be submitted to the examiner prior to the interview in order to permit the examiner to prepare in advance for the interview and to focus on the issues to be discussed. This form should identify the participants of the interview, the proposed date of the interview, whether the interview will be personal, telephonic, or video conference, and should include a brief description of the issues to be discussed. A copy of the completed "Applicant Initiated Interview Request " form should be attached to the Interview Summary form, PTOL-413 at the completion of the interview and a copy should be given to applicant or applicant's representative. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM D CUMMIN G whose telephone number is (571)272-7861. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 12 noon to 6pm. 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, Anthony S. Addy can be reached at (571) 272-7795. 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 D. CUMMING Primary Examiner Art Unit 2645 /WILLIAM D CUMMING/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2645 Application/Control Number: 18/729,919 Page 2 Art Unit: 2645 NON-FINAL REJECTION Application/Control Number: 18/729,919 Page 3 Art Unit: 2645 NON-FINAL REJECTION Application/Control Number: 18/729,919 Page 4 Art Unit: 2645 NON-FINAL REJECTION Application/Control Number: 18/729,919 Page 5 Art Unit: 2645 NON-FINAL REJECTION Application/Control Number: 18/729,919 Page 6 Art Unit: 2645 NON-FINAL REJECTION Application/Control Number: 18/729,919 Page 8 Art Unit: 2645 NON-FINAL REJECTION Application/Control Number: 18/729,919 Page 9 Art Unit: 2645 NON-FINAL REJECTION Application/Control Number: 18/729,919 Page 10 Art Unit: 2645 NON-FINAL REJECTION Application/Control Number: 18/729,919 Page 11 Art Unit: 2645 NON-FINAL REJECTION Application/Control Number: 18/729,919 Page 12 Art Unit: 2645 NON-FINAL REJECTION Application/Control Number: 18/729,919 Page 13 Art Unit: 2645 NON-FINAL REJECTION Application/Control Number: 18/729,919 Page 14 Art Unit: 2645 NON-FINAL REJECTION Application/Control Number: 18/729,919 Page 15 Art Unit: 2645 NON-FINAL REJECTION Application/Control Number: 18/729,919 Page 16 Art Unit: 2645 NON-FINAL REJECTION Application/Control Number: 18/729,919 Page 17 Art Unit: 2645 NON-FINAL REJECTION
Prosecution Insights