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 office action is responsive to communication filed on 08/12/2024.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper content of an abstract of the disclosure.
A patent abstract is a concise statement of the technical disclosure of the patent and should include that which is new in the art to which the invention pertains. The abstract should not refer to purported merits or speculative applications of the invention and should not compare the invention with the prior art.
If the patent is of a basic nature, the entire technical disclosure may be new in the art, and the abstract should be directed to the entire disclosure. If the patent is in the nature of an improvement in an old apparatus, process, product, or composition, the abstract should include the technical disclosure of the improvement. The abstract should also mention by way of example any preferred modifications or alternatives.
Where applicable, the abstract should include the following: (1) if a machine or apparatus, its organization and operation; (2) if an article, its method of making; (3) if a chemical compound, its identity and use; (4) if a mixture, its ingredients; (5) if a process, the steps.
Extensive mechanical and design details of an apparatus should not be included in the abstract. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph within the range of 50 to 150 words in length.
See MPEP § 608.01(b) for guidelines for the preparation of patent abstracts.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the term “The embodiment of the disclosure”. It is suggested to start the abstract with --- A method, apparatus, electronic device, and storage medium for - ---. 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 Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 1 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph, as based on a disclosure which is not enabling. The disclosure does not enable one of ordinary skill in the art to practice the invention without the limitation of “receiving a connection detection request sent by a client based on redirection address information of a redirection server, wherein the connection detection request comprises negotiation address information of a signaling negotiation server, and the signaling server stores a signaling context corresponding to the signaling request negotiation , which is/are critical or essential to the practice of the invention but not included in the claim(s). See In re Mayhew, 527 F.2d 1229, 188 USPQ 356 (CCPA 1976). Claims 1 and 11 recite the “signaling context” being generated and stored and without showing how such generated stored signaling context is integrated with the rest of the limitations of the claims. It appears that paragraphs [0012 – 0014] define the process of the claimed invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1 and 11 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claims 1 and 11, the limitation of “generating, in response to a signaling request sent by a client, a signaling context corresponding to the signaling request, and storing the signaling context” is unclear. It is not understood to the Examiner how such generated and stored signaling context is further connected with the rest of the claimed limitations. It is kindly suggested to clarify the purpose of the signaling context in the claims.
Claims 2 – 6 and 12 – 20 are necessarily rejected as being dependent upon the rejection of claims 1 and 11.
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 (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 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)(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.
(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 1 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Xie et al (US 2008/0104192; hereinafter Xie).
Regarding claim 1, Xie discloses a signaling negotiation method, applied to a signaling negotiation server (abstract), comprising:
generating, in response to a signaling request sent by a client, a signaling context
corresponding to the signaling request, and storing the signaling context (paragraphs [0046], [0054 – 0056]; Xie discloses that If the request from the Target ASN-GW instructs to redirect the R3 data path, then identification information of the relevant information required to redirect the R3 data path is carried in a message of the request);
in response to receiving redirection address information of a redirection server
corresponding to the signaling request (paragraph [0046]; Xie discloses that If the request from the Target ASN-GW instructs to redirect the R3 data path, then identification information of the relevant information required to redirect the R3 data path is carried in a message of the request; and the Anchor ASN-GW returns the relevant information corresponding to the identification information to the Target ASN-GW), generating a target signaling response message based on the redirection address information (paragraphs [0040 - 0042]; Xie discloses returning, by the Target ASN-GW, a message containing the information on the R3 data path redirection result to the Anchor ASN-GW, to notify the Anchor ASN-GW of the R3 data path redirection result) and negotiation address information of the signaling negotiation address information of the signaling negotiation server (paragraphs [0051], [0054 – 0055]; XIE discloses that the Anchor ASN-GW includes a determining module adapted for determining a negotiation result according to the corresponding request from the Target ASN-GW, or the corresponding request from the Target ASN-GW and a local decision, and returning a reply to the Target ASN-GW according to the negotiation result.); and
feeding back the target signaling response message to the client, to enable the client to detect connectivity based on the redirection address information (paragraphs [0070]; Xie discloses that the Anchor ASN-GW determines according to its actual conditions whether to establish an R4 data path or redirect an R3 data path, and returns a corresponding response message to the Target ASN-GW), and obtain target data corresponding to the signaling request based on a result of detection (paragraph [0105]; Xie discloses that the Anchor ASN-GW 702 includes: a determining module 7021, which is adapted for determining a negotiation result according to the corresponding request from the Target ASN-GW 701, or the corresponding request from the Target ASN-GW 701 and a local decision, and returning a reply to the Target ASN-GW 701 according to the negotiation result so as to trigger a corresponding process).
Claim 7 incorporates substantially all the limitations of claim 1 with minor modifications in the claimed language. The reasons for rejecting claim 1 applies in claim 7. Therefore, claim 7 is rejected for the same reason.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8 - 10 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
LU et al (US 2022/0207513) discloses a method and system for integrated payment.
Vange et al (US 9,380,129) discloses a data redirection system and method therefor.
Oehrke et al (US 6,735,631) discloses a method and system for networking redirecting.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YVES DALENCOURT whose telephone number is (571)272-3998. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8AM-5:30PM.
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, Ario Etienne can be reached at 571-272-4001. 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.
/YVES DALENCOURT/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2457
Prosecution Insights