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 .
Status of Claims
The following is a non-final, first action on the merits, in response to application filed September 04, 2024. Claims 1-20, are currently pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDSs) submitted on 03/04/2025, is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
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.
Claim(s) ,1, 19, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al (hereinafter Chen) (US 10,187,784 IDS cited) in view of YU et al (hereinafter YU) (US 2021/0011737, IDS cited).
Regarding claim 1, Chen discloses an apparatus comprising processing circuitry configured to:
engage in an embedded subscriber identity module eSIM profile transfer process ( ... moving a profile from the eUICC of first UE 110 to the eUICC of second UE 120 ... " (column 2, lines 3 to 6) to receive at a target device ( ... second UE 120 ... ) (column 2, line 5), executing a first operating system OS that implements a first protocol stack related to eSIM profile transfers, an eSIM profile from a source device ( ... first UE 110 ... ) (column 2, line 4) executing a second OS that implements a second protocol stack related to eSIM profile transfers to the target device, wherein the first protocol stack and the second protocol stack are different;
process, based on signals received from the source device, a token for transferring the eSIM profile ( ... eUICC controller 105 may receive (at 1) a request to move the profile stored on the eUICC of first UE 110 to the eUICC of second UE 120 ... the profile transfer request may be initiated by first UE 110 ... ) (column 2, lines 17-20, noting that the request may generally be a token);
generate, for transmission to an enablement server, a request for the eSIM profile, wherein the request comprises the token ( ... eUICC controller 105 may obtain (at 2') the base profile from a subscription management device of network 130. For instance, the base profile may be stored in a Subscription Manager-Data Preparation ("SM-DP") server of network 130 ... ) (column 2, lines 50-54); and
process, based on signals received from the enablement server, the eSIM profile (Once eUICC controller 105 has received and/or reconstructed the profile associated with first UE 110, eUICC controller 105 may issue (at 3) a profile disable and/or delete command to first UE 110 ... ) (column 3, lines 1-4). Chen does not expressly show that the target device executes a first operating system OS that implements a first protocol stack related to eSIM profile transfers and the source device executes a second operating system OS that implements a second protocol stack related to eSIM profile transfers, wherein the first protocol stack and the second protocol stack are different.
In consulting the prior art in the field of wireless communications and related eSIM profile transfer techniques, the skilled person, wishing to find a solution to the above mentioned objective technical problem, would come across document
YU in a similar field of endeavor discloses the principle of an embedded subscriber identity module eSIM profile transfer (para. 0110-0139, figs. 2 and 3) and ( ... profile transmission ... ) ( para. 0110) wherein different operating systems implementing different protocol stacks are provided (When the terminal runs the first OS, the terminal obtains a second OS identifier that matches a second profile, where a first profile is installed on the first OS ... ) (para. 0112). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of YU with Chen for the benefit of enable interoperability between different eSIM implementations. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so to provide optimum profile transmission that matches a second profile where a first profile is installed on the first OS and arrive at inventive activity.
With reference to claim 19, YU further discloses performing, by the first protocol stack, an authentication operation with the source device ( ... LPA sends an authentication server message to the eUICC, where the authentication server message includes the second OS identifier and the matching identifier ... ) (para. 0130), and sending a token context of the token from the first protocol stack to the second protocol stack ( ... the activation code token is used to index the profile, so that the terminal obtains the associated profile by using the activation code token ... ) (para. 0130), noting that the context of the token is obviously shared by the first and second OSs.
Regarding claim 20, Chen discloses an apparatus comprising processing circuitry configured to:
perform an authentication operation with a source device (First UE 110 may perform (at 320) an authentication procedure with network portal 305 ... ) (column 4, lines 58-59) executing a first operating system OS implementing a first protocol stack related to embedded subscriber identity module eSIM profile transfers, wherein the source device is performing an eSIM profile transfer process to transfer an eSIM profile to a target device ( ... UE-initiated profile transfer. In this example, a profile is transferred from the eUICC of first UE 110 to the eUICC of second UE 120 ... ) (column 4, lines 46-48) executing a second OS implementing a second protocol stack that is different from the first protocol stack;
generate, for transmission to the source device, an authentication token based on successful performance of the authentication operation (Upon successful authentication, network portal 305 may provide (at 325) account information to first UE 110 ... ) (in lines 65 to 66 of column 4, lines 65-66, noting that the account information corresponds to the general authentication token);
generate a server nonce associated with an entitlement server; and
process, based on signaling received from the source device, a request for a token to be used in the eSIM profile transfer process (First UE 110 may issue (at 330) the profile transfer request to eUICC controller 105 ... ) (column 5, lines 60-61 and ( ... profile transfer request initiated by first UE 110 may be considered a "push" profile transfer request because first UE 110 is requesting that an existing profile on the eUICC of first UE 110 be pushed to the eUICC of second UE 120 ... ) in line 66 of (column 5, line66 to column 6, line 2), the request comprising the authorization token and a signed blob that includes the server nonce.
Chen does not expressly show that the source device executes a first operating system OS that implements a first protocol stack related to eSIM profile transfers, the target device executes a second operating system OS that implements a second protocol stack related to eSIM profile transfers, the apparatus generates a server nonce associated with an entitlement server, and the request comprises the authorization token and a signed blob that includes the server nonce, interoperability between different eSIM implementations is enabled in a secure manner. YU discloses the principle of an embedded subscriber identity module eSIM profile transfer ( ... profile transmission ... ) (para. 0110) wherein different operating systems implementing different protocol stacks are provided (When the terminal runs the first OS, the terminal obtains a second OS identifier that matches a second profile, where a first profile is installed on the first OS ... ) (para. 0112), a server nonce associated with an entitlement server is generated (... LPA sends an initiate authentication message to the SM-DP+ server, where the message includes the eUICC information, the eUICC challenge, and the address information of the SM-DP+ server, para.0132, which implies that a server nonce is generated based on the eUICC challenge), and the request comprises the authorization token and a signed blob that includes the server nonce ( ... the activation code token is used to index the profile, so that the terminal obtains the associated profile by using the activation code token ... ) (para. 0130).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of YU with Chen for the benefit of enable interoperability between different eSIM implementations. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so to provide optimum profile transmission that matches a second profile where a first profile is installed on the first OS in a secure manner and arrive at inventive activity.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 2-18, 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
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to QUTBUDDIN GHULAMALI whose telephone number is (571) 272-3014. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30am to 4:00pm.
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, Chieh Fan can be reached at 571 272 3042. 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.
/QUTBUDDIN GHULAMALI/
Primary Examiner,
Art Unit 2632.
Prosecution Insights