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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities: line 6 of the claim recites “to if the verified number of ports”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 1-14 are 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "identifying the number of ports supportable" in lines 3-4 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "identifying the number of enabled profiles" in line 6 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "identifying the number of ports supportable" in line 4 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "identify the number of enabled profiles" in lines 5-6 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "if the verified number of ports" in line 6 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
The dependent claims 2-7 and 9-14 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) based on their dependence to independent claims 1 and 8.
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, 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 1, 6-8, and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. US (2023/0054451) in view of Yi et al. US (2019/0050704).
Regarding Claim 1, Li discloses a method performed by a terminal (see Fig. 2 i.e., electronic device, Fig. 7, & Fig. 14a & Para’s [0279-0280] i.e., electronic device such as a smartphone (i.e., “terminal”)) in a wireless communication system (see Para’s [0160] & [0162-0163]), the method comprising: in case that the terminal supports multiple enabled profiles (MEP), identifying (see Fig. 13B i.e., S609) the number of ports supportable between the terminal and an enabled universal integrated circuit card (eUICC), (see Fig. 2 i.e., eSIM chip (i.e., eUICC) of electronic device, Fig. 8 i.e., Profiles of eSIM 196 & Para’s [0006-0007] i.e., The electronic device may support simultaneous establishment of a plurality of communication connections (i.e., the plurality of communication connections may each represent a “port”) based on a plurality of profiles in one eSIM (i.e., “the terminal supports MEP”), [0035] i.e., whether the quantity of enabled profiles compared to preset threshold…this prevents the electronic device from activating excessive profiles when a capability of the electronic device for maintaining communication connections (i.e., “number of ports supportable”) is exceeded, and maintains stable running of the electronic device, [0098] i.e., The eSIM is also referred to as an eUICC, [0128] i.e., When there are a plurality of hardware transceiver modules, a plurality of profiles enabled at the same time may separately use the plurality of hardware transceiver modules to perform communication connections, and receive and send data…a hardware transceiver module 1 is responsible for maintaining a communication connection established based on a profile 1, and receiving and sending data; and a hardware transceiver module 2 is responsible for maintaining a communication connection established based on a profile 2, and receiving and sending data (i.e., each profile uses a communication connection which is associated with a port to send and receive data), [0175] i.e., a plurality of communication connections need to be established based on the plurality of profiles, [0296-0302] i.e., S609: The electronic device determines whether a quantity of enabled profiles is less or more than a preset threshold (i.e., the preset threshold represents the number of supportable profiles/ports)…For example, it is assumed that the electronic device supports simultaneous enabling of a maximum of three profiles (i.e., number of supportable profiles/ports)…S610: If it is determined that the quantity of enabled profiles is not less than the preset threshold, the electronic device displays a prompt indicating that the quantity of enabled profiles exceeds the preset threshold….In this embodiment of this application, when the electronic device determines, in step S609, that the quantity of enabled profiles is not less than the preset threshold, if a new profile is to be enabled, the maximum quantity of profiles (i.e., number of supportable profiles/ports) that can be simultaneously enabled and standby in the electronic device is exceeded, and the electronic device may pop up a prompt box to prompt the user to disable an enabled profile and then enable the new profile & [0306])
identifying the number of enabled profiles among a plurality of profiles of the eUICC, (see Fig. 13B i.e., steps S609-S610 & Para’s [0296-0302] i.e., S610: If it is determined that the quantity of enabled profiles is not less than the preset threshold, the electronic device displays a prompt indicating that the quantity of enabled profiles exceeds the preset threshold & [0306] i.e., the electronic device determines from which of profiles 1-4 are enabled)
in case that the identified number of ports is less than the number of enabled profiles, determining to disable at least one profile among the enabled profiles: (see Para’s [0035] i.e., an activation operation is performed only when it is determined that the quantity of enabled profiles is less than the preset threshold. This prevents the electronic device from activating excessive profiles when a capability of the electronic device for maintaining communication connections is exceeded , [0296-0302] i.e., S609: The electronic device determines whether a quantity of enabled profiles is less or more than a preset threshold (i.e., the preset threshold represents the number of supportable profiles/ports)…For example, it is assumed that the electronic device supports simultaneous enabling of a maximum of three profiles (i.e., number of supportable profiles/ports)…S610: If it is determined that the quantity of enabled profiles is not less than the preset threshold (i.e., “identified number of ports is less than the number of enabled profiles”), the electronic device displays a prompt indicating that the quantity of enabled profiles exceeds the preset threshold….In this embodiment of this application, when the electronic device determines, in step S609, that the quantity of enabled profiles is not less than the preset threshold (i.e., “identified number of ports is less than the number of enabled profiles”), if a new profile is to be enabled, the maximum quantity of profiles that can be simultaneously enabled and standby in the electronic device is exceeded (i.e., “identified number of ports is less than the number of enabled profiles”), and the electronic device may pop up a prompt box to prompt the user to disable an enabled profile and then enable the new profile & [0306])
disable the at least one profile (see Para [0301] i.e., the electronic device may pop up a prompt box to prompt the user to disable an enabled profile and then enable the new profile)
While Li discloses the terminal disables the at least one profile (see Para [0301] i.e., the electronic device disables an enabled profile), Li does not disclose the claim feature of and delivering a command to disable the at least one profile to the eUICC. However the claim feature would be rendered obvious in view of Yi et al. US (2019/0050704).
Yi discloses delivering a command to disable at least one profile to the eUICC (see Para’s [0145] i.e., The ISD-R application interacts with an application logic function module (which is a LPA) in an application layer of the terminal device, for example, receives a command from the LPA to perform an operation such as enabling or disabling a profile, [0005-0008] i.e., the ISD-R application is on the eUICC, [0141-0142] i.e., eUICC includes ISD-R, [0151], & [0192]).
(Yi suggests the user can enable any profile on the eUICC or disable any enabled profile on the eUICC depending on the user’s need for giving the user flexibility for satisfying the users need, (see Para [0192])).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date for the terminal which disables the at least one profile as disclosed in Li to disable the profile by delivering a command to disable the at least one profile to the eUICC as disclosed in the teachings of Yi, because the motivation lies in Yi that the user can enable any profile on the eUICC or disable any enabled profile on the eUICC depending on the user’s need for giving the user flexibility for satisfying the users need.
Regarding Claims 6 and 13, Li discloses the method and terminal of claims 1 and 8 including an LPA communicating with the eUICC (see Para’s [0118], [0217], & [0251-0252]), but does not disclose the claim feature of wherein the command to disable the at least one profile is delivered from an LPA of the terminal to Issuer Security Domain Root (ISD-R) of the eUICC. However the claim feature would be rendered obvious in view of Yi et al. US (2019/0050704).
Yi discloses wherein the command to disable the at least one profile is delivered from an LPA of the terminal to Issuer Security Domain Root (ISD-R) of the eUICC. see Para’s [0145] i.e., The ISD-R application interacts with an application logic function module (which is a LPA) in an application layer of the terminal device, for example, receives a command from the LPA to perform an operation such as enabling or disabling a profile, [0005-0008] i.e., the ISD-R application is on the eUICC, [0141-0142] i.e., eUICC includes ISD-R, [0151], & [0192]).
(Yi suggests the user can enable any profile on the eUICC or disable any enabled profile on the eUICC depending on the user’s need for giving the user flexibility for satisfying the users need, (see Para [0192])).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date for the terminal which disables the at least one profile as disclosed in Li to disable the profile by delivering a command to disable the at least one profile from an LPA of the terminal to Issuer Security Domain Root (ISD-R) of the eUICC as disclosed in the teachings of Yi, because the motivation lies in Yi that the user can enable any profile on the eUICC or disable any enabled profile on the eUICC depending on the user’s need for giving the user flexibility for satisfying the users need.
Regarding Claim 7, the combination of Li in view of Yi discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the determining further comprises displaying information on deactivation of the at least one profile (see Fig. 16c i.e., 912 & Para’s [0301-0302] i.e., prompt box to prompt the user to disable an enabled profile & [0345-0346]), and incase that a user command to disable the at least one profile is input based on the displayed information (see Para [0302] i.e., after the user chooses, in the disable option box, to disable a profile corresponding to one of the options), the at least one profile is determined to be disabled, (see Fig. 16c i.e., 912 & Para’s [0301-0302] i.e., user disables an enabled profile & [0345-0350]),
Regarding Claim 8, Li discloses a terminal (see Fig. 2 i.e., electronic device, Fig. 7, & Fig. 14a & Para’s [0279-0280] i.e., electronic device such as a smartphone (i.e., “terminal”)) in a wireless communication system (see Para’s [0160] & [0162-0163]), the terminal comprising: a transceiver (see Fig. 8 i.e., transceiver & Para’s [0128] & [0175]); and a controller (see Figures 7-8 i.e., processor 110 & Para’s [0140] & [0142]) configured to, in case that the terminal supports multiple enabled profiles (MEP), identifying (see Fig. 13B i.e., S609) the number of ports supportable between the terminal and an enabled universal integrated circuit card (eUICC), (see Fig. 2 i.e., eSIM chip (i.e., eUICC) of electronic device, Fig. 8 i.e., Profiles of eSIM 196 & Para’s [0006-0007] i.e., The electronic device may support simultaneous establishment of a plurality of communication connections (i.e., the plurality of communication connections may each represent a “port”) based on a plurality of profiles in one eSIM (i.e., “the terminal supports MEP”), [0035] i.e., whether the quantity of enabled profiles compared to preset threshold…this prevents the electronic device from activating excessive profiles when a capability of the electronic device for maintaining communication connections (i.e., “number of ports supportable”) is exceeded, and maintains stable running of the electronic device, [0098] i.e., The eSIM is also referred to as an eUICC, [0128] i.e., When there are a plurality of hardware transceiver modules, a plurality of profiles enabled at the same time may separately use the plurality of hardware transceiver modules to perform communication connections, and receive and send data…a hardware transceiver module 1 is responsible for maintaining a communication connection established based on a profile 1, and receiving and sending data; and a hardware transceiver module 2 is responsible for maintaining a communication connection established based on a profile 2, and receiving and sending data (i.e., each profile uses a communication connection which is associated with a port to send and receive data), [0175] i.e., a plurality of communication connections need to be established based on the plurality of profiles, [0296-0302] i.e., S609: The electronic device determines whether a quantity of enabled profiles is less or more than a preset threshold (i.e., the preset threshold represents the number of supportable profiles/ports)…For example, it is assumed that the electronic device supports simultaneous enabling of a maximum of three profiles (i.e., number of supportable profiles/ports)…S610: If it is determined that the quantity of enabled profiles is not less than the preset threshold, the electronic device displays a prompt indicating that the quantity of enabled profiles exceeds the preset threshold….In this embodiment of this application, when the electronic device determines, in step S609, that the quantity of enabled profiles is not less than the preset threshold, if a new profile is to be enabled, the maximum quantity of profiles (i.e., number of supportable profiles/ports) that can be simultaneously enabled and standby in the electronic device is exceeded, and the electronic device may pop up a prompt box to prompt the user to disable an enabled profile and then enable the new profile & [0306])
to identify the number of enabled profiles among a plurality of profiles of the eUICC, (see Fig. 13B i.e., steps S609-S610 & Para’s [0296-0302] i.e., S610: If it is determined that the quantity of enabled profiles is not less than the preset threshold, the electronic device displays a prompt indicating that the quantity of enabled profiles exceeds the preset threshold & [0306] i.e., the electronic device determines from which of profiles 1-4 are enabled)
if the verified number of ports is less than the number of enabled profiles, determine to disable at least one profile among the enabled profiles, (see Para’s [0035] i.e., an activation operation is performed only when it is determined that the quantity of enabled profiles is less than the preset threshold. This prevents the electronic device from activating excessive profiles when a capability of the electronic device for maintaining communication connections is exceeded , [0296-0302] i.e., S609: The electronic device determines whether a quantity of enabled profiles is less or more than a preset threshold (i.e., the preset threshold represents the number of supportable profiles/ports)…For example, it is assumed that the electronic device supports simultaneous enabling of a maximum of three profiles (i.e., number of supportable profiles/ports)…S610: If it is determined that the quantity of enabled profiles is not less than the preset threshold (i.e., “identified number of ports is less than the number of enabled profiles”), the electronic device displays a prompt indicating that the quantity of enabled profiles exceeds the preset threshold….In this embodiment of this application, when the electronic device determines, in step S609, that the quantity of enabled profiles is not less than the preset threshold (i.e., “identified number of ports is less than the number of enabled profiles”), if a new profile is to be enabled, the maximum quantity of profiles that can be simultaneously enabled and standby in the electronic device is exceeded (i.e., “identified number of ports is less than the number of enabled profiles”), and the electronic device may pop up a prompt box to prompt the user to disable an enabled profile and then enable the new profile & [0306])
and to control to disable the at least one profile (see Para [0301] i.e., the electronic device may pop up a prompt box to prompt the user to disable an enabled profile and then enable the new profile)
While Li discloses the terminal disables the at least one profile (see Para [0301] i.e., the electronic device disables an enabled profile), Li does not disclose the claim feature of and delivering a command to disable the at least one profile to the eUICC. However the claim feature would be rendered obvious in view of Yi et al. US (2019/0050704).
Yi discloses delivering a command to disable at least one profile to the eUICC (see Para’s [0145] i.e., The ISD-R application interacts with an application logic function module (which is a LPA) in an application layer of the terminal device, for example, receives a command from the LPA to perform an operation such as enabling or disabling a profile, [0005-0008] i.e., the ISD-R application is on the eUICC, [0141-0142] i.e., eUICC includes ISD-R, [0151], & [0192]).
(Yi suggests the user can enable any profile on the eUICC or disable any enabled profile on the eUICC depending on the user’s need for giving the user flexibility for satisfying the users need, (see Para [0192])).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date for the terminal which disables the at least one profile as disclosed in Li to disable the profile by delivering a command to disable the at least one profile to the eUICC as disclosed in the teachings of Yi, because the motivation lies in Yi that the user can enable any profile on the eUICC or disable any enabled profile on the eUICC depending on the user’s need for giving the user flexibility for satisfying the users need.
Regarding Claim 14, the combination of Li in view of Yi discloses the terminal of claim 8,further comprising: a screen display (see Fig. 16c & Para’s [0140] i.e., display 194, [0164-0165], [0170-0171], [0301-0302], & [0345-0346]
Wherein the controller is further configured to control the screen display to display information on deactivation of the at least one profile (see Fig. 16c i.e., 912 & Para’s [0301-0302] i.e., prompt box to prompt the user to disable an enabled profile & [0345-0346]), and in case that a user command to disable the at least one profile is input based on the displayed information (see Para [0302] i.e., after the user chooses, in the disable option box, to disable a profile corresponding to one of the options), the at least one profile is determined to be disabled, (see Fig. 16c i.e., 912 & Para’s [0301-0302] i.e., user disables an enabled profile & [0345-0350]),
Claims 2 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. US (2023/0054451) in view of Yi et al. US (2019/0050704) as applied to claims 1 and 8 above, and further in view of LI et al. US (2022/0022028).
Regarding Claim 2, Li discloses the method of claim 1, including the claim features of wherein the delivering further comprises in case that the plurality of profiles includes a first profile and a second profile (Li, see Para’s [0128] i.e., profiles 1 & 2 & [0175] i.e., plurality of profiles), a local profile assistant (LPA) of the terminal (Li, see Para’s [0117-0118] i.e., the LPA is configured to manage an eSIM on an electronic device, [0217], [0224], & [0251-0252] i.e., LPA communicates with eUICC), and an application corresponding to the first profile and the second profile (Li, see Para [0103] i.e., standard network authentication algorithm for a profile, and the algorithm is invoked by a network access application (NAA) of a profile), a first port associated with the first profile (i.e., including corresponding application) and a second port associated with the second profile (i.e., including corresponding application) (Li, see Para’s [0128] i.e., communication connections (i.e., “ports”) established for profiles 1 and 2 & [0175] i.e., a plurality of communication connections need to be established based on the plurality of profiles) and the first port is not a supportable port (Li, see Para’s [0035] & [0296-0302] i.e., in step S609, if the quantity of enables profiles is not less than the preset threshold…the maximum quantity of profiles that can be simultaneously enabled and standby in the electronic device is exceeded, and the electronic device may pop up a prompt box to prompt the user to disable an enabled profile (i.e., profile/port is not supportable) and then enable the new profile) and thus, the enabled first profile mapped to the first port is to be disabled (Li, see Para [0301]), disable a first profile (Li, see Para [0301] i.e., disable an enabled profile (i.e., may be a “first profile”), but does not disclose the claim feature of delivering a command to disable the first profile to the eUICC. However the claim feature would be rendered obvious in view of Yi et al. US (2019/0050704).
Yi discloses delivering a command to disable at least one profile to the eUICC (see Para’s [0145] i.e., The ISD-R application interacts with an application logic function module (which is a LPA) in an application layer of the terminal device, for example, receives a command from the LPA to perform an operation such as enabling or disabling a profile, [0005-0008] i.e., the ISD-R application is on the eUICC, [0141-0142] i.e., eUICC includes ISD-R, [0151], & [0192]).
(Yi suggests the user can enable any profile on the eUICC or disable any enabled profile on the eUICC depending on the user’s need for giving the user flexibility for satisfying the users need, (see Para [0192])).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date for the terminal which disables the first profile as disclosed in Li to disable the profile by delivering a command to disable the at least one profile to the eUICC as disclosed in the teachings of Yi, because the motivation lies in Yi that the user can enable any profile on the eUICC or disable any enabled profile on the eUICC depending on the user’s need for giving the user flexibility for satisfying the users need.
The combination of Li in view of Yi does not disclose the claim features of the local profile assistant (LPA) of the terminal and the first profile (i.e., including its corresponding application) share the first port, the LPA and the second profile (i.e., including its corresponding application) share the second port, and delivering the command to disable the first profile through the second port. However the claim features would be rendered obvious in view of LI et al. US (2022/0022028).
LI discloses the local profile assistant (LPA) (see Fig. 5 i.e., LPA 602) and a first profile (see Fig. 5 i.e., eSIM A) share a first port (see Fig. 5 i.e., basic channel ), the LPA and a second profile (see Fig. 5 i.e., eSIM B) share a second port (see Fig. 5 i.e., channel X (i.e., “second port”)) (see Fig. 5 & Para [0028] i.e., When two eSIMs 208 are enabled on an eUICC 108 at the same time, communication between the eUICC 108 and a LPA 602 executing on a processor external to the eUICC 108, e.g., processor 104, can be extended to use both a basic channel and an additional non-basic channel (labeled as channel X) for SIM toolkit (STK) events…eSIM A uses the basic channel and eSIM B uses the non-basic channel X)
and delivering the command to disable the first profile through the second port (see Fig. 5 i.e., disable profile A command may be delivered via channel X (i.e., “second port”) since communication between the eUICC and LPA 602 can use both a basic channel and additional non-basic channel X & Para [0028] i.e., When two eSIMs 208 are enabled on an eUICC 108 at the same time, communication between the eUICC 108 and a LPA 602 executing on a processor external to the eUICC 108, e.g., processor 104, can be extended to use both a basic channel and an additional non-basic channel (labeled as channel X) for SIM toolkit (STK) events…eSIM A uses the basic channel and eSIM B uses the non-basic channel X…The LPA 602 then sends to the eUICC 108 a command to disable eSIMA (DisableProfile(A) command).
(LI suggests the user of the wireless device may have the flexibility to enable and disable various eSIMs for achieving flexible mapping of cellular wireless service subscription modules to logical channels and physical hardware interfaces and for adjusting association of channels for communication between the eUICC and LPA as the eSIMs are enabled, disabled, and/or reset, (see Para’s [0020] & [0028])).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date for the command delivered to disable the first profile as disclosed in Li in view of Yi to be delivered through the second port as disclosed in the teachings of LI who discloses local profile assistant (LPA) and a first profile share a first port, the LPA and a second profile share a second port, which results in the LPA and an application corresponding to the first profile and the second profile sharing the first port and the second port, because the motivation lies in LI for providing flexibility to the user to enable and disable various eSIMs for achieving flexible mapping of cellular wireless service subscription modules to logical channels and physical hardware interfaces and for adjusting association of channels for communication between the eUICC and LPA as the eSIMs are enabled, disabled, and/or reset.
Regarding Claim 9, the claim is directed towards a terminal which performs the same claim features as dependent claim 2. Therefore claim 9 is rejected as obvious over the combination of Li in view of Yi, and further in view of LI as in claim 2.
Claims 3 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. US (2023/0054451) in view of Yi et al. US (2019/0050704) as applied to claims 1 and 8 above, and further in view of Laina Farell et al. US (2022/0086622).
Regarding Claim 3, Li discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the delivering further comprises in case that the plurality of profiles includes a first profile and a second profile, (Li, see Para’s [0128] i.e., profiles 1 & 2 & [0175] i.e., plurality of profiles), a first port corresponding to the first profile and a second port corresponding to the second profile (Li, see Para’s [0128] i.e., communication connections (i.e., “ports”) established for profiles 1 and 2 & [0175] i.e., a plurality of communication connections need to be established based on the plurality of profiles)
and the first port is not a supportable port (Li, see Para’s [0035] & [0296-0302] i.e., in step S609, if the quantity of enables profiles is not less than the preset threshold…the maximum quantity of profiles that can be simultaneously enabled and standby in the electronic device is exceeded, and the electronic device may pop up a prompt box to prompt the user to disable an enabled profile (i.e., profile/port is not supportable) and then enable the new profile) and thus, the enabled first profile mapped to the first port is to be disabled, (Li, see Para [0301] i.e., disable an enabled profile (i.e., may be a “first profile”)
disable the first profile (see Para [0301]), but does not disclose the claim feature of delivering a command to disable the first profile to the eUICC. However the claim feature would be rendered obvious in view of Yi et al. US (2019/0050704).
Yi discloses delivering a command to disable at least one profile to the eUICC (see Para’s [0145] i.e., The ISD-R application interacts with an application logic function module (which is a LPA) in an application layer of the terminal device, for example, receives a command from the LPA to perform an operation such as enabling or disabling a profile, [0005-0008] i.e., the ISD-R application is on the eUICC, [0141-0142] i.e., eUICC includes ISD-R, [0151], & [0192]).
(Yi suggests the user can enable any profile on the eUICC or disable any enabled profile on the eUICC depending on the user’s need for giving the user flexibility for satisfying the users need, (see Para [0192])).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date for the terminal which disables the first profile as disclosed in Li to disable the profile by delivering a command to disable the at least one profile to the eUICC as disclosed in the teachings of Yi, because the motivation lies in Yi that the user can enable any profile on the eUICC or disable any enabled profile on the eUICC depending on the user’s need for giving the user flexibility for satisfying the users need.
The combination of Li in view of Yi does not disclose a third port corresponding to an LPA of the terminal is present separate from the first port and the second port and delivering a command to disable the first profile through the third port. However the claim features would be rendered obvious in view of Laina Farell et al. US (2022/0086622).
Laina Farell discloses a third port (see Fig. 1 i.e., interface 160) corresponding to an LPA of the terminal is present as a separate port (see Fig. 1 i.e., interface ES10 arrow 160 & Para [0035] i.e., interface ES10 arrow 160 between the LPA 130 and eUICC 120 which is used for enabling/disabling the eSIM profile in the eUICC receiver)
disable a profile through the third port (see Para’s [0035] i.e., LPA disables and deletes this eSIM profile at the eUICC 240 using standard ES10 & [0043])
(Laina Farell suggests the third port (i.e., ES10 interface) is used by the LPA for enabling or disabling eSIM profiles on the eUICC for efficiently managing the eSIM profiles on the eUICC, (see Para’s [0007], [0035], & [0043])).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date for the command to disable the first profile delivered from the LPA to the eUICC as disclosed in Li in view of Yi to be delivered by using the separate third port (i.e., ES10 interface) between the LPA and eUICC as disclosed in the teachings of Laina Farell who discloses the LPA can disable a profile on the eUICC through the third port (i.e., ES10 interface), which results in the third port separate from the first port and the second port, because the motivation lies in Laina Farell that the third port (i.e., ES10 interface) is used by the LPA for enabling or disabling eSIM profiles on the eUICC for efficiently managing the eSIM profiles on the eUICC.
Regarding Claim 10, the claim is directed towards a terminal which performs the same claim features as dependent claim 3. Therefore claim 10 is rejected as obvious over the combination of Li in view of Yi, and further in view of Laina Farell as in claim 3.
Claims 4 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. US (2023/0054451) in view of Yi et al. US (2019/0050704) as applied to claims 1 and 8 above, further in view of LI et al. US (2015/0349826), and further in view of LI et al. US (2022/0022014).
Regarding Claim 4, the combination of Li in view of Yi discloses the method of claim 1, including identifying the number of supportable ports (i.e., maximum number of profiles supported by the terminal which are each associated with a respective connection or port) (Li, see Para [0035] i.e., capability of the electronic device for maintaining communication connections is exceeded & [0296-0302] i.e., the preset threshold is a maximum quantity of profiles that can be simultaneously enabled in the electronic device), but does not disclose the claim features of wherein the identifying the number of supportable ports further comprises: transmitting, to the eUICC, a first message that includes at least one of MEP mode information supportable by the terminal and information on the maximum number of ports for the enabled profiles of the terminal; and receiving, from the eUICC, a second message that includes information on the number of ports jointly supportable by the terminal and the eUICC as a response to the first message. However the claim features would be rendered obvious in view of LI et al. US (2015/0349826).
LI discloses the electronic device transmitting, to the eUICC, a first message; (see Fig. 2 i.e., ESIMs 208 (i.e., profiles), Fig. 3 i.e., request (i.e., “first message”) for an indication of ESIM capabilities 302 transmitted from baseband component 110 to EUICC 108 & Para’s [0028] i.e., mobile device 102, [0029] i.e., eSIMs 208 (i.e., “profiles”) that are stored by the eUICC 108, [0030] i.e., at step 302, where the baseband component 110 issues to the eUICC 108 a request for an indication of eSIM capabilities)
and receiving, from the eUICC, a second message (see Fig. 3 i.e., 304) that includes information on the number of ports jointly supportable by the terminal and the eUICC as a response to the first message (see Para’s [0029], [0030] i.e., At step 304, the eUICC 108, in response to the request received from the baseband component 110, indicates multi-eSIM capabilities (i.e., number of profiles/ports jointly supportable by terminal and eUICC) to the base band component 110…Assuming however, that the eUICC 108 indicates multi-eSIM capabilities, the eUICC 108, at step 304, shares unique identifiers 210 for each of the eSIMs 208 managed by the eUICC 108 & [0031])
(LI suggests the baseband component of the mobile device transmits the request to the eUICC in order to obtain multi-eSIM capabilities from the eUICC for updating a configuration of the services 218 to reflect the eSIM capabilities of the eUICC 108 for managing the different connections that exist between the mobile device and the MNOs 114 (see Para’s [0030-0031])).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date for the maximum number of profiles (i.e., ports) supported by the electronic device according to the capability of the electronic device as discloses in Li in view of Yi to be identified by transmitting the request to the eUICC and receiving the response from the eUICC indicating the multi-eSIM capabilities of the eUICC as disclosed in LI, because the motivation lies in LI that the baseband component of the mobile device transmits the request to the eUICC in order to obtain multi-eSIM capabilities from the eUICC for updating a configuration of the services 218 to reflect the eSIM capabilities of the eUICC 108 for managing the different connections that exist between the mobile device and the MNOs 114.
The combination of Li in view of Yi, and further in view of LI does not disclose the claim feature of the first message that includes at least one of MEP mode information supportable by the terminal and information on the maximum number of ports for the enabled profiles of the terminal. However the claim feature would be rendered obvious in view of LI et al. US (2022/0022014).
LI discloses a terminal sends a first message that includes MEP mode information supportable by the terminal to the eUICC for obtaining capability information of each eSIM 208 (i.e., profiles) (see Para’s [0017] i.e., for mobile wireless devices that allow for multiple eSIMS (i.e., profiles) to be active at one time (i.e., MEP) & [0027] i.e., When the proprietary tag (i.e., proprietary tag may be interpreted as the “MEP mode information”) is included in the GetProfilesInfo (i.e., “first message”), the eUICC 108 can return IMEI binding information for each eSIM 208 installed on the eUICC 108 (i.e., the eUICC 108 which returns IMEI binding information for each eSIM 208 is triggered based on the received proprietary tag which implies the terminal supports MEP mode)).
(LI suggests the terminal sends the first message to the eUICC for receiving capability information of multiple eSIMs 208 installed on the eUICC which can be enabled at the terminal for efficiently performing communication, (see Para’s [0017] i.e., for mobile wireless devices that allow for multiple eSIMS (i.e., profiles) to be active at one time (i.e., MEP) & [0027])).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date for the first message used for receiving profile capability information from the eUICC as disclosed in Li in view of Yi, and further in view of LI to include the MEP mode information included in the first request message sent to the eUICC for obtaining profile capability information of multiple profiles installed on the eUICC as disclosed in LI, because the motivation lies in LI that the terminal sends the first message to the eUICC for receiving capability information of multiple eSIMs installed on the eUICC which can be enabled at the terminal for efficiently performing communication.
Regarding Claim 11, the claim is directed towards a terminal which performs the same claim features as dependent claim 4. Therefore claim 11 is rejected as obvious over the combination of Li in view of Yi, further in view of LI, and further in view of LI as in claim 4.
Claims 5 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. US (2023/0054451) in view of Yi et al. US (2019/0050704) as applied to claims 1 and 8 above, and further in view of Yu et al. US (2020/0314639).
Regarding Claim 5, the combination of Yi in view of Li discloses the method of claim1, wherein the identifying the number of enabled profiles further comprises: transmitting, to the eUICC, a message that requests MEP configuration information; (Li, see Para’s [0117-0118] & [0251-0252] i.e., the LPA communicates with the eUICC for receiving information about a downloaded and installed profile in the eSIM such as profile enabled/disabled state information (i.e., “MEP configuration information”) of profiles 1-4 received from the eUICC)
and receiving, from the eUICC, a third message that includes at least one of information on the number of enabled profiles (Li, see Para’s [0117-0118] & [0251-0252] i.e., the LPA communicates with the eUICC for receiving information about a downloaded and installed profile in the eSIM such as profile enabled/disabled state information of profiles 1-4 received from the eUICC (i.e., “information on the number of enabled profiles”)) and number information of a port corresponding the enabled profile based on the request message.
The combination of Yi in view of Li does not explicitly disclose the claim feature of transmitting, to the eUICC, a message that requests the MEP configuration information. However the claim feature would be rendered obvious in view of Yu et al. US (2020/0314639).
Yu discloses a terminal transmitting, to the eUICC, a message that requests MEP configuration information (see Fig. 13, S901 & Para’s [0313] i.e., plurality of enabled profiles, [0443-0445] i.e., The ISD-R receives a first message (i.e., request message) sent by the LPA used to instruct to obtain all profile information & [0451-0453] i.e., The ISD-R sends a fourth message to the LPA including profile list information)
(Yu suggests the LPA sends the first message to the ISD-R for requesting and obtaining all profile information in at least one OS installed in the eUICC for obtaining information about the profiles in the eUICC for managing the profiles by the LPA (see Fig. 13, S904 & Para’s [0225] & [0443-0445])).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date for the LPA which communicates with the eUICC for receiving MEP configuration information of the profiles in the eUICC as disclosed in Yi in view of Li to transmit a request message for obtaining information about the profiles such as the first message as sent from the LPA to the ISD-R as disclosed in Yu, because the motivation lies in Yu that the LPA sends the first message to the ISD-R for requesting and obtaining all profile information in at least one OS installed in the eUICC for obtaining information about the profiles in the eUICC for managing the profiles by the LPA.
Regarding Claim 12, the claim is directed towards a terminal which performs the same claim features as dependent claim 5. Therefore claim 12 is rejected as obvious over the combination of Li in view of Yi, and further in view of Yu as in claim 5.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADNAN A BAIG whose telephone number is (571)270-7511. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00am-5:00pm.
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, Huy Vu can be reached at 571-272-3155. 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.
/ADNAN BAIG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2461
Prosecution Insights