DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
The amendment filed 3/16/2026 has been placed of record in the file.
Claims 40, 48, 49, 52, and 53 have been amended.
Claims 44, 51, and 54 have been canceled.
Claims 40-43, 45-50, 52, and 53 are now pending.
The applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 40-43, 45-50, 52, and 53 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive as discussed below.
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.
Claims 52 and 53 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dany et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2025/0212001), hereinafter referred to as Dany, in view of Non-Patent Literature “New SID on Security and Privacy of AI/ML-based services and applications in 5G” reported by Marcus Wong, OPPO, hereinafter referred to as Wong.
Dany disclosed techniques for management of network activities between a UE and AF. In an analogous art, Wong disclosed techniques for advancing security in communications between a UE and AF. Both systems are directed toward the management of communications between a UE and AF in the 5GS.
Regarding claim 52, Dany discloses an authentication and key management for applications, AKMA, anchor function, AAnF, comprising: at least one processor; and at least one memory storing instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the AAnF at least to perform: maintaining an authentication and key management for applications, AKMA, context including a UE identifier, an AKMA anchor key KAKMA, and a primary AKMA key identifier, A-KID (paragraph 64, UE registered with AKMA-based AF keys, and paragraph 63, UE has GUTI, and paragraph 68, UE has AF_ID and A-KID); receiving from an application function, AF, an authentication and key management for applications, AKMA, application key request including an identifier of the UE indicating the UE to which a communication is to be transferred, and an indication that a non-access stratum, NAS, based UE invocation is required (paragraph 68, sends request for application key to Anchor Function, and paragraph 63, UE has GUTI); using the identifier of the UE to obtain the maintained AKMA context that corresponds to the UE (paragraph 64, registered UE); sending to the application function AF an AKMA application key response including a primary AKMA key identifier A-KID, and an AKMA application key KAF (paragraph 69, answers to AF with KAF, and paragraph 68, UE has A-KID); and providing the UE with a secondary AKMA key identifier A-KID' via a NAS container (paragraph 77, AMF forwards identifier for KAF).
Dany does not explicitly state that the communication to be transferred is an artificial intelligence, AI, model. However, transferring an AI model to a UE in the 5GS was well known in the art as evidenced by Wong. Since the inventions encompass the same field of endeavor, 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 system of Dany by adding the ability that the communication to be transferred is an artificial intelligence, AI, model as provided by Wong (see Section 3, AI/ML Model Transfer in 5GS). One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the benefit that ensuring secure AI model transfer would assist in protecting the UE and 5G system from potential threats and risks (see Wong, Section 3).
Regarding claim 53, the combination of Dany and Wong discloses wherein the at least one processor and the at least one memory cause the AAnF to further perform generating the secondary AKMA key identifier, A-KID' (Dany, paragraph 77, identifier for KAF).
Claims 40-43 and 45-50 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dany in view of Wong, further in view of Guo et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2023/0077391), hereinafter referred to as Guo.
The combination of Dany and Wong disclosed techniques for management of network activities between a UE and AF. In an analogous art, Guo disclosed techniques for activating security protection in communications between a UE and AF. Both systems are directed toward the management of communications between a UE and AF in the 5GS.
Regarding claim 40, Dany discloses a user equipment, UE, comprising: at least one processor; and at least one memory storing instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the UE at least to perform: maintaining an authentication and key management for applications, AKMA, context including a UE identifier, an AKMA anchor key KAKMA, and a primary AKMA key identifier, A-KID (paragraph 64, UE registered with AKMA-based AF keys, and paragraph 63, UE has GUTI, and paragraph 68, UE has AF_ID and A-KID); receiving from an application function, AF, a secondary AKMA key identifier, A-KID' in an application session request (paragraph 77, UE receives identifier for KAF); validating the AF for the UE using the AKMA key identifier A-KID, the validating comprising: obtaining from the secondary AKMA key identifier A-KID' an AKMA temporary UE identifier A-TID (paragraph 77, uses identifier to retrieve KAF and decrypt GUTI); and verifying whether the A-TID was included in the primary AKMA key identifier A-KID (paragraph 77, compares decrypted GUTI with GUTI stored in UE); and if the verifying is positive, then establishing an application session with the AF; or otherwise rejecting the application session with the AF (paragraph 77, UE uses application function).
Dany does not explicitly state receiving an artificial intelligence, AI, model from the AF. However, transferring an AI model to a UE in the 5GS was well known in the art as evidenced by Wong. Since the inventions encompass the same field of endeavor, 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 system of Dany by adding the ability for receiving an artificial intelligence, AI, model from the AF as provided by Wong (see Section 3, AI/ML Model Transfer in 5GS). One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the benefit that ensuring secure AI model transfer would assist in protecting the UE and 5G system from potential threats and risks (see Wong, Section 3).
The combination of Dany and Wong does not explicitly state wherein the secondary AKMA key identifier A-KID' is received over an application specific network application function interface Ua*. However, utilizing the Ua* protocol in 5GS communications was well known in the art as evidenced by Guo. Since the inventions encompass the same field of endeavor, 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 combination of Dany and Wong by adding the ability that the secondary AKMA key identifier A-KID' is received over an application specific network application function interface Ua* as provided by Guo (see paragraph 141, Ua* for message exchange between UE and AF). One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the benefit that implementing additional security activation in the 5GS would assist in providing end-to-end security protection between a UE and an AF for different service requirements (see Guo, paragraph 6).
Regarding claim 41, the combination of Dany, Wong, and Guo discloses wherein the at least one processor and the at least one memory cause the UE to further perform authentication and key management for applications, AKMA, based on 3GPP credentials in the 5G system, 5GS (Dany, paragraph 3, 3GPP credentials in the 5G system).
Regarding claim 42, the combination of Dany, Wong, and Guo discloses wherein the validating comprises obtaining a secondary AKMA key identifier A-KID' from a non-access stratum, NAS (Dany, paragraph 77, AMF forwards identifier for KAF).
Regarding claim 43, the combination of Dany, Wong, and Guo discloses wherein the secondary AKMA key identifier A-KID' includes an AF identifier that identifies the AF (Dany, paragraph 35, AF identifier).
Regarding claim 45, the combination of Dany, Wong, and Guo discloses wherein the secondary AKMA key identifier A-KID' is obtained from a session establishment request sent by the AF to the UE (Dany, paragraph 75, message exchange after session establishment).
Regarding claim 46, the combination of Dany, Wong, and Guo discloses wherein the at least one processor and the at least one memory cause the UE to further perform: authenticating the UE to a home network operator and responsively obtaining the AKMA context prior to the maintaining of the AKMA context (Dany, paragraph 65, UE registration done for Home PLMN).
Regarding claim 47, the combination of Dany, Wong, and Guo discloses using an AKMA application key KAF in encryption or decryption of data exchanged in the application session (Dany, paragraph 29, AF key is used in communications between UE and AF).
Regarding claim 48, Dany discloses an application function, AF, comprising: at least one processor; and at least one memory storing instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the AF at least to perform: identifying a desire to transfer a communication to a user equipment, UE (paragraph 46, communication from PLMN to UE); sending an authentication and key management for applications, AKMA, AKMA application key request to an AKMA anchor function, AAnF, including an identifier of the UE indicating the UE to which the communication is to be transferred, and an indication to trigger UE (paragraph 68, sends request for application key to Anchor Function, and paragraph 63, UE has GUTI); receiving an AKMA application key response from the AKMA anchor function, AAnF, including an AKMA application key KAF, and a primary AKMA key identifier A-KID (paragraph 69, answers to AF with KAF, and paragraph 68, UE has A-KID); establishing an application session with the UE (paragraph 71, application session established); transferring the communication to the UE using the AKMA application key KAF in encryption to protect the communication in the transferring (paragraph 29, AF key is used in communications between UE and AF); and providing the UE with a secondary AKMA key identifier A-KID' in an application session request (paragraph 77, sends identifier to UE).
Dany does not explicitly state that the communication to be transferred is an artificial intelligence, AI, model. However, transferring an AI model to a UE in the 5GS was well known in the art as evidenced by Wong. Since the inventions encompass the same field of endeavor, 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 system of Dany by adding the ability that the communication to be transferred is an artificial intelligence, AI, model as provided by Wong (see Section 3, AI/ML Model Transfer in 5GS). One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the benefit that ensuring secure AI model transfer would assist in protecting the UE and 5G system from potential threats and risks (see Wong, Section 3).
The combination of Dany and Wong does not explicitly state that the providing the UE with the secondary AKMA key identifier A-KID' occurs over an application specific network application function interface Ua*. However, utilizing the Ua* protocol in 5GS communications was well known in the art as evidenced by Guo. Since the inventions encompass the same field of endeavor, 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 combination of Dany and Wong by adding the ability that the providing the UE with the secondary AKMA key identifier A-KID' occurs over an application specific network application function interface Ua* as provided by Guo (see paragraph 141, Ua* for message exchange between UE and AF). One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the benefit that implementing additional security activation in the 5GS would assist in providing end-to-end security protection between a UE and an AF for different service requirements (see Guo, paragraph 6).
Regarding claim 49, the combination of Dany, Wong, and Guo discloses wherein the at least one processor and the at least one memory cause the AF to further perform generating the secondary AKMA key identifier, A-KID' (Dany, paragraph 77, identifier for KAF).
Regarding claim 50, the combination of Dany, Wong, and Guo discloses wherein the at least one processor and the at least one memory cause the AF to further perform providing the AKMA anchor function AAnF with the secondary AKMA key identifier A-KID' (Dany, paragraph 73, sends identifier to AAnF).
Response to Arguments
In the remarks, the applicant has argued that the combination of Dany, Wong, and Guo does not explicitly state that the secondary AKMA key identifier A-KID' is received over an application specific network application function interface Ua* or that the secondary AKMA key identifier A-KID' is provided via a NAS container. Concerning the Ua*, Guo clearly states the use of Ua* for message exchange between the UE and the AF. Since Dany already teaches that the UE receives the identifier from the AF, it is maintained that it would have been obvious to utilize Ua* for this exchange between the UE and the AF as Ua* was already known as taught by Guo. Concerning the NAS container, Dany explicitly states that the AMF forwards the identifier, where the AMF is part of the Core Network and utilizes NAS protocols. The applicant has provided no additional explanation as to why it is believed the prior art fails to teach the limitations at hand. As such, the applicant's arguments fail to comply with 37 CFR 1.111(b) because they amount to a general allegation that the claims define a patentable invention without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Victor Lesniewski whose telephone number is (571)272-2812. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday, 9am to 5pm.
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, Carl Colin can be reached at 571-272-3862. 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.
/Victor Lesniewski/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2493
Prosecution Insights