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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 18 December 2024 and 21 February 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 § 102
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)(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.
Claim 1, 3-6, 8, and 10-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by WIPO Publication No. WO2021167417 (Rajadurai et al).
Regarding claim 1, Rajadurai et al. discloses: “a method for a wireless transmit receive unit (WTRU) (FIG. 2: “UE”; [5]: “for authenticating and authorizing a device using 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP)”), the method comprising: sending a first message to a first network node (FIG. 2: “AAnF”), wherein the first message indicates an identification of the WTRU (FIG. 2: “3A. Access Token Request/Response”; [48]: “If the UE 101 is authorized to access EES-1 (111)”), and wherein the first message includes a request for an access token (FIG. 2: 3A; [48]: “Step 3A: The UE 101 requests the AAnF 106 to issue EES token to enable the UE 101 to connect to EES-1 (111)”); receiving a second message from the first network node, wherein the second message includes the access token (FIG. 2: “3A. Access Token Request/Response”; [48]: “then the AAnF 106 generates an EES token and provides the EES token to the UE 101 in a secure way (the token is encrypted using the KAKMA key or a combination of derived”); sending a third message to a second network node (FIG. 2: “Edge Enabler Server-2”), wherein the third message indicates an authentication request that includes the access token obtained from the second message (FIG. 2: “Step 5C, EEC registration/Application discovery request (Token)”); receiving an authentication challenge request from the second network node (FIG. 2: “Step 5F, EEC registration/Application discovery response (Application specific security policy)”; [57]: “the UE 101 can generate an EAS access key based on the security policy”); sending an authentication challenge response to the second network node ([152]: “FIGS. 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, and 11, show exemplary unit of the architecture … One or more units can be combined together to perform same or substantially similar function in the architecture”) based on processing the authentication challenge request at the WTRU (FIG. 2: “Step 6B; Application specific session establishment”; [58]: “Step 6: Based on the received security policy, the EEC 103 in the UE 101 generates the KEAS using the KEES and provides the KEAS to the application client in the UE 101. The UE 101 obtains MEC services from the EAS-B (112) by getting authenticated by the EAS-B (112) using the EAS access key KEAS”); and receiving a fourth message from the second network node ([152]: “FIGS. 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, and 11, show exemplary unit of the architecture … One or more units can be combined together to perform same or substantially similar function in the architecture”), wherein the fourth message indicates a response to the authentication request indicated by the third message” (FIG. 2: “Step 6D, Application specific step response”; [60]: “Once the EAS access key KEAs is validated, the EAS-B (112) sends an application specific response for providing intended MEC services to the UE 101. Thereafter, the UE 101 obtains the intended MEC services from the EAS-B (112)”).
With respect to claim 8, Rajadurai et al. discloses: “a wireless transmit receive unit (WTRU) (FIG. 1: 101, “UE”; [5]: “for authenticating and authorizing a device using 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP)”), the WTRU comprising: a processor (FIG. 1: 103; [33]: “an Edge Enabler Client (EEC) 103”; [175]: “at least one microprocessor and at least one memory with software modules located therein”) operatively connected to a transceiver (FIG. 1: 104; [34]: “The Modem 104”), the processor and transceiver configured to send a first message to a first network node (FIG. 2: “AAnF”) , wherein the first message indicates an identification of the WTRU (FIG. 2: “3A. Access Token Request/Response”; 48]: “If the UE 101 is authorized to access EES-1 (111)”), and wherein the first message includes a request for an access token (FIG. 2: 3A; [48]: “Step 3A: The UE 101 requests the AAnF 106 to issue EES token to enable the UE 101 to connect to EES-1 (111)”); the processor and transceiver configured to receive a second message from the first network node, wherein the second message includes the access token (FIG. 2: “3A. Access Token Request/Response”; [48]: “then the AAnF 106 generates an EES token and provides the EES token to the UE 101 in a secure way (the token is encrypted using the KAKMA key or a combination of derived”); the processor and transceiver configured to send a third message to a second network node (FIG. 2: “Edge Enabler Server-2”), wherein the third message indicates an authentication request that includes the access token obtained from the second message (FIG. 2: “Step 5C, EEC registration/Application discovery request (Token)”); the processor and transceiver configured to receive an authentication challenge request from the second network node (FIG. 2: “Step 5F, EEC registration/Application discovery response (Application specific security policy)”; [57]: “the UE 101 can generate an EAS access key based on the security policy”); the processor and transceiver configured to send an authentication challenge response to the second network node ([152]: “FIGS. 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, and 11, show exemplary unit of the architecture … One or more units can be combined together to perform same or substantially similar function in the architecture”) based on processing the authentication challenge request at the WTRU (FIG. 2: “Step 6B; Application specific session establishment”; [58]: “Step 6: Based on the received security policy, the EEC 103 in the UE 101 generates the KEAS using the KEES and provides the KEAS to the application client in the UE 101. The UE 101 obtains MEC services from the EAS-B (112) by getting authenticated by the EAS-B (112) using the EAS access key KEAS”) ; and the processor and transceiver configured to receive a fourth message from the second network node ([152]: “FIGS. 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, and 11, show exemplary unit of the architecture … One or more units can be combined together to perform same or substantially similar function in the architecture”), wherein the fourth message indicates a response to the authentication request indicated by the third message” (FIG. 2: “Step 6D, Application specific step response”; [60]: “Once the EAS access key KEAs is validated, the EAS-B (112) sends an application specific response for providing intended MEC services to the UE 101. Thereafter, the UE 101 obtains the intended MEC services from the EAS-B (112)”).
Regarding claims 3 and 10, Rajadurai et al. discloses:” the second network node is an Authentication Server Function (AUSF)” (FIG. 1: 107/108; [33]: “an Authentication Server Function (AUSF) 107”).
With respect to claims 4 and 11, Rajadurai et al. discloses: “the response to the authentication request indicates that the WTRU is authenticated” ([125]: “UE 101 is authenticated and authorized”).
Regarding claims 5 and 12, Rajadurai et al. discloses: “prior to sending the first message, establishing using Transport Layer Security (TLS) encryption with the first network node and the second network node; and sending a secure transmission based on receiving the authentication challenge response” (FIG. 2: “3B, Secure session establishment” TLS/SSL using server certificate”).
With respect to claims 6 and 13, Rajadurai et al. discloses: “the authentication challenge is processed using (Extended Authentication Protocol) EAP or Authentication and Key Agreement (AKA)” ([131]: “The UE 101 and the EDN 109 perform application layer specific authentication procedure (for example, EAP-AKA, TLS, HTTP-AKA, HTTPs)”).
Claims 15 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by WIPO Publication No. WO2021115686 (Yang et al).
Regarding claim 15, Yang et al. discloses: “a method (pg. 4, line 16: “Figure 1 shows an existing HTTP Digest AKA procedure”) for implemented by a network node (FIG. 1: UE/UICC); the method comprising: receiving a first message from a wireless transmit-receive unit (WTRU) (FIG. 8: 800-840; pg. 13, lines 11-15: “Figure 8 illustrates a communication device 800 (e.g., wireless device, UE) as implemented in accordance with one or more embodiments. As shown, the communication device 800 includes processing circuitry 810 and communication circuitry 820. The communication circuitry 820 (e.g., radio circuitry) is configured to transmit and/or receive information to and/or from one or more other nodes, e.g., via any communication technology. Such communication 15 may occur via one or more antennas 840”), wherein the first message indicates an authentication request (FIG. 1: “1) HTTP GET (Subscriber ID)”; pg. 4, lines 22-24: “UE sends an initial request (e.g., an HTTP GET message) which includes an identifier of the subscriber, e.g., a Mobile Station International Subscriber Directory Number (MSISDN) or an International Mobile Subscriber Identity (IMSI) to an authentication server”) sending an authentication challenge request to the WTRU (FIG. 1: “4) 401 Unauthorized Digest (RAND, AUTN)”; ); receiving an authentication challenge response from the WTRU (FIG. 1: “6) HTTP GET Digest (Hash derived from RES)”; pg. 5, line 4: “UE sends the generated Digest to the Auth Server in another request”); and sending a second message to the WTRU, wherein the second message indicates a response to the authentication request indicated by the first message” (FIG. 1: “8) “200 OK Digest (Hash derived from XRES”).
With respect to claim 16, Yang et al. discloses: “the network node is an Authentication Server Function (AUSF)” (FIG. 1: “Auth Server”; pg. 4, lines 22-25: “UE sends an initial request (e.g., an HTTP GET message) which includes an identifier of the subscriber, e.g., a Mobile Station International Subscriber Directory Number (MSISDN) or an International Mobile Subscriber Identity (IMSI) to an authentication server (referred to as Auth Server in Figure 1)”).
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 2 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rajadurai et al. in view of US Patent Application Publication No. 20250184881 (Olvera-Hernandez et al).
Claims 2 and 9 are dependent upon claims 1 and 8, respectively. As discussed above, Claims 1 and 8 are disclosed by Rajadurai et al. Thus, those limitations of claim 1 and Claim 8 that are recited in claims 2 and 9, respectively, are also disclosed by Rajadurai et al.
However, Rajadurai et al. does not clearly disclose the remaining limitations of the claims. To that end with respect to claims 2 and 9, Olvera-Hernandez et al. discloses: “the first network node is a Network Repository Function (NRF)” ([0008]: “The WTRU may determine an endpoint address associated with the first network node. The WTRU may determine the endpoint address by sending a request for the endpoint address to a network repository function (NRF) and receiving a response indicating the endpoint address”). It is respectfully submitted that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to combine Rajadurai et al. with Olvera-Hernandez et al. in order to provide an NRF as a first network node (e.g., see Olvera-Hernandez et al. @ [0008]).
Claims 7 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rajadurai et al. in view of US Patent Application Publication No. 20220240085 (Long).
Claims 7 and 14 are dependent upon claims 1 and 8, respectively. As discussed above, Claims 1 and 8 are disclosed by Rajadurai et al. Thus, those limitations of claim 7 and 14 that are recited in claims 1 and 8, respectively, are also disclosed by Rajadurai et al.
However, Rajadurai et al. does not clearly disclose the remaining limitations of the claims. To that end with respect to claims 7 and 14, Long discloses: “the identification of the WTRU is a Subscription Concealed Identifier (SUCI)” ([0016]: “ the encrypted identity of the subscriber of the UE may be a Subscription Concealed Identifier (SUCI)”). It is respectfully submitted that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to combine Rajadurai et al. with the invention of Long in order to provide a WTRU/UE identity with a SUCI (e.g., see Long @ [0016]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MYRON K WYCHE whose telephone number is (571)272-3390. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 am - 3:30 pm.
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, Kathy Wang-Hurst can be reached at 571-270-5371. 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.
/Myron Wyche/ 14 August 2026
Primary Examiner AU2644
Prosecution Insights