DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
2. Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. JP 2022-044393, filed on 03/18/2022.
Information Disclosure Statement
3. The information disclosure statements (IDSs) submitted on 09/15/2024 and 02/12/2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
4. Claims are objected to because of the following informalities:
(1) In claim 5, line 1, insert a colon “:” after the word “comprising”.
(2) In claim 8, line 1, insert a colon “:” after the word “comprising”.
(3) In claim 9, line 2, insert a colon “:” after the phrase “configured to”.
(4) In claim 10, line 2, insert a colon “:” after the phrase “configured to”.
(5) In claim 12, line 2, insert a colon “:” after the word “comprising”.
Appropriate correction is required.
5. 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.
Please note: Examiner has cited particular columns, line numbers, and figures in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teaching of the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well.
Applicants are reminded that MPEP 2141.02 states:
A prior art reference must be considered in its entirety, i.e., as a whole, including portions that would lead away from the claimed invention. W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc. v. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d 1540, 220 USPQ 303 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 851 (1984).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
6. 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.
7. Claims 1, 5, 8-9 and 11-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by BORISOGLEBSKI et al. (WO 2021151965) (hereinafter BORISOGLEBSKI) (BORISOGLEBSKI is disclosed in the IDS filed on 09/16/2024).
Regarding claims 1 and 14:
As shown in figures 1-7, BORISOGLEBSKI discloses numbering system for allocating a phone number to a subscriber (see MSISDN system, abstract), the system configured to:
receive an authentication information request for an individual subscriber from an entity that manages mobility of a user equipment (on page 7, lines 14-17, BORISOGLEBSKI teaches “After a registration authentication procedure is completed the MSC/VLR 107 sends a location update mobile application part (MAP) message to a home location register (HLR) 115 with the IMSI of the device that has registered with the MSC/VLR 107”. Also in abstract BORISOGLEBSKI teaches “receive a request to provide a home location register, HLR, or a home subscriber server, HSS, with an MSISDN for temporary allocation; access a set of MSISDNs; perform a selection method to select an MSISDN from the set of MSISDNs based on at least one characteristic of the request; and transmit the selected MSISDN for receipt by the HLR or HSS”);
determine whether a phone number has been allocated to the individual subscriber after the authentication information request has been received (on page 7, lines 14-17, BORISOGLEBSKI teaches “For example, if there is a particular flag set in the subscriber profile record or simply no MSISDN in that subscriber profile record, the HLR 115 identifies that there is a need for an MSISDN and is configured to transmit a request to the MSISDN server 100 via any suitable point to point message”. On page 13, lines 5-10, BORISOGLEBSKI teaches “At step S401 the MSC/VLR 107 sends a location update MAP message to the HLR 115. In response, the HLR 115 identifies the IMSI and in this example VLR number (step S403). At step S405 the HLR 115 retrieves subscription data from a subscriber profile record corresponding to the identified IMSI. In this example the subscription information includes a NULL entry for MSISDN”);
start processing for allocating a phone number to the individual subscriber in response to a determination that a phone number has not been allocated to the individual subscriber (on page 13, lines 10-13, BORISOGLEBSKI teaches “and this causes the HLR 115 to send a request to the MSISDN server 100 at step S407. The request sent to the to the MSISDN server 100 in this example comprises the IMSI and the VLR number, but it will be appreciated that it may simply be a request for an MSISDN.”);
receive a location registration request for the individual subscriber from the entity (on page 7, lines 14-17, BORISOGLEBSKI teaches “After a registration authentication procedure is completed the MSC/VLR 107 sends a location update mobile application part (MAP) message to a home location register (HLR) 115 with the IMSI of the device that has registered with the MSC/VLR 107”. on page 13, lines 5-6, BORISOGLEBSKI teaches “At step S401 the MSC/VLR 107 sends a location update MAP message to the HLR 115”); and
respond, in a case where a phone number has been allocated to the individual subscriber before a response to the location registration request is started, to the location registration request using the phone number (on page 7, lines 18-21, BORISOGLEBSKI teaches “The HLR 115 replies back with a MAP insert subscriber data (ISD) message that provides subscription information, including the MSISDN, for the host device to the MSC/VLR 107”. On page 13, lines 17-18, BORISOGLEBSKI teaches “The MSISDN server 100 uses the VLR number to select an MSISDN from the subset at step S411”. On page 14, lines 1-4, BORISOGLEBSKI teaches “The HLR 115 then updates the subscriber profile record for this user with the selected MSISDN (and optionally duration information) at step S415, and proceeds to send the MSISDN to the MSC/VLR 107 via a conventional ISD MAP message (step S417)”).
Regarding claims 12 and 15:
As shown in figures 1-7, BORISOGLEBSKI discloses a numbering system for allocating a phone number to a subscriber (abstract, MSISDN system), the system comprising
a subscriber management database (121 in figures 1, 3 and 5) that stores subscriber information regarding subscribers (on page 8, lines 9-12, BORISOGLEBSKI teaches “The storage device 121 may be part of the MSISDN server 100 or separate therefrom and communicates with the MSISDN server 100 using known communication protocols over a local network or via e.g. the Internet”. Also see figure 2, page 10, lines 24-32, page 11, lines 1-3)
wherein the system is configured to start processing for allocating a phone number to an individual subscriber based on a change in a status of the individual subscriber (on page 7, lines 14-17, BORISOGLEBSKI teaches “For example, if there is a particular flag set in the subscriber profile record or simply no MSISDN in that subscriber profile record, the HLR 115 identifies that there is a need for an MSISDN and is configured to transmit a request to the MSISDN server 100 via any suitable point to point message”. On page 13, lines 5-10, BORISOGLEBSKI teaches “At step S401 the MSC/VLR 107 sends a location update MAP message to the HLR 115. In response, the HLR 115 identifies the IMSI and in this example VLR number (step S403). At step S405 the HLR 115 retrieves subscription data from a subscriber profile record corresponding to the identified IMSI. In this example the subscription information includes a NULL entry for MSISDN”).
Regarding claim 5:
BORISOGLEBSKI further discloses a subscriber management database (100 in figure 1) that stores subscriber information regarding subscribers (page 9, lines 4-30), wherein the system is further configured to start processing for allocating a phone number to the individual subscriber based on a change in a status of the individual subscriber (see MSISDN allocation in figure 2, page 9, lines 4-30).
Regarding claim 8:
BORISOGLEBSKI further discloses a number management database (100 in figure 1) that stores phone numbers to be allocated to subscribers (page 9, lines 4-30), wherein the number management database stores subscriber identification information regarding a subscriber to which an individual phone number has been allocated (see MSISDN allocation in figure 2, page 9, lines 4-30).
Regarding claim 9:
BORISOGLEBSKI further discloses wherein the system is further configured to determine whether two or more phone numbers have been allocated to the same subscriber in the number management database (see MSISDN allocation in figure 2, page 9, lines 4-30).
Regarding claims 11 and 13:
BORISOGLEBSKI further discloses a non-transitory computer readable storage medium storing a computer program for causing a computer to function as the numbering system according to claim 1 (see claims 35-36).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
8. 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.
9. 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.
10. Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BORISOGLEBSKI in view of JAVED et al. (20150078173) (hereinafter Javed).
Regarding claim 3:
BORISOGLEBSKI discloses all of the subject matter as described above except for specifically teaching transmit an authentication information response to the entity in response to the authentication information request; and start processing for allocating a phone number to the individual subscriber before the authentication information response is transmitted to the entity.
However, Javed in the same field of endeavor teaches transmit an authentication information response to the entity in response to the authentication information request (see A-1 and A-5 in figure 5, par 0093-0100); and start processing for allocating a phone number to the individual subscriber before the authentication information response is transmitted to the entity (see A-1 and A-5 in figure 5, par 0093-0100). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use authentication information response as taught by Javed to modify the system and method of BORISOGLEBSKI in order to provide verify authentication for network connectivity (see figures 5-6) (See KSR Rationale: Combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results)
Allowable Subject Matter
11. Claims 2, 4, 6-7 and 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.
12. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The prior art of record, BORISOGLEBSKI does not teach or suggest in a case where a phone number has not been allocated to the individual subscriber before a response to the location registration request is started, perform processing for enabling a user equipment that stores subscriber identification information allocated to the individual subscriber, to attach to a network without restart.
The prior art of record, BORISOGLEBSKI also does not teach or suggest start processing for allocating a phone number to the individual subscriber after an authentication information request that is transmitted first in accordance with the entity having received an attach request for the individual subscriber is received and before a location registration request that is transmitted first after the entity transmits the authentication information request is received.
The prior art of record, BORISOGLEBSKI also does not teach or suggest a number management database that stores phone numbers to be allocated to subscribers; a number management server that accesses the number management database; and a subscriber management server that requests a phone number from the number management server, wherein latency of communication between the number management database and the number management server is shorter than latency of communication between the number management server and the subscriber management server.
The prior art of record, BORISOGLEBSKI also does not teach or suggest wherein the system is further configured to, when preceding processing for allocating a phone number to the individual subscriber is being executed, not execute further processing for allocating a phone number to the individual subscriber during a period until a time limit for a standby state for the preceding processing is exceeded.
The prior art of record, BORISOGLEBSKI also does not teach or suggest wherein the system is further configured to change, in response to a determination that two or more phone numbers have been allocated to the same subscriber in the number management database, a state of a phone number other than one phone number of the two or more phone numbers to a state of being able to allocate to another subscriber.
Conclusion
13. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Ishikawa et al. (US 8385889) disclose a radio communications system and method having subscriber information management apparatus, and a subscriber authentication module mounted in a terminal apparatus connectable to a mobile communications network to which the subscriber information management apparatus is connected.
Lee et al. (US 10237729) disclose a wireless communication system, and more particularly to increasing the privacy of subscriber identities during wireless communication.
14. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KABIR A TIMORY whose telephone number is (571)270-1674. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:00 AM-3:00 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, Hannah S Wang can be reached at 571-272-9018. 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.
/KABIR A TIMORY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2631
Prosecution Insights