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 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)(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.
Claims 1-5, 10-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ferdi et al. (US 12432559 B2, hereinafter Ferdi)
Regarding Claim 1, Ferdi teaches
A method performed by a wireless transmit and receive unit (WTRU) provisioned with a shared secret key, the method comprising: receiving, from a network, broadcasted one or more parameters of a puzzle;
(Ferdi [Col. 33, line 20-26] a method (e.g., implemented in WTRU 102) for wireless communications may comprise receiving a broadcast message including system information, identifying a first set of hashed IDs and a first random number based on the system information, each ID of the first set of hashed IDs may be individually hashed using at least the first random number.)
generating evidence based on solving the puzzle and injecting the shared secret key into the evidence while solving the puzzle;
(Ferdi [Col. 34, line 18-26] a method (e.g., implemented in WTRU 102) for wireless communications may comprise establishing a shared secret with a network entity based on one or more keying configuration parameters and a private key associated with a WTRU, deriving a secret key based on the shared secret and any of: the one or more keying configuration parameters, a public key associated with a WTRU, and an ID of the WTRU, generating a concealed ID, based on the secret key.)
sending, to the network, a registration request, wherein the registration request includes the generated evidence and a WTRU identity;
(Ferdi [Col. 13, line 36-43] the WTRU may send a Registration Request (e.g., with an SUCI) message to a NG-RAN and/or an Access and Mobility Management Function (AMF). In various embodiments, the WTRU may select a matching CAG ID, and may include the selected CAG ID in RRC layer signaling (e.g., in an UL RRC message).
and receiving, from the network, a registration accept responsive to the registration request.
(Ferdi [Col. 34, line 13-15] the method may comprise receiving a registration accept message after sending the registration request message.)
Regarding Claim 2 and as applied to Claim 1, Ferdi teaches
wherein the WTRU is further provisioned with the WTRU identity.
(Ferdi [Col. 13, line 33-36] If the WTRU finds at least a matching CAG ID, the WTRU may proceed with a registration procedure using a subscription concealed identifier (SUCI) of the WTRU or associated with the WTRU.)
Regarding Claim 3 and as applied to Claim 1 and Ferdi teaches
wherein the WTRU is further provisioned with a plurality of puzzles, wherein each puzzle comprises one or more parameters of the puzzle
(Ferdi [Col. 34, line 22-24] a secret key based on the shared secret and any of: the one or more keying configuration parameters.)
the one or more parameters of the puzzle include a puzzle index.
(Ferdi [Col. 30, line 24-26] it is contemplated that the RAN may transmit to the WTRU an identifier of the public key (e.g., a unique index).)
Regarding Claim 4 and as applied to Claim 1, Ferdi teaches
wherein the broadcasted one or more parameters of a puzzle include a puzzle index.
(Ferdi [Col. 30, line 24-26] it is contemplated that the RAN may transmit to the WTRU an identifier of the public key (e.g., a unique index).)
Regarding Claim 5 and as applied to Claim 1, Ferdi teaches
wherein the registration request further comprises the broadcasted one or more parameters of a puzzle.
(Ferdi [Col. 13, line 36-43] the WTRU may send a Registration Request (e.g., with an SUCI) message to a NG-RAN and/or an Access and Mobility Management Function (AMF). In various embodiments, the WTRU may select a matching CAG ID, and may include the selected CAG ID in RRC layer signaling (e.g., in an UL RRC message).
(Ferdi [Col. 25, line 43-56] The WTRU may derive a secret key using exchanged keying parameters (e.g., one or more of: gNB ephemeral public key(s) and WTRU ephemeral public key(s)) and a WTRU or UE identity (e.g., a C-RNTI). The WTRU may register with the network (e.g., the CAG cell or the gNB) while providing in the RRC layer (e.g., the RRC part of a Registration message) the one or more matching CAG IDs protected for confidentiality and integrity, using the secret key (e.g., as in an Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) algorithm).)
Regarding Claim 10, Ferdi teaches
A wireless transmit and receive unit (WTRU), the WTRU provisioned with a shared secret key, the WTRU comprising: at least one transceiver and at least one processor
(Ferdi [Col. 34, line 18-22] a method (e.g., implemented in WTRU 102) for wireless communications may comprise establishing a shared secret with a network entity based on one or more keying configuration parameters and a private key associated with a WTRU.
[Col. 36, line 22-24] an apparatus (e.g., WTRU 102) may comprise a receiver configured to receive a broadcast message including system information. The apparatus may also comprise a processor configured to identify a first set of hashed IDs and a first random number based on the system information)
wherein: the at least one transceiver and at least one processor are configured to receive, from a network, broadcasted one or more parameters of a puzzle;
(Ferdi [Col. 33, line 20-26] a method (e.g., implemented in WTRU 102) for wireless communications may comprise receiving a broadcast message including system information, identifying a first set of hashed IDs and a first random number based on the system information, each ID of the first set of hashed IDs may be individually hashed using at least the first random number.)
at least one transceiver and at least one processor are configured to generate evidence based on solving the puzzle and injecting the shared secret key into the evidence while solving the puzzle;
(Ferdi [Col. 34, line 18-26] a method (e.g., implemented in WTRU 102) for wireless communications may comprise establishing a shared secret with a network entity based on one or more keying configuration parameters and a private key associated with a WTRU, deriving a secret key based on the shared secret and any of: the one or more keying configuration parameters, a public key associated with a WTRU, and an ID of the WTRU, generating a concealed ID, based on the secret key.)
at least one transceiver and at least one processor are configured to send, to the network, a registration request, wherein the registration request includes the generated evidence and a WTRU identity;
(Ferdi [Col. 13, line 36-43] the WTRU may send a Registration Request (e.g., with an SUCI) message to a NG-RAN and/or an Access and Mobility Management Function (AMF). In various embodiments, the WTRU may select a matching CAG ID, and may include the selected CAG ID in RRC layer signaling (e.g., in an UL RRC message).
at least one transceiver and at least one processor are configured to receive, from the network, a registration accept responsive to the registration request.
(Ferdi [Col. 34, line 13-15] the method may comprise receiving a registration accept message after sending the registration request message.)
Regarding Claim 11 and as applied to Claim 10, Ferdi teaches
wherein the WTRU is further provisioned with the WTRU identity.
(Ferdi [Col. 13, line 33-36] If the WTRU finds at least a matching CAG ID, the WTRU may proceed with a registration procedure using a subscription concealed identifier (SUCI) of the WTRU or associated with the WTRU.)
Regarding Claim 12 and as applied to Claim 10 and Ferdi teaches
wherein the WTRU is further provisioned with a plurality of puzzles, wherein each puzzle comprises one or more parameters of the puzzle
(Ferdi [Col. 34, line 22-24] a secret key based on the shared secret and any of: the one or more keying configuration parameters.)
the one or more parameters of the puzzle include a puzzle index.
(Ferdi [Col. 30, line 24-26] it is contemplated that the RAN may transmit to the WTRU an identifier of the public key (e.g., a unique index).)
Regarding Claim 13 and as applied to Claim 10, Ferdi teaches
wherein the broadcasted one or more parameters of a puzzle include a puzzle index.
(Ferdi [Col. 30, line 24-26] it is contemplated that the RAN may transmit to the WTRU an identifier of the public key (e.g., a unique index).)
Regarding Claim 14 and as applied to Claim 10, Ferdi teaches
wherein the registration request further comprises the broadcasted one or more parameters of a puzzle.
(Ferdi [Col. 13, line 36-43] the WTRU may send a Registration Request (e.g., with an SUCI) message to a NG-RAN and/or an Access and Mobility Management Function (AMF). In various embodiments, the WTRU may select a matching CAG ID, and may include the selected CAG ID in RRC layer signaling (e.g., in an UL RRC message).
(Ferdi [Col. 25, line 43-56] The WTRU may derive a secret key using exchanged keying parameters (e.g., one or more of: gNB ephemeral public key(s) and WTRU ephemeral public key(s)) and a WTRU or UE identity (e.g., a C-RNTI). The WTRU may register with the network (e.g., the CAG cell or the gNB) while providing in the RRC layer (e.g., the RRC part of a Registration message) the one or more matching CAG IDs protected for confidentiality and integrity, using the secret key (e.g., as in an Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) algorithm).)
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 6-9, 15 -18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ferdi (US 12432559 B2, hereinafter Ferdi) in view of RYU (EP 3751908 A1, hereinafter Ryu)
Regarding Claim 3, Ferdi teaches all of Claim 1 and further teaches
wherein the WTRU is further provisioned with a plurality of puzzles, wherein each puzzle comprises one or more parameters of the puzzle
(Ferdi [Col. 34, line 22-24] a secret key based on the shared secret and any of: the one or more keying configuration parameters.)
the one or more parameters of the puzzle include a puzzle index.
(Ferdi [Col. 30, line 24-26] it is contemplated that the RAN may transmit to the WTRU an identifier of the public key (e.g., a unique index).)
Regarding Claim 6, Ferdi teaches all of Claim 1 but does not specifically teach
wherein the network is a non-terrestrial network (NTN).
However, in a similar endeavor Ryu specifically teaches
wherein the network is a non-terrestrial network (NTN).
(Ryu [Col 54, line 22-23] The access network type may comprise a non-terrestrial network (NTN) access network type.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the examined application to have modified Ferdi and by incorporating Ryu to have non-terrestrial network as one of the network option to communicate with the communication device/UE.
The motivation of doing so would have enabled a wider option of communication specially from a remote area where land base networks are not available.
Regarding Claim 7 Ferdi teaches all of Claim 1 but fails to teach
wherein the broadcasted one or more parameters of a puzzle are received from network equipment on board a satellite.
In a similar endeavor Ryu teaches
wherein the broadcasted one or more parameters of a puzzle are received from network equipment on board a satellite.
(Ryu [Col. 44, line 50-58 and Col. 45, line 1-3] The wireless device may determine NAS periods/NAS timers (e.g. first NAS period, second NAS period, third NAS period) based on access network information received from an access network of the PLMN. The access network information may indicate an access network type of a plurality of access network types. For example, the plurality of access network types may comprise a non-terrestrial network (NTN), a terrestrial network (TN), and/or the like. The NTN access network type may comprise a GEO NTN access network type, a LEO NTN access network type, a MEO NTN access network, and/or the like.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the examined application to have modified Ferdi and by incorporating Ryu to have the puzzle parameters received from the network equipment on board a satellite.
The motivation of doing so would have enabled a wider option of communication specially from a remote area where land base networks are not available.
Regarding Claim 8, Ferdi teaches all of Claim 7 but does not teach specifically teach
wherein the network equipment on board a satellite comprises an eNB or a gNB.
However, in a similar endeavor Ryu specifically teaches
wherein the network equipment on board a satellite comprises an eNB or a gNB.
(Ryu [Col.39-line 54 to Col. 40-line 4] As shown in FIG. 20, the different types of access networks may include terrestrial access networks and non-terrestrial access networks. An ng-eNB may constitute a type of terrestrial access network and a gNB may constitute another type of terrestrial access network. A non-GEO (e.g. LEO) satellite may a type of non-terrestrial access network and a GEO satellite may constitute another type of non-terrestrial access network.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the examined application to have modified Ferdi and by incorporating Ryu to have both 4G LTE and 5G NR network handling capacity onboard of a satellite.
The motivation of doing so would have enabled the communication process even in the remote area to have reduced latency, lower feeder load, improved coverage and mobility, network flexibility and scalability.
Regarding Claim 9, Ferdi teaches all of Claim 7, but does not specifically teach
wherein the network equipment on board a satellite comprises a mobility management entity (MME) or an access and mobility management function (AMF).
However, in a similar endeavor, Ryu specifically teaches
wherein the network equipment on board a satellite comprises a mobility management entity (MME) or an access and mobility management function (AMF).
(Ryu [Col. 1, line 18-23] The plurality of NAS periods comprise: a first value associated with the GEO access network type; and a second value associated with the LEO access network type. A NAS procedure is initiated by sending, to an access and mobility management function (AMF) via the base station, a first NAS request message.)
(Note: Examiner is required to search references for one of the two limitations. Examiner has elaborated on and that is considered to be sufficient.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the examined application to have modified Ferdi and by incorporating Ryu to have AMF onboard satellite.
The motivation of doing so would have enabled the communication system to improve efficiency and security. AMF onboard a satellite improves latency, mobility, autonomy, and QoS for mobile users, while enabling AI-driven optimization and reduced reliance on ground control.
Regarding Claim 15, Ferdi teaches all of Claim 10 but does not specifically teach
wherein the network is a non-terrestrial network (NTN).
However, in a similar endeavor Ryu specifically teaches
wherein the network is a non-terrestrial network (NTN).
(Ryu [Col 54, line 22-23] The access network type may comprise a non-terrestrial network (NTN) access network type.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the examined application to have modified Ferdi and by incorporating Ryu to have non-terrestrial network as one of the network option to communicate with the communication device/UE.
The motivation of doing so would have enabled a wider option of communication specially from a remote area where land base networks are not available.
Regarding Claim 16 Ferdi teaches all of Claim 10 but fails to teach
wherein the broadcasted one or more parameters of a puzzle are received from network equipment on board a satellite.
In a similar endeavor Ryu teaches
wherein the broadcasted one or more parameters of a puzzle are received from network equipment on board a satellite.
(Ryu [Col. 44, line 50-58 and Col. 45, line 1-3] The wireless device may determine NAS periods/NAS timers (e.g. first NAS period, second NAS period, third NAS period) based on access network information received from an access network of the PLMN. The access network information may indicate an access network type of a plurality of access network types. For example, the plurality of access network types may comprise a non-terrestrial network (NTN), a terrestrial network (TN), and/or the like. The NTN access network type may comprise a GEO NTN access network type, a LEO NTN access network type, a MEO NTN access network, and/or the like.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the examined application to have modified Ferdi and by incorporating Ryu to have the puzzle parameters received from the network equipment on board a satellite.
The motivation of doing so would have enabled a wider option of communication specially from a remote area where land base networks are not available.
Regarding Claim 17, Ferdi teaches all of Claim 16 but does not teach specifically teach
wherein the network equipment on board a satellite comprises an eNB or a gNB.
However, in a similar endeavor Ryu specifically teaches
wherein the network equipment on board a satellite comprises an eNB or a gNB.
(Ryu [Col.39-line 54 to Col. 40-line 4] As shown in FIG. 20, the different types of access networks may include terrestrial access networks and non-terrestrial access networks. An ng-eNB may constitute a type of terrestrial access network and a gNB may constitute another type of terrestrial access network. A non-GEO (e.g. LEO) satellite may a type of non-terrestrial access network and a GEO satellite may constitute another type of non-terrestrial access network.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the examined application to have modified Ferdi and by incorporating Ryu to have both 4G LTE and 5G NR network handling capacity onboard of a satellite.
The motivation of doing so would have enabled the communication process even in the remote area to have reduced latency, lower feeder load, improved coverage and mobility, network flexibility and scalability.
Regarding Claim 18, Ferdi teaches all of Claim 16, but does not specifically teach
wherein the network equipment on board a satellite comprises a mobility management entity (MME) or an access and mobility management function (AMF).
However, in a similar endeavor, Ryu specifically teaches
wherein the network equipment on board a satellite comprises a mobility management entity (MME) or an access and mobility management function (AMF).
(Ryu [Col. 1, line 18-23] The plurality of NAS periods comprise: a first value associated with the GEO access network type; and a second value associated with the LEO access network type. A NAS procedure is initiated by sending, to an access and mobility management function (AMF) via the base station, a first NAS request message.)
(Note: Examiner is required to search references for one of the two limitations. Examiner has elaborated one and that is considered to be sufficient.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the examined application to have modified Ferdi and by incorporating Ryu to have AMF onboard satellite.
The motivation of doing so would have enabled the communication system to improve efficiency and security. AMF onboard a satellite improves latency, mobility, autonomy, and QoS for mobile users, while enabling AI-driven optimization and reduced reliance on ground control.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RANA HASSAN MAHMUD whose telephone number is (571)272-8939. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Friday.
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 5712705371. 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.
/RANA H MAHMUD/Examiner, Art Unit 2644
/SAID M ELNOUBI/Examiner, Art Unit 2644
Prosecution Insights