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 § 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 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.
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.
Claims 1, 13, & 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Casati, US 11304125 B2 (hereinafter Casati), in view of Mariyani, US 11700516 B2 (hereinafter Mariyani).
Regarding claim 1, Casati teaches a system for managing device technology accessibility of a user equipment (UE) in a communications network, the system comprising: a network device comprising one or more processors; and a non-transitory computer-readable media comprising executable instructions that, when executed, causes the network device to perform operations in a communication network, (Casati; col. 13, lines 30-36 - - teaches the processor 12 (and/or co-processors or any other circuitry assisting or otherwise associated with the processor) may be in communication with the memory device 14 via a bus for passing information among components of the apparatus 10. The memory device may be non-transitory and may include, for example, one or more volatile and/or non-volatile memories.
comprising: receiving, at the network device, an indication to initiate a logic flow; (Casati; col. 16, lines 6-13 & fig. 6A, step 600 - - teaches at block 600, the RACS-capable network receives, for example by using means such as the processor 12 and the communication interface 16, a registration request message. The registration request message (interpreted as the indication) initiates a logic flow as seen in blocks 610 and onward).
retrieving, by the network device during the logic flow, device certification information associated with the UE (Casati; col. 16, lines 22-28 & fig. 6A step 610 - - teaches after the RACS-capable network receives the registration request from the user equipment, the RACS-capable network, for example by using means such as the processor 12, obtains an international mobile equipment identity (IMEI) or permanent equipment identifier (PEI) of the user equipment and extracting a type allocation code (TAC) from the IMEI or the PEI as shown in block 610).
and device profile information associated with the UE; (Casati; col. 16, lines 36-42 & fig. 6A, step 612 - - teaches as shown in block 612, the RACS-capable network, for example by using means such as the processor 12, obtains a user equipment radio capability identification (ID) associated with the user equipment).
based on the device certification information (Casati; col. 1, lines 49-52 & 61-64 - - teaches the IDs that are stored in the UCMF and UE as defined by the UE manufacturers and associated to the UE model TAC are also known as UE manufacturer-assigned UE radio Capability ID. [..] Further, the UE may be identified/associated in the network in a 5GS using a Permanent Equipment Identity (PEI) and in the EPS by using an International Mobile Equipment Identity (IMEI) (interpreted as basic hardware features as defined by the device certification information).
the device profile information, (Casati; col. 16, lines 36-42 & fig. 6A, step 612 - - teaches as shown in block 612, the RACS-capable network, for example by using means such as the processor 12, obtains a user equipment radio capability identification (ID) associated with the user equipment).
Casati fails to clearly specify the one or more network capabilities of the communications network, modifying one or more device technologies associated with the UE.
However, Mariyani teaches and one or more network capabilities of the communications network, (Mariyani; col. 13, lines 30-35 - - teaches the UDM determining a Public Land Mobile Network Identifier (PLMN ID) for the wireless UE; and the UDM identifying the set of provisioned service values comprises selecting the updated service values for the wireless UE based on the PLMN ID.)
modifying one or more device technologies associated with the UE. (Mariyani; col. 13, lines 20-22 - - teaches generating new provisioned service values by overriding the set of the provisioned service values based on the updated service values (interpreted as modifying)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant's claimed invention to have incorporated the teachings of Mariyani into the invention of Casati to include the feature of using internally stored device profile information and network-specific parameters as inputs to drive modification of UE device technologies, in order to enable the network device to make more informed and accurate provisioning decisions by leveraging both the UE's existing provisioned service configuration and the network's own operational parameters alongside the device certification data already retrieved, improving the efficiency and accuracy of device technology management across the communications network (see Casati; col. 1, lines 49-52 & 61-64 and Mariyani; col. 13, lines 30-35).
Regarding claim 13, Casati teaches a non-transitory computer-readable media comprising executable instructions that, when executed, causes a user equipment comprising one or more processors to perform operations for managing device technology accessibility of a user equipment (UE) in a communications network, (Casati; col. 13, lines 30-36 - - teaches the processor 12 (and/or co-processors or any other circuitry assisting or otherwise associated with the processor) may be in communication with the memory device 14 via a bus for passing information among components of the apparatus 10. The memory device may be non-transitory and may include, for example, one or more volatile and/or non-volatile memories.
the executable instructions comprising the steps of: receiving, at the network device, an indication to initiate a logic flow; (Casati; col. 16, lines 6-13 & fig. 6A, step 600 - - teaches at block 600, the RACS-capable network receives, for example by using means such as the processor 12 and the communication interface 16, a registration request message. The registration request message (interpreted as the indication) initiates a logic flow as seen in blocks 610 and onward).
retrieving, by the network device during the logic flow, device certification information associated with the UE (Casati; col. 16, lines 22-28 & fig. 6A step 610 - - teaches after the RACS-capable network receives the registration request from the user equipment, the RACS-capable network, for example by using means such as the processor 12, obtains an international mobile equipment identity (IMEI) or permanent equipment identifier (PEI) of the user equipment and extracting a type allocation code (TAC) from the IMEI or the PEI as shown in block 610).
and device profile information associated with the UE; and (Casati; col. 16, lines 36-42 & fig. 6A, step 612 - - teaches as shown in block 612, the RACS-capable network, for example by using means such as the processor 12, obtains a user equipment radio capability identification (ID) associated with the user equipment).
based on the device certification information (Casati; col. 1, lines 49-52 & 61-64 - - teaches the IDs that are stored in the UCMF and UE as defined by the UE manufacturers and associated to the UE model TAC are also known as UE manufacturer-assigned UE radio Capability ID. [..] Further, the UE may be identified/associated in the network in a 5GS using a Permanent Equipment Identity (PEI) and in the EPS by using an International Mobile Equipment Identity (IMEI) (interpreted as basic hardware features as defined by the device certification information).
the device profile information, (Casati; col. 16, lines 36-42 & fig. 6A, step 612 - - teaches as shown in block 612, the RACS-capable network, for example by using means such as the processor 12, obtains a user equipment radio capability identification (ID) associated with the user equipment).
Casati fails to clearly specify the one or more network capabilities of the communications network, modifying one or more device technologies associated with the UE.
However, Mariyani teaches one or more network capabilities of the communications network, (Mariyani; col. 13, lines 30-35 - - teaches the UDM determining a Public Land Mobile Network Identifier (PLMN ID) for the wireless UE; and the UDM identifying the set of provisioned service values comprises selecting the updated service values for the wireless UE based on the PLMN ID.)
modifying one or more device technologies associated with the UE. (Mariyani; col. 13, lines 20-22 - - teaches generating new provisioned service values by overriding the set of the provisioned service values based on the updated service values (interpreted as modifying)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant's claimed invention to have incorporated the teachings of Mariyani into the invention of Casati to include the feature of using internally stored device profile information and network-specific parameters as inputs to drive modification of UE device technologies, in order to enable the network device to make more informed and accurate provisioning decisions by leveraging both the UE's existing provisioned service configuration and the network's own operational parameters alongside the device certification data already retrieved, improving the efficiency and accuracy of device technology management across the communications network (see Casati; col. 1, lines 49-52 & 61-64 and Mariyani; col. 13, lines 30-35).
Regarding claim 17, Casati teaches a method for managing device technology accessibility of a user equipment (UE) in a communications network, the method comprising: (Casati; col. 13, lines 30-36 - - teaches the processor 12 (and/or co-processors or any other circuitry assisting or otherwise associated with the processor) may be in communication with the memory device 14 via a bus for passing information among components of the apparatus 10. The memory device may be non-transitory and may include, for example, one or more volatile and/or non-volatile memories.
receiving, at the network device, an indication to initiate a logic flow; (Casati; col. 16, lines 6-13 & fig. 6A, step 600 - - teaches at block 600, the RACS-capable network receives, for example by using means such as the processor 12 and the communication interface 16, a registration request message. The registration request message (interpreted as the indication) initiates a logic flow as seen in blocks 610 and onward).
retrieving, by the network device during the logic flow, device certification information associated with the UE (Casati; col. 16, lines 22-28 & fig. 6A step 610 - - teaches after the RACS-capable network receives the registration request from the user equipment, the RACS-capable network, for example by using means such as the processor 12, obtains an international mobile equipment identity (IMEI) or permanent equipment identifier (PEI) of the user equipment and extracting a type allocation code (TAC) from the IMEI or the PEI as shown in block 610).
and device profile information associated with the UE; and (Casati; col. 16, lines 36-42 & fig. 6A, step 612 - - teaches as shown in block 612, the RACS-capable network, for example by using means such as the processor 12, obtains a user equipment radio capability identification (ID) associated with the user equipment).
based on the device certification information (Casati; col. 1, lines 49-52 & 61-64 - - teaches the IDs that are stored in the UCMF and UE as defined by the UE manufacturers and associated to the UE model TAC are also known as UE manufacturer-assigned UE radio Capability ID. [..] Further, the UE may be identified/associated in the network in a 5GS using a Permanent Equipment Identity (PEI) and in the EPS by using an International Mobile Equipment Identity (IMEI) (interpreted as basic hardware features as defined by the device certification information).
the device profile information, (Casati; col. 16, lines 36-42 & fig. 6A, step 612 - - teaches as shown in block 612, the RACS-capable network, for example by using means such as the processor 12, obtains a user equipment radio capability identification (ID) associated with the user equipment).
Casati fails to clearly specify the one or more network capabilities of the communications network, modifying one or more device technologies associated with the UE.
However, Mariyani teaches one or more network capabilities of the communications network, (Mariyani; col. 13, lines 30-35 - - teaches the UDM determining a Public Land Mobile Network Identifier (PLMN ID) for the wireless UE; and the UDM identifying the set of provisioned service values comprises selecting the updated service values for the wireless UE based on the PLMN ID.)
modifying one or more device technologies associated with the UE. (Mariyani; col. 13, lines 20-22 - - teaches generating new provisioned service values by overriding the set of the provisioned service values based on the updated service values (interpreted as modifying)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant's claimed invention to have incorporated the teachings of Mariyani into the invention of Casati to include the feature of using internally stored device profile information and network-specific parameters as inputs to drive modification of UE device technologies, in order to enable the network device to make more informed and accurate provisioning decisions by leveraging both the UE's existing provisioned service configuration and the network's own operational parameters alongside the device certification data already retrieved, improving the efficiency and accuracy of device technology management across the communications network (see Casati; col. 1, lines 49-52 & 61-64 and Mariyani; col. 13, lines 30-35).
Claims 2 & 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Casati, US 11304125 B2, in view of Mariyani, US 11700516 B2 as applied to claim 1, further in view of Kumar, US 11716608 B2 (hereinafter Kumar).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Casati and Mariyani teach the system of claim 1. The combination of Casati and Mariyani fails to teach wherein the network device comprises a Device Management System (DMS).
However, Kumar teaches wherein the network device comprises a Device Management System (DMS). (Kumar; col. 19, lines 24-27 - - teaches the method further comprises maintaining, at the UE segregation server unit (interpreted as the DMS due to its storing and managing TAC data), at least one database comprising the at least one TAC information of the set of user equipment. The UE segregation server unit is a centralized network-side server that stores and manages TAC-based device data for UE).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant's claimed invention to have incorporated the teachings of Kumar into the invention of Casati and Mariyani to include the feature of wherein the network device comprises a Device Management System (DMS), in order to provide the network device with a dedicated and organized repository for managing device-specific information throughout the UE’s lifecycle on the communications network, enabling more reliable and consistent retrieval of device data during the logic flow, improving the efficiency and accuracy of device technology modification decisions by centralizing TAC information in a persistent internal database rather than relying on distributed data sources (see Kumar; col. 19, lines 24-27).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Casati, Mariyani, and Kumar teach the system of claim 2. The combination of Casati, Mariyani, and Kumar further teach wherein the device profile information is retrieved from the DMS. (Kumar; col. 18, lines 9-19 - - teaches the MME forwards the received “UE Info Capability Indication” (interpreted as device profile information) message to an UE segregation server unit 302. At step 5, the UE segregation server unit 302 compares the UE capability associated with the received UE Info Capability Indication of the one or more UEs [200], with an erroneous TAC (IMEI based) available in the least one database).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant's claimed invention to have incorporated the teachings of Kumar into the invention of Casati, Mariyani and Kumar to include the feature of retrieving device profile information from the DMS's own internal database by querying stored UE capability information using TAC as the lookup key, in order to enable the network device to access a comprehensive and network-specific record of the UE's capability configuration directly from a centralized internal repository rather than retrieving it from the UE over the air or from an external source, improving the speed and consistency of device profile data retrieval during the logic flow by ensuring the network device references a pre-stored authoritative internal record of the UE's capabilities when making device technology modification decisions (see Kumar; col. 18, lines 9-19).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Casati, US 11304125 B2, in view of Mariyani, US 11700516 B2 as applied to claim 1, further in view of Parvataneni, US 20250175846 A1 (hereinafter Parvataneni).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Casati and Mariyani teach the system of claim 1. The combination of Casati and Mariyani fail to teach wherein the device profile information comprises frequency bands that the UE supports.
However, Parvataneni teaches wherein the device profile information comprises frequency bands that the UE supports. (Parvataneni; para. 37 - - teaches the end device profile information may include other information pertaining to attributes or characteristics of end device such as […] wireless capabilities (e.g., network frequencies and/or frequency bands supported)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teachings of Parvataneni into the invention of Casati and Mariyani to include the feature of the device profile information comprising frequency bands that the UE supports, in order to enable the network device to make more precise and targeted device technology modification decisions by accounting for the specific frequency bands the UE is capable of operating on in addition to the UE's general capability and certification data already retrieved, improving the granularity and accuracy of device technology provisioning by ensuring the network device has access to band-specific UE capability data when determining which device technologies should be added or modified for that UE (see Parvataneni; para. 56).
Claims 5, 6, & 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Casati, US 11304125 B2, in view of Mariyani, US 11700516 B2 as applied to claims 1, further in view of Hawkes, US 20180295506 A1 (hereinafter Hawkes).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Casati and Mariyani the system of claim 1. The combination of Casati and Mariyani fail to teach wherein the device certification information is retrieved from a Global System for Mobile Communications Association (GSMA) database.
However, Hawkes teaches wherein the device certification information is retrieved from a Global System for Mobile Communications Association (GSMA) database. (Hawkes; para. 75 - - teaches a unique device identifier (interpreted as the device certification information) that may include an identifier of a Global System for Mobile communication Association (GSMA) approved group that allocates the type allocation code (interpreted as being retrieved from the GSMA database)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant's claimed invention to have incorporated the teachings of Hawkes into the invention of Casati and Mariyani to include the feature of retrieving device certification information from a GSMA database by using a GSMA-approved group identifier and associated Type Allocation Code to uniquely identify and verify the UE's certified device model and capabilities, in order to enable the network device to obtain authoritative and globally standardized device certification data from an established external source rather than relying solely on device-reported identifiers, improving the reliability and accuracy of device identification during the logic flow by ensuring the certification information used to drive device technology modification decisions is sourced from a recognized international certification authority whose TAC allocations are standardized across all compliant mobile devices and network operators (see Hawkes; para. 75).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Casati, Mariyani, and Hawkes teach the system of claim 5. The combination of Casati, Mariyani, and Hawkes further teach wherein the indication comprises a notification that the GSMA database has been updated with new device certification information. (Hawkes; para. 76 - - sequentially teaches the “transaction” may include obtaining/reading data, deleting/changing data, and/or access to information (interpreted as being updated)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant's claimed invention to have incorporated the teachings of Hawkes into the invention of Casati, Mariyani and Hawkes to include the feature of using a notification that the GSMA database has been updated with new device certification information as the indication that triggers initiation of the logic flow at the network device, in order to enable the network device to automatically and proactively respond to changes in globally standardized device certification data by initiating the retrieval and modification workflow as soon as new or updated TAC information becomes available in the GSMA database rather than waiting for a UE registration event or periodic sweep to trigger the process, improving the timeliness and responsiveness of device technology management by ensuring that newly certified device models and updated device capabilities are promptly reflected in the network's device technology configurations for affected UEs (see Hawkes; para. 76).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Casati and Mariyani teach the system of claim 1. The combination of Casati and Mariyani fail to teach wherein the device certification information comprises a Type Allocation Code (TAC) of the UE.
However, Hawkes teaches wherein the device certification information comprises a Type Allocation Code (TAC) of the UE (Hawkes; para. 75 - - teaches the first unique device identifier may include an identifier of a Global System for Mobile communication Association (GSMA) approved group that allocates the type allocation code.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant's claimed invention to have incorporated the teachings of Hawkes into the invention of Casati and Mariyani to include the feature of the device certification information comprising a Type Allocation Code (TAC) of the UE, in order to enable the network device to uniquely identify the UE's device model and manufacturer using a globally standardized eight-digit code embedded in the UE's IMEI that is recognized across all compliant mobile networks and certification authorities, improving the precision of device identification during the logic flow by ensuring the certification information used to drive device technology modification decisions is anchored to a standardized device identifier whose allocation and maintenance is governed by the GSMA rather than a proprietary or operator-specific identifier scheme (see Hawkes; para. 75).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Casati, US 11304125 B2, in view of Mariyani, US 11700516 B2 as applied to claim 1, further in view of Brust, EP 3096557 A1 (hereinafter Brust).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Casati and Mariyani teach the system of claim 1. the combination of Casati and Mariyani fail to teach wherein the one or more device technologies comprises features and functionalities supported by the UE.
However, Brust teaches wherein the one or more device technologies comprises features and functionalities supported by the UE. (Brust; para. 33 - - teaches the UE is enabled with VoLTE advance calling feature in settings, the network supports VoLTE services, and the UE is provisioned for VoLTE services.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant's claimed invention to have incorporated the teachings of Brust into the invention of Casati and Mariyani to include the feature of one or more device technologies comprising features and functionalities supported by the UE, in order to enable the network device to identify and manage discrete UE supported features and functionalities as the actionable targets of the device technology modification decision rather than treating device technologies as a generic or undifferentiated category, improving the specificity and effectiveness of device technology management by ensuring the network device can precisely determine which individual features and functionalities supported by the UE need to be added or modified based on the retrieved device certification information, device profile information, and network capabilities of the communications network (see Brust; para. 33).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Casati, US 11304125 B2, in view of Mariyani, US 11700516 B2 as applied to claim 1, further in view of Li, WO 2020186145 A1 (hereinafter Li).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Casati and Mariyani teach the system of claim 1. The combination of Casati and Mariyani fail to teach wherein the one or more network capabilities comprises functionalities and services that the communications network provides to the UE based on network-specific parameters of the communications network.
However, Li teaches wherein the one or more network capabilities comprises functionalities and services that the communications network provides to the UE based on network-specific parameters of the communications network. (Li; paragraph 56 - - teaches that a “network capability management function” is an NF that configures the network slice (interpreted as the network that provides specific network capabilities to the UE) to serve the UE/AS with a set of desired network capabilities).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant's claimed invention to have incorporated the teachings of Li into the invention of Casati and Mariyani to include the feature of the one or more network capabilities comprising functionalities and services that the communications network provides to the UE based on network-specific parameters of the communications network, in order to enable the network device to account for the network's own operational parameters and service delivery capacity as a distinct and meaningful input to the device technology modification decision alongside the retrieved device certification information and device profile information, improving the accuracy and appropriateness of device technology modification outcomes by ensuring that device technologies are only added or modified for a given UE to the extent that the communications network's current infrastructure and network-specific parameters are capable of supporting and delivering those technologies and services to that UE (see Li; para. 56).
Claims 10, 14, & 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Casati, US 11304125 B2, in view of Mariyani as applied to claims 1, 13, and 17, US 11700516 B2, further in view of Shah, US 10820176 B2 (hereinafter Shah).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Casati and Mariyani teach the system of claim 1. the combination of Casati and Mariyani fail to teach wherein modifying the one or more device technologies comprises adding a new technology device to the device profile information.
However, Shah teaches wherein modifying the one or more device technologies comprises adding a new technology device to the device profile information. (Shah; col. 10, lines 56-58 and col. 10 & 11, lines 64-65 & 1-4 - - teaches the firmware 138 can be changed, altered, reinstalled, and/or updated, which is represented in FIG. 1 as the updated firmware 142 (interpreted as device technologies). […] Further, instances of firmware can include a file and/or segment of executable instructions that is loaded (interpreted as added) into at least a portion of the memory 128 available on the UE).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant's claimed invention to have incorporated the teachings of Shah into the invention of Casati and Mariyani to include the feature of modifying the one or more device technologies comprises adding a new technology device to the device profile information, in order to enable the network device to expand the set of device technologies available to the UE by actively adding new technology entries to the UE's device profile information rather than being limited to modifying or reconfiguring existing technology entries already present in the profile, improving the comprehensiveness and currency of the UE's device technology configuration by ensuring the network device can provision newly supported features and functionalities to the UE as they become available through firmware updates and new technology deployments on the communications network (see Shah; col. 10, lines 56-58 and col. 10 & 11, lines 64-65 & 1-4).
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Casati and Mariyani teach the computer-readable media of claim 13. The combination of Casati and Mariyani fail to teach wherein modifying the one or more device technologies comprises adding a new technology device to the device profile information.
However, Shah teaches wherein modifying the one or more device technologies comprises adding a new technology device to the device profile information. (Shah; col. 10, lines 56-58 and col. 10 & 11, lines 64-65 & 1-4 - - teaches the firmware 138 can be changed, altered, reinstalled, and/or updated, which is represented in FIG. 1 as the updated firmware 142 (interpreted as device technologies). […] Further, instances of firmware can include a file and/or segment of executable instructions that is loaded (interpreted as added) into at least a portion of the memory 128 available on the UE).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant's claimed invention to have incorporated the teachings of Shah into the invention of Casati and Mariyani to include the feature of modifying the one or more device technologies comprises adding a new technology device to the device profile information, in order to enable the network device to expand the set of device technologies available to the UE by actively adding new technology entries to the UE's device profile information rather than being limited to modifying or reconfiguring existing technology entries already present in the profile, improving the comprehensiveness and currency of the UE's device technology configuration by ensuring the network device can provision newly supported features and functionalities to the UE as they become available through firmware updates and new technology deployments on the communications network (see Shah; col. 10, lines 56-58 and col. 10 & 11, lines 64-65 & 1-4).
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Casati and Mariyani teach the method of claim 17. The combination of Casati and Mariyani fail to teach wherein modifying the one or more device technologies comprises adding a new technology device to the device profile information.
However, Shah teaches wherein modifying the one or more device technologies comprises adding a new technology device to the device profile information (Shah; col. 10, lines 56-58 and col. 10 & 11, lines 64-65 & 1-4 - - teaches the firmware 138 can be changed, altered, reinstalled, and/or updated, which is represented in FIG. 1 as the updated firmware 142 (interpreted as device technologies). […] Further, instances of firmware can include a file and/or segment of executable instructions that is loaded (interpreted as added) into at least a portion of the memory 128 available on the UE).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant's claimed invention to have incorporated the teachings of Shah into the invention of Casati and Mariyani to include the feature of modifying the one or more device technologies comprises adding a new technology device to the device profile information, in order to enable the network device to expand the set of device technologies available to the UE by actively adding new technology entries to the UE's device profile information rather than being limited to modifying or reconfiguring existing technology entries already present in the profile, improving the comprehensiveness and currency of the UE's device technology configuration by ensuring the network device can provision newly supported features and functionalities to the UE as they become available through firmware updates and new technology deployments on the communications network (see Shah; col. 10, lines 56-58 and col. 10 & 11, lines 64-65 & 1-4).
Claims 11, 15, & 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Casati, US 11304125 B2, in view of Mariyani, US 11700516 B2 as applied to claims 1, 13, & 17, further in view of Li, CN 118158640 A (hereinafter Li 2).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Casati and Mariyani teach the system of claim 1. The combination of Casati and Mariyani fail to teach wherein modifying the one or more device technologies comprises modifying a first value associated with an existing device technology associated with the UE to a second value.
However, Li 2 teaches wherein modifying the one or more device technologies comprises modifying a first value associated with an existing device technology associated with the UE to a second value. (Li 2; para. 102 - - teaches that the value of the roaming capability modification flag bit is modified from a default value to a target value (interpreted as modified from a first value to a second value). A roaming capability modification flag bit is a functionality/capability supported by the UE (interpreted as device technology) that indicates whether the UE supports certain roaming-related features or procedures.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant's claimed invention to have incorporated the teachings of Li 2 into the invention of Casati and Mariyani to include the feature of wherein modifying the one or more device technologies comprises modifying a first value associated with an existing device technology associated with the UE to a second value, in order to enable the network device to make targeted and precise changes to individual existing device technology values rather than wholesale replacing the entire device technology profile, improving the efficiency and granularity of device technology management by ensuring the network device can selectively update only the specific device technology values that require modification based on the retrieved device certification information, device profile information, and network capabilities without disrupting the remaining device technology configurations already correctly provisioned for that UE (see Li 2; para. 102).
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Casati and Mariyani teach the computer-readable media of claim 13. The combination of Casati and Mariyani fail to teach wherein modifying the one or more device technologies comprises modifying a first value associated with an existing device technology associated with the UE to a second value.
However, Li 2 teaches wherein modifying the one or more device technologies comprises modifying a first value associated with an existing device technology associated with the UE to a second value. (Li 2; para. 102 - - teaches that the value of the roaming capability modification flag bit is modified from a default value to a target value (interpreted as modified from a first value to a second value). A roaming capability modification flag bit is a functionality/capability supported by the UE (interpreted as device technology) that indicates whether the UE supports certain roaming-related features or procedures.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant's claimed invention to have incorporated the teachings of Li 2 into the invention of Casati and Mariyani to include the feature of wherein modifying the one or more device technologies comprises modifying a first value associated with an existing device technology associated with the UE to a second value, in order to enable the network device to make targeted and precise changes to individual existing device technology values rather than wholesale replacing the entire device technology profile, improving the efficiency and granularity of device technology management by ensuring the network device can selectively update only the specific device technology values that require modification based on the retrieved device certification information, device profile information, and network capabilities without disrupting the remaining device technology configurations already correctly provisioned for that UE (see Li 2; para. 102).
Regarding claim 19, the combination of Casati and Mariyani teach the method of claim 17. The combination of Casati and Mariyani fail to teach wherein modifying the one or more device technologies comprises modifying a first value associated with an existing device technology associated with the UE to a second value.
However, Li 2 teaches wherein modifying the one or more device technologies comprises modifying a first value associated with an existing device technology associated with the UE to a second value. (Li 2; para. 102 - - teaches that the value of the roaming capability modification flag bit is modified from a default value to a target value (interpreted as modified from a first value to a second value). A roaming capability modification flag bit is a functionality/capability supported by the UE (interpreted as device technology) that indicates whether the UE supports certain roaming-related features or procedures.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant's claimed invention to have incorporated the teachings of Li 2 into the invention of Casati and Mariyani to include the feature of wherein modifying the one or more device technologies comprises modifying a first value associated with an existing device technology associated with the UE to a second value, in order to enable the network device to make targeted and precise changes to individual existing device technology values rather than wholesale replacing the entire device technology profile, improving the efficiency and granularity of device technology management by ensuring the network device can selectively update only the specific device technology values that require modification based on the retrieved device certification information, device profile information, and network capabilities without disrupting the remaining device technology configurations already correctly provisioned for that UE (see Li 2; para. 102).
Claims 12, 16, & 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Casati, US 11304125 B2, in view of Mariyani, US 11700516 B2 as applied to claims 11, 15, & 19, in view of Li 2, CN 118158640 A as applied to claims 11, 15, & 19, further in view of Holcman, US 8463279 B2 (hereinafter Holcman).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Casati and Mariyani teach the system of claim 11. The combination of Casati and Mariyani fail to teach wherein the first value comprises provisioning the existing device technology to the UE using in-network capabilities of the communications network, and wherein the second value comprises provisioning the existing device technology to the UE using a third-party provider or third-party application.
However, Holcman teaches wherein the first value comprises provisioning the existing device technology to the UE using in-network capabilities of the communications network (Holcman; col. 5, lines lines 65-67 & 1-2 - - teaches the first provisioning information is associated with the network operator that has provisioned the removable module and is providing the wireless device access to the network controlled by the operator through the removable module),
and wherein the second value comprises provisioning the existing device technology to the UE using a third-party provider or third-party application (Holcman; col. 5 & 6, lines 65-67 & 1-2 - - teaches in another aspect, the second provisioning information is associated with a third-party network service provider (e.g. a service provider other than the network operator), such as the Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) of the open market wireless device or the like).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teachings of Holcman into the invention of Casati, Mariyani, and Li 2 to include the feature of wherein the first value comprises provisioning the existing device technology to the UE using in-network capabilities of the communications network and wherein the second value comprises provisioning the existing device technology to the UE using a third-party provider or third-party application, in order to enable the network device to distinguish between and selectively switch between two distinct provisioning methods for an existing device technology based on the retrieved device certification information, device profile information, and network capabilities, improving the flexibility and efficiency of device technology management by ensuring the network device can offload the provisioning of existing device technologies from the network's own internal infrastructure to a third-party provider or application when doing so would better serve the UE or optimize the use of the network's internal resources (see Holcman; col. 5 & 6, lines 65-67 & 1-2).
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Casati, Mariyani, and Li 2 teach the computer-readable media of claim 15. The combination of Casati, Mariyani, and Li 2 fails to teach wherein the first value comprises provisioning the existing device technology to the UE using in-network capabilities of the communications network, and wherein the second value comprises provisioning the existing device technology to the UE using a third-party provider or third-party application.
However, Holcman teaches wherein the first value comprises provisioning the existing device technology to the UE using in-network capabilities of the communications network (Holcman; col. 4, lines 16-20 - - teaches the first provisioning information is associated with the network operator that has provisioned the removable module and is providing the wireless device access to the network controlled by the operator through the removable module).,
and wherein the second value comprises provisioning the existing device technology to the UE using a third-party provider or third-party application (Holcman; col. 5 & 6, lines 65-67 & 1-2 - - teaches in another aspect, the second provisioning information is associated with a third-party network service provider (e.g. a service provider other than the network operator), such as the Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) of the open market wireless device or the like).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teachings of Holcman into the invention of Casati, Mariyani, and Li 2 to include the feature of wherein the first value comprises provisioning the existing device technology to the UE using in-network capabilities of the communications network and wherein the second value comprises provisioning the existing device technology to the UE using a third-party provider or third-party application, in order to enable the network device to distinguish between and selectively switch between two distinct provisioning methods for an existing device technology based on the retrieved device certification information, device profile information, and network capabilities, improving the flexibility and efficiency of device technology management by ensuring the network device can offload the provisioning of existing device technologies from the network's own internal infrastructure to a third-party provider or application when doing so would better serve the UE or optimize the use of the network's internal resources (see Holcman; col. 5 & 6, lines 65-67 & 1-2).
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Casati, Mariyani, and Li 2 teach the method of claim 19. The combination of Casati, Mariyani, and Li 2 fail to teach wherein the first value comprises provisioning the existing device technology to the UE using in-network capabilities of the communications network, and wherein the second value comprises provisioning the existing device technology to the UE using a third-party provider or third-party application.
However, Holcman teaches wherein the first value comprises provisioning the existing device technology to the UE using in-network capabilities of the communications network (Holcman; col. 4, lines 16-25 - - teaches the first provisioning information is associated with the network operator that has provisioned the removable module and is providing the wireless device access to the network controlled by the operator through the removable module),
and wherein the second value comprises provisioning the existing device technology to the UE using a third-party provider or third-party application (Holcman; col. 5 & 6, lines 65-67 & 1-2 - - teaches in another aspect, the second provisioning information is associated with a third-party network service provider (e.g. a service provider other than the network operator), such as the Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) of the open market wireless device or the like).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teachings of Holcman into the invention of Casati, Mariyani, and Li 2 to include the feature of wherein the first value comprises provisioning the existing device technology to the UE using in-network capabilities of the communications network and wherein the second value comprises provisioning the existing device technology to the UE using a third-party provider or third-party application, in order to enable the network device to distinguish between and selectively switch between two distinct provisioning methods for an existing device technology based on the retrieved device certification information, device profile information, and network capabilities, improving the flexibility and efficiency of device technology management by ensuring the network device can offload the provisioning of existing device technologies from the network's own internal infrastructure to a third-party provider or application when doing so would better serve the UE or optimize the use of the network's internal resources (see Holcman; col. 5 & 6, lines 65-67 & 1-2).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDRES RAFAEL SANCHEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-8776. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30-9:00.
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, Anthony Addy can be reached at 571-272-7795. 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.
/ANDRES RAFAEL SANCHEZ/Examiner, Art Unit 2645
/ANTHONY S ADDY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2645
Prosecution Insights