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 .
This action is in response to the preliminary amendment filed on 2/13/2025. Claims 2-21 are pending and have been considered below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 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(s) 2,3,12,13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kuang et al. (WO 2020/025047; see attached English translation).
Regarding claims 2, and 12:
Kuang discloses a system and method for a network device (see figures; abstract) comprising:
a processor and a memory (figures 8-13 [processor 801,901 etc, and memory 1302]; para 63-78,104-108; para 310-322; para 340-344), the processor and memory configured to:
receive a non-access stratum (NAS) message comprising an indication of a non-cellular capability registration request from a wireless transmit/receive unit (WTRU) (para 191, partially reproduced herein with emphasis {non-access stratum (NAS) message, such as a registration request message…}), the non-cellular capability registration request comprising an identifier of the WTRU, an indication of one or more non-cellular device capabilities to be registered with a network to facilitate a discovery operation, and, for each of the one or more non-cellular device capabilities, a non-cellular capability identifier (para 152-153 {including devices … sensors, global positioning system (GPS)… full or partial functions that do not rely on smart phones, such as smart watches or smart glasses}, para 156 [these sensors, features/functions are non cellular function of devices and registered for those devices]; figures; para 192; para 248 {NAS message is, for example, a registration request message, and the NAS message may carry a capability identifier}); and
send an acknowledgement for the non-cellular capability registration request (para 204 {feedback message from the access network device} [feedback is equivalent to acknowledgement]; para 214,239; figs; and see throughout the disclosure).
Regarding claims 3, 13:
Kuang discloses all of the subject matter as described above and wherein the processor and memory are configured to receive the NAS message via an access and mobility management function (AMF) (figs; para 155 [AMF]; and throughout disclosure).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 2-6,9,12-16,19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oyman (US 2015/0256861) in view of Xu (US 2020/0280888).
Regarding claims 2, and 12:
Oyman discloses a system and method for a network device (see figures; abstract) comprising:
a processor and a memory (figures 1,12,13; para 148-151; processor and memory in para 158-166), the processor and memory configured to:
receive a non-access stratum (NAS) message comprising an indication of a non-cellular capability registration request from a wireless transmit/receive unit (WTRU) (para 24, partially reproduced herein with emphasis {Signaling from the user equipment (UE) to the network of the orientation sensor capabilities and/or the current device}; see fig 1 [Mobile terminal profile send to server]; para 26 [MT's identity]; para 35), the non-cellular capability registration request comprising an identifier of the WTRU, an indication of one or more non-cellular device capabilities to be registered with a network to facilitate a discovery operation, and, for each of the one or more non-cellular device capabilities, a non-cellular capability identifier (para 29 {… device capability attributes on the device orientation capabilities of the client device (e.g., UE) can include a list of device orientation positions that provides an indication…} [orientation is non cellular capability]; fig 3-8; para 35; para 124 {… attribute (e.g, "NumOfCameras") may be defined to identify the number of capture cameras on the client device (e.g., mobile terminal). A value of more than one can indicate that the client device has…} [cameras is non cellular capability]); and
send an acknowledgement for the non-cellular capability registration request (para 35 […acknowledge the SIP SUBSCRIBE message]; figs 5,6; and see throughout the disclosure).
Oyman discloses all of the subject matter as described above, except for specifically teaching that receive a Non-Access Stratum (NAS) message comprising registration request.
However, Xu in the same field of endeavor discloses a system and method for data communication where receive a Non-Access Stratum (NAS) message comprising registration request (para 40 {… receiving a first indicator being associated with a capability of the UE 10 and support for the UE 10 triggering a UE policy configuration … UE policy is delivered in one NAS message…}; para 41; para 44 {registration request message is a non-access stratum (NAS) message…}; and see throughout).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use teachings of Xu in Oyman in order to provide user device capability information and policy delivery in NAS message without duplication by negotiation of the delivery (KSR: Combining Prior Art Elements According to Known Methods to Yield Predictable Results).
Regarding claims 3, 13:
Oyman and Xu discloses all the subject matter as described above and wherein receive the NAS message via an access and mobility management function (AMF) (Xu, para 27-29; figs; para 44; and throughout disclosure).
Regarding claims 4, 14:
Oyman and Xu discloses all the subject matter as described above and comprises one or more of an interface definition, the non-cellular capability identifier, or an indication of an operating system associated with the WTRU (para 23 [interface]; para 26 [MT's identity, and may supplement the identity signaling with extra attributes]; and see throughout).
Regarding claims 5, 15:
Oyman and Xu discloses all of the subject matter as described above and wherein the non-cellular capability registration request comprises one or more of an address or uniform resource locator (URL) for obtaining information about the one or more non-cellular device capabilities (para 26 [URL]; and throughout).
Regarding claims 6, 16:
Oyman and Xu discloses all of the subject matter as described above and wherein the non-cellular capability registration request comprises one or more of a device manufacturer identifier or an indication of an operating system associated with the WTRU (para 26 [provide device capability profiles for the manufacturer or vendor's products]; and throughout).
Regarding claims 9, 19:
Oyman and Xu discloses all of the subject matter as described above and wherein the non-cellular capability registration request comprises information associated with one or more operations associated with the one or more non-cellular device capabilities.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-8,10-11,17-18,20-21 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Larmo et al. (US 2018/0302785) discloses a system and method for establishing a direct control link.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HIRDEPAL SINGH whose telephone number is (571)270-1688. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00-5:00 M-F.
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 on (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.
/HIRDEPAL SINGH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2631
Prosecution Insights