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 .
Specification
The new title of “IMS APPLICATION SERVER DISCOVERY VIA HOME SUBSCRIBER SERVER OR UNIFIED DATA MANAGEMENT FUNCTION” filed 06/08/26 is acknowledged and entered.
Drawings
New corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in this application because --the unlabeled rectangular box(es) shown in the drawings should be provided with descriptive text labels--. Applicant is advised to employ the services of a competent patent draftsperson outside the Office, as the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office no longer prepares new drawings. The corrected drawings are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application.
The requirement for corrected drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 12-13 of applicant’s response, filed 06/08/26, with respect to the rejections under 35 USC 112 in view of applicant’s amendments have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejections of claims 2-8 and 10-14 have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 13-15 of applicant’s response, filed 06/08/26, with respect to the rejections under 35 USC 101 in view of applicant’s amendments have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejections of claims 1-20 have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 15-17 of applicant’s response, filed 06/08/26, with respect to the rejections under 35 USC 102/103 in view of applicant’s amendments have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejections of claims 1-20 have been withdrawn.
While applicant’s amendments have overcome all of the previous claim rejections, they have also introduced various inconsistencies into the claim language which are addressed via claim objection and rejection, as shown below.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, line 12, “the a respective IMS AS” should be changed to --the respective IMS AS--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-3, 5, 9-11, 13-15, 18, 20-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1, recites “an IMS AS” within lines 28, 29, 30, 31, and 39, making it unclear which IMS AS is being referenced and if these limitations are meant to be directed to the one or more IMS AS of line 6 or a different IMS AS.
Claim 2 recites “information indicating one or more IMS services provided by the respective IMS AS; information indicating one or more users for which the respective IMS AS supports IMS services; information indicating one or more groups of users for which the respective IMS AS supports IMS services; information indicating one or more user categories for which the respective IMS AS supports IMS services; and information indicating one or more events and services that can be exposed by the respective IMS AS.” which renders the claim indefinite as claim 1 previously recites each of the elements
“information indicating one or more IMS services provided by the respective IMS AS; information indicating one or more users for which the respective IMS AS supports IMS services”, “information indicating one or more groups of users for which the respective IMS AS supports IMS services”, “information indicating one or more user categories for which the respective IMS AS supports IMS services” and “information indicating one or more events and services that can be exposed by the respective IMS AS.”
As they do not include antecedence to the previous recitations, it is unclear if these are meant to reference the same information as recited within claim 1 (in alternative form) or different information. As at least one of these elements is required within claim 1, the listed recitation within claim 2 appears to potentially require a new listing with a second form of the item.
Claim 3 recites “an IMS AS instance identifier or IMS AS set identifier; a session initiation protocol uniform resource identifier via which the respective IMS AS can be reached; and an IMS AS diameter address of the respective IMS AS.” which renders the claim indefinite as claim 1 previously recites each of the elements
“an IMS AS instance identifier or IMS AS set identifier”, “a session initiation protocol uniform resource identifier via which the respective IMS AS can be reached” and “an IMS AS diameter address of the respective IMS AS”.
As they do not include antecedence to the previous recitations, it is unclear if these are meant to reference the same information as recited within claim 1 (in alternative form) or different information. Further, as at least one of these elements is required within claim 1, the listed recitation within claim 3 appears to potentially require a new listing with a second form of the item.
Claim 5 recites “information indicating one or more target IMS services provided by an IMS AS; information indicating one or more target users for which an IMS AS supports IMS services; information indicating one or more target groups of users for which an IMS AS supports IMS services; and information indicating one or more target events and services exposed by an IMS AS.” which renders the claim indefinite as claim 1 previously recites each of the elements
“information indicating one or more target IMS services provided by an IMS AS”, “information indicating one or more target users for which an IMS AS supports IMS services”, “information indicating one or more target groups of users for which an IMS AS supports IMS services”, and “information indicating one or more target events and services exposed by an IMS AS”.
As they do not include antecedence to the previous recitations, it is unclear if these are meant to reference the same information as recited within claim 1 (in alternative form) or different information. Further, as at least one of these elements is required within claim 1, the listed recitation within claim 5 appears to potentially require a new listing with a second form of the item.
Claim 9, recites “an IMS AS” within lines 9, 10, 11, 12, making it unclear which IMS AS is being referenced and if these limitations are meant to be directed to the one or more IMS AS of line 6 or a different IMS AS.
Claim 10 recites “information indicating one or more target IMS services provided by an IMS AS; information indicating one or more target users for which an IMS AS supports IMS services; information indicating one or more target groups of users for which an IMS AS supports IMS services; and information indicating one or more target events and services that can be exposed by an IMS AS.” which renders the claim indefinite as claim 9 previously recites each of the elements
“information indicating one or more target IMS services provided by an IMS AS; information indicating one or more target users for which an IMS AS supports IMS services; information indicating one or more target groups of users for which an IMS AS supports IMS services; or information indicating one or more target events and services that can be exposed by an IMS AS.”
As they do not include antecedence to the previous recitations, it is unclear if these are meant to reference the same information as recited within claim 1 (in alternative form) or different information. Further, as at least one of these elements is required within claim 9, the listed recitation within claim 10 appears to potentially require a new listing with a second form of the item.
Claim 10, recites “an IMS AS” within lines 3, 4, 6, 9-10, making it unclear which IMS AS is being referenced and if these limitations are meant to be directed to the one or more IMS AS of claim 9 or a different IMS AS.
Claim 11 recites “IMS AS identifying information, information indicating one or more IMS services provided by an IMS AS; information indicating one or more users for which an IMS AS supports IMS services; information indicating one or more groups of users for which an IMS AS supports IMS services; and information indicating one or more events and services exposed by an IMS AS.” which renders the claim indefinite as claim 9 previously recites each of the elements
“IMS AS identifying information, information indicating one or more IMS services provided by an IMS AS; information indicating one or more users for which an IMS AS supports IMS services; information indicating one or more groups of users for which an IMS AS supports IMS services; and information indicating one or more events and services exposed by an IMS AS.”
As they do not include antecedence to the previous recitations, it is unclear if these are meant to reference the same information as recited within claim 9 (in alternative form) or different information. Further, as at least one of these elements is required within claim 9, the listed recitation within claim 11 appears to potentially require a new listing with a second form of the item.
Further, it is noted that claim 9 already explicitly requires that the IMS profile comprises “IMS AS identifying information”. Thus, it is unclear what is meant by repeating the same limitation within claim 11 for the IMS profile to again comprise “IMS AS identifying information”, it is unclear if this is meant to be new identifying information.
Claim 15, separately recites “one or more users” and “one or more groups of users” in lines 5, 14, 15, 22, and 23, making it unclear if the “one or more users” and “one or more groups of users” are meant to reference the same or different users and groups of users.
Claim 15, lines 20-26, recite “information indicating one or more target IMS services provided by an IMS AS, information indicating one or more target users for which an IMS AS supports IMS services, information indicating one or more target groups of users for which an IMS AS supports IMS services, and information indicating one or more target events and services exposed by an IMS AS.” which renders the claim indefinite as claim 15 previously recites each of the elements within lines 13-18.
Thus, it is unclear if the different forms of information are the same as, meant to reference, the prior recitations or constitute different forms of information.
Claim 18 recites “IMS AS identifying information, information indicating one or more IMS services provided by an IMS AS; information indicating one or more users for which an IMS AS supports IMS services; information indicating one or more groups of users for which an IMS AS supports IMS services; and information indicating one or more events and services exposed by an IMS AS.” which renders the claim indefinite as claim 15 previously recites each of the elements multiple times, within lines 13-18 and 20-26.
As they do not include antecedence to the previous recitations, it is unclear if these are meant to reference the same information as recited within claim 15 (in alternative form) or different information. Further, as at least one of these elements is required within claim 15, the listed recitation within claim 18 appears to potentially require a new listing with a second form of the item.
Additionally, it is unclear if any of the “one or more users” or “one or more groups of users” recited within claim 20 are meant to reference the “one or more users” or “one or more groups of users” recite within line 5 of claim 15.
Claim 20 recites “information indicating whether the IMS AS supports service exposure via a network exposure function; information indicating one or more IMS services provided by an IMS AS; information indicating one or more users for which an IMS AS supports IMS services; information indicating one or more groups of users for which an IMS AS supports IMS services; and information indicating one or more events and services exposed by an IMS AS.” which renders the claim indefinite as claim 15 previously recites each of the elements multiple times, within lines 13-18 and 20-26.
As they do not include antecedence to the previous recitations, it is unclear if these are meant to reference the same information as recited within claim 15 (in alternative form) or different information.
Additionally, it is unclear if any of the “one or more users” or “one or more groups of users” recited within claim 20 are meant to reference the “one or more users” or “one or more groups of users” recite within line 5 of claim 15.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to James R Sheleheda whose telephone number is (571)272-7357. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 am-5 pm CST.
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, Benjamin Bruckart can be reached at (571) 272-3982. 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.
/James R Sheleheda/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2424
Prosecution Insights