DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-20 have been examined and are rejected.
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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-19 of U.S. Patent No. 12192251. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims cover substantially the same subject matter and recite similar limitations.
Regarding claims 1, 9 and 17, claims 1, 9 and 17 of Application No. 18/968,332 correspond to claims 1, 8 and 15 of U.S. Patent No. 12192251. See the table below.
Application No. 18/968,332
U.S. Patent No. 12192251
Claims 1, 9 and 17. A method of providing a data traffic session, the method comprising: receiving, by a unified data management function (UDM), a proxy-call session control function (P-CSCF) restoration indication over a single N70 interface extending directly between the UDM and a serving-call session control function (S-CSCF); and
transmitting, by the UDM, the P-CSCF restoration indication to a session management function (SMF) responsive to receiving the P-CSCF restoration indication over the single N70 interface, wherein the P-CSCF restoration indication prompts the SMF to send an internet protocol (IP) messaging system (IMS) Packet Data Network (PDN) connection release message instructing a user equipment (UE) to release registration with a first P-CSCF and re-register with a second P-CSCF that is different than the first P-CSCF.
Claims 1 and 8. A method of providing a data traffic session, the method comprising: receiving, by a unified data management function (UDM), a proxy-call session control function (P-CSCF) restoration indication over a single N70 interface extending directly between the UDM and a serving-call session control function (S-CSCF); based on at least receiving the SIP message,
transmitting, by the UDM, the P-CSCF restoration indication to a session management function (SMF) responsive to receiving the P-CSCF restoration indication over the single N70 interface; based on at least receiving the P-CSCF restoration indication, sending, from the SMF to a user equipment (UE), an internet protocol (IP) messaging system (IMS) Packet Data Network (PDN) connection release message instructing the UE to release registration with a first P-CSCF and re-register with a second P-CSCF that is different than the first P-CSCF; receiving an indication, by an application server (AS), that the UE is registered with the second P-CSCF; and based on at least receiving a session initiation message, establishing the data traffic session for the UE with the second P-CSCF.
Claims 1, 9 and 17. A method of providing a data traffic session, the method comprising: receiving, by a unified data management function (UDM), a proxy-call session control function (P-CSCF) restoration indication over a single N70 interface extending directly between the UDM and a serving-call session control function (S-CSCF); and
transmitting, by the UDM, the P-CSCF restoration indication to a session management function (SMF) responsive to receiving the P-CSCF restoration indication over the single N70 interface, wherein the P-CSCF restoration indication prompts the SMF to send an internet protocol (IP) messaging system (IMS) Packet Data Network (PDN) connection release message instructing a user equipment (UE) to release registration with a first P-CSCF and re-register with a second P-CSCF that is different than the first P-CSCF.
Claim 15. A method of providing a data traffic session, the method comprising: receiving, by a unified data management function (UDM), a proxy-call session control function (P-CSCF) restoration indication over a single N70 interface extending directly between the UDM and a serving-call session control function (S-CSCF); and
transmitting, by the UDM, the P-CSCF restoration indication to a session management function (SMF) responsive to receiving the P-CSCF restoration indication over the single N70 interface, wherein the P-CSCF restoration indication prompts the SMF to send an internet protocol (IP) messaging system (IMS) Packet Data Network (PDN) connection release message instructing a user equipment (UE) to release registration with a first P-CSCF, to re-register with a second P-CSCF that is different than the first P-CSCF, and to notify an application server (AS) that the UE is registered with the second P-CSCF, and wherein notifying the AS that the UE is registered with the second P-CSCF triggers establishment of the data traffic session for the UE with the second P-CSCF.
Regarding claims 2-8, 10-16 and 18-20, claims 2, 10 and 18 of Application No. 18/968,332 correspond to claims 1, 8 and 15 of U.S. Patent No. 12192251.
Claims 2, 10 and 18 of Application No. 18/968,332 correspond to claims 1, 8 and 15 of U.S. Patent No. 12192251.
Claims 3, 11 and 19 of Application No. 18/968,332 correspond to claims 2, 9 and 16 of U.S. Patent No. 12192251.
Claims 4, 12 and 20 of Application No. 18/968,332 correspond to claims 3, 10 and 17 of U.S. Patent No. 12192251.
Claims 5 and 13 of Application No. 18/968,332 correspond to claims 4, 11 and 18 of U.S. Patent No. 12192251.
Claims 6 and 14 of Application No. 18/968,332 correspond to claims 5, 12 and 19 of U.S. Patent No. 12192251.
Claims 7 and 15 of Application No. 18/968,332 correspond to claims 6 and 13 of U.S. Patent No. 12192251.
Claims 8 and 16 of Application No. 18/968,332 correspond to claims 7 and 14 of U.S. Patent No. 12192251.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. Claim 17 recites “A computer program product having computer-executable instructions stored thereon, which, upon execution by one or more processors…”, which is a product consisting of only computer-executable instructions. A person of ordinary skill in the art would interpret the limitations to mean merely computer executable functions, rendering the claimed product comprising merely executable functions, which is non-statutory. Claims 18-20 fail to remedy the deficiency of claim 17 and are rejected. This rejection may be overcome by amending claim 17 to recite: “A computer program product comprising a non-transitory computer-readable medium having computer-executable instructions stored thereon, which, upon execution by one or more processors…”
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.
Claims 1, 4-6, 9, 12-14, 17 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al. (WO 2021/120744, see the English translated copy) in view of Stille et al. (WO 2021/158149) further in view of Li et al. (U.S. PGPub 2020/0178336).
Regarding claims 1, 9 and 17, Chen teaches A method of providing a data traffic session, the method comprising: receiving, by a unified data management function (UDM), a proxy-call session control function (P-CSCF) restoration indication extending directly between the UDM and a serving-call session control function (S-CSCF); and (Chen, see page 14, paragraphs 5-11 where Step 603: The S-CSCF entity sends second indication information to the UDM entity, where the second indication information is used to indicate that the IMS session of the terminal device fails...when the failure scenario described above occurs, the P-CSCF entity may return a failure response message to the S-CSCF entity, indicating that the IMS session of the terminal device has failed. The specific embodiment of the failure response message may be the session initiation protocol (SIP) 604...Step 605: The UDM entity sends first indication information to the SMF entity, where the first indication information is used to indicate that the IMS session of the terminal device fails...the UDM entity may send a message 4 to the SMF entity.)
transmitting, by the UDM, the P-CSCF restoration indication to a session management function (SMF) responsive to receiving the P-CSCF restoration indication, (Chen, see page 14, paragraphs 5-11 where Step 603: The S-CSCF entity sends second indication information to the UDM entity, where the second indication information is used to indicate that the IMS session of the terminal device fails...when the failure scenario described above occurs, the P-CSCF entity may return a failure response message to the S-CSCF entity, indicating that the IMS session of the terminal device has failed. The specific embodiment of the failure response message may be the session initiation protocol (SIP) 604...Step 605: The UDM entity sends first indication information to the SMF entity, where the first indication information is used to indicate that the IMS session of the terminal device fails...the UDM entity may send a message 4 to the SMF entity.)
However, Chen does not explicitly teach over a single N70 interface
over a single N70 interface
Stille teaches over a single N70 interface (Stille, see fig. 8; see page 16, lines 19-30 where the sending in this Action 201 may be over one of: a) an SBI N70 interface…; see page 21, lines 28-31 where the receiving in this Action 304 may be over one of: a) the SBI N70 interface...; see page 26, lines 20-25 where over the SBI N70 interface...; see page 29, lines 25-30 where to send is configured to be over one of: a) the SBI N70...)
over the single N70 interface (Stille, see fig. 8; see page 16, lines 19-30 where the sending in this Action 201 may be over one of: a) an SBI N70 interface…; see page 21, lines 28-31 where the receiving in this Action 304 may be over one of: a) the SBI N70 interface...; see page 26, lines 20-25 where over the SBI N70 interface...; see page 29, lines 25-30 where to send is configured to be over one of: a) the SBI N70...)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was filed, to combine Chen and Stille to provide the technique of sending and receiving over an N70 interface of Stille in the system of Chen in order to reduce the work effort of the functions in the system (Stille, see page 27, lines 27-30).
However, Chen-Stille does not explicitly teach wherein the P-CSCF restoration indication prompts the SMF to send an internet protocol (IP) messaging system (IMS) Packet Data Network (PDN) connection release message instructing a user equipment (UE) to release registration with a first P-CSCF and re-register with a second P-CSCF that is different than the first P-CSCF.
Li teaches wherein the P-CSCF restoration indication prompts the SMF to send an internet protocol (IP) messaging system (IMS) Packet Data Network (PDN) connection release message instructing a user equipment (UE) to release registration with a first P-CSCF and re-register with a second P-CSCF that is different than the first P-CSCF. (Li, see fig. 10 steps 510-511 third message from SMF to UE; see paragraphs 0222-0226 where the SMF sends a PDU session release request (or a PDU session updating request), which carries a P-CSCF list, to the UE...The PDU session release request (or the PDU session updating request) is forwarded to the UE by the AMF... In step 511, the UE processes the PDU session release request (or the PDU session updating request)...; see also figs. 11-12; see paragraph 0227 where after the IMS registration process succeeds, the S-CSCF re-forwards the SIP message received in the foregoing step to the new P-CSCF, and the P-CSCF forwards the SIP message to the UE. After receiving the SIP message, the UE continues the subsequent processing...))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was filed, to combine Chen-Stille and Li to provide the technique of the P-CSCF restoration indication prompts the SMF to send an internet protocol (IP) messaging system (IMS) Packet Data Network (PDN) connection release message instructing a user equipment (UE) to release registration with a first P-CSCF and re-register with a second P-CSCF that is different than the first P-CSCF of Li in the system of Chen in order to simplify the process of failure recovery and more rapidly recovering the IMS service (Li, see paragraph 0113).
Regarding claims 4, 12 and 20, Chen-Stille-Li teaches wherein the P-CSCF restoration indication is transmitted by the S-CSCF responsive to the S-CSCF receiving an indication that the first P-CSCF is unavailable. (Chen, see page 14, paragraphs 5-11 where Step 603: The S-CSCF entity sends second indication information to the UDM entity, where the second indication information is used to indicate that the IMS session of the terminal device fails...when the failure scenario described above occurs, the P-CSCF entity may return a failure response message to the S-CSCF entity, indicating that the IMS session of the terminal device has failed. The specific embodiment of the failure response message may be the session initiation protocol (SIP) 604...)
over the single N70 interface (Stille, see fig. 8; see page 16, lines 19-30 where the sending in this Action 201 may be over one of: a) an SBI N70 interface…; see page 21, lines 28-31 where the receiving in this Action 304 may be over one of: a) the SBI N70 interface...; see page 26, lines 20-25 where over the SBI N70 interface...; see page 29, lines 25-30 where to send is configured to be over one of: a) the SBI N70...) The motivation regarding to the obviousness to claims 1, 9 and 17 is also applied to claims 4, 12 and 20.
Regarding claims 5 and 13, Chen-Stille-Li teaches wherein the indication that the first P-CSCF is unavailable comprises a time-out without a response from the first P-CSCF. (Li, see fig. 10; see paragraph 0204-0206 where the previous P-CSCF fails and does not respond, or loses UE data after failing and restarting, the P-CSCF returns an SIP failure to the S-CSCF...S-CSCF has detected the P-CSCF failure in steps 502 and 503, the S-CSCF sends an SAR request, which carries a P-CSCF failure recovery indication, to an HSS...after the HSS receives the SAR request of the S-CSCF, the HSS sends the P-CSCF failure recovery indication to the UDM...) The motivation regarding to the obviousness to claims 1, 9 and 17 is also applied to claims 5 and 13.
Regarding claims 6 and 14, Chen-Stille-Li teaches wherein the indication that the first P-CSCF is unavailable comprises a message from the first P-CSCF. (Chen, see page 14, paragraphs 5-11 where Step 603: The S-CSCF entity sends second indication information to the UDM entity, where the second indication information is used to indicate that the IMS session of the terminal device fails...when the failure scenario described above occurs, the P-CSCF entity may return a failure response message to the S-CSCF entity, indicating that the IMS session of the terminal device has failed. The specific embodiment of the failure response message may be the session initiation protocol (SIP) 604...)
Claims 2-3, 7, 10-11, 15 and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen-Stille-Li in view of Christopher et al. (U.S. PGPub 2020/0153874).
Regarding claims 2, 10 and 18, Chen-Stille-Li teaches all of the features of claims 1, 9 and 17. However, Chen-Stille-Li does not explicitly teach wherein the IMS PDN connection release message further instructs the UE to notify an application server (AS) that the UE is registered with the second P-CSCF.
Christopher teaches wherein the IMS PDN connection release message further instructs the UE to notify an application server (AS) that the UE is registered with the second P-CSCF. (Christopher, see figs. 5-5; see paragraph 0058 where include a primary P-CSCF server 150A and/or any secondary P-CSCF server 150B...Based on a determination that the device 120 is registered, in step 52, with the receiving P-CSCF device (such as a primary P-CSCF server 150A), the P-CSCF device may begin call termination processing (services to allow the call to begin) and may forward the call to the device 120, in step 53. Based on a determination that the device 120 is not registered with the receiving P-CSCF; see paragraph 0068 where Based on receipt of that notification message, the device 120 may begin a registration process with the primary P-CSCF server 150A (e.g., in shown in step 49 of FIG. 4)...)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was filed, to combine Chen-Stille-Li and Christopher to provide the technique of wherein the IMS PDN connection release message further instructs the UE to notify an application server (AS) that the UE is registered with the second P-CSCF of Christopher in the system of Chen-Stille-Li order to allow the system to provide other options such as forwarding and rejecting calls based on registration (Christopher, see abstract and see fig. 5).
Regarding claims 3, 11 and 19, Chen-Stille-Li teaches wherein the AS comprises a telephony application server (TAS). (Christopher, see paragraph 0035 where A Telephony Application Server (TAS) may be used by residential IMS users for feature processing, such as call holding…; see paragraph 0037) The motivation regarding to the obviousness to claims 2, 10 and 18 is also applied to claims 3, 11 and 19.
Regarding claims 7 and 15, Chen-Stille-Li teaches all of the features of claims 1, 9 and 17. However, Chen-Stille-Li does not explicitly teach wherein the IMS PDN connection release message further instructs the UE to perform a proxy node discovery with a status repository to discover the second P-CSCF.
Christopher teaches wherein the IMS PDN connection release message further instructs the UE to perform a proxy node discovery with a status repository to discover the second P-CSCF. (Christopher, see fig. 4 Discovery with Primary P-CSCF; see paragraph 0021 where The P-CSCF server discovery mechanism on the computing device may be configured to recognize the indicators in the SIP messages.; see paragraph 0022 where The device 120 may perform the P-CSCF discovery process...; see paragraph 0052 where include a standard P-CSCF discovery and IMS registration process.; see also paragraph 0057)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was filed, to combine Chen-Stille-Li and Christopher to provide the technique of the IMS PDN connection release message further instructs the UE to perform a proxy node discovery with a status repository to discover the second P-CSCF of Christopher in the system of Chen-Stille-Li order to allow the system to provide other options such as forwarding and rejecting calls based on registration (Christopher, see abstract and see fig. 5).
Claims 8 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen-Stille-Li-Christopher in view of Smith et al. (U.S. PGPub 2022/0014948).
Regarding claims 8 and 16, Chen-Stille-Li-Christopher teaches all of the features of claims 7 and 15. However, Chen-Stille-Li-Christopher does not explicitly teach wherein the status repository comprises a network repository function (NRF).
Smith teaches wherein the status repository comprises a network repository function (NRF). (Smith, see figs. 1B-1C; see paragraph 0047-0048 where include a network exposure function (NEF) 154 and a network repository function (NRF)... Nnrf 158C (a service-based interface exhibited by the NRF 156)...Other service-based interfaces (e.g., Nudr, N5g-eir, and Nudsf) not shown in FIG. 1C can also be used...)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was filed, to combine Chen-Stille-Li-Christopher and Smith to provide the technique of the status repository comprises a network repository function (NRF) of Smith in the system of Chen-Stille-Li-Christopher in order to increase resiliency of the network (Smith, see paragraph 0087).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. This includes:
U.S. PGPub 2020/0153875, which describes methods for establishing a connection with a dual registered device;
U.S. PGPub 2021/0337372, which describes methods for event subscription management in a network comprising a set of NF nodes, and corresponding NF nodes; and
U.S. PGPub 2021/0105196, which describes method and system for group communications with shared downlink data.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MENG VANG whose telephone number is (571)270-7023. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8AM-2PM, 3PM-5PM.
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, NICHOLAS TAYLOR can be reached at (571) 272-3889. 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.
/MENG VANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2443
Prosecution Insights