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 (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 - 3, 5 - 11, 13 - 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shaikh et al. (US 20130242754 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Shaikh discloses a method comprising:
receiving, by a network device and from a visited network component in a wireless network, a roaming authorization request for a visiting user equipment (UE) device with a first network serving as a home network for the UE device, wherein the roaming authorization request includes a unique identifier for the UE device ([0029] discloses “MME 232 may be involved in a bearer activation/deactivation process (e.g., for UE 210) and may choose a SGW for UE 210 at an initial attach and at a time of intra-LTE handover. MME 232 may authenticate UE 210 (e.g., via interaction with HSS 242). …..MME 232 may check authorization of UE 210 to camp on a service provider's Public Land Mobile Network (PLMN)”; [0014] discloses “an equipment identity register (EIR)”; [0017] discloses “The EIR may store a list of mobile devices (e.g., identified by an international mobile station equipment identity (IMEI)) that are to be monitored and/or banned from a network”; [0035]; wherein the network device is interpreted as the equipment identity register (EIR) and the visited network component is the MME 232; wherein the EIR is checked to see if the UE is banned or not; Fig. 2, elements 232, 250);
conducting, by the network device and in response to the roaming authorization request, a UE device lookup ([0017] discloses “The EIR may store a list of mobile devices (e.g., identified by an international mobile station equipment identity (IMEI)) that are to be monitored and/or banned from a network”; [0035] discloses similar);
and sending, by the network device and to the visited network component, a roaming authorization response, wherein the roaming authorization response includes authorization to the first network ([0029] discloses “MME 232 may check authorization of UE 210 to camp on a service provider's Public Land Mobile Network (PLMN) and may enforce roaming restrictions for UE 210. … MME 232 may provide a control plane function for mobility between LTE and access networks with a S3 interface terminating at MME 232. MME 232 may also terminate a S6a interface towards HSS 242 for roaming UEs.”; wherein after authorization is granted, the roaming authorization response would enforce roaming restrictions).
Shaikh does not explicitly disclose a network pointer. However, Shaikh discloses terminating/not terminating the S6a interface towards the HSS242. Hence, the network pointer can be interpreted as an address of what is allowed or not allowed.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to interpret the network pointer as the address of the interface that are allowed or not allowed, because this would provide the UE with authorization to access only certain network areas.
Regarding claim 2, Shaikh discloses identifying, based on the conducting, the interface terminated ([0029] discloses “MME 232 may check authorization of UE 210 to camp on a service provider's Public Land Mobile Network (PLMN) and may enforce roaming restrictions for UE 210. … MME 232 may provide a control plane function for mobility between LTE and access networks with a S3 interface terminating at MME 232. MME 232 may also terminate a S6a interface towards HSS 242 for roaming UEs.”).
Network pointer analyzed as in claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 3, Shaikh discloses receiving, via a provisioning process, the unique identifier for the UE device and the network pointer (page 4, Table 1, 3rd last and 2nd last entries 5421 and 5420, right column indicates use of IMSI of the UE). Obtaining network pointer analyzed as in claim 1.
Regarding claim 5, Shaikh discloses the response includes a network address for a component in the first network ([0029] discloses “… MME 232 may provide a control plane function for mobility between LTE and access networks with a S3 interface terminating at MME 232. MME 232 may also terminate a S6a interface towards HSS 242 for roaming UEs.”; wherein the network address is interpreted as address of terminated interfaces).
Network pointer analyzed as in claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 6, Shaikh discloses the network device is located externally with respect to the wireless network (Fig. 2, EIR to all networks; [0023]; [0035]).
Regarding claim 7, Shaikh discloses the unique identifier for the UE device includes one of: an International Mobile Subscriber Identity (IMSI), or a Subscription Permanent Identifier (SUPI) (page 4, Table 1, 3rd last and 2nd last entries 5421 and 5420, right column indicates use of IMSI of the UE).
Regarding claim 8, Shaikh discloses the visited network component includes a mobility management entity (MME) or an Access and Mobility Management Function (AMF) (Fig. 2, element MME 232 disclosed; [0023]).
Claim 9 is similarly analyzed as claim 1.
Claim 10 is similarly analyzed as claim 2.
Claim 11 is similarly analyzed as claim 3.
Claim 13 is similarly analyzed as claim 5.
Regarding claim 14, Shaikh discloses the network pointer includes a network address for one of:
Unified Data Management (UDM) in the first network,
a Home Subscriber Server (HSS) in the first network (Fig. 2, HSS 242; ([0029] discloses “… MME 232 may provide a control plane function for mobility between LTE and access networks with a S3 interface terminating at MME 232. MME 232 may also terminate a S6a interface towards HSS 242 for roaming UEs.”; wherein network address is inherent in the control plane function since the S6a interface can be terminated)
or a combined UDM+HSS in the first network.
Claim 15 is similarly analyzed as claim 6.
Claim 16 is similarly analyzed as claim 7.
Regarding claim 17, Shaikh does not explicitly disclose the network device is located within the wireless network.
However, Shaikh discloses the EIR is external to the wireless networks (Fig. 2, EIR to all networks; [0023]; [0035]).
Having the network device located within the wireless network is an obvious variation of having it external to the network (Rationales for Obviousness (MPEP 2143, Rationales E & F) ). The functions performed by EIR250 (listed in [0035]) can be performed by EIR250 irrespective of where it is located. Hence, it can be located within the wireless network.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to have the EIR250 within the wireless network, because this would allow for possibly faster communication with other devices in the network.
Claim 18 is similarly analyzed as claim 1.
Claim 19 is similarly analyzed as claim 8.
Claim 20 is similarly analyzed as claim 6.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 12 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Other Prior Art Cited
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to the applicant’s disclosure.
The following patents/publications are cited to further show the state of the art with respect to PLMN roaming:
Prabhakar et al. (US 20210297844) discloses Selection of Slice-Supporting PLMNs While Roaming Away from Home Network.
Ramprasad (US 20220141641) discloses System And Process For Configuring A Dynamic Roaming Public Land Mobile Network (PLMN).
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADOLF DSOUZA whose telephone number is (571)272-1043. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9 AM - 5 PM.
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, Chieh M Fan can be reached at 571-272-3042. 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.
/ADOLF DSOUZA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2632
Prosecution Insights