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 (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 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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 5, 7, 9-12, 15, 17, 19, 20-21, 23, 25-26, and 29-30, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Agiwal (US 2022/022266 A1) in view of Xu (US 2022/0225465 A1), and further in view of da Silva et al. (US 2019/0306764 A1).
Regarding claims 1 and 11, Agiwal:
a method for a User Equipment (UE) (par.[0048] describes a user equipment), comprising:
being configured with a first timer T319 with a first value and a second timer, not T319 with a second value (par.[0219] describes two different timers, one for SDT and another for non-SDT, see e.g. “The UE may also stop the timer started upon initiation of SDT procedure and start the timer for connection resume procedure i.e. T319.”. As each timer has a value, the first timer is configured with a first value and a second timer is configured with a second value the timers are different, also, the timer for non-SDT and associated with RRCConnectionResume, is the timer T319, see e.g. “start the timer for connection resume procedure i.e. T319.”) wherein the first timer and the second timer are used to control a duration of a Radio Resource Control (RRC) connection resume procedure (fig(s).1-2 depict a 2-step and 4-step RACH procedure wherein the UE transmits an RRC_RESUME message to the network, additionally, the fig(s). 5-6 and par.[0219] describe switching from a first timer to a second timer, wherein each use the RRC_RESUME, or are used to control the duration of the RRC_RESUME, as the EDT/SDT use the RRC_RESUME, and the non-EDT/SDT would utilize the RRC_RESUME);
initiating the RRC connection resume procedure while the UE is in RRC_INACTIVE (par.[0237 – 0238] describes performing the RRC_CONNECTION resume while the UE is in the RRC_INACTIVE state);
starting a timer, among the first timer and the second timer (the aforecited timers each for RRC_RESUME, while one is utilized for non-SDT, and the other for SDT as discussed above), with the first value of the first timer being started for non-Small Data Transmission (SDT), for the RRC connection resume procedure upon initiation of the RRC connection resume procedure (par.[0219] describes starting a timer for the RRC_RESUME for non-SDT, see e.g. “and start the timer for connection resume procedure i.e. T319.”), and with the second value of the second timer being started for SDT, for the RRC connection resume procedure upon transmission of a RRC resume request message of the RRC connection resume procedure (fig(s).2-3 which depict the RRC_RESUME in conjunction with the SDT procedure, and par.[0219] which recites, in part, “The UE may also stop the timer started upon initiation of SDT procedure”. That is, the when the RRC_RESUME is sent for the SDT the timer for SDT is also started);
While the disclosure of Agiwal substantially discloses the claimed invention, it may not disclose:
the first timer and the second timer are stopped upon reception of an RRC response message for the RRC connection resume procedure; and
wherein the UE enters RRC_IDLE upon expiry of the first timer or the second timer.
In an analogous art, the disclosure of Xu teaches:
the first timer and the second timer are stopped upon reception of an RRC response message for the RRC connection resume procedure (par.[0083] describes the stopping of either timer by reception of RRC message, see “after the timer is started or restarted, the timer is not always in a running state, but is stopped when a specific condition, for example, the foregoing scenario of stopping the timer, is met. For example, when receiving an RRC connection release message from the network device, the terminal controls the timer to stop running, that is, stops the timer. It may be understood that when the terminal receives a radio resource control RRC connection resume message, a connection setup message, or the like from the network device, the terminal may also stop the timer”. Also, par.[0099]. Also par.[0136] describes stopping the first timer upon reception of RRC message, wherein the first timer is utilized for SDT.)
and;
wherein the UE enters RRC_IDLE upon expiry of the first timer or the second timer (par.[0322] teaches when either timer expires the UE entering into the IDLE state when the RRC connection restoration failure for a first timer, par.[0444] refers to T2 which is another timer, and the UE may enter into IDLE state based on the failure of the timer T2); and
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant application to combine the teachings of Agiwal for a timer associated with SDT and a timer associated with more data transmission, with the disclosure of Xu, which teaches the expiry and stopping of the multiple timers. The motivation/suggestion would have been to prevent RRC_RESUME failure and provide a mechanism for better ensuring that resume procedure is successful.
While the prior art teaches that UE should stop the timer upon reception of an RRC_RESPONSE message, it may not disclose:
wherein the first timer and the second timer are stopped upon reception of a RRC reject message for the RRC connection resume procedure.
In an analogous art, the disclosure of da Silva teaches:
wherein the first timer and the second timer are stopped upon reception of a RRC reject message for the RRC connection resume procedure (par.[0309] which recites, in part, “By utilizing the failure timer in the resume procedure, the UE may be stopped when the UE receives a valid message from the network, such as a setup message, a reject message, a release message, and a suspend message, such that the UE may stop awaiting the resume procedure and change to a corresponding state based on the received message without generating more signaling.” That is, the failure timers are utilized to control the RRC_RESUME procedure to prevent excessive signaling when an RRC_RESPONSE such as RRC_REJECT is received from the network. Additionally, the disclosure recites, in part, “Additionally, if a separate failure timer, T, is introduced from the timer T300 used for RRC connection re-establishment, the timer T also may be stopped in the following events when the UE is performing the resume procedure. For example, the timer, T, stops when the UE receives a RRCConnectionSetup message, when the UE receives a RRCReject message, and when the UE performs a cell reselection while the timer, T, is running.”. That is, the T300 along with an additional timer such as a T319, etc. may also be stopped when the timer is running and the UE receives a valid RRC_RESPONSE message such as the RRC_REJECT message).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant application to combine the teachings of Agiwal and Xu as discussed above, in combination with the disclosure of da Silva which describes monitoring the RRC_RESUME procedure utilizing timers. The motivation/suggestion would have been to prevent excessive signaling from the UE when the Resume procedure fails or has been completed.
Regarding claim 2 and 12, Agiwal discloses:
wherein the RRC resume request message is transmitted in MSGA of a 2-step Random Access Channel (RACH) or msg3 of 4-step RACH (fig.1 depicts a 4-step RACH wherein RRCResume is sent in a msg3 and fig.2 depicts a 2-step RACH wherein the MSGa comprises the RRCResumeRequest).
Regarding claims 5 and 15, Agiwal discloses:
wherein the first RRC_RESUME_REQUEST is a RRC_RESUME_REQUEST or an RRC_RESUME_REQUEST1 (par.[0084] which teaches the RRC_RESUME_REQUEST or the RRC_RESUME_REQUEST1).
Regarding claims 7 and 17, Xu discloses:
starting the timer used to identify the failure of the RRC connection resume procedure not for small data transmission upon initiation of the RRC connection resume procedure not for small data transmission (par.[0136] describes starting the first timer during the initiation of the RRC_RESUME process from the UE. The process may then end or be extended by a second timer of a same or different type. It is noted that RRC_RESUME can be used for EDT/SDT or traditional RESUME procedure).
Regarding claim 9 and 19, Xu teaches:
wherein a configuration of the first timer, used to identify failure of the RRC connection resume procedure small data transmission, is included in system information (par.[0146] describes broadcasting (i.e. system information) the configuration for the timer, such as the duration etc.. The timer being used for RRC_RESUME for SDT, par.[0170 – 0171]).
Regarding claims 10 and 20, the disclosure of Xu teaches:
wherein the first timer and the second timer are stopped (see rejection of the independent claims as it pertains to the stopping of timers) upon reception of a RRC resume message (par.[0058] describes the RRCConnectionResume message), a RRC setup message (par.[0058] describes the RRCConnectionSetup message), a RRC release message (par.[0058] depicts the RRC release message).
Regarding claims 21 and 23, Agiwal discloses:
wherein the first timer is a T319 timer (par.[0219] describes an SDT timer and a T319 timer for non-SDT).
Regarding claims 25 and 26, Xu discloses:
Wherein the first value is different than the second value (par.[0460] which describes the T319 duration or second duration, and the new timer T(2-4) may be the same or longer. Thus, the disclosure teaches a plurality of configurable values of a T319 timer and a new timer. Additionally Xu teaches that first and second timer may be T319 and wherein the two timers have a same or different value par.[0408, 0458- 0460]).
Regarding claim 29 and 30, Agiwal discloses:
wherein second timer is not a timer T319 (par.[0219] describes a T319 for non-SDT and SDT timer for SDT).
Claim(s) 4 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Agiwal, Xu, and da Silva, as applied to claims 1 and 11 above, and further in view of Lindheimer et al. (US 2020/0120741 A1).
Regarding claim 4 and 14, the disclosures of Agiwal, Xu, and da Silva, substantially disclose the claimed subject matter but may not disclose:
wherein the RRC connection resume procedure not for small data transmission is for responding to radio access network (RAN) paging, triggering RAN-based Notification Area (RNA) updates, or sidelink communication.
However, the above technique was well-known prior to the effective filing date of the instant application. For example, the disclosure of Lindheimer teaches:
Wherein the RRC connection resume procedure not for small data transmission is for responding to radio access network (RAN) paging, triggering RAN-based Notification Area (RNA) updates, or sidelink communication (Abstract: discloses that the UE may perform Resume for RNA update. Par.[0021] discloses that the UE may perform resume in response to RAN paging.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant application to combine the teachings of Agiwal, Xu, and da Silva, with the disclosure of Linheimer. The motivation/suggestion would have been to allow the UE to perform a TA update or receive paging for downlink data while the UE is in the RRC_INACTIVE state.
Response to Arguments
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 11, and each of their respective dependent claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Fujishiro et al. (US 2022/0256587 A1) “Communication Control Method, User Equipment, and Apparatus for Performing Early Data Transmission”, par.[0004]
Fujishiro et al. (US 2020/0187245 A1) “Communication Control Method”
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 JAMAAL HENSON whose telephone number is (571)272-5339. The examiner can normally be reached M-Thu: 7:30 am - 6:30 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, Derrick Ferris can be reached at (571)272-3123. 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.
JAMAAL HENSON
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2411
/JAMAAL HENSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2411
Prosecution Insights