DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 1/14/26 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
This office action is in response to amendment filed on 1/14/26. Claims 1-20 are currently pending, of which, claims 13-20 are withdrawn from consideration.
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 pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-3, 6-9, and 12 is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Chen et al. (US 2015/0003315) in view of Pawar et al. (US 2009/0327443), in view of Bachmann et al. (US 2010/0056175), and further in view of Yu et al. (KR 20120070298 see translation for citations).
Regarding claim 1, Chen teaches a wireless transmit/receive unit (WTRU) (user equipment) [Fig. 1] comprising:
a transceiver; and
a processor;
wherein the transceiver and the processor are configured to:
receive, from a base station, information for configuring a group of WTRUs including a group identifier (group air interface identity/G-RNTI) (see “A user equipment obtains a group air interface identity configured by a base station…” [par 67] and “The user equipment receives a configuration command sent from the base station and obtains a G-RNTI corresponding to the IP broadcast address” [par 71]);
receive, from the base station, a group transmission (IP broadcast data packet/IP multicast data packet) for the WTRUs in the group based on the group identifier (see “The user equipment receives an IP broadcast data packet or an IP multicast data packet using the group air interface identity” [par 68]);
receive information (multicast transmission) directly from another WTRU of the group (see “…only user equipments in a group can send multicast transmission in the group” [par 11] which suggests a user equipment can “receive information directly from another WTRU of the group” since user equipments in the group can send multicast transmission to each other).
Chen does not explicitly teach that the information for configuring a group of WTRUs includes a WTRU specific identifier indicating a unique identity of the WTRU within the group that is usable to address WTRU-specific information within group signaling. In an analogous prior art reference, Pawar teaches a WTRU (client node) receives a WTRU specific identifier (unique identifier/MAC_ID) indicating a unique identity of the WTRU within the group (see “At step 510 a communication system maintains a division of client nodes into groups based on unique identifiers that are assigned to these client nodes” [par 53] and “A client nodes may have MAC_IDs assigned from the ranges 6-63 and 72-127…The MAC_IDs can also serve as unique client node identifiers and as the basis for dividing the client nodes into groups” [par 54]) that is usable to address WTRU-specific information (acknowledgement data) within group signaling (AAM) (see “At step 514, the access node transmits a single AAM that contains acknowledgement data associated with all of the client nodes in the group. This transmission may be broadcast to all client nodes or multicast to just the client nodes in the group. Preferably, the AAM includes (1) a preamble indicating that the AAM contains aggregated acknowledgements, (2) a group identifier indicating the group of client nodes to which the acknowledgements relate…” [par 55] and “Preferably, the client node (1) parses the preamble to determine that the message contains aggregated acknowledgements, (2) parses the group identifier and determines that the AAM is directed to the group that the client node was assigned to, and (3) uses its MAC_ID to determine which bits in the AAM contains the client node's acknowledgment data [par 56] which suggests that a client device is assigned a unique identifier/MAC ID, or “WTRU specific identifier indicating a unique identity of the WTRU”, which is used to address the client nodes acknowledgement data within the AAM, or “address WTRU-specific information within group signaling”). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Chen to allow the information for configuring a group of WTRUs to include a WTRU specific identifier indicating a unique identity of the WTRU within the group that is usable to address WTRU-specific information within group signaling, as taught by Pawar, in order to communicate with a sub-group of WTRUs within the group when required.
The combination of Chen and Pawar does not explicitly teach wherein the WTRUs of the group share a mobility pattern and are located in proximity to teach other; transmit, to the other WTRUs of the group, group configuration information including the group identifier; and that the WTRU is further configured to transmit, to the base station, an indication that the WTRU is leaving the group. In an analogous prior art reference, Bachmann teaches:
WTRUs of a group share a mobility pattern (move jointly) and are located in proximity to teach other (see “Initially the UEs 207, 208, 209 are grouped into a mobility group as they are assumed to move jointly through the network” [par 64]);
transmit, to the other WTRUs of the group, group configuration information (group announcement) including the group identifier (group ID) (see “In another exemplary embodiment of the invention a terminal may detect a group announcement (including a group ID) that is broadcast on an air interface…E.g. the announcement may be received via WLAN or Bluetooth while the mobility group may relate to tracking of the group members location within a UMTS network” [par 74] which suggests that a terminal may broadcast an announcement including a group ID to other terminals in the group since WLAN and/or Bluetooth is used for communication between terminals); and
a WTRU (terminal) is configured to transmit, to a base station, an indication (deregistration message) that the WTRU is leaving the group (see “And also in absence of the group announcement, because the terminal may have left the group, the terminal may automatically send a message to the mobility management entity to deregister from the group” [par 75]). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the invention of Chen and Pawar to allow the WTRUs of the group to share a mobility pattern and be located in proximity to teach other; transmit, to the other WTRUs of the group, group configuration information including the group identifier; and modify the WTRU to be further configured to transmit, to the base station, an indication that the WTRU is leaving the group, as taught by Bachmann in order to form the group of WTRUs via a direct connection between the WTRUs and manage mobility of the group traveling jointly together on a train or airplane thereby reducing signaling overhead.
The combination of Chen, Pawar, and Bachmann does not explicitly teach that the WTRU is further configured to receive, from the base station, an indication that the WTRUs in the group have changed. In an analogous prior art reference, Yu teaches a WTRU is configured to receive an indication that the WTRUs in the group have changed (see “As described above, when receiving a joining response (G_JOIN_RES) from all members notifying acceptance or rejection, the group manager A 502 confirms all members of the group to participate in group communication, and sends the group members list (G_MEM_INFO) to the group members” [p. 4, par 9] which suggests that group member devices receive an updated group members list if a group member joins). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the combination of Chen, Pawar, and Bachmann to allow the WTRU to be further configured to receive an indication that the WTRUs in the group have changed, as taught by Yu, from the base station, in order for the WTRU to manage members of the group for communication.
Regarding claim 2, Bachmann teaches the WTRU of claim 1, wherein the transceiver and the processor are further configured to receive, from the base station, information (Group Location Area Registration Confirmation message) indicating how the WTRUs of the group are to act (group update procedure) (see “This may for example be accomplished by sending a Group Location Area Registration Confirmation message to all UEs in the mobility group. The Group Location Area Registration Confirmation message may include the assigned group ID and optionally the group update procedure together with associated other parameters, e.g. maximum random delay value, for instructing the UEs of the mobility group to use a specific mechanism for the group location updates (as for example outlined previously herein)” [par 107]).
Regarding claim 3, Bahmann teaches the WTRU of claim 1, wherein one WTRU (designated special terminal) of the group of WTRUs represents the group (see “In this exemplary scenario this designated special terminal sends group location area registration messages with the mobility group ID on behalf of the group members” [par 86]).
Regarding claim 6, Bachmann teaches the WTRU of claim 1, wherein the transceiver and the processor are further configured to receive, from the base station, an indication to join a second group of WTRUs having a second group identifier (see “For example if terminals have an individual RFID tag, same may be scanned by the entity when the terminals are entering a train or a train station” [par 77] and “When having received the scanned identities the mobility management entity may determine the permanent IDs of the terminals (or corresponding temporal IDs assigned to them by the network) and assigns a (multicast) group identifier to the terminals“ [par 79] which in combination suggests that if a terminal scans an RFID tag of a second train it would “join a second group of WTRUs having a second group identifier”).
Claim 7 recites subject matter similar to claim 1 and is therefore rejected on the same basis.
Claim 8 recites subject matter similar to claim 2 and is therefore rejected on the same basis.
Claim 9 recites subject matter similar to claim 3 and is therefore rejected on the same basis.
Claim 12 recites subject matter similar to claim 6 and is therefore rejected on the same basis.
Claims 4 and 10 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Chen et al. (US 2015/0003315) in view of Pawar et al. (US 2009/0327443), in view of Bachmann et al. (US 2010/0056175), and further in view of Yu et al. (KR 20120070298). as applied to claims 1 and 7 above, and further in view of Corson et al. (US 8,565,801).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Chen, Pawar, Bachmann, and Yu does not explicitly teach wherein the transceiver and the processor are further configured to receive, from the base station, an indication to leave the group. In an analogous prior art reference, Corson teaches a WTRU (end node) is configured to receive, from a base station (access node), an indication to leave the group (response signal) (see “The Request (Group Membership Information Change) signal 604 includes, e.g., information identifying the end node 200, and indicating multicast groups to which the end node 200 is requesting membership ( e.g., joining) and/or is terminating membership ( e.g., leaving)” [col 11, lines 55-59] and “The Response signal 606 includes, e.g., a confirmation that the corresponding Request (Group Membership Information Change) signal 604 was received, an indication that one or more aspects of the corresponding Request (Group Membership Information Change) signal 604 were accepted” [col 12, lines 8-14]). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time the invention was made to modify the combination of Chen, Pawar, Bachmann, and Yu to allow the transceiver and the processor to be further configured to receive, from the base station, an indication to leave the group, as taught by Corson, in order to remove a WTRU from a group when desired.
Claim 10 recites subject matter similar to claim 4 and is therefore rejected on the same basis.
Claims 5 and 11 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Chen et al. (US 2015/0003315) in view of Pawar et al. (US 2009/0327443), in view of in view of Bachmann et al. (US 2010/0056175), and further in view of Yu et al. (KR 20120070298). as applied to claims 1 and 7 above, and further in view of Michaelis (US 2008/0219227).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Chen, Pawar, Bachmann, and Yu does not explicitly teach wherein the transceiver and the processor are further configured to transmit directly to at least one other WTRU of the group a second indication that the WTRU is leaving the group. In an analogous prior art reference, Michaelis teaches a WTRU (mobile device) is configured to transmit directly to at least one other WTRU of the group a second indication that the WTRU is leaving the group (see “The first mobile device 28 can then communicate the desire to leave the multicast group to all members of the group using the established multicast group communication link, messages 45” [par 50]). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time the invention was made to modify the combination of Chen, Pawar, Bachmann, and Yu to allow wherein the transceiver and the processor to be further configured to transmit directly to at least one other WTRU of the group a second indication that the WTRU is leaving the group, as taught by Michaelis, in order to allow a user to signal to other members of the group the desire to leave the group.
Claim 11 recites subject matter similar to claim 5 and is therefore rejected on the same basis.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-12 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
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Nam T Huynh whose telephone number is (571)272-5970. The examiner can normally be reached 9am-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, Alison Slater can be reached at 571-270-0375. 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.
/NAM T HUYNH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2647