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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 6 on pages 7-8 have been considered but are moot based on new grounds of rejection necessitated by applicant’s amendments (“modifying a Physical Random-Access Channel (PRACH) preamble to contain an identifier of the object”, “said request including the modified PRACH preamble” of claim 1 and “modify a Physical Random-Access Channel (PRACH) preamble to contain an identifier of the object”, “the request including the modified PRACH preamble” of claim 6), not previously claimed and thus, not previously considered.
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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1, 3-7, 9-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liao et al. (US 2015/0029866 A1) hereinafter Liao in view of Speight et al (US 2014/0161024 A1) hereinafter Speight.
Regarding claim 1, Liao teaches a method implemented by a device applying to relay data between an object and a base station in a cellular network (relay UE performing relay discovery between remote UE and network; para. 73 and Figs. 5-15, base station provides access to network; para. 38), the object and said device being synchronized (relay discover used to synchronize remote UE and relay UE; para. [158, 162, 171-172, 175]) and connected to the base station (remote UE and relay UE each receive dedicated [connected] configuration message from network related to UU interface [connected]; para. [113-114, 176] and Figs. 5-8).
While Liao discloses RACH, preamble, and transmission of remote ID for relaying of remote UE traffic, Liao does not explicitly disclose the method comprising: modifying a Physical Random-Access Channel (PRACH) preamble to contain an identifier of the object; emitting a request, over a PRACH, to request resources of said network to relay said data, said request including the modified PRACH preamble; receiving a response to said request from said base station; and relaying the data or not relaying the data as a function of said response.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Speight teaches the method comprising: modifying a Physical Random-Access Channel (PRACH) preamble to contain an identifier of the object (random access preambles transmitted on Physical Random-Access Channel (PRACH); para. [109, 125], new [modify] medium access control (MAC) relayed packet data unit (PDU) on Physical Random-Access Channel (PRACH) transmits preamble message; para. [144-147, 162] and Figs. [11, 15], MAC relayed PDU includes radio network temporary identifier (RNTI) of remote UE; para. [162, 177] and Fig. 15, request resources using new MAC control element; para. 139); emitting a request, over a PRACH, to request resources of said network to relay said data (PRACH used to transmit random access preambles; para. 125, new [modify] MAC relayed PDU on PRACH transmits preamble message; para. [144-147, 162] and Figs. [11, 15], relay transmits new MAC message to base station requesting resources; para. 194 and Fig. 19, relay for relaying data from remote UE; para. 107), said request including the modified PRACH preamble (new MAC message including remote UE ID; para. 194 and Fig. 19); receiving a response to said request from said base station (relay receives grant from base station; para. 194 and Fig. 19); and relaying the data or not relaying the data as a function of said response (grant includes resources for relaying remote UE messages; para. 194 and Fig. 19).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Speight to the system of Liao, where Liao’s relaying (para. [07, 50-51, 54, 118]) along with Speight’s relaying for power limited devices (para. [03-04, 101]) improves the system by reducing power use of power limited devices.
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Liao and Speight teaches the limitation of previous claim 1.
While Liao discloses requesting resources for itself, Liao does not explicitly disclose wherein said request includes a request for resources from said network that can be used by the device to transmit the device's own data.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Speight further teaches wherein said request includes a request for resources from said network that can be used by the device to transmit the device's own data (new MAC relay header includes conventional buffer status report (BSR); para. 162 and Fig. 15, BSR transferred for required [request of] resources; para. [195, 233]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Speight to the modified system of Liao and Speight, where Liao and Speight’s modified system along with Speight’s relaying for power limited devices (para. [03-04, 101]) improves the system by reducing power use of power limited devices.
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Liao and Speight teaches the limitation of previous claim 1.
Liao further teaches wherein said identifier is a temporary or permanent identifier (UE ID includes RNTI; para. [160, 178, 181-183, 185, 187-189]).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Liao and Speight teaches the limitation of previous claim 1.
While Liao discloses time and frequency resources, Liao does not explicitly disclose wherein said identifier is encoded into said request by a combination of a time slot and a frequency.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Speight further teaches wherein said identifier is encoded into said request by a combination of a time slot and a frequency (random access channel transmissions on time and frequency resource; para. 20, new [modify] MAC relayed PDU [slot] PRACH transmits preamble message; para. [144-147, 162] and Figs. [11, 15]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Speight to the modified system of Liao and Speight, where Liao and Speight’s modified system along with Speight’s relaying for power limited devices (para. [03-04, 101]) improves the system by reducing power use of power limited devices.
Regarding claim 6, Liao teaches a method implemented by a base station to select a single device from at least one applicant device for relaying data between an object and said base station in a cellular network (network selects relay UE; para. 155 and Fig. 7 step S730, relay UE performing relay discovery between remote UE and network; para. 73 and Figs. 5-15, base station provides access to network; para. 38), the object and said single device being synchronized (relay discover used to synchronize remote UE and relay UE; para. [158, 162, 171-172, 175]) and connected to said base station (remote UE and relay UE each receive dedicated [connected] configuration message from network related to UU interface [connected]; para. [113-114, 176] and Figs. 5-8),
selecting the single device from among said at least one applicant device (network selects relay UE among multiple relay UEs; para. 155 and Fig. 7 step S730); and allocating resources in said network (resources allocated by network; para. 79) and sending a positive response to the selected single device (network transmits acceptance of relay service; para. 156).
While Liao discloses RACH, preamble, and transmission of remote ID for relaying of remote UE traffic, Liao does not explicitly disclose the method comprising: receiving, from the at least one applicant device, a request emitted by the at least one applicant device, over a Physical Random-Access Channel (PRACH), to request resources of said network to relay said data, said request including a modified PRACH preamble containing an identifier of said object.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Speight teaches the method comprising: receiving, from the at least one applicant device, a request emitted by the at least one applicant device, over a Physical Random-Access Channel (PRACH), to request resources of said network to relay said data (Physical Random-Access Channel (PRACH) used to transmit random access preambles; para. [109, 125], new [modify] MAC relayed packet data unit (PDU) on PRACH transmits preamble message; para. [144-147, 162] and Figs. [11, 15], relay transmits new MAC message to base station requesting resources; para. 194 and Fig. 19, base station receives new MAC message from relay requesting resources; para. 194 and Fig. 19, relay for relaying data from remote UE; para. 107), said request including a modified PRACH preamble containing an identifier of said object (new MAC message including remote UE ID; para. 194 and Fig. 19).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Speight to the system of Liao, where Liao’s relaying (para. [07, 50-51, 54, 118]) along with Speight’s relaying for power limited devices (para. [03-04, 101] ) improves the system by reducing power use of power limited devices.
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Liao and Speight teaches the limitation of previous claim 6.
Liao further teaches wherein said positive response further includes said identifier of the object (network transmits acceptance of relay service; para. 156).
Regarding claim 9, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 1, including a processor (processor; para. 207-208: Liao); and a non-transitory computer readable medium comprising instructions stored thereon which when executed by the processor (embodiments realized in software in memory and hardware including processor; para. [37, 47, 207-208]: Liao).
Regarding claim 10, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 6, including a processor (processor; para. 207-208: Liao); and a non-transitory computer readable medium comprising instructions stored thereon which when executed by the processor (embodiments realized in software in memory and hardware including processor; para. [37, 47, 207-208]: Liao).
Regarding claim 11, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 9.
Regarding claim 12, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 10.
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Liao and Speight teaches the limitation of previous claim 6.
Liao further teaches sending a negative response to a non-selected device of the applicant devices for relaying the data (network selects relay UE; para. 155 and Fig. 7 step S730, network transmits rejection of relay service [rejection to non-selected device(s)]; para. 156).
Regarding claim 14, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 13.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liao in view of Speight, and further in view of Loehr et al. (US 2018/0069618 A1) hereinafter Loehr.
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Liao and Speight teaches the limitation of previous claim 6.
While Liao discloses requesting resources for itself, Liao does not explicitly disclose wherein said request further includes a request for resources for said at least one applicant device's own data.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Speight further teaches wherein said request further includes a request for resources for said at least one applicant device's own data (new MAC relay header includes conventional buffer status report (BSR); para. 162 and Fig. 15, BSR transferred for required [request of] resources; para. [195, 233]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Speight to the modified system of Liao and Speight, where Liao and Speight’s modified system along with Speight’s relaying for power limited devices (para. [03-04, 101]) improves the system by reducing power use of power limited devices.
The combination of Liao and Speight does not explicitly disclose the method includes sending a response as to allocation of the resources for the at least one applicant device's own data.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Loehr teaches the method includes sending a response as to allocation of the resources for the at least one applicant device's own data (based on response from BS of scheduling request or preamble, relay UE relays data of both remote UE and relay UE; para. [296, 314]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Loehr to the modified system of Liao and Speight, where Liao and Speight’s modified system along with resource assignment for relays (para. 266) improves the user experience by ensuring QoS requirements are fulfilled.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Jen (US 2011/0014922 A1) discloses a method of handling random access procedure and related communication device.
Harum et al. (US 2011/0159802 A1) discloses a radio base station, radio terminal device, radio relay station device, transmission power control method, radio communication relay method, and radio communication system.
Utkovski et al. (US 2022/0110169 A1) discloses a data-centric event-based random access procedure.
Chun (US 2020/0187298 A1) discloses a method for transmitting and receiving data by using relay terminal.
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 JOSE L PEREZ whose telephone number is (571) 270-7348. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 11 am - 3 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/uspto-automated-interview-request-air-form.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Michael Thier can be reached at (571) 272-2832. 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.
/JOSE L PEREZ/Examiner, Art Unit 2474
/Michael Thier/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2474
Prosecution Insights