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
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, 5, 8-9, 12-13, 28, 35, 37-38, and 46-47 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huawei (R2-1701133, “Report of email discussion [96#57][LTE/FeD2D]-Adapter layer and bearer handling”, 3GPP TSG-RAN WD2 Meeting #97 Athens, Greece, 13-17 February 2017), hereinafter, Huawei, in view of YU et al. (Patent No: US 2018/0279319 A1), hereinafter, YU and further in view of WANG et al. (Patent No: US20230073469A1), hereinafter, WANG.
Regarding Claim 1, Huawei teaches,
An information transmission method, -Fig. 5.1.1-1;Page 6; Section 2.2(recites, “At least bearer identity of remote UE should be contained in the adaptor layer. Considering the case that the remote UE may transmit unicast non-3GPP traffic to relay UE without relaying to the network, it is better to add a relay indication in the adapter layer to indicate whether the traffic should be relayed to the network or not.”)
comprising: in a layer 2 (L2) relay scenario, establishing an end-to-end adaptation layer; -Fig. 5.1.1-1, 5.1.1-2 (Figures show layer 2 (L2) relay scenario and end-to-end adaption layer establishment between remote UE and core network through relay UE)
wherein, a function of the end-to-end adaptation layer includes one or a combination of routing and bearer mapping. -Page 10; line 8-14( It recites, “ Traffic of one or multiple evolved ProSe Remote UEs may be mapped to a single DRB of Uu interface of the evolved ProSe UE-to-Network Relay UE. Multiple Uu DRBs may be used to carry traffic of different QoS classes, for one or multiple evolved ProSe Remote UEs. Multiple bearers of the evolved ProSe Remote UE may be mapped to a single Uu DRB of the evolved ProSe UE-to-Network Relay UE. It is also possible to multiplex traffic of evolved ProSe UE-to-Network Relay UE itself onto the Uu DRB, which is used to relay traffic to/from evolved ProSe Remote UEs. How the mapping of the traffic between sidelink bearers and Uu bearers is done is up to the eNB implementation and the mapping is configured in evolved ProSe UE-to-Network Relay UE by the eNB.”)
for a UE-to-Network relay scenario, a protocol data unit (PDU) header of an adaptation layer PDU at least including: -Page 10, line 16-24 (It recites, “Within a Uu DRB, different evolved ProSe Remote UEs and different bearers of the evolved ProSe Remote UE are indicated by additional information included in adaptation layer header which is added to PDCP PDU. The remote UE is identified in the adaptation layer header on Uu by a local identifier, which is known to at least the eNB and the relay UE. An identifier of the bearer of the evolved ProSe Remote UE (e.g. DRB ID) is also included in the adaptation layer header….
Adaptation layer header is added to PDCP PDU. The adaptation layer header for the non-3GPP short range interface includes a DRB ID identifying the bearer of the evolved ProSe Remote UE” As explained above bearer ID of the remote UE is included in the adaptation layer header which is included into PDCP PDU and allocated by the network device to the remote UE)
Page 9; Fig, 5.1.1-1, 5.1.1-2 (The Figures show UE-to-Network relay scenario over sidelink (PC5) with end-to-end adaptation layer between relay UE and the network device (eNB) and adaptation layer is over RLC layer both at the relay UE and at the network device (eNB))
Although implicit, Huawei does not explicitly mention,
protocol data unit (PDU) header of an adaptation layer PDU at least including: an identifier of an end-to-end bearer between the remote UE and a network device allocated by the network device to the remote UE;
for a UE-to-UE relay scenario, the PDU header of the adaptation layer PDU at least including: end-to-end bearer identifiers of a first remote UE and a second remote UE on the sidelink interface;
wherein for the UE-to-UE relay scenario, the establishing an end-to-end adaptation layer comprises: establishing the end-to-end adaptation layer between the relay UE and the second remote UE, the establishing the end-to-end adaptation layer between the relay UE and the second remote UE comprises adding the end-to-end adaptation layer above the RLC layer of the relay UE and above the RLC layer of the second remote UE respectively.
However, in an analogous invention, YU teaches,
protocol data unit (PDU) header of an adaptation layer PDU at least including: an identifier of an end-to-end bearer between the remote UE and a network device allocated by the network device to the remote UE; -Paragraph [0025, 0035] ([0035] recites, “For a UL packet, a similar list of the PDB values may be configured to a remote UE so that the remote UE can use the index of the PDB in the list to indicate the UL PDB information either in C-PDU or PC5 adaptation layer PDU header.” [0025] recites, “The QoS class identifier (QCI) used as a main QoS indicator in direct 3GPP communication defines not only the priority but also other QoS parameters/attributes, such as packet delay budget (PDB) and packet error rate (PER). When considering D2D based UE-to-Network relay, the delay introduced by additional hop (i.e., SL communication) in a radio access network should be taken into account for e2e QoS control. “ End-to-end bearer attribute index e.g., PDB may be included into adaptation layer PDU)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the “Adapter layer and bearer handling” of Huawei to include the concept of “protocol data unit (PDU) header of an adaptation layer PDU at least including: an identifier of an end-to-end bearer between the remote UE and a network device allocated by the network device to the remote UE;” of YU. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to improve functioning of communications networks and their nodes [0070].
Although implicit, Huawei and YU combination do not explicitly teach,
for a UE-to-UE relay scenario, the PDU header of the adaptation layer PDU at least including: end-to-end bearer identifiers of a first remote UE and a second remote UE on the sidelink interface;
wherein for the UE-to-UE relay scenario, the establishing an end-to-end adaptation layer comprises: establishing the end-to-end adaptation layer between the relay UE and the second remote UE, the establishing the end-to-end adaptation layer between the relay UE and the second remote UE comprises adding the end-to-end adaptation layer above the RLC layer of the relay UE and above the RLC layer of the second remote UE respectively.
However, WANG teaches,
for a UE-to-UE relay scenario, the PDU header of the adaptation layer PDU at least including: end-to-end bearer identifiers of a first remote UE and a second remote UE on the sidelink interface; -Fig. 11; Paragraph [0008][0194] ([0008] recites, “An embodiment of the present application provides a sidelink relay communication method applied to UE-to-UE relay communication. The method includes the processes below. A relay UE acquires first configuration information of relay communication from a base station and performs data forwarding for a source UE and a target UE according to the first configuration information of the relay communication.” [0194-0195] recites, “…The second configuration information of relay communication includes at least one of the following: end-to-end sidelink bearer configuration between the source UE and the target UE, PC5 RLC bearer configuration between the source UE and the relay UE, or the mapping relationship between the end-to-end sidelink bearer between the source UE and the target UE and the PC5 RLC bearer between the source UE and the relay UE. The end-to-end sidelink bearer configuration between the source UE and the target UE includes any one of the following: a target UE identifier, a bearer identifier or index, a mapping from a QoS flow to a sidelink bearer, whether to carry an SDAP subheader, PDCP configuration, or the PC5 RLC bearer identifier or index between a source UE and a relay UE associated with the source UE.”)
wherein for the UE-to-UE relay scenario, the establishing an end-to-end adaptation layer comprises: establishing the end-to-end adaptation layer between the relay UE and the second remote UE, the establishing the end-to-end adaptation layer between the relay UE and the second remote UE comprises adding the end-to-end adaptation layer above the RLC layer of the relay UE and above the RLC layer of the second remote UE respectively. -Fig. 11, 12; Paragraph [0160] (Fig. 11, 12 show the UE-to-UE relay scenario with adaptation layer above the RLC layer between relay UE and second remote UE (target UE3). [0160] recites, “an adaptation layer is required for data routing processing between the source UE and the relay UE and/or the relay UE and the target UE. An L2 UE-to-UE relay control plane protocol stack is shown in FIG. 11. A user plane protocol stack is shown in FIG. 12.”)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the “Adapter layer and bearer handling” of Huawei to include the concept of “for a UE-to-UE relay scenario, the PDU header of the adaptation layer PDU at least including: end-to-end bearer identifiers of a first remote UE and a second remote UE on the sidelink interface; wherein for the UE-to-UE relay scenario, the establishing an end-to-end adaptation layer comprises: establishing the end-to-end adaptation layer between the relay UE and the second remote UE, the establishing the end-to-end adaptation layer between the relay UE and the second remote UE comprises adding the end-to-end adaptation layer above the RLC layer of the relay UE and above the RLC layer of the second remote UE respectively.” of WANG. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to reduce the burden of the cellular network, reduce the battery power consumption of a user equipment, increase a data rate, and improve the robustness of network infrastructure [0047]
Regarding Claim 5, Huawei, YU and WANG combination teach the limitations of Claim 1.
Huawei further teaches,
The method according to claim 1, wherein, the identifier of the end-to-end bearer between the remote UE and the network device allocated by the network device to the remote UE includes: UE identification information allocated by the network device to the remote UE, an end-to-end logical channel identifier between the remote UE and the network device; -Page 10, line 16-24 (It recites, “Within a Uu DRB, different evolved ProSe Remote UEs and different bearers of the evolved ProSe Remote UE are indicated by additional information included in adaptation layer header which is added to PDCP PDU. The remote UE is identified in the adaptation layer header on Uu by a local identifier, which is known to at least the eNB and the relay UE. An identifier of the bearer of the evolved ProSe Remote UE (e.g. DRB ID) is also included in the adaptation layer header….
Adaptation layer header is added to PDCP PDU. The adaptation layer header for the non-3GPP short range interface includes a DRB ID identifying the bearer of the evolved ProSe Remote UE” As explained above UE identification, bearer ID of the remote UE is included in the adaptation layer header which is included into PDCP PDU and allocated by the network device to the remote UE)
Although implicit, Huawei does not explicitly mention
or, the identifier of the end-to-end bearer between the remote UE and the network device allocated by the network device to the remote UE includes: the UE identification information allocated by the network device to the remote UE, an end-to-end bearer between the remote UE and the network device.
However, in an analogous invention YU teaches,
or, the identifier of the end-to-end bearer between the remote UE and the network device allocated by the network device to the remote UE includes: the UE identification information allocated by the network device to the remote UE, an end-to-end bearer between the remote UE and the network device. -Paragraph [0025, 0035] ([0035] recites, “For a UL packet, a similar list of the PDB values may be configured to a remote UE so that the remote UE can use the index of the PDB in the list to indicate the UL PDB information either in C-PDU or PC5 adaptation layer PDU header.” [0025] recites, “The QoS class identifier (QCI) used as a main QoS indicator in direct 3GPP communication defines not only the priority but also other QoS parameters/attributes, such as packet delay budget (PDB) and packet error rate (PER). When considering D2D based UE-to-Network relay, the delay introduced by additional hop (i.e., SL communication) in a radio access network should be taken into account for e2e QoS control. “ End-to-end bearer attribute index e.g., PDB may be included into adaptation layer PDU)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the “Adapter layer and bearer handling” of Huawei to include the concept of “the UE identification information allocated by the network device to the remote UE, an end-to-end bearer between the remote UE and the network device” of YU. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to improve functioning of communications networks and their nodes [0070].
Regarding Claim 8, Huawei, YU and WANG combination teaches the limitations of Claim 1.
Huawei further teaches,
The method according to claim 1, wherein the method further comprises: in the uplink direction, generating, by the adaptation layer of the remote UE, the adaptation layer PDU, and delivering the adaptation layer PDU to a corresponding RLC entity according to a sixth mapping relationship; the sixth mapping relationship being a mapping relationship between the end-to-end bearer between the network device and the remote UE and the sidelink interface bearer of the remote UE: -Page 10, line 10-22 (recites, “Multiple bearers of the evolved ProSe Remote UE may be mapped to a single Uu DRB of the evolved ProSe UE-to-Network Relay UE. It is also possible to multiplex traffic of evolved ProSe UE-to-Network Relay UE itself onto the Uu DRB, which is used to relay traffic to/from evolved ProSe Remote UEs. How the mapping of the traffic between sidelink bearers and Uu bearers is done is up to the eNB implementation and the mapping is configured in evolved ProSe UE-to-Network Relay UE by the eNB. An adaptation layer over Uu is supported to identify the evolved ProSe Remote UE/evolved ProSe UE-to-Network Relay UE and the corresponding. Within a Uu DRB, different evolved ProSe Remote UEs and different bearers of the evolved ProSe Remote UE are indicated by additional information included in adaptation layer header which is added to PDCP PDU. The remote UE is identified in the adaptation layer header on Uu by a local identifier, which is known to at least the eNB and the relay UE. An identifier of the bearer of the evolved ProSe Remote UE (e.g. DRB ID) is also included in the adaptation layer header….An adaptation layer is supported over non-3GPP access for the short range link between the evolved ProSe Remote UE and the evolved ProSe UE-to-Network Relay UE. Adaptation layer header is added to PDCP PDU. “)
Although implicit, Huawei does not explicitly teach,
receiving, by the relay UE, the adaptation layer PDU, and delivering the adaptation layer PDU to an RLC entity corresponding to the Uu interface backhaul link bear according to a seventh mapping relationship; the seventh mapping relationship being a mapping relationship between the sidelink interface bearer of the remote UE and the Uu interface backhaul link bear of the remote UE:
receiving, by the network device, the adaptation layer PDU and determining the corresponding PDCP entity according to the identifier of the end-to-end bearer between the remote UE and the network device allocated by the network device to the remote UE included in the PDU header of the adaptation layer PDU.
However, In an analogous invention WANG teaches,
receiving, by the relay UE, the adaptation layer PDU, and delivering the adaptation layer PDU to an RLC entity corresponding to the Uu interface backhaul link bear according to a seventh mapping relationship; the seventh mapping relationship being a mapping relationship between the sidelink interface bearer of the remote UE and the Uu interface backhaul link bear of the remote UE: -Fig. 3, 4; Paragraph [0061] (all mapping relationship comes from the network side. It also shows remote UE communicates with the network through relay UE by means of Uu interface. [0061] recites, “An L2 UE-to-Network relay control plane protocol stack is shown in FIG. 3. A user plane protocol stack is shown in FIG. 4. A relay adaptation layer may be introduced for implementing the L2 forwarding and routing function”)
receiving, by the network device, the adaptation layer PDU and determining the corresponding PDCP entity according to the identifier of the end-to-end bearer between the remote UE and the network device allocated by the network device to the remote UE included in the PDU header of the adaptation layer PDU. -Fig. 3, 4; Paragraph [0063-0069](Once mapping relationship is established between the sidelink interface bearer (PC5) and end-to-end bearer between remote UE and the network device, traffic flow follows through protocol stack as usual. [0063-0064] recites, “the relay UE may be specifically that the relay UE receives the data packet from the remote UE. The data packet is mapped by the remote UE from a Uu bearer to a PC5 RLC bearer between the remote UE and the relay UE based on a configured mapping relationship to transmit to the relay UE. That the relay UE maps the data packet to the second bearer between the relay UE and the target communication device and transmits the data packet to the target communication device may be specifically that the relay UE identifies the Uu bearer of the remote UE to which the data packet belongs, maps the data packet to the relay bearer between the relay UE and the base station, and transmits the data packet to the base station.” [0069] recites, “The relay UE receives and parses the data packet from the remote UE, identifies that the data packet is the data packet to be forwarded to the base station, identifies the remote UE Uu bearer to which the data packet belongs, maps the data packet to be forwarded to the relay air interface bearer between the relay UE and the base station, and transmits the data packet to the base station.”)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the “Adapter layer and bearer handling” of Huawei to include the concept of “receiving, by the relay UE, the adaptation layer PDU, and delivering the adaptation layer PDU to an RLC entity corresponding to the Uu interface backhaul link bear according to a seventh mapping relationship; the seventh mapping relationship being a mapping relationship between the sidelink interface bearer of the remote UE and the Uu interface backhaul link bear of the remote UE:
receiving, by the network device, the adaptation layer PDU and determining the corresponding PDCP entity according to the identifier of the end-to-end bearer between the remote UE and the network device allocated by the network device to the remote UE included in the PDU header of the adaptation layer PDU.” of WANG. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to reduce the burden of the cellular network, reduce the battery power consumption of a user equipment, increase a data rate, and improve the robustness of network infrastructure [0047]
Claim 9 is rejected because it only describes different configurations based on the different mapping relationship which is conveyed from the network side to the remote UE. Once the relationship mapping is conveyed, configuration is straight forward and there is no novelty. Claim 9 is rejected for the same rational as Claim 8. Applicant’s attention is directed to the rejection of Claim 8.
Regarding Claim 12, Huawei, YU and WANG teach the limitations of Claim 1.
Huawei further teaches,
The method according to claim 1, wherein the establishing the end-to-end adaptation layer between the relay UE and the network device comprises: adding the end-to-end adaptation layer above the RLC layer of the relay UE and above the RLC layer of the network devices respectively. -Figure 5.1.1-1 (Fig. 5.1.1-1 shows end-to-end adaptation layer sits on top of RLC layer both at relay UE and at network device)
Claim 13 is rejected because it only describes different configurations based on the different mapping relationship which is conveyed from the network side to the remote UE and identifiers are included in PDU header as discussed in Claim 8 rejection. Once the relationship mapping is conveyed, configuration is straight forward and there is no novelty. Claim 13 is rejected for the same rational as Claim 8. Applicant’s attention is directed to the rejection of Claim 8.
Claim 28 is the apparatus claim corresponding to the method claim 1 that has been rejected above. Applicant attention is directed to the rejection of claim 1. Claim 28 is rejected under the same rational as claim 1.
Although implicit, Huawei does not explicitly mention,
An information transmission device comprising: a transceiver, a memory, a processor, and a program stored on the memory and executed by the processor; wherein the processor is configured to read program instructions in the memory
However, WANG teaches,
An information transmission device comprising: a transceiver, a memory, a processor, and a program stored on the memory and executed by the processor; wherein the processor is configured to read program instructions in the memory -Paragraph [0022-0023] ([0022] recites, “An embodiment of the present application provides a communication device. The communication device includes one or more processors and a storage apparatus configured to store one or more programs. When executed by the one or more processors, the one or more programs cause the one or more processors to implement the preceding sidelink relay communication method applied to UE-to-Network relay communication.”)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the “Adapter layer and bearer handling” of Huawei to include the concept of “An information transmission device comprising: a transceiver, a memory, a processor, and a program stored on the memory and executed by the processor; wherein the processor is configured to read program instructions in the memory ” of WANG. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to reduce the burden of the cellular network, reduce the battery power consumption of a user equipment, increase a data rate, and improve the robustness of network infrastructure [0047]
Claim 35 is the apparatus claim corresponding to the method claim 9 that has been rejected above. Applicant attention is directed to the rejection of claim 9. Claim 35 is rejected under the same rational as claim 9.
Claim 37 is the apparatus claim corresponding to the method claim 12 that has been rejected above. Applicant attention is directed to the rejection of claim 12. Claim 37 is rejected under the same rational as claim 12.
Claim 38 is the apparatus claim corresponding to the method claim 13 that has been rejected above. Applicant attention is directed to the rejection of claim 13. Claim 38 is rejected under the same rational as claim 13.
Regarding Claim 46, Huawei, YU and WANG teaches the limitations of Claim 1.
Although implicit, Huawei does not implicitly teach
The method according to claim 1, wherein, the end-to-end bearer identifiers of the first remote UE and the second remote UE on the sidelink interface include: the sidelink interface source L2 ID, the sidelink interface destination L2 ID, and the sidelink interface logical channel identifier; or, the end-to-end bearer identifiers of the first remote UE and the second remote UE on the sidelink interface include: the sidelink interface source L2 ID, the sidelink interface destination L2 ID, and the sidelink interface bearer identifier.
However, WANG teaches,
The method according to claim 1, wherein, the end-to-end bearer identifiers of the first remote UE and the second remote UE on the sidelink interface include: the sidelink interface source L2 ID, the sidelink interface destination L2 ID, and the sidelink interface logical channel identifier; or, the end-to-end bearer identifiers of the first remote UE and the second remote UE on the sidelink interface include: the sidelink interface source L2 ID, the sidelink interface destination L2 ID, and the sidelink interface bearer identifier. -Paragraph [0072, 0077, 0095-0096] ([0077] recites, “The normal unicast connection between the remote UE and the relay UE and the PC5 connection for relay and forwarding correspond to PC5 connections of different source identifiers and target identifiers. Thus, the relay UE can distinguish through the source identifier and the target identifier in a MAC subheader. [0072] recites, ”…Specifically, the adaptation layer packet header between the remote UE and the relay UE contains the Uu bearer identifier or the Uu bearer index of the remote UE.” [0095-0096] recites, “In one example, the remote UE identifier includes at least one of the following: a UE layer 2 identifier, part of a UE layer 2 identifier, a C-RNTI or local identifier configured by the base station for the remote UE, or a local identifier configured by the relay UE for the remote UE….The UE layer 2 identifier is a remote UE L2 ID. L2 ID is 24 bits and can be completely contained in the adaptation layer packet header”)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the “Adapter layer and bearer handling” of Huawei to include the concept of “the bearer identifier of the remote UE on the sidelink interface includes: the end-to-end bearer identifiers of the first remote UE and the second remote UE on the sidelink interface include: the sidelink interface source L2 ID, the sidelink interface destination L2 ID, and the sidelink interface logical channel identifier; or, the end-to-end bearer identifiers of the first remote UE and the second remote UE on the sidelink interface include: the sidelink interface source L2 ID, the sidelink interface destination L2 ID, and the sidelink interface bearer identifier.” of WANG. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to reduce the burden of the cellular network, reduce the battery power consumption of a user equipment, increase a data rate, and improve the robustness of network infrastructure [0047]
Regarding Claim 47, Huawei, YU and WANG teaches the limitations of Claim 28.
Although implicit, Huawei does not implicitly teach,
The device according to claim 28, wherein the end-to-end bearer identifiers of the first remote UE and the second remote UE on the sidelink interface include: the sidelink interface source L2 ID, the sidelink interface destination L2 ID, and the sidelink interface logical channel identifier; or, the end-to-end bearer identifiers of the first remote UE and the second remote UE on the sidelink interface include: the sidelink interface source L2 ID, the sidelink interface destination L2 ID, and a sidelink interface bearer identifier; the end-to-end bearer identifiers of the first remote UE and the second remote UE on the sidelink interface include: the sidelink interface source L2 ID, the sidelink interfacedestination L2 ID, and the sidelink interface logical channel identifier; or, the end-to-end bearer identifiers of the first remote UE and the second remote UE on the sidelink interface include: the sidelink interface source L2 ID, the sidelink interface destination L2 ID, and a sidelink interface bearer identifier.
However, WANG teaches,
The device according to claim 28, wherein the end-to-end bearer identifiers of the first remote UE and the second remote UE on the sidelink interface include: the sidelink interface source L2 ID, the sidelink interface destination L2 ID, and the sidelink interface logical channel identifier; or, the end-to-end bearer identifiers of the first remote UE and the second remote UE on the sidelink interface include: the sidelink interface source L2 ID, the sidelink interface destination L2 ID, and a sidelink interface bearer identifier; the end-to-end bearer identifiers of the first remote UE and the second remote UE on the sidelink interface include: the sidelink interface source L2 ID, the sidelink interface destination L2 ID, and the sidelink interface logical channel identifier; or, the end-to-end bearer identifiers of the first remote UE and the second remote UE on the sidelink interface include: the sidelink interface source L2 ID, the sidelink interface destination L2 ID, and a sidelink interface bearer identifier. -Paragraph [0081] ([0072, 0077, 0081, 0095-0096] recites, “The relay UE receives and parses the data packet sent by the remote UE, and identifies that the data packet is a data packet that needs to be forwarded to the base station through the PC5 RLC bearer/LCID dedicated to forwarding data and exchanging with the remote UE or the relay forwarding indication in the adaptation layer packet header. The relay UE may identify the remote UE Uu SRB/DRB to which the data packet belongs according to either a one-to-one mapping relationship between the Uu SRB/DRB of the remote UE and the PC5 RLC bearer or the Uu bearer identifier or the Uu bearer index of the remote UE contained in the adaptation layer.” [0077] recites, “The normal unicast connection between the remote UE and the relay UE and the PC5 connection for relay and forwarding correspond to PC5 connections of different source identifiers and target identifiers. Thus, the relay UE can distinguish through the source identifier and the target identifier in a MAC subheader. [0072] recites, ”…Specifically, the adaptation layer packet header between the remote UE and the relay UE contains the Uu bearer identifier or the Uu bearer index of the remote UE.” [0095-0096] recites, “In one example, the remote UE identifier includes at least one of the following: a UE layer 2 identifier, part of a UE layer 2 identifier, a C-RNTI or local identifier configured by the base station for the remote UE, or a local identifier configured by the relay UE for the remote UE….The UE layer 2 identifier is a remote UE L2 ID. L2 ID is 24 bits and can be completely contained in the adaptation layer packet header”)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the “Adapter layer and bearer handling” of Huawei to include the concept of “the bearer identifier of the remote UE on the sidelink interface includes: a sidelink interface source L2 ID, a sidelink interface destination L2 ID, and a sidelink interface logical channel identifier;” of WANG. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to reduce the burden of the cellular network, reduce the battery power consumption of a user equipment, increase a data rate, and improve the robustness of network infrastructure [0047]
Claims 4, 31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huawei, YU and further in view of WANG and further in view of Release 17 (3GPP TR 23.752 v0.3.0 (2020-01)), hereinafter, Release 17.
Regarding Claim 4, Huawei, YU and WANG combination teaches the limitation of Claim 1
Although implicit, Huawei does not teach,
The method according to claim 3, wherein the PDU header of the adaptation layer PDU further comprises a sidelink interface cast type identifier.
However, Release 17 teaches,
The method according to claim 3, wherein the PDU header of the adaptation layer PDU further comprises a sidelink interface cast type identifier. -Section 6.12.1; Page 46 ( recites, “ Traffic descriptor that can consist of one or several of the following: ……. the transmission mode (cast type)”)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the “Adapter layer and bearer handling” of Huawei to include the concept of “PDU header of the adaptation layer PDU further comprises a sidelink interface cast type identifier” as proposed in Release 17. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to be able to modify the policy rules by the network (e.g., based on AF request) -Section 6.12.1, Page 46.
Claim 31 is the apparatus claim corresponding to the method claim 4 that has been rejected above. Applicant attention is directed to the rejection of claim 4. Claim 31 is rejected under the same rational as claim 4.
Claims 18, 20, 41 and 43 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huawei
in view of YU, WANG and further in view of Nokia et al. (“Discussion on adaptation layer for FeD2D” 3GPP TSG-RAN WG2 Meeting #96, 14-18 November 2016), hereinafter, Nokia.
Regarding Claim 18, Huawei, YU and WANG combination teach the limitations of Claim 1.
Huawei further teaches,
The method according to claim 1, wherein the method further comprises: generating, by an adaptation layer of the first remote UE, an adaptation layer PDU, and determining a corresponding RLC entity when the adaptation layer PDU is transmitted between the first remote UE and the relay UE according to a twentieth mapping relationship -Section 1, Page 1 (Agreements recites,” An adapter layer on the Uu interface is supported. The Uu adapter layer needs to identify the remote/relay UE and the corresponding bearer. This additional information is provided in the RLC SDU/PDCP PDU. “)
Huawei and WANG combination don’t explicitly teach
the twentieth mapping relationship being a mapping relationship between a sidelink end-to-end bearer between the first remote UE and the second remote UE and a sidelink interface bearer between the first remoteUE and the relayUEreceiving, by the relayUE, the adaptation layer PDU, and determining the corresponding RLC entity when the adaptation layer PDU is transmitted between the relayUE and the second remoteUE according to a twenty-first mapping relationship; the twenty-first mapping relationship being a mapping relationship between the sidelink interface bearer between the first remoteUE and the relayUE and the sidelink interface bear between the relayUE and the second remoteUE;receiving, by the second remoteUE, the adaptation layer PDU, and determining the corresponding the PDCP entity according to the end-to-end bearer identifiers of the first remoteUE and the second remoteUE on the sidelink interface included in the PDU header of the adaptation layer PDU.
However, Nokia teaches
the twentieth mapping relationship being a mapping relationship between a sidelink end-to-end bearer between the first remote UE and the second remote UE and a sidelink interface bearer between the first remoteUE and the relayUEreceiving, by the relayUE, the adaptation layer PDU, and determining the corresponding RLC entity when the adaptation layer PDU is transmitted between the relayUE and the second remoteUE according to a twenty-first mapping relationship; the twenty-first mapping relationship being a mapping relationship between the sidelink interface bearer between the first remoteUE and the relayUE and the sidelink interface bear between the relayUE and the second remoteUE;receiving, by the second remoteUE, the adaptation layer PDU, and determining the corresponding the PDCP entity according to the end-to-end bearer identifiers of the first remoteUE and the second remoteUE on the sidelink interface included in the PDU header of the adaptation layer PDU. -Page 2, Proposal 3 (Proposal 3 describes the mapping relationship between sidelink and Uu (and between remote UEs traffic flows and relay UE’s traffic flows). It recites, “ Proposal 3: There is a need to support a mechanism to maintain DRBs (de)multiplexing/mapping between SL and Uu (and between remote UEs traffic flows and relay UE’s own traffic flows). Mapping should be configured in Relay UE by the eNB. As indicated in the e-mail discussion and agreed by most of the companies the adaptation layer is used to distinguish different flows and different remote UEs and it needs to be present on Uu interface no matter which technology is used in sidelink. For non-3GPP sidelink, although there may be different channels or different identifiers to distinguish different bearers of the remote UE, the eNB does not need to know anything about such non-3GPP identifiers but relies on some adaptation at sidelink for bearer mapping. In this case the adaptation layer should use the remote UE ID and DRB ID for DRB between remote UE and eNB identification as also agreed by most of the companies during the discussion. On the other hand companies were not that concurring when it comes to the need of adapter layer on PC5 based sidelink and e-mail discussion proposals include corresponding FFS. For PC5 such adapter layer, although could be present, is not necessarily needed. In this case MAC identifiers (LCID, UE ID) can be used to distinguish the traffic from multiple remote UEs. Resigning from adapter layer would allow to keep the PC5 overhead to minimum and therefore we propose not to include it on PC5 interface. “)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the “Adapter layer and bearer handling” of Huawei to include the concept of “mapping relationship between a sidelink end-to-end bearer between the first remote UE and the second remote UE and a sidelink interface bearer between the first remoteUE and the relayUEreceiving, by the relayUE, the adaptation layer PDU” of Nokia. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to support mechanism to maintain DRBs [Page 2, Proposal 3]
Regarding Claim 20, Huawei and WANG teach the limitations of claim 1
Huawei does not explicitly teach,
The method according to claim 1 wherein the establishing the end-to-end adaptation layer between the first remote UE and the second remote UE comprises: adding the end-to-end adaptation layer above the RLC layer of the relay UE and above the RLC layer of the second remote UE respectively, wherein the method further comprises: generating, by the first remote UE, the PDCP PDU, and determining the RLC entity corresponding to the PDCP PDU according to a twenty-second mapping relationship; the twenty-second mapping relationship being a mapping relationship between the sidelink end-to-end bearer between the first remote UE and the second remote UE and the end-to-end bearer between the first remote UE and the relay UE; generating, by the relay UE, the adaptation layer PDU according to the PDCP PDU, and determining a corresponding RLC entity when the adaptation layer PDU is transmitted between the relay UE and the second remote UE according to a twenty-third mapping relationship; the twenty-third mapping relationship being a mapping relationship between the sidelink interface bear between the first remote UE and the relay UE and the sidelink interface bear between the relay UE and the second remote UE; receiving, by the second remote UE, the adaptation layer PDU, and determining the corresponding PDCP entity according to the end-to-end bearer identifiers of the first remoteUE and the second remote UE on the sidelink interface included in the PDU header of the adaptation layer PDU.
However, WANG teaches
The method according to claim 1, wherein the establishing the end-to-end adaptation layer between the first remote UE and the second remote UE comprises: adding the end-to-end adaptation layer above the RLC layer of the relay UE and above the RLC layer of the second remote UE respectively. -Fig. 11, 12; Paragraph [0160] (Fig. 11, 12 show for UE-to-UE configuration, end-to-end adaptation layer with adaptation layer above RLC of the relay UE and above RLC layer of the second remote UE (destination UE, UE3) [0160] recites, “an adaptation layer is required for data routing processing between the source UE and the relay UE and/or the relay UE and the target UE. An L2 UE-to-UE relay control plane protocol stack is shown in FIG. 11. A user plane protocol stack is shown in FIG. 12.”)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the “Adapter layer and bearer handling” of Huawei to include the concept of “The method according to claim 1, wherein the establishing the end-to-end adaptation layer between the first remote UE and the second remote UE comprises: adding the end-to-end adaptation layer above the RLC layer of the relay UE and above the RLC layer of the second remote UE respectively.” of WANG. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to reduce the burden of the cellular network, reduce the battery power consumption of a user equipment, increase a data rate, and improve the robustness of network infrastructure [0047]
Huawei and WANG combination do not teach
wherein the method further comprises: generating, by the first remote UE, the PDCP PDU, and determining the RLC entity corresponding to the PDCP PDU according to a twenty-second mapping relationship; the twenty-second mapping relationship being a mapping relationship between the sidelink end-to-end bearer between the first remote UE and the second remote UE and the end-to-end bearer between the first remoteUE and the relay UE:generating, by the relay UE, the adaptation layer PDU according to the PDCP PDU, and determining a corresponding RLC entity when the adaptation layer PDU is transmitted between the relay UE and the second remote UE according to a twenty-third mapping relationship; the twenty-third mapping relationship being a mapping relationship between the sidelink interface bear between the first remote UE and the relay UE and the sidelink interface bear between the relay UE and the second remote UE:receiving, by the second remote UE, the adaptation layer PDU, and determining the corresponding PDCP entity according to the end-to-end bearer identifiers of the first remote UE and the second remote UE on the sidelink interface included in the PDU header of the adaptation layer PDU
However, Nokia teaches
wherein the method further comprises: generating, by the first remote UE, the PDCP PDU, and determining the RLC entity corresponding to the PDCP PDU according to a twenty-second mapping relationship; the twenty-second mapping relationship being a mapping relationship between the sidelink end-to-end bearer between the first remote UE and the second remote UE and the end-to-end bearer between the first remoteUE and the relay UE:generating, by the relay UE, the adaptation layer PDU according to the PDCP PDU, and determining a corresponding RLC entity when the adaptation layer PDU is transmitted between the relay UE and the second remote UE according to a twenty-third mapping relationship; the twenty-third mapping relationship being a mapping relationship between the sidelink interface bear between the first remote UE and the relay UE and the sidelink interface bear between the relay UE and the second remote UE: receiving, by the second remote UE, the adaptation layer PDU, and determining the corresponding PDCP entity according to the end-to-end bearer identifiers of the first remote UE and the second remote UE on the sidelink interface included in the PDU header of the adaptation layer PDU. -Page 2, Proposal 3 (Proposal 3 describes the mapping relationship between sidelink and Uu (and between remote UEs traffic flows and relay UE’s traffic flows). It recites, “ Proposal 3: There is a need to support a mechanism to maintain DRBs (de)multiplexing/mapping between SL and Uu (and between remote UEs traffic flows and relay UE’s own traffic flows). Mapping should be configured in Relay UE by the eNB. As indicated in the e-mail discussion and agreed by most of the companies the adaptation layer is used to distinguish different flows and different remote UEs and it needs to be present on Uu interface no matter which technology is used in sidelink. For non-3GPP sidelink, although there may be different channels or different identifiers to distinguish different bearers of the remote UE, the eNB does not need to know anything about such non-3GPP identifiers but relies on some adaptation at sidelink for bearer mapping. In this case the adaptation layer should use the remote UE ID and DRB ID for DRB between remote UE and eNB identification as also agreed by most of the companies during the discussion. On the otherhand companies were not that concurring when it comes to the need of adapter layer on PC5 based sidelink and e-mail discussion proposals include corresponding FFS. For PC5 such adapter layer, although could be present, is not necessarily needed. In this case MAC identifiers (LCID, UE ID) can be used to distinguish the traffic from multiple remote UEs. Resigning from adapter layer would allow to keep the PC5 overhead to minimum and therefore we propose not to include it on PC5 interface. “)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the “Adapter layer and bearer handling” of Huawei to include the concept of “mapping relationship between the sidelink end-to-end bearer between the first remote UE and the second remote UE and the end-to-end bearer between the first remoteUE and the relay” of Nokia. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to support mechanism to maintain DRBs [Page 2, Proposal 3]
Claim 41 is the apparatus claim corresponding to the method claim 18 that has been rejected above. Applicant attention is directed to the rejection of claim 18. Claim 41 is rejected under the same rational as claim 18.
Claim 43 is the apparatus claim corresponding to the method claim 20 that has been rejected above. Applicant attention is directed to the rejection of claim 20. Claim 43 is rejected under the same rational as claim 20.
Response to Argument(s)
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to any of the references being used in the current rejection.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 AHMED SAIFUDDIN whose telephone number is (703)756-4581. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30am-6:00pm.
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, KHALED M KASSIM can be reached on 571-270-3770. 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.
/AHMED SAIFUDDIN/Examiner, Art Unit 2475
/ABDULLAHI AHMED/Examiner, Art Unit 2475