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 .
Response to Amendment
This is in response to an amendment/response filed 2/12/2026.
Claim 20 has been cancelled.
Claim 22 has been added.
Claims 1, 3-19, and 21-22 are now pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the independent claims (pages 7-9) in a reply filed 2/12/2026 have been considered but are moot because the arguments are based on newly changed limitations in the amendment and new ground of rejections using newly introduced references or a newly introduced portion of an existing reference are applied in the current rejection.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 5, 7-9, 11, 13-19, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hong et al. US 20120320763 (hereinafter “Hong”) and in view of Perras et al. WO 2019245783 (hereinafter “Perras”) and in further view of Ishii et al. US 20140153390 (hereinafter “Ishii”)
As to claim 1, 11, and 18 (claim 1 is the method claim for the system and non-transitory machine-readable medium in claim 11 and 18 respectively):
Hong discloses:
A method, comprising: aggregating, by network equipment, a direct link and a relay link between a first user equipment and a second user equipment; (“The link cooperating type may correspond to a scheme of transmitting a data frame using both of the direct link and the relay link. The source node may transmit a data frame to the destination node through the direct link, and the source may transmit the same data frame to the destination node through the relay link. The destination node may combine signals simultaneously received through two links and restore received data.”, Hong [0065])
wherein the direct link is configured to directly route first user traffic between the first user equipment and the second user equipment, wherein the relay link is configured to route second user traffic between the first user equipment and the second user equipment via a third user equipment, (“The link cooperating type may correspond to a scheme of transmitting a data frame using both of the direct link and the relay link. The source node may transmit a data frame to the destination node through the direct link, and the source may transmit the same data frame to the destination node through the relay link. The destination node may combine signals simultaneously received through two links and restore received data.”, Hong [0065])
Hong as described above does not explicitly teach:
and reusing, by the network equipment, a first link measurement procedure and a first link management procedure associated with the direct link and a second link measurement procedure and a second link management procedure associated with the relay link,
wherein the reusing the second link measurement procedure and the second link management procedure includes reusing the second link measurement procedure and the second link management procedure for application to the direct link,
and wherein the second link measurement procedure includes a radio resource management (RRM) measurement procedure and the second link management procedure includes a radio link failure (RLF) management procedure.
However, Perras further teaches using the same link measurement and management procedure used for the relay link which includes:
and reusing, by the network equipment, a first link measurement procedure and a first link management procedure associated with the direct link and a second link measurement procedure and a second link management procedure associated with the relay link, wherein the reusing the second link measurement procedure and the second link management procedure includes reusing the second link measurement procedure and the second link management procedure for application to the direct link,(In some examples, a “relay” WTRU may be used between the source WTRU and target WTRU. This “relay” is not shown or discussed in the various figures and description herein. However, the same procedures as described in the following sub-sections may be applied to communications involving a relay WTRU, the relay being used only to transfer (e.g.,“transparently”) messages between the source and target WTRUs.”, Perras [0083]) (“In a new first method, (Method 1), some examples include an exchange of new L2 IDs between source and target WTRUs. Such examples may include modification of an existing message (e.g., ProSe keepalive messages) to carry the new source L2 ID; e.g., to support concurrent exchange of new source and peer L2 IDs. In a further extension of Method 1 , termed Method 3 below, an exchange of new MSB of KD-sess ID and LSB of KD-sess ID as well as an exchange of new L2 IDs for the source and peer WTRUs may be supported. Such Method 1 - based examples and extensions may also or instead include introduction of new privacy messages and procedures to carry the new source L2 ID, e.g., to support concurrent exchange of new source and peer L2 IDs.”, Perras [0091]) (“FIG. 5 is a sequence chart 500 illustrating an example of such a direct link setup procedure. Message 501 is a direct communication request, sent from a requesting or source WTRU 510 to a destination or target or peer WTRU 520, that may include a privacy indication, the source WTRU privacy timer, and/or supported privacy policies. Message 502 is a direct communication accept sent in response to the request message from a destination or target or peer WTRU 520 to a requesting or source WTRU 510, that confirms the privacy indication, the source WTRU privacy timer, and/or supported privacy policies sent in the request message. In some examples, the privacy timer value is passed to the other WTRU to inform that WTRU in advance that the L2 ID will change during the lifetime of the session; e.g., periodically. The WTRU receiving a privacy timer configuration from its peer can expect the change within the time specified by the privacy timer value. If the change does not occur within this period, the receiving WTRU may trigger the replacement of this ID; e.g., using the privacy procedure shown and described with respect to FIG. 9.”, Perras [0099]) (FIG. 3, 5, 6-14 show various link management and measurement procedure, Perras) - (Examiner’s Note: in [0083], Perras mentions that the same procedures can be applied to a relay link which implies that both the direct link and relay link can use the same procedures for link management and measurement. If both links are using the same procedures, the links are “reusing” procedures that are applicable to each link. )
Perras and Hong are analogous because they pertain to transmitting using relay and direct link.
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include using the same link measurement and management procedure used for the relay link as described in Perras into Hong. By modifying the method to include reusing the same link measurement and management procedure used for the relay link as taught by Perras, the benefits of improved link reliability (Hong [0065] and Perras [0099]) are achieved.
The combination of Hong and Perras as described above does not explicitly teach:
and wherein the second link measurement procedure includes a radio resource management (RRM) measurement procedure and the second link management procedure includes a radio link failure (RLF) management procedure.
However, Ishii further teaches link measurement and link management procedure which includes:
and wherein the second link measurement procedure includes a radio resource management (RRM) measurement procedure (“If the determination in step S1604 is negative, user equipment 100 maintains the D2D connection with the advanced user equipment 500 in a step S1607. Step S1604 could be performed using alternative criteria to the path loss, such as the received power of the D2D pilot signal, the received quality of the D2D pilot signal, the SIR of the D2D pilot signal, and other suitable factors. Based on the radio resource management described in FIG. 24, non-interfering D2D connections may be maintained whereas interfering D2D connections may be released so that good system quality is maintained.”, Ishii [0202]) and the second link management procedure includes a radio link failure (RLF) management procedure. (“Measurement index #7 corresponds to the number of radio link failures in the D2D connections. This number may be that for all the radio link failures in the macro cell coverage area. Alternatively, the number may that for advanced user equipment radio link failures. The number of radio link failures may be reported by the user equipment 100 over LTE connection 720. Alternatively, it may be reported by advanced user equipment 500 over LTE connection 730. The report on the radio link failures may be included in the control signaling in the step S1301. Through this measurement item, network operators can determine whether some of the radio interface parameters should be modified. For example, if the number of radio link failures in the D2D connections is higher than a threshold value (which may imply that some of the radio interface parameters are not optimized), network operators may determine that some of the radio interface parameters should be modified.”, Ishii [0244])
Perras, Ishii, and Hong are analogous because they pertain to managing direct links between UEs.
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include link measurement and link management procedure as described in Ishii into Hong as modified by Perras. By modifying the method to include link measurement and link management procedure as taught by Ishii, the benefits of improved link reliability (Hong [0065] and Perras [0099]) and improved link management (Ishii [0244]) are achieved.
As to claim 3:
Hong as described above does not explicitly teach:
The method of claim 1, wherein the reusing comprises: reusing, for the relay link, the first link measurement procedure and the first link management procedure for the direct link.
However, Perras further teaches using the same link measurement and management procedure used for the relay link which includes:
The method of claim 1, wherein the reusing comprises: reusing, for the relay link, the first link measurement procedure and the first link management procedure for the direct link. (In some examples, a “relay” WTRU may be used between the source WTRU and target WTRU. This “relay” is not shown or discussed in the various figures and description herein. However, the same procedures as described in the following sub-sections may be applied to communications involving a relay WTRU, the relay being used only to transfer (e.g.,“transparently”) messages between the source and target WTRUs.”, Perras [0083]) (“In a new first method, (Method 1), some examples include an exchange of new L2 IDs between source and target WTRUs. Such examples may include modification of an existing message (e.g., ProSe keepalive messages) to carry the new source L2 ID; e.g., to support concurrent exchange of new source and peer L2 IDs. In a further extension of Method 1 , termed Method 3 below, an exchange of new MSB of KD-sess ID and LSB of KD-sess ID as well as an exchange of new L2 IDs for the source and peer WTRUs may be supported. Such Method 1 - based examples and extensions may also or instead include introduction of new privacy messages and procedures to carry the new source L2 ID, e.g., to support concurrent exchange of new source and peer L2 IDs.”, Perras [0091]) (“FIG. 5 is a sequence chart 500 illustrating an example of such a direct link setup procedure. Message 501 is a direct communication request, sent from a requesting or source WTRU 510 to a destination or target or peer WTRU 520, that may include a privacy indication, the source WTRU privacy timer, and/or supported privacy policies. Message 502 is a direct communication accept sent in response to the request message from a destination or target or peer WTRU 520 to a requesting or source WTRU 510, that confirms the privacy indication, the source WTRU privacy timer, and/or supported privacy policies sent in the request message. In some examples, the privacy timer value is passed to the other WTRU to inform that WTRU in advance that the L2 ID will change during the lifetime of the session; e.g., periodically. The WTRU receiving a privacy timer configuration from its peer can expect the change within the time specified by the privacy timer value. If the change does not occur within this period, the receiving WTRU may trigger the replacement of this ID; e.g., using the privacy procedure shown and described with respect to FIG. 9.”, Perras [0099]) (FIG. 3, 5, 6-14 show various link management and measurement procedure, Perras) - (Examiner’s Note: in [0083], Perras mentions that the same procedures can be applied to a relay link which implies that both the direct link and relay link can use the same procedures for link management and measurement. If both links are using the same procedures, the links are “reusing” procedures that are applicable to each link. )
Perras and Hong are analogous because they pertain to transmitting using relay and direct link.
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include using the same link measurement and management procedure used for the relay link as described in Perras into Hong. By modifying the method to include reusing the same link measurement and management procedure used for the relay link as taught by Perras, the benefits of improved link reliability (Hong [0065] and Perras [0099]) are achieved.
As to claim 5:
Hong discloses:
The method of claim 1, wherein the reusing comprises managing division of network traffic between the direct link and the relay link. (“The link cooperating type may correspond to a scheme of transmitting a data frame using both of the direct link and the relay link. The source node may transmit a data frame to the destination node through the direct link, and the source may transmit the same data frame to the destination node through the relay link. The destination node may combine signals simultaneously received through two links and restore received data.”, Hong [0065])
As to claim 7:
Hong discloses:
The method of claim 1, wherein the relay link and the direct link are independent communication links established between the first user equipment and the second user equipment. (FIG. 1, Hong)
As to claim 8:
Hong discloses:
The method of claim 1, further comprising: prior to the aggregating, implementing, by the network equipment, a relay functionality to relay network communication between the first user equipment and the second user equipment. (“The link cooperating type may correspond to a scheme of transmitting a data frame using both of the direct link and the relay link. The source node may transmit a data frame to the destination node through the direct link, and the source may transmit the same data frame to the destination node through the relay link. The destination node may combine signals simultaneously received through two links and restore received data.”, Hong [0065]) (FIG. 1, Hong)
As to claim 9:
Hong discloses:
The method of claim 1, further comprising: prior to the aggregating, establishing the direct link and the relay link, wherein the establishing comprises facilitating establishing direct connectivity for the first user equipment and the second user equipment. (“The link cooperating type may correspond to a scheme of transmitting a data frame using both of the direct link and the relay link. The source node may transmit a data frame to the destination node through the direct link, and the source may transmit the same data frame to the destination node through the relay link. The destination node may combine signals simultaneously received through two links and restore received data.”, Hong [0065]) (FIG. 1, Hong)
As to claim 13:
Hong as described above does not explicitly teach:
The system of claim 11, wherein the respective link measurement procedures comprise a first link management procedure and a first link measurement procedure for the first communication routing and a second link management procedure and a second link measurement procedure for the second communication routing, and wherein the reusing comprises reusing the first link management procedure and the first link measurement procedure for the second user device.
However, Perras further teaches using the same link measurement and management procedure used for the relay link which includes:
The system of claim 11, wherein the respective link measurement procedures comprise a first link management procedure and a first link measurement procedure for the first communication routing and a second link management procedure and a second link measurement procedure for the second communication routing, and wherein the reusing comprises reusing the first link management procedure and the first link measurement procedure for the second user device. (In some examples, a “relay” WTRU may be used between the source WTRU and target WTRU. This “relay” is not shown or discussed in the various figures and description herein. However, the same procedures as described in the following sub-sections may be applied to communications involving a relay WTRU, the relay being used only to transfer (e.g.,“transparently”) messages between the source and target WTRUs.”, Perras [0083]) (“In a new first method, (Method 1), some examples include an exchange of new L2 IDs between source and target WTRUs. Such examples may include modification of an existing message (e.g., ProSe keepalive messages) to carry the new source L2 ID; e.g., to support concurrent exchange of new source and peer L2 IDs. In a further extension of Method 1 , termed Method 3 below, an exchange of new MSB of KD-sess ID and LSB of KD-sess ID as well as an exchange of new L2 IDs for the source and peer WTRUs may be supported. Such Method 1 - based examples and extensions may also or instead include introduction of new privacy messages and procedures to carry the new source L2 ID, e.g., to support concurrent exchange of new source and peer L2 IDs.”, Perras [0091]) (“FIG. 5 is a sequence chart 500 illustrating an example of such a direct link setup procedure. Message 501 is a direct communication request, sent from a requesting or source WTRU 510 to a destination or target or peer WTRU 520, that may include a privacy indication, the source WTRU privacy timer, and/or supported privacy policies. Message 502 is a direct communication accept sent in response to the request message from a destination or target or peer WTRU 520 to a requesting or source WTRU 510, that confirms the privacy indication, the source WTRU privacy timer, and/or supported privacy policies sent in the request message. In some examples, the privacy timer value is passed to the other WTRU to inform that WTRU in advance that the L2 ID will change during the lifetime of the session; e.g., periodically. The WTRU receiving a privacy timer configuration from its peer can expect the change within the time specified by the privacy timer value. If the change does not occur within this period, the receiving WTRU may trigger the replacement of this ID; e.g., using the privacy procedure shown and described with respect to FIG. 9.”, Perras [0099]) (FIG. 3, 5, 6-14 show various link management and measurement procedure, Perras) - (Examiner’s Note: in [0083], Perras mentions that the same procedures can be applied to a relay link which implies that both the direct link and relay link can use the same procedures for link management and measurement. If both links are using the same procedures, the links are “reusing” procedures that are applicable to each link. )
Perras and Hong are analogous because they pertain to transmitting using relay and direct link.
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include using the same link measurement and management procedure used for the relay link as described in Perras into Hong. By modifying the method to include reusing the same link measurement and management procedure used for the relay link as taught by Perras, the benefits of improved link reliability (Hong [0065] and Perras [0099]) are achieved.
As to claim 14:
Hong as described above does not explicitly teach:
The system of claim 11, wherein the respective link measurement procedures comprise a first link management procedure and a first link measurement procedure for the first communication routing and a second link management procedure and a second link measurement procedure for the second communication routing, and wherein the reusing comprises reusing the second link management procedure and the second link measurement procedure for the first user device.
However, Perras further teaches using the same link measurement and management procedure used for the relay link which includes:
The system of claim 11, wherein the respective link measurement procedures comprise a first link management procedure and a first link measurement procedure for the first communication routing and a second link management procedure and a second link measurement procedure for the second communication routing, and wherein the reusing comprises reusing the second link management procedure and the second link measurement procedure for the first user device. (In some examples, a “relay” WTRU may be used between the source WTRU and target WTRU. This “relay” is not shown or discussed in the various figures and description herein. However, the same procedures as described in the following sub-sections may be applied to communications involving a relay WTRU, the relay being used only to transfer (e.g.,“transparently”) messages between the source and target WTRUs.”, Perras [0083]) (“In a new first method, (Method 1), some examples include an exchange of new L2 IDs between source and target WTRUs. Such examples may include modification of an existing message (e.g., ProSe keepalive messages) to carry the new source L2 ID; e.g., to support concurrent exchange of new source and peer L2 IDs. In a further extension of Method 1 , termed Method 3 below, an exchange of new MSB of KD-sess ID and LSB of KD-sess ID as well as an exchange of new L2 IDs for the source and peer WTRUs may be supported. Such Method 1 - based examples and extensions may also or instead include introduction of new privacy messages and procedures to carry the new source L2 ID, e.g., to support concurrent exchange of new source and peer L2 IDs.”, Perras [0091]) (“FIG. 5 is a sequence chart 500 illustrating an example of such a direct link setup procedure. Message 501 is a direct communication request, sent from a requesting or source WTRU 510 to a destination or target or peer WTRU 520, that may include a privacy indication, the source WTRU privacy timer, and/or supported privacy policies. Message 502 is a direct communication accept sent in response to the request message from a destination or target or peer WTRU 520 to a requesting or source WTRU 510, that confirms the privacy indication, the source WTRU privacy timer, and/or supported privacy policies sent in the request message. In some examples, the privacy timer value is passed to the other WTRU to inform that WTRU in advance that the L2 ID will change during the lifetime of the session; e.g., periodically. The WTRU receiving a privacy timer configuration from its peer can expect the change within the time specified by the privacy timer value. If the change does not occur within this period, the receiving WTRU may trigger the replacement of this ID; e.g., using the privacy procedure shown and described with respect to FIG. 9.”, Perras [0099]) (FIG. 3, 5, 6-14 show various link management and measurement procedure, Perras) - (Examiner’s Note: in [0083], Perras mentions that the same procedures can be applied to a relay link which implies that both the direct link and relay link can use the same procedures for link management and measurement. If both links are using the same procedures, the links are “reusing” procedures that are applicable to each link. )
Perras and Hong are analogous because they pertain to transmitting using relay and direct link.
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include using the same link measurement and management procedure used for the relay link as described in Perras into Hong. By modifying the method to include reusing the same link measurement and management procedure used for the relay link as taught by Perras, the benefits of improved link reliability (Hong [0065] and Perras [0099]) are achieved.
As to claim 15:
Hong as described above does not explicitly teach:
The system of claim 11, wherein the operations further comprise: prior to the combining, establishing the first communication routing and the second communication routing via a cellular interface.
However, Perras further teaches establishing communication via a cellular interface which includes:
The system of claim 11, wherein the operations further comprise: prior to the combining, establishing the first communication routing and the second communication routing via a cellular interface. (“By way of example, the WTRUs 102a, 102b, 102c, 102d, any of which may be referred to as a “station” and/or an “STA”, may be configured to transmit and/or receive wireless signals and may include a user equipment (UE), a mobile station, a fixed or mobile subscriber unit, a subscription-based unit, a pager, a cellular telephone”, Perras [0026])
Perras and Hong are analogous because they pertain to transmitting using relay and direct link.
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include establishing communication via a cellular interface as described in Perras into Hong. By modifying the method to include establishing communication via a cellular interface as taught by Perras, the benefits of improved link reliability (Hong [0065] and Perras [0099]) are achieved.
As to claim 16:
Hong as described above does not explicitly teach:
The system of claim 11, wherein the operations further comprise: prior to the combining, establishing the first communication routing and the second communication routing via a sidelink interface.
However, Perras further teaches sidelink interface which includes:
The system of claim 11, wherein the operations further comprise: prior to the combining, establishing the first communication routing and the second communication routing via a sidelink interface. (“In embodiments described herein, proximity-based services may be referred to as “ProSe”. ProSe communication 5 (PC5) may represent a reference point (e.g., interface) between two WTRUs or any number of WTRUs. Any of control and user plane messages may be exchanged between WTRUs over the PC5 reference point (e.g., interface).”, Perras [0079])
Perras and Hong are analogous because they pertain to transmitting using relay and direct link.
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include sidelink interface as described in Perras into Hong. By modifying the method to include sidelink interface as taught by Perras, the benefits of improved link reliability (Hong [0065] and Perras [0099]) are achieved.
As to claim 17:
Hong discloses:
The system of claim 11, wherein the operations further comprise: prior to the combining, establishing the first communication routing and the second communication routing, wherein the establishing comprises implementing a relay functionality to relay wireless communication between the first user device and the second user device. (FIG. 1, Hong)
As to claim 19:
Hong as described above does not explicitly teach:
The non-transitory machine-readable medium of claim 18, wherein the reusing comprises reusing, for the relay link, the link management procedure and the link measurement procedure of the direct link.
However, Perras further teaches using the same link measurement and management procedure used for the relay link which includes:
The non-transitory machine-readable medium of claim 18, wherein the reusing comprises reusing, for the relay link, the link management procedure and the link measurement procedure of the direct link. (In some examples, a “relay” WTRU may be used between the source WTRU and target WTRU. This “relay” is not shown or discussed in the various figures and description herein. However, the same procedures as described in the following sub-sections may be applied to communications involving a relay WTRU, the relay being used only to transfer (e.g.,“transparently”) messages between the source and target WTRUs.”, Perras [0083]) (“In a new first method, (Method 1), some examples include an exchange of new L2 IDs between source and target WTRUs. Such examples may include modification of an existing message (e.g., ProSe keepalive messages) to carry the new source L2 ID; e.g., to support concurrent exchange of new source and peer L2 IDs. In a further extension of Method 1 , termed Method 3 below, an exchange of new MSB of KD-sess ID and LSB of KD-sess ID as well as an exchange of new L2 IDs for the source and peer WTRUs may be supported. Such Method 1 - based examples and extensions may also or instead include introduction of new privacy messages and procedures to carry the new source L2 ID, e.g., to support concurrent exchange of new source and peer L2 IDs.”, Perras [0091]) (“FIG. 5 is a sequence chart 500 illustrating an example of such a direct link setup procedure. Message 501 is a direct communication request, sent from a requesting or source WTRU 510 to a destination or target or peer WTRU 520, that may include a privacy indication, the source WTRU privacy timer, and/or supported privacy policies. Message 502 is a direct communication accept sent in response to the request message from a destination or target or peer WTRU 520 to a requesting or source WTRU 510, that confirms the privacy indication, the source WTRU privacy timer, and/or supported privacy policies sent in the request message. In some examples, the privacy timer value is passed to the other WTRU to inform that WTRU in advance that the L2 ID will change during the lifetime of the session; e.g., periodically. The WTRU receiving a privacy timer configuration from its peer can expect the change within the time specified by the privacy timer value. If the change does not occur within this period, the receiving WTRU may trigger the replacement of this ID; e.g., using the privacy procedure shown and described with respect to FIG. 9.”, Perras [0099]) (FIG. 3, 5, 6-14 show various link management and measurement procedure, Perras) - (Examiner’s Note: in [0083], Perras mentions that the same procedures can be applied to a relay link which implies that both the direct link and relay link can use the same procedures for link management and measurement. If both links are using the same procedures, the links are “reusing” procedures that are applicable to each link. )
Perras and Hong are analogous because they pertain to transmitting using relay and direct link.
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include using the same link measurement and management procedure used for the relay link as described in Perras into Hong. By modifying the method to include reusing the same link measurement and management procedure used for the relay link as taught by Perras, the benefits of improved link reliability (Hong [0065] and Perras [0099]) are achieved.
As to claim 21:
Hong discloses:
The method of claim 1, wherein traffic is divided between the direct link and the relay link according to a split based on at least one of: a protocol feedback, a link quality measurement, or a Quality of Service (QoS) requirement. (“An aspect of the present invention provides an apparatus and method for changing a relay operation type from a link switching type to a link cooperating type vice-versa according to a channel status of a relay link and a direct link.”, Hong [0007]) (“The apparatus may further include a link quality measurement unit to measure the link quality between the source node and the relay node, the link quality between the relay node and the destination node, and the link quality between the source node and the destination node.”, Hong [0044]) (“According to an aspect of the present invention, it is possible to change a relay operation type from a link switching type to a link cooperating type and vice versa according to a channel status of a relay link and a direct link.”, Hong [0045]) (Examiner’s Note: the relay operation type changes from link switching to link cooperating type based on the link quality measurement; link cooperating type combines split data at the destination node)
Claim(s) 4, 6, 10, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hong in view of Perras and Ishii, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Basu et al. US 20230276297 (hereinafter “Basu”)
As to claim 4 and 12 (claim 4 is the method claim for the system in claim 12):
The combination of Hong, Perras, and Ishii as described above does not explicitly teach:
The method of claim 1, wherein the aggregating comprises: aggregating the direct link based on a first packet data convergence protocol layer of the first user equipment; and aggregating the relay link based on a second packet data convergence protocol layer of the second user equipment.
However, Basu further teaches aggregating links based on separate PDCP layer which includes:
The method of claim 1, wherein the aggregating comprises: aggregating the direct link based on a first packet data convergence protocol layer of the first user equipment; and aggregating the relay link based on a second packet data convergence protocol layer of the second user equipment. (FIG. 4A shows link aggregation at UE3, Basu) (“FIG. 2B depicts a PC5 protocol stack 250, according to embodiments of the disclosure. While FIG. 2B shows the Tx-Remote-UE 201, the SL-Relay-UE 203, and the Rx-Remote-UE 205, these are representative of a set of UEs communicating peer-to-peer via PC5 and other embodiments may involve different UEs. As depicted, the PC5 protocol stack includes a physical (“PHY”) layer 755, a Media Access Control (“MAC”) sublayer 760, a Radio Link Control (“RLC”) sublayer 765, a Packet Data Convergence Protocol (“PDCP”) sublayer 770, and Radio Resource Control (“RRC”) and Service Data Adaptation Protocol (“SDAP”) layers (depicted as combined element “RRC/SDAP” 775), for the control plane and user plane, respectively”, Basu [0079])
Ishii, Perras, Basu, and Hong are analogous because they pertain to direct link management.
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include aggregating links based on separate PDCP layer as described in Basu into Hong as modified by Ishii and Perras. By modifying the method to include aggregating links based on separate PDCP layer as taught by Basu, the benefits of improved link reliability (Hong [0065], Perras [0099], and Basu [0077]) and improved link management (Ishii [0244]) are achieved.
As to claim 6:
The combination of Hong, Perras, and Ishii as described above does not explicitly teach:
The method of claim 1, further comprising: routing, by the network equipment, first user traffic via the direct link; and routing, by the network equipment, the second user traffic via the relay link, wherein the routing of the first user traffic and the routing of the second user traffic are performed at a same time.
However, Basu further teaches transmitting data through each link at the same time which includes:
The method of claim 1, further comprising: routing, by the network equipment, first user traffic via the direct link; and routing, by the network equipment, the second user traffic via the relay link, wherein the routing of the first user traffic and the routing of the second user traffic are performed at a same time.(“ As depicted in FIG. 4A, a groupcast transmission is made by the UE1 201 over Interface-1 (including the direct-interface/Path-1 and links to UE2a and UE2b). A Relay UE may transmit the TB to the UE3 205 over Path-2 or Path-3. Note that the Interface-2 (i.e., sidelink interface between UE2a/2B and UE3) could be UC or GC as indicated by UE1 to UE2a/b. Alternatively, the Interface-2 could be BC as indicated by UE1 to UE2a/2b. In FIG. 4A, only one UE3 is shown, but it is representative of one of multiple receiver UEs of a GC or BC case.”, Basu [0093])
Ishii, Basu, Perras, and Hong are analogous because they pertain to direct link management.
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include transmitting data through each link at the same time as described in Basu into Hong as modified by Ishii and Perras. By modifying the method to include transmitting data through each link at the same time as taught by Basu, the benefits of improved link reliability (Hong [0065], Perras [0099], and Basu [0077]) and improved link management (Ishii [0244]) are achieved.
As to claim 10:
The combination of Hong, Perras, and Ishii as described above does not explicitly teach:
The method of claim 1, wherein the direct link and the relay link are configured to operate according to a new radio network communication protocol.
However, Basu further teaches aggregating direct and relay link for NR protocol which includes:
The method of claim 1, wherein the direct link and the relay link are configured to operate according to a new radio network communication protocol. (“In the following descriptions, the term “RAN node” is used for the base station but it is replaceable by any other radio access node, e.g., gNB, ng-eNB, eNB, Base Station (“BS”), Access Point (“AP”), etc. Further, the operations are described mainly in the context of 5G NR. However, the below described solutions/methods are also equally applicable to other mobile communication systems improved communications using relay over sidelink radio interface.”, Basu [0068])
Ishii, Basu, Perras, and Hong are analogous because they pertain to direct link management.
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include aggregating direct and relay link for NR protocol as described in Basu into Hong as modified by Ishii and Perras. By modifying the method to include aggregating direct and relay link for NR protocol as taught by Basu, the benefits of improved link reliability (Hong [0065], Perras [0099], and Basu [0077]) and improved link management (Ishii [0244]) are achieved.
Claim(s) 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hong in view of Perras and Ishii, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Zhang et al. US 20210153063 (hereinafter “Zhang”)
As to claim 22:
The combination of Hong, Perras, and Ishii as described above does not explicitly teach:
The method of claim 1, wherein the direct link and the relay link are aggregated under a same packet data convergence protocol (PDCP), and wherein traffic flow across the direct link and the relay link is based on a split bearer or a switched bearer.
However, Zhang further teaches direct link and relay link aggregation using a split bearer which includes:
The method of claim 1, wherein the direct link and the relay link are aggregated under a same packet data convergence protocol (PDCP), and wherein traffic flow across the direct link and the relay link is based on a split bearer or a switched bearer. (“L2 PDCP based UC architecture represents one embodiment. One potential benefit is improved multiple relay UE diversity, in that the same data could be transmitted on multiple links to a remote UE or network equipment, and thus provide multi-link gain. Another potential benefit is improved throughput and coverage, in that data could be split and transmitted on multiple links to the remote UE or network equipment, and aggregated at the destination to improve overall throughput relative to single-link transmission.”, Zhang [0110]) (“According to another embodiment, after the PDCP bearer is split into more than one bearer to form multiple RLC streams, each stream is served by an individual MAC layer or entity and an individual PHY layer or entity, and thus multiple sets of parallel UC protocol stacks of RLC, MAC and PHY layers or entities are configured. Examples of this, related to the scenarios shown in FIGS. 3A, 4A, and 5A, are shown in FIGS. 3C, 4C, and 5C, respectively.”, Zhang [0111])
Ishii, Zhang, Perras, and Hong are analogous because they pertain to direct link management.
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include direct link and relay link aggregation using a split bearer as described in Zhang into Hong as modified by Ishii and Perras. By modifying the method to include direct link and relay link aggregation using a split bearer as taught by Zhang, the benefits of improved link reliability (Hong [0065], Perras [0099], and Zhang [0009]) and improved link management (Ishii [0244]) are achieved.
Conclusion
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 ANDREW C KIM whose telephone number is (703)756-5607. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9AM - 5PM (PST).
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, Sujoy K Kundu can be reached at (571) 272-8586. 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.
/A.C.K./
Examiner
Art Unit 2471
/SUJOY K KUNDU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2471