DETAILED ACTION
This Office action is in response to Amendment filed on 2/25/2026. Claims 1, 19 and 20 have been
amended. Claims 1-20 remain pending in the application.
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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e),
was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 2/25/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed on 2/25/2026 has been entered.
Response to Remarks/Arguments
Applicant’s remarks/arguments (page 6-9), filed on 2/25/2026, with respect to claim 1 have been fully
considered but are moot because the arguments are based on newly added limitations in the amendment and new ground of rejections using a newly introduced reference (Wang) 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 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 of this title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that
are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KIM et al.
(US 2018/0352387 Al, hereinafter “Kim”) in view of Park et al. (US 2020/0221421 Al, hereinafter “Park”) and in further view of Wang (US 2023/0050170 Al, hereinafter “Wang”).
Regarding claim 1, Kim discloses:
A user equipment (UE), comprising (LTE system architecture includes one or more user equipment, Kim: Fig. 1, [0034]):
a receiver configured to (receiver may be a part of the UE, Kim: [0036]):
receive broadcast configuration information (The MCCH is a point-to-multipoint downlink channel used for transmitting MBMS control information from the network to a UE. UE may acquire the MBSFN area information list and the MBMS notification configuration information, Kim: [0055], [0091]-[0092]),
Kim does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the broadcast configuration information indicates a plurality of Multicast Radio Bearers (MRBs) for the same Multimedia Broadcast Multicast Service (MBMS) session and a Group-Radio Network Temporary Identity (G-RNTI); and
receive the same MBMS session on the plurality of MRBs.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Park teaches:
wherein the broadcast configuration information indicates a plurality of Multicast Radio Bearers (MRBs) for the same Multimedia Broadcast Multicast Service (MBMS) session and a Group-Radio Network Temporary Identity (G-RNTI) (A UE that may be receiving an MBMS service via MRB may acquire MCCH information. IE SC-MTCH-InfoList may provide a list of ongoing MBMS sessions transmitted via SC-MRB and for MBMS session, an associated G-RNTI and scheduling information, Park: [0155], [0198]); and
receive the same MBMS session on the plurality of MRBs (UE may receive the MBMS (MBMS, SC-PTM, and/or V2X) service in the target cell and/or the secondary cell with the same G-RNTI parameter and/or same MBMS (MBMS, SC-PTM, and/or V2X) resource parameter that the UE may have received in the current cell, Park: [0203]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kim in view of Park in order to further modify the broadcast configuration information that indicates a plurality of Multicast Radio Bearers (MRBs) for the same Multimedia Broadcast Multicast Service (MBMS) session and a Group-Radio Network Temporary Identity and receiving the same MBMS session on the plurality of MRBs from the teachings of Park.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated because it may modify MBMS configuration information provided on MCCH as updating the MBMS configuration information carried on BCCH i.e. at a coinciding BCCH and MCCH modification period (Park: [0154]).
Yet, Kim in view of Park does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the UE is configured to:
establish a packet data convergence protocol (PDCP) entity for each MRB of the plurality of MRBs, and
establish a radio link control (RLC) entity for each MRB of the plurality of MRBs.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Wang teaches:
wherein the UE is configured to (The UE configures RLC, MAC and the physical layer upon starting to receive an MRB transmitted on MTCH, Wang: [0044]):
establish a packet data convergence protocol (PDCP) entity for each MRB of the plurality of MRBs (UE establishes an SDAP entity and a PDCP entity for this MRB, Wang: [0044]), and
establish a radio link control (RLC) entity for each MRB of the plurality of MRBs (Upon MRB establishment, the UE establishes an RLC entity, Wang: [0044]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kim and Park in view of Wang in order to further modify that UE is configured to establish a packet data convergence protocol (PDCP) entity and a radio link control (RLC) entity for each MRB of the plurality of MRBs from the teachings of Wang.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated because with the increasingly demand for multicast services for critical communication services such as involving disaster situations and public safety services, the necessity of a reliable multicast data delivery requires improvement of the existing mobile multicast/broadcast services (Wang: [0003]).
Regarding claim 19, Kim discloses:
A base station, comprising (base station (eNB, 220), Kim: Fig. 2, [0042]):
a transmitter configured to (In the DL, a transmitter may be a part of the eNB, Kim: [0036]):
transmit broadcast configuration information (The MCCH is a point-to-multipoint downlink channel used for transmitting MBMS control information from the network to a UE. UE may acquire the MBSFN area information list and the MBMS notification configuration information, Kim: [0055], [0091]-[0092]),
Kim does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the broadcast configuration information indicates a plurality of Multicast Radio Bearers (MRBs) for the same Multimedia Broadcast Multicast Service (MBMS) session and a Group-Radio Network Temporary Identity (G-RNTI); and
transmit the same MBMS session on the plurality of MRBs.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Park teaches:
wherein the broadcast configuration information indicates a plurality of Multicast Radio Bearers (MRBs) for the same Multimedia Broadcast Multicast Service (MBMS) session and a Group-Radio Network Temporary Identity (G-RNTI) (A UE that may be receiving an MBMS service via MRB may acquire MCCH information. IE SC-MTCH-InfoList may provide a list of ongoing MBMS sessions transmitted via SC-MRB and for MBMS session, an associated G-RNTI and scheduling information, Park: [0155], [0198]); and
transmit the same MBMS session on the plurality of MRBs (eNB may transmit a G-RNTI parameter and/or MBMS (MBMS, SC-PTM, and/or V2X) resource parameter associated with an MBMS (MBMS, SC-PTM, and/or V2X) service provided in a cell of the eNB to another eNB, Park: [0202], [0209]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kim in view of Park in order to further modify the broadcast configuration information that indicates a plurality of Multicast Radio Bearers (MRBs) for the same Multimedia Broadcast Multicast Service (MBMS) session and a Group-Radio Network Temporary Identity and transmitting the same MBMS session on the plurality of MRBs from the teachings of Park.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated because it may modify MBMS configuration information provided on MCCH as updating the MBMS configuration information carried on BCCH i.e. at a coinciding BCCH and MCCH modification period (Park: [0154]).
Yet, Kim in view of Park does not explicitly disclose:
wherein a packet data convergence protocol (PDCP) entity is established for each MRB of the plurality of MRBs, and a radio link control (RLC) entity is established for each MRB of the plurality of MRBs.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Wang teaches:
wherein a packet data convergence protocol (PDCP) entity is established for each MRB of the plurality of MRBs, and a radio link control (RLC) entity is established for each MRB of the plurality of MRBs (UE establishes an SDAP entity and a PDCP entity for this MRB. Upon MRB establishment, the UE establishes an RLC entity, Wang: [0044]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kim and Park in view of Wang in order to further modify that a packet data convergence protocol (PDCP) entity is established for each MRB of the plurality of MRBs, and a radio link control (RLC) entity is established for each MRB of the plurality of MRBs from the teachings of Wang.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated because with the increasingly demand for multicast services for critical communication services such as involving disaster situations and public safety services, the necessity of a reliable multicast data delivery requires improvement of the existing mobile multicast/broadcast services (Wang: [0003]).
Regarding claim 20, Kim discloses:
A method, comprising (method of determining an MBMS service, Kim: [0001]):
receiving broadcast configuration information on a Multicast Broadcast Service Control Channel (MCCH) (The MCCH is a point-to-multipoint downlink channel used for transmitting MBMS control information from the network to a UE. UE may acquire the MBSFN area information list and the MBMS notification configuration information, Kim: [0055], [0091]-[0092]),
Kim does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the broadcast configuration information indicates a plurality of Multicast Radio Bearers (MRBs) for the same Multimedia Broadcast Multicast Service (MBMS) session and a Group-Radio Network Temporary Identity (G-RNTI); and
receive the same MBMS session on the plurality of MRBs
However, in the same field of endeavor, Park teaches:
wherein the broadcast configuration information indicates a plurality of Multicast Radio Bearers (MRBs) for the same Multimedia Broadcast Multicast Service (MBMS) session and a Group-Radio Network Temporary Identity (G-RNTI) (A UE that may be receiving an MBMS service via MRB may acquire MCCH information. IE SC-MTCH-InfoList may provide a list of ongoing MBMS sessions transmitted via SC-MRB and for MBMS session, an associated G-RNTI and scheduling information, Park: [0155], [0198]); and
receive the same MBMS session on the plurality of MRBs (UE may receive the MBMS (MBMS, SC-PTM, and/or V2X) service in the target cell and/or the secondary cell with the same G-RNTI parameter and/or same MBMS (MBMS, SC-PTM, and/or V2X) resource parameter that the UE may have received in the current cell, Park: [0203]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kim in view of Park in order to further modify the broadcast configuration information that indicates a plurality of Multicast Radio Bearers (MRBs) for the same Multimedia Broadcast Multicast Service (MBMS) session and a Group-Radio Network Temporary Identity and receiving the same MBMS session on the plurality of MRBs from the teachings of Park.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated because it may modify MBMS configuration information provided on MCCH as updating the MBMS configuration information carried on BCCH i.e. at a coinciding BCCH and MCCH modification period (Park: [0154]).
Yet, Kim in view of Park does not explicitly disclose:
wherein a packet data convergence protocol (PDCP) entity is established for each MRB of the plurality of MRBs, and a radio link control (RLC) entity is established for each MRB of the plurality of MRBs.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Wang teaches:
wherein a packet data convergence protocol (PDCP) entity is established for each MRB of the plurality of MRBs, and a radio link control (RLC) entity is established for each MRB of the plurality of MRBs (UE establishes an SDAP entity and a PDCP entity for this MRB. Upon MRB establishment, the UE establishes an RLC entity, Wang: [0044]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kim and Park in view of Wang in order to further modify that a packet data convergence protocol (PDCP) entity is established for each MRB of the plurality of MRBs, and a radio link control (RLC) entity is established for each MRB of the plurality of MRBs from the teachings of Wang.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated because with the increasingly demand for multicast services for critical communication services such as involving disaster situations and public safety services, the necessity of a reliable multicast data delivery requires improvement of the existing mobile multicast/broadcast services (Wang: [0003]).
Claims 2-3, 8-14, and 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim and Park and Wang in view of KIM (US 2019/0387535 Al, hereinafter “Kim_2019”).
Regarding claim 2, Kim-Park-Wang teaches all the claimed limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim 1 above.
Kim further discloses:
The UE according to claim 1, wherein the UE is in an idle state and for any higher-layer packet transmitted through the plurality of MRBs (In RRC_IDLE state, the UE may receive broadcasts of system information. transmits an MBMS interest indication message to the base station through an MBMS point to multipoint radio bearer (MRB). Kim: [0066]),
Kim-Park-Wang does not explicitly disclose:
sequence numbers of the higher-layer packet in the plurality of MRBs are the same.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Kim_2019 teaches:
sequence numbers of the higher-layer packet in the plurality of MRBs are the same (data transmission by the secondary RLC entity may be detected as duplication in the PDCP entity of a receiver (a terminal or a base station) because the receiver has already received the data of PDCP sequence number 2, thereby discarding the duplicate data, Kim_2019: [0177], [0182]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kim-Park-Wang in view of Kim_2019 in order to further modify sequence numbers of the higher-layer packet in the plurality of MRBs that are the same from the teachings of Kim_2019.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated because the base station is able to improve a data rate, and is able to transmit control information with a low transmission delay and high reliability to the terminal by applying packet duplication transmission (Kim_2019: [0013]).
Regarding claim 3, Kim-Park-Wang-Kim_2019 teaches all the claimed limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim 2 above.
Kim-Park-Wang does not explicitly disclose:
The UE according to claim 2, wherein a PDCP6l05 is a receiving Packet Data Convergence Protocol (PDCP) entity, the PDCP6105 not using a function of encryption and integrity protection.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Kim_2019 teaches:
wherein a PDCP6l05 is a receiving Packet Data Convergence Protocol (PDCP) entity, the PDCP6105 not using a function of encryption and integrity protection (PDCP entity may generate a PDCP header, may perform integrity protection in consideration of the same, may perform ciphering on the PDCP SDU, Kim_2019: [0155]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kim-Park-Wang in view of Kim_2019 in order to further modify PDCP6l05 as a receiving Packet Data Convergence Protocol (PDCP) entity and the PDCP6105 as not using a function of encryption and integrity protection from the teachings of Kim_2019.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated because the base station is able to improve a data rate, and is able to transmit control information with a low transmission delay and high reliability to the terminal by applying packet duplication transmission (Kim_2019: [0013]).
Regarding claim 8, Kim-Park-Wang-Kim_2019 teaches all the claimed limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim 3 above.
Kim further discloses:
The UE according to claim 3, wherein the broadcast configuration information is RRC signaling (MCCH transmits an MBMS-related RRC message, Kim: [0076], [0090]).
Regarding claim 9, Kim-Park-Wang-Kim_2019 teaches all the claimed limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim 8 above.
Kim further discloses:
The UE according to claim 8, wherein the broadcast configuration information indicates configuration information for a PDCP entity of an MRB of the plurality of MRBs (MBMS gateway 270 uses a PDCP and IP multicast to transmit user data to the base station 220 and performs session control signaling for the radio access network 200, Kim: [0043]).
Regarding claim 10, Kim-Park-Wang-Kim_2019 teaches all the claimed limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim 9 above.
Kim-Park-Wang does not explicitly disclose:
The UE according to claim 9, wherein a sequence number of the higher-layer packet is indicated by a Sequence Number (SN) field comprised in the higher-layer packet;
the higher-layer packet refers to a L2 packet; and the L2 packet is an RLC Protocol Data Unit (PDU).
However, in the same field of endeavor, Kim_2019 teaches:
wherein a sequence number of the higher-layer packet is indicated by a Sequence Number (SN) field comprised in the higher-layer packet (reordering function of the NR PDCP entity refers to a function of reordering PDCP PDU s received in a lower layer based on a PDCP sequence number (SN), Kim_2019: [0110]);
the higher-layer packet refers to a L2 packet; and the L2 packet is an RLC Protocol Data Unit (PDU) (MAC is connected to a plurality of RLC entities configured in a single terminal, multiplexes RLC PDUs into MAC PDUs, and demultiplexes RLC PDUs from MAC PDUs, Kim_2019: [0075]]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kim-Park-Wang in view of Kim_2019 in order to further modify a sequence number of the higher-layer packet indicated by a Sequence Number (SN) field comprised in the higher-layer packet and the higher-layer packet refers to a L2 packet and the L2 packet as an RLC Protocol Data Unit (PDU) from the teachings of Kim_2019.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated because the base station is able to improve a data rate, and is able to transmit control information with a low transmission delay and high reliability to the terminal by applying packet duplication transmission (Kim_2019: [0013]).
Regarding claim 11, Kim-Park-Wang-Kim_2019 teaches all the claimed limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim 10 above.
Kim further discloses:
The UE according to claim 10, wherein the PDCP6 l 05 is a PDCP entity of an MRB of the plurality of MRBs (MBMS gateway 270 uses a PDCP and IP multicast to transmit user data to the base station 220 and performs session control signaling for the radio access network 200, Kim: [0043]).
Regarding claim 12, Kim-Park-Wang-Kim_2019 teaches all the claimed limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim 11 above.
Kim further discloses:
The UE according to claim 11, wherein the PDCP6105 also provides header compression used for an upper-layer packet to reduce radio transmission overhead (PDCP layer provides a function of header compression function that reduces unnecessary control information, Kim: [0059], [0063]).
Regarding claim 13, Kim-Park-Wang-Kim_2019 teaches all the claimed limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim 3 above.
Kim further discloses:
The UE according to claim 3, wherein:
the receiver is configured to receive logical channel configuration information for a first MRB of the plurality of MRBs (RRC layer controls logical channels, transport channels, and physical channels in relation to the configuration, reconfiguration, and release of RBs. An RB is a logical path provided by the L1 and L2 for data delivery between the UE and the network, Kim: [0060]),
Kim-Park-Wang does not explicitly disclose:
and wherein for any higher-layer packet transmitted through two MRBs sequence numbers of the higher-layer packet in the MRBs are the same.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Kim_2019 teaches:
and wherein for any higher-layer packet transmitted through two MRBs sequence numbers of the higher-layer packet in the MRBs are the same (PDCP entity may transmit one packet to the primary RLC entity, and may duplicate the packet to thus transmit the same packet to the secondary RLC entity. data transmission by the secondary RLC entity may be detected as duplication in the PDCP entity of a receiver (a terminal or a base station) because the receiver has already received the data of PDCP sequence number 2, thereby discarding the duplicate data, Kim_2019: [0163], [0177]-[0178]);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kim-Park-Wang in view of Kim_2019 in order to further modify that any higher-layer packet transmitted through two MRBs sequence numbers of the higher-layer packet in the MRBs are the same from the teachings of Kim_2019.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated because the base station is able to improve a data rate, and is able to transmit control information with a low transmission delay and high reliability to the terminal by applying packet duplication transmission (Kim_2019: [0013]).
Regarding claim 14, Kim-Park-Wang-Kim_2019 teaches all the claimed limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim 3 above.
Kim further discloses:
The UE according to claim 3, wherein:
the receiver is configured to receive one or multiple fields in a System Information Block (SIB) (UE may receive the MBMS after receiving system information on the cell. The system information carries one or more system information blocks. System information on a cell is broadcast including configuration information on the MBSSFN subframe, Kim: [0004], [0051], [0086]);
Regarding claim 16, Kim-Park-Wang-Kim_2019 teaches all the claimed limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim 8 above.
Kim-Park-Wang does not explicitly disclose:
The UE according to claim 8, wherein: transmitting PDCP does not use the function of PDCP duplication.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Kim_2019 teaches:
transmitting PDCP does not use the function of PDCP duplication (If the packet duplication transmission is deactivated, the PDCP entity transmits a packet only to the primary RLC entity 705, and does not transmit a packet to the secondary RLC entity in the uplink transmission. The configuration of the activation and deactivation state of the packet duplication transmission may be determined by a MAC control element (MAC CE), Kim_2019: [0162], [0166]);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kim-Park-Wang in view of Kim_2019 in order to further modify that transmitting PDCP does not use the function of PDCP duplication from the teachings of Kim_2019.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated because the base station is able to improve a data rate, and is able to transmit control information with a low transmission delay and high reliability to the terminal by applying packet duplication transmission (Kim_2019: [0013]).
Regarding claim 17, Kim-Park-Wang-Kim_2019 teaches all the claimed limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim 12 above.
Kim-Park-Wang does not explicitly disclose:
The UE according to claim 12, wherein: transmitting PDCP does not use the function of PDCP duplication.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Kim_2019 teaches:
transmitting PDCP does not use the function of PDCP duplication (If the packet duplication transmission is deactivated, the PDCP entity transmits a packet only to the primary RLC entity 705, and does not transmit a packet to the secondary RLC entity in the uplink transmission. The configuration of the activation and deactivation state of the packet duplication transmission may be determined by a MAC control element (MAC CE), Kim_2019: [0162], [0166]);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kim-Park-Wang in view of Kim_2019 in order to further modify that transmitting PDCP does not use the function of PDCP duplication from the teachings of Kim_2019.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated because the base station is able to improve a data rate, and is able to transmit control information with a low transmission delay and high reliability to the terminal by applying packet duplication transmission (Kim_2019: [0013]).
Regarding claim 18, Kim-Park-Wang-Kim_2019 teaches all the claimed limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim 3 above.
Kim-Park-Wang does not explicitly disclose:
The UE according to claim 3, wherein: transmitting PDCP does not use the function of PDCP duplication.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Kim_2019 teaches:
transmitting PDCP does not use the function of PDCP duplication (If the packet duplication transmission is deactivated, the PDCP entity transmits a packet only to the primary RLC entity 705, and does not transmit a packet to the secondary RLC entity in the uplink transmission. The configuration of the activation and deactivation state of the packet duplication transmission may be determined by a MAC control element (MAC CE), Kim_2019: [0162], [0166]);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kim-Park-Wang in view of Kim_2019 in order to further modify that transmitting PDCP does not use the function of PDCP duplication from the teachings of Kim_2019.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated because the base station is able to improve a data rate, and is able to transmit control information with a low transmission delay and high reliability to the terminal by applying packet duplication transmission (Kim_2019: [0013]).
Claims 4-7 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim-Park-Wang-Kim_2019 in view of YI et al. (US 2019/0289489 Al, hereinafter “Yi”).
Regarding claim 4, Kim-Park-Wang-Kim_2019 teaches all the claimed limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim 3 above.
Kim-Park-Wang-Kim_2019 does not explicitly disclose:
The UE according to claim 3, wherein a non-unicast index of any of the plurality of MRBs is the (G-RNTI), where the non-unicast index comprises 16 bits.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Yi teaches:
wherein a non-unicast index of any of the plurality of MRBs is the (G-RNTI), where the non-unicast index comprises 16 bits ("G-RNTI" refers to a group RNTI, a certain PDCCH is CRC-masked with a radio network temporary identity (RNTI) and one or more UEs located in a cell monitor the PDCCH using its RNTI information. And, a specific UE with RNTI. PDCP PDU is a bit string that is byte aligned (i.e. multiple of 8 bits) in length, Yi: [0064], [0087], [0125]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kim-Park-Wang-Kim_2019 in view of Yi in order to further modify non-unicast index of any of the K sub-bearers as G-RNTI from the teachings of Yi.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated because overall throughput of a radio communication system can be improved (Yi: [0027]).
Regarding claim 5, Kim-Park-Wang-Kim_2019-Yi teaches all the claimed limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim 4 above.
Kim-Park-Wang-Yi does not explicitly disclose:
The UE according to claim 4, wherein the broadcast configuration information includes a Radio Link Control (RLC) entity configuration and a logical channel configuration for the plurality of MRBs.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Kim_2019 teaches:
wherein the broadcast configuration information includes a Radio Link Control (RLC) entity configuration and a logical channel configuration for the plurality of MRBs (RRC-connection-setup message may contain configuration information for each logical channel, configuration information for each bearer, configuration information of a PDCP entity, configuration information of an RLC entity, or configuration information of a MAC entity, Kim_2019: [0140]);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kim-Park-Wang-Yi in view of Kim_2019 in order to further modify that the broadcast configuration information includes a Radio Link Control (RLC) entity configuration and a logical channel configuration for the plurality of MRBs from the teachings of Kim_2019.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated because the base station is able to improve a data rate, and is able to transmit control information with a low transmission delay and high reliability to the terminal by applying packet duplication transmission (Kim_2019: [0013]).
Regarding claim 6, Kim-Park-Wang-Kim_2019-Yi teaches all the claimed limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim 5 above.
Kim further discloses:
The UE according to claim 5, wherein the higher-layer packet is an Internet Protocol (IP) packet (The PDCP layer provides a function of header compression function that reduces unnecessary control information such that data being transmitted by employing IP packets, such as IPv4 or IPv6, Kim: [0059]).
Regarding claim 7, Kim-Park-Wang-Kim_2019-Yi teaches all the claimed limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim 6 above.
Kim further discloses:
The UE according to claim 6, wherein the PDCP6105 also provides header compression used for an upper-layer packet to reduce radio transmission overhead (PDCP layer provides a function of header compression function that reduces unnecessary control information, Kim: [0059], [0063]).
Regarding claim 15, Kim-Park-Wang-Kim_2019-Yi teaches all the claimed limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim 7 above.
Kim-Park-Wang-Yi does not explicitly disclose:
The UE according to claim 7, wherein: transmitting PDCP does not use the function of PDCP duplication.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Kim_2019 teaches:
transmitting PDCP does not use the function of PDCP duplication (If the packet duplication transmission is deactivated, the PDCP entity transmits a packet only to the primary RLC entity 705, and does not transmit a packet to the secondary RLC entity in the uplink transmission. The configuration of the activation and deactivation state of the packet duplication transmission may be determined by a MAC control element (MAC CE), Kim_2019: [0162], [0166]);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kim-Park-Wang-Yi in view of Kim_2019 in order to further modify that transmitting PDCP does not use the function of PDCP duplication from the teachings of Kim_2019.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated because the base station is able to improve a data rate, and is able to transmit control information with a low transmission delay and high reliability to the terminal by applying packet duplication transmission (Kim_2019: [0013]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should
be directed to SANG C LEE whose telephone number is (703)756-1461. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00AM-5:00PM ET.
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, HASSAN PHILLIPS can be reached on (571)272-3940. 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.
/S.C.L./Examiner, Art Unit 2467
/Robert C Scheibel/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2467 April 17, 2026
Prosecution Insights