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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12/29/2025 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed 07/10/2025 has been entered. Claims 1, 10, 21-24 have been amended. Claims 1-7,10-18 and 21-24 are currently pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/25/2025 have been fully considered. Regarding independent claims 1, 10 and 21-24, the arguments are moot based on new grounds of rejection.
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.
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 non-obviousness.
Claims 1-3, 5, 7, 10-12, 14 and 21-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bangolae et al. (WO 2017099837 A1) hereinafter Bangolae in view of Chen et al. (US 20190320455 A1) hereinafter Chen in further view of Fischer (US 20090253422 A1) hereinafter Fischer.
Regarding claim 1,
Bangolae teaches a method for wireless communication by a remote user equipment (UE) (reachability method for a remote UE [0012] and [0042]; Figs. 3 and 8), comprising: connecting, via a sidelink, to a relay node connected to a network entity (reachability method for a remote UE connecting with a network through a relay [0012] and [0042]; Figs. 3 and 8), wherein the relay node performs layer 2 (L2) relaying between the network entity and the remote UE (performing layer 2 relaying between the network and the remote UE [0032]; Figs. 3 and 8); and receiving a paging message from the network entity forwarded by the relay node (receiving paging message from eNodeB through a relay [0012] and [0042]; Figs. 3 and 8), wherein the paging message is received while the remote UE is in an idle mode or inactive state (the paging message is received while the remote UE is in idle mode [0012], [0033] and [0042]; Figs. 3 and 8).
Bangolae does not explicitly teach a paging message that includes system information block (SIB) information; and the SIB information comprises at least one of timer or constant parameters used by the UE or unified access control (UAC) parameters.
Chen teaches a paging message that includes system information block (SIB) information (SI modification information may be carried in a paging message [0051]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Chen to the teachings of Bangolae. One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because the resources used to transmit the paging message can also be used to transmit the SIB information (Bangolae [0051]).
Bangolae and Chen do not explicitly teach the SIB information comprises at least one of timer or constant parameters used by the UE or unified access control (UAC) parameters.
Fischer teaches the SIB information comprises at least one of timer or constant parameters used by the UE or unified access control (UAC) parameters (SIB including a timer [0030]-[0031] and [0059]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Fischer to the teachings of Bangolae and Chen. One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it improves SIB information updating (Fischer [0030]).
Regarding claim 2,
Bangolae and Chen and Fischer teach all the features of claim 1, as outlined above.
Bangolae does not explicitly teach the SIB information comprises at least one of: cell access related parameters; radio resource control (RRC) connection establishment failure control parameters; cell specific parameters of a serving cell.
Chen teaches the SIB information comprises at least one of: cell access related parameters; radio resource control (RRC) connection establishment failure control parameters; cell specific parameters of a serving cell (MIB containing parameters for acquiring information from the cell [0034] and [0051]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Chen to the teachings of Bangolae. One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would enhance SI modification and acquisition (Chen [0004]-[0005]).
Regarding claim 3,
Bangolae and Chen and Fischer teach all the features of claim 1, as outlined above.
Bangolae does not explicitly teach the paging message indicates public warning system (PWS) or a common SIB update.
Chen teaches the paging message indicates public warning system (PWS) (paging with PWS indication [0105]) or a common SIB update.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Chen to the teachings of Bangolae. One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would enhance SI modification and acquisition (Chen [0004]-[0005]).
Regarding claim 5,
Bangolae and Chen and Fischer teach all the features of claim 1, as outlined above.
Bangolae does not explicitly teach the SIB information indicates a dedicated SIB update.
Chen teaches the SIB information indicates a dedicated SIB update (specific SIB update information [0034]-[0036]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Chen to the teachings of Bangolae. One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would enhance SI modification and acquisition (Chen [0004]-[0005]).
Claims 10-12 and 14 “relay node method” are rejected under the same reasoning as claims 1-3 and 5 “remote UE method”, respectively, where Bangolae teaches sending paging to the remote UE in response to receiving paging (Fig. 3) and Chen teaches the paging message containing SIB information ([0051]).
Claim 21 “remote UE apparatus” and Claim 22 “relay node apparatus” are rejected under the same reasoning as claim 1 “remote UE method”.
Claim 23 “remote UE device” is rejected under the same reasoning as claim 1 “remote UE method”, where Bangolae teaches the remote UE comprising a memory coupled with a processor ([0058]-[0065] ; Fig. 4).
Claim 24 “relay node device” is rejected under the same reasoning as claim 1 “remote UE method”, where Bangolae teaches the relay node device comprising a memory coupled with a processor ([0066]-[0072] ; Fig. 5). Bangolae further teaches sending paging to the remote UE in response to receiving paging (Fig. 3) and Chen teaches the paging message containing SIB information ([0051])).
Claims 4 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bangolae and Chen and Fischer in further view of Buckley et al. (US 20180324571 A1) hereinafter Buckley.
Regarding claim 4,
Bangolae and Chen and Fischer teach all the features of claim 3, as outlined above.
Bangolae and Chen do not explicitly teach the remote UE receives the SIB information via at least one of groupcast or broadcast signaling to one or more UEs associated with the relay node, including the remote UE.
Buckley teaches the remote UE receives the SIB information via at least one of groupcast or broadcast signaling to one or more UEs associated with the relay node, including the remote UE (SIB information received through broadcast message intended for UEs including the relay UE [0129]; Figs 3 and 4).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Buckley to the teachings of Bangolae and Chen and Fischer. One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would allow rebroadcasting of PWS information through relay (Buckley [0126]-[0128]).
Claim 13 “relay node method” is rejected under the same reasoning as claim 4 “remote UE method”, where Bangolae teaches sending paging to the remote UE in response to receiving paging (Fig. 3) and Chen teaches the paging message containing SIB information ([0051])).
Claims 6 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bangolae and Chen in further view of Wang et al. (US 20220338283) hereinafter Wang.
Regarding claim 6,
Bangolae and Chen and Fischer teach all the features of claim 5, as outlined above.
Bangolae and Chen and Fischer do not explicitly teach the remote UE receives the SIB information via a dedicated sidelink radio resource control (RRC) message.
Wang teaches the remote UE receives the SIB information via a dedicated sidelink radio resource control (RRC) message (SIB received through a PC5-RRC message [0029]-[0034]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Wang to the teachings of Bangolae and Chen and Fischer. One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would expand on-demand SI acquisition (Wang [0003]-[0004]).
Claim 15 “relay node method” is rejected under the same reasoning as claim 6 “remote UE method”, where Bangolae teaches sending paging to the remote UE in response to receiving paging (Fig. 3) and Chen teaches the paging message containing SIB information ([0051]).
Claims 7 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bangolae and Chen in further view of Sheng (US 20180092027) hereinafter Sheng.
Regarding claim 7,
Bangolae and Chen and Fischer teach all the features of claim 1, as outlined above.
Bangolae and Chen and Fischer do not explicitly teach sending, to the relay node, a request for the SIB information; and obtaining the SIB information from the relay node in response to the request.
Sheng teaches sending, to the relay node, a request for the SIB information (remote UE sending system information request message to relay node [0269]-[0280]; Figs. 5-2 and 5-3); and obtaining the SIB information from the relay node in response to the request (relay node responding with the system information [0269]-[0280]; Figs. 5-2 and 5-3).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Sheng to the teachings of Bangolae and Chen and Fischer. One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would enhance power efficiency (Sheng [0005]-[0011]).
Claim 16 “relay node method” is rejected under the same reasoning as claim 7 “remote UE method”, where Bangolae teaches sending paging to the remote UE in response to receiving paging (Fig. 3) and Chen teaches the paging message containing SIB information ([0051])).
Claims 17 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bangolae and Chen and Sheng in further view of Wang.
Regarding claim 17,
Bangolae and Chen and Fischer and Sheng teach all the features of claim 16, as outlined above.
Bangolae and Chen and Sheng do not explicitly teach the SIB information is obtained from the network entity via an on-demand SIB acquisition procedure.
Wang teaches the SIB information is obtained from the network entity via an on-demand SIB acquisition procedure (particular SIB retrieved as a result of a request [0029]-[0034]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Wang to the teachings of Bangolae and Chen and Fischer and Sheng. One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would expand on-demand SI acquisition (Wang [0003]-[0004]).
Regarding claim 18,
Bangolae and Chen and Fischer and Sheng and Wang teach all the features of claim 17, as outlined above.
Bangolae and Chen and Sheng do not explicitly teach the on-demand SIB acquisition procedure involves one or more random access channel (RACH) messages.
Wang teaches the on-demand SIB acquisition procedure involves one or more random access channel (RACH) messages (on demand SI request through a RACH procedure [0029]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Wang to the teachings of Bangolae and Chen and Sheng. One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would expand on-demand SI acquisition (Wang [0003]-[0004]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABDUL AZIZ SANTARISI whose telephone number is (703)756-4586. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 AM - 5:00 PM 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, Ayman Abaza can be reached on (571)270-0422. 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.
/ABDUL AZIZ SANTARISI/Examiner, Art Unit 2465
/John Pezzlo/
Primary Examiner
AU 2465B
3 March 2026