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
2. This is a Final Office action in response to applicant’s remarks and arguments filed on 03/24/2026.
3. Status of the claims:
• Claims 16, 25, 27, 31, and 33 have been amended.
• Claim 38 has been added.
Claim 24 has been canceled.
• Claims 16, 18-23, 25-33, 35-38 are currently pending and have been examined.
Response to remarks/arguments
4. Applicant’s remarks and arguments filed on 03/24/2026 with respect to amended independent claims 16, 27, 33 have been fully considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection. Upon further search and consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Martin et al. (US 20190288770 A1).
5. In response to Applicant’s remarks and arguments filed on 03/04/2026 regarding amended independent claim 1, the Examiner acknowledges that the combination of cited references does not explicitly teach the newly recited features as argued by Applicant. However, the system of Martin et al. (US 20190288770 A1) cures this deficiency.
Please see the rejection below.
Claim Objections
Claim 33 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 33 is directed to “a relay user equipment (“UE”) and should be amended to read, “at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory, the processor configured to cause the relay UE to”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
6. 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.
7. 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.
8. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
9. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
10. Claims 16, 18-23, 25-33, 35-38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zisimopoulos et al. (US 20160286471 A1), CAO et al. (US 2020/0322100 A1) and further in view of Martin et al. (US 20190288770 A1).
Regarding claim 16, Zisimopoulos discloses a User Equipment (“UE”) (FIG. 2) comprising: at least one memory (Fig. 9: Memory 920); and at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory (Fig. 9: Processor 910 coupled to memory 920), and processor is configured to cause the UE to: receive a relay advertisement from a sidelink (“SL”) Relay UE supporting operation (Zisimopoulos, Fig. 2, S225, para. 9, 55: Step 225 Relay Offer Message. Receiving at least one ProSe discovery message from each of a plurality of ProSe relay candidates providing access to a network), wherein the relay advertisement contains at least one relay attribute (Zisimopoulos, para. 10, 53, 55: evaluating the received ProSe discovery messages with respect to the relay selection rule may include evaluating the relay offer message with respect to the relay selection rule); determine that relay via the SL Relay UE is needed based on the at least one relay attribute (Zisimopoulos, Fig. 2, S250, para. 57: the UE 115-b may engage in communications with the network via relay communications 250 with the ProSe relay candidate 135-b and backhaul communications 255 between the ProSe relay candidate 135-b and the base station 105-b); transmit a relay connection request to the SL Relay UE (Zisimopoulos, Fig. 2, S245, para. 57: step 245 Relay Connection Request. At 245, the UE may transmit a relay connection request to the ProSe relay candidate 135-b); receive a relay connection confirmation from the SL Relay UE (Zisimopoulos, para. 57: Upon acceptance of the relay connection request by the ProSe relay candidate 135-b, the UE 115-b may engage in communications with the network via relay communications 250 with the ProSe relay candidate 135-b).
Zisimopoulos does not appear to explicitly disclose wherein the at least one relay attribute comprises one or more of: a Hybrid Automatic Repeat Request (“HARQ”) feedback support, a support for blind retransmissions, or a combination thereof.
In the same field of endeavor, CAO discloses wherein the at least one relay attribute comprises one or more of: a Hybrid Automatic Repeat Request (“HARQ”) feedback support, a support for blind retransmissions, or a combination thereof (CAO, para. 57, 140, 147: which define blind retransmission in the context of sidelink (SL) communication).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Zisimopoulos with the teaching of CAO by using the above features such as the relay attribute comprises a Hybrid Automatic Repeat Request (“HARQ”) feedback support as taught by CAO. The motivation for doing so would have been to improve the reliability of the sidelink (SL) transmission (CAO, para. [0057]).
Zisimopoulos and CAO do not appear to explicitly discloses perform SL communication with a remote receiver device via the SL Relay UE by transmitting, via the SL Relay UE, a last data packet that was unsuccessfully transmitted to the remote receiver device.
In the same of endeavor, Martin teaches perform SL communication with a remote receiver device via the SL Relay UE by transmitting, via the SL Relay UE, a last data packet that was unsuccessfully transmitted to the remote receiver device (Martin, para. [0095], FIG. 11, FIG 13A, [0102], step 1305: FIG. 13A shows a flow diagram illustrating a method of further communications between a single buffer relay device, a remote UE, and an eNodeB and a relay node including a relay to remote UE transmission failure in accordance with embodiments of the present disclosure. The method then comprises, in step S1305, re-transmitting the PDUs that have not been successfully received from the buffer to the receiving UE).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Zisimopoulos with the teaching of Martin by using the above features such as perform SL communication with a remote receiver device via the SL Relay UE by transmitting, via the SL Relay UE, a last data packet that was unsuccessfully transmitted to the remote receiver device as taught by CAO. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide communications devices acting as relay devices and methods of operating communications devices acting as relay devices which are operable to optimize user-plane relaying operation (Martin, [0002]).
Regarding claim 18, Zisimopoulos, CAO, and Martin disclose the UE of claim 16, wherein the at least one relay attribute comprises one or more of: a support for distance based SL HARQ feedback based communication, a Cell identity of a serving cell (Zisimopoulos, para. 10, 64: the MBMS relay information message may include at least a E-UTRAN cell identity (ECI)), a range of supported PC5 Quality of service (“QoS”) identifiers (“PQIs”), supported cast types, supported service types, a Minimum Communication Range (“MCR”) support capability, a location availability, or a combination thereof.
Regarding claim 19, Zisimopoulos, CAO, and Martin disclose the UE of claim 16, wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to determine that relay via the SL Relay UE is needed based on one or more of: a radio condition of an interface between the UE and the SL Relay UE, a radio condition between the SL Relay UE and the remote receiver device, a geographical distance between the UE and the SL Relay UE, or a combination thereof (Zisimopoulos, para. 11, 50, 61: Communications between UEs 115 and ProSe relay candidates 135 may be made using a Device-to-Device (D2D) communication protocol, such as a PC5 communication protocol. LTE/LTE-A communications between ProSe relay candidates 135 and base stations 105 may be made over Universal Mobile Telecommunication System (UMTS) air interfaces, also known as Uu interfaces).
Regarding claim 20, Zisimopoulos, CAO, and Martin disclose the UE of claim 16, wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to search for a candidate SL Relay UE in response to reaching a predetermined number of unsuccessful attempts to communicate directly with the remote receiver device or in response to the UE determining that a conditions of a direct link to the remote receiver device are unsatisfactory (Zisimopoulos, para. 60: The relay status information 345 may include status or maintenance flags indicating, for example, whether the ProSe relay candidate is temporarily without connectivity or has low battery power. The relay status information 345 may enable a UE considering the ProSe relay candidate to pass on the ProSe relay candidate or seek/reselect another ProSe relay candidate. The indicator of service continuity support 350 may indicate whether the ProSe relay candidate is capable of providing service continuity).
Regarding claim 21, Zisimopoulos, CAO, and Martin disclose the UE of claim 16, wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to search for a candidate SL Relay UE during groupcast SL communication in response to the UE determining that a threshold number of HARQ feedback acknowledgements are not received (Zisimopoulos, para. 44, 63: The MAC layer may also use Hybrid ARQ (HARD) to provide retransmission (i.e., a number of HARQ transmissions not received) at the MAC layer to improve link efficiency. Moreover, paragraph 63 discloses the discovery type 420 may indicate whether a ProSe discovery message is a UE-to-network relay discovery message or a group member discovery message).
Regarding claim 22, Zisimopoulos, CAO, and Martin disclose the UE of claim 16, wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to search for a candidate SL Relay UE in response to not having access to the location of the UE or in response to reaching a predetermined battery state (Zisimopoulos, para. 60: The relay status information 345 may include status or maintenance flags indicating, for example, whether the ProSe relay candidate is temporarily without connectivity or has low battery power. The relay status information 345 may enable a UE considering the ProSe relay candidate to pass on the ProSe relay candidate or seek/reselect another ProSe relay candidate).
Regarding claim 23, Zisimopoulos, CAO, and Martin disclose the UE of claim 16, wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to:
detect a trigger to search for a candidate SL Relay UE while a first transmission to the remote receiver device is ongoing, and terminate the first transmission in response to detecting the trigger (Zisimopoulos, para. 60: The relay status information 345 may enable a UE considering the ProSe relay candidate to pass on the ProSe relay candidate or seek/reselect another ProSe relay candidate. The indicator of service continuity support 350 may indicate whether the ProSe relay candidate is capable of providing service continuity).
Regarding claim 24, Zisimopoulos, CAO, and Martin disclose the UE of claim 23, wherein to perform SL communication with the remote receiver device via the SL Relay UE, the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to transmit a last data packet that was unsuccessfully transmitted to the remote receiver device (Zisimopoulos, para. 44: The MAC layer may also use Hybrid ARQ (HARD) to provide retransmission at the MAC layer to improve link efficiency).
Regarding claim 25, Zisimopoulos, CAO, and Martin disclose the UE of claim 16, wherein the processor is configured to cause the UE to: transmit transmissions directly to the remote receiver device while performing the SL communication with the remote receiver device via the SL Relay UE (Zisimopoulos, para. 68: The transmitter module 530 or RF transmitter may be used to transmit various types of data or control signals (i.e., transmissions) over one or more communication links of a wireless communication system, such as one or more communication links of the wireless communication system 100 described with reference to FIG. 1. In some examples, the transmissions may include D2D communications and/or LTE/LTE-A communications), and determine to stop performing the SL communication with the remote receiver device via the SL Relay UE in response to reaching a threshold number of successful attempts to communicate directly with the remote receiver device (Zisimopoulos, para. 83: the threshold condition evaluation module 650 may be used to determine whether a radio validity condition of the relay selection rule, if present, is satisfied. When it is determined that the radio validity condition is satisfied, the evaluation of ProSe discovery messages corresponding to a ProSe relay candidate may pass to the upper layer condition evaluation module).
Regarding claim 26, Zisimopoulos, CAO, and Martin disclose the UE of claim 16, wherein the processor is configured to cause the UE to: measure a radio quality of a direct link to the remote receiver device while performing the SL communication with the remote receiver device via the SL Relay UE (Zisimopoulos, para. 83, 129: the UE may measure a relay-to-UE RSRP (e.g., a ProSe relay candidate-to-UE RSRP. The operation(s) at block 1215 may be performed using the wireless communication management module 520 described with reference to FIG. 5, 6, or 9, or the measurement management module 635 described with reference to FIG. 6), and determine to stop performing the SL communication with the remote receiver device via the SL Relay UE in response to the radio quality of the direct link to the remote receiver device exceeding a threshold value (Zisimopoulos, para. 83: the threshold condition evaluation module 650 may be used to determine whether a radio validity condition of the relay selection rule, if present, is satisfied. When it is determined that the radio validity condition is satisfied, the evaluation of ProSe discovery messages corresponding to a ProSe relay candidate may pass to the upper layer condition evaluation module).
Regarding claim 27, Zisimopoulos discloses a method performed by a User Equipment (“UE”) (FIG. 2), the method comprising: receiving a relay advertisement from a sidelink (“SL”) Relay UE supporting SL operation (Zisimopoulos, Fig. 2, S225, para. 9, 55: Step 225 Relay Offer Message. Receiving at least one ProSe discovery message from each of a plurality of ProSe relay candidates providing access to a network), wherein the relay advertisement contains at least one relay attribute (Zisimopoulos, para. 10, 53, 55: evaluating the received ProSe discovery messages with respect to the relay selection rule may include evaluating the relay offer message with respect to the relay selection rule); determining that relay via the SL Relay UE is needed based on the at least one relay attribute (Zisimopoulos, Fig. 2, S250, para. 57: the UE 115-b may engage in communications with the network via relay communications 250 with the ProSe relay candidate 135-b and backhaul communications 255 between the ProSe relay candidate 135-b and the base station 105-b); transmitting a relay connection request to the SL Relay UE (Zisimopoulos, Fig. 2, S245, para. 57: step 245 Relay Connection Request. At 245, the UE may transmit a relay connection request to the ProSe relay candidate 135-b); receiving a relay connection confirmation from the SL Relay UE (Zisimopoulos, para. 57: Upon acceptance of the relay connection request by the ProSe relay candidate 135-b, the UE 115-b may engage in communications with the network via relay communications 250 with the ProSe relay candidate 135-b).
Zisimopoulos does not appear to explicitly disclose wherein the at least one relay attribute comprises one or more of: a Hybrid Automatic Repeat Request (“HARQ”) feedback support, a support for blind retransmissions.
In the same field of endeavor, CAO discloses wherein the at least one relay attribute comprises one or more of: a Hybrid Automatic Repeat Request (“HARQ”) feedback support, a support for blind retransmissions (CAO, para. 57, 140, 147: which define blind retransmission in the context of sidelink (SL) communication).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Zisimopoulos with the teaching of CAO by using the above features such as the relay attribute comprises a Hybrid Automatic Repeat Request (“HARQ”) feedback support as taught by CAO. The motivation for doing so would have been to improve the reliability of the sidelink (SL) transmission (CAO, para. [0057]).
Zisimopoulos and CAO do not appear to explicitly discloses performing SL communication with a remote receiver device via the SL Relay UE by transmitting, via the SL Relay UE, a last data packet that was unsuccessfully transmitted to the remote receiver device.
In the same of endeavor, Martin teaches perform SL communication with a remote receiver device via the SL Relay UE by transmitting, via the SL Relay UE, a last data packet that was unsuccessfully transmitted to the remote receiver device (Martin, para. [0095], FIG. 11, FIG 13A, [0102], step 1305: FIG. 13A shows a flow diagram illustrating a method of further communications between a single buffer relay device, a remote UE, and an eNodeB and a relay node including a relay to remote UE transmission failure in accordance with embodiments of the present disclosure. The method then comprises, in step S1305, re-transmitting the PDUs that have not been successfully received from the buffer to the receiving UE).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Zisimopoulos with the teaching of Martin by using the above features such as perform SL communication with a remote receiver device via the SL Relay UE by transmitting, via the SL Relay UE, a last data packet that was unsuccessfully transmitted to the remote receiver device as taught by CAO. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide communications devices acting as relay devices and methods of operating communications devices acting as relay devices which are operable to optimize user-plane relaying operation (Martin, [0002]).
Regarding claim 28, Zisimopoulos, CAO, and Martin disclose the method of claim 27, further comprising searching for a candidate SL Relay UE during groupcast SL communication in response to determining that a threshold number of HARQ feedback acknowledgements are not received (Zisimopoulos, para. 44, 63: The MAC layer may also use Hybrid ARQ (HARD) to provide retransmission (i.e., a number of HARQ transmissions not received) at the MAC layer to improve link efficiency. Moreover, paragraph 63 discloses the discovery type 420 may indicate whether a ProSe discovery message is a UE-to-network relay discovery message or a group member discovery message).
Regarding claim 29, Zisimopoulos, CAO, and Martin disclose the method of claim 27, further comprising searching for a candidate SL Relay UE in response to not having access to the location of the UE or in response to reaching a predetermined battery state (Zisimopoulos, para. 60: The relay status information 345 may include status or maintenance flags indicating, for example, whether the ProSe relay candidate is temporarily without connectivity or has low battery power. The relay status information 345 may enable a UE considering the ProSe relay candidate to pass on the ProSe relay candidate or seek/reselect another ProSe relay candidate).
Regarding claim 30, Zisimopoulos, CAO, and Martin disclose the method of claim 27, further comprising: detecting a trigger to search for a candidate SL Relay UE while a first transmission to the remote receiver device is ongoing, and terminating the first transmission in response to detecting the trigger (Zisimopoulos, para. 60: The relay status information 345 may enable a UE considering the ProSe relay candidate to pass on the ProSe relay candidate or seek/reselect another ProSe relay candidate. The indicator of service continuity support 350 may indicate whether the ProSe relay candidate is capable of providing service continuity), wherein performing SL communication with the remote receiver device via the SL Relay UE comprises transmitting a last data packet that was unsuccessfully transmitted to the remote receiver device (Zisimopoulos, para. 44: The MAC layer may also use Hybrid ARQ (HARD) to provide retransmission at the MAC layer to improve link efficiency).
Regarding claim 31, Zisimopoulos, CAO, and Martin disclose the method of claim 27, further comprising: transmitting transmissions directly to the remote receiver device while performing SL communication with the remote receiver device via the SL Relay UE (Zisimopoulos, para. 68: The transmitter module 530 or RF transmitter may be used to transmit various types of data or control signals (i.e., transmissions) over one or more communication links of a wireless communication system, such as one or more communication links of the wireless communication system 100 described with reference to FIG. 1. In some examples, the transmissions may include D2D communications and/or LTE/LTE-A communications); and determining to stop performing SL communication with the remote receiver device via the SL Relay UE in response to reaching a threshold number of successful attempts to communicate directly with the remote receiver device (Zisimopoulos, para. 83: the threshold condition evaluation module 650 may be used to determine whether a radio validity condition of the relay selection rule, if present, is satisfied. When it is determined that the radio validity condition is satisfied, the evaluation of ProSe discovery messages corresponding to a ProSe relay candidate may pass to the upper layer condition evaluation module).
Regarding claim 32, Zisimopoulos, CAO, and Martin disclose the method of claim 27, further comprising: measuring a radio quality of a direct link to the remote receiver device while performing SL communication with the remote receiver device via the SL Relay UE (Zisimopoulos, para. 83, 129: the UE may measure a relay-to-UE RSRP (e.g., a ProSe relay candidate-to-UE RSRP. The operation(s) at block 1215 may be performed using the wireless communication management module 520 described with reference to FIG. 5, 6, or 9, or the measurement management module 635 described with reference to FIG. 6), and determining to stop performing SL communication with a remote receiver device via the SL Relay UE in response to the radio quality of the direct link to the remote receiver device exceeding a threshold value (Zisimopoulos, para. 83: the threshold condition evaluation module 650 may be used to determine whether a radio validity condition of the relay selection rule, if present, is satisfied. When it is determined that the radio validity condition is satisfied, the evaluation of ProSe discovery messages corresponding to a ProSe relay candidate may pass to the upper layer condition evaluation module).
Regarding claim 33, Zisimopoulos discloses a relay User Equipment (“UE”) comprising: at least one memory (Fig. 9: Memory 920); and at least one processor coupled to the memory (Fig. 9: Processor 910 coupled to memory 920), the processor configured to cause the UE to: transmit a relay advertisement supporting sidelink (“SL”) operation (Zisimopoulos, Fig. 2, S225, para. 9, 55: Step 225 Relay Offer Message. Receiving at least one ProSe discovery message from each of a plurality of ProSe relay candidates providing access to a network), wherein the relay advertisement contains at least one relay attribute for selecting a SL relay (Zisimopoulos, para. 10, 53, 55: evaluating the received ProSe discovery messages with respect to the relay selection rule may include evaluating the relay offer message with respect to the relay selection rule); receive a relay connection request from a remote transmitter device (Zisimopoulos, Fig. 2, S245, para. 57: step 245 Relay Connection Request. At 245, the UE may transmit a relay connection request to the ProSe relay candidate 135-b); transmit a relay connection confirmation to the remote transmitter device (Zisimopoulos, para. 57: Upon acceptance of the relay connection request by the ProSe relay candidate 135-b, the UE 115-b may engage in communications with the network via relay communications 250 with the ProSe relay candidate 135-b); and relay SL communication between the remote transmitter device and a remote receiver device (Zisimopoulos, Fig. 2, S250, para. 57: Upon acceptance of the relay connection request by the ProSe relay candidate 135-b, the UE 115-b may engage in communications with the network via relay communications 250 with the ProSe relay candidate 135-b and backhaul communications 255 between the ProSe relay candidate 135-b and the base station 105-b).
Zisimopoulos does not appear to explicitly disclose wherein the at least one relay attribute comprises one or more of: a Hybrid Automatic Repeat Request (“HARQ”) feedback support, a support for blind retransmissions.
In the same field of endeavor, CAO discloses wherein the at least one relay attribute comprises one or more of: a Hybrid Automatic Repeat Request (“HARQ”) feedback support, a support for blind retransmissions (CAO, para. 57, 140, 147: which define blind retransmission in the context of sidelink (SL) communication).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Zisimopoulos with the teaching of CAO by using the above features such as the relay attribute comprises a Hybrid Automatic Repeat Request (“HARQ”) feedback support as taught by CAO. The motivation for doing so would have been to improve the reliability of the sidelink (SL) transmission (CAO, para. [0057]).
Zisimopoulos and CAO do not appear to explicitly discloses performing SL communication with a remote receiver device via the SL Relay UE by relaying a last data packet that was unsuccessfully transmitted from the remote transmitter device to the remote receiver device.
In the same of endeavor, Martin teaches relay SL communication between the remote transmitter device a remote receiver device by relaying a last data packet that was unsuccessfully transmitted from the remote transmitter device to the remote receiver device (Martin, para. [0095], FIG. 11, FIG 13A, [0102], step 1305: FIG. 13A shows a flow diagram illustrating a method of further communications between a single buffer relay device, a remote UE, and an eNodeB and a relay node including a relay to remote UE transmission failure in accordance with embodiments of the present disclosure. The method then comprises, in step S1305, re-transmitting the PDUs that have not been successfully received from the buffer to the receiving UE).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Zisimopoulos with the teaching of Martin by using the above features such as relay SL communication between the remote transmitter device a remote receiver device by relaying a last data packet that was unsuccessfully transmitted from the remote transmitter device to the remote receiver device as taught by CAO. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide communications devices acting as relay devices and methods of operating communications devices acting as relay devices which are operable to optimize user-plane relaying operation (Martin, [0002]).
Regarding claim 35, Zisimopoulos, CAO, and Martin disclose the relay UE of claim 33, wherein the at least one relay attribute comprises one or more of: a support for distance based SL HARQ feedback based communication, a Cell identity of a serving cell (Zisimopoulos, para. 10, 64: the MBMS relay information message may include at least a E-UTRAN cell identity (ECI)), a range of supported PC5 Quality of service (“QoS”) identifiers (“PQIs”), supported cast types, supported service types, a Minimum Communication Range (“MCR”) support capability, a location availability, or a combination thereof.
Regarding claim 36, Zisimopoulos, CAO, and Martin disclose the UE of claim 23, wherein the remote receiver device comprises a remote receiver UE (Zisimopoulos, Fig. 5, para. 65, 89, 91: the remote receiver device includes a remote receiver UE).
Regarding claim 37, Zisimopoulos, CAO, and Martin disclose the method of claim 30, wherein the remote receiver device comprises a remote receiver UE (Zisimopoulos, Fig. 5, para. 65, 89, 91: the remote receiver device includes a remote receiver UE).
Regarding claim 38, Zisimopoulos discloses a method performed by a relay User Equipment ("UE") (FIG. 2), the method comprising:
transmitting a relay advertisement supporting sidelink ("SL") operation (Zisimopoulos, Fig. 2, S225, para. 9, 55: Step 225 Relay Offer Message. Receiving at least one ProSe discovery message from each of a plurality of ProSe relay candidates providing access to a network), wherein the relay advertisement contains at least one relay attribute for selecting a SL relay (Zisimopoulos, para. 10, 53, 55: evaluating the received ProSe discovery messages with respect to the relay selection rule may include evaluating the relay offer message with respect to the relay selection rule); receiving a relay connection request from a remote transmitter device (Zisimopoulos, para. 57: Upon acceptance of the relay connection request by the ProSe relay candidate 135-b, the UE 115-b may engage in communications with the network via relay communications 250 with the ProSe relay candidate 135-b); transmitting a relay connection confirmation to the remote transmitter device (Zisimopoulos, Fig. 2, S245, para. 57: step 245 Relay Connection Request. At 245, the UE may transmit a relay connection request to the ProSe relay candidate 135-b).
Zisimopoulos does not appear to explicitly disclose wherein the at least one relay attribute comprises one or more of: a Hybrid Automatic Repeat Request ("HARQ") Feedback support, a support for Blind Retransmissions, or a combination thereof.
In the same field of endeavor, CAO discloses wherein the at least one relay attribute comprises one or more of: a Hybrid Automatic Repeat Request ("HARQ") Feedback support, a support for Blind Retransmissions, or a combination thereof (CAO, para. 57, 140, 147: which define blind retransmission in the context of sidelink (SL) communication).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Zisimopoulos with the teaching of CAO by using the above features such as the relay attribute comprises a Hybrid Automatic Repeat Request (“HARQ”) feedback support as taught by CAO. The motivation for doing so would have been to improve the reliability of the sidelink (SL) transmission (CAO, para. [0057]).
Zisimopoulos and CAO do not appear to explicitly discloses relaying SL communication between the remote transmitter device and a remote receiver device by relaying a last data packet that was unsuccessfully transmitted from the remote transmitter device to the remote receiver device.
In the same of endeavor, Martin teaches relaying SL communication between the remote transmitter device and a remote receiver device by relaying a last data packet that was unsuccessfully transmitted from the remote transmitter device to the remote receiver device (Martin, para. [0095], FIG. 11, FIG 13A, [0102], step 1305: FIG. 13A shows a flow diagram illustrating a method of further communications between a single buffer relay device, a remote UE, and an eNodeB and a relay node including a relay to remote UE transmission failure in accordance with embodiments of the present disclosure. The method then comprises, in step S1305, re-transmitting the PDUs that have not been successfully received from the buffer to the receiving UE).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Zisimopoulos with the teaching of Martin by using the above features such as relay SL communication between the remote transmitter device a remote receiver device by relaying a last data packet that was unsuccessfully transmitted from the remote transmitter device to the remote receiver device as taught by CAO. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide communications devices acting as relay devices and methods of operating communications devices acting as relay devices which are operable to optimize user-plane relaying operation (Martin, [0002]).
Conclusion
11. 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.
12. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEAN F VOLTAIRE whose telephone number is (571)272-3953. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-6:30 PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, REBECCA E. SONG can be reached at (571)270-3667. 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.
/JEAN F VOLTAIRE/Examiner, Art Unit 2417
/REBECCA E SONG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2417
Prosecution Insights