DETAILED ACTION The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. This is in response to the correspondence filed on 02/13/23. Claims 45-64 are still pending and have been considered below. Claim Objections Claims 59 and 63 are objected to because of the following informalities: the instant claims recite various acronyms without first providing a corresponding meaning in plain English. Appropriate correction is required. Claim 61 is objected to because of the following informalities: the instant claim should be amended to recite, “…the device comprising : [ [ ” ]]…” . Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.— The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 45-64 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claims 45, 52, 56, 58, 61 and 64 recite the limitation "the DU" throughout the claims. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims. Examiner notes that the preceding claim language appears to establish at least two separate and distinct instances of a “DU” (see lines 1 and 4 of Claim 45; lines 1 and 7 of Claim 61; and lines 3 and 6 of Claim 64); thus, render the claims indefinite in that it is unclear as to which one the limitation in question should be in reference to. Claim 59 recites the limitation "the relay UE" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Examiner further notes that the instant claim also recites various acronyms that have no corresponding meaning established in the claim language itself, which further renders the claim indefinite. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 45, 46, 48, 49, 51 -54 and 56-64 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Sirotkin et al. (2019/0223078) . Claim 45: Sirotkin et al. discloses a method of protecting integrity of a header of a data unit, DU, at an adaptation layer for a relayed radio communication between a remote radio device and a radio access network, RAN, or a further radio device through a relay radio device, the method comprising or initiating: obtaining, at a transmitter, TX, a DU from a transparent layer, wherein the relayed radio communication uses a protocol stack comprising the adaptation layer below the transparent layer that is relayed transparently at the relay radio device ( reception of the same packet and/or similar packet) [page 9, paragraph 0085] ; protecting, at the adaptation layer of the TX, the integrity of the header of the DU by including a token in the header of the DU at the adaptation layer, the token comprising a local temporary identifier, ID, of the remote radio device, wherein the integrity-protected header is attached to the DU obtained from the transparent layer ( the gNB -CU may generate PDCP header based on the packet, where as part of the functionality of the PDCP layer, perform integrity protection for the data packet… the gNB -CU may generate an adaptation layer header may indicate one or more relays included in the route and may include information related to the one or more relays and/or may encode the header to include a sequence of relay identifiers) [page 9, paragraphs 0090-009 2 ] ; and transmitting, from the TX, the DU comprising the integrity-protected header to a receiver, RX ( the gNB -CU may transfer the data packet, the PDCP header and the adaptation layer header) [page 9, paragraph 0093] . Claim 46: Sirotkin et al. discloses the method of claim 45, wherein at least one of the integrity-protection, the integrity-protected header, and the token has a limited validity [page 11, paragraph 0120 | page 12, paragraph 0129 | page 13, paragraphs 0130 & 0143] and/or is valid for at least one of: a predefined time period; a predefined number of integrity protected headers of DUs at the adaptation layer; and a predefined number of transmissions of one or more DUs. Claim 48: Sirotkin et al. discloses the method of claim 45, wherein the integrity protecting is configured by one of: a central unit of the relayed radio communication; the RAN; and the further radio device [page 9, paragraphs 0084 & 0090] . Claim 49: Sirotkin et al. discloses the method of claim 45, wherein the token is configured by one of: the RAN; a coordinator radio device, which is a radio device node operating a coordinator in a proximity; and an application server [page 2, paragraphs 0019-0022 | page 9, paragraphs 0084] . Claim 51: Sirotkin et al. discloses the method of claim 45, wherein the transparent layer comprises a packet data convergence protocol, PDCP, layer [page 9, paragraph 0090] . Claim 52: Sirotkin et al. discloses the method of claim 45, wherein the DU comprises a packet data unit, PDU [page 9, paragraph 0089] . Claim 53: Sirotkin et al. discloses the method of claim 45, further comprising or initiating transmitting, from the TX to the RX, a configuration message indicative of at least one of: a configuration of the protecting and/or one or more parameters of the protecting and/or the token of the protecting; and/or that the adaptation layer of the TX is capable of performing the protecting [page 9, paragraph 0093] . Claim 54: Sirotkin et al. discloses the method of claim 45, further comprising or initiating, at the adaptation layer, generating the token based on at least one of: a key; an identity of the TX; an identity of the RX; an identifier of a radio bearer; and one or more parameters of the protecting [page 9, paragraphs 0090-0091] . Claim 56: Sirotkin et al. discloses the method of claim 45, wherein the token comprises at least one of: a sequence number of the DU at the adaptation layer; a radio bearer, RB, identity; a direction of transmission of the DU; and an integrity protection key; and/or wherein one or more parameters of the protecting comprises at least one of: the sequence number of the DU at the adaptation layer; the radio bearer, RB, identity; the temporary local identifier, ID, of the remote radio device; the direction of transmission of the DU; and the integrity protection key [page 9, paragraphs 0090-0092] . Claim 57: Sirotkin et al. discloses the method of claim 45, further comprising or initiating cyphering at least one of the header and the integrity-protected header [page 9, paragraphs 0090-0092] . Claim 58: Sirotkin et al. discloses the method of claim 45, further comprising or initiating receiving, at the TX from the RX, a configuration message, wherein the configuration message is indicative of at least one of: a configuration of the protecting and/or one or more parameters of the protecting and/or a token of the protecting; and/or that an adaptation layer of the RX is capable of validating at least one of the token, the header and the DU [page 9, paragraph 0093] . Claim 59: Sirotkin et al. discloses the method of claim 45, wherein one or more parameters of the protecting are configured by the RAN via Uu RRC, wherein the Uu RRC is signaled via the relay UE [page 9, paragraphs 0084 & 0090] . Claim 60: Sirotkin et al. discloses the method of claim 45, performed by the remote radio device as the TX [page 2, paragraphs 0019-0022 | page 9, paragraphs 0084] . Claim 61: Sirotkin et al. discloses a device for protecting integrity of a header of a data unit, DU, at an adaptation layer for a relayed radio communication between a remote radio device and a radio access network, RAN, or a further radio device through a relay radio device, the device comprising” memory configured to store instructions [page 4, paragraph 0043] ; and processing circuitry configured to execute the instructions, whereby the device is operative to: obtain, at a transmitter, TX, a DU from a transparent layer, wherein the relayed radio communication uses a protocol stack comprising the adaptation layer below the transparent layer that is relayed transparently at the relay radio device [page 9, paragraph 0085] ; protect, at the adaptation layer of the TX, the integrity of the header of the DU, wherein the integrity-protected header is attached to the DU obtained from the transparent layer [page 9, paragraphs 0090-0092] ; and transmit, from the TX, the DU comprising the integrity-protected header to a receiver, RX [page 9, paragraph 0093] . Claim 62: Sirotkin et al. discloses the device of claim 61, wherein the device is a base station configured to communicate with a user equipment, UE [page 2, paragraphs 0019-0022 | page 9, paragraphs 0084] . Claim 63: Sirotkin et al. discloses the device of claim 61, wherein the device is a UE configured to communicate with a base station or a radio device functioning as a gateway [page 2, paragraphs 0019-0022 | page 9, paragraphs 0084] . Claim 64: Sirotkin et al. discloses a non-transitory computer readable medium having instructions stored thereon that, when executed by processing circuitry of a device configured to protect the integrity of a header of a data unit, DU, at an adaptation layer for a relayed radio communication between a remote radio device and a radio access network, RAN, or a further radio device through a relay radio device, causes the device to: obtain, at a transmitter, TX, a DU from a transparent layer, wherein the relayed radio communication uses a protocol stack comprising the adaptation layer below the transparent layer that is relayed transparently at the relay radio device [page 9, paragraph 0085] ; protect, at the adaptation layer of the TX, the integrity of the header of the DU, wherein the integrity-protected header is attached to the DU obtained from the transparent layer [page 9, paragraphs 0090-0092] ; and transmit, from the TX, the DU comprising the integrity-protected header to a receiver, RX [page 9, paragraph 0093] . Allowable Subject Matter Claims 47, 50 and 55 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims . Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Damnjanovic et al. (2021/0084697). Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT EDWARD ZEE whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)270-1686 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT Monday-Friday 9AM-5PM EST . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Joseph Hirl can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-3685 . 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. /EDWARD ZEE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2435