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 .
DETAILED ACTION
1. This communication is response to the application filed 1/04/2024 havingclaims 1-20 pending and presented for examination.
Priority
2. Application filed on 05/23/2023 is a has is a 371 of PCT/US2021/059702 11/17/2021 PCT/US2021/059702 has PRO 63/121,642 12/04/2020 are acknowledged.
Drawings
3. The drawings were received on 05/23/2023 and these drawings are accepted.
4. Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 5/23/2023 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Oath/Declaration
4. The Oath/Declaration filed on 05/23/2023 is accepted by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 7 objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 7 is dependent on claim 1, claim should dependent on claim 6. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
1. 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.
2. 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.
Claims 1, 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by US Publication US 20200322939 A1 CAO et al. (Hereinafter “CAO ").
As per claim 1, CAO teaches a relay user equipment (UE) device comprising: a receiver configured to receive system information from a cell (para 0261- 0262], fig. 8A, relay UE receives system information from a particular cell ); a controller configured to process the system information, to generate selected system information that is a portion of the system information (para 0261- 0262], fig. 8A, relay UE process the information to generate selected system information that is a portion of the system information to transfer to the UE ) selecting system information that is a portion of the system information); and a transmitter configured to transmit a PC5 groupcast message including the selected system information to a plurality of remote UE devices of a groupcast group associated with the groupcast message (para 0261- 0262], fig. 8A,, transmitting by the relay station a PC5 groupcast message including the selected system information to a plurality of remote UE devices of a groupcast group associated with the groupcast message). 20200322939
As per claim 5, CAO teaches the relay UE device of claim 1, wherein the PC5 groupcast message is based on a default destination L2 ID allocated for transmission of groupcast messages from relay UE devices to multiple remote UE devices (para 0261- 0262], fig. 8A, PC5 groupcast message is based on a default destination L2 ID allocated for transmission of groupcast messages from relay UE devices to multiple remote UE devices).
5. Claim(s) 6-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(2) as being anticipated US PG Pub US 20240298163 A1 to Wu et al (hereinafter Wu).
As per claim 6, Wu teaches a remote user equipment (UE) device comprising: a receiver configured to receive a first PC5 groupcast message and a second PC5 groupcast message (para 0054-0055], fig. 1, 4 UE 101 C is receiving PC5 groupcast message from 101 A and a second PC5 groupcast message 101b), the first PC5 groupcast message transmitted from a first candidate relay UE and comprising first selected system information that is a portion of first relay-received system information received at the first candidate relay UE from a first cell (para 0054-0055],[0014] fig. 1,4 first PC5 message from a first relay candidate 101A and information associated with PC5 information from that particular cell and portion of first relay-received system information such as location, mapping and other solicitation information received at the first candidate relay UE from a first cell), the second PC5 groupcast message transmitted from a second candidate relay UE and comprising second selected system information that is a portion of second relay-received system information received at the second candidate relay UE from a second cell ((para 0054-0055], [0014] fig. 1, second PC5 message is from a second relay station 101B comprising second selected system information that is a portion of second relay-received system information system information such as location, mapping and other solicitation information received at the second candidate relay UE from a second cell; and a controller configured to select); and a controller configured to select, from the first candidate relay UE and the second candidate relay and at least partially based on the first selected system information and the second selected system information, a relay UE for UE-to-Network (U2N) communication ( (para 0054-0055], fig. 1, 101C controller selects based on the close proximity to which cell and communicates with base station through the particular relay station such as based on the first selected system information and the second selected system information, a relay UE for UE-to-Network (U2N) communication ).
As per claim 7, Wu teaches the remote UE device of claim 1, wherein the first PC5 groupcast message is a first sidelink discovery message and the second PC5 groupcast message is a second sidelink discovery message (para 0054-0055], fig. 1, first PC5 groupcast message is a first sidelink discovery message and the second PC5 groupcast message is a second sidelink discovery message).
As per claim 8, Wu teaches the remote UE device of claim 6, wherein the first selected system information is remote UE cell access information for accessing the first cell and the second system selected information is remote UE cell access information for accessing the second cell (para 0054-0055], fig. 1, wherein the first selected system information is remote UE cell access information for accessing the first cell and the second system selected information is remote UE cell access information for accessing the second ).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
1. 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.
2. 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.
3. 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.
4. 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.
5. Claim(s) 2-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CAO further view of US PG Pub US 20230292098 A1 to Ganesan et al (hereinafter Ganesan).
As per claim 2, CAO teaches the relay UE device of claim 1, wherein: the controller is further configured to establish a sidelink DRX configuration identifying a time for transmitting the groupcast message (para 0089- 0090], establish a sidelink DRX configuration identifying a time for transmitting the groupcast message). ; and the transmitter is further configured to transmit a sidelink DRX configuration message to the plurality of remote UE devices (para 0089], transmit a sidelink DRX configuration message to the plurality of remote UE devices ). 20230292098
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date, to modify the combination system of CAO by establish a sidelink DRX configuration identifying a time for transmitting the groupcast message; and the transmitter is further configured to transmit a sidelink DRX configuration message to the plurality of remote UE devices as suggested by Ganesan, this modification would benefit CAO reduced latency and increased coverage in a mobile communication network.
As per claim 3, CAO teaches the relay UE device of claim 2, wherein the controller is configured to establish the sidelink DRX configuration through a negotiation procedure with the plurality of remote UE devices ( para 0089- 0090], sidelink DRX configuration through a negotiation procedure with the plurality of remote UE devices).
Examiner supplies the same rational as supplied in claim 2.
As per claim 4, CAO teaches the relay UE device of claim 2, wherein the controller is configured to establish the sidelink DRX configuration through a negotiation with the cell (para 0066], establish the sidelink DRX configuration through a negotiation with the cell) .
Examiner supplies the same rational as supplied in claim 2.
Claim(s)11-12, 14-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu further view of US PG Pub US 20210029605 A1 to KADIRI et al (hereinafter KADIRI).
As per claim 11, Wu teaches the remote UE device of claim 8, KADIRI teaches wherein: the first selected system information comprises a first selected System Information Block (SIB) that is a portion of an SIB transmitted by the first cell and the second system selected information comprises a second selected SIB which is a portion of an SIB transmitted by the second cell (para 0055, first selected system information comprises a first selected System Information Block (SIB) that is a portion of an SIB transmitted by the first cell and the second system selected information comprises a second selected SIB which is a portion of an SIB transmitted by the second cell). 20210029605
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date, to modify the combination system of Wu teaches by the first selected system information comprises a first selected System Information Block (SIB) that is a portion of an SIB transmitted by the first cell and the second system selected information comprises a second selected SIB which is a portion of an SIB transmitted by the second cell as suggested by KADIRI, this modification would benefit Wu for efficient data transmission in a mobile communication system.
As per claim 12, Wu teaches the remote UE device of claim 11, KADIRI teaches wherein: the SIB transmitted by the first cell is one of SIB1, SIB3, SIB4 and SIB5 and the SIB transmitted by the second cell is one of SIB1,S1B3, S1B4 and S1B5 (para 0055, comprises one of the SIB).
Examiner supplies the same rational as supplied in claim 11.
As per claim 14, Wu teaches the remote UE device of claim 6, KADIRI teaches wherein the first selected system information comprises neighbor frequency information indicating operating frequencies of first neighbor cells in proximity of the first cell and the second selected system information comprises neighbor frequency information indicating operating frequencies of second neighbor cells in proximity of the second cell (para 0090], various frequencies associated source and target stations and first cell and the second selected system information comprises neighbor frequency information indicating operating frequencies of second neighbor cells in proximity of the second cell).
Examiner supplies the same rational as supplied in claim 11.
As per claim 15, Wu teaches the remote UE device of claim 14, KADIRI teaches wherein the first selected system information comprises first frequency priority information for cell reselection for the first cell and the second selected system information comprises second frequency priority information for cell reselection for the second cell ((para 0090], wherein the first selected system information comprises first frequency priority information for cell reselection for the first cell and the second selected system information comprises second frequency priority information for cell reselection for the second cell ).
Examiner supplies the same rational as supplied in claim 11.
As per claim 16, Wu teaches the remote UE device of claim 15, KADIRI teaches wherein the first selected system information comprises a first cell frequency of the Uu link to the first cell on which the first candidate relay UE device is camped and the second selected system information comprises a second cell frequency of the Uu link to the second cell on which the second candidate relay UE device is camped (para 0091], wherein the first selected system information comprises a first cell frequency of the Uu link to the first cell on which the first candidate relay UE device is camped and the second selected system information comprises a second cell frequency of the Uu link to the second cell on which 9the second candidate relay UE device is camped).
Examiner supplies the same rational as supplied in claim 11.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 9-10, 13, 17-20 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.
Response to Arguments
On page 7 of applicant's argument regarding claim 1, applicant argues that, " Applicant submits that the relay UE of Cao forwarding the entire SL CG configuration cannot be reasonably interpreted as disclosing a relay UE processing the SL CG configuration to generate selected system information that is a portion of the SL CG configuration received from the BS. In light of the foregoing, Applicant submits that Cao cannot be reasonably interpreted as disclosing "a controller configured to process the system information, to generate selected system information that is a portion of the system information," as recited in claim 1". Cao in para [0261], and fig.8, teaches the limitation as claim in 1, as per Cao, UE1 which is acting as relay station for groupcast relay station for plurality of station UE2 and UE3, by acting as relay station for the network 200, relay station UE1 receives system information from network such as CG configuration for UE group, while UE1 transmits a portion of the received information as PC5 sidelink group message to UE2 and UE3 to a plurality of remote UE devices of a groupcast group associated with the groupcast message.
On page 8 of applicant's argument regarding claim 1, applicant argues that, "For example, independent claim 6 recites "a first PC5 groupcast message and a second PC5 groupcast message, the first PC5 groupcast message transmitted from a first candidate relay UE and comprising first selected system information that is a portion of first relay-received system information received at the first candidate relay UE from a first cell, the second PC5 groupcast message transmitted from a second candidate relay UE and comprising second selected system information that is a portion of second relay-received system information received at the second candidate relay UE from a second cell." (Emphasis added). Applicant submits that at least these features of claim 6 are not disclosed by Wu.Applicant's argument have been considered but are not persuasive. Wherein remote UE 101c, recvies PC5 groupcase from couple of relay station, here UE101c which is outside the UE101a and UE101b are inside the coverage of the network 101c which connects to both UE101a and UE101b through PC5 connection to establish connection with network, based on the closeness and signal strength of the UE 101c will connect it throught 101a or 101b, as shown in fig. 2, wherein when UE101c is close to 101b it connects to the network through 101b thereby controller of UE101c configured to select candidated relay 101b based on the recived information from 101b to a connection and UE to network through happens. Wherein remote UE 101c, recvies PC5 groupcase from couple of relay station
On page 9 of applicant's argument regarding claim 1, applicant argues that, "Applicant submits that the UEs 101A and 101B of Wu transmitting all of the received information in a discovery message cannot be reasonably interpreted as disclosing "a first PC5 groupcast message and a second PC5 groupcast message, the first PC5 groupcast message transmitted from a first candidate relay UE and comprising first selected system information that is a portion of first relay-received system information received at the first candidate relay UE from a first cell, the second PC5 groupcast message transmitted from a second candidate relay UE and comprising second selected system information that is a portion of second relay-received system information received at the second candidate relay UE from a second cell," as recited in Applicant's claim 6.Applicant submits that at least these features of claim 6 are not disclosed by Wu.Applicant's argument have been considered but are not persuasive. UE101c which is outside the UE101a and UE101b are inside the coverage of the network 101c which connects to both UE101a and UE101b through PC5 connection to establish connection with network, based on the closeness and signal strength of the UE 101c will connect it throught 101a or 101b, as shown in fig. 2, wherein when UE101c is close to 101b it connects to the network through 101b thereby controller of UE101c configured to select candidated relay 101b based on the recived information from 101b to a connection and UE to network through happens.
Conclusion
Prior arts made of record, not relied upon: US Patent Publication US 20170142625 A1; US Patent Publication US 20180279196 A1, US Patent Publication US 20180160338 A1
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANEZ EBRAHIM whose telephone number is (571)270-7153. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8 AM to 5 PM 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ANEZ C EBRAHIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2467