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 Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1,12, and 39 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 (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 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 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 1,3,9,11,12,14,39,50 are being rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (CN 106572514, hereinafter Wang) in view of Ma et al. (US 20170223669, hereinafter Ma)
Regarding claim 1, Wang discloses a method for message notification, applied to a user equipment (UE) comprising:
receiving a message transmitted by a relay UE, wherein the message carries public land mobile network (PLMN) information and the PLMN information is PLMN information corresponding to a serving cell of the relay UE (Page 2: Par.15: Lines 1-2 and Page 2: Par. 14: Lines 1-2; The remote UE receives a discovery message sent by the relay UE. This message includes a PLMN list, a TAC, and mobility state information corresponding to its own serving cell);
and determining, based on the message, a PLMN corresponding to the serving cell of the relay UE (Page 2: Par. 1: Lines 1-2; The PLMN list of the serving cell sent by the relay UE meets the access requirement of the remote UE. Because the remote UE cannot evaluate whether the relay UE meets access requirement without first identifying a PLMN from the received list, this shows that the UE determines the PLMN corresponding to the serving cell of the relay UE)
Wang, does not disclose wherein the receiving the message transmitted by the relay UE, wherein the message carries the PLM information, comprises any one of:
explicitly carrying the PLMN information in sidelink control information (SCI) transmitted by the relay UE;
implicitly carrying the PLMN information based on a resource used by the message transmitted by the relay UE;
wherein the explicitly carrying the PLMN information in the SCI transmitted by the relay UE, comprises at least one of:
in case that the SCI is split into first-stage SCI and second-stage SCI, explicitly carrying the PLMN information only in the first-stage SCI;
in case that the SCI is split into first-stage SCI and second-stage SCI, explicitly carrying the PLMN information only in the second-stage SCI;
in case that the SCI is split into first-stage SCI and second-stage SCI, explicitly carrying the PLMN information in both the first-stage SCI and the second-stage SCI.
Ma however discloses implicitly carrying the PLMN information based on a resource used by the message transmitted by the UE (Par. 7-10; Respective PLMNs correspond to respective D2D resource-pool information; therefore, the PLMN associated with a transmission can be identified based on the resource pool associated with that PLMN; Par. 15-17: The transmitting UE uses a transmission resource selected from the resource pool corresponding to its serving PLMN; thus, the resource used to transmit the discovery message is associated with the serving PLMN of the transmitting UE; Par. 20: Different PLMN identities are expressly mapped to different D2D resource pools; therefore, the resource pool used for a D2D transmission provides an association to the corresponding PLMN; Par. 75-80: A D2D discovery message is transmitted using a resource specifically corresponding to the transmitting UE's serving PLMN, such that the serving-PLMN information is implicitly represented by the resource used for the transmission).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wang's relay discovery procedure to implicitly carry the PLMN information corresponding to the serving cell of the relay UE based on the resource used by the relay UE's discovery message, as taught by Ma. Wang teaches transmitting PLMN information corresponding to the relay UE's serving cell in a discovery message, while Ma teaches associating different PLMNs with different D2D discovery resource pools and transmitting a D2D discovery message using a resource selected from the resource pool corresponding to the transmitting UE's serving PLMN. It would therefore have been obvious to convey Wang's PLMN information using the known PLMN-associated resource-pool technique of Ma, thereby allowing the PLMN information to be implicitly represented by the resource used to transmit the discovery message.
Regarding claim 3 as applied to claim 1, Wang discloses wherein the message transmitted by the relay UE comprises any one of:
a relay discovery message (Page 2: Par. 14: Lines 1-2; The relay UE sends a discovery signal (i.e. message) to a remote UE with PLMN information);
a response message corresponding to a relay discovery message (No patentable weight given due to optional language “or”);
and sidelink control information (SCI) that allocates a resource for a relay discovery message or a response message corresponding to the relay discovery message (No patentable weight given due to optional language “or”).
Regarding claim 9 as applied to claim 1, Wang discloses further comprising at least one of:
for a relay UE meeting a preset condition, determining a PLMN corresponding to a serving cell of the relay UE, and transmitting the PLMN to a non-access stratum (NAS) layer for the UE for assisting the NAS layer for the UE to perform PLMN selection (No patentable weight given due to the optional language “or”); or
for a relay UE meeting a preset condition (Page 2: Detailed Description: Lines 7-8; Relay UE needs to have a signal quality greater than a threshold (i.e. preset condition)), determining a PLMN corresponding to a serving cell of the relay UE (Page 2: Par. 1: Lines 1-2; The PLMN list of the serving cell sent by the relay UE meets the access requirement of the remote UE. Because the remote UE cannot evaluate whether the relay UE meets access requirement without first identifying a PLMN from the received list, this shows that the UE determines the PLMN corresponding to the serving cell of the relay UE), and performing relay UE selection (Page 2: Example: Lines 3-5; Remote UE selects a suitable relay UE based on the information sent by the relay UE which includes a PLMN list) and/or relay UE reselection based on the PLMN (No patentable weight given due to the optional language “or”).
Regarding claim 11 as applied to claim 9, Wang discloses wherein the preset condition comprises at least one of:
A channel quality of a sidelink interface between a UE and a relay UE being greater than a first threshold (Page 2: Example: Lines 3-8; The received power and signal quality of the signal on the PC5 interface (i.e. sidelink interface) needs to be greater than a certain threshold for a relay UE to be chosen); or
A channel quality of a Uu interface between a relay UE and a network device being greater than a second threshold (No patentable weight given due to the optional language “or”).
Regarding claim 12, the rejection of claim 1 addresses all the limitations presented in claim 12. Therefore, all the limitations of claim 12 are addressed.
Regarding claim 14 as applied to claim 12, the rejection of claim 3 addresses all the limitations presented in claim 14. Therefore, all the limitations of claim 14 are addressed.
Regarding claim 39, Wang in view of Ma discloses a UE comprising:
a processor; and
a memory storing a computer program executable on the processor, wherein the computer program, when executed by the processor, causes the UE to perform the following steps of (A wireless UE capable of performing the stated functions necessarily includes a processor and memory storing a computer program executable on the processor):
The remaining limitations were addressed in the rejection of claim 1. Therefore, the remaining limitations of claim 39 are addressed.
Regarding claim 50, Wang in view of Ma discloses a relay UE comprising:
a processor; and
a memory storing a computer program executable on the processor, wherein the computer program, when executed by the processor, causes the UE to perform the following steps of (A wireless UE capable of performing the stated functions necessarily includes a processor and memory storing a computer program executable on the processor):
The remaining limitations were addressed in the rejection of claim 12. Therefore, the remaining limitations of claim 50 are addressed.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (CN 106572514, hereinafter Wang) in view of Ma et al. (US 20170223669, hereinafter Ma) in further view of Ahmad et al. (WO 2018031344, hereinafter Ahmad).
Regarding claim 10 as applied to claim 9, Wang in view of Ma discloses the relay UE meeting the preset condition, the determining the PLMN corresponding to the serving cell of the relay UE, and performing relay UE selection based on the PLMN.
Wang in view of Ma does not disclose wherein for the relay UE meeting the preset condition, the determining the PLMN corresponding to the serving cell of the relay UE, and performing relay UE selection based on the PLMN, comprises:
in case that the UE performs relay UE selection and/or relay UE reselection, selecting, based on the PLMN corresponding to the serving cell of the relay UE, a relay UE of which a serving cell corresponding to a PLMN consistent with a PLMN selected by the UE.
Ahmad, however, discloses in case that the UE performs relay UE selection and/or relay UE reselection (Section II. B.; Remote UE based relay selection), selecting, based on the PLMN corresponding to the serving cell of the relay UE, a relay UE of which a serving cell corresponding to a PLMN consistent with a PLMN selected by the UE (Par. 102: Lines 3-6 and Par. 110: Lines 4-5; The remote UE selects relay UEs conditioned on their PLMN).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined Wang in view of Ma’s teaching that the remote UE receives a PLMN list from the relay UE and selects a suitable relay based on that information with Ahmad’s teaching that relay UE selection is performed by the UE using PLMN ID. PLMN-aligned relay selection would ensure subscription/policy compatibility and roaming/network-sharing compliance, reduced authentication failures, and lower signaling by avoiding cross PLMN retries.
Claims 59,60 are being rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (CN 106572514, hereinafter Wang) in view of Ma et al. (US 20170223669, hereinafter Ma) in further view of Zhao et al. (WO 2011032497, hereinafter Zhao)
Regarding claim 59 as applied to claim 1, Wang in view of Ma does not disclose:
wherein in case that there is only one serving cell of the relay UE, the PLMN information indicates PLMN corresponding to the serving cell of the relay UE;
in case that there are multiple serving cells of the relay UE, the PLMN information indicates PLMN corresponding to a primary cell (PCell) of the relay UE;
in case that there are multiple serving cells of the relay UE and the multiple serving cells correspond to different network devices, the PLMN information indicates PLMN corresponding to a primary cell (PCell) of a master network node for the relay UE;
in case that there are multiple serving cells of the relay UE and the multiple serving cells correspond to a same PLMN, the PLMN information indicates the PLMN;
or in case that there are multiple serving cells of the relay UE and the multiple serving cells correspond to different PLMNs, the PLMN information indicates a set of the different PLMNs.
Zhao, however, discloses in case that there are multiple serving cells of the relay UE and the multiple serving cells correspond to a same PLMN, the PLMN information indicates the PLMN (Page. 6: Lines 7-12; When a UE has multiple serving cells, one of the serving cells is designated as a primary serving cell, and that cell provides NAS mobility parameters including a PLMN ID).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wang in view of Ma such that, when multiple serving cells are present, PLMN information is indicated based on a primary serving cell or corresponding network node, and when a single serving cell is present, the PLMN information corresponds to that serving cell, in order to ensure consistent and unambiguous identification of a PLMN for mobility management and network selection procedures in multi-cell environments.
Regarding claim 60 as applied to claim 12, the rejection of claim 59 addresses the limitations presented in claim 60. Therefore, the limitations of claim 60 have been addressed.
Conclusion
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FABIAN BOTELLO whose telephone number is (571)272-4439. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 am - 5:30 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, Wesley Kim can be reached at (572) 272-7867. 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.
/FABIAN BOTELLO/Examiner, Art Unit 2648
/WESLEY L KIM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2648
Prosecution Insights