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
Amendments filed on 02/11/2026 are entered for prosecution. Claims 1-20 remain pending in the application. The amendments change the scopes of the previously presented claims. New grounds of rejections are applied to the amended claims and the current Office Action is made FINAL as necessitated by the claim amendments.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the examiner’s objection in a reply filed 02/11/2026 regarding the terms “first” and “second” have been fully considered and they are persuasive. Therefore, the objection has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to Claims 1-20 in a reply filed 02/11/2026 (hereinafter, Remarks) regarding newly added limitations have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding the amended claim 1:
Applicant submits that Hoang and Girolamo, either alone or in combination, do not disclose “(Remarks Page 12) in response to the trigger condition being associated with only the second link failure, continuing to transmit first user plane data via a sidelink data radio bearer (SL-DRB) terminated in the relay UE and receive second user plane data from the relay UE” recited in the amended claim 1.
The applicant further respectfully contends that “(Remarks Page 13 Hoang's "Direct Communication Request" (a handshake message) and Girolamo's status/keep-alive messages to teach the transmission of "user plane data." However, these are control plane signaling messages that are inherently transmitted via SRBs or MAC Control Elements, not SL-DRBs)”.
However, the examiner respectfully disagrees. Hoang’s “Direct Communication Request” includes not only a handshake message but also a data transmission (Hoang – [0190] Examples of the direct communication message may include an (e.g., upper layer) message intended for link establishment, a discovery message... a response message (e.g., a message sent in response to a direct communication message), a data transmission, etc). Hence, Hoang’s “Direct Communication Request” is transmitted on the user plane data.
Hoang also discloses the sidelink UEs may receive and transmit transmissions (e.g., data transmission) using PC5-RRC protocol, wherein SL-SRB and SL-DRB are configured/corresponding to the PC5-RRC connection ([0363] The sidelink relay and/or a WTRU may receive/transmit the transmission using one or more of various protocols, including RRC protocols, for example using PC5-RRC and/or Uu RRC protocols; [0112] The PC5-RRC connection and the corresponding sidelink SRBs and sidelink DRBs are released when the PC5 unicast link is released as indicated by upper layers).
Therefore, regarding the amended claim 1, Hoang discloses:
in response to the trigger condition being associated with only the second link failure ([0195] Other examples of the events may include receiving from a peer WTRU and/or a sidelink relay an indication of an event that the peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay may have detected with respect to a (e.g., next) hop, which event may be similar to those above. For example, the indication may indicate that the peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay has experienced an RLF on a link associated with the same relayed link and/or path (e.g., a next hop)), continuing to transmit first user plane data via a sidelink data radio bearer (SL-DRB) ([0363] The sidelink relay and/or a WTRU may receive/transmit the transmission using one or more of various protocols, including RRC protocols, for example using PC5-RRC and/or Uu RRC protocols; [0112] The PC5-RRC connection and the corresponding sidelink SRBs and sidelink DRBs are released when the PC5 unicast link is released as indicated by upper layers) terminated in the relay UE and receive second user plane data from the relay UE ([0197] When relay (re)selection is triggered (e.g., in connection with the WTRU determining to transmit a direct communication message); [0211] a duration of one or more TPs (For example, the WTRU may determine to transmit a message (e.g., a direct communication message (first user plane data)) in multiple transmission periods; [0212] a maximum communication request time (For example, the maximum communication request time may be used to determine whether a current unicast session between the source and destination WTRUs may (or should) be maintained. If the source WTRU does not receive a response from the destination WTRU within the maximum communication request time… if the source WTRU receives the response within the maximum communication request time, the source WTRU may continue the transmission session among the WTRUs); [0190] Examples of the direct communication message may include… a response message (e.g., a message sent in response to a direct communication message (second user plane data)), a data transmission, etc).
Regarding independent claims 15 and 16, the applicant submits the same arguments as presented in claim 1. Thus, examiner applies the same reasoning as presented in claim 1. Similarly, examiner applies the same reasoning for dependent claims 2-14 and 17-20.
Claim Interpretation
The broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) of “Radio Resource Control (RRC)” recited in Claims 1, 4, 8, 12-13, 15-16 and 18 includes anything that is somehow related to control of radio resource in a wireless communication system or protocol (See the instant specification, PGPub, [0053] “In some embodiments of the present application, the wireless communication system 100 is compatible with the 5G NR of the 3GPP protocol, , wherein BS(s) 102 transmit data using an OFDM modulation scheme on the downlink (DL) ... More generally, however, the wireless communication system 100 may implement some other open or proprietary communication protocols, for example, WiMAX, among other protocols.” and [0054] “[0054] In some embodiments of the present application, BS(s) 102 may communicate using other communication protocols, such as the IEEE 802.11 family of wireless communication protocols.”. As a result of the broad spectrum of applicable wireless communication systems and wireless communication protocols, BRI of RRC includes, but is not limited to RRC as defined in 3GPP TS 38.331 or TS 36.331.
The BRI of “PC5” includes anything that is related to a link between UEs because each of “PC5 link 1” and “PC5 link 2” in Fig.1 is a link between UEs.
The BRI of “user plane data” includes any data transmission on the user plane, which Hoang discloses (Hoang - [0190] Examples of the direct communication message may include an (e.g., upper layer) message intended for link establishment, a discovery message... a response message (e.g., a message sent in response to a direct communication message), a data transmission, etc). Therefore, a direct communication message being transmitted/received (Hoang - [0286] A WTRU (e.g., a sidelink relay) may determine to forward a message (e.g., a direct communication message) and may perform forwarding of the message. Forwarding of the message may include any of the following: [0289] The WTRU may prepare another message (e.g., another direct communication message) corresponding to the received message (e.g., the received direct communication message)) is on the “user plane data”.
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 1-20 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.
Claim 1 recites “transmit first user plane data via a sidelink data radio bearer (SL-DRB) terminated in the relay UE” is indefinite because it is unclear whether the “first user plane data” or the “SL-DRB” is the one being referred to “terminated in the relay UE”. According to the instant specification “[0102] In some embodiments, after the UE receives the failure notification associated with the sidelink failure in the link between the relay UE and the abovementioned another UE, the UE continues to transmit data terminated in the relay UE and continues to receive data from the relay UE”. For the purpose of examination, “terminated in the relay UE” will be interpreted as “first user plane data terminated in the relay UE”.
Independent claim 15 has the similar indefiniteness; therefore, the examiner applied the same reasoning for the rejection as claim 1. Similarly, examiner applies the same rejection for dependent claims 2-14.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 7, 11 and 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Hoang (US-20230300713-A1).
Regarding claim 1, Hoang discloses a method performed by a first user equipment (UE), the method comprising:
establishing a PC5 radio resource control (RRC) connection of a first link between the first UE and a relay UE, a RRC connection of a second link between the relay UE and a second UE having been established (Fig. 4; [0122] In various embodiments, a method may be implemented in a first WTRU (e.g., a source WTRU (first UE)) and may include any of determining one or more first measurements based on one or more first sidelink transmissions (first link) received from a second WTRU (e.g., a sidelink relay (relay UE)) (PC5 RRC connection has already been established in order for UEs to determine measurements based on sidelink transmissions); receiving, from the second WTRU, one or more second measurements associated with a path between the first WTRU and a third WTRU (e.g., a destination WTRU (second UE)) and including the second WTRU, wherein the second measurements may be based, at least in part, on one or more second sidelink transmissions (second link) exchanged between the third WTRU and the second WTRU… determining one or more transmission parameters for transmitting one or more discovery messages during a communication period based on any of the path measurement and quality of service (QoS) criteria; and transmitting the discovery messages according to the transmission parameters. The terms “a measurement of a path”, “path measurement” and “combined sidelink measurement” may be used interchangeably herein; [0111] A unicast link at the AS layer is supported via a PC5-RRC connection. In a draft of the “3rd Generation Partnership Project; Technical Specification Group Radio Access Network; NR; Radio Resource Control (RRC) protocol specification (Release 16)”, the PC5-RRC connection is defined as follows; [0112] “The PC5-RRC connection is a logical connection between a pair of a Source Layer-2 ID and a Destination Layer-2 ID in the AS. One PC5-RRC connection is corresponding to one PC5 unicast link [xx]. The PC5-RRC signaling, as specified in sub-clause 5.X.9, can be initiated after its corresponding PC5 unicast link establishment [xx]; [0113] For each PC5-RRC connection of unicast, one sidelink SRB is used to transmit the PC5-S messages… One sidelink SRB is used to transmit the PC5-RRC signaling, which is protected and only sent after the PC5-S security has been established.”));
performing a relay reselection procedure based on a trigger condition associated with at least one of a first link failure or a second link failure, the trigger condition being at least one of ([0194] The WTRU (e.g., the AS layer thereof) may trigger a relay (re)selection procedure based on one or more events and/or factors):
detecting a sidelink failure ([0194] Examples of the events and/or factors may include any of the following: (i) detection of a radio link failure (RLF) with a sidelink relay);
detecting a failure in a RRC relayed connection of a third link between the first UE and the second UE ([0194] Examples of the events and/or factors may include any of the following: (i) detection of a radio link failure (RLF) with a sidelink relay (wherein the sidelink relay is associated with the destination UE (second UE) via the second sidelink transmission; Hence the source UE (first UE) and the destination UE (second UE) are in a RRC relayed connection via the sidelink relay (relay UE)));
receiving a failure notification from the relay UE ([0195] receiving from a peer WTRU and/or a sidelink relay an indication of an event that the peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay may have detected with respect to a (e.g., next) hop … For example, the indication may indicate that the peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay has experienced an RLF on a link associated with the same relayed link and/or path (e.g., a next hop); or
receiving a failure indication from an upper layer of the first UE; and
in response to the trigger condition being associated with only the second link failure ([0195] Other examples of the events may include receiving from a peer WTRU and/or a sidelink relay an indication of an event that the peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay may have detected with respect to a (e.g., next) hop, which event may be similar to those above. For example, the indication may indicate that the peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay has experienced an RLF on a link associated with the same relayed link and/or path (e.g., a next hop)), continuing to transmit first user plane data via a sidelink data radio bearer (SL-DRB) ([0363] The sidelink relay and/or a WTRU may receive/transmit the transmission using one or more of various protocols, including RRC protocols, for example using PC5-RRC and/or Uu RRC protocols; [0112] The PC5-RRC connection and the corresponding sidelink SRBs and sidelink DRBs are released when the PC5 unicast link is released as indicated by upper layers) terminated in the relay UE and receive second user plane data from the relay UE ([0197] When relay (re)selection is triggered (e.g., in connection with the WTRU determining to transmit a direct communication message); [0211] a duration of one or more TPs (For example, the WTRU may determine to transmit a message (e.g., a direct communication message (first user plane data)) in multiple transmission periods; [0212] a maximum communication request time (For example, the maximum communication request time may be used to determine whether a current unicast session between the source and destination WTRUs may (or should) be maintained. If the source WTRU does not receive a response from the destination WTRU within the maximum communication request time… if the source WTRU receives the response within the maximum communication request time, the source WTRU may continue the transmission session among the WTRUs); [0190] Examples of the direct communication message may include… a response message (e.g., a message sent in response to a direct communication message (second user plane data)), a data transmission, etc).
Regarding claim 2, Hoang further discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the failure notification received from the relay UE is one of:
a sidelink radio link failure (RLF) notification associated with the second link between the relay UE and the second UE ([0195] receiving from a peer WTRU and/or a sidelink relay an indication of an event that the peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay may have detected with respect to a (e.g., next) hop … For example, the indication may indicate that the peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay has experienced an RLF on a link associated with the same relayed link and/or path (e.g., a next hop));
a notification of failing to recover a sidelink RLF on the second link between the relay UE and the second UE; or
a notification of a PC5-signaling (PC5-S) link failure on the second link between the relay UE and the second UE ([0195] receiving from a peer WTRU and/or a sidelink relay an indication of an event that the peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay may have detected with respect to a (e.g., next) hop … For example, the indication may indicate that the peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay has experienced an RLF on a link associated with the same relayed link and/or path (e.g., a next hop) (RLF experienced by peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay, which has PC5 interface for exchanging signals)).
Regarding claim 4, Hoang further discloses the method of claim 2, wherein the sidelink RLF notification includes a cause, and the cause is at least one of:
reaching a maximum number of radio link control (RLC) retransmission;
an expiry of a timer for transmission of RRC reconfiguration for sidelink;
reaching a maximum number of consecutive hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) discontinuous transmission (DTX) ([0195] Alternatively, and/or additionally, the indication indicates that a number of consecutive HARQ DTX on transmissions of the peer WTRU satisfies (e.g., has reached) a threshold. Alternatively, and/or additionally, the indication indicates that a number of consecutive HARQ DTX on transmissions of the sidelink relay satisfies (e.g., has reached) a threshold);
receiving an integrity check failure indication; or an occurrence of the PC5-S link failure.
Regarding claim 7, Hoang further discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the sidelink failure occurs in the first link between the first UE and the relay UE, and wherein the sidelink failure is at least one of:
a radio link failure (RLF) in the first link between the first UE and the relay UE ([0194] [0194] The WTRU (e.g., the AS layer thereof) may trigger a relay (re)selection procedure based on one or more events and/or factors. The events and/or factors, for example, may occur at, and/or be considered by, the AS layer. Examples of the events and/or factors may include any of the following: (i) detection of a radio link failure (RLF) with a sidelink relay); or
a configuration failure of configuration information that is associated with the first link between the first UE and the relay UE.
Regarding claim 11, Hoang further discloses:
Wherein the second link failure is indicated by receiving the failure notification associated with the sidelink failure in the second link between the relay UE and the second UE ([0195] Other examples of the events may include receiving from a peer WTRU and/or a sidelink relay an indication of an event that the peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay may have detected with respect to a (e.g., next) hop, which event may be similar to those above. For example, the indication may indicate that the peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay has experienced an RLF on a link associated with the same relayed link and/or path (e.g., a next hop)).
Regarding claim 15, Hoang discloses a first user equipment (UE) for wireless communication, comprising:
at least one memory (Fig. 1B – 130, 132; [0033] non-removable memory 130, removable memory 132); and
at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory ([0033] Fig. 1B, the WTRU 102 may include a processor 118… non-removable memory 130, removable memory 132) and configured to cause the first UE to (FIGS. 1A-1D, where various elements of the network may utilize, perform, be arranged in accordance with and/or be adapted and/or configured for the methods, apparatuses and systems provided herein):
establish a PC5 radio resource control (RRC) connection of a first link between the first UE and a relay UE, a RRC connection of a second link between the relay UE and a second UE having been established (Fig. 4; [0122] In various embodiments, a method may be implemented in a first WTRU (e.g., a source WTRU (first UE)) and may include any of determining one or more first measurements based on one or more first sidelink transmissions (first link) received from a second WTRU (e.g., a sidelink relay (relay UE)) (PC5 RRC connection has already been established in order for UEs to determine measurements based on sidelink transmissions); receiving, from the second WTRU, one or more second measurements associated with a path between the first WTRU and a third WTRU (e.g., a destination WTRU (second UE)) and including the second WTRU, wherein the second measurements may be based, at least in part, on one or more second sidelink transmissions (second link) exchanged between the third WTRU and the second WTRU… determining one or more transmission parameters for transmitting one or more discovery messages during a communication period based on any of the path measurement and quality of service (QoS) criteria; and transmitting the discovery messages according to the transmission parameters. The terms “a measurement of a path”, “path measurement” and “combined sidelink measurement” may be used interchangeably herein; [0111] A unicast link at the AS layer is supported via a PC5-RRC connection. In a draft of the “3rd Generation Partnership Project; Technical Specification Group Radio Access Network; NR; Radio Resource Control (RRC) protocol specification (Release 16)”, the PC5-RRC connection is defined as follows; [0112] “The PC5-RRC connection is a logical connection between a pair of a Source Layer-2 ID and a Destination Layer-2 ID in the AS. One PC5-RRC connection is corresponding to one PC5 unicast link [xx]. The PC5-RRC signaling, as specified in sub-clause 5.X.9, can be initiated after its corresponding PC5 unicast link establishment [xx]; [0113] For each PC5-RRC connection of unicast, one sidelink SRB is used to transmit the PC5-S messages… One sidelink SRB is used to transmit the PC5-RRC signaling, which is protected and only sent after the PC5-S security has been established.”));
perform a relay reselection procedure based on a trigger condition associated with at least one of a first link failure or a second link failure, the trigger condition being at least one of ([0194] The WTRU (e.g., the AS layer thereof) may trigger a relay (re)selection procedure based on one or more events and/or factors):
detection of a sidelink failure ([0194] Examples of the events and/or factors may include any of the following: (i) detection of a radio link failure (RLF) with a sidelink relay);
detection of a failure in a RRC relayed connection of a third link between the first UE and the second UE ([0194] Examples of the events and/or factors may include any of the following: (i) detection of a radio link failure (RLF) with a sidelink relay (wherein the sidelink relay is associated with the destination UE (second UE) via the second sidelink transmission; Hence the source UE (first UE) and the destination UE (second UE) are in a RRC relayed connection via the sidelink relay (relay UE)));
a reception of a failure notification from the relay UE ([0195] receiving from a peer WTRU and/or a sidelink relay an indication of an event that the peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay may have detected with respect to a (e.g., next) hop … For example, the indication may indicate that the peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay has experienced an RLF on a link associated with the same relayed link and/or path (e.g., a next hop)); or
a reception of a failure indication from an upper layer of the first UE; and
in response to the trigger condition being associated with only the second link failure ([0195] Other examples of the events may include receiving from a peer WTRU and/or a sidelink relay an indication of an event that the peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay may have detected with respect to a (e.g., next) hop, which event may be similar to those above. For example, the indication may indicate that the peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay has experienced an RLF on a link associated with the same relayed link and/or path (e.g., a next hop)), continue to transmit first user plane data via a sidelink data radio bearer (SL-DRB) ([0363] The sidelink relay and/or a WTRU may receive/transmit the transmission using one or more of various protocols, including RRC protocols, for example using PC5-RRC and/or Uu RRC protocols; [0112] The PC5-RRC connection and the corresponding sidelink SRBs and sidelink DRBs are released when the PC5 unicast link is released as indicated by upper layers) terminated in the relay UE and receive second user plane data from the relay UE ([0197] When relay (re)selection is triggered (e.g., in connection with the WTRU determining to transmit a direct communication message), the WTRU may perform any of the following… The WTRU may initiate and/or change the scheduling of various measurements, such as, for example, initiating CQI measurement to be performed by the peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay, and/or instructing a peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay to initiate CQI measurement with its own peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay (e.g., a next hop); [0211] a duration of one or more TPs (For example, the WTRU may determine to transmit a message (e.g., a direct communication message (first user plane data)) in multiple transmission periods; [0212] a maximum communication request time (For example, the maximum communication request time may be used to determine whether a current unicast session between the source and destination WTRUs may (or should) be maintained. If the source WTRU does not receive a response from the destination WTRU within the maximum communication request time… if the source WTRU receives the response within the maximum communication request time, the source WTRU may continue the transmission session among the WTRUs); [0190] Examples of the direct communication message may include… a response message (e.g., a message sent in response to a direct communication message (second user plane data)), a data transmission, etc.).
Regarding claim 16, Hoang discloses a relay user equipment (UE) for wireless communication, comprising:
at least one memory (Fig. 1B – 130, 132; [0033] non-removable memory 130, removable memory 132); and
at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory ([0033] Fig. 1B, the WTRU 102 may include a processor 118… non-removable memory 130, removable memory 132) and configured to cause the relay UE to (FIGS. 1A-1D, where various elements of the network may utilize, perform, be arranged in accordance with and/or be adapted and/or configured for the methods, apparatuses and systems provided herein):
establish a PC5 radio resource control (RRC) connection of a first link between a first UE and the relay UE (Fig. 4; [0122] In various embodiments, a method may be implemented in a first WTRU (e.g., a source WTRU (first UE)) and may include any of determining one or more first measurements based on one or more first sidelink transmissions (first link) received from a second WTRU (e.g., a sidelink relay (relay UE)) (PC5 RRC connection has already been established in order for UEs to determine measurements based on sidelink transmissions));
establish a RRC connection of a second link between the relay UE and a second UE (Fig. 4; [0122] In various embodiments, a method may be implemented in a first WTRU (e.g., a source WTRU (first UE)) and may include any of determining one or more first measurements based on one or more first sidelink transmissions (first link) received from a second WTRU (e.g., a sidelink relay (relay UE)) (PC5 RRC connection has already been established in order for UEs to determine measurements based on sidelink transmissions); receiving, from the second WTRU, one or more second measurements associated with a path between the first WTRU and a third WTRU (e.g., a destination WTRU (second UE)) and including the second WTRU, wherein the second measurements may be based, at least in part, on one or more second sidelink transmissions (second link) exchanged between the third WTRU and the second WTRU… determining one or more transmission parameters for transmitting one or more discovery messages during a communication period based on any of the path measurement and quality of service (QoS) criteria; and transmitting the discovery messages according to the transmission parameters. The terms “a measurement of a path”, “path measurement” and “combined sidelink measurement” may be used interchangeably herein; [0111] A unicast link at the AS layer is supported via a PC5-RRC connection. In a draft of the “3rd Generation Partnership Project; Technical Specification Group Radio Access Network; NR; Radio Resource Control (RRC) protocol specification (Release 16)”, the PC5-RRC connection is defined as follows; [0112] “The PC5-RRC connection is a logical connection between a pair of a Source Layer-2 ID and a Destination Layer-2 ID in the AS. One PC5-RRC connection is corresponding to one PC5 unicast link [xx]. The PC5-RRC signaling, as specified in sub-clause 5.X.9, can be initiated after its corresponding PC5 unicast link establishment [xx]; [0113] For each PC5-RRC connection of unicast, one sidelink SRB is used to transmit the PC5-S messages… One sidelink SRB is used to transmit the PC5-RRC signaling, which is protected and only sent after the PC5-S security has been established.”));
transmit a failure notification to the first UE ([0195] receiving from a peer WTRU and/or a sidelink relay (relay ue) an indication of an event that the peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay may have detected with respect to a (e.g., next) hop … For example, the indication may indicate that the peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay has experienced an RLF on a link associated with the same relayed link and/or path (e.g., a next hop); and
continue to receive first user plane data from the first UE via a sidelink data radio bearer (SL-DRB) ([0363] The sidelink relay and/or a WTRU may receive/transmit the transmission using one or more of various protocols, including RRC protocols, for example using PC5-RRC and/or Uu RRC protocols; [0112] The PC5-RRC connection and the corresponding sidelink SRBs and sidelink DRBs are released when the PC5 unicast link is released as indicated by upper layers) and transmit second user plane data to the first UE ([0197] When relay (re)selection is triggered (e.g., in connection with the WTRU determining to transmit a direct communication message), the WTRU may perform any of the following… The WTRU may initiate and/or change the scheduling of various measurements, such as, for example, initiating CQI measurement to be performed by the peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay, and/or instructing a peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay to initiate CQI measurement with its own peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay (e.g., a next hop); [0211] a duration of one or more TPs (For example, the WTRU may determine to transmit a message (e.g., a direct communication message (first user plane data)) in multiple transmission periods; [0212] a maximum communication request time (For example, the maximum communication request time may be used to determine whether a current unicast session between the source and destination WTRUs may (or should) be maintained. If the source WTRU does not receive a response from the destination WTRU within the maximum communication request time… if the source WTRU receives the response within the maximum communication request time, the source WTRU may continue the transmission session among the WTRUs); [0190] Examples of the direct communication message may include… a response message (e.g., a message sent in response to a direct communication message (second user plane data)), a data transmission, etc.).
Regarding claim 17, Hoang further disclose the relay UE of claim 16, wherein the failure notification is one of:
a sidelink radio link failure (RLF) notification associated with the second link between the relay UE and the second UE ([0195] receiving from a peer WTRU and/or a sidelink relay (relay UE) an indication of an event that the peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay may have detected with respect to a (e.g., next) hop … For example, the indication may indicate that the peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay has experienced an RLF on a link associated with the same relayed link and/or path (e.g., a next hop);
a notification of failing to recover a sidelink RLF on the second link between the relay UE and the second UE; or
a notification of a PC5-signaling (PC5-S) link failure on the second link between the relay UE and the second UE ([0195] receiving from a peer WTRU and/or a sidelink relay (relay UE) an indication of an event that the peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay may have detected with respect to a (e.g., next) hop … For example, the indication may indicate that the peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay has experienced an RLF on a link associated with the same relayed link and/or path (e.g., a next hop) (RLF experienced by relay ue and second UE, which has PC5 interface for exchanging signals)).
Regarding claim 18, Hoang further discloses the relay UE of claim 17, wherein the sidelink RLF notification indicates a cause of the failure notification as at least one of:
reaching a maximum number of radio link control (RLC) retransmission;
reaching a maximum number of consecutive hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) discontinuous transmission (DTX) ([0195] For example, the indication may indicate that the peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay (relay ue) has experienced an RLF on a link associated with the same relayed link and/or path (e.g., a next hop). Alternatively, and/or additionally, the indication indicates that a number of consecutive HARQ DTX on transmissions of the peer WTRU satisfies (e.g., has reached) a threshold. Alternatively, and/or additionally, the indication indicates that a number of consecutive HARQ DTX on transmissions of the sidelink relay satisfies (e.g., has reached) a threshold);
an expiry of a timer for transmission of RRC reconfiguration for sidelink ([0195] (vii) an expiration of an inactivity timer (e.g., the relay (re)selection may be triggered following expiry of a time period during which the WTRU has not performed any transmissions to, and/or receptions from, the sidelink relay));
a reception of an integrity check failure indication; or
an occurrence of the PC5-S link failure ([0195] receiving from a peer WTRU and/or a sidelink relay (relay ue) an indication of an event that the peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay may have detected with respect to a (e.g., next) hop … For example, the indication may indicate that the peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay has experienced an RLF on a link associated with the same relayed link and/or path (e.g., a next hop) (RLF experienced by relay ue and second UE, which has PC5 interface for exchanging signals; hence RLF is a PC5-S link failure)).
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 7, 9, 11, 15, 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hoang in view of DI GIROLAMO et al. (US-20220191962-A1, hereafter DI GIROLAMO).
Regarding claim 1, Hoang discloses a method performed by a first user equipment (UE), the method comprising:
establishing a PC5 radio resource control (RRC) connection of a first link between the first UE and a relay UE, a RRC connection of a second link between the relay UE and a second UE having been established (Fig. 4; [0122] In various embodiments, a method may be implemented in a first WTRU (e.g., a source WTRU (first UE)) and may include any of determining one or more first measurements based on one or more first sidelink transmissions (first link) received from a second WTRU (e.g., a sidelink relay (relay UE)) (PC5 RRC connection has already been established in order for UEs to determine measurements based on sidelink transmissions); receiving, from the second WTRU, one or more second measurements associated with a path between the first WTRU and a third WTRU (e.g., a destination WTRU (second UE)) and including the second WTRU, wherein the second measurements may be based, at least in part, on one or more second sidelink transmissions (second link) exchanged between the third WTRU and the second WTRU… determining one or more transmission parameters for transmitting one or more discovery messages during a communication period based on any of the path measurement and quality of service (QoS) criteria; and transmitting the discovery messages according to the transmission parameters. The terms “a measurement of a path”, “path measurement” and “combined sidelink measurement” may be used interchangeably herein; [0111] A unicast link at the AS layer is supported via a PC5-RRC connection. In a draft of the “3rd Generation Partnership Project; Technical Specification Group Radio Access Network; NR; Radio Resource Control (RRC) protocol specification (Release 16)”, the PC5-RRC connection is defined as follows; [0112] “The PC5-RRC connection is a logical connection between a pair of a Source Layer-2 ID and a Destination Layer-2 ID in the AS. One PC5-RRC connection is corresponding to one PC5 unicast link [xx]. The PC5-RRC signaling, as specified in sub-clause 5.X.9, can be initiated after its corresponding PC5 unicast link establishment [xx]; [0113] For each PC5-RRC connection of unicast, one sidelink SRB is used to transmit the PC5-S messages… One sidelink SRB is used to transmit the PC5-RRC signaling, which is protected and only sent after the PC5-S security has been established.”));
performing a relay reselection procedure based on a trigger condition associated with at least one of a first link failure or a second link failure, the trigger condition being at least one of ([0194] The WTRU (e.g., the AS layer thereof) may trigger a relay (re)selection procedure based on one or more events and/or factors. The events and/or factors, for example, may occur at, and/or be considered by, the AS layer):
detecting a sidelink failure ([0194] Examples of the events and/or factors may include any of the following: (i) detection of a radio link failure (RLF) with a sidelink relay);
detecting a failure in a RRC relayed connection of a third link between the first UE and the second UE ([0194] Examples of the events and/or factors may include any of the following: (i) detection of a radio link failure (RLF) with a sidelink relay (wherein the sidelink relay is associated with the destination UE (second UE) via the second sidelink transmission; Hence the source UE (first UE) and the destination UE (second UE) are in a RRC relayed connection via the sidelink relay (relay UE)));
receiving a failure notification from the relay UE ([0195] receiving from a peer WTRU and/or a sidelink relay an indication of an event that the peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay may have detected with respect to a (e.g., next) hop … For example, the indication may indicate that the peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay has experienced an RLF on a link associated with the same relayed link and/or path (e.g., a next hop); or
receiving an indication from an upper layer of the first UE ([0193] A WTRU (e.g., the AS layer thereof) may receive from upper layers, and/or be informed by upper layers of, a specific message (e.g., a direct communication message). In one approach, the AS layer may receive an indication from the upper layer(s) of the presence of a direct communication message); and
in response to the trigger condition being associated with only the second link failure ([0195] Other examples of the events may include receiving from a peer WTRU and/or a sidelink relay an indication of an event that the peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay may have detected with respect to a (e.g., next) hop, which event may be similar to those above. For example, the indication may indicate that the peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay has experienced an RLF on a link associated with the same relayed link and/or path (e.g., a next hop)), continuing to transmit first user plane data via a sidelink data radio bearer (SL-DRB) ([0363] The sidelink relay and/or a WTRU may receive/transmit the transmission using one or more of various protocols, including RRC protocols, for example using PC5-RRC and/or Uu RRC protocols; [0112] The PC5-RRC connection and the corresponding sidelink SRBs and sidelink DRBs are released when the PC5 unicast link is released as indicated by upper layers) terminated in the relay UE and receive second user plane data from the relay UE ([0197] When relay (re)selection is triggered (e.g., in connection with the WTRU determining to transmit a direct communication message), the WTRU may perform any of the following… The WTRU may initiate and/or change the scheduling of various measurements, such as, for example, initiating CQI measurement to be performed by the peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay, and/or instructing a peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay to initiate CQI measurement with its own peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay (e.g., a next hop); [0211] a duration of one or more TPs (For example, the WTRU may determine to transmit a message (e.g., a direct communication message (first user plane data)) in multiple transmission periods; [0212] a maximum communication request time (For example, the maximum communication request time may be used to determine whether a current unicast session between the source and destination WTRUs may (or should) be maintained. If the source WTRU does not receive a response from the destination WTRU within the maximum communication request time… if the source WTRU receives the response within the maximum communication request time, the source WTRU may continue the transmission session among the WTRUs); [0190] Examples of the direct communication message may include… a response message (e.g., a message sent in response to a direct communication message (second user plane data)), a data transmission, etc.).
Hoang does not explicitly disclose the indication is a failure indication.
However, DI GIROLAMO discloses the indication is a failure indication ([0187] the Upper Layer (PC5-S) may provide some indication to the RRC layer at UE1 and/or UE2 that a keep-alive timer associated with the SL has expired, the Controlling entity 100 or the peer UEs (UE1 or UE2) may declare a sidelink radio link failure (SL RLF), the Controlling entity 100 may take some more proactive steps to help deal with the SL RLF, and the peer UEs may take some more proactive steps. to help deal with the SL RLF).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was filed to modify the indication of Hoang to include the failure indication as taught by DI GIROLAMO. This would allow the UEs to take more proactive steps in order to detect and deal with the sidelink RLF (DI GIROLAMO [0187]).
Regarding claim 2, Hoang further discloses wherein the failure notification received from the relay UE is one of:
a sidelink radio link failure (RLF) notification associated with the second link between the relay UE and the second UE ([0195] receiving from a peer WTRU and/or a sidelink relay an indication of an event that the peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay may have detected with respect to a (e.g., next) hop … For example, the indication may indicate that the peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay has experienced an RLF on a link associated with the same relayed link and/or path (e.g., a next hop));
a notification of failing to recover a sidelink RLF on the second link between the relay UE and the second UE; or
a notification of a PC5-signaling (PC5-S) link failure on the second link between the relay UE and the second UE ([0195] receiving from a peer WTRU and/or a sidelink relay an indication of an event that the peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay may have detected with respect to a (e.g., next) hop … For example, the indication may indicate that the peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay has experienced an RLF on a link associated with the same relayed link and/or path (e.g., a next hop) (RLF experienced by peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay, which has PC5 interface for exchanging signals)).
Regarding claim 4, Hoang further discloses wherein the sidelink RLF notification includes a cause, and the cause is at least one of:
reaching a maximum number of radio link control (RLC) retransmission;
an expiry of a timer for transmission of RRC reconfiguration for sidelink;
reaching a maximum number of consecutive hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) discontinuous transmission (DTX) ([0195] Alternatively, and/or additionally, the indication indicates that a number of consecutive HARQ DTX on transmissions of the peer WTRU satisfies (e.g., has reached) a threshold. Alternatively, and/or additionally, the indication indicates that a number of consecutive HARQ DTX on transmissions of the sidelink relay satisfies (e.g., has reached) a threshold);
receiving an integrity check failure indication; or
an occurrence of the PC5-S link failure.
Regarding claim 7, Hoang further discloses wherein the sidelink failure occurs in the first link between the first UE and the relay UE, and wherein the sidelink failure is at least one of:
a radio link failure (RLF) in the first link between the first UE and the relay UE ([0194] [0194] The WTRU (e.g., the AS layer thereof) may trigger a relay (re)selection procedure based on one or more events and/or factors. The events and/or factors, for example, may occur at, and/or be considered by, the AS layer. Examples of the events and/or factors may include any of the following: (i) detection of a radio link failure (RLF) with a sidelink relay); or
a configuration failure of configuration information that is associated with the first link between the first UE and the relay UE.
Regarding claim 9, Hoang further discloses wherein:
the failure notification is transmitted by the relay UE to the first UE ([0195] Other examples of the events may include receiving from a peer WTRU and/or a sidelink relay an indication of an event… the indication may indicate that the peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay has experienced an RLF on a link associated with the same relayed link and/or path (e.g., a next hop) (sidelink relay transmitted an indication of an RLF on the link between the peer WTRU (second UE) and the sidelink relay to the first UE)).
Hoang does not explicitly disclose in response to an expiry of a timer for a keep-alive procedure, the failure notification is indicated from an upper layer of the relay UE to an access stratum (AS) layer of the relay UE, the timer for the keep-alive procedure is associated with the second link.
However, DI GIROLAMO discloses in response to an expiry of a timer for a keep-alive procedure, a failure notification is indicated from an upper layer of a particular UE to an access stratum (AS) layer of the particular UE, the timer for the keep-alive procedure is associated with a sidelink ([0187] Additionally, one or more of the lower access stratum layers (PHY, MAC, RLC, PDCP, SDAP) may provide some indication to the RRC layer at UE1 and/or UE2 that a SL radio link quality is poor, the Upper Layer (PC5-S) may provide some indication to the RRC layer at UE1 and/or UE2 that a keep-alive timer associated with the SL has expired, the Controlling entity 100 or the peer UEs (UE1 or UE2) may declare a sidelink radio link failure (SL RLF), the Controlling entity 100 may take some more proactive steps to help deal with the SL RLF, and the peer UEs may take some more proactive steps to help deal with the SL RLF).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was filed to modify the failure notification of Hoang to be indicated from an upper layer of the relay UE wherein the timer is associated with the second link just the same way as the failure notification is indicated from an upper layer of the particular UE and when the timer is associated with a second link as taught by DI GIROLAMO in order to provide a timer and sidelink RLF related inter-layer communication (DI GIROLAMO, [0187]) when the first UE detect expiration of the timer (DI GIROLAMO - [0187]; Hoang - [0194] The WTRU (e.g., the AS layer thereof) may trigger a relay (re)selection procedure based on one or more events and/or factors. The events and/or factors, for example, may occur at, and/or be considered by, the AS layer. Examples of the events and/or factors may include any of the following: (i) detection of a radio link failure (RLF) with a sidelink relay… (vii) an expiration of an inactivity timer (e.g., the relay (re)selection may be triggered following expiry of a time period during which the WTRU has not performed any transmissions to, and/or receptions from, the sidelink relay)).
Regarding claim 11, Hoang further discloses:
Wherein the second link failure is indicated by receiving the failure notification associated with the sidelink failure in the second link between the relay UE and the second UE ([0195] Other examples of the events may include receiving from a peer WTRU and/or a sidelink relay an indication of an event that the peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay may have detected with respect to a (e.g., next) hop, which event may be similar to those above. For example, the indication may indicate that the peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay has experienced an RLF on a link associated with the same relayed link and/or path (e.g., a next hop)).
Regarding claim 15, Hoang discloses a first user equipment (UE) for wireless communication, comprising:
at least one memory (Fig. 1B – 130, 132; [0033] non-removable memory 130, removable memory 132); and
at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory ([0033] Fig. 1B, the WTRU 102 may include a processor 118… non-removable memory 130, removable memory 132) and configured to cause the first UE to (FIGS. 1A-1D, where various elements of the network may utilize, perform, be arranged in accordance with and/or be adapted and/or configured for the methods, apparatuses and systems provided herein):
establish a PC5 radio resource control (RRC) connection of a first link between the first UE and a relay UE, a RRC connection of a second link between the relay UE and a UE having been established (Fig. 4; [0122] In various embodiments, a method may be implemented in a first WTRU (e.g., a source WTRU (first UE)) and may include any of determining one or more first measurements based on one or more first sidelink transmissions (first link) received from a second WTRU (e.g., a sidelink relay (relay UE)) (PC5 RRC connection has already been established in order for UEs to determine measurements based on sidelink transmissions); receiving, from the second WTRU, one or more second measurements associated with a path between the first WTRU and a third WTRU (e.g., a destination WTRU (second UE)) and including the second WTRU, wherein the second measurements may be based, at least in part, on one or more second sidelink transmissions (second link) exchanged between the third WTRU and the second WTRU… determining one or more transmission parameters for transmitting one or more discovery messages during a communication period based on any of the path measurement and quality of service (QoS) criteria; and transmitting the discovery messages according to the transmission parameters. The terms “a measurement of a path”, “path measurement” and “combined sidelink measurement” may be used interchangeably herein; [0111] A unicast link at the AS layer is supported via a PC5-RRC connection. In a draft of the “3rd Generation Partnership Project; Technical Specification Group Radio Access Network; NR; Radio Resource Control (RRC) protocol specification (Release 16)”, the PC5-RRC connection is defined as follows; [0112] “The PC5-RRC connection is a logical connection between a pair of a Source Layer-2 ID and a Destination Layer-2 ID in the AS. One PC5-RRC connection is corresponding to one PC5 unicast link [xx]. The PC5-RRC signaling, as specified in sub-clause 5.X.9, can be initiated after its corresponding PC5 unicast link establishment [xx]; [0113] For each PC5-RRC connection of unicast, one sidelink SRB is used to transmit the PC5-S messages… One sidelink SRB is used to transmit the PC5-RRC signaling, which is protected and only sent after the PC5-S security has been established.”));
perform a relay reselection procedure based on a trigger condition associated with at least one of a first link failure or a second link failure, the trigger condition being at least one of ([0194] The WTRU (e.g., the AS layer thereof) may trigger a relay (re)selection procedure based on one or more events and/or factors):
detection of a sidelink failure ([0194] Examples of the events and/or factors may include any of the following: (i) detection of a radio link failure (RLF) with a sidelink relay);
detection of a failure in a RRC relayed connection of a third link between the first UE and the second UE ([0194] Examples of the events and/or factors may include any of the following: (i) detection of a radio link failure (RLF) with a sidelink relay (wherein the sidelink relay is associated with the destination UE (second UE) via the second sidelink transmission; Hence the source UE (first UE) and the destination UE (second UE) are in a RRC relayed connection via the sidelink relay (relay UE)));
a reception of a failure notification from the relay UE ([0195] receiving from a peer WTRU and/or a sidelink relay an indication of an event that the peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay may have detected with respect to a (e.g., next) hop … For example, the indication may indicate that the peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay has experienced an RLF on a link associated with the same relayed link and/or path (e.g., a next hop); or
a reception of an indication from an upper layer of the first UE ([0195] receiving from a peer WTRU and/or a sidelink relay an indication of an event that the peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay may have detected with respect to a (e.g., next) hop … For example, the indication may indicate that the peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay has experienced an RLF on a link associated with the same relayed link and/or path (e.g., a next hop); and
in response to the trigger condition being associated with only the second link failure ([0195] Other examples of the events may include receiving from a peer WTRU and/or a sidelink relay an indication of an event that the peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay may have detected with respect to a (e.g., next) hop, which event may be similar to those above. For example, the indication may indicate that the peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay has experienced an RLF on a link associated with the same relayed link and/or path (e.g., a next hop)), continue to transmit first user plane data via a sidelink data radio bearer (SL-DRB) ([0363] The sidelink relay and/or a WTRU may receive/transmit the transmission using one or more of various protocols, including RRC protocols, for example using PC5-RRC and/or Uu RRC protocols; [0112] The PC5-RRC connection and the corresponding sidelink SRBs and sidelink DRBs are released when the PC5 unicast link is released as indicated by upper layers) terminated in the relay UE and receive second user plane data from the relay UE ([0197] When relay (re)selection is triggered (e.g., in connection with the WTRU determining to transmit a direct communication message), the WTRU may perform any of the following… The WTRU may initiate and/or change the scheduling of various measurements, such as, for example, initiating CQI measurement to be performed by the peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay, and/or instructing a peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay to initiate CQI measurement with its own peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay (e.g., a next hop); [0211] a duration of one or more TPs (For example, the WTRU may determine to transmit a message (e.g., a direct communication message (first user plane data)) in multiple transmission periods; [0212] a maximum communication request time (For example, the maximum communication request time may be used to determine whether a current unicast session between the source and destination WTRUs may (or should) be maintained. If the source WTRU does not receive a response from the destination WTRU within the maximum communication request time… if the source WTRU receives the response within the maximum communication request time, the source WTRU may continue the transmission session among the WTRUs); [0190] Examples of the direct communication message may include… a response message (e.g., a message sent in response to a direct communication message (second user plane data)), a data transmission, etc.).
Hoang does not explicitly disclose the indication is a failure indication.
However, DI GIROLAMO discloses the indication is a failure indication ([0187] the Upper Layer (PC5-S) may provide some indication to the RRC layer at UE1 and/or UE2 that a keep-alive timer associated with the SL has expired, the Controlling entity 100 or the peer UEs (UE1 or UE2) may declare a sidelink radio link failure (SL RLF), the Controlling entity 100 may take some more proactive steps to help deal with the SL RLF, and the peer UEs may take some more proactive steps. to help deal with the SL RLF).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was filed to modify the indication of Hoang to include the failure indication as taught by DI GIROLAMO. This would allow the UEs to take more proactive steps in order to detect and deal with the sidelink RLF (DI GIROLAMO [0187]).
Regarding claim 19, Hoang further discloses the relay UE of claim 16, wherein, to transmit the failure notification to the first UE, the processor is configured to cause the relay UE to:
receive, an indication of a PC5-S link failure on the second link between the relay UE and the second UE ([0195] Other examples of the events may include receiving from a peer WTRU and/or a sidelink relay (relay UE) an indication of an event… the indication may indicate that the peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay has experienced an RLF on a link (RLF experienced by relay UE and second UE, which has PC5 interface for exchanging signals; hence RLF is a PC5-S link failure) associated with the same relayed link and/or path (e.g., a next hop) (first UE receive an indication of an RLF on the link between the peer WTRU (second UE))); and
transmit the failure notification of the PC5-S link failure to the first UE ([0195] Other examples of the events may include receiving from a peer WTRU and/or a sidelink relay (relay UE) an indication of an event… the indication may indicate that the peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay has experienced an RLF on a link associated with the same relayed link and/or path (e.g., a next hop) (relay UE transmitted an indication of an RLF to the first UE)).
Hoang does not explicitly disclose receive, by an access stratum (AS) layer of the relay UE.
However, DI GIROLAMO discloses receive, by an access stratum (AS) layer of an UE (0187] the Upper Layer (PC5-S) may provide some indication to the RRC layer (RRC layer is part of the AS layer) at UE1 and/or UE2 that a keep-alive timer associated with the SL has expired, the Controlling entity 100 or the peer UEs (UE1 or UE2) may declare a sidelink radio link failure (SL RLF), the Controlling entity 100 may take some more proactive steps to help deal with the SL RLF, and the peer UEs may take some more proactive steps to help deal with the SL RLF). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was filed to modify the relay UE of Hoang include an access stratum (AS) layer of an relay UE just the same way as an access stratum (AS) layer of an UE as taught by DI GIROLAMO in order to provide a RLF related inter-layer communication (DI GIROLAMO, [0187]) to transmit the failure notification to the first UE and thereby trigger relay reselection (DI GIROLAMO - [0187]; Hoang - [0194] The WTRU (e.g., the AS layer thereof) may trigger a relay (re)selection procedure based on one or more events and/or factors. The events and/or factors, for example, may occur at, and/or be considered by, the AS layer. Examples of the events and/or factors may include any of the following: (i) detection of a radio link failure (RLF) with a sidelink relay).
Regarding claim 20, Hoang further discloses the relay UE of claim 16, wherein, to transmit the failure notification to the first UE, the processor is configured to cause the relay UE to:
transmit a notification of a PC5-signaling (PC5-S) link failure to the first UE ([0195] Other examples of the events may include receiving from a peer WTRU and/or a sidelink relay (relay UE) an indication of an event… the indication may indicate that the peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay has experienced an RLF on a link associated with the same relayed link and/or path (e.g., a next hop) (relay UE transmitted an indication of an RLF to the first UE)).
Hoang does not explicitly disclose a detection of an expiry of a timer of a keep-alive procedure, wherein the timer for the keep-alive procedure being associated with the second link.
However, DI GIROLAMO discloses a detection of an expiry of a timer for a keep-alive procedure, wherein the timer for the keep-alive procedure is associated with a sidelink (0187] Additionally, one or more of the lower access stratum layers (PHY, MAC, RLC, PDCP, SDAP) may provide some indication to the RRC layer at UE1 and/or UE2 that a SL radio link quality is poor, the Upper Layer (PC5-S) may provide some indication to the RRC layer at UE1 and/or UE2 that a keep-alive timer associated with the SL has expired, the Controlling entity 100 or the peer UEs (UE1 or UE2) may declare a sidelink radio link failure (SL RLF), the Controlling entity 100 may take some more proactive steps to help deal with the SL RLF, and the peer UEs may take some more proactive steps to help deal with the SL RLF).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was filed to modify the relay UE of Hoang to detect an expiry of a timer of a keep-alive procedure, wherein the timer for the keep-alive procedure being associated with the second link just the same way as the detection of an expiry of a timer for a keep-alive procedure, wherein the timer for the keep-alive procedure is associated with a sidelink as taught by DI GIROLAMO in order to provide a timer and sidelink RLF related inter-layer communication (DI GIROLAMO, [0187]) to transmit the failure notification to the first UE and thereby trigger relay reselection (DI GIROLAMO - [0187]; Hoang - [0194] The WTRU (e.g., the AS layer thereof) may trigger a relay (re)selection procedure based on one or more events and/or factors. The events and/or factors, for example, may occur at, and/or be considered by, the AS layer. Examples of the events and/or factors may include any of the following: (i) detection of a radio link failure (RLF) with a sidelink relay… (vii) an expiration of an inactivity timer (e.g., the relay (re)selection may be triggered following expiry of a time period during which the WTRU has not performed any transmissions to, and/or receptions from, the sidelink relay)).
Claims 3, 5, 8 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hoang in view of FU et al. (US-20230063048-A1, hereafter FU).
Regarding claim 3, Hoang does not explicitly disclose the method of claim 2, where the notification failure is received after an access stratum (AS) layer of the relay UE receives an indication of the PC5-S link failure or an expiry of a timer of a keep-alive procedure.
However, FU discloses an expiry of a timer of a keep-alive procedure ([0087] once a SL unicast link is established, the involved UEs can monitor the radio link quality and claim radio link failure (RLF) if the link fails to meet certain criteria. Possible criteria include: [0088] expiry of timer started after indication of radio problems (e.g., out of sync) from PHY (RLF occurs after expiry of a timer started); [0095] In LTE D2D communication, a PC5-S keep-alive procedure is used to monitor the link quality, as defined in 3GPP TS 24.334. Basically, the requesting UE manages a keep-alive timer T4102 and a keep-alive counter for this procedure. The keep-alive timer T4102 is used to trigger periodic initiation of the procedure, and is started (or restarted) whenever the UE receives a PC5 signaling message or user-plane data from the peer UE over the SL The keep-alive counter is set to an initial value of zero after link establishment; [0096] FIG. 10 shows a signal flow diagram for an exemplary LTE keep-alive procedure between a requesting UE and peer UE engaged in SL communications. The requesting UE may initiate the procedure under either of the following conditions: 1) a request from upper layers to check the viability of the direct link is received; or 2) the keep-alive timer T4102 for this link expires. The requesting UE initiates the procedure by stopping timer T4102 if it is still running and generating a DIRECT_COMMUNICATION_ KEEPALIVE message with a keep-alive Counter IE that contains the value of the keep-alive counter for this link).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was filed to modify the notification of the PC5-S link failure of Hoang to be received after an expiry of a timer of a keep-alive procedure as taught by FU. This would allow the UE to monitor the sidelink quality and release the established sidelink due to a bad link quality or stopped service (FU – [0087] a UE may release the established unicast link due to bad link quality or due to stopped service, using the link release signaling procedure shown in FIG. 9; [0095] In LTE D2D communication, a PC5-S keep-alive procedure is used to monitor the link quality, as defined in 3GPP TS 24.334).
Regarding claim 5, Hoang discloses the PC5-S link failure as in claim 2 above.
Hoang does not disclose the method of claim 2, wherein the failure is detected based on at least one of an expiry of a first timer for a keep-alive procedure, the first timer for the keep-alive procedure associated with the first link between the first UE and the relay UE, or an expiry of a second timer for the keep-alive procedure, the second timer for the keep-alive procedure associated with the third link between the first UE and the second UE.
However, FU discloses an expiry of a particular timer for the keep-alive procedure, wherein the particular timer for the keep-alive procedure associated with a sidelink ([0087] once a SL unicast link is established, the involved UEs can monitor the radio link quality and claim radio link failure (RLF) if the link fails to meet certain criteria. Possible criteria include: [0088] expiry of timer started after indication of radio problems (e.g., out of sync) from PHY (RLF occurs after expiry of a timer started); [0104] In some embodiments, if UE1 has an ongoing SL unicast connection with UE2, and UE1 does not receive any SL transmissions from UE2 for a certain time (e.g., as defined by a timer, T_alive) (not receive transmission for a certain time defined by a timer, hence the expiry of a timer), this will trigger UE1 to send a PC5-S keep-alive message to the UE2. In case UE2 does not respond to the PC5-S keep-alive message from UE1, UE1 will start releasing the SL connection with UE2 without any retransmission attempts at PC5-S layer).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was filed to modify the detection of the failure of Hoang to include an expiry of a first timer for a keep-alive procedure, wherein the first timer for the keep-alive procedure associated with the first link between the first UE and the relay UE just the same way as an expiry of a particular timer for the keep-alive procedure, wherein the particular timer for the keep-alive procedure associated with a sidelink as taught by FU. This would allow the UEs to avoid unnecessary transmissions of keep-alive messages over the PC5-S layer and facilitate faster detection of RLF on PC5 for sidelink communications (FU - [0102] such embodiments facilitate reduced signaling between UEs by avoiding unnecessary transmissions of keep-alive messages and acknowledgements over the PC5-S layer. Such embodiments also provide new conditions for triggering keep-alive messages for the NR SL, e.g., HARQ feedback. In addition, such embodiments facilitate better fulfillment of service requirements by setting keep-alive message timers adaptively. In addition, such embodiments facilitate faster detection of RLF on PC5 for SL communications).
Regarding claim 8, Hoang discloses the failure in the RRC relayed connection of the third link as in claim 1 above.
Hoang does not explicitly disclose the failure of the third link is detected based on at least one of an expiry of a first timer for a RRC reconfiguration procedure, the first timer for the RRC reconfiguration procedure is associated with the RRC relayed connection of the third link between the first UE and the second UE, or an expiry of a second timer for a keep-alive procedure, the second timer for the keep-alive procedure is associated with the third link between the first UE and the second UE.
However, FU discloses an expiry of a particular timer for the keep-alive procedure, wherein the particular timer for the keep-alive procedure associated with a sidelink ([0104] In some embodiments, if UE1 has an ongoing SL unicast connection with UE2, and UE1 does not receive any SL transmissions from UE2 for a certain time (e.g., as defined by a timer, T_alive) (not receive transmission for a certain time defined by a timer, hence the expiry of a timer), this will trigger UE1 to send a PC5-S keep-alive message to the UE2. In case UE2 does not respond to the PC5-S keep-alive message from UE1, UE1 will start releasing the SL connection with UE2 without any retransmission attempts at PC5-S layer).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was filed to modify the failure detection of the third link of Hoang to include an expiry of a second timer for a keep-alive procedure, wherein the second timer for the keep-alive procedure is associated with the third link just the same way as an expiry of a particular timer for the keep-alive procedure, wherein the particular timer for the keep-alive procedure associated with a sidelink taught by FU. This would allow the UEs to avoid unnecessary transmissions of keep-alive messages over the PC5-S layer and facilitate faster detection of RLF on PC5 for sidelink communications (FU - [0102] such embodiments facilitate reduced signaling between UEs by avoiding unnecessary transmissions of keep-alive messages and acknowledgements over the PC5-S layer. Such embodiments also provide new conditions for triggering keep-alive messages for the NR SL, e.g., HARQ feedback. In addition, such embodiments facilitate better fulfillment of service requirements by setting keep-alive message timers adaptively. In addition, such embodiments facilitate faster detection of RLF on PC5 for SL communications).
Regarding claim 14, Hoang further discloses:
transmitting, by an access stratum (AS) layer of the first UE, an indication to a PC5-signaling (PC5-S) layer of the first UE ([0196] Triggering (re)selection may include any of the following. The WTRU (e.g., the AS layer thereof) may inform upper layers that triggering of relay (re)selection is warranted (e.g., based on the events and/or factors); [0200] the AS layer may report to upper layers (Note that the broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) of “a PC5-signaling (PC5-S) layer” includes upper layers because, according to [0087] of the instant specification, “an upper layer of the UE is a PC5-S layer”) various sidelink measurements, such as, e.g., sidelink measurements per hop for one or more (e.g., each) hops, combined sidelink measurements for a plurality of hops, a reachability indication to a destination WTRU, etc.).
Hoang does not explicitly disclose the indication that indicates the first UE has stopped receiving the second data from the relay UE.
However, FU discloses an indication indicates that a first UE has stopped receiving data from a second UE ([0104] In some embodiments, if UE1 has an ongoing SL unicast connection with UE2, and UE1 does not receive any SL transmissions from UE2 for a certain time (e.g., as defined by a timer, T_alive), this will trigger UE1 to send a PC5-S keep-alive message to the UE2. In case UE2 does not respond to the PC5-S keep-alive message from UE1, UE1 will start releasing the SL connection with UE2 (releasing the SL connection will stop the UE from receiving data between each other) without any retransmission attempts at PC5-S layer).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was filed to modify the indication of Hoang to include the indication that indicates the first UE has stopped receiving the second data from the relay UE the same way as an indication that indicates a first UE has stopped receiving data from a second UE taught by FU. This would help the UEs avoid unnecessary transmissions of the keep-alive messages and help the upper layers better determine which UEs can act as relays (FU – [0102] These exemplary embodiments provide various specific improvements that address various problems… For example, such embodiments facilitate reduced signaling between UEs by avoiding unnecessary transmissions of keep-alive messages and acknowledgements over the PC5-S layer… In addition, such embodiments facilitate faster detection of RLF on PC5 for SL communications; Hoang – [0321] The WTRU may determine the allowed zones based on a function of its WTRU ID (provided by upper layers), so that upper layers can control which WTRUs can act as relays. This approach may be motivated to restrict the number of relays in a specific area).
Claims 3, 5, 8, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hoang and DI GIROLAMO in further view of FU.
Regarding claim 3, Hoang and DI GIROLAMO do not explicitly disclose the method of claim 2, where the notification failure is received after an access stratum (AS) layer of the relay UE receives an indication of the PC5-S link failure or an expiry of a timer of a keep-alive procedure.
However, FU discloses an expiry of a timer of a keep-alive procedure ([0087] once a SL unicast link is established, the involved UEs can monitor the radio link quality and claim radio link failure (RLF) if the link fails to meet certain criteria. Possible criteria include: [0088] expiry of timer started after indication of radio problems (e.g., out of sync) from PHY (RLF occurs after expiry of a timer started); [0095] In LTE D2D communication, a PC5-S keep-alive procedure is used to monitor the link quality, as defined in 3GPP TS 24.334. Basically, the requesting UE manages a keep-alive timer T4102 and a keep-alive counter for this procedure. The keep-alive timer T4102 is used to trigger periodic initiation of the procedure, and is started (or restarted) whenever the UE receives a PC5 signaling message or user-plane data from the peer UE over the SL The keep-alive counter is set to an initial value of zero after link establishment; [0096] FIG. 10 shows a signal flow diagram for an exemplary LTE keep-alive procedure between a requesting UE and peer UE engaged in SL communications. The requesting UE may initiate the procedure under either of the following conditions: 1) a request from upper layers to check the viability of the direct link is received; or 2) the keep-alive timer T4102 for this link expires. The requesting UE initiates the procedure by stopping timer T4102 if it is still running and generating a DIRECT_COMMUNICATION_ KEEPALIVE message with a keep-alive Counter IE that contains the value of the keep-alive counter for this link).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was filed to modify the notification of the PC5-S link failure of Hoang and DI GIROLAMO to be received after an expiry of a timer of a keep-alive procedure as taught by FU. This would allow the UE to monitor the sidelink quality and release the established sidelink due to a bad link quality or stopped service (FU – [0087] a UE may release the established unicast link due to bad link quality or due to stopped service, using the link release signaling procedure shown in FIG. 9; [0095] In LTE D2D communication, a PC5-S keep-alive procedure is used to monitor the link quality, as defined in 3GPP TS 24.334).
Regarding claim 5, Hoang and DI GIROLAMO disclose the PC5-S link failure as in claim 2 above.
Hoang and DI GIROLAMO do not disclose the method of claim 2, wherein the failure is detected based on at least one of an expiry of a first timer for a keep-alive procedure, the first timer for the keep-alive procedure associated with the first link between the first UE and the relay UE, or an expiry of a second timer for the keep-alive procedure, the second timer for the keep-alive procedure associated with the third link between the first UE and the second UE.
However, FU discloses an expiry of a particular timer for the keep-alive procedure, wherein the particular timer for the keep-alive procedure associated with a sidelink ([0087] once a SL unicast link is established, the involved UEs can monitor the radio link quality and claim radio link failure (RLF) if the link fails to meet certain criteria. Possible criteria include: [0088] expiry of timer started after indication of radio problems (e.g., out of sync) from PHY (RLF occurs after expiry of a timer started); [0104] In some embodiments, if UE1 has an ongoing SL unicast connection with UE2, and UE1 does not receive any SL transmissions from UE2 for a certain time (e.g., as defined by a timer, T_alive) (not receive transmission for a certain time defined by a timer, hence the expiry of a timer), this will trigger UE1 to send a PC5-S keep-alive message to the UE2. In case UE2 does not respond to the PC5-S keep-alive message from UE1, UE1 will start releasing the SL connection with UE2 without any retransmission attempts at PC5-S layer).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was filed to modify the detection of the failure of Hoang and DI GIROLAMO to include an expiry of a first timer for a keep-alive procedure, wherein the first timer for the keep-alive procedure associated with the first link between the first UE and the relay UE just the same way as an expiry of a particular timer for the keep-alive procedure, wherein the particular timer for the keep-alive procedure associated with a sidelink as taught by FU. This would allow the UEs to avoid unnecessary transmissions of keep-alive messages over the PC5-S layer and facilitate faster detection of RLF on PC5 for sidelink communications (FU - [0102] such embodiments facilitate reduced signaling between UEs by avoiding unnecessary transmissions of keep-alive messages and acknowledgements over the PC5-S layer. Such embodiments also provide new conditions for triggering keep-alive messages for the NR SL, e.g., HARQ feedback. In addition, such embodiments facilitate better fulfillment of service requirements by setting keep-alive message timers adaptively. In addition, such embodiments facilitate faster detection of RLF on PC5 for SL communications).
Regarding claim 8, Hoang and DI GIROLAMO disclose the failure in the RRC relayed connection of the third link as in claim 1 above.
Hoang and DI GIROLAMO do not explicitly disclose the failure of the third link is detected based on at least one of an expiry of a first timer for a RRC reconfiguration procedure, the first timer for the RRC reconfiguration procedure is associated with the RRC relayed connection of the third link between the first UE and the second UE, or an expiry of a second timer for a keep-alive procedure, the second timer for the keep-alive procedure is associated with the third link between the first UE and the second UE.
However, FU discloses an expiry of a particular timer for the keep-alive procedure, wherein the particular timer for the keep-alive procedure associated with a sidelink ([0104] In some embodiments, if UE1 has an ongoing SL unicast connection with UE2, and UE1 does not receive any SL transmissions from UE2 for a certain time (e.g., as defined by a timer, T_alive) (not receive transmission for a certain time defined by a timer, hence the expiry of a timer), this will trigger UE1 to send a PC5-S keep-alive message to the UE2. In case UE2 does not respond to the PC5-S keep-alive message from UE1, UE1 will start releasing the SL connection with UE2 without any retransmission attempts at PC5-S layer).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was filed to modify the failure detection of the third link of Hoang and DI GIROLAMO to include an expiry of a second timer for a keep-alive procedure, wherein the second timer for the keep-alive procedure is associated with the third link just the same way as an expiry of a particular timer for the keep-alive procedure, wherein the particular timer for the keep-alive procedure associated with a sidelink taught by FU. This would allow the UEs to avoid unnecessary transmissions of keep-alive messages over the PC5-S layer and facilitate faster detection of RLF on PC5 for sidelink communications (FU - [0102] such embodiments facilitate reduced signaling between UEs by avoiding unnecessary transmissions of keep-alive messages and acknowledgements over the PC5-S layer. Such embodiments also provide new conditions for triggering keep-alive messages for the NR SL, e.g., HARQ feedback. In addition, such embodiments facilitate better fulfillment of service requirements by setting keep-alive message timers adaptively. In addition, such embodiments facilitate faster detection of RLF on PC5 for SL communications).
Regarding claim 14, Hoang further discloses:
transmitting, by an access stratum (AS) layer of the first UE, an indication to a PC5-signaling (PC5-S) layer of the first UE ([0196] Triggering (re)selection may include any of the following. The WTRU (e.g., the AS layer thereof) may inform upper layers that triggering of relay (re)selection is warranted (e.g., based on the events and/or factors); [0200] the AS layer may report to upper layers (Note that the broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) of “a PC5-signaling (PC5-S) layer” includes upper layers because, according to [0087] of the instant specification, “an upper layer of the UE is a PC5-S layer”) various sidelink measurements, such as, e.g., sidelink measurements per hop for one or more (e.g., each) hops, combined sidelink measurements for a plurality of hops, a reachability indication to a destination WTRU, etc.).
Hoang and DI GIROLAMO do not explicitly disclose the indication that indicates the first UE has stopped receiving the second data from the relay UE.
However, FU discloses an indication indicates that a first UE has stopped receiving data from a second UE ([0104] In some embodiments, if UE1 has an ongoing SL unicast connection with UE2, and UE1 does not receive any SL transmissions from UE2 for a certain time (e.g., as defined by a timer, T_alive), this will trigger UE1 to send a PC5-S keep-alive message to the UE2. In case UE2 does not respond to the PC5-S keep-alive message from UE1, UE1 will start releasing the SL connection with UE2 (releasing the SL connection will stop the UE from receiving data between each other) without any retransmission attempts at PC5-S layer).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was filed to modify the indication of Hoang and DI GIROLAMO to include the indication that indicates the first UE has stopped receiving the second data from the relay UE the same way as an indication that indicates a first UE has stopped receiving data from a second UE taught by FU. This would help the UEs avoid unnecessary transmissions of the keep-alive messages and help the upper layers better determine which UEs can act as relays (FU – [0102] These exemplary embodiments provide various specific improvements that address various problems… For example, such embodiments facilitate reduced signaling between UEs by avoiding unnecessary transmissions of keep-alive messages and acknowledgements over the PC5-S layer… In addition, such embodiments facilitate faster detection of RLF on PC5 for SL communications; Hoang – [0321] The WTRU may determine the allowed zones based on a function of its WTRU ID (provided by upper layers), so that upper layers can control which WTRUs can act as relays. This approach may be motivated to restrict the number of relays in a specific area).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hoang in view of Freda et al. (US-20230180313-A1, hereafter Freda).
Regarding claim 6, Hoang further discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the indication is received from a PC5-signaling (PC5-S) layer of the first UE and is received by an access stratum (AS) layer of the first UE from the PC5-S layer of the first UE ([0193] A WTRU (e.g., the AS layer thereof) may receive from upper layers (Note that the broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) of “a PC5-signaling (PC5-S) layer” includes upper layers because, according to [0087] of the instant specification, “an upper layer of the UE is a PC5-S layer”), and/or be informed by upper layers of, a specific message (e.g., a direct communication message). In one approach, the AS layer may receive an indication from the upper layer(s) of the presence of a direct communication message).
Hoang does not explicitly disclose the indication is a failure indication indicating a PC5-S link failure of the first link between the first UE and the relay UE.
However, Freda discloses a failure indication indicating a PC5-S link failure of the first link between the first UE and the relay UE ([0192] One factor that may be involved in deciding the link over which to establish a connection may be one or more indications from the relay WTRU. For example, a remote WTRU (first UE) may establish/resume a Uu RRC connection via a relay WTRU (relay UE) if the relay WTRU allows this, or based on information provided by the relay WTRU. For example, a remote WTRU may receive an indication from the relay WTRU that a relayed connection cannot be established. Such indication may come in the form of a response to a PC5-RRC reconfiguration message (e.g., a reconfiguration failure). Such indication may come in the form of a PC5-RRC message or other protocol layer message initiated by the relay WTRU (e.g., a flow control message explicitly/implicitly indicating such; e.g., a PC5-RRC message broadcast by the relay WTRU indicating that the relay should not be accessed)).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was filed to modify the indication of Hoang to include a failure indication indicating a PC5-S link failure of the first link between the first UE and the relay UE as taught by Freda. This would help the first UE decides whether or not establish a connection with the relay UE (Freda - [0188] A first remote WTRU (e.g., source 191) may make the decision of relay versus direct connection, both, and/or neither, based on one or more of the following factors: whether a remote WTRU has a PC5-RRC connection established with a relay WTRU; Uu cell quality; SL quality (e.g., based on SL CQI, SL RSRP, flow/congestion control measurements, etc.); indication from a peer WTRU (e.g., remote or relay)).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hoang and DI GIROLAMO in further view of Freda.
Regarding claim 6, Hoang further discloses wherein the indication is received from a PC5-signaling (PC5-S) layer of the first UE and is received by an access stratum (AS) layer of the first UE from the PC5-S layer of the first UE ([0193] A WTRU (e.g., the AS layer thereof) may receive from upper layers (Note that the broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) of “a PC5-signaling (PC5-S) layer” includes upper layers because, according to [0087] of the instant specification, “an upper layer of the UE is a PC5-S layer”), and/or be informed by upper layers of, a specific message (e.g., a direct communication message). In one approach, the AS layer may receive an indication from the upper layer(s) of the presence of a direct communication message).
Hoang and DI GIROLAMO do not explicitly disclose the indication is a failure indication indicating a PC5-S link failure of the first link between the first UE and the relay UE.
However, Freda discloses a failure indication indicating a PC5-S link failure of the first link between the first UE and the relay UE ([0192] One factor that may be involved in deciding the link over which to establish a connection may be one or more indications from the relay WTRU. For example, a remote WTRU (first UE) may establish/resume a Uu RRC connection via a relay WTRU (relay UE) if the relay WTRU allows this, or based on information provided by the relay WTRU. For example, a remote WTRU may receive an indication from the relay WTRU that a relayed connection cannot be established. Such indication may come in the form of a response to a PC5-RRC reconfiguration message (e.g., a reconfiguration failure). Such indication may come in the form of a PC5-RRC message or other protocol layer message initiated by the relay WTRU (e.g., a flow control message explicitly/implicitly indicating such; e.g., a PC5-RRC message broadcast by the relay WTRU indicating that the relay should not be accessed)).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was filed to modify the indication of Hoang and DI GIROLAMO to include a failure indication indicating a PC5-S link failure of the first link between the first UE and the relay UE as taught by Freda. This would help the first UE decides whether or not establish a connection with the relay UE (Freda - [0188] A first remote WTRU (e.g., source 191) may make the decision of relay versus direct connection, both, and/or neither, based on one or more of the following factors: whether a remote WTRU has a PC5-RRC connection established with a relay WTRU; Uu cell quality; SL quality (e.g., based on SL CQI, SL RSRP, flow/congestion control measurements, etc.); indication from a peer WTRU (e.g., remote or relay)).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hoang and in view of ZHAO (US-20170244468-A1).
Regarding claim 10, Hoang further disclose the method of claim 1, further comprising:
receiving the failure notification associated with the sidelink failure in the second link between the relay UE and the second UE ([0195] receiving from a peer WTRU and/or a sidelink relay an indication of an event that the peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay may have detected with respect to a (e.g., next) hop … For example, the indication may indicate that the peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay has experienced an RLF on a link associated with the same relayed link and/or path (e.g., a next hop)).
Hoang does not explicitly disclose a response of suspending a transmission of data terminated in the second UE.
However, ZHAO discloses suspending a transmission of data terminated in the second UE ([0068] sending, by the source terminal (first UE), an instruction message to a destination node (second UE) through the source relay terminal (relay UE) to instruct the destination node to stop data from being transmitted to the source terminal, wherein the destination node is a destination terminal or a destination network node).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was filed to modify the failure notification associated with the sidelink failure in the second link of Hoang to include the suspension of a transmission of data terminated in the second UE as a response as taught by ZHAO. This allows for minimal data loss between UEs during relay reselection due to a sidelink RLF ( ZHAO - [0135] With the implementation above, the control node device instructs the source terminal or the destination node to stop data from being transmitted, upon deciding to reselect a relay terminal, so that a loss of data between the source terminal and the destination terminal while a relay terminal is being reselected can be avoided as many as possible).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hoang and DI GIROLAMO in further view of ZHAO.
Regarding claim 10, Hoang further disclose:
receiving the failure notification associated with the sidelink failure in the second link between the relay UE and the second UE ([0195] receiving from a peer WTRU and/or a sidelink relay an indication of an event that the peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay may have detected with respect to a (e.g., next) hop … For example, the indication may indicate that the peer WTRU and/or sidelink relay has experienced an RLF on a link associated with the same relayed link and/or path (e.g., a next hop)).
Hoang and DI GIROLAMO do not explicitly disclose a response of suspending a transmission of data terminated in the second UE.
However, ZHAO discloses suspending a transmission of data terminated in the second UE ([0068] sending, by the source terminal (first UE), an instruction message to a destination node (second UE) through the source relay terminal (relay UE) to instruct the destination node to stop data from being transmitted to the source terminal, wherein the destination node is a destination terminal or a destination network node).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was filed to modify the failure notification associated with the sidelink failure in the second link of Hoang and DI GIROLAMO to include the suspension of a transmission of data terminated in the second UE as a response as taught by ZHAO. This allows for minimal data loss between UEs during relay reselection due to a sidelink RLF ( ZHAO - [0135] With the implementation above, the control node device instructs the source terminal or the destination node to stop data from being transmitted, upon deciding to reselect a relay terminal, so that a loss of data between the source terminal and the destination terminal while a relay terminal is being reselected can be avoided as many as possible).
Claims 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hoang and in view of KUO (US-20210409263-A1).
Regarding claim 12, Hoang does not explicitly disclose the method of claim 11, further comprising of stopping receiving the second data from the relay UE in response to receiving an end-mark indication from the relay UE or receiving a RRC message including an indication of completing data forwarding terminated in the first UE.
However, KUO disclose receiving an end-mark indication from the relay UE ([0329] According to 3GPP TS 38.331, the UE shall release all Sidelink (SL) Data Radio Bearers (DRBs) established for a PC5 unicast link established with a peer UE if sidelink radio link failure is detected. In the scenario of a UE-to-UE relaying, if sidelink radio link failure is detected on one of the two PC5 unicast links established with the Source UE and the Target UE, the data from the other PC5 unicast link would accumulate in buffer of the UE-to-UE Relay, which would consume the buffer space of the UE-to-UE Relay unnecessarily because the data cannot be relayed (or forwarded) to the destination via the failed PC5 unicast link. Therefore, it would be beneficial for the UE-to-UE Relay to initiate a Layer-2 link release procedure to release the PC5 unicast link with the other UE (release procedure is the end-mark indication from the relay UE) when detecting a sidelink radio link failure on the PC5 unicast link with one UE. FIG. 19 illustrates an example of this solution).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was filed to modify the stopping of receiving of data from the relay UE of Hoang in response to receiving an end-mark indication from the relay UE to as taught by KUO in order to avoid the accumulation of data in the buffer when there is a failure in one of the sidelink (KUO – [0329]; Hoang – [0197] When relay (re)selection is triggered (e.g., in connection with the WTRU determining to transmit a direct communication message), the WTRU may perform any of the following. The WTRU may take various actions to avoid or limit unnecessary measurements (and hence, battery usage), including suspending or cancelling some or all relay evaluation measurements (e.g., measurements for determining whether to perform relay (re)selection)).
Regarding claim 13, Hoang further discloses the method of claim 12, further comprising:
releasing the PC5 RRC connection between the first UE and an established link ([0414] The WTRU may then send an inactive indication to the newly established link if it can recover the current relay based on the information on and/or about one or more inactive relays; [0415] The WTRU may stop relay reselection by stop transmitting and/or receiving direct communication messages (e.g., DIRECT_COMM_REQ message) transmission. [0416] The WTRU may release the connection with the newly established link, for example, by sending a PC5 RRC release message).
Hoang does not explicitly disclose the established link is the relay UE.
However, KUO discloses the established link is the relay UE ([0329] According to 3GPP TS 38.331, the UE shall release all Sidelink (SL) Data Radio Bearers (DRBs) established for a PC5 unicast link established with a peer UE if sidelink radio link failure is detected. In the scenario of a UE-to-UE relaying, if sidelink radio link failure is detected on one of the two PC5 unicast links established with the Source UE and the Target UE, the data from the other PC5 unicast link would accumulate in buffer of the UE-to-UE Relay, which would consume the buffer space of the UE-to-UE Relay unnecessarily because the data cannot be relayed (or forwarded) to the destination via the failed PC5 unicast link. Therefore, it would be beneficial for the UE-to-UE Relay to initiate a Layer-2 link release procedure to release the PC5 unicast link with the other UE when detecting a sidelink radio link failure on the PC5 unicast link with one UE. FIG. 19 illustrates an example of this solution).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was filed to modify the releasing the connection between the first UE and an established link of Hoang to include the relay UE to as taught by KUO in order to avoid the accumulation of data in the buffer when there is a sidelink RLF detected and when the relays are inactive (KUO – [0329]; Hoang – [0415]).
Claims 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hoang and DI GIROLAMO in further view of KUO.
Regarding claim 12, Hoang and DI GIROLAMO do not disclose the method of claim 11, further comprising of stopping receiving the second data from the relay UE in response to receiving an end-mark indication from the relay UE or receiving a RRC message including an indication of completing data forwarding terminated in the first UE.
However, KUO disclose receiving an end-mark indication from the relay UE ([0329] According to 3GPP TS 38.331, the UE shall release all Sidelink (SL) Data Radio Bearers (DRBs) established for a PC5 unicast link established with a peer UE if sidelink radio link failure is detected. In the scenario of a UE-to-UE relaying, if sidelink radio link failure is detected on one of the two PC5 unicast links established with the Source UE and the Target UE, the data from the other PC5 unicast link would accumulate in buffer of the UE-to-UE Relay, which would consume the buffer space of the UE-to-UE Relay unnecessarily because the data cannot be relayed (or forwarded) to the destination via the failed PC5 unicast link. Therefore, it would be beneficial for the UE-to-UE Relay to initiate a Layer-2 link release procedure to release the PC5 unicast link with the other UE (release procedure is the end-mark indication from the relay UE) when detecting a sidelink radio link failure on the PC5 unicast link with one UE. FIG. 19 illustrates an example of this solution).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was filed to modify the stopping of receiving of data from the relay UE of Hoang and DI GIROLAMO in response to receiving an end-mark indication from the relay UE to as taught by KUO in order to avoid the accumulation of data in the buffer when there is a failure in one of the sidelink (KUO – [0329]; Hoang – [0197] When relay (re)selection is triggered (e.g., in connection with the WTRU determining to transmit a direct communication message), the WTRU may perform any of the following. The WTRU may take various actions to avoid or limit unnecessary measurements (and hence, battery usage), including suspending or cancelling some or all relay evaluation measurements (e.g., measurements for determining whether to perform relay (re)selection)).
Regarding claim 13, Hoang further discloses the method of claim 12, further comprising:
releasing the PC5 RRC connection between the first UE and an established link ([0414] The WTRU may then send an inactive indication to the newly established link if it can recover the current relay based on the information on and/or about one or more inactive relays; [0415] The WTRU may stop relay reselection by stop transmitting and/or receiving direct communication messages (e.g., DIRECT_COMM_REQ message) transmission. [0416] The WTRU may release the connection with the newly established link, for example, by sending a PC5 RRC release message).
Hoang and DI GIROLAMO do not explicitly disclose the established link is the relay UE.
However, KUO discloses the established link is the relay UE ([0329] According to 3GPP TS 38.331, the UE shall release all Sidelink (SL) Data Radio Bearers (DRBs) established for a PC5 unicast link established with a peer UE if sidelink radio link failure is detected. In the scenario of a UE-to-UE relaying, if sidelink radio link failure is detected on one of the two PC5 unicast links established with the Source UE and the Target UE, the data from the other PC5 unicast link would accumulate in buffer of the UE-to-UE Relay, which would consume the buffer space of the UE-to-UE Relay unnecessarily because the data cannot be relayed (or forwarded) to the destination via the failed PC5 unicast link. Therefore, it would be beneficial for the UE-to-UE Relay to initiate a Layer-2 link release procedure to release the PC5 unicast link with the other UE when detecting a sidelink radio link failure on the PC5 unicast link with one UE. FIG. 19 illustrates an example of this solution).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was filed to modify the releasing the connection between the first UE and an established link of Hoang and DI GIROLAMO to include the relay UE to as taught by KUO in order to avoid the accumulation of data in the buffer when there is a sidelink RLF detected and when the relays are inactive (KUO – [0329]; Hoang – [0415]).
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 THERESA NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-2386. The examiner can normally be reached 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, MOO JEONG can be reached at (571)272-9617. 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.
/THERESA NGUYEN/Examiner, Art Unit 2418
/Moo Jeong/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2418
Prosecution Insights