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 . Claims 1-11, 13-14, 16, 20-21, 42, 44-45, 52-54, 59 are pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 3-4, 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu et al. (US# 2020/0235876 hereinafter referred to as Xu) in view of Hosseini et al. (US# 2021/0112574 hereinafter referred to as Hosseini).
RE Claim 1¸ Xu discloses a user device, UE, for a wireless communication network, wherein the UE is to act as a relaying entity so as to provide functionality to support connectivity between a transmitting entity and a receiving entity of the wireless communication network (See Xu [0041], [0100], [0108] – UE acting as a relay node, between source and destination node), and
wherein, responsive to receiving a transmission from the transmitting entity:
if the transmission is directed to the relaying entity, sending a first feedback to the transmitting entity, wherein the first feedback indicates successful or non-successful receipt of the transmission at the relaying entity (See Xu [0041], [0100], [0108] – UE determines if node itself is destination of packet; if it is determined that the UE is the destination of the packet, the destination node sends HARQ-ACK back to source), and
if the transmission is directed to the receiving entity:
relaying the transmission towards the receiving entity, transmitting a second feedback instead of the first feedback to the transmitting entity (See Xu [0041], [0100], [0108] – UE determines if node itself is destination of packet; if it is determined that the UE is not the destination of the packet, the UE forwards the packet to the destination node; the destination node sends HARQ-ACK back to source either directly or through intermediate nodes (i.e. relay nodes); the UE, acting as a relay node, forwards received HARQ-ACK messages back to the source node),
wherein the second feedback indicates a successful and/or non-successful receipt of the transmission at the receiving entity (See Xu [0041], [0100], [0108] – the UE, acting as a relay node, forwards received HARQ-ACK messages back to the source node),
wherein the UE is to transmit the feedback received from the receiving entity (See Xu [0041], [0100], [0108] – the UE, acting as a relay node, forwards received HARQ-ACK messages back to the source node), wherein the UE uses SL in case the transmitting entity is a UE or a relaying entity (See Xu FIGs 1, 4; [0103]-[0104] – if the destination of the transmission (i.e. original transmitting entity that is now receiving the feedback) is another UE, the transmission takes place over SL), and wherein the UE uses UL in the case the transmitting entity is a network entity (See Xu FIGs 1, 4; [0103]-[0104] – if the destination of the transmission (i.e. original transmitting entity that is now receiving the feedback) is a base station, the transmission takes place over UL).
Xu does not specifically disclose the UE transmitting the feedback in the physical, PHY, layer; or
wherein the UE uses PSFCH when transmitting feedback on the sidelink, and wherein the UE uses PUCCH or PUSCH when transmitting feedback on the uplink (emphasis added).
However, Hosseini teaches of wherein the UE is to transmit the feedback received from the receiving entity in the physical, PHY, layer (See Hosseini FIG 2; [0091] – UE sending feedback on PSFCH or PUCCH),
wherein the UE uses PSFCH when transmitting feedback on the sidelink (See Hosseini FIG 2; [0091] – if UE sends feedback to another UE on the sidelink, transmission is on PSFCH), and wherein the UE uses PUCCH or PUSCH when transmitting feedback on the uplink (See Hosseini FIG 2; [0091] – if UE sends feedback to base station on the uplink, transmission is on PUCCH).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to implement the wireless communication system, wherein the UE uses SL in case the transmitting entity is a UE or a relaying entity, and wherein the UE uses UL in the case the transmitting entity is a network entity, as disclosed in Xu, wherein the UE transmitting the feedback in the physical, PHY, layer; and
wherein the UE uses PSFCH when transmitting feedback on the sidelink, and wherein the UE uses PUCCH or PUSCH when transmitting feedback on the uplink, as taught in Hosseini. One is motivated as such in order to improve transmission error detection and satisfy timing capabilities (See Hosseini Background; Summary).
RE Claim 3¸ Xu, modified by Hosseini, discloses a user device, UE, as set forth in claim 1 above, wherein, if the UE receives a feedback from the receiving entity indicating a successful receipt of the transmission at the receiving entity, the UE is to transmit to the transmitting entity the second feedback within a configured or pre-configured time window following the receipt of the second feedback (See Xu [0041], [0100], [0108] – receiving entity sending HARQ-ACK back to transmitting entity via relay UE which forwards to transmitting entity at a configured time window (i.e. whatever time window the relay UE is programmed to transmit the response)).
RE Claim 4¸ Xu, modified by Hosseini, discloses a user device, UE, as set forth in claim 1 above, wherein, if the UE receives a feedback from the receiving entity indicating a non-successful receipt of the transmission at the receiving entity, the UE is to:
transmit to the transmitting entity the second feedback within a configured or pre-configured time window following the receipt of the feedback, and not retransmit the transmission to the receiving entity (See Xu [0041], [0100], [0108] – receiving entity sending HARQ-NACK back to transmitting entity via relay UE which forwards to transmitting entity at a configured time window (i.e. whatever time window the relay UE is programmed to transmit the response)), or
retransmit the transmission to the receiving entity, and continue to retransmit the transmission with the same or with different transmission parameters, until a feedback indicating a successful receipt of the transmission is received from the receiving entity, and transmit to the transmitting entity the second feedback, or until one or more of predefined events occur.
RE Claim 7¸ Xu, modified by Hosseini, discloses a user device, UE, as set forth in claim 1 above, wherein the UE is to receive the transmission from the transmitting entity over a direct interface, or over an access network interface (See Xu FIGs 1, 4; Background; Summary – sent over direct interface such as sidelink or access network link).
RE Claim 8¸ Xu, modified by Hosseini, discloses a user device, UE, as set forth in claim 1 above, wherein
the transmitting entity comprises a user device, UE, or a relaying entity, and the receiving entity comprises a user device, UE, or a relaying entity (See Xu FIGs 1, 4; Background; Summary – transmitting/receiving entity can be UE, relay UE, or network entity), or
the transmitting entity comprises a user device, UE, or a relaying entity and the receiving entity comprises a network entity (See Xu FIGs 1, 4; Background; Summary –transmitting/receiving entity can be UE, relay UE, or network entity), or
the transmitting entity comprises a network entity and the receiving entity comprises a user device, UE, or a relaying entity (See Xu FIGs 1, 4; Background; Summary – transmitting/receiving entity can be UE, relay UE, or network entity).
Claims 2, 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu et al. (US# 2020/0235876 hereinafter referred to as Xu) in view of Hosseini et al. (US# 2021/0112574 hereinafter referred to as Hosseini) and Fang et al. (US# 2014/0254471 hereinafter referred to as Fang).
RE Claim 2, Xu, modified by Hosseini, discloses a user device, UE, as set forth in claim 1 above.
Xu, modified by Hosseini, does not specifically disclose if the UE receives no feedback from the receiving entity, the UE transmits the second feedback to indicate a non-successful receipt of the transmission at the receiving entity.
However, Fang teaches of if the UE receives no feedback from the receiving entity, the UE transmits the second feedback to indicate a non-successful receipt of the transmission at the receiving entity (See Fang [0130] – relay node sends NACK if it doesn’t receive response from next hop (loses backhaul link)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to implement the wireless communication system, as disclosed in Xu, modified by Hosseini, wherein if the UE receives no feedback from the receiving entity, the UE transmits the second feedback to indicate a non-successful receipt of the transmission at the receiving entity, as taught in Fang. One is motivated as such in order to improve wireless coverage and connectivity in the wireless network (See Fang Background; Summary).
RE Claim 5, Xu, modified by Hosseini, discloses a user device, UE, as set forth in claim 4 above. Xu, modified by Hosseini, does not specifically disclose wherein the one or more predefined events comprise one or more of:
a configured or pre-configured timer, during which the UE carries out the retransmissions, elapses, or
a configured or pre-configured maximum number of relay retransmissions which the UE carries out is reached.
However, Fang teaches of wherein the one or more predefined events comprise one or more of:
a configured or pre-configured timer, during which the UE carries out the retransmissions, elapses, or
a configured or pre-configured maximum number of relay retransmissions which the UE carries out is reached (See Fang [0130] – performing retransmissions up to a maximum number of retransmissions before sending back NACK (after a couple of retransmissions)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to implement the wireless communication system, as disclosed in Xu, modified by Hosseini, wherein the one or more predefined events comprise one or more of:
a configured or pre-configured timer, during which the UE carries out the retransmissions, elapses, or
a configured or pre-configured maximum number of relay retransmissions which the UE carries out is reached, as taught in Fang. One is motivated as such in order to improve wireless coverage and connectivity in the wireless network (See Fang Background; Summary).
RE Claim 6, Xu, modified by Hosseini, discloses a user device, UE, as set forth in claim 4 above. Xu, modified by Hosseini, does not specifically disclose wherein, responsive to the one or more predefined events, the UE is to transmit to the transmitting entity the second feedback indicating a non-successful receipt of the transmission at the receiving entity, within a configured or pre-configured time window following the receipt of the feedback.
However, Fang teaches of wherein, responsive to the one or more predefined events, the UE is to transmit to the transmitting entity the second feedback indicating a non-successful receipt of the transmission at the receiving entity, within a configured or pre-configured time window following the receipt of the feedback (See Fang [0130] – if no ACK/NACK is received, relay node retransmitting packet up to a couple times and then sending NACK back to the transmitting entity at configured time window (e.g. at earliest possible opportunity)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to implement the wireless communication system, as disclosed in Xu, modified by Hosseini, wherein, responsive to the one or more predefined events, the UE is to transmit to the transmitting entity the second feedback indicating a non-successful receipt of the transmission at the receiving entity, within a configured or pre-configured time window following the receipt of the feedback, as taught in Fang. One is motivated as such in order to improve wireless coverage and connectivity in the wireless network (See Fang Background; Summary).
Claims 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu et al. (US# 2020/0235876 hereinafter referred to as Xu) in view of Hosseini et al. (US# 2021/0112574 hereinafter referred to as Hosseini) and Damnjanovic et al. (US# 2012/0134305 hereinafter referred to as Damnjanovic).
RE Claim 9, Xu, modified by Hosseini, discloses a user device, UE, as set forth in claim 1 above. Xu, modified by Hosseini, does not specifically disclose wherein the feedback received from the receiving entity comprises, in addition to indicating a successful and/or non-successful receipt of the transmission at the receiving entity, additional information, including one or more of:
a link quality between the UE and the receiving entity,
a distance measure or a zone ID, indicating the distance between the UE and the receiving entity,
additional data assisting the transmitting entity to ensure that the receiving entity successfully receives the transmissions,
an indication that the receiving entity intends to transmit data to the transmitting entity,
a signal from the receiving entity indicating to stop a HARQ/transmission process,
a beam index, of a best beam or top-m beams received at the receiving UE and transmitted from the UE.
However, Damnjanovic teaches of wherein the feedback received from the receiving entity comprises, in addition to indicating a successful and/or non-successful receipt of the transmission at the receiving entity, additional information, including one or more of:
a link quality between the UE and the receiving entity,
a distance measure or a zone ID, indicating the distance between the UE and the receiving entity,
additional data assisting the transmitting entity to ensure that the receiving entity successfully receives the transmissions,
an indication that the receiving entity intends to transmit data to the transmitting entity (See Damnjanovic [0006], [0041] – sending both HARQ-ACK and SR together),
a signal from the receiving entity indicating to stop a HARQ/transmission process,
a beam index, of a best beam or top-m beams received at the receiving UE and transmitted from the UE.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to implement the wireless communication system, as disclosed in Xu, modified by Hosseini, wherein the feedback received from the receiving entity comprises, in addition to indicating a successful and/or non-successful receipt of the transmission at the receiving entity, additional information, including one or more of:
a link quality between the UE and the receiving entity,
a distance measure or a zone ID, indicating the distance between the UE and the receiving entity,
additional data assisting the transmitting entity to ensure that the receiving entity successfully receives the transmissions,
an indication that the receiving entity intends to transmit data to the transmitting entity,
a signal from the receiving entity indicating to stop a HARQ/transmission process,
a beam index, of a best beam or top-m beams received at the receiving UE and transmitted from the UE, as taught in Damnjanovic. One is motivated as such in order to improve the efficiency of control channel signaling (See Damnjanovic Abstract, Background; Summary).
RE Claim 10, Xu, modified by Hosseini, discloses a user device, UE, as set forth in claim 1 above. Xu, modified by Hosseini, does not specifically disclose wherein feedback received from the receiving entity is an aggregated feedback indicating a successful and/or non-successful receipt of two or more transmissions at the receiving entity.
However, Damnjanovic teaches of wherein feedback received from the receiving entity is an aggregated feedback indicating a successful and/or non-successful receipt of two or more transmissions at the receiving entity (See Damnjanovic [0035], [0037], [0072] – ACK/NACK bundling for multiple transmissions).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to implement the wireless communication system, as disclosed in Xu, modified by Hosseini, wherein feedback received from the receiving entity is an aggregated feedback indicating a successful and/or non-successful receipt of two or more transmissions at the receiving entity, as taught in Damnjanovic. One is motivated as such in order to improve the efficiency of control channel signaling (See Damnjanovic Abstract, Background; Summary).
RE Claim 11, Xu, modified by Hosseini and Damnjanovic, discloses a user device, UE, as set forth in claim 10 above, wherein the aggregated feedback may comprise one or more of:
an indication that within a predefined time window, some or all transmissions are received successfully or non-successfully,
an indication that a predefined number of transmissions are received successfully or non-successfully,
which of the transmissions are received successfully and/or which of the transmissions are received non-successfully or failed (See Damnjanovic [0011], [0035], [0037], [0072] – ACK/NACK bundling for multiple transmissions indicating which transmissions are ACK or NACK),
which of the successfully received transmissions are received with an exceeded delay budget,
an indication of a deteriorating link quality between the UE and the receiving entity,
an update indicating a new maximum possible QoS over the relay link between the UE and the remote UE.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 07/07/2026 have been fully considered.
Regarding Claims 13-14, 16, 20-21, 42, 44-45, 52-54, 59, see Allowable Subject Matter section.
Regarding Applicant's argument that the cited references do not teach Claims 1-11, the Examiner respectfully disagrees. The Applicant has argued that Xu does not describe two different feedbacks (first feedback, second feedback) carried on separate feedback links. The Examiner disagrees and submits that Xu teaches of sending a “first feedback” if the relaying entity is the intended recipient of the transmission (“transmission is directed to”) (See Xu [0041], [0096], [0100], [0108] – the end recipient of the transmission generates and sends back HARQ-ACK. In this case, since the relaying entity IS the end recipient, the relaying entity (UE) is the one that generates and transmits back the HARQ-ACK). In addition, Xu teaches of sending a “second feedback” if the relaying entity is not the intended recipient of the transmission. (See Xu [0041], [0096], [0100], [0108] – the end recipient of the transmission generates and sends back HARQ-ACK. In this case, since the relaying entity IS NOT the end recipient, the relaying entity (UE) receives and forwards a HARQ-ACK generated by the end recipient). The HARQ-ACK generated by the relaying entity (first feedback) and the HARQ-ACK received at the relaying entity and forwarded (second feedback) are different in Xu as the HARQ-ACK identifies the original message that is being “acknowledged”. A HARQ-ACK generated by the relaying entity as the intended recipient of the original transmission is different in content than a HARQ-ACK received at the relaying entity that is acknowledging a completely different transmission intended for a different end recipient. That is, XU DOES contemplate the relaying UE sending a first feedback about its own receipt (See Xu FIGs 6-7; [0096], [0100] - the UE 620c identifies that the packet is for UE 620c. In some embodiments, the packet destination UE, in FIG. 6 this is 620c, determines the source of the packet by checking the packet source ID. The packet destination UE can feedback a HARQ-ACK to another UE in the group or to the base station, according to the packet source ID) that is different in content to a second feedback that is forwarded from a different end receiving recipient UE.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 13-14, 16, 20-21, 42, 44-45, 52-54, 59 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Prior art teaches of a UE acting as a relaying entity to provide connectivity between a transmitting entity and a receiving entity or a wireless network (See Xu), wherein, responsive to receiving a transmission from the transmitting entity: if the transmission is directed to the relaying entity, sending a first feedback to the transmitting entity, wherein the first feedback indicates successful or non-successful receipt of the transmission at the relaying entity, and if the transmission is directed to the receiving entity: relaying the transmission towards the receiving entity, transmitting a second feedback instead of the first feedback to the transmitting entity, wherein the second feedback indicates a successful and/or non-successful receipt of the transmission at the receiving entity (See Xu). In addition, prior art teaches of sending feedback using PSFCH or PUCCH based on transmitting on SL or UL (See Hosseini), adjusting resources when it is determined there is not enough resources for transmission (See Back, Li), determining resources based on source ID (See Ko), and determining PUCCH or PSFCH resource for feedback based on certain parameters/configuration (See Lee).
However, prior art does not specifically disclose, nor would it have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine to produce:
“A user device, UE, for a wireless communication network,
wherein the UE is to act as a relaying entity so as to provide functionality to support connectivity between a transmitting entity and one or more receiving entities of the wireless communication network,
wherein responsive to receiving the transmission from the transmitting entity, the UE is to transmit a first feedback to the transmitting entity using a first feedback link between the transmitting entity and the UE, the first feedback indicating a successful and/or non-successful receipt of the transmission at the UE,
wherein, responsive to receiving a transmission from the transmitting entity and to relaying the transmission towards the receiving entity, the UE is to transmit a second feedback to the transmitting entity, the second feedback indicating a successful and/or non-successful receipt of the transmission at the receiving entity, and
the UE is to transmit the second feedback associated with the receiving entity using a second feedback link between the transmitting entity and the UE, the first and second feedback links using different resources in an existing PHY channel,
wherein, if the transmitting entity is another UE or a relaying entity, the UE is to transmit the second feedback using PSFCH resources scheduled by the transmitting entity for the first feedback,
wherein, if the transmitting entity is a network entity, the UE is to transmit the second feedback using the PUCCH or PUSCH resources scheduled by the transmitting entity for the first feedback”, as claimed (emphasis added, Claim 13); or
“A wireless communication network, comprising a transmitting entity for a wireless communication network,
wherein the transmitting entity is connectable to a relaying entity so as to provide functionality to support connectivity between the transmitting entity and one or more receiving entities of the wireless communication network, and
wherein, responsive to sending a transmission to the relaying entity for relaying to the receiving entity, the transmitting entity is to receive from the relaying entity a feedback, the feedback indicating a successful and/or non-successful receipt of the transmission at the receiving entity, one or more remote user devices, receiving entity,
one or more user devices providing functionality to support connectivity between the transmitting entity and the one or more receiving entities, and
a base station,
wherein the relaying entity and the transmitting entity operate in Mode 1 so that the base station indicates the resources to be used by the transmitting entity and the relaying entity,
wherein the relaying entity is configured or preconfigured with resources via configured grants for the transmission of the data to the receiving entity, and
wherein if the base station determines that the resources in the configured grants are not sufficient for the transmission of the data from the relaying entity to the receiving entity, the base station provides to the relaying entity a control message indicating additional resources for the transmission to the relaying entity”, as claimed (emphasis added, Claim 42).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Ko et al. (US# 2022/0159649), Lee et al. (US# 2022/0201654), Li et al. (US# 2021/0092763).
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 Steve R Young whose telephone number is (571)270-7518. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5pm.
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, Chirag G Shah can be reached at (571) 272-3144. 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.
/STEVE R YOUNG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2477
