Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s representative filed arguments on 10/28/2025 with respect to
independent claim 1 has been considered and are not persuasive. Specifically,
applicant presented arguments on Page 9 that the prior art of PENG does not
specifically teach “determining, by the second UE, whether the first DCR message through the indirect path and the second DCR message through the direct path are transmitted from a same UE based on first local ID and the second local ID being same”
Examiner respectfully disagrees with applicant’s arguments.
The amended claim language describes that the second UE determines whether DCR messages received through indirect and direct paths are from the same UE based on matching identifiers. The claim reflects that both messages share the same local ID, showing they originate from one UE despite different paths.
The combination of PENG and PERRAS, specifically PERRAS teaches this feature “determining, by the second UE, whether the first DCR message through the indirect path and the second DCR message through the direct path are transmitted from a same UE based on first local ID and the second local ID being same” (as shown in FIG. 4, the second UE determines that the first DCR message through the indirect path and the second DCR message through the direct path are transmitted from the same UE based on identical local identifiers reused across both links. See PERRAS [0072], [0111], [0116], [0145]).
[Therefore, the second UE identifies that both the indirect and direct path messages originate from the same UE through matching local identifiers reused across the two links. This sequence supports the described flow and content of the messages].
Therefore, as shown above the combination of PENG and PERRAS teaches the amended limitations of claim 9.
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.
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 1,3,7 and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over PENG (US 2023/0082590 A1), in view of PERRAS et al. (US 2024/0349084 A1; hereinafter “PERRAS”).
Regarding claim 1, PENG teaches a method of operating a second user equipment (UE) ([0290] the method includes the second terminal device) for relaying in a wireless communication system ([0177] FIG. 5 a UE-UE relay system), the method comprising: establishing, by the second UE ([0042] the second terminal device), a connection with a relay UE ([0042] The second terminal device sends, when transmission quality of the first message meets a first preset condition, a second message to at least one candidate relay device that meets the first preset condition, where the second message is for establishing a first unicast connection).
receiving, by the second UE ([0295] the second terminal device), a first direct communication request (DCR) message (FIG. 2 S210) including a first L2 ID (identifier) and a first local ID which is transmitted from the relay UE through an indirect path ([0295] The second terminal device receives a second identifier of the first terminal device when receiving the first message, where the second identifier is allocated by the at least one candidate relay device to the first terminal device, [0042] A second terminal device receives a first message sent by at least one candidate relay device, where the first message includes a first identifier of the second terminal device),
receiving, by the second UE, a second DCR message including a second L2 ID and a second local ID which is transmitted from a first UE through a direct path ([0083] the initiating UE allocates the local identifiers to the different target UEs, so that the initiating UE can distinguish between the different target UEs, [0263] the first terminal device allocates local identifiers to the different target UEs, so that the first terminal device can distinguish between the different target UEs),
However, PENG does not teach selecting one of the direct path or the indirect path based on respectively different thresholds related to signal strength, based on the first DCR message and the second DCR message being transmitted from the same UE, the thresholds respectively correspond to the indirect path or the direct path, determining, by the second UE, whether the first DCR message through the indirect path and the second DCR message through the direct path are transmitted from a same UE based on first local ID and the second local ID being same.
In an analogous art, PERRAS teaches selecting one of the direct path or the indirect path based on respectively different thresholds related to signal strength ([0028] The data has differing throughput requirements, reliability requirements, data throughput requirements, mobility requirements, [0143] Operation 7-1, the source UE1 determines to switch the traffic with the target UE2 to via an indirect link or direct link (operation 7-0) based on a link quality threshold, [0144] The threshold indicates a LOW threshold (indirect link) and/or a HIGH threshold (direct link) such that data is sent via link; [0150]), based on the first DCR message and the second DCR message being
transmitted from the same UE, the thresholds respectively correspond to the
indirect path or the direct path ([0150] when a threshold is met, triggering the path
switching from the direct link to the indirect link or vice-versa),
determining, by the second UE, whether the first DCR message through the indirect path and the second DCR message through the direct path are transmitted from a same UE based on first local ID and the second local ID being same ([0072] The source UE detects that the source UE currently has an indirect link with a target UE when receiving a second message (e.g., a Direct Communication Accept (DCA) message for the direct link establishment), [0111] User info of the target UE2 discovered is the same user info that is associated to an indirect link via the Relay, [0116] If the same IP addresses are re-used, the IP addresses from the indirect link are associated with the direct link, [0145] The target UE2 determines if the IP addresses used for the direct link are re-used for the indirect link via the Relay based on reception of an indication (e.g., the “keep-IP-addr” reuse indication)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the threshold as taught by PERRAS within the parameter of PENG. One would have been motivated to do so in order to provide effective support path switching, multiple paths and/or seamless continuity during a Discovery procedure and/or during a link establishment procedure to enhance system performance (PERRAS [0074]).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of PENG and PERRAS, specifically PERRAS teaches wherein the first DCR message includes a source address of the relay UE and the second DCR message includes a source address of the first UE ( [0105] WTRU1 broadcasts a DCR message (e.g., a first message), WTRU1 specifies WTRU1-L2-ID as the source ID for the per-hop link, [0107] the per-hop destination ID is set to this specific relay per-hop ID).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the WTRU1 as taught by PERRAS within the parameter of PENG. One would have been motivated to do so in order to provide effective support path switching, multiple paths and/or seamless continuity during a Discovery procedure and/or during a link establishment procedure to enhance system performance (PERRAS [0074]).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of PENG and PERRAS, specifically PENG teaches wherein the first local ID or the second local ID is included in a medium access control (MAC) header. ([0332] When sending the first message, the initiating UE further sends a destination identifier and a source identifier. which are carried in a MAC header).
Regarding claim 9, PENG teaches a second user equipment (UE) ([0290] the second terminal device) in a wireless communication system ([0177] FIG. 5 wireless communication system), the second UE comprising:
at least one processor ([0150] a processor); and
at least one computer memory ([0150] a memory) operably connectable to the at least one processor and configured to store instructions that, when executed, cause the at least one processor to perform operations comprising ([0150] the memory is configured to store program instructions and data necessary for the communication apparatus, [0473] executed by the processor): establishing, by the second UE ([0042] the second terminal device), a connection with a relay UE ([0042] The second terminal device sends, when transmission quality of the first message meets a first preset condition, a second message to at least one candidate relay device that meets the first preset condition, where the second message is for establishing a first unicast connection).
receiving, by the second UE ([0295] the second terminal device), a first direct communication request (DCR) message (FIG. 2 S210) including a first L2 ID (identifier) and a first local ID which is transmitted from the relay UE through an indirect path ([0295] The second terminal device receives a second identifier of the first terminal device when receiving the first message, where the second identifier is allocated by the at least one candidate relay device to the first terminal device, [0042] A second terminal device receives a first message sent by at least one candidate relay device, where the first message includes a first identifier of the second terminal device),
receiving, by the second UE, a second DCR message including a second L2 ID and a second local ID which is transmitted from a first UE through a direct path ([0083] the initiating UE allocates the local identifiers to the different target UEs, so that the initiating UE can distinguish between the different target UEs, [0263] the first terminal device allocates local identifiers to the different target UEs, so that the first terminal device can distinguish between the different target UEs),
However, PENG does not teach selecting one of the direct path or the indirect path based on respectively different thresholds related to signal strength, based on the first DCR message and the second DCR message being transmitted from the same UE, the thresholds respectively correspond to the indirect path or the direct path, determining, by the second UE, whether the first DCR message through the indirect path and the second DCR message through the direct path are transmitted from a same UE based on first local ID and the second local ID being same.
In an analogous art, PERRAS teaches selecting one of the direct path or the indirect path based on respectively different thresholds related to signal strength ([0028] The data has differing throughput requirements, reliability requirements, data throughput requirements, mobility requirements, [0143] Operation 7-1, the source UE1 determines to switch the traffic with the target UE2 to via an indirect link or direct link (operation 7-0) based on a link quality threshold, [0144] The threshold indicates a LOW threshold (indirect link) and/or a HIGH threshold (direct link) such that data is sent via link; [0150]), based on the first DCR message and the second DCR message being
transmitted from the same UE, the thresholds respectively correspond to the
indirect path or the direct path ([0150] when a threshold is met, triggering the path
switching from the direct link to the indirect link or vice-versa),
determining, by the second UE, whether the first DCR message through the indirect path and the second DCR message through the direct path are transmitted from a same UE based on first local ID and the second local ID being same ([0072] The source UE detects that the source UE currently has an indirect link with a target UE when receiving a second message (e.g., a Direct Communication Accept (DCA) message for the direct link establishment), [0111] User info of the target UE2 discovered is the same user info that is associated to an indirect link via the Relay, [0116] If the same IP addresses are re-used, the IP addresses from the indirect link are associated with the direct link, [0145] The target UE2 determines if the IP addresses used for the direct link are re-used for the indirect link via the Relay based on reception of an indication (e.g., the “keep-IP-addr” reuse indication)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the threshold as taught by PERRAS within the parameter of PENG. One would have been motivated to do so in order to provide effective support path switching, multiple paths and/or seamless continuity during a Discovery procedure and/or during a link establishment procedure to enhance system performance (PERRAS [0074]).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of PENG and PERRAS, specifically PENG teaches wherein the second UE is configured to communicate with at least one of another UE, a UE related to an autonomous vehicle, a base station, or a network ([0204] In a wireless communication system, data communication is performed between UEs via a network, or communication between UEs may be directly performed not through a network device. A typical application scenario of sidelink communication is vehicle-to-everything (V2X). In the vehicle-to-everything, each vehicle is one UE, [0205] The unicast communication is similar to data communication performed after a radio resource control (RRC) connection is established between a UE and a base station).
Conclusion
The following prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US 2024/0373321 A1 (CHEN et al.) discloses method, device and computer program product for wireless communication.
US 2024/0389180 A1 (LI et al.) discloses a sidelink communication apparatus, applicable to a second terminal as a target relay terminal for direct to indirect path switch of a first terminal as a remote terminal.
US 2025/0016656 A1 (ZHENG et al.) discloses a data transmission method and apparatus, a terminal, and a network-side device.
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 THEODORE IM whose telephone number is (571)270-1955. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9AM-5PM ET.
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, UN C CHO can be reached on 571-272-7919. 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.
/T.I./ Examiner, Art Unit 2413
/UN C CHO/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2413