DETAILED ACTION
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office Action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 01/14/2026 has been entered and made of record.
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 .
Claim Status
Claims 1, 4, 9, 11, 14, 19, 21, 23, 25-26 and 28 are amended.
No new claim is/are added.
Claims 1-30 are pending for examination.
Applicant Argument
Applicant’s response has been fully considered. Below are applicant’s main arguments and examiner’s response to those arguments:
Applicant argument: (remark pages 9-11), filed on 01/14/2026, with respect to claim 1, ‘independent claim 1 has been amended to recite … As such, Applicant requests withdrawal of the rejection of record’.
Examiner’s response: Examiner respectfully disagrees. First, in response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, examiner would like to mention that one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
Sun teaches send UL data over PUSCH of multiple CCs (Sun: [FIG.1],[FIG.2], [FIG.5], [0042], [0092]) and Type teaches device (WTRU) can be configured with UL split buffer threshold which is dependent on a remaining PDB threshold, in another word, if all UL data can be sent via the first link within the remaining PDB threshold (it is OK to send twice or more times if only within the remaining PDB threshold), then do not activate the second link to send any UL data; otherwise, if the UL data cannot be sent via the first link within the remaining PDB threshold, then the UL data are divided into two portions where first portion can be sent over the first link within the remaining PDB threshold (may be sent over the first link twice or more times if only within the remaining PDB threshold) and the remaining portion which cannot be sent over the first link within the remaining PDB threshold are sent over the second link (Teyeb: [Abstract], [0081], [0075]). Therefore, combination of Sun and Teyeb teaches the subject matters as claimed.
Applicant’s arguments (remark pages 9-12), filed on 01/14/2026, with respect to claims 1-30 have been considered but are not convincing. The claim rejection for claims 1-30 under 35 USC § 103 are not withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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, 6-8, 11-13, 16-18, 20-22, 24 and 26-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun et al. (US 20240057118 A1), hereinafter “Sun”, in view of Teyeb et al. (US 20240196262 A1), hereinafter “Teyeb”.
Per claim 1, 11 and 26:
Regarding claim 1, Sun teaches ‘A user equipment (UE)’ (Sun: [0016]: “FIG. 13 illustrates a user equipment”); ‘comprising: a memory’ (Sun: [FIG.13]: “Memory”); ‘storing processor-readable code’ (this is implied); ‘at least one processor’ (Sun: [FIG.13]: “Processors”); ‘coupled to the memory’ (this is implied); ‘the at least one processor configured to execute the processor-readable code to cause the at least one processor to’ (Sun: [0154]: “processor circuitry that executes or otherwise operates computer-executable instructions, such as program code, software modules, or functional processes from memory/storage 1312 to cause the UE 1300 to perform operations”);
‘receive, from a base station, a downlink control information (DCI) configured to schedule a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) transmission, from the UE to the base station, via a first number of component carriers (CCs)’ (Sun: [FIG.5]: “PUSCH”, “CC1”, “CC2”; [0051]: “multi-cell PUSCH/PDSCH scheduling with a single DCI … a scheduling Cell 1 schedules itself and two other cells Cell2 and Cell 3 simultaneously”; [FIG.1]: “Component Carrier (CC) 122”, “Component Carrier (CC) 124”; [FIG.2]: “Master cell group (MCG) 220”, “Secondary cell group (SCG) 221”; [0091]: “receiving a first downlink control information (DCI) message that includes: a first carrier information field (CIF) that indicates a first component carrier (CC); and a second CIF that indicates a second CC that is different than the first CC”, receive DCI configured to schedule PUSCH transmission via CCs of MCG; [0017]: “a base station”);
‘transmit, to the base station, a portion of the PUSCH transmission via the first number of CCs’ (Sun: [0092]: “transmitting a first uplink data transmission on the first CC and transmitting a second uplink data transmission on the second CC”, transmit a portion of UL data via CCs of MCG);
‘transmit, to the base station, a remaining portion of the PUSCH transmission via a second number of CCs based on a remaining uplink packet delay budget (PDB) failing to satisfy a remaining uplink PDB threshold after transmitting the portion of the PUSCH transmission via the first number of CCs’ (Sun: [0042]: “FIG. 2 illustrates an example of dual connectivity (DC), in which the UE 104 may simultaneously transmit and receive data on multiple component carriers (CCs) from two different cell groups”; could transmit other portion of UL data via CCs of SCG (a second number of CCs)). However, Sun fails to expressly teach based on a remaining uplink packet delay budget (PDB) failing to satisfy a remaining uplink PDB threshold after transmitting the portion of the PUSCH transmission via the first number of CCs.
However, Teyeb in the same field of endeavor teaches device (WTRU) can be configured with UL split buffer threshold which is dependent on a remaining PDB threshold, in another word, if all UL data can be sent via the first link within the remaining PDB threshold (it is OK to send twice or more times if only within the remaining PDB threshold), then do not activate the second link to send any UL data; otherwise, if the UL data cannot be sent via the first link within the remaining PDB threshold, then the UL data are divided into two portions where first portion can be sent over the first link within the remaining PDB threshold (may be sent over the first link twice or more times if only within the remaining PDB threshold) and the remaining portion which cannot be sent over the first link within the remaining PDB threshold are sent over the second link (Teyeb: [Abstract]: “The device may receive a packet and may determine a remaining PDB. The device may select a buffer threshold based on the configuration information and the determined remaining PDB. If an amount of data in an uplink (UL) buffer is equal to or above the selected buffer threshold, the device may transmit the packet via a first available link. If the determined remaining PDB is less than the remaining PDB threshold, the device may transmit the packet via both the first link and the second link”; [0081]: “The UL split buffer thresholds (e.g., multiple buffer thresholds) may be dependent on a remaining PDB range of packets”; [0075]: “WTRUs may be configured to use different UL split buffer thresholds (e.g., multiple buffer thresholds, such as a first buffer threshold and a second buffer threshold). The UL split buffer thresholds (e.g., multiple buffer thresholds, such as the first buffer threshold and the second buffer threshold) may be dependent on a remaining PDB”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Teyeb’s teaching with that of Sun for device to transmit, to the base station, a remaining portion of the PUSCH transmission via a second number of CCs based on a remaining uplink packet delay budget (PDB) failing to satisfy a remaining uplink PDB threshold after transmitting the portion of the PUSCH transmission via the first number of CC in order to optimize UL split buffer threshold for dual connectivity based on a remaining PDB (see reference quotes in element above).
Regarding claim 11, claim 11 recites the method implemented by the UE of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 26, claim 26 recites the memory and the method implemented by the UE of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above).
Per claim 2, 12 and 27:
Regarding claim 2, combination of Sun and Teyeb teaches the UE of claim 1 (discussed above).
Sun teaches ‘wherein the DCI is further configured to schedule the PUSCH transmission, from the UE to the base station, via the second number of CCs’ (Sun: [0097]: “When a single DCI is allowed to schedule multiple PDSCH/PUSCH simultaneously in different cells, in terms of comparing with … pdcch-BlindDetectionSCG-UE”; [FIG.2]: “Secondary cell group (SCG) 221”, “Serving cell 216 (PSCell)”, “Serving cell 218 (SCell)”; schedule the PUSCH transmission via CCs of SCG).
Regarding claim 12, claim 12 recites the method implemented by the UE of claim 2 (see rejection of claim 2 above).
Regarding claim 27, claim 27 recites the memory and the method implemented by the UE of claim 2 (see rejection of claim 2 above).
Per claim 3 and 13:
Regarding claim 3, combination of Sun and Teyeb teaches the UE of claim 1 (discussed above).
Sun teaches ‘wherein the DCI includes a first carrier indicator field (CIF) and a second CIF’ (Sun: [0091]: “receiving a first downlink control information (DCI) message that includes: a first carrier information field (CIF) … and a second CIF”); ‘the first CIF identifies the first number of CCs’ (Sun: [0063]: “one value of the CIF may map to a first combination of two or more CCs”); ‘the second CIF identifies the second number of CCs’ (Sun: [0063]: “another value of the CIF may map to a second combination of two or more CCs”).
Regarding claim 13, claim 13 recites the method implemented by the UE of claim 3 (see rejection of claim 3 above).
Per claim 6 and 16:
Regarding claim 6, combination of Sun and Teyeb teaches the UE of claim 1 (discussed above).
Sun teaches ‘wherein the first number of CCs equals one’ (Sun: [0042]: “Each of the MCG 220 and SCG 221 has a primary serving cell and, optionally, one or more secondary serving cells”, MCG could have only PCell without any SCell); ‘the second number of CCs equals two or more’ ({FIG.2]: “Secondary cell group (SCG) 221”: {“CC 226”, “CC 228”}, 2 CCs of SCG).
Regarding claim 16, claim 16 recites the method implemented by the UE of claim 6 (see rejection of claim 6 above).
Per claim 7 and 17:
Regarding claim 7, combination of Sun and Teyeb teaches the UE of claim 1 (discussed above).
Sun teaches ‘via the second number of CCs based on a radio resource control (RRC) configured value’ (Sun: [0042]: “dual connectivity (DC), in which the UE 104 may simultaneously transmit and receive data on multiple component carriers (CCs) from two different cell groups”; [0063]: “another value of the CIF may map to a second combination of two or more CCs”; [0047]: “mapping of the value of the CIF to the actual cell is configured by RRC”, via the CCs of SCG based on RRC configured value).
Regarding claim 17, claim 17 recites the method implemented by the UE of claim 7 (see rejection of claim 7 above).
Per claim 8 and 18:
Regarding claim 8, combination of Sun and Teyeb teaches the UE of claim 7 (discussed above).
Sun teaches ‘wherein the RRC configured value indicates the second number of CCs’ (Sun: [0063]: “another value of the CIF may map to a second combination of two or more CCs”; [0047]: “mapping of the value of the CIF to the actual cell is configured by RRC”, RRC configured value would indicate the CCs of SCG).
Regarding claim 18, claim 18 recites the method implemented by the UE of claim 8 (see rejection of claim 8 above).
Regarding claim 20, combination of Sun and Teyeb teaches the method of claim 17 (discussed above).
Sun teaches ‘receiving, from the base station, a RRC message including the RRC configured value’ (Sun: [0195]: “receiving the indication by radio resource control (RRC) signaling”; [0017]: “a base station”, receive a RRC message include the RRC configured value from the base station).
Regarding claim 21, Sun teaches ‘An apparatus configured for wireless communication’ (Sun: [FIG.1]: “UE” for wireless communication);
‘the apparatus comprising:
means for receiving, from a base station, a downlink control information (DCI) configured to schedule a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) transmission, from the apparatus to the base station, via a first number of component carriers (CCs)’ (Sun: [FIG.5]: “PUSCH”, “CC1”, “CC2”; [0051]: “multi-cell PUSCH/PDSCH scheduling with a single DCI … a scheduling Cell 1 schedules itself and two other cells Cell2 and Cell 3 simultaneously”; [FIG.1]: “Component Carrier (CC) 122”, “Component Carrier (CC) 124”; [FIG.2]: “Master cell group (MCG) 220”, “Secondary cell group (SCG) 221”; [0091]: “receiving a first downlink control information (DCI) message that includes: a first carrier information field (CIF) that indicates a first component carrier (CC); and a second CIF that indicates a second CC that is different than the first CC”, receive DCI configured to schedule PUSCH transmission via CCs of MCG; [0017]: “a base station”);
‘means for transmitting, to the base station, a portion of the PUSCH transmission via the first number of CCs’ (Sun: [0092]: “transmitting a first uplink data transmission on the first CC and transmitting a second uplink data transmission on the second CC”, transmit a portion of UL data via CCs of MCG);
‘means for transmitting, to the base station, a remaining portion of the PUSCH transmission via a second number of CCs based on a remaining uplink packet delay budget (PDB) failing to satisfy a remaining uplink PDB threshold after transmitting the portion of the PUSCH transmission via the first number of CCs’ (Sun: [0042]: “FIG. 2 illustrates an example of dual connectivity (DC), in which the UE 104 may simultaneously transmit and receive data on multiple component carriers (CCs) from two different cell groups”; could transmit other portion of UL data via CCs of SCG (a second number of CCs)). However, Sun fails to expressly teach transmit a remaining portion of UL data based on a remaining uplink packet delay budget (PDB) failing to satisfy a remaining uplink PDB threshold after transmitting the portion of the PUSCH transmission via the first number of CCs.
However, Teyeb teaches device (WTRU) can be configured with UL split buffer threshold which is dependent on a remaining PDB threshold, in another word, if all UL data can be sent via the first link within the remaining PDB threshold (it is OK to send twice or more times if only within the remaining PDB threshold), then do not activate the second link to send any UL data; otherwise, if the UL data cannot be sent via the first link within the remaining PDB threshold, then the UL data are divided into two portions where first portion can be sent over the first link within the remaining PDB threshold (may be sent over the first link twice or more times if only within the remaining PDB threshold) and the remaining portion which cannot be sent over the first link within the remaining PDB threshold are sent over the second link (Teyeb: [Abstract]: “The device may receive a packet and may determine a remaining PDB. The device may select a buffer threshold based on the configuration information and the determined remaining PDB. If an amount of data in an uplink (UL) buffer is equal to or above the selected buffer threshold, the device may transmit the packet via a first available link. If the determined remaining PDB is less than the remaining PDB threshold, the device may transmit the packet via both the first link and the second link”; [0081]: “The UL split buffer thresholds (e.g., multiple buffer thresholds) may be dependent on a remaining PDB range of packets”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Teyeb’s teaching with that of Sun for device to transmit the remaining portion of UL data via SCG based on a remaining uplink packet delay budget (PDB) failing to satisfy a remaining uplink PDB threshold after transmitting the portion of the PUSCH transmission via the first number of CCs in order to optimize UL split buffer threshold for dual connectivity based on a remaining PDB (see reference quotes in element above).
Regarding claim 22, combination of Sun and Teyeb teaches the apparatus of claim 21 (discussed above).
Sun teaches ‘wherein the DCI includes a first carrier indicator field (CIF) and a second CIF’ (Sun: [0091]: “receiving a first downlink control information (DCI) message that includes: a first carrier information field (CIF) … and a second CIF”); ‘the first CIF identifies the first number of CCs’ (Sun: [0063]: “one value of the CIF may map to a first combination of two or more CCs”); ‘the second CIF identifies the second number of CCs’ (Sun: [0063]: “another value of the CIF may map to a second combination of two or more CCs”).
Regarding claim 24, combination of Sun and Teyeb teaches the apparatus of claim 21 (discussed above).
Sun teaches ‘via the second number of CCs based on a radio resource control (RRC) configured value’ (Sun: [0042]: “dual connectivity (DC), in which the UE 104 may simultaneously transmit and receive data on multiple component carriers (CCs) from two different cell groups”; [0063]: “another value of the CIF may map to a second combination of two or more CCs”; [0047]: “mapping of the value of the CIF to the actual cell is configured by RRC”, via the CCs of SCG based on RRC configured value).
Claims 4-5, 9-10, 14-15, 23, 25 and 28-30 and are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over combination of Sun and Teyeb, in view of Rao et al. (US 20230283424 A1), hereinafter “Rao”.
Per claim 4 and 14:
Regarding claim 4, combination of Sun and Teyeb teaches the UE of claim 1 (discussed above).
Combination of Sun and Teyeb teaches ‘wherein the DCI includes an indication of the remaining uplink PDB threshold’ (Sun: “Scheduling of uplink scheduling … using downlink control information (DCI) messages”. Teyeb: [Abstract]: “A device may transmit data to a first parent node via a first link and to a second parent node via a second link. The device may receive configuration information indicating at least one of: a first buffer threshold associated with a first remaining packet delay budget (PDB)”, may receive configuration information includes an indication of a remaining uplink PDB threshold). However, combination of Sun and Teyeb fails to expressly teach the configuration information is via DCI.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Teyeb’s teaching of remaining UL PDB threshold with that of Sun in order to optimize UL split buffer threshold for dual connectivity based on a remaining PDB (Teyeb: [0081]: “The UL split buffer thresholds (e.g., multiple buffer thresholds) may be dependent on a remaining PDB range of packets”).
However, Rao in the same field of endeavor teaches UE could receive indication of PDB in DCI (Rao: [0115]: “The WTRU may receive the indication in DCI … The indication may include one or more updated LCH parameters (e.g., priority, packet delay budget (PDB)”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Rao’s teaching with that of combination of Sun and Teyeb for the DCI to include an indication of a remaining uplink PDB threshold in order to manage UL data transmission by enforcing PDB (Teyeb: [Title]: “ENFORCING PACKET DELAY BUDGETS”).
Regarding claim 14, claim 14 recites the method implemented by the UE of claim 4 (see rejection of claim 4 above).
Per claim 5 and 15:
Regarding claim 5, combination of Sun, Teyeb and Rao teaches the UE of claim 4 (discussed above).
Combination of Sun and Teyeb ‘transmit, to the base station, the remaining portion of the PUSCH transmission via the first number of CCs when the remaining uplink PDB satisfies the remaining uplink PDB threshold’ (Sun: [FIG.2]: “Master cell group (MCG) 220”, “Serving cell 212 (PCell)”, “Serving cell 213 (SCell)”. Teyeb: [Abstract]: “The device may receive a packet and may determine a remaining PDB. The device may select a buffer threshold based on the configuration information and the determined remaining PDB. If an amount of data in an uplink (UL) buffer is equal to or above the selected buffer threshold, the device may transmit the packet via a first available link”. Would transmit the remaining portion of UL date via CCs of MCG when the remaining uplink PDB satisfies the remaining uplink PDB threshold).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Teyeb’s teaching of remaining UL PDB threshold with that of Sun in order to optimize UL split buffer threshold for dual connectivity based on a remaining PDB (Teyeb: [0081]: “The UL split buffer thresholds (e.g., multiple buffer thresholds) may be dependent on a remaining PDB range of packets”).
Regarding claim 15, claim 15 recites the method implemented by the UE of claim 5 (see rejection of claim 5 above).
Per claim 9 and 19:
Regarding claim 9, combination of Sun and Teyeb teaches the UE of claim 7 (discussed above).
Combination of Sun and Teyeb teaches ‘the RRC configured value indicates the remaining uplink PDB threshold’ (Sun: [0195]: “receiving the indication by radio resource control (RRC) signaling”. Teyeb: [Abstract]: “A device may transmit data to a first parent node via a first link and to a second parent node via a second link. The device may receive configuration information indicating at least one of: a first buffer threshold associated with a first remaining packet delay budget (PDB)”, may receive configuration information includes an indication of a remaining uplink PDB threshold). However, combination of Sun and Teyeb fails to expressly teach the configuration information is via RRC configured value;
‘transmits the remaining portion of the PUSCH transmission via the second number of CCs based on the RRC configured value when the remaining uplink PDB fails to satisfy the remaining uplink PDB threshold’ (Sun: [0042]: “FIG. 2 illustrates an example of dual connectivity (DC), in which the UE 104 may simultaneously transmit and receive data on multiple component carriers (CCs) from two different cell groups”; [FIG.2]: “Secondary cell group (SCG) 221”, “Serving cell 216 (PSCell)”, “Serving cell 218 (SCell)”, via CCs of SCG. Teyeb: [Abstract]: “The device may receive a packet and may determine a remaining PDB. The device may select a buffer threshold based on the configuration information and the determined remaining PDB … If the determined remaining PDB is less than the remaining PDB threshold, the device may transmit the packet via both the first link and the second link”; would transmit the remaining UL data over the second link (CCs of SCG) when the remaining uplink PDB fails to satisfy the remaining uplink PDB threshold).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Teyeb’s teaching of remaining UL PDB threshold with that of Sun in order to optimize UL split buffer threshold for dual connectivity based on a remaining PDB (Teyeb: [0081]: “The UL split buffer thresholds (e.g., multiple buffer thresholds) may be dependent on a remaining PDB range of packets”).
However, Rao teaches UE could receive indication of PDB in RRC (Rao: [0115]: “The WTRU may receive the indication in DCI, in a DL MAC CE, in an RRC message… The indication may include one or more updated LCH parameters (e.g., priority, packet delay budget (PDB)”, indication of PDB in RRC message).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Rao’s teaching with that of combination of Sun and Teyeb for the RRC configured value to include an indication of a remaining uplink PDB threshold in order to manage UL data transmission by enforcing PDB (Teyeb: [Title]: “ENFORCING PACKET DELAY BUDGETS”).
Regarding claim 19, claim 19 recites the method implemented by the UE of claim 9 (see rejection of claim 9 above).
Regarding claim 10, combination of Sun, Teyeb and Rao teaches the UE of claim 9 (discussed above).
Combination of Sun and Teyeb teaches ‘transmit, to the base station, the remaining portion of the PUSCH transmission via the first number of CCs when the remaining uplink PDB satisfies the remaining uplink PDB threshold’ (Sun: [FIG.2]: “Master cell group (MCG) 220”, “Serving cell 212 (PCell)”, “Serving cell 213 (SCell)”. Teyeb: [Abstract]: “The device may receive a packet and may determine a remaining PDB. The device may select a buffer threshold based on the configuration information and the determined remaining PDB. If an amount of data in an uplink (UL) buffer is equal to or above the selected buffer threshold, the device may transmit the packet via a first available link”. Would transmit the remaining portion of UL date via CCs of MCG when the remaining uplink PDB satisfies the remaining uplink PDB threshold).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Teyeb’s teaching of remaining UL PDB threshold with that of Sun in order to optimize UL split buffer threshold for dual connectivity based on a remaining PDB (Teyeb: [0081]: “The UL split buffer thresholds (e.g., multiple buffer thresholds) may be dependent on a remaining PDB range of packets”).
Regarding claim 23, combination of Sun and Teyeb teaches the apparatus of claim 21 (discussed above).
Combination of Sun and Teyeb teaches ‘wherein the DCI includes an indication of the remaining uplink PDB threshold’ (Sun: “Scheduling of uplink scheduling … using downlink control information (DCI) messages”. Teyeb: [Abstract]: “A device may transmit data to a first parent node via a first link and to a second parent node via a second link. The device may receive configuration information indicating at least one of: a first buffer threshold associated with a first remaining packet delay budget (PDB)”, may receive configuration information includes an indication of a remaining uplink PDB threshold). However, combination of Sun and Teyeb fails to expressly teach the configuration information is via DCI.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Teyeb’s teaching of remaining UL PDB threshold with that of Sun in order to optimize UL split buffer threshold for dual connectivity based on a remaining PDB (Teyeb: [0081]: “The UL split buffer thresholds (e.g., multiple buffer thresholds) may be dependent on a remaining PDB range of packets”).
However, Rao teaches UE could receive indication of PDB in DCI (Rao: [0115]: “The WTRU may receive the indication in DCI … The indication may include one or more updated LCH parameters (e.g., priority, packet delay budget (PDB)”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Rao’s teaching with that of combination of Sun and Teyeb for the DCI to include an indication of a remaining uplink PDB threshold in order to manage UL data transmission by enforcing PDB (Teyeb: [Title]: “ENFORCING PACKET DELAY BUDGETS”).
Regarding claim 25, combination of Sun and Teyeb teaches the apparatus of claim 24 (discussed above).
Combination of Sun and Teyeb teaches ‘the RRC configured value indicates the second number of CCs and the remaining uplink PDB threshold’ (Sun: [0042]: “dual connectivity (DC), in which the UE 104 may simultaneously transmit and receive data on multiple component carriers (CCs) from two different cell groups”; [0195]: “receiving the indication by radio resource control (RRC) signaling”; [0063]: “another value of the CIF may map to a second combination of two or more CCs”; [0047]: “mapping of the value of the CIF to the actual cell is configured by RRC”, indication CCs of SCG by RRC configured value. Teyeb: [Abstract]: “A device may transmit data to a first parent node via a first link and to a second parent node via a second link. The device may receive configuration information indicating at least one of: a first buffer threshold associated with a first remaining packet delay budget (PDB)”, may receive configuration information includes an indication of a remaining uplink PDB threshold). However, combination of Sun and Teyeb fails to expressly teach the configuration information is via RRC configured value;
‘the means for transmitting the remaining portion of the PUSCH transmission via the second number of CCs based on the RRC configured value includes the means for transmitting the PUSCH transmission using the second number of CCs based on the RRC configured value when the remaining uplink PDB fails to satisfy the remaining uplink PDB threshold’ (Sun: [0042]: “FIG. 2 illustrates an example of dual connectivity (DC), in which the UE 104 may simultaneously transmit and receive data on multiple component carriers (CCs) from two different cell groups”; [FIG.2]: “Secondary cell group (SCG) 221”, “Serving cell 216 (PSCell)”, “Serving cell 218 (SCell)”, using CCs of SCG. Teyeb: [Abstract]: “The device may receive a packet and may determine a remaining PDB. The device may select a buffer threshold based on the configuration information and the determined remaining PDB … If the determined remaining PDB is less than the remaining PDB threshold, the device may transmit the packet via both the first link and the second link”; would transmit the remaining UL data over the second link (CCs of SCG) when the remaining uplink PDB fails to satisfy the remaining uplink PDB threshold).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Teyeb’s teaching of remaining UL PDB threshold with that of Sun in order to optimize UL split buffer threshold for dual connectivity based on a remaining PDB (Teyeb: [0081]: “The UL split buffer thresholds (e.g., multiple buffer thresholds) may be dependent on a remaining PDB range of packets”).
However, Rao teaches UE could receive indication of PDB in RRC (Rao: [0115]: “The WTRU may receive the indication in DCI, in a DL MAC CE, in an RRC message… The indication may include one or more updated LCH parameters (e.g., priority, packet delay budget (PDB)”, indication of PDB in RRC message).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Rao’s teaching with that of combination of Sun and Teyeb for the RRC configured value to include an indication of a remaining uplink PDB threshold in order to manage UL data transmission by enforcing PDB (Teyeb: [Title]: “ENFORCING PACKET DELAY BUDGETS”).
Regarding claim 28, combination of Sun and Teyeb teaches the non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 26 (discussed above).
Combination of Sun and Teyeb teaches ‘wherein the DCI includes an indication of the remaining uplink PDB threshold’ (Sun: “Scheduling of uplink scheduling … using downlink control information (DCI) messages”. Teyeb: [Abstract]: “A device may transmit data to a first parent node via a first link and to a second parent node via a second link. The device may receive configuration information indicating at least one of: a first buffer threshold associated with a first remaining packet delay budget (PDB)”, may receive configuration information includes an indication of a remaining uplink PDB threshold). However, combination of Sun and Teyeb fails to expressly teach the configuration information is via DCI.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Teyeb’s teaching of remaining UL PDB threshold with that of Sun in order to optimize UL split buffer threshold for dual connectivity based on a remaining PDB (Teyeb: [0081]: “The UL split buffer thresholds (e.g., multiple buffer thresholds) may be dependent on a remaining PDB range of packets”).
However, Rao teaches UE could receive indication of PDB in DCI (Rao: [0115]: “The WTRU may receive the indication in DCI … The indication may include one or more updated LCH parameters (e.g., priority, packet delay budget (PDB)”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Rao’s teaching with that of combination of Sun and Teyeb for the DCI to include an indication of a remaining uplink PDB threshold in order to manage UL data transmission by enforcing PDB (Teyeb: [Title]: “ENFORCING PACKET DELAY BUDGETS”).
Regarding claim 29, combination of Sun and Teyeb teaches the non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 26 (discussed above).
Combination of Sun and teaches ‘receiving, from the base station, a RRC message including an RRC configured value indicating the second number of CCs and a remaining uplink PDB threshold’ (Sun: [0042]: “dual connectivity (DC), in which the UE 104 may simultaneously transmit and receive data on multiple component carriers (CCs) from two different cell groups”; [0195]: “receiving the indication by radio resource control (RRC) signaling”; [0063]: “another value of the CIF may map to a second combination of two or more CCs”; [0047]: “mapping of the value of the CIF to the actual cell is configured by RRC”, indication CCs of SCG by RRC configured value. Teyeb: [Abstract]: “A device may transmit data to a first parent node via a first link and to a second parent node via a second link. The device may receive configuration information indicating at least one of: a first buffer threshold associated with a first remaining packet delay budget (PDB)”, may receive configuration information includes an indication of a remaining uplink PDB threshold). However, combination of Sun and Teyeb fails to expressly teach the configuration information is in RRC configured value.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Teyeb’s teaching of remaining UL PDB threshold with that of Sun in order to optimize UL split buffer threshold for dual connectivity based on a remaining PDB (Teyeb: [0081]: “The UL split buffer thresholds (e.g., multiple buffer thresholds) may be dependent on a remaining PDB range of packets”).
However, Rao teaches UE could receive indication of PDB in RRC (Rao: [0115]: “The WTRU may receive the indication in DCI, in a DL MAC CE, in an RRC message… The indication may include one or more updated LCH parameters (e.g., priority, packet delay budget (PDB)”, indication of PDB in RRC message).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Rao’s teaching with that of combination of Sun and Teyeb for the RRC configured value to include an indication of a remaining uplink PDB threshold in order to manage UL data transmission by enforcing PDB (Teyeb: [Title]: “ENFORCING PACKET DELAY BUDGETS”).
Regarding claim 30, combination of Sun, Teyeb and Rao teaches the non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 26 (discussed above).
Combination of Sun and Teyeb teaches ‘transmits, to the base station, the remaining portion of the PUSCH transmission using the second number of CCs when the remaining uplink PDB fails to satisfy the remaining uplink PDB threshold’ (Sun: [0042]: “FIG. 2 illustrates an example of dual connectivity (DC), in which the UE 104 may simultaneously transmit and receive data on multiple component carriers (CCs) from two different cell groups”; [FIG.2]: “Secondary cell group (SCG) 221”, “Serving cell 216 (PSCell)”, “Serving cell 218 (SCell)”, using CCs of SCG. Teyeb: [Abstract]: “The device may receive a packet and may determine a remaining PDB. The device may select a buffer threshold based on the configuration information and the determined remaining PDB … If the determined remaining PDB is less than the remaining PDB threshold, the device may transmit the packet via both the first link and the second link”; would transmit the remaining UL data over the second link (CCs of SCG) when the remaining uplink PDB fails to satisfy the remaining uplink PDB threshold).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Teyeb’s teaching of remaining UL PDB threshold with that of Sun in order to optimize UL split buffer threshold for dual connectivity based on a remaining PDB (Teyeb: [0081]: “The UL split buffer thresholds (e.g., multiple buffer thresholds) may be dependent on a remaining PDB range of packets”).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GUOXING FAN whose telephone number is (703)756-1310. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 am - 5:00 pm 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, Yemane Mesfin can be reached at (571)272-3927. 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.
/G.F./Examiner, Art Unit 2462
/YEMANE MESFIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2462