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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on August 21, 2023 and November 21, 2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-10 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-3, 5-11 of copending Application No. 18/237477 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because of minor variations. The instant claim recites plurality of entities and plurality of channels for respective entities, while the reference claim recites an entity with plurality of communication channels, and instant claim recites selecting one entity + one channel, while the reference recites selecting one channel. Thus, the instant claim 1 is not patentably distinct from the reference as both are selecting a channel from plurality of channels based on the data state with minor variations.
The mapping of claim 1 of the instant application and claim 1 of the reference application is noted below.
Claim No.
Instant Application
Claim No.
18/237477
1
A wireless communication device comprising: a controller configured to:
configure a plurality of entities for requirements of data to be transmitted by a radio bearer;
configure communication channels with different communication configurations for the respective entities;
select one entity and one communication channel in accordance with a state of the data;
and control data communication with a counterpart wireless communication device.
1
A wireless communication device comprising: a controller configured to:
configure an entity that processes data to be transmitted by a radio bearer;
configure a plurality of communication channels with different communication configurations for requirements of the data;
select one communication channel from the communication channels in accordance with a state of the data;
and control data communication with a counterpart wireless communication device.
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 factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu et al. (US 20220150997 A1, as provided by the IDS submitted on November 21, 2024), hereinafter Xu, in view of Koziol et al. (WO 2022161608 A1), hereinafter Koziol.
Regarding Claim 1, Xu discloses A wireless communication device (¶0088 FIG. 4 first apparatus, network device) comprising:
a controller (Xu Fig. 9, ¶0151,0152 apparatus included a processor 410) configured to:
configure a plurality of entities for requirements of data to be transmitted by a radio bearer; (Xu ¶0073: one PDCP is configured to be associated with a plurality of RLC entities with different modes for the flexible switching. (¶0084 Fig. 3 in S210) ¶0071 Each radio bearer includes one PDCP entity and one or more RLC entities, and each RLC entity corresponds to one logical channel. Data on the logical channels may be multiplexed at the MAC layer. ¶0068 discloses the user plane protocol layer structure include functions of protocol layers such as a PDCP layer, an RLC layer, a MAC layer and a service data adaptation protocol (SDAP) layer may be further included above the PDCP layer, indicates plurality of entities/protocols in the radio bearer for transmission. ¶0072 discloses some services has relatively high requirement on reliability of data that when the network device needs to switch between the multicast transmission mode and a unicast transmission mode, indicates using the entity to meet the requirement.)
configure communication channels with different communication configurations for the respective entities; (Xu ¶0039 one PDCP is configured to be associated with a plurality of RLC entities. During data transmission, data is transmitted through the RLC entity corresponding to the unicast transmission mode and/or the RLC entity corresponding to the multicast transmission mode. ¶0084 plurality of RLC entities are associated with the PDCP entity and belong to a same radio bearer, or an identifier (ID) included in a configuration of the PDCP entity and identifiers included in configurations of the plurality of RLC entities. One RLC entity corresponds to one logical channel (communication channel). It may alternatively be described as that one PDCP entity is associated with a plurality of logical channels. logical channel may be considered as an interface or a channel connecting the RLC entity to a MAC entity, indicates different communication channel configuration based on the RLC entity selection)
control data communication with a counterpart wireless communication device. (Xu ¶0088 FIG. 4 discloses a schematic diagram of protocol stack architectures of a first apparatus transmitting data (¶0068 control plane protocol layer data) to a second apparatus (counterpart), including PDCP, plurality of RLCs and MAC with different communication modes (¶0089-0091))
Though Xu teaches different communication configurations (unicast vs multicast) across plurality of RLC entities (¶0084 logical channel) under one radio bearer (Fig. 3, 4), Xu does not specifically disclose the selection based on data state:
select one entity and one communication channel in accordance with a state of the data; and
Koziol, however, discloses:
select one entity and one communication channel in accordance with a state of the data; and (WO2022161608A1 Fig. 1, pg. 11, ll. 7-10 discloses transmitter to dynamically choose the most resource efficient transmission scheme, which at the same time meets the reliability and/or latency target of the traffic, per each burst of packets based on the instantaneous burst characteristics. pg. 19, ll. 21-32 Fig. 6 shows an illustration PDCP of a DRB is configured with multiple RLC entities, (indicates communication channels with different characteristics) and these RLC entities are divided into different subsets. The logical channels (LCHs) (communication channels) associated to the first RLC subset are configured with different logical channel prioritization (LCP) setting (e.g. LCH mapping restrictions) than the LCHs associated to the second RLC subset. Then, depending on the arrival time of a PDCP PDU of the burst (state of the data), the PDCP determines which RLC subset it should submit the PDCP PDU to (indicates selection of the channel based on state of the data). For instance, for PDCP PDUs of the burst arrive earlier than a time point (arrival time threshold), the UE may have more delay budget so it can submit the PDCP PDUs to RLCs with LCH mapping restrictions that can tolerate more latency. Conversely, for PDCP PDUs of the burst arrive later than the time point (arrival time threshold), the UE does not have much time left to process the data, so it can submit the PDCP PDUs to RLCs with LCH mapping restrictions that enables low-delay transmission.)
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Xu with the feature of allowing the transmitter to dynamically choose the most resource efficient transmission scheme (channel), as taught by Koziol. Doing so allows meeting the reliability and/or latency target of the traffic, per each burst of packets based on the instantaneous burst characteristics. (Koziol, pg. 11, ll. 7-10)
Regarding Claim 2, Xu and Koziol discloses claim 1. Xu and Koziol further discloses: wherein the controller is further configured to:
wherein the controller is further configured to: configure a first entity performing a process of a first protocol for the data to be transmitted by the radio bearer; (Xu discloses ¶0068 a service data adaptation protocol (SDAP) layer (first entity) included above the PDCP layer on the radio bearer (¶0071))
configure a second entity performing a process of a second protocol for the data; and (Xu ¶0071 Data on each radio bearer needs to be processed at each layer. Each layer has a corresponding functional entity to perform a corresponding function. For example, the PDCP layer corresponds to a PDCP entity (second entity), the RLC layer corresponds to an RLC entity, and the MAC layer corresponds to a MAC entity.)
configure a plurality of third entities performing a process of a third protocol for the data and associated with the communication channels with different communication configurations, (Xu ¶0039 one PDCP is configured to be associated with a plurality of RLC entities. During data transmission, data is transmitted through the RLC entity corresponding to the unicast transmission mode and/or the RLC entity corresponding to the multicast transmission mode. Xu ¶0084 One RLC entity corresponds to one logical channel (communication channel). It may alternatively be described as that one PDCP entity is associated with a plurality of logical channels. Koziol further discloses pg. 19, ll. 21-32 Fig. 6 shows an illustration PDCP of a DRB is configured with multiple RLC entities, depending on the arrival time of a PDCP PDU of the burst (state of the data), PDCP PDUs to a suitable RLC with LCH mapping is selected)
wherein the second entity selects the communication channel with the communication configuration relevant to the state of the data and (Koziol discloses pg. 19, ll. 21-32 Fig. 6 shows an illustration PDCP of a DRB is configured with multiple RLC entities, depending on the arrival time of a PDCP PDU of the burst (state of the data), PDCP PDUs to a suitable RLC with LCH mapping is selected)
sends the data to the third entity associated with the selected communication channel. (Koziol discloses pg. 19, ll. 21-32 Fig. 6 shows an illustration PDCP of a DRB is configured with multiple RLC entities, depending on the arrival time of a PDCP PDU of the burst (state of the data), PDCP PDUs to a suitable RLC with LCH mapping is selected pg. 20, ll. 5-18 If the PDCP selects the RLC 1 and/or RLC 2 of the RLC subset 1 , the transmitting device is able to transmit the burst by using large subcarrier spacing based on the LCH mapping restriction. If the PDCP selects the RLC 3 and/or RLC 4 of the RLC subset 2, the transmitting device is able to transmit the burst by using small subcarrier spacing based on the LCH mapping restriction, indicates selecting and sending the data to one of the RLC LCH depending on state of the data).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Xu with the feature of allowing the transmitter to dynamically choose the most resource efficient transmission scheme (channel), as taught by Koziol. Doing so allows meeting the reliability and/or latency target of the traffic, per each burst of packets based on the instantaneous burst characteristics. (Koziol, pg. 11, ll. 7-10)
Regarding Claim 3, Xu and Koziol discloses claim 2. Koziol further discloses:
wherein the second entity selects the communication channel in accordance with a time at which the data arrives at the second entity and a delay time allowed for the data. (Fig. 7, pg. 21, ll. 1-10 discloses a flow chart for selecting a RLC subset (third entity) based on burst arrival time at PDCP (S720). In S730, it is checked if the burst arrival time is before or after the offset threshold. If the burst arrives before the offset threshold (YES in S730), the method proceeds to S740. In S740, the transmitter of the UE submits the PDCP PDU of the burst to the first RLC subset with the first LCP setting. If the burst arrives after the offset threshold (NO in S730), the method proceeds to S750. In S750, the transmitter of the UE submits the PDCP PDU of the burst to the second RLC subset with the second LCP setting. pg. 17, ll. 18-25 discloses the transmission schemes additionally comprise the other relevant transmission parameters, packet delay budget (PDB) (i.e. delay time allowed) to be applied in other protocol layers (see Fig. 6, pg. 19, ll. 21-35), indicates channel selection depends on the data arrival time and the allowed delay time)
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Xu with the feature of allowing the transmitter to dynamically choose the most resource efficient transmission scheme (channel), as taught by Koziol. Doing so allows meeting the reliability and/or latency target of the traffic, per each burst of packets based on the instantaneous burst characteristics. (Koziol, pg. 11, ll. 7-10)
Regarding Claim 4, Xu and Koziol discloses claim 2. Xu further discloses:
wherein the first protocol is a service data adaptation protocol (SDAP). (Xu discloses ¶0068 a service data adaptation protocol (SDAP) layer (first protocol) included above the PDCP layer on the radio bearer (¶0071))
Regarding Claim 5, Xu and Koziol discloses claim 2. Xu further discloses:
wherein the second protocol is a packet data convergence protocol (PDCP). (Xu Fig. 1, 4 ¶0071 Data on each radio bearer needs to be processed at each layer. Each layer has a corresponding functional entity to perform a corresponding function. For example, the PDCP layer corresponds to a PDCP entity (second protocol))
Regarding Claim 6, Xu and Koziol discloses claim 2. Xu further discloses:
wherein the third protocol is a radio link control (RLC). (Xu Fig. 1, 4 ¶0071 Data on each radio bearer needs to be processed at each layer. Each layer has a corresponding functional entity to perform a corresponding function. For example, the RLC layer corresponds to an RLC entity (third protocol))
Regarding Claim 7, Xu and Koziol discloses claim 2. Xu and Koziol further discloses:
wherein the controller is further configured to configure a fourth entity performing a process of a fourth protocol for the data, and (Xu Fig. 1, 4 ¶0071 Data on each radio bearer needs to be processed at each layer. Each layer has a corresponding functional entity to perform a corresponding function. For example, the MAC layer corresponds to a MAC entity (fourth protocol))
the fourth entity configures retransmission of the data in accordance with the communication channel to which the data is assigned. (Koziol Fig. 6, pg. 20, ll. 20-24 Another way than choosing a different RLC may influence the likelihood for a transmission to meet the delay target are other MAC entity settings (fourth entity) such as the maximal number of HARQ retransmissions that are possible, or the priority that an associated logical channel is configured with)
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Xu with the feature of allowing the transmitter to dynamically choose the most resource efficient transmission scheme (channel), as taught by Koziol. Doing so allows meeting the reliability and/or latency target of the traffic, per each burst of packets based on the instantaneous burst characteristics. (Koziol, pg. 11, ll. 7-10)
Regarding Claim 8, Xu and Koziol discloses claim 1. Xu and further discloses:
further including a wireless transmitter that transmits the data to the counterpart wireless communication device, (Xu ¶0088 FIG. 4 discloses a schematic diagram of protocol stack architectures of a first apparatus transmitting data (¶0068 user plane protocol layer data) to a second apparatus (counterpart), including PDCP, plurality of RLCs and MAC with different communication modes (¶0089-0091))
wherein the wireless transmitter transmits the data using a carrier wave in a frequency band relevant to the communication channel to which the data is assigned. (Xu Fig. 1, 4 ¶0068 A network device and a terminal device that communicate with each other includes a physical layer to transmit control plane and user plane data. Fig. 13, ¶0178 In a transmit direction, the baseband apparatus 803 processes information, and sends the information to the radio frequency apparatus 802. The radio frequency apparatus 802 processes the information of the device, and then sends the processed information to the (counterpart device) through the antenna 801. ¶0056 device may be for mobile communication using GSM/CDMA/WCDMA (indicates the network <-> terminal device communicating using the carrier wave in a configured frequency band))
Regarding Claim 9, Xu discloses A wireless communication device (¶0088 Fig. 4 a second apparatus for the counterpart, Fig. 1 discloses terminal as the counterpart transmitter, with the symmetrical protocol entities) comprising:
a controller configured to: (Xu Fig. 11, ¶0169 processor 610)
configure a plurality of entities for requirements of data to be transmitted by a radio bearer; (Xu Fig. 1, 0071 discloses terminal device transmitting data to the network device. Data first arrives at a PDCP layer of the terminal device. After being processed at the PDCP layer, the data is transmitted to an RLC layer and a MAC layer. ¶0073: one PDCP is configured to be associated with a plurality of RLC entities with different modes for the flexible switching. ¶0071 Each radio bearer includes one PDCP entity and one or more RLC entities, and each RLC entity corresponds to one logical channel. Data on the logical channels may be multiplexed at the MAC layer. ¶0068 discloses the user plane protocol layer structure include functions of protocol layers such as a PDCP layer, an RLC layer, a MAC layer and a service data adaptation protocol (SDAP) layer may be further included above the PDCP layer, indicates plurality of entities/protocols in the radio bearer for transmission. ¶0072 discloses some services has relatively high requirement on reliability of data that when the network device needs to switch between the multicast transmission mode and a unicast transmission mode, indicates using the entity to meet the requirement.))
configure communication channels with different communication configurations for the respective entities; (Xu ¶0039 one PDCP is configured to be associated with a plurality of RLC entities. During data transmission, data is transmitted through the RLC entity corresponding to the unicast transmission mode and/or the RLC entity corresponding to the multicast transmission mode. ¶0084 plurality of RLC entities are associated with the PDCP entity and belong to a same radio bearer, or an identifier (ID) included in a configuration of the PDCP entity and identifiers included in configurations of the plurality of RLC entities. One RLC entity corresponds to one logical channel (communication channel). It may alternatively be described as that one PDCP entity is associated with a plurality of logical channels. logical channel may be considered as an interface or a channel connecting the RLC entity to a MAC entity, indicates different communication channel configuration based on the RLC entity selection)
Though Xu teaches different communication configurations (unicast vs multicast) across plurality of RLC entities (¶0084 logical channel) under one radio bearer (Fig. 1, 3, 4), Xu does not specifically disclose the selection based on data state:
select one entity and one communication channel in accordance with a state of the data; and
control data communication with a counterpart wireless communication device, in accordance with a control of the counterpart wireless communication device.
Koziol, however, discloses:
select one entity and one communication channel in accordance with a state of the data; and (WO2022161608A1 Fig. 1, pg. 11, ll. 7-10 discloses transmitter to dynamically choose the most resource efficient transmission scheme, which at the same time meets the reliability and/or latency target of the traffic, per each burst of packets based on the instantaneous burst characteristics. pg. 19, ll. 21-32 Fig. 6 shows an illustration PDCP of a DRB is configured with multiple RLC entities, (indicates communication channels with different characteristics) and these RLC entities are divided into different subsets. The logical channels (LCHs) (communication channels) associated to the first RLC subset are configured with different logical channel prioritization (LCP) setting (e.g. LCH mapping restrictions) than the LCHs associated to the second RLC subset. Then, depending on the arrival time of a PDCP PDU of the burst (state of the data), the PDCP determines which RLC subset it should submit the PDCP PDU to (indicates selection of the channel based on state of the data). For instance, for PDCP PDUs of the burst arrive earlier than a time point (arrival time threshold), the UE may have more delay budget so it can submit the PDCP PDUs to RLCs with LCH mapping restrictions that can tolerate more latency. Conversely, for PDCP PDUs of the burst arrive later than the time point (arrival time threshold), the UE does not have much time left to process the data, so it can submit the PDCP PDUs to RLCs with LCH mapping restrictions that enables low-delay transmission.)
control data communication with a counterpart wireless communication device, in accordance with a control of the counterpart wireless communication device. (pg. 11, ll. 34-35; pg. 12, ll. 1-10 At step S201.: First, the UE (i.e., the transmitting device) is configured by the network (e.g., gNB) by one or more configurations comprising one or more burst descriptors, associated one or more transmission schemes, and one or more assistance parameters. At step S204.: The UE processor selects the transmission scheme based on the determined burst descriptor. At step S205.: The UE transmitter transmits the burst of packets according to the selected transmission scheme, indicates the UE communicates with the gNB (counterpart) in accordance with the configuration (control) by the gNB (counterpart device))
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Xu with the feature of allowing the transmitter to dynamically choose the most resource efficient transmission scheme (channel), as taught by Koziol. Doing so allows meeting the reliability and/or latency target of the traffic, per each burst of packets based on the instantaneous burst characteristics. (Koziol, pg. 11, ll. 7-10)
Regarding Claim 10, Xu discloses A wireless communication system comprising: a first wireless communication device; and a second wireless communication device that is a counterpart of the first wireless communication device, ((¶0088 FIG. 4 first apparatus, network device and second apparatus, terminal device) directed to a system claim and that does not teach or further define over the limitations recited in claim 1. Therefore, claim 10 is also rejected for similar reasons set forth in claim 1.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMMED NIAMUL HUDA KHAN whose telephone number is (703)756-1689. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8AM-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, Rebecca Song can be reached at 571-270-3667. 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.
/M.N.K./Examiner, Art Unit 2417
/REBECCA E SONG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2417
Prosecution Insights