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 03/29/2023; the submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 6, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US-20190098554-A1 to Ljung et al., from hereon Ljung in view of US 10349334 B2 to Martin.
Regarding claim 1 Ljung teaches…a method of operating a first relay-capable device in a communications network (Fig. 2, P.37 discloses a method for operating as a terminal performing the relay function within a wireless access network Fig 2,4), the network including a base station and a plurality of relay-capable devices (Fig. 1, P.73 discloses a communication system that may comprise a plurality of base station and a plurality of devices such as items 3, 4, and 5), including the first relay-capable device, which are each able to act as a relay device for connection of at least one communication device to the base station, the method comprising (P.77 discloses… the terminal device 3 may perform D2D communication to provide configuration information related to a relay function of the terminal device 3 to at least one other terminal 2, 5. The configuration information allows the at least one other terminal 2, 5 to determine whether the terminal device 3 is suitable to start acting as a relay for relaying messages between the at least one other terminal 2, 5 and the base station 11 ): the first relay-capable device establishing a connection with a second relay-capable device acting as a relay device for the base station (P. 78 discloses… the terminal device 3 is configured to generate several data elements of a configuration information which relate to the suitability of the terminal device 4 for acting as a relay. The terminal device 3 is configured to transmit a message including the configuration information to at least one other terminal 2, 5 which fulfills proximity criteria, i.e., which is located sufficiently close to the terminal device 3 such that it meets pre-defined proximity criteria. The terminal device 3 may transmit the message including the configuration information in response to a request for configuration information received from the at least one other terminal 2, 5. The terminal device 3 may selectively activate a relay function after transmission of the message which includes the configuration information); but does not teach…the first relay-capable device transmitting to the second relay-capable device information providing a measurement of a suitability of the first relay-capable device to act as the relay device for the base station; and after receiving from the second relay-capable device an indication that the first relay- capable device should take over as the relay device for the base station, starting operation as the relay device for the base station.
Martin teaches… the first relay-capable device transmitting to the second relay-capable device information providing a measurement of a suitability of the first relay-capable device to act as the relay device for the base station (claim 1 and 2 discloses the procedure for selecting using the measurements of characteristics received and meets the threshold criteria further discloses as he procedure for selecting the second relay node includes performing measurements of a characteristic of a discovery signal received from each of the plurality of relay nodes at the receiver, and the circuitry is configured to control the transmitter to transmit a discovery signal initiation message to each of the plurality of relay nodes instructing each of the plurality of relay nodes to transmit the discovery signal in the case that the measured signal characteristic associated with the first relay node is determined to be less than the predetermined threshold value); and after receiving from the second relay-capable device an indication that the first relay- capable device should take over as the relay device for the base station, starting operation as the relay device for the base station (claim 1 and 3 disclose the procedure for transmitting and receiving the measurements for which the new relay will be selected (based on the threshold) and be the relay for the base station ).
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 combination of Ljung by incorporating the teachings of Martin because the method and device allow for a selection/reselection procedure that helps to reduce power consumption and reduces the risk of service disruption where a selection/reselection threshold is meets a suitability parameter (Martin, Clo. 12, Lns. 65-67). The motivation is that by applying a well-known standard or protocol or machine to a system provides the system with significantly improved industrial applicability.
Regarding claim 2 Ljung teaches a method of operating a second relay-capable device in a communications network (P.54 discloses a method for transmitting announcement indicating the terminal may act as a relay, Fig. 2 discloses the communication network ), the network including a base station and a plurality of relay-capable devices (Fig. 1, P.73 discloses a communication system that may comprise a plurality of base station and a plurality of devices such as items 3, 4, and 5), including the second relay-capable device, which are each able to act as a relay device for connection of at least one communication device to the base station, the method comprising comprising (P.77 discloses… the terminal device 3 may perform D2D communication to provide configuration information related to a relay function of the terminal device 3 to at least one other terminal 2, 5. The configuration information allows the at least one other terminal 2, 5 to determine whether the terminal device 3 is suitable to start acting as a relay for relaying messages between the at least one other terminal 2, 5 and the base station 11 ): the second relay-capable device acting as a relay device for the base station receiving from a first relay-capable device a message including information providing a measurement of a suitability of the first relay-capable device to act as the relay device for the base station(P. 78 discloses… the terminal device 3 is configured to generate several data elements of a configuration information which relate to the suitability of the terminal device 4 for acting as a relay. The terminal device 3 is configured to transmit a message including the configuration information to at least one other terminal 2, 5 which fulfills proximity criteria, i.e., which is located sufficiently close to the terminal device 3 such that it meets pre-defined proximity criteria. The terminal device 3 may transmit the message including the configuration information in response to a request for configuration information received from the at least one other terminal 2, 5. The terminal device 3 may selectively activate a relay function after transmission of the message which includes the configuration information); deactivating the second relay capable device as the relay device for the base station (P.81 discloses the deactivation of the relay function of a terminal from the base station). but does not teach…and after comparing the information with a measure of a suitability of the second relay- capable device to act as the relay device for the base station and determining that the first relay-capable device would be more suitable for acting as the relay device for the base station
Martin teaches…and after comparing the information with a measure of a suitability of the second relay- capable device to act as the relay device for the base station and determining that the first relay-capable device would be more suitable for acting as the relay device for the base station (Fig. 8, Col 13, Lns. 56-65 discloses a scenario where the reselection threshold and the level of suitability indicate that a second relay will not be used as the first relay continues to be the most suitable acting as relay).
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 combination of Ljung by incorporating the teachings of Martin because the method and device allow for a selection/reselection procedure that helps to reduce power consumption and reduces the risk of service disruption where a selection/reselection threshold is meets a suitability parameter (Martin, Clo. 12, Lns. 65-67). The motivation is that by applying a well-known standard or protocol or machine to a system provides the system with significantly improved industrial applicability.
Regarding claim 3 Ljung and Martin teach the method according to claim 1 Martin teaches…herein the information providing a measurement of a suitability of the first relay-capable device to act as a relay device is a numerical value obtained by combining values determined for a plurality of criteria (Col 14, Lns 36-40 discloses a threshold numerical value as a measurement of suitability that is performed for each device).
Regarding claim 6 Ljung and Martin teach the method according to claim 2, Martin teaches…wherein the second relay-capable device determines its suitability to act as the relay device for the base station in the same manner as the first relay- capable device and compares a numerical value which the second relay-capable device has derived with the numerical value from the first relay-capable device(Col 14, Lns 36-40 discloses a threshold numerical value as a measurement of suitability that is performed for each device).
Regarding claim 13 Ljung and Martin teach the method according to claim 1,Ljung teaches…wherein at least one of the first relay-capable device and the second relay-capable device is a mobile device (P. 11 discloses the portable user equipment also known as a mobile device).
Claim(s) 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US-20190098554-A1 to Ljung et al., from hereon Ljung and US 10349334 B2 to Martin in view of US-10609743-B2 to Li et al., from hereon Li.
Regarding claim 4 Ljung and Martin teach the method according to claim 3, but do not teach…wherein the criteria comprise at least one of: a length of time the first relay-capable device has been stationary, a length of time the second relay-capable device has been acting as a relay device for the base station, and a status of a power supply to the second relay-capable device.
Li teaches… wherein the criteria comprise at least one of: a length of time the first relay-capable device has been stationary, a length of time the second relay-capable device has been acting as a relay device for the base station, and a status of a power supply to the second relay-capable device (Col 1, Lns. 55-65 and Col 2, Lns. 1-5 discloses the sending of message contain power supply status information of the N UE that can act as relays).
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 combination of Ljung and Martin by incorporating the teachings of Li because the method and device allow for D2D transmission of data via first message that includes indications of identity and status information of the UE such as power supply status or remaining power (Li, Col. 9, Lns. 3-10 ). The motivation is that by applying a well-known standard or protocol or machine to a system provides the system with significantly improved industrial applicability.
Claim(s) 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US-20190098554-A1 to Ljung et al., from hereon Ljung and US 10349334 B2 to Martin in view of US-20240259906-A1 to Freda et al., from hereon Freda.
Regarding claim 7 Ljung and Martin teach the method according to claim1,but do not teach…wherein the network is a public land mobile network.
Freda teaches… wherein the network is a public land mobile network (Fig. 6, Col. 16P. discloses the wireless network supported by relay capable terminal being a public land mobile network (PLMN)).
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 combination of Ljung and Martin by incorporating the teachings of Freda because the method and device allow the re-establishment of communication via relay by detecting suitable entities such as cell or relay allowing remote selection (Freda,P. 25 ). The motivation is that by applying a well-known standard or protocol or machine to a system provides the system with significantly improved industrial applicability.
Claim(s) 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US-20190098554-A1 to Ljung et al., from hereon Ljung and US 10349334 B2 to Martin in view of US-20200328776-A1 to Scholand et al., from hereon Scholand.
Regarding claim 8 Ljung and Martin teach the method according to claim1,but do not teach…wherein the relay device provides an access point in a wireless local area network.
Scholand teaches… wherein the relay device provides an access point in a wireless local area network (P.100 discloses the wireless environment being either a cellular (mobile) or WLAN or WiFi APs ).
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 combination of Ljung and Martin by incorporating the teachings of Freda because the method and device allow the re-establishment of communication via relay by detecting suitable entities such as cell or relay allowing remote selection (Freda,P. 25 ). The motivation is that by applying a well-known standard or protocol or machine to a system provides the system with significantly improved industrial applicability.
Claim(s) 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US-20190098554-A1 to Ljung et al., from hereon Ljung and US 10349334 B2 to Martin in view of US-20200100088-A1 to Kim et al., from heron Kim.
Regarding claim 9 Ljung and Martin teach the method according to claim1, but do not teach…wherein the transmission of information providing a measurement of a suitability of a relay-capable device to act as a relay device is security protected.
Kim teaches… wherein the transmission of information providing a measurement of a suitability of a relay-capable device to act as a relay device is security protected (P.521 discloses security protection between eRemote-UE and aeNB indicating the protection availability in the PC5 environment as per section 5.45 of 3GPP TS 23.303 ).
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 combination of Ljung and Martin by incorporating the teachings of Kim because the method and device allow the usage of indirect_comunication_response for performing the security procedure inherent of PC5 environment (Kim, P. 25 ). The motivation is that by applying a well-known standard or protocol or machine to a system provides the system with significantly improved industrial applicability.
Claim(s) 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US-20190098554-A1 to Ljung et al., from hereon Ljung and US 10349334 B2 to Martin in view of WO-2017052569-A1 to Thyagarajan.
Regarding claim 14 Ljung and Martin teach the method according to claim 13, but do not teach…wherein the mobile device is a vehicle-mounted device.
Thyagarajan teaches… wherein the mobile device is a vehicle-mounted device (P.53 ).
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 combination of Ljung and Martin by incorporating the teachings of Thyagarajan because the method and device allow configuration of radio access nodes that selects a plurality of user devices to act as relay devices for other remote in proximity over D2D communication (Thyagarajan, Abs). The motivation is that by applying a well-known standard or protocol or machine to a system provides the system with significantly improved industrial applicability.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5, 10, 15, 21, and 22 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the main reason for allowance of the claims under discussion is the inclusion of “the second relay-capable device is a vehicle-mounted device and a further criterion is a programmed time for a vehicle heater operation”, “the event that a response to the first relay-capable device transmitting to the second relay-capable device information providing a measurement of a suitability of the first relay-capable device to act as the relay device for the base station does not lead to the first relay-capable device starting operation as the relay device, a timer is started and upon expiry of the timer the first relay-capable device the steps of the method are repeated”, “wherein the information providing a measurement of a suitability of the first relay-capable device to act as a relay device is a numerical value obtained by combining values determined for a plurality of criteria”, “the second relay-capable device determines its suitability to act as the relay device for the base station in the same manner as the first relay-capable device and compares a numerical value which the second relay- capable device has derived with the numerical value from the first relay-capable device”, “the event that a response to the first relay-capable device transmitting to the second relay-capable device information providing a measurement of a suitability of the first relay-capable device to act as the relay device for the base station does not lead to the first relay-capable device starting operation as the relay device, a timer is started and upon expiry of the timer the first relay-capable device the steps of the method are repeated”, and “the event that a response to the first relay-capable device transmitting to the second relay-capable device information providing a measurement of a suitability of the first relay-capable device to act as the relay device for the base station does not lead to the first relay-capable device starting operation as the relay device, a timer is started and upon expiry of the timer the first relay-capable device the steps of the method are repeated” as the prior art of record in stand-alone form nor in combination read into the claims as supported by the specification. Furthermore, the nearest prior art such asUS-20230328807-A1 to Wu et al., US-20230284310-A1 to Wu et al., and US 2017/0251507 A1 to Fodor disclose timer for transmission of RRC reconfiguration but are silent on starting timer for the first relay device and the repetition of the steps of evaluating potential relay terminals and deciding when to switch between them and the ability to combine into one value multiple indications of suitability to determine which is the best relay terminals to perform the communication. Claims 16-20 are allowed as they depend from an allowed claim .
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO form PTO-892: US-20230328807-A1 to Wu et al., discloses timer for transmission of RRC reconfiguration and US-20230284310-A1 to Wu et al., discloses timer RRC reconfiguration, and US 2017/0251507 A1 to Fodor discloses timers and RRC communication.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LOUIS SAMARA whose telephone number is (408)918-7582. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 6-3 PT.
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, Ayaz Sheikh can be reached at 571-272-3795. 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.
/LOUIS SAMARA/Examiner, Art Unit 2476 1-3,