DETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to claims filed on 02/11/2026. Claims 1-7, 9-12, 15, 17-24 are pending for evaluation.
Note: The claims are presented with independent claims listed first in numerical order, followed by dependent claims also in numerical order; any dual or mirror claims are grouped with the lowest-numbered claim in their respective pairing.
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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 02/11/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed on 02/11/2026 has been entered. Claim 16 is cancelled; Claims 8, 13, and 14 were previously cancelled. Claims 1, 7, 15, and 21 have been amended. Claims 22-24 have been added; Claims 1-7, 9-12, 15, 17-24 are pending for evaluation. The objection to Claim 16 in the Final Rejection mailed 11/13/2025 is withdrawn because Claim 16 has been cancelled.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to independent Claim(s) 1, 7, 15, and 21 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant’s arguments presented with respect to Claim(s) 2-6, 9-12, 17-20, and 21-24 are substantively the same as those set forth for Claims 1, 7, 15, and 21. Accordingly, the same reasoning and supporting explanation provided for Claims 1, 7, 15, and 21 are equally applicable to Claims 2-6, 9-12, 17-20, and 21-24.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: The word “acceptance” is misspelled within the phrase “inactivating the first timer upon receipt of a first acceptation message responsive to the first discovery message.” Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities: The word “acceptance” is misspelled within the phrase “wherein the first acceptation message is transmitted by the second UE through the fourth UE.” Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities: The word “acceptance” is misspelled within the phrase “transmit a first acceptation message responsive to the first discovery message if the first discovery message is received when the first timer is active, wherein the first acceptation message is transmitted to the second UE through a fourth UE and a first hop configuration is transmitted to the fourth UE with the first acceptation message.” Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 15 is objected to because of the following informalities: The word “acceptance” is misspelled within the phrase “inactivate the first timer upon receipt of a first acceptation message responsive to the first discovery message.” Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 21 is objected to because of the following informalities: The word “acceptance” is misspelled within the phrase “transmitting a first acceptation message responsive to the first discovery message if the first discovery message is received when the first timer is active, wherein the first acceptation message is transmitted to the second UE through a fourth UE and a first hop configuration is transmitted to the fourth UE with the first acceptation message.” Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 6-7, 12, 15, 20, 21, and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Freda et al. (US 2024/0259906, previously presented), Freda hereinafter, in view of Bhargava et al. (US 2016/0337971), Bhargava hereinafter, and Kuo et al. (US 2021/0409936), Kuo hereinafter.
Regarding Claim 1, Freda teaches a method performed by a first user equipment (UE), the method comprising (Fig. 6, Para. [0153-0223]):
activating a first timer after a first path to a second UE is determined as failed (Fig. 6, step 603; Para. [0153] - As shown at 603, upon a determination that SL RLF has occurred (e.g., consistent with one or more procedures of the present description), while connected to a relay, the remote WTRU may then select a suitable relay, shown at 604; Para. [0153] - The remote WTRU may retry such procedure until the list of suitable relays has been exhausted or until a timer associated with relay reselection is expired or until a determined time duration has elapsed; Para. [0146] - In any of the examples described herein, successful reselection as a result of RLF and/or transmission/reception of an LPI message may depend on performing all actions within a configured time or timer. The WTRU may start a timer, whereby expiry of the timer prior to completion of the associated actions may result in a failed reselection procedure, or the WTRU may determine that when a time period has elapsed prior to completion of the associated actions may result in a failed reselection procedure. Such timer or time duration may further depend on any or a combination of QoS/SLRB configuration of the established service or services over the relay and/or CBR. Regarding QoS/SLRB configuration, for example, the source/relay WTRU may be configured with a reselection timer or reselection time duration associated with each SLRB. Upon triggering reselection, the WTRU may set a timer to the minimum value of the timer of each established SLRB, or consider the time duration to be the minimum value of the timer of each established SLRB. Regarding CBR, for example, the source/relay WTRU may be configured with a reselection timer or a reselection time duration associated with a range of CBRs. Upon triggering reselection, the WTRU may set a timer to the value associated with the measured CBR at the time of reselection trigger; See also Para. [0106-0108, 0110, 0115, 0128, 0162, 0167, 0180, 0196-0198, 0207] );
The examiner interprets Para. [0153] in conjunction with Para. [0146] to mean that the WTRU starts a timer at the beginning of the reselection procedure at step 604 in Fig. 6.
transmitting a first discovery message (Fig. 6, step 604; Para. [0153] - The suitable relays may be those relays for which the measured SL RSRP is higher than a threshold, that satisfy some upper layer criteria associated with the discovery message, and that have an allowable PLMN; Para. [0149] - A WTRU may initiate a relay selection procedure, which may involve transmission/reception of a discovery message and/or link establishment message from upper layers.; See also Para. [0106, 0150, 0162, 0207] );
The examiner interprets step 604 of Fig. 6 and Para. [0153] in conjunction with Para. [0149] to mean that the WTRU can transmit a discovery message to select an alternate relay upon detecting a path failure.
inactivating the first timer upon receipt of a first acceptation message responsive to the first discovery message (Fig. 6, steps 607 and 608; Para. [0153] - At 607, the remote WTRU may determine whether reconfiguration was successful, e.g., based on a response received from the selected alternate relay…If reconfiguration for a newly selected relay is determined to be successful, e.g., based on a response received from the newly selected relay, at 608 the remote WTRU may update its current relay with the new L2 IDs of the newly selected relay and, at 609, transmit the Uu re-establishment request message using its existing SL RLC channel for SRB1 transmission, except that the L2 IDs may be changed for the new L2 IDs; Para. [0146] - In any of the examples described herein, successful reselection as a result of RLF and/or transmission/reception of an LPI message may depend on performing all actions within a configured time or timer. The WTRU may start a timer, whereby expiry of the timer prior to completion of the associated actions may result in a failed reselection procedure, or the WTRU may determine that when a time period has elapsed prior to completion of the associated actions may result in a failed reselection procedure. Such timer or time duration may further depend on any or a combination of QoS/SLRB configuration of the established service or services over the relay and/or CBR; See also Para. [0106-0108, 0110, 0115, 0126-0128, 0131, 0137, 0142, 0147, 0151-0152, 0162, 0167, 0180, 0196-0198, 0207] ).
The examiner interprets the receipt of an acceptance message as in Para. [0153] as a sidelink radio bearer (SLRB) configuration. Thus, in light of Para. [0146] the timer or timer duration may depend on receipt of an acceptance message.
receiving a first hop configuration from a fourth UE (Fig. 4; Para. [0092] - FIG. 4 is a diagram illustrating an example architecture for link management and recovery in the context of WTRU-to-WTRU relaying. A relay WTRU 402 may be used as a WTRU-to-WTRU relay, as shown in FIG. 4. A first link as shown in FIG. 4 may correspond to the link between a source WTRU 401 and the relay WTRU 402. The second link may refer to the link between the relay WTRU 402 and any of the destination or next hop WTRU 403 in a multi-hop WTRU-to-WTRU or WTRU-to-network link; Para. [0142] - For another example, the relay WTRU may perform relay reselection and/or reconfiguration of the second path following any triggers similar to those for transmission of the LPI message if the RSRP of the selected relay is above a configured or pre-configured threshold. A relay WTRU in examples such as this, or any reselection procedure, may further perform one of the following procedures. For instance, the relay WTRU may inform the source WTRU (e.g., via an LPI or similar message) that the relay WTRU is performing relay reselection. For example, the source WTRU may buffer any traffic to the relay WTRU during performance of the relay reselection. The relay WTRU may inform the source WTRU of any successful or failed reselection performed by the relay WTRU. For example, the WTRU may provide the source WTRU with updated configuration and/or QoS information of the updated link to the destination, such as new cell ID of the new cell to which the last hop relay WTRU is connected, new number of hops to the destination, expected latency or other expected QoS over the new link to the destination, new bearer configuration or bearer mapping configuration or capability information associated with subsequent nodes (e.g., relay of NW) along the new path, such as support for multicarrier or support for full duplex operation; See also Fig.6, step 604, Para. [0153]; Fig. 5, Para. [0093]; Para. [0068-0069, 0111, 0126, 0132, 0138-0139, 0141, 0150, 0207]).
Yet, Freda does not expressly disclose determining a path to be used based on conditions associated with the second UE and the fourth UE, wherein the conditions include battery levels, and a number of hops.
However, Bhargava teaches
determining a path to be used based on conditions associated with the second UE and the fourth UE, wherein the conditions include battery levels, and a number of hops (Para. [0092-0094] - [0092] The above-described embodiment may allow nearby wireless terminals to route packets to sinks via relays in a distributed manner. This is because, in some systems, each wireless terminal independently decides whether to act as a relay or a sink based on certain factors. For example, the first wireless terminal could choose to participate as a router based on at least one of the following factors: quality of nearby sinks and relays, quantity of nearby sinks and relays, battery life, source of power, average throughput, bandwidth usage, bandwidth needs, bandwidth availability, type of device, level of mobility, time of day, subscription fees, user profile, non-cellular signal strength and quality, cellular signal strength and quality, level of wireless interference seen by non-cellular interface, level of wireless interference seen by cellular interface, number of hops to a sink, and surrounding wireless environment. For example, each of, or a subset of, these factors may be compared against respective threshold values and if a factor exceeds the threshold, the device may act as a router and if the threshold is not met, the device may not act as a router; See also Para. [0134, 0251, 0264]; Fig. 1, Para. [0043-0048]; Fig. 3, Para. [0063-0075]; Fig. 4, Para. [0076-0091]; Fig. 5, Para. [0095-0101]; Fig. 6, Para. [0102-0135]; Fig. 7A-D, Para. [0136-0140]; Fig. 8A-C, Para. [0140-0172]; Fig. 9, Para. [0173-0176]; Fig. 10, Para. [0177-0186]; Fig. 11-12, Para. [0186-0206]; Fig. 16, Para. [0225-0235]; Fig. 17, Para. [0236-0244]; Fig. 25A, Para. [0304] Fig. 26A, Para. [0305-0306]; Figs. 29-31)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Freda’s invention of “methods and apparatuses for link management and recovery for sidelink relays” (Freda Para. [0002]) with Bhargava’s invention of “methods, a wireless devices, and computer program products for expanding the coverage and improving the capacity of a cellular network” (Bhargava Para. [0037]) because Bhargava’s invention provides methods to “more efficiently allocate the system resources of the cellular network in order to more effectively meet the throughput demand for users in areas where the signal strength is low” (Bhargava Para. [0042]).
Yet, Freda nor Bhargava expressly teach and establishing, based on the determined path, a unicast communication with the fourth UE through the second UE or a third UE based on a type of relay.
However, Kuo teaches
and establishing, based on the determined path, a unicast communication with the fourth UE through the second UE or a third UE based on a type of relay (Fig. 14, steps 1-6; Para. [0336-0345] - [0338] 1. UE-1 wants to establish unicast communication with UE-2 and the communication can be either through direct link with UE-2 or via a UE-to-UE relay. Then UE-1 broadcasts directly communication request with relay_indication=1. The request will be received by relay-1, relay-2. The request may also be received by UE-2 if it is in the proximity of UE-1. [0339] 2. Relay-1 and relay-2 decide to forward the request. They broadcast the message in their proximity with relay_indication=0. If a relay receives this message, it will just drop it. [0340] 3. UE-2 receives the requests from relay-1 and relay-2. [0341] 4. UE-2 chooses relay-1 and replies with request accept. If UE-2 directly receives the direct communication request from UE-1, it may choose to setup a direct communication link by sending the request accept directly to UE-1. The response message includes indication on the type of communication link being established (e.g. via relay or direct). [0342] 5. UE-1 receives the request accept from relay-1. UE-1 chooses path according to e.g. policies (e.g. always choose direct path if it is possible), signal strength, etc. If UE-1 receives request accept directly from UE-2, it may choose to setup a direct L2 link as described in clause 6.3.3 of TS 23.287 [5], then step 6 is skipped. [0343] 6. UE-1 and UE-2 setup communication link through chosen UE-to-UE relay. The link setup information may vary depending on the type of relay, e.g. L2 or L3 relaying; See also Fig. 5, Para. [0080-0095]; Fig. 8, Para. [0101-0159]; Fig. 9, Para. [0160-0209]; Para. [0347-0348]; Fig. 15, Para. [0349-0385]; Fig. 16, Para. [0386-0397]; Fig. 17; Fig. 18; Fig. 19, Para. [0398-0402] )
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide and establishing, based on the determined path, a unicast communication with the fourth UE through the second UE or a third UE based on a type of relay as taught by Kuo, in the combined system of Freda/Bhargava, so that it would provide methods for “a User Equipment-to-User Equipment (UE-to-UE) Relay to report sidelink UE capability information” (Kuo Para. [0005]).
PNG
media_image1.png
786
554
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 1: Fig. 6 from Freda et al. (US 2024/0259906)
Regarding Claim 7, Freda teaches an apparatus, comprising (Fig. 1B, Para. [0027-0036]):
at least one memory (Fig. 1B, element 130/132; Para. [0027, 0032]);
and at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory and operable to cause the apparatus to (Fig. 1B, element 118; Para. [0027-0028, 0032]):
activate a first timer after a first path to a second UE is determined as failed (Fig. 6, step 603; Para. [0153]; Para. [0153]; Para. [0146]; See also Para. [0106-0108, 0110, 0115, 0128, 0162, 0167, 0180, 0196-0198, 0207]);
inactivate the first timer upon receipt of a first discovery message from the second UE (Fig. 6, steps 607 and 608; Para. [0153]; Para. [0146]; See also Para. [0106-0108, 0110, 0115, 0126-0128, 0131, 0137, 0142, 0147, 0151-0152, 0162, 0167, 0180, 0196-0198, 0207]).
transmit a first acceptation message responsive to the first discovery message if the first discovery message is received when the first timer is active (Fig. 6, step 604; Para. [0153]; Para. [0149]; See also Para. [0106, 0150, 0162, 0207]);
wherein the first acceptation message is transmitted to the second UE through a fourth UE and a first hop configuration is transmitted to the fourth UE with the first acceptation message (Fig. 4; Para. [0092] - FIG. 4 is a diagram illustrating an example architecture for link management and recovery in the context of WTRU-to-WTRU relaying. A relay WTRU 402 may be used as a WTRU-to-WTRU relay, as shown in FIG. 4. A first link as shown in FIG. 4 may correspond to the link between a source WTRU 401 and the relay WTRU 402. The second link may refer to the link between the relay WTRU 402 and any of the destination or next hop WTRU 403 in a multi-hop WTRU-to-WTRU or WTRU-to-network link; Para. [0142] - For another example, the relay WTRU may perform relay reselection and/or reconfiguration of the second path following any triggers similar to those for transmission of the LPI message if the RSRP of the selected relay is above a configured or pre-configured threshold. A relay WTRU in examples such as this, or any reselection procedure, may further perform one of the following procedures. For instance, the relay WTRU may inform the source WTRU (e.g., via an LPI or similar message) that the relay WTRU is performing relay reselection. For example, the source WTRU may buffer any traffic to the relay WTRU during performance of the relay reselection. The relay WTRU may inform the source WTRU of any successful or failed reselection performed by the relay WTRU. For example, the WTRU may provide the source WTRU with updated configuration and/or QoS information of the updated link to the destination, such as new cell ID of the new cell to which the last hop relay WTRU is connected, new number of hops to the destination, expected latency or other expected QoS over the new link to the destination, new bearer configuration or bearer mapping configuration or capability information associated with subsequent nodes (e.g., relay of NW) along the new path, such as support for multicarrier or support for full duplex operation; See also Fig.6, step 604, Para. [0153]; Fig. 5, Para. [0093]; Para. [0068-0069, 0111, 0126, 0132, 0138-0139, 0141, 0150, 0207]);
The examiner interprets the updated configuration “such as new cell ID of the new cell to which the last hop relay WTRU is connected, new number of hops to the destination” as a first hop configuration.
The examiner interprets “The relay WTRU may inform the source WTRU of any successful or failed reselection performed by the relay WTRU” as an acceptance message in the case of a successful reselection as in Fig. 6, step 607 and Para. [0153].
The examiner interprets Para. [0142] in combination with Para. [0153] and Fig. 6 to mean that a remote WTRU can select a relay path that includes multiple hops. Para. [0153] discloses acceptance messages transmitted from the first UE to the second UE (i.e., the remote WTRU and the relay WTRU). In the case of a multi-hop path, it can be interpreted that these messages will have to be transmitted through the multi-hop path and through the last hop relay, which could be the original WTRU relay or a new WTRU relay (i.e., a fourth UE).
Yet, Freda does not expressly disclose determine a path to be used based on conditions associated with the second UE and the fourth UE, wherein the conditions include battery levels, and a number of hops.
However, Bhargava teaches
determine a path to be used based on conditions associated with the second UE and the fourth UE, wherein the conditions include battery levels, and a number of hops (Para. [0092-0094]; See also Para. [0134, 0251, 0264]; Fig. 1, Para. [0043-0048]; Fig. 3, Para. [0063-0075]; Fig. 4, Para. [0076-0091]; Fig. 5, Para. [0095-0101]; Fig. 6, Para. [0102-0135]; Fig. 7A-D, Para. [0136-0140]; Fig. 8A-C, Para. [0140-0172]; Fig. 9, Para. [0173-0176]; Fig. 10, Para. [0177-0186]; Fig. 11-12, Para. [0186-0206]; Fig. 16, Para. [0225-0235]; Fig. 17, Para. [0236-0244]; Fig. 25A, Para. [0304] Fig. 26A, Para. [0305-0306]; Figs. 29-31)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Freda’s invention of “methods and apparatuses for link management and recovery for sidelink relays” (Freda Para. [0002]) with Bhargava’s invention of “methods, a wireless devices, and computer program products for expanding the coverage and improving the capacity of a cellular network” (Bhargava Para. [0037]) because Bhargava’s invention provides methods to “more efficiently allocate the system resources of the cellular network in order to more effectively meet the throughput demand for users in areas where the signal strength is low” (Bhargava Para. [0042]).
Yet, Freda nor Bhargava expressly teach and establish, based on the determined path, a unicast communication with the fourth UE through the second UE or a third UE based on a type of relay.
However, Kuo teaches
and establish, based on the determined path, a unicast communication with the fourth UE through the second UE or a third UE based on a type of relay (Fig. 14, steps 1-6; Para. [0336-0345]; See also Fig. 5, Para. [0080-0095]; Fig. 8, Para. [0101-0159]; Fig. 9, Para. [0160-0209]; Para. [0347-0348]; Fig. 15, Para. [0349-0385]; Fig. 16, Para. [0386-0397]; Fig. 17; Fig. 18; Fig. 19, Para. [0398-0402] )
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide and establish, based on the determined path, a unicast communication with the fourth UE through the second UE or a third UE based on a type of relay as taught by Kuo, in the combined system of Freda/Bhargava, so that it would provide methods for “a User Equipment-to-User Equipment (UE-to-UE) Relay to report sidelink UE capability information” (Kuo Para. [0005]).
Regarding Claim 15, Freda teaches an apparatus, comprising (Fig. 1B, Para. [0027-0036]):
at least one memory (Fig. 1B, element 130/132; Para. [0027, 0032]);
and at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory and operable to cause the apparatus to (Fig. 1B, element 118; Para. [0027-0028, 0032]):
activate a first timer after a first path to a second user equipment (UE) is determined as failed (Fig. 6, step 603; Para. [0153]; Para. [0153]; Para. [0146]; See also Para. [0106-0108, 0110, 0115, 0128, 0162, 0167, 0180, 0196-0198, 0207]);
transmit a first discovery message ((Fig. 6, step 604; Para. [0153]; Para. [0149]; See also Para. [0106, 0150, 0162, 0207]);
inactivate the first timer upon receipt of a first acceptation message responsive to the first discovery message (Fig. 6, steps 607 and 608; Para. [0153]; Para. [0146]; See also Para. [0106-0108, 0110, 0115, 0126-0128, 0131, 0137, 0142, 0147, 0151-0152, 0162, 0167, 0180, 0196-0198, 0207])
receive a first hop configuration from a fourth UE (Fig. 4; Para. [0092]; Para. [0142]; See also Fig.6, step 604, Para. [0153]; Fig. 5, Para. [0093]; Para. [0068-0069, 0111, 0126, 0132, 0138-0139, 0141, 0150, 0207]).
Yet, Freda does not expressly disclose determine a path to be used based on conditions associated with the second UE and the fourth UE, wherein the conditions include battery levels, and a number of hops.
However, Bhargava teaches
determine a path to be used based on conditions associated with the second UE and the fourth UE, wherein the conditions include battery levels, and a number of hops (Para. [0092-0094]; See also Para. [0134, 0251, 0264]; Fig. 1, Para. [0043-0048]; Fig. 3, Para. [0063-0075]; Fig. 4, Para. [0076-0091]; Fig. 5, Para. [0095-0101]; Fig. 6, Para. [0102-0135]; Fig. 7A-D, Para. [0136-0140]; Fig. 8A-C, Para. [0140-0172]; Fig. 9, Para. [0173-0176]; Fig. 10, Para. [0177-0186]; Fig. 11-12, Para. [0186-0206]; Fig. 16, Para. [0225-0235]; Fig. 17, Para. [0236-0244]; Fig. 25A, Para. [0304] Fig. 26A, Para. [0305-0306]; Figs. 29-31)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Freda’s invention of “methods and apparatuses for link management and recovery for sidelink relays” (Freda Para. [0002]) with Bhargava’s invention of “methods, a wireless devices, and computer program products for expanding the coverage and improving the capacity of a cellular network” (Bhargava Para. [0037]) because Bhargava’s invention provides methods to “more efficiently allocate the system resources of the cellular network in order to more effectively meet the throughput demand for users in areas where the signal strength is low” (Bhargava Para. [0042]).
Yet, Freda nor Bhargava expressly teach and establish, based on the determined path, a unicast communication with the fourth UE through the second UE or a third UE based on a type of relay.
However, Kuo teaches
and establish, based on the determined path, a unicast communication with the fourth UE through the second UE or a third UE based on a type of relay (Fig. 14, steps 1-6; Para. [0336-0345]; See also Fig. 5, Para. [0080-0095]; Fig. 8, Para. [0101-0159]; Fig. 9, Para. [0160-0209]; Para. [0347-0348]; Fig. 15, Para. [0349-0385]; Fig. 16, Para. [0386-0397]; Fig. 17; Fig. 18; Fig. 19, Para. [0398-0402] )
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide and establish, based on the determined path, a unicast communication with the fourth UE through the second UE or a third UE based on a type of relay as taught by Kuo, in the combined system of Freda/Bhargava, so that it would provide methods for “a User Equipment-to-User Equipment (UE-to-UE) Relay to report sidelink UE capability information” (Kuo Para. [0005]).
Regarding Claim 21, Freda teaches a method performed by a first user equipment (UE), the method comprising (Fig. 6, Para. [0153-0223]):
activating a first timer after a first path to a second UE is determined as failed (Fig. 6, step 603; Para. [0153]; Para. [0153]; Para. [0146]; See also Para. [0106-0108, 0110, 0115, 0128, 0162, 0167, 0180, 0196-0198, 0207]);
inactivating the first timer upon receipt of a first discovery message from the second UE (Fig. 6, steps 607 and 608; Para. [0153]; Para. [0146]; See also Para. [0106-0108, 0110, 0115, 0126-0128, 0131, 0137, 0142, 0147, 0151-0152, 0162, 0167, 0180, 0196-0198, 0207]).
transmitting a first acceptation message responsive to the first discovery message if the first discovery message is received when the first timer is active (Fig. 6, step 604; Para. [0153]; Para. [0149]; See also Para. [0106, 0150, 0162, 0207]);
wherein the first acceptation message is transmitted to the second UE through a fourth UE and a first hop configuration is transmitted to the fourth UE with the first acceptation message (Fig. 4; Para. [0092];Para. [0142]; See also Fig.6, step 604, Para. [0153]; Fig. 5, Para. [0093]; Para. [0068-0069, 0111, 0126, 0132, 0138-0139, 0141, 0150, 0207]);
Yet, Freda does not expressly disclose determining a path to be used based on conditions associated with the second UE and the fourth UE, wherein the conditions include battery levels, and a number of hops.
However, Bhargava teaches
determining a path to be used based on conditions associated with the second UE and the fourth UE, wherein the conditions include battery levels, and a number of hops (Para. [0092-0094]; See also Para. [0134, 0251, 0264]; Fig. 1, Para. [0043-0048]; Fig. 3, Para. [0063-0075]; Fig. 4, Para. [0076-0091]; Fig. 5, Para. [0095-0101]; Fig. 6, Para. [0102-0135]; Fig. 7A-D, Para. [0136-0140]; Fig. 8A-C, Para. [0140-0172]; Fig. 9, Para. [0173-0176]; Fig. 10, Para. [0177-0186]; Fig. 11-12, Para. [0186-0206]; Fig. 16, Para. [0225-0235]; Fig. 17, Para. [0236-0244]; Fig. 25A, Para. [0304] Fig. 26A, Para. [0305-0306]; Figs. 29-31)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Freda’s invention of “methods and apparatuses for link management and recovery for sidelink relays” (Freda Para. [0002]) with Bhargava’s invention of “methods, a wireless devices, and computer program products for expanding the coverage and improving the capacity of a cellular network” (Bhargava Para. [0037]) because Bhargava’s invention provides methods to “more efficiently allocate the system resources of the cellular network in order to more effectively meet the throughput demand for users in areas where the signal strength is low” (Bhargava Para. [0042]).
Yet, Freda nor Bhargava expressly teach and establishing, based on the determined path, a unicast communication with the fourth UE through the second UE or a third UE based on a type of relay.
However, Kuo teaches
and establishing, based on the determined path, a unicast communication with the fourth UE through the second UE or a third UE based on a type of relay (Fig. 14, steps 1-6; Para. [0336-0345]; See also Fig. 5, Para. [0080-0095]; Fig. 8, Para. [0101-0159]; Fig. 9, Para. [0160-0209]; Para. [0347-0348]; Fig. 15, Para. [0349-0385]; Fig. 16, Para. [0386-0397]; Fig. 17; Fig. 18; Fig. 19, Para. [0398-0402] )
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide and establish, based on the determined path, a unicast communication with the fourth UE through the second UE or a third UE based on a type of relay as taught by Kuo, in the combined system of Freda/Bhargava, so that it would provide methods for “a User Equipment-to-User Equipment (UE-to-UE) Relay to report sidelink UE capability information” (Kuo Para. [0005]).
Regarding Claim 2, Freda in view of Bhargava and Kuo teaches Claim 1.
Freda further teaches
wherein the first acceptation message is transmitted by the second UE through the fourth UE (Fig. 4; Para. [0092]; Para. [0142]; See Also Fig.6, step 604, Para. [0153]; See also Fig. 5, Para. [0093]; Para. [0068-0069, 0111, 0126, 0132, 0138-0139, 0141, 0150, 0207]).
Regarding Claims 6, 12, 20, and 22 Freda in view of Bhargava and Kuo teaches Claims 1, 7, 15, and 21.
Freda further teaches
receiving/transmit/receive/transmitting a first rejection message from the second UE responsive to the first discovery message (Fig. 6, step 607; Para. [0153] - At 607, the remote WTRU may determine whether reconfiguration was successful, e.g., based on a response received from the selected alternate relay. For example, if the relay responds with a failure, or if the remote WTRU does not receive a response, the remote WTRU may retry the reconfiguration with a different suitable relay. The remote WTRU may retry such procedure until the list of suitable relays has been exhausted or until a timer associated with relay reselection is expired or until a determined time duration has elapsed; See also Para. [0082-0083, 0085-0086. 0089-0090, 0108, 0110, 0114, 0119, 0124 -0127, 0131, 0136-0137, 0142, 0146, 0151-0152, 0154, 0161, 0170-0171, 0181, 0184, 0196-0197, 0208]);
and releasing/release a connection to the second UE (Para. [0154] - In the example illustrated in FIG. 6, on a condition of failed recovery, the remote WTRU may delete its context and move to RRC_IDLE, trigger a relay reselection procedure, and/or trigger a cell reselection procedure. In embodiments, relay reselection may yield a new or different set of suitable relays compared with the NW provided set of relays; See also Para. [0082-0083, 0085-0086. 0089-0090, 0108, 0110, 0114, 0119, 0124 -0127, 0131, 0136-0137, 0142, 0146, 0151-0152, 0153, 0161, 0170-0171, 0181, 0184, 0196-0197, 0208]).
Claim(s) 3-5, 9-11, 17-19, 23, and 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Freda in view of Bhargava and Kuo, and further in view of Wang (US 2022/0361267, previously presented).
Regarding Claims 3, 9, 17, and 23 Freda in view of Bhargava and Kuo teaches Claims 1, 7, 15, and 21.
Yet, Freda, Bhargava, nor Kuo explicitly teach transmitting/receive/transmit an establishment confirmation to the second UE.
However, Wang teaches
transmitting/receive/transmit/receiving an establishment confirmation to the second UE (Fig. 5, step 533; Para. [0032] - At step 533, when remote UE 501 establishes QoS flow with the indicated configuration, an RRC message including establishment complete is sent to gNB 503, forwarded by relay UE 502; Fig. 5, step 552; Para. [0031] - At step 552, remote UE 501 acknowledges relay UE 502 via a PC5 RRC message of Relay Channel Establishment complete message; See also Fig. 4, Para. [0030], Fig. 6, Para. [0039-0043]; Fig. 7, Para [0044-0047]; Fig. 8, Para. [0048-0050; Fig. 9, Para. [0051])
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide transmitting/receive/transmit an establishment confirmation to the second UE as taught by Wang, in the combined system of Freda/Bhargava/Kuo, so that it would provide “sidelink relay channel establishment” (Wang Para. [0002]) because Wang’s invention provides methods for “relay UE established sidelink relay channels upon receiving sidelink relay connection request” where the requests can come from the base station or a remote UE (Wang Para. [0005]).
Regarding Claims 4, 10, 18, and 24 Freda in view of Bhargava, Kuo, and Wang teaches Claims 3, 9, 17, and 23.
Yet, Freda, Bhargava, nor Kuo explicitly teach wherein a first status report is transmitted/received with the establishment confirmation.
However, Wang teaches
wherein a first status report is transmitted/received with the establishment confirmation (Fig. 5, step 533; Para. [0032] - At step 533, when remote UE 501 establishes QoS flow with the indicated configuration, an RRC message including establishment complete is sent to gNB 503, forwarded by relay UE 502; See also Para. [0031]; Fig. 4, Para. [0030]; Fig. 6, Para. [0039-0043]; Fig. 7, Para [0044-0047]; Fig. 8, Para. [0048-0050; Fig. 9, Para. [0051]).
The examiner interprets the QoS flow with the indicated configuration in Para. [0032] as a status report.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide wherein a first status report is transmitted/received with the establishment confirmation as taught by Wang, in the combined system of Freda/Bhargava/Kuo, so that it would provide “sidelink relay channel establishment” (Wang Para. [0002]) because Wang’s invention provides methods for “relay UE established sidelink relay channels upon receiving sidelink relay connection request” where the requests can come from the base station or a remote UE (Wang Para. [0005]).
Regarding Claims 5, 11, and 19, Freda in view of Bhargava, Kuo, and Wang teaches Claims 3, 9, and 17.
Yet, Freda, Bhargava, nor Kuo explicitly teach receiving/transmit/receive a second status report from the second UE.
However, Wang teaches
receiving/transmit/receive a second status report from the second UE (Fig. 5, step 532; Para. [0032] - At step 532, the 5GC of the NR network through gNB 503 sends a NAS message to remote UE 501, forwarded by relay UE 502 as an RRC message. The service accept message is an acknowledgement from the network to the service request and a command to remote UE 501 to establish necessary QoS flow between remote UE and gNB. In order to support Layer 2 relay operation, the RB establishment command includes the necessary configuration to establish the end-to-end QoS flow between remote UE and gNB. Assuming the Layer-2 Relay works at RLC layer for relaying, the configuration within the RB establishment command includes one or more elements of SDAP configuration, PDCP configuration including security key, end-to-end RB ID, and QoS information for each radio bearer to be established. One Radio bearer may be established to carry multiple QoS flows. If remote UE 501 did not initiate the initial registration before the service request message, the initial registration before the service request message, the initial registration procedure needs to apply before service request message; See also Para. [0031]; Fig. 4, Para. [0030]; Fig. 6, Para. [0039-0043]; Fig. 7, Para [0044-0047]; Fig. 8, Para. [0048-0050; Fig. 9, Para. [0051]).
The examiner interprets the service acknowledgement message and its associated contents in Para. [0032] as a status report.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide receiving/transmit/receive a second status report from the second UE as taught by Wang, in the combined system of Freda/Bhargava/Kuo, so that it would provide “sidelink relay channel establishment” (Wang Para. [0002]) because Wang’s invention provides methods for “relay UE established sidelink relay channels upon receiving sidelink relay connection request” where the requests can come from the base station or a remote UE (Wang Para. [0005]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RAENITA ANN FENNER whose telephone number is (571)270-0880. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 - 5:30 PM.
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, Marcus Smith can be reached at (571) 270-1096. 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.
/R.A.F./Examiner, Art Unit 2468
/Thomas R Cairns/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2468
Prosecution Insights