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 .
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.
Response to Amendment
This action is responsive to amendments and remarks filed 30 March 2026, claims 1-26, 66, 69 and 72 are pending in the application.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Examiner finds disclosure of the algorithm of the “means for relaying communications between the remote UE and the network entity based at least in part on the configuration information for the adaptation layer of the sidelink signaling interface” at [0161]-[0162] of applicant’s disclosure.
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.
Claim 66 is rejected under the judicially created doctrine of obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,856,623. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the patented claim merely broaden the scope of the pending claim by not claiming some claim elements (i.e. bearer identifier information identifying one or more bearers between the remote UE and a network entity associated with the relay service, radio link control (RLC) channel mapping information, wherein the RLC channel mapping information includes a mapping between a bearer identifier and one or more RLC channels of the sidelink unicast link and one or more RLC channels of a link with the network entity, or data routing information associated with the relay service; ). The patented claim is nearly identical in every other aspect to the pending claims. It is the Examiner’s position that broadening the patented claims by not claiming some claim elements would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in view of the patented claims. It is important to note that the instant application is a national stage entry of the international application which yielded patent (U.S. Patent No. 11,856,623) which is itself a continuation of the international application and used herein as the basis for the obviousness-type double patenting rejection.
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.
Claim(s) 1-10, 20-26, 66, 69 and 72 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ericsson, “RAN2 impacts introduced by Layer 2 SL relay”, 3GPP TSG-RAN WG2 #112e, Electronic meeting, November 2nd-13th 2020, R2-2009230, hereafter D1 in view of Wang (US 2023/0403626 A1).
Regarding claim 1, D1 appears to disclose a method of wireless communication performed by a relay user equipment (UE), comprising:
establishing a sidelink unicast link with a remote UE via a sidelink signaling interface (pg. 5, Section 2.5 Connection establishment disclosing a default configuration of sidelink signalling radio bearer zero (SL SRB0) on PC5”; pg. 4, paragraph below proposal 11 disclosing the relay UE forwarding to the remote UE via PC5 link; pg. 6, Section 2.7, first paragraph “Revised Proposal 19 disclosing PC5-connedcted remote UE; connection via PC5 and transmission via PC5 implicitly disclose the establishment of the PC5 link, the PC5 link seen as corresponding to the claimed “sidelink unicast link”);
identifying configuration information for an adaptation layer of the sidelink signaling interface, the configuration information including a remote UE identifier for the remote UE, identifying the sidelink unicast link between the remote UE and the relay UE for a relay service (Section 2.1 first and second paragraph contemplating adaptation layer on the first hop (i.e., PC5 interface between remote UE and relay UE; as opposed to, second hop on the Uu link between the relay UE and the gNB) for remote UE to Network (U2N) relay disclosing information carried in the adaptation layer header proposed for the UE to network relay and for the UE to UE relay for the first hop on the PC5 and third paragraph disclosing for both scenarios “ remote UE ID and/or RB ID are the key information”; pg. 2, Issue 2: other information fields in adaptation layer header and subsequent paragraph), and at least one of:
bearer identifier information identifying one or more bearers between the remote UE and a network entity associated with the relay service (Section 2.1 first to third paragraphs disclosing “RB ID“ (e.g., radio bearer identity) information proposed for adaptation layer header for UE to network and UE to UE relay as key information; pg. 2, Issue 2: other information fields in adaptation layer header and subsequent paragraph disclosing RB ID as information in the adaptation layer header),
data routing information associated with the relay service (pg. 2, paragraph Issue 2: other information fields in adaptation layer header and subsequent paragraph disclosing inclusion of destination field in the adaptation layer header to ensure the packet is routed to the proper destination);
relaying communications between the remote UE and the network entity based at least in part on the configuration information for the adaptation layer of the sidelink signaling interface (Section 2.1 disclosing key information is to be placed in the adaptation layer header implicitly disclosing this is for communication between the remote UE and gNB in the UE to network relay scenario; pg. 2 paragraph below Issue 2 disclosing Besides the remote UE ID and TB ID, the Destination ID can be used in the header when a L2 relay is serving as a U2N relay for a remote UE).
D1 discloses there is a risk of UE ID being misused due to lack of security protection for the adaptation layer header (Section 2.1 Issue 1, Observation 2 and intervening disclosure). D1 does not disclose the following; however, Wang discloses an invention directed at the problem disclosed by D1 ([0005] disclosing “Since there may be no security protection to the adaptation layer header, it may be possible that the remote UE ID is disclosed and misused during transmissions”) and discloses:
receiving an indication of a modified remote UE identifier via radio resource control signaling ([0163] disclosing “a gNB may configure/reconfigure a new UE ID to a remote UE, and the new UE ID may be used in the adaptation layer.”; [0165] disclosing “ the gNB may send a Uu RRC signaling to a relay UE of the concerned remote UE. The relay UE can read the RRC signaling and obtain the new UE ID for the concerned remote UE.”);
modifying the remote UE identifier, of the configuration information, to the modified remote UE identifier; and relaying the communications based at least in part on the configuration information, including the modified remote UE identifier ([0006] disclosing updating the adaptation layer header; [0161] disclosing “every time when the remote UE is reconfigured with a new UE ID for an adaptation layer, the UE (e.g., the relay UE or the remote UE, etc.) and/or the gNB may keep both the old ID and the new ID for the concerned remote UE for a configured time period. During this time period, the UE and/or the gNB can process the received adaptation layer PDUs containing either the old ID or the new ID for the concerned remote UE.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the solution identified by Wang to the problem disclosed by D1 because the teaching lies in Wang that doing so can adaptively and flexibly update an adaptation layer header to avoid misbehaviors of the various nodes on ID handling ([0005]-[0006]).
Regarding claim 2, D1 discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the sidelink signaling interface is a ProSe sidelink (PC5) interface and the link with the network entity is via a Uu interface (Section 2.1 disclosing the second hop as Uu interface and first hop as PC5 interface).
Regarding claim 3, D1 discloses the method of claim 1, wherein relaying communications between the remote UE and the network entity is based at least in part on a sidelink signaling interface adaptation layer header (Section 2.1 disclosing the Information is contained in the adaptation layer header), wherein the sidelink signaling interface adaptation layer header indicates at least one of:
the remote UE identifier of the remote UE, a bearer identifier of a bearer between the remote UE and a network entity associated with the relay service, or a path identifier for the data routing associated with the relay service (Section 2.1 first and second paragraph contemplating adaptation layer on the first hop PC5 interface and key information in the adaptation layer header being remote UE ID and RB ID; pg. 2 paragraph below Issue 2 disclosing Besides the remote UE ID and TB ID, the Destination ID can be used in the header when a L2 relay is serving as a U2N relay for a remote UE ).
Regarding claim 4, D1 does not expressly disclose the following; however, Wang suggests the method of claim 1, wherein the remote UE identifier corresponds to a unique index assigned to each remote UE, of a plurality of remote UEs, in communication with the relay UE via respective sidelink unicast links ([0121], [0126]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the solution identified by Wang to the problem disclosed by D1 because the teaching lies in Wang that doing so can adaptively and flexibly update an adaptation layer header to avoid misbehaviors of the various nodes on ID handling ([0005]-[0006]).
Regarding claim 5, D1 does not expressly disclose the following; however, Wang suggests the method of claim 1, further comprising:
assigning remote UE identifiers to each remote UE, of a plurality of remote UEs, in communication with the relay UE ([0121], [0167]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the solution identified by Wang to the problem disclosed by D1 because the teaching lies in Wang that doing so can adaptively and flexibly update an adaptation layer header to avoid misbehaviors of the various nodes on ID handling ([0005]-[0006]).
Regarding claim 6, D1 appears to disclose the method of claim 1, wherein establishing the sidelink unicast link with the remote UE comprises:
the remote UE identifier to the remote UE including a unique index associated with the sidelink unicast link (it is inherent in the prior art that the relay UE also has a UE identifier which is used in communications between UEs as a source address).
D1 does not expressly disclose the following; however, Wang suggest assigning the remote UE identifier; and transmitting, to the remote UE, an indication of the remote UE identifier via a sidelink signaling interface message ([0167]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the solution identified by Wang to the problem disclosed by D1 because the teaching lies in Wang that doing so can adaptively and flexibly update an adaptation layer header to avoid misbehaviors of the various nodes on ID handling ([0005]-[0006]).
Regarding claim 7, D1 does not disclose the following; however, Wang suggests the method of claim 1, further comprising:
assigning a unique index associated with the sidelink unicast link; and transmitting information indicating the unique index to the network entity via a radio resource control message ([0167]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the solution identified by Wang to the problem disclosed by D1 because the teaching lies in Wang that doing so can adaptively and flexibly update an adaptation layer header to avoid misbehaviors of the various nodes on ID handling ([0005]-[0006]).
Regarding claim 8, D1 discloses the method of claim 1, wherein identifying the configuration information comprises:
receiving, from the network entity, a relaying configuration indicating at least part of the configuration information (Section 2.2 Disclosing resource allocation for the sidelink interface configured by the network for carrying the adaptation layer information discussed above ).
Regarding claim 9, D1 does not disclose the following; however, Wang suggests the method of claim 1, wherein identifying the configuration information comprises:
receiving, from the network entity, an indication of the remote UE identifier via a radio resource control message ([0163], [0165]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the solution identified by Wang to the problem disclosed by D1 because the teaching lies in Wang that doing so can adaptively and flexibly update an adaptation layer header to avoid misbehaviors of the various nodes on ID handling ([0005]-[0006]).
Regarding claim 10, D1 does not disclose the following; however, Wang suggests the method of claim 9, wherein receiving, from the network entity, the indication of the remote UE identifier comprises:
receiving, from the network entity, an indication of remote UE identifiers for each remote UE, of a plurality of remote UEs, in communication with the relay UE ([0121], [0163], [0165]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the solution identified by Wang to the problem disclosed by D1 because the teaching lies in Wang that doing so can adaptively and flexibly update an adaptation layer header to avoid misbehaviors of the various nodes on ID handling ([0005]-[0006]).
Regarding claim 20, D1 discloses there is a risk of UE ID being misused due to lack of security protection for the adaptation layer header (Section 2.1 Issue 1, Observation 2 and intervening disclosure). D1 does not disclose the following; however, Wang discloses an invention directed at the problem disclosed by D1 ([0005] disclosing “Since there may be no security protection to the adaptation layer header, it may be possible that the remote UE ID is disclosed and misused during transmissions”) and suggests the method of claim 1, further comprising:
performing a privacy update procedure with at least one of the remote UE or the network entity, wherein the privacy update procedure includes updating information included in configuration information ([0148], [0163]-[0167]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the solution identified by Wang to the problem disclosed by D1 because the teaching lies in Wang that doing so can adaptively and flexibly update an adaptation layer header to avoid misbehaviors of the various nodes on ID handling ([0005]-[0006]).
Regarding claim 21, D1 does not disclose the following; however, Wang suggests the method of claim 20, wherein performing the privacy update procedure comprises:
performing the privacy update procedure according to a periodic schedule ([0148]-[0149]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the solution identified by Wang to the problem disclosed by D1 because the teaching lies in Wang that doing so can adaptively and flexibly update an adaptation layer header to avoid misbehaviors of the various nodes on ID handling ([0005]-[0006]).
Regarding claim 22, D1 does not disclose the following; however, Wang suggests the method of claim 20, wherein performing the privacy update procedure comprises:
detecting a trigger event associated with a privacy update; and performing the privacy update procedure based at least in part on detecting the trigger event ([0148]-[0149]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the solution identified by Wang to the problem disclosed by D1 because the teaching lies in Wang that doing so can adaptively and flexibly update an adaptation layer header to avoid misbehaviors of the various nodes on ID handling ([0005]-[0006]).
Regarding claim 23, D1 does not disclose the follwong; however, Wang discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising:
communicating, with the remote UE via the sidelink unicast link, to indicate the modified remote UE identifier; and communicating, with the network entity, to indicate the modified remote UE identifier ([0167]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the solution identified by Wang to the problem disclosed by D1 because the teaching lies in Wang that doing so can adaptively and flexibly update an adaptation layer header to avoid misbehaviors of the various nodes on ID handling ([0005]-[0006]).
Regarding claim 24, D1 does not disclose the following; however, Wang suggests the method of claim 20, wherein performing the privacy update procedure comprises:
receiving, from the network entity, an indication of modified identifier information for at least one of the adaptation layer of the sidelink signaling interface or the adaption layer of the link with the network entity ([0161]-[0162], [0165]);
modifying the configuration information based at least in part on the modified identifier information ([0161]);
communicating, with the remote UE via the sidelink unicast link, to indicate the modified identifier information ([0165]); and
communicating, with the network entity, to indicate that the configuration information for the sidelink signaling interface has been modified at the relay UE and the remote UE based at least in part on communicating with the remote UE to indicate the modified identifier information ([0163]-[0166] disclosing RRC reconfiguration which inherently includes a response indicating the reconfiguration is complete).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the solution identified by Wang to the problem disclosed by D1 because the teaching lies in Wang that doing so can adaptively and flexibly update an adaptation layer header to avoid misbehaviors of the various nodes on ID handling ([0005]-[0006]).
Regarding claim 25, D1 does not expressly disclose the following; however, Wang suggests the method of claim 24, further comprising:
receiving, from the remote UE, a signal that includes a previous identifier, that is modified by the modified identifier information to a modified identifier, in an adaptation layer header of the signal after receiving the indication of the modified identifier information and prior to receiving a signal that includes an indication of the modified identifier; and relaying, to the network entity via an RLC channel, the signal based at least in part on the previous identifier ([0161]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the solution identified by Wang to the problem disclosed by D1 because the teaching lies in Wang that doing so can adaptively and flexibly update an adaptation layer header to avoid misbehaviors of the various nodes on ID handling ([0005]-[0006]).
Regarding claim 26, D1 does not expressly disclose the following; however, Wang suggests the method of claim 24, further comprising:
receiving, from the remote UE or the network entity, a signal that includes an indication of a modified identifier, indicated in the modified identifier information, in an adaptation layer header of the signal; and refraining from relaying communications using a previous identifier based at least in part on receiving the signal that includes the indication of the modified identifier in the adaptation layer header of the signal ([0161]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the solution identified by Wang to the problem disclosed by D1 because the teaching lies in Wang that doing so can adaptively and flexibly update an adaptation layer header to avoid misbehaviors of the various nodes on ID handling ([0005]-[0006]).
Regarding claim 66, the claim is directed towards a relay user equipment (UE) for wireless communication, comprising: a memory; and one or more processors operatively coupled to the memory, the memory and the one or more processors configured to perform the method of claim 1. D1 does not expressly disclose such implementations; however, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to implement the method in the manner claimed techniques because it provides a flexibly configured system that can be easily reprogrammed as technical specifications evolve.
Regarding claim 69, the claim is directed towards a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing a set of instructions for wireless communication, the set of instructions comprising: one or more instructions that, when executed by one or more processors of a relay user equipment (UE), cause the relay UE to perform the method of claim 1. D1 does not expressly disclose such implementations; however, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to implement the method in the manner claimed techniques because it provides a flexibly configured system that can be easily reprogrammed as technical specifications evolve.
Regarding claim 72, the claim is directed towards an apparatus for wireless communication, comprising means for performing the method of claim 1; D1 discloses equivalent means; accordingly, claim 72 is rejected on the grounds presented above for claim 1 .
Claim(s) 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1 in view of Wang (US 2023/0403626 A1), further in view of Lee et al. (US 2018/0287689 A1).
Regarding claim 11, D1 does not disclose the following; however, Lee suggests the method of claim 9, wherein receiving, from the network entity, the indication of the remote UE identifier comprises:
receiving, from the network entity, an indication of a cell radio network temporary identifier (C-RNTI) for each remote UE, of a plurality of remote UEs, in communication with the relay UE (Fig. 10, Response RRC message from eNB to relay UE, [0108]-[0111]; using common sense as a guide, one of ordinary skill in the art would readily apply these techniques to more than one UE given the fact that conflicts can arise between local IDs of the remote UEs).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the techniques of D1 with the invention of Lee because this provides a manner of ensuring there is not a conflict between remote UE IDs.
Regarding claim 12, D1 does not disclose the following; however, Lee suggests the method of claim 9, wherein receiving, from the network entity, the indication of the remote UE identifier comprises:
receiving, from the network entity, an indication of a temporary identifier for each remote UE, of a plurality of remote UEs, in communication with the relay UE, wherein the temporary identifier is unique among the plurality of remote UEs in communication with the relay UE (Fig. 10, Response RRC message from eNB to relay UE, [0108]-[0111]; using common sense as a guide, one of ordinary skill in the art would readily apply these techniques to more than one UE given the fact that conflicts can arise between local IDs of the remote UEs).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the techniques of D1 with the invention of Lee because this provides a manner of ensuring there is not a conflict between remote UE IDs.
Claim(s) 13-14 and 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1 in view of Wang (US 2023/0403626 A1), further in view of Burbridge et al. (US 2018/0213577 A1).
Regarding claim 13, D1 does not expressly disclose the following; however, Burbridge suggests the method of claim 1, wherein identifying the configuration information comprises:
receiving, from the network entity, the bearer identifier information including an indication of a bearer identifier identifying a bearer between the remote UE and the network entity associated with the relay service ([0057]-[0061] disclosing mapping information for relaying; [0062] disclosing configuring the Relay UE with said mapping via RRC signaling),
wherein the bearer identifier is the same as a data radio bearer (DRB) identifier of a DRB between the remote UE and the network entity or the same as a signaling radio bearer (SRB) identifier of an SRB between the remote UE and the network entity ([0064] disclosing the mapping can be for both DRB and SRB).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the techniques of D1 with the teaching in Burbridge in order to provide a method for facilitating relaying and mobility using the sidelink interface in a wireless communication system.
Regarding claim 14, D1 does not expressly disclose the following; however, Burbridge suggests the method of claim 1, wherein identifying the configuration information comprises:
receiving, from the network entity, the bearer identifier information including an indication of a bearer identifier identifying a bearer between the remote UE and the network entity associated with the relay service ([0057]-[0061] disclosing mapping information for relaying; [0062] disclosing configuring the Relay UE with said mapping via RRC signaling),
wherein the bearer identifier is a unique identifier associated with the bearer between the remote UE and the network entity to be used with the relay service ([0058] DRB Identity is implicitly unique; [0064] disclosing the mapping can be for both DRB and SRB).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the techniques of D1 with the teaching in Burbridge in order to provide a method for facilitating relaying and mobility using the sidelink interface in a wireless communication system.
Regarding claim 18, D1 suggest the method of claim 1, wherein relaying communications between the remote UE and the network entity comprises:
receiving, from the remote UE via the sidelink unicast link, a packet data convergence protocol (PDCP) packet data unit (PDU) that includes an adaptation layer header that indicates at least one of: the remote UE identifier associated with the remote UE, or a bearer identifier (Section 2.1 disclosing adaptation layer header below PDCP layer comprising UE identifier and radio Bearer ID contemplated for the first hop between remote UE and Relay UE);
generating a Uu PDCP PDU for the link with the network entity that includes an adaptation layer header that indicates at least one of: the remote UE identifier associated with the remote UE, or the bearer identifier (Section 2.1 disclosing adaptation layer header below PDCP layer comprising UE identifier and radio Bearer ID for the second hop between the Relay UE and the gNB);
transmitting, to the network entity, the Uu PDCP PDU for the link with the network entity that includes the adaptation layer header (Section 2.1 disclosing support of adaptation layer between the relay UE and the gNB and the adaptation layer header below the PDCP layer).
D1 does not expressly disclose the following; however, Burbridge suggest identifying an RLC channel of the link with the network entity based at least in part on the RLC channel mapping information and the bearer identifier; and transmitting, to the network entity via the RLC channel, the Uu PDCP PDU for the link with the network entity that includes the adaptation layer header (Fig. 3a and 3b, RLC layer 334; [0223] disclosing a relay UE capable of mapping using LCID of Uu between eNB and relay UE and LCID of PC5 between remote UE and relay UE).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the techniques of D1 with the teaching in Burbridge in order to provide a method for facilitating relaying and mobility using the sidelink interface in a wireless communication system.
Regarding claim 19, D1 discloses the method of claim 1, wherein relaying communications between the remote UE and the network entity comprises:
receiving, from the network entity, a Uu packet data convergence protocol (PDCP) packet data unit (PDU) that includes an adaptation layer header that indicates at least one of: the remote UE identifier associated with the remote UE, or a bearer identifier (Section 2.1 disclosing adaptation layer header below PDCP layer comprising UE identifier and radio Bearer ID for the second hop between the Relay UE and the gNB);
generating a PDCP PDU for the sidelink unicast link that includes an adaptation layer header that indicates at least one of: the remote UE identifier associated with the remote UE, or the bearer identifier (Section 2.1 disclosing adaptation layer header below PDCP layer comprising UE identifier and radio Bearer ID contemplated for the first hop between remote UE and Relay UE); and
transmitting, to the remote UE, the PDCP PDU for the sidelink unicast link that includes the adaptation layer header (Section 2.1 disclosing contemplation of adaptation layer between the relay UE and the remote UE and the adaptation layer header below the PDCP layer).
identifying an RLC channel of the sidelink unicast link based at least in part on the RLC channel mapping information and the bearer identifier; and transmitting, to the remote UE via the RLC channel, the PDCP PDU for the sidelink unicast link that includes the adaptation layer header (Fig. 3a and 3b, RLC layer 334; [0223] disclosing a relay UE capable of mapping using LCID of Uu between eNB and relay UE and LCID of PC5 between remote UE and relay UE).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the techniques of D1 with the teaching in Burbridge in order to provide a method for facilitating relaying and mobility using the sidelink interface in a wireless communication system.
Claim(s) 15-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1 in view of Wang (US 2023/0403626 A1), further in view of Lin et al. (US 2022/0095411 A1).
Regarding claim 15, D1 does not disclose the following; however, Lin suggests the method of claim 1, wherein identifying the configuration information comprises:
receiving, from the network entity, an indication of a default bearer identifier identifying a signaling radio bearer (SRB) associated with radio resource control messages ([0011] disclosing the Relay UE uses a default bearer for SRB0 transmission; [0029]-[0030] disclosing signaling radio bearer (SRB) SRB0 is for RRC messaging; [0119]-[0121] disclosing upon receiving the SRB0 response from the base station the relay UE forwards the response to the Remote UE using the default configuration).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the techniques of D1 with the teaching in Lin because this allows the SRB0 of the remote UE to be forwarded to the base station even before the bearers for Uu traffic forwarding (PC5 interface between remote UE and relay UE, and Uu interface between relay UE and the base station) of this relay UE are established ([0009]).
Regarding claim 16, D1 does not expressly disclose the following; however, Lin suggests the method of claim 15, further comprising:
receiving, from the remote UE via the sidelink unicast link, a radio resource control setup request message, wherein the radio resource control setup request message includes the default bearer identifier (Fig. 1, Step 1 SRB0 message, [0029]-[0030] disclosing the SRB0 message is for RRCSetupRequest);
determining that the radio resource control setup request message is to be transmitted using the SRB associated with radio resource control messages based at least in part on the default bearer identifier ([0051] disclosing After receiving the SRB0 message, the relay UE can base on the RLC channel, logical channel, bearer, remote UE ID, or adaptation layer header to determine whether to forward the message to the base station.; [0072] ); and
relaying the radio resource control setup request message to the network entity via an RLC channel for the SRB associated with radio resource control messages (Fig. 1, Step 2, [0050]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the techniques of D1 with the teaching in Lin because this allows the SRB0 of the remote UE to be forwarded to the base station even before the bearers for Uu traffic forwarding (PC5 interface between remote UE and relay UE, and Uu interface between relay UE and the base station) of this relay UE are established ([0009]).
Regarding claim 17, D1 does not expressly disclose the following; however, Lin suggests the method of claim 16, further comprising:
receiving, from the network entity, a relaying configuration via a radio resource control message indicating the bearer identifier based at least in part on relaying the radio resource control setup request message to the network entity (Fig. 1, step response to SRB0 message, [0097]-[0098]); and
relaying the radio resource control message indicating the bearer identifier to the remote UE based at least in part on the relaying configuration ([0098] disclosing the response to SRB0 for connection management includes the remote UE ID so the relay UE knows to which remote UE to forward the message).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the techniques of D1 with the teaching in Lin because this allows the SRB0 of the remote UE to be forwarded to the base station even before the bearers for Uu traffic forwarding (PC5 interface between remote UE and relay UE, and Uu interface between relay UE and the base station) of this relay UE are established ([0009]).
Response to Arguments
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Applicant’s amendments and remarks have effectively overcome the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112 presented in the previous office action; accordingly, said rejections are withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-26, 66, 69 and 72 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Kim (WO 2021/125403 A1).
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Joseph A Bednash whose telephone number is (571)270-7500. The examiner can normally be reached 7 AM - 4:30 PM M-F.
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, Huy Vu can be reached at (571)272-3155. 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.
/JOSEPH A BEDNASH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2461