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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 06/25/2026 has been entered.
This office action is in response to the amendment filed 06/25/2026.
Claims 1-38, 39-53 (new claims) are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 06/30/2026, 08/28/2026 was filed after the mailing date of the Notice of Allowance on 03/26/2026 . 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 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.
Claim limitation of the claims 44, 45-48 has/have been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because it uses/they use a generic placeholder “means for” coupled with functional language “means for receiving, from the a second UE, means for transmitting, to the second UE, means for receiving, from the second UE ” without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Furthermore, the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
Since the claim limitation(s) invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, claim(s) 25 has/have been interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification that achieves the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
A review of the specification shows that the following appears to be the corresponding structure described in the specification for the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph limitation: The Specification, Paragraphs 0200-0203 discloses “means for receiving, from a second UE, a first system information transmission comprising one or more parameters associated with a relay connection with the second UE; means for transmitting, to the second UE, a request associated with a network device for a second system information transmission, wherein transmission of the request is based at least in part on the relay connection with the second UE and a connection state of the first UE, and wherein the relay connection with the second UE is based at least in part on the one or more parameters in the first system information transmission; and means for receiving, from the second UE, the second system information transmission in response to the request ”.
If applicant wishes to provide further explanation or dispute the examiner’s interpretation of the corresponding structure, applicant must identify the corresponding structure with reference to the specification by page and line number, and to the drawing, if any, by reference characters in response to this Office action.
If applicant does not intend to have the claim limitation(s) treated under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112 , sixth paragraph, applicant may amend the claim(s) so that it/they will clearly not invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, or present a sufficient showing that the claim recites/recite sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function to preclude application of 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
For more information, see MPEP § 2173 et seq. and Supplementary Examination Guidelines for Determining Compliance With 35 U.S.C. 112 and for Treatment of Related Issues in Patent Applications, 76 FR 7162, 7167 (Feb. 9, 2011).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-15, 16-28, 29, 30, 31-35, 36-38, 39-43, 49-53 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 1 is allowed over the prior art or record since the cited reference taken individually or in combination fails to particular disclose the following limitations: “ the request being based at least in part on the relay connection with the second UE and a connection state of the first UE, and the relay connection with the second UE being based at least in part on the one or more parameters in the first system information transmission ” and in combination with other limitations recited as specified in claim 1.
Claim 16 is allowed over the prior art or record since the cited reference taken individually or in combination fails to particular disclose the following limitations: “the receiving of the request being based at least in part on the relay connection with the second UE and a connection state of the first UE, and the relay connection with the second UE being based at least in part on the one or more parameters in the first system information transmission ” and in combination with other limitations recited as specified in claim 16.
Claim 29 is allowed over the prior art or record since the cited reference taken individually or in combination fails to particular disclose the following limitations: “ a request associated with a network device for a second system information transmission, wherein transmission of the request is based at least in part on the relay connection with the second UE and a connection state of the first UE, and wherein the relay connection with the second UE is based at least in part on the one or more parameters in the first system information transmission ” and in combination with other limitations recited as specified in claim 29 .
Claim 30 is allowed over the prior art or record since the cited reference taken individually or in combination fails to particular disclose the following limitations: “wherein reception of the request is based at least in part on the relay connection with the second UE and a connection state of the first UE, and wherein the relay connection with the second UE is based at least in part on the one or more parameters in the first system information transmission ” and in combination with other limitations recited as specified in claim 30.
Claim 49 is allowed over the prior art or record since the cited reference taken individually or in combination fails to particular disclose the following limitations: “wherein transmission of the request is based at least in part on the relay connection with the second UE and a connection state of the first UE, and wherein the relay connection with the second UE is based at least in part on the one or more parameters in the first system information transmission ” and in combination with other limitations recited as specified in claim 49 .
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is consider pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
Basu Mallick et al. ( US 20230300725, Provisional Application 63055639 ) discloses
receiving, from a second UE (the evolved ProSe Remote UE receives the essential SIBs (E-SIB) the evolved ProSe UE-to-Network Relay UE via the sidelink ) [see Paragraphs 0072-0073] , a first system information transmission ( At least the following SIBs can be considered as essential SIBs: MIB (SFN, bandwidth), SIB1 (PLMN, cell information), SIB2 (Access Barring information), and FeD2D SIB related info (e.g., SIB18/19 or new SIBs)) comprising one or more parameters associated with a relay connection with the second UE (the evolved ProSe UE-to-Network Relay UE)
( the evolved ProSe Remote UE receives the essential SIBs (E-SIB) the evolved ProSe UE-to-Network Relay UE via the sidelink using broadcast/multi-cast ) [see Paragraphs 0072-0073] ;
transmitting, to the second UE , a request (on-demand SI request ) associated with a base station for a second system information transmission (on-demand SI acquisition) , the request based at least in part on the relay connection with the second UE ( the relay connection between the evolved ProSe Remote UE and the evolved ProSe UE-to-Network Relay UE via the sidelink ) [see Paragraphs 0068-0074 and Figure 2 ]
and a connection state of the first UE (an RRC Connected state UE ) [see Paragraph 0080 & 0076-0084 ] , the relay connection based at least in part on the one or more parameters (MIB (SFN, bandwidth), SIB1 (PLMN, cell information), SIB2 (Access Barring information), and FeD2D SIB related info (e.g., SIB18/19 or new SIBs) in the essential SIBs ) in the first system information transmission (essential SIBs) [see Paragraph 0072];
receiving, from the second UE, the second system information transmission in response to the request (the remote UE receives the on-demand SIB from the relay UE in response to the request ) [see Paragraphs 0068-0084 and Figure 2 ].
Wang et al. ( US 20220338283 ) discloses receiving, from a second UE, via broadcast ( the remote UE receives the SI delivery method , from the relay UE, via the periodic broadcast 407 ) [see Figure 4 and Figure 5 and Paragraphs 0028-0034] [see Paragraphs 0005-0006].
However, Basu Mallick et al. ( US 20230300725) and Wang et al. ( US 20220338283 ) do not disclose : “ the request being based at least in part on the relay connection with the second UE and a connection state of the first UE, and the relay connection with the second UE being based at least in part on the one or more parameters in the first system information transmission ”.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHUONG T HO whose telephone number is (571)272-3133. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30-4:00.
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, Charles C Jiang can be reached at 571-270-7191. 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.
/CHUONG T HO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2412
