DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to the Amendment filed 11/11/2025. Claims 1-14 are currently pending in the application.
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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/11/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Due to the claim amendments, the previous claim objections and claim rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) have been withdrawn.
Regarding the rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2), Applicant argues that Kang et al. does not disclose the features of this claim requiring “a controller configured to determine whether the relay UE device is capable of providing relay service to each of a target UE device and a base station, the controller configured to select a relay capability indicator from a set” and “ a transmitter configured to transmit a sidelink discovery message comprising the relay capability indicator.” The Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Applicant argues that absent from Kang et al. is any disclosure of the relay UE actually determining whether the relay UE device is capable of providing relay service to each of a target UE and a base station. The Examiner disagrees with this interpretation of the teachings of Kang et al. Specifically, Kang et al. teaches in operation 661 of Figure 6B acquiring relay discovery message transmission and reception configuration information that is used to configure and transmit a discovery message in operation 667 of Figure 6B (See paragraphs 121-123 and Figure 6B of Kang et al.). Kang et al. also discloses that this configuration information includes a target destination (See paragraph 122 of Kang et al.), and also discloses that the discovery message is configured to include a destination, DST, ID of the services that the relay UE can relay (See paragraph 125 and Table 1 of Kang et al.). Thus, in this manner, the relay UE 1 650 of Kang et al. determines configuration information indicating the target destinations that it is capable of providing relay service to. Further, Kang et al. teaches that relay target destination may be a base station in the case of a U2N relay and may be another terminal in the case of a U2U relay (See paragraph 184 of Kang et al.). Thus, it is clear from this teaching of Kang et al. that the target destination of the relay may be a base station or another terminal, i.e. another UE. Since Kang et al. teaches a relay UE acquiring relay discovery message transmission configuration information that includes target destination information that the relay UE can relay, and since Kang et al. also teaches that the target destination may be a base station or another terminal, Kang et al. does disclose its relay UE determining whether the relay UE device is capable of providing relay service to each of a target UE and a base station.
Applicant also argues that paragraphs 184-185 describe a terminal (e.g. not a relay) determining whether to perform relay discovery based on either a potential U2N relay scenario or a U2U relay scenario. The Examiner respectfully disagrees with this interpretation of the teachings of Kang et al. Specifically, as discussed above, Kang et al. teaches that relay target destination may be a base station in the case of a U2N relay and may be another terminal in the case of a U2U relay (See paragraph 184 of Kang et al.). Kang et al. also teaches that the same sidelink discovery procedure may be applied to a source terminal and a target terminal for supporting the U2N and U2U relay wherein the sidelink relay may acquire information required to transmit the sidelink discovery message (See paragraphs 184-186 of Kang et al.). Thus, it is clear from this section of Kang et al. as well as the teachings in paragraphs 121-125 of Kang et al. that the relay UE does determine information regarding whether it is capable of provide relay service to multiple destinations that may include a base station in the case of a U2N relay and another terminal in the case of U2U relay. Thus, the rejection of claim 1 based on the teachings of Kang et al. is maintained.
Regarding the rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2), Applicant argues that Kang et al. does not disclose the features of this claim requiring “[a] remote user equipment (UE) device comprising: a receiver configured to receive a coverage indicator indicating whether the candidate relay UE device transmitting the coverage indicator is in coverage of a cell.” The Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Applicant argues that Kang et al. does not disclose that the relay discovery messages include a coverage indicator, nor do they describe the remote UE receiving, from each candidate relay UE, an indication of in-coverage or out-of-coverage. The Examiner respectfully disagrees with this interpretation of the teachings of Kang et al. As discussed above, Kang et al. teaches a UEs receiving discovery messages from relay UEs in operation 667 in response to transmitting a discovery solicitation message in operation 657 (See paragraphs 121-123 and Figure 6B of Kang et al.). Kang et al. also discloses that the configuration information of the discovery messages includes target destinations (See paragraph 122 of Kang et al.), and also discloses that the discovery message is configured to include destination, DST, ID of the services that the relay UE can relay (See paragraph 125 and Table 1 of Kang et al.). This target destination ID indication of the services that the relay UE can relay is equivalent to the claimed coverage indicator indicating whether the relay UE device is in coverage of a cell, since the destination ID indication indicates that the relay UE is capable of provide relay service to the destination, such that the relay UE is “in coverage” of the destination. Thus, the rejection of claim 5 based on the teachings of Kang et al. is maintained.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 5, and 7-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kang et al. (U.S. Publication US 2022/0103997 A1).
With respect to claim 1, Kang et al. discloses a relay user equipment (UE) device comprising: a controller and a transmitter (See paragraphs 66-67, paragraphs 95-98, Figure 1A and Figure 3 of Kang et al. for reference to a relay UE including a controller and communication unit, which acts as a transmitter and receiver). Kang et al. also discloses the controller configured to determine whether the relay UE device is capable of providing relay service to each of a target UE device and a base station (See paragraphs 121-122, paragraph 184, and Figure 6B of Kang et al. for reference to the relay UE determining whether it is capable of providing U2U relay to a target destination UE and/or providing U2N relay to a base station). Kang et al. further discloses the controller configured to select a relay capability indicator from a set comprising a U2U relay only indicator, a U2N relay only indicator, and a dual relay indicator, the U2U relay only indicator selected when the relay UE device is capable of providing relay service to a target UE device without relay service to the base station, the U2N relay only indicator selected when the relay UE device is capable of providing relay service to the base station without relay service directly to the target UE device, the dual relay indicator selected when the relay UE device is capable of providing relay service to the base station and relay service to the target UE device (See paragraphs 121-123, paragraphs 184-185, and Figure 6B of Kang et al. for reference to the relay UE determining to transmit a discovery message responding to a discovery solicitation message from another UE, wherein the discovery message indicates whether the UE can provide relay for a target destination UE, i.e. U2U relay, and/or provide relay for a base station, i.e. U2N relay). Kang et al. also discloses the transmitter configured to transmit a sidelink discovery message comprising the relay capability indicator (See paragraphs 121-123, paragraphs 184-185, and Figure 6B of Kang et al. for reference to the relay UE transmitting the discovery message including the indications of U2U and/or U2N relay capabilities).
With respect to claim 5, Kang et al. discloses a remote user equipment (UE) device comprising: a receiver and a controller (See paragraphs 66-67, paragraph 71, paragraphs 95-98, Figure 1A and Figure 3 of Kang et al. for reference to a remote terminal UE including a controller and communication unit, which acts as a transmitter and receiver). Kang et al. also discloses the receiver configured to receive a coverage indicator from each of a plurality of candidate relay UE devices, each coverage indicator indicating whether the candidate relay UE device transmitting the coverage indicator is in coverage of a cell (See paragraphs 66-67, paragraphs 72-73, paragraphs 121-122, and Figures 1A and 6B of Kang et al. for reference to the remote UE transmitting a discovery solicitation message and receiving discover messages from one or more candidate relay UEs indicating capability of the candidate relay UEs to provide relay for a target destination UE, i.e. U2U relay, and/or provide relay for a base station, i.e. U2N relay, wherein an indication of U2N relay is an indication that the relay UE is in coverage of a cell corresponding to the base station). Kang et al. also discloses the controller configured to select, from the plurality of candidate relay UE devices, a selected relay UE device for providing a relay connection to a target UE device (See paragraph 124, paragraphs 121-122, and Figure 6B of Kang et al. for reference to the remote UE selecting a relay UE based on receiving discovery messages, wherein the selected relay UE is capable of providing relay to an target destination UE indicated a transmitted discovery solicitation message).
With respect to claim 7, Kang et al. discloses wherein the coverage indicator comprises a relay capability indicator selected from a set comprising a U2U relay only indicator, a U2N relay only indicator, and a dual relay indicator, the U2U relay only indicator selected when the relay UE device is capable of providing relay service to a target UE device without relay service to the base station, the U2N relay only indicator selected when the relay UE device is capable of providing relay service to the base station without relay service directly to the target UE device, the dual relay indicator selected when the relay UE device is capable of providing relay service to the base station and relay service to the target UE device (See paragraphs 121-123, paragraphs 184-185, and Figure 6B of Kang et al. for reference to the relay UE determining to transmit a discovery message responding to a discovery solicitation message from the remote UE, wherein the discovery message indicates whether the UE can provide relay for a target destination UE, i.e. U2U relay, and/or provide relay for a base station, i.e. U2N relay).
With respect to claim 8, Kang et al. discloses wherein the controller is configured to select the selected relay UE device based on one or more communication paths from the remote UE device to the target UE device capable of being provided by each of the plurality of candidate relay UE devices (See paragraph 124, paragraph 189 of Kang et al. for reference to a strength of a signal between the remote UE and a relay UE, i.e. the path between the UEs, being used to determine whether the relay UE is capable of providing sidelink relay for the remote UE, wherein only relay UEs determined to be capable of providing the relay are selected).
With respect to claim 9, Kang et al. discloses wherein the controller is configured to select the selected relay UE device based an expected reliability of the communication paths (See paragraph 124, paragraph 189 of Kang et al. for reference to a strength of a signal between the remote UE and a relay UE, i.e. an expected reliability of the path between the UEs, being used to determine whether the relay UE is capable of providing sidelink relay for the remote UE, wherein only relay UEs determined to be capable of providing the relay are selected).
With respect to claim 10, Kang et al. discloses a transmitter configured to transmit a Model B discovery request identifying the target UE device, the receiver configured to receive a plurality of Model B discovery responses, each of the Model B discovery responses comprising one of the coverage indicators (See paragraphs 121-124, paragraph 133, and Figure 6B for reference to transmitting a discovery solicitation message from the remote UE indicating a target destination UE and selecting a relay UE based on received discover messages in response to the solicitation message, wherein the discovery solicitation and discovery message may be of model B).
With respect to claim 11, Kang et al. discloses wherein at least one of the coverage indicators comprises a target UE coverage indicator indicating whether the target UE device is in coverage of a cell (See paragraphs 184-185 of Kang et al. for reference to indicating whether a UE can provide U2N service, i.e. service to a base station, which means the UE is in coverage of the base station).
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.
Claims 2-3 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kang et al. in view of Kaur et al. (U.S. Patent US 10,531,365 B2).
With respect to claim 2, although Kang et al. does disclose a UE indicating that it can provide U2N relay (See paragraphs 184-185 of Kang et al.), Kang et al. does not specifically disclose transmitting the sidelink discovery message comprising a cell identifier of the base station. However, Kaur et al., in the field of communications, discloses a relay WTRU transmitting an indication of a cell ID of a base station it is being served by (See column 11 lines 28-47 and Figure 4 of Kaur et al.). Transmitting an indication of a cell ID of a base station a relay UE is being served by has the advantage of allowing a remote device to determine to which specific base station a relay UE may provide relay service. Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing, when presented with the work of Kaur et al., to combine transmitting an indication of a cell ID of a base station a relay UE is being served by, as suggested by Kaur et al., within the system and method of Kang et al., with the motivation being to allow a remote device to determine to which specific base station a relay UE may provide relay service.
With respect to claim 3, Kang et al. discloses a receiver configured to receive a Model B discovery request message from a remote UE device, the Model B discovery request message identifying the target UE device (See paragraphs 121-124, paragraph 133, and Figure 6B for reference to receiving a discovery solicitation message from the remote UE indicating a target destination UE, wherein the discovery solicitation and discovery message may be of model B).
With respect to claim 6, although Kang et al. does disclose a UE indicating that it can provide U2N relay (See paragraphs 184-185 of Kang et al.), Kang et al. does not specifically disclose wherein coverage indicator comprises a cell identifier uniquely identifying the cell. However, Kaur et al., in the field of communications, discloses a relay WTRU transmitting an indication of a cell ID of a base station it is being served by (See column 11 lines 28-47 and Figure 4 of Kaur et al.). Transmitting an indication of a cell ID of a base station a relay UE is being served by has the advantage of allowing a remote device to determine to which specific base station a relay UE may provide relay service. Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing, when presented with the work of Kaur et al., to combine transmitting an indication of a cell ID of a base station a relay UE is being served by, as suggested by Kaur et al., within the system and method of Kang et al., with the motivation being to allow a remote device to determine to which specific base station a relay UE may provide relay service.
Claims 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kang et al. in view of Pan et al. (U.S. Publication US 2022/0007445 A1).
With respect to claim 12, Kang et al. does not specifically disclose wherein the controller is further configured to: initiate a timer when the transmitter transmits a Model B discovery request; and delay selecting the selected relay UE device until the timer has expired. However, Pan et al., in the field of communications, discloses in order to make a relay selection, a source UE can setup a timer after sending out a Direct Communication Request for collecting the corresponding response messages, wherein the messages may be Model B discovery/selection messages (See paragraph 294 and paragraph 297 of Pan et al.). Using a timer has the advantage of allowing time for all responses to a relay request message to be received before deciding on which relay to select. Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing, when presented with the work of Pan et al., to combine using a timer, as suggested by Pan et al., within the system and method of Kang et al., with the motivation being to allow time for all responses to a relay request message to be received before deciding on which relay to select.
With respect to claim 13, Kang et al. does not specifically disclose wherein the controller is further configured to: initiate a timer when the receiver receives a first Model B discovery response of the plurality of Model B discovery responses; and delay selecting the selected relay UE device until the timer has expired. However, Pan et al., in the field of communications, discloses in order to make a relay selection, a source UE can setup a timer after receiving the first copy of the Direct Communication Request for collecting multiple copies of the message from multiple different paths before making the decision, wherein the messages may be Model B discovery/selection messages (See paragraph 294 and paragraph 297 of Pan et al.). Using a timer has the advantage of allowing time for all responses to a relay request message to be received before deciding on which relay to select. Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing, when presented with the work of Pan et al., to combine using a timer, as suggested by Pan et al., within the system and method of Kang et al., with the motivation being to allow time for all responses to a relay request message to be received before deciding on which relay to select.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4 and 14 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 Jason E Mattis whose telephone number is (571)272-3154. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00am-4:30pm.
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 571-2723155. 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.
/JASON E MATTIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2461