DETAILED ACTION
The following is a final office action in response to applicant’s amendment filed on 12/18/2025 for response of the office actions mailed on 09/18/2025. No claims are cancelled. Therefore, claims 1-26 are pending and addressed below.
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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 16 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 1 and 16 in lines 5/8 respectively, “I-RNTI profile valid” should be replaced by "Inactive Radio Network Temporary Identifier, I-RNTI profile valid”. … missing the definition of an acronym at the first instance.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
In 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 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 factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 1-3, 5, 7-8, 10, 16-18, 20, 22-23 and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Godin et al. (2022/0117006), Godin hereinafter, in view of Tao et al. (2023/0104628), Tao hereinafter.
Re. claims 1 and 16, Godin teaches a method (Fig.1-9 & ¶0060/¶0062) performed by a first network node (Fig.1-5), and a first network node (Fig.1-5) comprising: processing circuitry (Fig. 10a, 12); and memory (Fig. 10a, 14) coupled with the processing circuitry, wherein the memory includes instructions that when executed by the processing circuitry (Fig. 10a & ¶0109-¶0100) causes the network node to perform operations (Fig.1-9 & ¶0060/¶0062) comprising: determining one or more Local node Identifiers (Fig. 2 & ¶0060 - at 202, if the CU-UP1 is a last serving CU-UP for a UE, then the CU-CP may determine an I-RNTI (inactive radio network temporary identifier, see ¶0059) with the first R bits of the UE identifier part matching an identifier for the CU-UP1. As illustrated at 204, the CU-CP may send, and the UE may receive, an RRC release message. The RRC release message may include the determined I-RNTI that includes the R bits of the CU-UP1 identifier, remaining UE identifier bits, and network node (e.g., gNB) identifier bits. …. the I-RNTI may include the current serving network node identifier (e.g., gNB-ID) which is to be the anchor gNB. As illustrated at 206, the UE may store this network node identifier (e.g., gNB-ID) in an RRC inactive context.); and transmitting a radio resource control, RRC, release message with suspend configuration to a user equipment, to transition the user equipment to RRC Inactive, the RRC release message comprising a Local node Identifier for the first network node and a UE context identifier (Fig. 1-9 & ¶0060 - As illustrated at 204, the CU-CP may send, and the UE may receive, an RRC release message. The RRC release message may include the determined I-RNTI that includes the R bits of the CU-UP1 identifier, remaining UE identifier bits, and network node (e.g., gNB) identifier bits. …. the I-RNTI may include the current serving network node identifier (e.g., gNB-ID) which is to be the anchor gNB. As illustrated at 206, the UE may store this network node identifier (e.g., gNB-ID) in an RRC inactive context. Fig. 1-9 & ¶0062 - When the R bits are statically reserved during the F1 setup procedure, the number of inactive UE contexts per CU-UP may be restricted. If a UE has to be suspended from a CU-UP more than the number of instances allowed by the remaining bits, then the RRC release message may include an indication to indicate that the UE is to use an RRC-based resume. Additionally, or alternatively, the UE context can be shifted to a CU-UP which has a fewer number of inactive contexts. For example, assuming 24 bits assigned for a gNB, if R bits occupy 8 bits, 16 bits would be available to identify the session within the CU-UP for an inactive context.).
Yet, Godin does not expressly teach transmitting, to a second network node neighboring the first network node, each of the one or more Local node Identifier comprising: an Inactive-Radio Network Temporary Identifier, I-RNTI, profile valid for the first network node and associated with a full I-RNTI; and/or an I-RNTI profile valid for the first network node and associated with a short I-RNTI;
However, in the analogous art, Tao explicitly discloses transmitting, to a second network node neighboring the first network node, each of the one or more Local node Identifier comprising: an Inactive-Radio Network Temporary Identifier, I-RNTI, profile valid for the first network node and associated with a full I-RNTI; and/or an I-RNTI profile valid for the first network node and associated with a short I-RNTI; (Fig.25 & ¶0271 - In 5G NR there is the I-RNTI and the short I-RNTI (see TS 38.331 v15.8.0 section 6.3.2), each of which could be used as the non-cell-specific UE ID. The I-RNTI has 40 bits, and is composed differently, depending on the I-RNTI reference profile. On the other hand, the short I-RNTI has less bits than the full I-RNTI, in particular 24 bits.
PNG
media_image2.png
312
638
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Fig.25 & ¶0275 - In current 5G NR systems, the UE is configured by the gNB to use either the full or short I-RNTI (e.g., as part of SIB1). Thus, exemplary, the UE, when performing the improved data transmission procedure and deciding to use the non-cell-specific UE ID for the small-data transmission, uses the full or short I-RNTI in line with the indication from the gNB. ¶0305 - FIG. 25, which illustrates the message exchange between the UE, the old anchor gNB and the new gNB to which the UE moved while in the inactive state. This improved variant of the data transmission method uses the 4-step RACH procedure to convey the small data in msg3. Msg3 also comprises the control message with a non-cell specific UE ID (such as the full I-RNTI or short I-RNTI). See ¶0306-¶0308.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine Godin’s invention of a system and a method for data transmission with stateless routing in a wireless communication system to include Tao’s invention of a system and a method for small data transmission in a 5G/NR <New Radio> network, because it provides an efficient mechanism in determining UE identification (e.g., cell-specific UE identification or a non-cell-specific) to use for the small data transmission when the UE is in an inactive state operating in the 5G/NR <New Radio> network. (¶0005-¶0006, Tao)
Re. Claims 2 and 17, Godin and Tao teach claims 1 and 16.
Godin further teaches wherein the first network node is a first radio access network, RAN, node, the second network node is a second RAN node and the Local node Identifiers comprise NG RAN Node Local node Identifiers (Fig. 1-9 & ¶0060 - As illustrated at 204, the CU-CP may send, and the UE may receive, an RRC release message. The RRC release message may include the determined I-RNTI that includes the R bits of the CU-UP1 identifier, remaining UE identifier bits, and network node (e.g., gNB) identifier bits. …. the I-RNTI may include the current serving network node identifier (e.g., gNB-ID) which is to be the anchor gNB. As illustrated at 206, the UE may store this network node identifier (e.g., gNB-ID) in an RRC inactive context. Fig. 1-9 & ¶0067- operations at 306-314, the DU may receive information from the UE and may analyze the first R bits (e.g., MSB) of the UE identifier part of the I-RNTI. ….. the R bits may not be the first R bits, but may be R bits within the UE identifier part of the I-RNTI determined according to some predefined bitmap. If the R bits match one of the CU-UP(s) to which the DU is connected, then the DU may forward the packet to those CU-UP(s). After this, the CU-UP(s) may retrieve the UE context from the received I-RNTI and may use the received-UP MAC-I to check the authenticity of the packet.).
Re. Claims 3 and 18, Godin and Tao teach claims 1 and 16.
Yet, Godin does not expressly teach transmitting one or more of an I-RNTI profile valid for a third network node and associated with a full I-RNTI, the I-RNTI profile valid for a third network node and associated with a short I-RNTI, a Local node Identifier valid for a third network node and associated with a full I-RNTI, the Local node Identifier valid for a third network node and associated with a short I- RNTI, wherein the third network node neighbors the first network node.
However, in the analogous art, Tao explicitly discloses transmitting one or more of an I-RNTI profile valid for a third network node and associated with a full I-RNTI, the I-RNTI profile valid for a third network node and associated with a short I-RNTI, a Local node Identifier valid for a third network node and associated with a full I-RNTI, the Local node Identifier valid for a third network node and associated with a short I- RNTI, wherein the third network node neighbors the first network node. (Fig.25 & ¶0271 - In 5G NR there is the I-RNTI and the short I-RNTI (see TS 38.331 v15.8.0 section 6.3.2), each of which could be used as the non-cell-specific UE ID. The I-RNTI has 40 bits, and is composed differently, depending on the I-RNTI reference profile. On the other hand, the short I-RNTI has less bits than the full I-RNTI, in particular 24 bits.
PNG
media_image2.png
312
638
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Fig.25 & ¶0275 - In current 5G NR systems, the UE is configured by the gNB to use either the full or short I-RNTI (e.g., as part of SIB1). Thus, exemplary, the UE, when performing the improved data transmission procedure and deciding to use the non-cell-specific UE ID for the small-data transmission, uses the full or short I-RNTI in line with the indication from the gNB. ¶0305 - FIG. 25, which illustrates the message exchange between the UE, the old anchor gNB and the new gNB to which the UE moved while in the inactive state. This improved variant of the data transmission method uses the 4-step RACH procedure to convey the small data in msg3. Msg3 also comprises the control message with a non-cell specific UE ID (such as the full I-RNTI or short I-RNTI). See ¶0306-¶0308.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine Godin’s invention of a system and a method for data transmission with stateless routing in a wireless communication system to include Tao’s invention of a system and a method for small data transmission in a 5G/NR <New Radio> network, because it provides an efficient mechanism in determining UE identification (e.g., cell-specific UE identification or a non-cell-specific) to use for the small data transmission when the UE is in an inactive state operating in the 5G/NR <New Radio> network. (¶0005-¶0006, Tao)
Re. Claims 5 and 20, Godin and Tao teach claims 3 and 18.
Godin further teaches wherein the third network node neighbors the second network node.( Fig. 3-5 & ¶0049 - When the target node receives the RRC resume request message from the UE, it may extract the I-RNTI and may contact the source node based on the information in the I-RNTI by sending an Xn application protocol (Xn-AP) retrieve UE context request message with the I-RNTI, the resume MAC-I/short resume MAC-I and target cell identifier included. This may allow the source node to validate the UE request and to retrieve the UE context including the UE 5G AS security context. Also, see ¶0050-¶0051.Fig. 3 & ¶0067- operations at 306-314, the DU may receive information from the UE and may analyze the first R bits (e.g., MSB) of the UE identifier part of the I-RNTI. ….. the R bits may not be the first R bits, but may be R bits within the UE identifier part of the I-RNTI determined according to some predefined bitmap. If the R bits match one of the CU-UP(s) to which the DU is connected, then the DU may forward the packet to those CU-UP(s). After this, the CU-UP(s) may retrieve the UE context from the received I-RNTI and may use the received-UP MAC-I to check the authenticity of the packet Fig. 5 & ¶0081 - As illustrated at 504, the UE may send, and the DU may receive, the RRC resume. For example, the RRC resume may include an SDT UL packet that includes I-RNTI for the UE, a MAC-I, and a payload. As illustrated at 506, the DU may analyze R bits of the UE identifier within the I-RNTI to determine whether the R bits match an identifier of a CU-UP to which the DU is connected. If the analysis results in a match, then, at 508, the DU may send the RRC resume message to the CU-CP. In addition, at 510, the DU may send the UL packet to the CU-UP associated with the identifier that matches the R bits. Fig. 5 & ¶0082 - As illustrated at 512, the CU-CP may determine the UE context from the I-RNTI. As illustrated at 514, the CU-CP may send, and the UE may receive, an RRC release message. For example, the RRC release message may include an indication to suspend the RRC connection and may include a new I-RNTI. As illustrated at 516, the CU-UP may check the MAC-I using the K.sub.UPint (“K_UPint” in FIG. 5). As illustrated at 518, the CU-UP may send, and the UPF may receive, the payload from the UL packet. For example, the payload may be sent using the GTP TEID of the stored context. As illustrated at 520, the CU-UP may send, and the UE may receive, an ACK. For example, the ACK may indicate that the payload has been forwarded to the UPF).
Re. Claims 7 and 22, Godin and Tao teach claims 1 and 16.
Yet, Godin does not expressly teach wherein the network node is further adapted to perform operations comprising: receiving, from the second network node neighboring the first network node, second information comprising: an I-RNTI profile valid for the second network node and associated with a full I-RNTI; and/or an I-RNTI profile valid for the second network node and associated with a short I-RNTI.
However, in the analogous art, Tao explicitly discloses wherein the network node is further adapted to perform operations comprising: receiving, from the second network node neighboring the first network node, second information comprising: an I-RNTI profile valid for the second network node and associated with a full I-RNTI; and/or an I-RNTI profile valid for the second network node and associated with a short I-RNTI. (Fig.25 & ¶0271 - In 5G NR there is the I-RNTI and the short I-RNTI (see TS 38.331 v15.8.0 section 6.3.2), each of which could be used as the non-cell-specific UE ID. The I-RNTI has 40 bits, and is composed differently, depending on the I-RNTI reference profile. On the other hand, the short I-RNTI has less bits than the full I-RNTI, in particular 24 bits.
PNG
media_image2.png
312
638
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Fig.25 & ¶0275 - In current 5G NR systems, the UE is configured by the gNB to use either the full or short I-RNTI (e.g., as part of SIB1). Thus, exemplary, the UE, when performing the improved data transmission procedure and deciding to use the non-cell-specific UE ID for the small-data transmission, uses the full or short I-RNTI in line with the indication from the gNB. ¶0305 - FIG. 25, which illustrates the message exchange between the UE, the old anchor gNB and the new gNB to which the UE moved while in the inactive state. This improved variant of the data transmission method uses the 4-step RACH procedure to convey the small data in msg3. Msg3 also comprises the control message with a non-cell specific UE ID (such as the full I-RNTI or short I-RNTI). See ¶0306-¶0308.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine Godin’s invention of a system and a method for data transmission with stateless routing in a wireless communication system to include Tao’s invention of a system and a method for small data transmission in a 5G/NR <New Radio> network, because it provides an efficient mechanism in determining UE identification (e.g., cell-specific UE identification or a non-cell-specific) to use for the small data transmission when the UE is in an inactive state operating in the 5G/NR <New Radio> network. (¶0005-¶0006, Tao)
Re. Claims 8 and 23, Godin and Tao teach claims 7 and 22.
Yet, Godin does not expressly teach wherein receiving the second information further comprises receiving one or more of an I-RNTI profile valid for a fourth network node and associated with a full I-RNTI, the I-RNTI profile valid for a fourth network node and associated with a short I-RNTI, a Local node Identifier valid for a fourth network node and associated with a full I-RNTI, the Local node Identifier valid for a fourth network node and associated with a short I-RNTI, wherein the fourth network node neighbors the second network node.
However, in the analogous art, Tao explicitly discloses wherein receiving the second information further comprises receiving one or more of an I-RNTI profile valid for a fourth network node and associated with a full I-RNTI, the I-RNTI profile valid for a fourth network node and associated with a short I-RNTI, a Local node Identifier valid for a fourth network node and associated with a full I-RNTI, the Local node Identifier valid for a fourth network node and associated with a short I-RNTI, wherein the fourth network node neighbors the second network node. (Fig.25 & ¶0271 - In 5G NR there is the I-RNTI and the short I-RNTI (see TS 38.331 v15.8.0 section 6.3.2), each of which could be used as the non-cell-specific UE ID. The I-RNTI has 40 bits, and is composed differently, depending on the I-RNTI reference profile. On the other hand, the short I-RNTI has less bits than the full I-RNTI, in particular 24 bits.
PNG
media_image2.png
312
638
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Fig.25 & ¶0275 - In current 5G NR systems, the UE is configured by the gNB to use either the full or short I-RNTI (e.g., as part of SIB1). Thus, exemplary, the UE, when performing the improved data transmission procedure and deciding to use the non-cell-specific UE ID for the small-data transmission, uses the full or short I-RNTI in line with the indication from the gNB. ¶0305 - FIG. 25, which illustrates the message exchange between the UE, the old anchor gNB and the new gNB to which the UE moved while in the inactive state. This improved variant of the data transmission method uses the 4-step RACH procedure to convey the small data in msg3. Msg3 also comprises the control message with a non-cell specific UE ID (such as the full I-RNTI or short I-RNTI). See ¶0306-¶0308.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine Godin’s invention of a system and a method for data transmission with stateless routing in a wireless communication system to include Tao’s invention of a system and a method for small data transmission in a 5G/NR <New Radio> network, because it provides an efficient mechanism in determining UE identification (e.g., cell-specific UE identification or a non-cell-specific) to use for the small data transmission when the UE is in an inactive state operating in the 5G/NR <New Radio> network. (¶0005-¶0006, Tao)
Re. Claims 10 and 25, Godin and Tao teach claims 8 and 23.
Godin further teaches wherein the fourth network node neighbors the first network node.( Fig. 3-5 & ¶0049 - When the target node receives the RRC resume request message from the UE, it may extract the I-RNTI and may contact the source node based on the information in the I-RNTI by sending an Xn application protocol (Xn-AP) retrieve UE context request message with the I-RNTI, the resume MAC-I/short resume MAC-I and target cell identifier included. This may allow the source node to validate the UE request and to retrieve the UE context including the UE 5G AS security context. Also, see ¶0050-¶0051. Fig. 3 & ¶0067- operations at 306-314, the DU may receive information from the UE and may analyze the first R bits (e.g., MSB) of the UE identifier part of the I-RNTI. ….. the R bits may not be the first R bits, but may be R bits within the UE identifier part of the I-RNTI determined according to some predefined bitmap. If the R bits match one of the CU-UP(s) to which the DU is connected, then the DU may forward the packet to those CU-UP(s). After this, the CU-UP(s) may retrieve the UE context from the received I-RNTI and may use the received-UP MAC-I to check the authenticity of the packet Fig. 5 & ¶0081 - As illustrated at 504, the UE may send, and the DU may receive, the RRC resume. For example, the RRC resume may include an SDT UL packet that includes I-RNTI for the UE, a MAC-I, and a payload. As illustrated at 506, the DU may analyze R bits of the UE identifier within the I-RNTI to determine whether the R bits match an identifier of a CU-UP to which the DU is connected. If the analysis results in a match, then, at 508, the DU may send the RRC resume message to the CU-CP. In addition, at 510, the DU may send the UL packet to the CU-UP associated with the identifier that matches the R bits. Fig. 5 & ¶0082 - As illustrated at 512, the CU-CP may determine the UE context from the I-RNTI. As illustrated at 514, the CU-CP may send, and the UE may receive, an RRC release message. For example, the RRC release message may include an indication to suspend the RRC connection and may include a new I-RNTI. As illustrated at 516, the CU-UP may check the MAC-I using the K.sub.UPint (“K_UPint” in FIG. 5). As illustrated at 518, the CU-UP may send, and the UPF may receive, the payload from the UL packet. For example, the payload may be sent using the GTP TEID of the stored context. As illustrated at 520, the CU-UP may send, and the UE may receive, an ACK. For example, the ACK may indicate that the payload has been forwarded to the UPF).
Claims 4, 6, 9, 11-13, 19, 21, 24 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Godin, in view of Tao, further in view of 3GPP TSG-RAN WG3#110; R3-206905; Source: Nokia, Nokia Shanghai Bell; E-Meeting, 02– 12 November 2020, R3-206905_Nokia, hereinafter.
Re. Claims 4 and 19, Godin and Tao teach claims 3 and 18.
Yet, Godin and Tao do not expressly teach wherein the third network node does not neighbor the second network node.
However, in the analogous art, R3-206905_Nokia explicitly discloses wherein the third network node does not neighbor the second network node. (Page 1: The gNBs exchange a “Local gNB ID” across the Xn interface, however it is not clear:
- How this Local gNB ID is generated?
- How does it help the disambiguation i.e. assuming this is random chosen how does it prevent that two neighbor gNBs don’t allocate the same Local gNB ID?
- If each gNB decides its own length of ID, how to disambiguate between two local gNB IDs which would overlap on the MSB?
- Is the expectation that in case of a detected collision, the gNB detecting the collision would re-assign again its “local gNB ID” and send it again to all its neighbours?
- What is the probability of convergence of the above algorithm? How much increase of signaling will this generate over the Xn interface?
Due to the above concerns, it seems as efficient to generate the bits encoding the old gNB ID pointer taking for example the modulo value of the true gNB ID. For instance, if the length of the old gNB ID pointer is 16 bits, then it is good enough to take old gNB ID pointer = gNB ID modulo 65536 (2^16).
Page 2: Resolve old NG-RAN node from I-RNTI
The I-RNTI provides the new NG-RAN node with an NG-RAN node pointer referring to the old NG-RAN node and a reference to the UE context in this old NG-RAN node.
To support the new NG-RAN node to resolve the old NG-RAN node from the I-RNTI, the NG-RAN nodes in the network may be configured with:
- The length of the NG-RAN node pointer values to be used,
- The generation of NG-RAN node pointer should be equal to the residual of NG-RAN node ID modulo 2^(length)
If Local gNB ID for the new new NG-RAN node is failed to be generated based on the aforesaid disclosures, which prevents for two neighboring gNBs in allocating a distinct Local gNB ID, eventually, fails to consider neighbors to each other).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine Godin’s invention of a system and a method for data transmission with stateless routing in a wireless communication system and Tao’s invention of a system and a method for small data transmission in a 5G/NR <New Radio> network to include R3-206905_Nokia’s invention of disambiguating I-RNTI (Inactive Radio Network Temporary Identifier) when a UE (User Equipment) resumes from RRC_INACTIVE mode into a new gNB (different than an anchor gNB) in a wireless communication system, because it provides an efficient mechanism in generating bits for encoding old gNB ID pointer, in detecting collision, with less impact on Xn signaling impact, in the wireless communication system. (Page 1, R3-206905_Nokia)
Re. Claims 6 and 21, Godin and Tao teach claims 3 and 18.
Yet, Godin and Tao do not expressly teach wherein determining the one or more Local node Identifiers comprises for each Local node Identifier in a plurality of the one or more Local node Identifiers, determining a random number as the Local node Identifier.
However, in the analogous art, R3-206905_Nokia explicitly discloses wherein determining the one or more Local node Identifiers comprises for each Local node Identifier in a plurality of the one or more Local node Identifiers, determining a random number as the Local node Identifier (Page 1: The gNBs exchange a “Local gNB ID” across the Xn interface, however it is not clear:
- How this Local gNB ID is generated?
- How does it help the disambiguation i.e. assuming this is random chosen how does it prevent that two neighbor gNBs don’t allocate the same Local gNB ID?
- If each gNB decides its own length of ID, how to disambiguate between two local gNB IDs which would overlap on the MSB?
- Is the expectation that in case of a detected collision, the gNB detecting the collision would re-assign again its “local gNB ID” and send it again to all its neighbours?
- What is the probability of convergence of the above algorithm? How much increase of signaling will this generate over the Xn interface?
Due to the above concerns, it seems as efficient to generate the bits encoding the old gNB ID pointer taking for example the modulo value of the true gNB ID. For instance, if the length of the old gNB ID pointer is 16 bits, then it is good enough to take old gNB ID pointer = gNB ID modulo 65536 (2^16).
Page 2: Resolve old NG-RAN node from I-RNTI
The I-RNTI provides the new NG-RAN node with an NG-RAN node pointer referring to the old NG-RAN node and a reference to the UE context in this old NG-RAN node.
To support the new NG-RAN node to resolve the old NG-RAN node from the I-RNTI, the NG-RAN nodes in the network may be configured with:
- The length of the NG-RAN node pointer values to be used,
- The generation of NG-RAN node pointer should be equal to the residual of NG-RAN node ID modulo 2^(length)
- randomly generated local gNB identifier as disclosed supra.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine Godin’s invention of a system and a method for data transmission with stateless routing in a wireless communication system and Tao’s invention of a system and a method for small data transmission in a 5G/NR <New Radio> network to include R3-206905_Nokia’s invention of disambiguating I-RNTI (Inactive Radio Network Temporary Identifier) when a UE (User Equipment) resumes from RRC_INACTIVE mode into a new gNB (different than an anchor gNB) in a wireless communication system, because it provides an efficient mechanism in generating bits for encoding old gNB ID pointer, in detecting collision, with less impact on Xn signaling impact, in the wireless communication system. (Page 1, R3-206905_Nokia)
Re. Claims 9 and 24, Godin and Tao teach claims 8 and 23.
Yet, Godin and Tao do not expressly teach wherein the fourth network node does not neighbor the first network node.
However, in the analogous art, R3-206905_Nokia explicitly discloses wherein the fourth network node does not neighbor the first network node. (Page 1: The gNBs exchange a “Local gNB ID” across the Xn interface, however it is not clear:
- How this Local gNB ID is generated?
- How does it help the disambiguation i.e. assuming this is random chosen how does it prevent that two neighbor gNBs don’t allocate the same Local gNB ID?
- If each gNB decides its own length of ID, how to disambiguate between two local gNB IDs which would overlap on the MSB?
- Is the expectation that in case of a detected collision, the gNB detecting the collision would re-assign again its “local gNB ID” and send it again to all its neighbours?
- What is the probability of convergence of the above algorithm? How much increase of signaling will this generate over the Xn interface?
Due to the above concerns, it seems as efficient to generate the bits encoding the old gNB ID pointer taking for example the modulo value of the true gNB ID. For instance, if the length of the old gNB ID pointer is 16 bits, then it is good enough to take old gNB ID pointer = gNB ID modulo 65536 (2^16).
Page 2: Resolve old NG-RAN node from I-RNTI
The I-RNTI provides the new NG-RAN node with an NG-RAN node pointer referring to the old NG-RAN node and a reference to the UE context in this old NG-RAN node.
To support the new NG-RAN node to resolve the old NG-RAN node from the I-RNTI, the NG-RAN nodes in the network may be configured with:
- The length of the NG-RAN node pointer values to be used,
- The generation of NG-RAN node pointer should be equal to the residual of NG-RAN node ID modulo 2^(length)
If Local gNB ID for the new new NG-RAN node is failed to be generated based on the aforesaid disclosures, which prevents for two neighboring gNBs in allocating a distinct Local gNB ID, eventually, fails to consider neighbors to each other).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine Godin’s invention of a system and a method for data transmission with stateless routing in a wireless communication system and Tao’s invention of a system and a method for small data transmission in a 5G/NR <New Radio> network to include R3-206905_Nokia’s invention of disambiguating I-RNTI (Inactive Radio Network Temporary Identifier) when a UE (User Equipment) resumes from RRC_INACTIVE mode into a new gNB (different than an anchor gNB) in a wireless communication system, because it provides an efficient mechanism in generating bits for encoding old gNB ID pointer, in detecting collision, with less impact on Xn signaling impact, in the wireless communication system. (Page 1, R3-206905_Nokia)
Re. Claims 11 and 26, Godin and Tao teach claims 8 and 23.
Yet, Godin and Tao do not expressly teach detecting a conflict responsive to detecting that more than one Global Node ID matches the Local node Identifier received; and transmitting a notification to the second network node of the conflict.
However, in the analogous art, R3-206905_Nokia explicitly discloses detecting a conflict responsive to detecting that more than one Global Node ID matches the Local node Identifier received; and transmitting a notification to the second network node of the conflict. (Page 1: The gNBs exchange a “Local gNB ID” across the Xn interface, however it is not clear:
- How this Local gNB ID is generated?
- How does it help the disambiguation i.e. assuming this is random chosen how does it prevent that two neighbor gNBs don’t allocate the same Local gNB ID?
- If each gNB decides its own length of ID, how to disambiguate between two local gNB IDs which would overlap on the MSB?
- Is the expectation that in case of a detected collision, the gNB detecting the collision would re-assign again its “local gNB ID” and send it again to all its neighbours?
- What is the probability of convergence of the above algorithm? How much increase of signaling will this generate over the Xn interface?
Due to the above concerns, it seems as efficient to generate the bits encoding the old gNB ID pointer taking for example the modulo value of the true gNB ID. For instance, if the length of the old gNB ID pointer is 16 bits, then it is good enough to take old gNB ID pointer = gNB ID modulo 65536 (2^16).
Page 2: Resolve old NG-RAN node from I-RNTI
The I-RNTI provides the new NG-RAN node with an NG-RAN node pointer referring to the old NG-RAN node and a reference to the UE context in this old NG-RAN node.
To support the new NG-RAN node to resolve the old NG-RAN node from the I-RNTI, the NG-RAN nodes in the network may be configured with:
- The length of the NG-RAN node pointer values to be used,
- The generation of NG-RAN node pointer should be equal to the residual of NG-RAN node ID modulo 2^(length)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine Godin’s invention of a system and a method for data transmission with stateless routing in a wireless communication system and Tao’s invention of a system and a method for small data transmission in a 5G/NR <New Radio> network to include R3-206905_Nokia’s invention of disambiguating I-RNTI (Inactive Radio Network Temporary Identifier) when a UE (User Equipment) resumes from RRC_INACTIVE mode into a new gNB (different than an anchor gNB) in a wireless communication system, because it provides an efficient mechanism in generating bits for encoding old gNB ID pointer, in detecting collision, with less impact on Xn signaling impact, in the wireless communication system. (Page 1, R3-206905_Nokia)
Re. Claim 12, Godin and Tao teach claim 1.
Yet, Godin and Tao do not expressly teach responsive to detecting that a conflict exists with the Local node Identifier for the first network node: deriving a new Local node Identifier; and transmitting the new Local node Identifier to the second network node.
However, in the analogous art, R3-206905_Nokia explicitly discloses responsive to detecting that a conflict exists with the Local node Identifier for the first network node: deriving a new Local node Identifier; and transmitting the new Local node Identifier to the second network node. (Page 1: The gNBs exchange a “Local gNB ID” across the Xn interface, however it is not clear:
- How this Local gNB ID is generated?
- How does it help the disambiguation i.e. assuming this is random chosen how does it prevent that two neighbor gNBs don’t allocate the same Local gNB ID?
- If each gNB decides its own length of ID, how to disambiguate between two local gNB IDs which would overlap on the MSB?
- Is the expectation that in case of a detected collision, the gNB detecting the collision would re-assign again its “local gNB ID” and send it again to all its neighbours?
- What is the probability of convergence of the above algorithm? How much increase of signaling will this generate over the Xn interface?
Due to the above concerns, it seems as efficient to generate the bits encoding the old gNB ID pointer taking for example the modulo value of the true gNB ID. For instance, if the length of the old gNB ID pointer is 16 bits, then it is good enough to take old gNB ID pointer = gNB ID modulo 65536 (2^16).
Page 2: Resolve old NG-RAN node from I-RNTI
The I-RNTI provides the new NG-RAN node with an NG-RAN node pointer referring to the old NG-RAN node and a reference to the UE context in this old NG-RAN node.
To support the new NG-RAN node to resolve the old NG-RAN node from the I-RNTI, the NG-RAN nodes in the network may be configured with:
- The length of the NG-RAN node pointer values to be used,
- The generation of NG-RAN node pointer should be equal to the residual of NG-RAN node ID modulo 2^(length)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine Godin’s invention of a system and a method for data transmission with stateless routing in a wireless communication system and Tao’s invention of a system and a method for small data transmission in a 5G/NR <New Radio> network to include R3-206905_Nokia’s invention of disambiguating I-RNTI (Inactive Radio Network Temporary Identifier) when a UE (User Equipment) resumes from RRC_INACTIVE mode into a new gNB (different than an anchor gNB) in a wireless communication system, because it provides an efficient mechanism in generating bits for encoding old gNB ID pointer, in detecting collision, with less impact on Xn signaling impact, in the wireless communication system. (Page 1, R3-206905_Nokia)
Re. Claim 13, Godin and Tao teach claim 1.
Yet, Godin and Tao do not expressly teach responsive to the I-RNTI profile for the first network node changing; deriving a new Local node Identifier; and transmitting the new Local node Identifier to the second network node.
However, in the analogous art, R3-206905_Nokia explicitly discloses responsive to the I-RNTI profile for the first network node changing; deriving a new Local node Identifier; and transmitting the new Local node Identifier to the second network node. (Page 1: The gNBs exchange a “Local gNB ID” across the Xn interface, however it is not clear:
- How this Local gNB ID is generated?
- How does it help the disambiguation i.e. assuming this is random chosen how does it prevent that two neighbor gNBs don’t allocate the same Local gNB ID?
- If each gNB decides its own length of ID, how to disambiguate between two local gNB IDs which would overlap on the MSB?
- Is the expectation that in case of a detected collision, the gNB detecting the collision would re-assign again its “local gNB ID” and send it again to all its neighbours?
- What is the probability of convergence of the above algorithm? How much increase of signaling will this generate over the Xn interface?
Due to the above concerns, it seems as efficient to generate the bits encoding the old gNB ID pointer taking for example the modulo value of the true gNB ID. For instance, if the length of the old gNB ID pointer is 16 bits, then it is good enough to take old gNB ID pointer = gNB ID modulo 65536 (2^16).
Page 2: Resolve old NG-RAN node from I-RNTI
The I-RNTI provides the new NG-RAN node with an NG-RAN node pointer referring to the old NG-RAN node and a reference to the UE context in this old NG-RAN node.
To support the new NG-RAN node to resolve the old NG-RAN node from the I-RNTI, the NG-RAN nodes in the network may be configured with:
- The length of the NG-RAN node pointer values to be used,
- The generation of NG-RAN node pointer should be equal to the residual of NG-RAN node ID modulo 2^(length)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine Godin’s invention of a system and a method for data transmission with stateless routing in a wireless communication system and Tao’s invention of a system and a method for small data transmission in a 5G/NR <New Radio> network to include R3-206905_Nokia’s invention of disambiguating I-RNTI (Inactive Radio Network Temporary Identifier) when a UE (User Equipment) resumes from RRC_INACTIVE mode into a new gNB (different than an anchor gNB) in a wireless communication system, because it provides an efficient mechanism in generating bits for encoding old gNB ID pointer, in detecting collision, with less impact on Xn signaling impact, in the wireless communication system. (Page 1, R3-206905_Nokia)
Claims 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Godin, in view of Tao, further in view Khlass et al. (2022/0070958), Khlass hereinafter.
Re. Claim 14, Godin and Tao teach claim 1.
Yet, Godin and Tao do not expressly teach receiving, from the second network node, an indication of an addition of at least one Local node Identifier used by the second network node.
However, in the analogous art, Khlass explicitly discloses receiving, from the second network node, an indication of an addition of at least one Local node Identifier used by the second network node. (Fig. 9-10 & ¶0077 - As shown in the example of FIG. 9, the NG-RAN node 1 initiates the procedure by sending the XN SETUP REQUEST message to the candidate NG-RAN node2. The candidate NG-RAN node2 replies with the XN SETUP RESPONSE message. FIG. 10 illustrates an example of some of the information contained in the Xn SETUP request and/or response messages. Fig. 11 & ¶0079 - a new NG-RAN node initiates the procedure by sending the RETRIEVE UE CONTEXT REQUEST message to the old NG-RAN node. If the old NG-RAN node is able to identify the UE context by means of the UE context ID, and to successfully verify the UE by means of the integrity protection contained in the RETRIEVE UE CONTEXT REQUEST message, and decides to provide the UE context to the new NG-RAN node, it can respond to the new NG-RAN node with the RETRIEVE UE CONTEXT RESPONSE message.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine Godin’s invention of a system and a method for data transmission with stateless routing in a wireless communication system and Tao’s invention of a system and a method for small data transmission in a 5G/NR <New Radio> network to include Khlass’s invention of a system and a method for user equipment (UE) context relocation at radio access network notification area edge in a wireless communication system, because it provides an efficient mechanism for providing assistance information related to the RNA (radio access network (RAN) notification area) edge node determination to an anchor network node, when it is determined that target network node is located at the edge of RNA configured for the user equipment (UE) in the wireless communication system. (¶0002-¶0009, Khlass)
Re. Claim 15, Godin and Tao teach claim 1.
Yet, Godin and Tao do not expressly teach receiving, from the second network node, an indication of a removal of at least one Local node Identifier used by the second network node.
However, in the analogous art, Khlass explicitly discloses receiving, from the second network node, an indication of a removal of at least one Local node Identifier used by the second network node. (Fig. 11 & ¶0079 - Otherwise, the old NG-RAN node can respond to the new NG-RAN node with the RETRIEVE UE CONTEXT FAILURE message with a specific cause to indicate the reason. For example, the old NG-RAN node can respond to the new NG-RAN node with a radio network layer cause, such as ‘unknown old NG-RAN node UE XnAP ID,’ UE context ID not known,' or ‘non-relocation of context’. An ‘unknown old NG-RAN node UE XnAP ID’ cause means that the action failed because the old NG-RAN node UE XnAP ID or the S-NG-RAN node UE XnAP ID is unknown. A ‘UE context ID not known’ reason means that the context retrieval procedure cannot be performed because the UE context cannot be identified. A ‘non-relocation of context’ reason means that the context retrieval procedure is not performed because the old RAN node has decided not to relocate the UE context.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine Godin’s invention of a system and a method for data transmission with stateless routing in a wireless communication system and Tao’s invention of a system and a method for small data transmission in a 5G/NR <New Radio> network to include Khlass’s invention of a system and a method for user equipment (UE) context relocation at radio access network notification area edge in a wireless communication system, because it provides an efficient mechanism for providing assistance information related to the RNA (radio access network (RAN) notification area) edge node determination to an anchor network node, when it is determined that target network node is located at the edge of RNA configured for the user equipment (UE) in the wireless communication system. (¶0002-¶0009, Khlass)
Response to Arguments
Earlier claim objections for claims 1, 3, 7-8, 13, 16, 18 and 22-23 have been withdrawn following amended claim languages as submitted on 12/18/2025.
Earlier 112(b) rejection for claims 16-26 have been withdrawn following amended claim languages as submitted on 12/18/2025
Applicant's arguments for §103 rejection filed on 12/18/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding remarks at pages 9-10 for independent claim 1, applicant argues that Tao fails to teach, “transmitting, to a second network node neighboring the first network node, each of the one or more Local node Identifier comprising: an Inactive-Radio Network Temporary Identifier, I-RNTI, profile valid for the first network node and associated with a full I-RNTI; and/or an I-RNTI profile valid for the first network node and associated with a short I-RNTI;”. Applicant further argues that Tao does not disclose transmitting, between neighboring network nodes, information describing an I-RNTI profile valid for a particular network node, nor signaling how a received I-RNTI should be parsed based on node-specific identifier structures. See page 10 of remarks as submitted on 12/18/2025.
Examiner respectfully disagrees with the applicant. For example, Tao discloses that there is the I-RNTI and the short I-RNTI (see TS 38.331 v15.8.0 section 6.3.2) in 5G NR, each of which could be used as the non-cell-specific UE ID. The I-RNTI has 40 bits, and is composed differently, depending on the I-RNTI reference profile. On the other hand, the short I-RNTI has less bits than the full I-RNTI, in particular 24 bits. See ¶0271 along with Fig.25.
Tao further discloses that there are three different profiles for the full I-RNTI as per 3GPP TS 38.300 v16.0.0 annex C, which is reproduced below. See ¶0272 along with table <below>/Fig.25.
PNG
media_image2.png
312
638
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Tao continues in disclosing that I-RNTI comprises different parts, a UE-specific reference (ID) (i.e., UE context within a logical NG-RAN node) and a NG-RAN node address (such as the gNB ID) as well as PLMN specific information for profile 2. …. the UE-specific part of the I-RNTI (see above table), which is 20 bits long, can be used as the cell-specific UE ID in the improved data transmission procedure. Correspondingly, the cell-specific UE ID is smaller than both options of the non-cell-specific UE ID. …. the gNB can additionally indicate to the UE from which bit to which bit inside the full I-RNTI identifies the UE. See ¶0272/¶0277 with table <above>/Fig.25.
Tao further discloses by illustrating exchanges of messages as shown in Fig.25, for example, the message exchange between the UE (see Fig.25), the old anchor gNB (see Fig.25, as neighboring network nodes) and the new gNB (see Fig.25, as neighboring network nodes) to which the UE moved while in the inactive state….. the new gNB (i.e., neighboring network nodes as shown in Fig. 25) retrieves the necessary UE context from the old gNB (i.e., neighboring network nodes as shown in Fig. 25) and uses the retrieved UE context to decode the small data. The new gNB (i.e., neighboring network nodes as shown in Fig. 25) thus becomes the new anchor gNB (i.e., neighboring network nodes as shown in Fig. 25) for the UE and may assign a particular cell-specific UE ID (Please note that cell-specific UE ID can be used as UE-specific part, which is a part of I-RNTI reference profile, which is 20 bits long as shown in the table above, Also, see ¶0272/¶0277) to the UE. The corresponding msg4 of the RACH procedure may thus carry the newly assigned cell-specific UE ID. The newly assigned cell specific UE ID (Please note that cell-specific UE ID can be used as UE-specific part, which is a part of I-RNTI reference profile, which is 20 bits long as shown in the table above, Also, see ¶0272/¶0277) can then be used by the UE in future communication with the new gNB (e.g., for a further small-data transmission) …… See ¶0305-¶0306, quite a contrast to applicant’s argument at least at 9-10 of remarks as submitted on 12/18/2025.
Applicant further argues that Godin fails to teach, “transmitting a radio resource control, RRC, release message with suspend configuration to a user equipment, to transition the user equipment to RRC Inactive, the RRC release message comprising a Local node Identifier for the first network node and a UE context identifier”. See page 10 of remarks as submitted on 12/18/2025.
Examiner respectfully disagrees with the applicant. For example, Godin discloses that the CU-CP may send, and the UE may receive, an RRC release message as illustrated at 204 of Fig. 2. The RRC release message may include the determined I-RNTI <inactive radio network temporary identifier, see ¶0059> that includes the R bits of the CU-UP1 identifier, remaining UE identifier bits, and network node (e.g., gNB) identifier bits. …. the I-RNTI may include the current serving network node identifier (e.g., gNB-ID) which is to be the anchor gNB. As illustrated at 206 of Fig. 2, the UE may store this network node identifier (e.g., gNB-ID) in an RRC inactive context. See ¶0060. Godin further discloses that when the R bits are statically reserved during the F1 setup procedure, the number of inactive UE contexts per CU-UP may be restricted. If a UE has to be suspended from a CU-UP more than the number of instances allowed by the remaining bits, then the RRC release message may include an indication to indicate that the UE is to use an RRC-based resume. Additionally, or alternatively, the UE context can be shifted to a CU-UP which has a fewer number of inactive contexts. For example, assuming 24 bits assigned for a gNB, if R bits occupy 8 bits, 16 bits would be available to identify the session within the CU-UP for an inactive context. See ¶0062 along with Fig. 1-9, quite contrary to applicant’s argument at least at 9-10 of remarks as submitted on 12/18/2025.
Similar arguments are applicable for independent claim 16.
There are NO specific allegations for any other references, hence, moot.
For these reasons, it is maintained that independent claim 1, is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Godin, in view of Tao.
For similar reasons, it is maintained that independent claim 16, is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Godin, in view of Tao.
As all other dependent claims depend either directly or indirectly from the independent claims 1 and 16, similar rationale also applies to all respective dependent 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 MOHAMMED SHAMSUL CHOWDHURY whose telephone number is (571)272-0485. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday 9 AM- 6 PM EST (Friday Var.).
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, Hassan Phillips can be reached on 571-272-3940. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MOHAMMED S CHOWDHURY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2467