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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 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.
Claim(s) 1, 5, 21, and 25, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Fu et al. (US 2023/0040049 A1).
Regarding claim(s) 1 and 21, Fu discloses:
a first device (par.[0002] describes a terminal) comprising:
at least one processor (fig.3 element 310); and
at least one memory (fig.3 element 330) including computer program code (par.[0105] describes the memory with code stored thereon);
wherein the at least one memory and the computer program code are configured to, with the at least one processor, cause the first device to:
select, based on a mode selection configuration, a small data transmission mode to be initiated from a plurality of small data transmission modes (par.[0004] describes two different modes for small data transmission, one utilizing RRC signaling, and the other w/o RRC signalling.), wherein, wherein the mode selection configuration comprises a validity configuration indicating whether the first device is allowed to initiate any of the plurality of small data transmission modes (par.[0007 – 0008] describes the condition for transmitting in an SDT first mode, or in a second SDT mode, par.[0012 and 0076]) and wherein the validity configuration comprises a criterion for determining whether the first device is allowed to initiate any of the plurality of small data transmission modes (par.[0012] the conditions as discussed in for determining whether or not the UE may perform the SDT in the first mode or the second mode, par.[0065 – 0075, and 0087-0098]), the criterion being based on at least one of the a comparison of the mobility level of the first device with a mobility threshold (par.[0079] which recites, in part, “the effective range of the specific resources is still effective (for example, configuring that the effective range of the specific resources is A cell and B cell”, interpreted as a mobility threshold, that is, the UE must be in the cell where the resources can be utilized, otherwise, the particular resource cannot be used), a device type of the first device and a device capability (par.[0067] wherein the terminal has the capability to utilize either of the first mode or second mode of SDT); and
perform a small data transmission procedure with a second device according to the selected small data transmission mode (par.[0106] describes the utilization of the first and/or second SDT mode based on conditions and criteria set above, once met, allows the UE to utilize one of the modes of transmission).
Regarding claim 5, Fu discloses:
wherein the at least one memory and the computer program code are configured to, with the at least one processor, cause the first device to select a small data transmission mode to be initiated by:
in accordance with the validity configuration indicating that the first device is allowed to initiate one of the plurality of small data transmission modes, determining that the small data transmission mode is to be initiated (par.[0012] the conditions as discussed in for determining whether or not the UE may perform the SDT in the first mode or the second mode, par.[0065 – 0075, and 0087-0098])
Regarding claim 25, Fu discloses:
a non-transitory computer readable medium comprising program instructions that, when executed on an apparatus, cause the apparatus to perform the method of claim 21 (see rejection of claim 1 and 21 above in view of the memory with code stored thereon).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 2-3 and 10-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fu as applied to independent claims 1 and 21 in view of Christofferson (US 2023/0371066 A1).
Regarding claim 2, the disclosure of Fu teaches the independent claims, but does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the at least one memory and the computer program code are configured to, with the at least one processor, further cause the first device to:
indicate the selection of the small data transmission mode to the second device.
In an analogous art, the disclosure of Christofferson teaches:
wherein the at least one memory and the computer program code are configured to, with the at least one processor, further cause the first device to:
indicate the selection of the small data transmission mode to the second device (par.[0091] which recites, in part, “The UE 10 transmits an access request to the radio network node 12 to perform data transmission of the first type of data transmission. The access request may indicate the type of data transmission such as SDT.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant application to combine the teachings of Fu with the disclosure of Christofferson. The motivation/suggestion would have been to request access to the network.
Regarding claims 3, Christofferson discloses:
wherein at least two of the plurality of small data transmission modes define different numbers of data transmissions during a small data transmission procedure and/or different resource types used in a small data transmission procedure (par.[0006] references RP-200954, and table-1 describes configured grant type 1 resources, and/or RACH based SDT in either 2-steps or 4-steps for SDT. Par.[0007] describes preconfigured uplink resources. Par.[0009 - 0017] describes SDT with RRC message for RACH and configured grant based SDT, additional UL/DL SDT transmission without entering the RRC_CONNECTED state etc.. That is, the disclosure teaches configured grant/PUR and RACH based SDT which would use different resources as well as a single SDT uplink/downlink transmission or more data wherein a UE may transmit and/or receive additional UL/DL data without entering the RRC_CONNECTED state as part of the SDT procedure).
Regarding claim 10, Christofferson discloses:
wherein the at least one memory and the computer program code are configured to, with the at least one processor, cause the first device to indicate the selection of the small data transmission mode by:
encoding indication information about the selection of the small data transmission mode into a message to be transmitted to the second device; and
causing the message encoded with the indication information to be transmitted to the second device during the small data transmission procedure (par.[0091] describes the UE forwarding to the second device an access request for SDT, par.[0066]).
Regarding claim 11, Christofferson discloses:
transmitting, to the second device, a message for the small data transmission procedure based on at least one of:
one of a plurality of available resources corresponding to the selected small data transmission mode, one of a plurality of resource types corresponding to the selected small data transmission mode, or one of a plurality of random access types corresponding to the selected small data transmission mode (par.[0091] describes the access request including a request for a first type of transmission, corresponds to resources, RACH types, and SDT modes, par.[0090]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 4 and 6-9 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
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Huang et al. (US 2021/0227586 A1) “Method and Apparatus for Random Access Channel (RACH)-Based Small Data Transmission Procedure in a Wireless Communication System”
Zhang (US 2024/0080906 A1) “Method and Device Using in Communication Node for Wireless Communication”
Kim et al. (US 2021/0112590 A1) “Method for Performing Random Access Procedure and Apparatus Therefor”
Liu et al. (US 2021/00558823 A1) “User Equipment, Base Station, and Related Method”
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMAAL HENSON whose telephone number is (571)272-5339. The examiner can normally be reached M-Thu: 7:30 am - 6:30 pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Derrick Ferris can be reached at (571)272-3123. 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.
JAMAAL HENSON
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2411
/JAMAAL HENSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2411