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 .
Election/Restrictions
The applicant elected Group II, of claims 14 – 21 and 24, without traverse on 18th December 2025.
---------- ---------- ----------
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 25th July 2023 and 30th October 2024 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
========== ========== ==========
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 14 – 19 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Novlan et al (US 2016/0157254 A1).
Claim 24 (similarly Claim 14). Novlan shows a wireless communication device (fig. 1: R 114, for example; fig. 2: UE) for determining and reporting feasibility of the wireless communication device for serving as a node for a multi-path connection to a target wireless communication device (fig. 12), the wireless communication device comprising: one or more transmitters (fig. 2: RF transceivers); one or more receivers (fig. 2: RF transceivers); and processing circuitry associated with the one or more transmitters and the one or more receivers (fig. 2: controller / processor), the processing circuitry configured to cause the wireless communication device to: receive a feasibility request from a node ([0095]: the UE receives allocation resources and a request for a feasibility measurement from the eNB), the feasibility request being a request for a response that indicates whether the wireless communication device is able to serve as a node for a multi-path connection to a target wireless communication device that must satisfy one or more application-level requirements of a particular application ([0096]: the UE performs the feasibility measurement of the allocation resources and selects a set of resources based on a priority rule wherein the priority rules includes a priority indicator that is provided by a higher level signaling for each of the resource pools); determine whether the wireless communication device is able to serve as a node for the multi-path connection to the target wireless communication device that must satisfy the one or more application-level requirements of the particular application ([0096]: the UE performs the feasibility measurement of the allocation resources – the measurement is a part of “determination” of feasibility; fig. 15 shows multi-path connections); and send a feasibility response to the node ([0097]: the UE transmits the results of the feasibility measurement to the eNB), the feasibility response comprising information that indicates whether the wireless communication device is able to serve as a node for the multi-path connection to the target wireless communication device that must satisfy the one or more application-level requirements of the particular application, in accordance with the determination ([0096]: the priority rules includes a priority indicator that is provided by a higher level signaling for each of the resource pools, the priority rule can also be implicitly carried by an identification for each of the plurality of resource pools, the priority rule can also include a priority indication based on a type of data transmission associated with each of the resources pools; [0140]: a priority indicator may be provided by higher layer signaling for each resource pool (e.g. SIB, RRC, or application layer message) or may be preconfigured; [0156] – [0157]: the network/eNB may configure a UE to serve as a D2D UE-to-network relay depending on multiple factors such as device capability, proximity measurement to other UEs, group membership, coverage location, device power metrics, traffic metrics/characteristics, and network/user/application preferences, authorization, and or indication… this authorization may be set as a preconfiguration, or implicit based on the general D2D configuration from the network (e.g. based on D2D capability, group membership, or resource configuration) wherein a UE capable of transmitting PD2DSCH may also be configured to act as a UE-to-Network relay).
Claim 15. Novlan shows the method of claim 14 wherein determining whether the wireless communication device is able to serve as a node for the multi-path connection to the target wireless communication device comprises determining whether the wireless communication device satisfies one or more criteria that are related to the one or more application-level requirements of the particular application ([0096]: the UE performs the feasibility measurement of the allocation resources and selects a set of resources based on a priority rule; [0140]: a priority indicator may be provided by higher layer signaling for each resource pool (e.g. SIB, RRC, or application layer message) or may be preconfigured).
Claim 16. Novlan shows the method of claim 15 wherein the one or more criteria used for the determination comprise one or more criteria that are based on: one or more static capabilities of a potential candidate wireless communication device ([0180]: these factors may be transmitted as part of a relay selection feasibility report using higher layer or application layer signaling wherein the network/eNB may utilize a hierarchy of one or more factors with different weights or priority to determine whether a given set of candidate relay UEs may be selected for relay operation), one or more semi-static capabilities of the potential candidate wireless communication device ([0156] – [0157]: the network/eNB may configure a UE to serve as a D2D UE-to-network relay depending on multiple factors such as device capability, proximity measurement to other UEs, group membership, coverage location, device power metrics, traffic metrics/characteristics, and network/user/application preferences, authorization, and or indication… this authorization may be set as a preconfiguration, or implicit based on the general D2D configuration from the network (e.g. based on D2D capability, group membership, or resource configuration) wherein a UE capable of transmitting PD2DSCH may also be configured to act as a UE-to-Network relay), or both (see above).
Claim 17. Novlan shows the method of claim 14 wherein determining whether the wireless communication device is able to serve as a node for the multi-path connection to the target wireless communication device comprises determining whether the wireless communication device is able to serve as a node for the multi-path connection to the target wireless communication device taking into consideration a current workload of the wireless communication device ([0131]: the mapping of the scheduling assignment (SA) resource pool subsets may correspond to a mapping of the SA resource pool where the SA resource pool subset is mapped using a bitmap to the system bandwidth; [0179]: the relay selection process may depend on multiple factors such as device capability, proximity measurement to other UEs, group membership, coverage location, device power metrics, traffic metrics/characteristics, and network/user/application preferences, authorization, and or indication – “relay” indicates multi-path connections).
Claim 18. Novlan shows the method of claim 14 wherein determining whether the wireless communication device is able to serve as a node for the multi-path connection to the target wireless communication device comprises determining whether the wireless communication device has a capability to serve as a relay in a multi-hop link (fig. 15 shows multi-hop link; [0176] – [0177]: D2D relay links – multi-hop link).
Claim 19. Novlan shows the method of claim 14 wherein determining whether the wireless communication device is able to serve as a node for the multi-path connection to the target wireless communication device comprises determining whether the wireless communication device has a capability to serve as a relay in a multi-hop link for the multi-path connection that must satisfy the one or more application-level requirements of the particular application (fig. 15 shows multi-hop link and [0158]: a UE may be configured to act as a UE-to-Network Relay utilizing a higher layer (e.g. L2, L3, or application layer) control message indicating the necessary configuration information to support a relay link between the Relay UE and the eNB as well as the OOC UE).
---------- ---------- ----------
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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Novlan et al in view of Abedini et al (US 2019/0110268 A1).
Claim 20. Novlan shows the method of claim 14 wherein determining whether the wireless communication device is able to serve as a node for the multi-path connection to the target wireless communication device (see claim 14); Novlan does not expressly describe a further feature that comprises determining whether the wireless communication device has a capability to switch between a receive mode of operation and a transmit mode of operation within a defined amount of time required to satisfy the one or more application-level requirements of the particular application.Abedini teaches feature of determining whether a wireless communication device has a capability to switch between a receive mode of operation and a transmit mode of operation within a defined amount of time required to satisfy the one or more application-level requirements of the particular application ([0090]: the reports may include capability information, a transmit-receive switching requirement, a synchronization reference switching requirement, or scheduling information of the node R2 wherein the capability information may include a UE-category or a power class of the node R2 and/or frequency bands, radio access technologies (RATs), measurement and reporting supported by the node R2, and/or features supported by the node R2 wherein the transmit-receive switching requirement refers to the amount of time required for the node R2 to switch from a transmit mode to a receive mode or from a receive mode to a transmit mode).It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the mode-switching capability determination feature as taught by Abedini in the method of Novlan as this timing adjustment feature facilitates avoiding interference and increasing resource utilization efficiency.
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Novlan et al in view of Shaheen et al (US 2003/0035401 A1).
Claim 21. Novlan shows the method of claim 14 wherein: the wireless communication device is determined to not be able to serve as a node for the multi-path connection to the target wireless communication device that must satisfy the one or more application-level requirements of the particular application ([0181]: the eNB may prioritize relay selection for the UEs with the lowest feasibility ranks, while UEs that do not meet the criteria for the lowest feasibility rank are excluded from consideration).Novlan does not expressly describe feature of: the feasibility response further comprises information that indicates a reason that the wireless communication device is determined to not be able to serve as a node for the multi-path connection to the target wireless communication device that must satisfy the one or more application-level requirements of the particular application.Shaheen teaches feature of indication of a reason that a wireless communication device is determined to not be able to serve as a node for the multi-path connection to a target wireless communication device that must satisfy the one or more application-level requirements of the particular application ([0007]: provide an admission process employing the QoS capabilities of the communicating entities to determine the feasibility of a successful outcome of a call/session setup procedure… the call will be rejected with a clear indication of the reason).It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the “reason indication” feature as taught by Shaheen in the feasibility response of Novlan to reduce network resource cost.
========== ========== ==========
Conclusion
The prior art made of record is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
1. Novlan et al, US 2014/0242963 A1: a method includes determining, at a first eNodeB (eNB) associated with a first cell of a network, that a first user equipment (UE) is to engage in a device discovery process wherein the method also includes coordinating parameters of the device discovery process with a second eNB; the second eNB is associated with a second cell of the network and with a second UE; the parameters define one or more resources to be used in the first and second cells during the device discovery process wherein the method further includes communicating at least some of the parameters to the first UE; and that the device discovery process includes a process in which the first UE identifies one or more other UEs with which the first UE is able to engage in device-to-device communications.
2. Kim et al, US 2021/0400540 A1: a method of transmitting and receiving signals by a child node in a next-generation wireless communication system, the method comprising transmitting a resource request message for requesting for one of a downlink (DL) resource and an uplink (UL) resource to a parent node; receiving a resource allocation grant message indicating one of the requested resource and a flexible resource from the parent node; and transmitting and receiving a signal using the indicated resource, wherein, based on the resource allocation grant message indicating the flexible resource, the flexible resource is used as the requested resource.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Xavier Szewai Wong whose telephone number is 571.270.1780. The examiner can normally be reached on 11:30 am - 8:30 pm Mon to Fri.
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, Jeffrey Rutkowski can be reached on 571.270.1215. 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.
/XAVIER S WONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2415 4th January 2026