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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 11-14, 20-24, 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Xu et al. (2023/0371111), hereinafter Xu.
Re. Claims 11 and 21, Xu teaches a method performed in a first communication device, comprising transmitting and receiving circuitry and processing circuitry (Fig. 17), operating in a wireless communication network in a normal mode, for communications for the first communication device (Fig. 1d. The figure shows a Relay UE communicating directly with the Access network device, which Examiner interprets as the “normal mode”. Examiner notes that Xu does not use the term “normal mode”, however it is understood that a UE normally conducts communications between itself and a network node, which is embodied in Fig. 1d. Examiner interprets that the election of a relay mode in Xu is in lieu of replacing the “normal mode” shown in Fig. 1d), and as a relay node, for relaying communications for a second communication device (Fig. 1d, communication is shown between two source UE’s and a relay UE), wherein the wireless communication network comprises a network node providing a coverage area and at least two mobile communication devices (¶0003 - For example, when a user equipment (for example, remote UE) is outside coverage of a communication network, or quality of communication between the user equipment and an access network device in the communication network is poor, the user equipment may indirectly communicate with the communication network based on D2D communication, in other words, through a relay (for example, relay UE)), the method comprising: receiving a request from the network node to function as a relay node for the second communication device (¶0287- In addition to requesting to establish a connection to a peer device, the direct connection request message may further request a relay service); entering into a relay mode operation (¶0290 - The remote terminal initiates the direct communication request message to the relay terminal, to request to establish a PC5 link with the relay terminal); setting up a relay link comprising a first communication link between the first communication device and the network node and a second communication link between the first communication device and the second communication device (¶0296 - After step 204 and step 205, the remote terminal establishes the PC5 link with the relay terminal. The PC5 link may be used for direct communication between the relay terminal and the remote terminal); relaying communications between the network node and the second communication device via the relay link (¶0296 - may be further used by the relay terminal to provide the relay service or indirect communication for the remote terminal); and
wherein in the relay mode operation, controlling at least one of the mobility and functionality of the first communication device in a normal mode operation is controllable to prioritize the relaying function (¶0385 - The PCF may further determine, based on requirements of the first application for different performance, a priority of the relay mode corresponding to the first application).
Re. Claims 12 and 22, Xu teaches Claims 11 and 21.
Xu additionally teaches wherein to prioritize the relaying function, the method comprises any one or a combination of the following: a) reserving resources within the first communication device to perform the relaying function (¶0013 - the first policy information determined by the policy control function network element may be further enabled to better match the remote terminal, configuring the first policy information for the remote terminal by the policy control function network element is optimized, and overheads of sending the first policy information to the remote terminal by the policy control function network element may be further reduced. & ¶0014 - the remote terminal may determine, based on a capability of the remote terminal, the first relay mode in the relay mode supported by the remote terminal. Additionally, Examiner interprets that only one of the claimed features needs to be mapped because of the presence of “One or a combination of”); b) releasing one or more of the other communication links; c) releasing one or more of the other communication activities; d) releasing one or more of data processing activities; e) enabling specific hardware capabilities such as hardware acceleration if such capabilities exist; f) changing beam direction; g) adapting beam selection; h) adapting security within the first communication device.
Re. Claims 13 and 23, Xu teaches Claims 11 and 21.
Xu additionally teaches wherein the method further comprises: monitoring a quality of the second communication link, and informing the network node of the quality of the second communication link (¶0003 – when a user equipment (for example, remote UE) is outside coverage of a communication network, or quality of communication between the user equipment and an access network device in the communication network is poor, the user equipment may indirectly communicate with the communication network based on D2D communication, & ¶0075 - the relay terminal may further receive the information (for example, the RSC corresponding to the first relay mode) about the first relay mode determined by the remote terminal based on the correspondence between the relay mode and an RSC and the correspondence between an RSC and the first application that are in the first policy information. Examiner interprets that in order for the whole operation to begin, the relay terminal must be informed of the current issue being addressed, in this case the poor network quality, which can be sent to the relay terminal via the initial correspondence. Xu’s definition of a “first policy information” explicitly, but not exclusively, defines itself as information needed to create the first relay mode, which could reasonably be interpreted as including the poor signal quality, which would be required for the process to begin).
Re. Claims 14 and 24, Xu teaches Claims 11 and 21.
Xu additionally teaches wherein the method further comprises: monitoring a quality of the first communication link; and informing the network node of the quality of the first communication link (¶0003 - when a user equipment (for example, remote UE) is outside coverage of a communication network, or quality of communication between the user equipment and an access network device in the communication network is poor, the user equipment may indirectly communicate with the communication network based on D2D communication, & ¶0075 - the relay terminal may further receive the information (for example, the RSC corresponding to the first relay mode) about the first relay mode determined by the remote terminal based on the correspondence between the relay mode and an RSC and the correspondence between an RSC and the first application that are in the first policy information. Examiner interprets that in order for the whole operation to begin, the relay terminal must be informed of the current issue being addressed, in this case the poor network quality, which can be sent to the relay terminal via the initial correspondence. Xu’s definition of a “first policy information” explicitly, but not exclusively, defines itself as information needed to create the first relay mode, which could reasonably be interpreted as including the poor signal quality, which would be required for the process to begin).
Re. Claims 20 and 30, Xu teaches Claims 11 and 21.
Xu additionally teaches further comprising: exiting from the relay mode operation based on any one of: a) a predefined time period that is expired; b) an instruction received from the network node; c) an indication received from the second communication device. d) inability to function as a relay node anymore due to some critical functionality that will prevent the first communication device from continuing in relay mode operation (¶0057 - In the foregoing technical solution, when determining that the relay terminal does not support a relay mode (the seventh relay mode) selected by the remote terminal, the relay terminal may feed back the fourth response message to the remote terminal, to indicate that the relay terminal does not support the seventh relay mode, so that the remote terminal determines again, based on first policy information and the seventh relay mode, a relay mode that can be supported by the relay terminal. In this way, the remote terminal performs relay communication via the relay terminal in the first relay mode. Examiner interprets that only one of the claimed features needs to be mapped because of the presence of “One or a combination of”).
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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.
Claims 15-19, and 25-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu in view of Fan et al. (2021/0185546), hereinafter Fan.
Re. Claims 15 and 25, Xu teaches Claims 11 and 21.
Yet, Xu does not expressly teach wherein the movement of the first communication device is controllable and the method comprises: adjusting the position of the first communication device so that the quality of the first and second communication links meet a required threshold, wherein the quality threshold for the first communication link is greater than or equal to the quality threshold for the second communication link.
However, Fan explicitly teaches wherein the movement of the first communication device is controllable and the method comprises: adjusting the position of the first communication device so that the quality of the first and second communication links meet a required threshold, wherein the quality threshold for the first communication link is greater than or equal to the quality threshold for the second communication link (¶0015 - determining a first communication frequency for communications between the device and the user equipment based on features determined to be present in an environment associated with the user equipment, the first communication frequency being different from a second communication frequency used by the communication network & ¶0026 - In response to the observed signal quality falling below the given threshold as described above, the mobile antenna device 10 can move from its original location to a different location. Examiner interprets, since the intent of the change in location is to improve signal quality, that the movement is to a location that has a quality higher than the requisite threshold).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of Fan to the teaching of Xu. The motivation for such would be as Fan provides that the communication device can move to a location when the connection goes below a threshold (¶0026, Fan). All of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements, as claimed by known methods, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Re. Claims 16 and 26, Xu and Fan teach 15 and 25.
Yet, Xu does not expressly teach wherein adjusting the position is performed based on any one or a combination of the following: a) instructions received from the network node; b) information received from the second communication device; c) stored location information; d) predicted channel quality in the moving path of the second communication device; e) historic data on channel quality at different positions.
However, Fan expressly teaches wherein adjusting the position is performed based on any one or a combination of the following: a) instructions received from the network node; b) information received from the second communication device; c) stored location information (¶0021 - the memory 16 can include a non-transitory computer readable storage medium that contains computer executable instructions, and the processor 14 can execute instructions stored by the memory 16, ¶0026 - In response to the observed signal quality falling below the given threshold as described above, the mobile antenna device 10 can move from its original location to a different location. & ¶0041 - The adaptive enhancer 40 can also include a GPS module 416 that can enable the adaptive enhancer 40 to obtain positioning data, e.g., in the form of geographic coordinates or the like, and deliver this positioning data to a UE 20 and/or other device. Examiner interprets that only one of the claimed features needs to be mapped because of the presence of “One or a combination of”); d) predicted channel quality in the moving path of the second communication device; e) historic data on channel quality at different positions.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of Fan to the teaching of Xu. The motivation for such would be as Fan provides that the communication device can move to a location when the based on the stored location and threshold information (¶0026, Fan). All of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements, as claimed by known methods, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Re. Claims 17 and 27, Xu and Fan teach claims 15 and 25.
Yet, Xu does not expressly teach wherein adjusting the position so that the quality of the first and second communication links meet a required threshold is performed by: taking one unit of movement; checking the quality of the first communication link; adjusting the position of the first communication device if the quality of the first communication links does not meet a required threshold; checking the quality of the second communication link; adjusting the position of the first communication device if the quality of the second communication links does not meet a required threshold.
However, Fan explicitly teaches wherein adjusting the position so that the quality of the first and second communication links meet a required threshold is performed by: taking one unit of movement (¶0026 - In response to the observed signal quality falling below the given threshold as described above, the mobile antenna device 10 can move from its original location to a different location); checking the quality of the first communication link; adjusting the position of the first communication device if the quality of the first communication links does not meet a required threshold (¶0015 - facilitating movement of the device from a first position associated with a user equipment to a second position in response to an observed signal strength at the user equipment from a communication network being determined to have fallen below a threshold. Examiner interprets this method can be easily replicated for both the first and second devices); checking the quality of the second communication link; adjusting the position of the first communication device if the quality of the second communication links does not meet a required threshold (¶0015 - facilitating movement of the device from a first position associated with a user equipment to a second position in response to an observed signal strength at the user equipment from a communication network being determined to have fallen below a threshold. Examiner interprets this method can be easily replicated for both the first and second devices).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of Fan to the teaching of Xu. The motivation for such would be as Fan provides that the communication device can move to a location when the connection goes below a threshold (¶0026, ¶0015 Fan). All of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements, as claimed by known methods, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Re. Claims 18 and 28, Xu and Fan teach Claims 11 and 21.
Yet, Xu does not expressly teach wherein the movement of the first communication device is controllable and the method comprises: adjusting the velocity of the first communication device to avoid entering an area where the quality of the first communication link does not or will not meet a required threshold.
However, Fan explicitly teaches wherein the movement of the first communication device is controllable and the method comprises: adjusting the velocity of the first communication device (Fig. 4 428, Fig. 11 1144, ¶0045 - the adaptive enhancer 40 can include a rotor system 428 composed of, e.g., a rotor and blades and/or other suitable components, which can enable airborne movement of the adaptive enhancer 40. In support of the previous understanding that inherently, the presence of motion from one place) to avoid entering an area where the quality of the first communication link does not OR will not meet a required threshold (¶0026 - In response to the observed signal quality falling below the given threshold as described above, the mobile antenna device 10 can move from its original location to a different location. Examiner interprets that inherently, by moving the device from a location that does not meet the threshold communication link, to an area that meets the threshold, implies that the velocity of the device must have been managed to a degree to allow the device to reach its destination).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of Fan to the teaching of Xu. The motivation for such would be as Fan provides that the communication device can adjust its velocity to a location when the connection goes below a threshold (¶0026, Fan). All of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements, as claimed by known methods, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Re. Claims 19 and 29, Xu and Fan teach Claims 18 and 28.
However, Xu does not expressly teach wherein adjusting the velocity is performed based on any one or a combination of the following: a) instructions received from the network node; b) information received from the second communication device; c) stored location information; d) predicted channel quality in the moving path of the second communication device; e) historic data on channel quality at different positions.
Yet, Fan explicitly teaches wherein adjusting the velocity is performed based on any one or a combination of the following: a) instructions received from the network node; b) information received from the second communication device; c) stored location information (¶0021 - the memory 16 can include a non-transitory computer readable storage medium that contains computer executable instructions, and the processor 14 can execute instructions stored by the memory 16, ¶0026 - In response to the observed signal quality falling below the given threshold as described above, the mobile antenna device 10 can move from its original location to a different location. & ¶0041 - The adaptive enhancer 40 can also include a GPS module 416 that can enable the adaptive enhancer 40 to obtain positioning data, e.g., in the form of geographic coordinates or the like, and deliver this positioning data to a UE 20 and/or other device. Examiner interprets that only one of the claimed features needs to be mapped because of the presence of “One or a combination of”); d) predicted channel quality in the moving path of the second communication device; e) historic data on channel quality at different positions.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of Fan to the teaching of Xu. The motivation for such would be as Fan provides that the communication device can move to a location when the connection goes below a stored threshold amount(¶0026, Fan). All of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements, as claimed by known methods, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 02/23/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant has provided arguments for Claims 11-16, 18-26, and 28-30, each of which will be addressed individually and in the order presented in the remarks.
On Page 12, Applicant argues two points regarding the independent claims 11 and 21. First, Applicant argues that Xu’s direct connection request message is not received from a network node providing a coverage area. Examiner disagrees with this interpretation, as the generally understood definition of a network node is any device connected to a network capable of creating, transmitting or receiving information, to which Examiner upholds that the remote terminal as presented fits this explanation. Second, Applicant argues that Xu does not disclose a difference between the relay mode operation and a normal operation. To this, Examiner introduces Fig. 1d to provide important groundwork to establish that the UE’s within the network have a base “normal” operation. Examiner interprets that the selection of a relay mode indicates the selection of the relay over the understood normal mode of operation that every UE performs. As such, Examiner disagrees with the arguments on the present grounds and upholds the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1).
Regarding Claims 12 and 22, on page 13, Applicant argues that Xu does not teach the reservation being performed within the first communication device. Examiner has provided further context with ¶0014 (the remote terminal may determine, based on a capability of the remote terminal, the first relay mode in the relay mode supported by the remote terminal) which shows the terminal, based on its own capability, can select the first relay mode that it supports. With this further context, Examiner interprets that Xu does in fact teach the limitation being contested here.
Regarding Claims 13 and 23, on page 13 Applicant argues that the rejection is not sufficient as the reference does not inform a network node about the poor quality. Examiner disagrees with this interpretation as Xu provides that initial information must be sent to the terminal, which has been established to be a network node in Examiner’s interpretation, in order to begin the transmission relay process (¶0075 - the relay terminal may further receive the information (for example, the RSC corresponding to the first relay mode) about the first relay mode determined by the remote terminal based on the correspondence between the relay mode and an RSC and the correspondence between an RSC and the first application that are in the first policy information). Pertinent information in order to conduct this process would include but not be limited to the type of relay and the current “bad” connection to which the relay has to perform better than. Under this interpretation, Examiner respectfully disagrees with the argument.
Regarding Claims 14 and 24, on page 14 Applicant argues the same as Claim 13 and 23 and Examiner disagrees with this interpretation on the same grounds as above.
Regarding Claims 20 and 30, on page 14 Applicant argues that Xu does not teach wherein the terminal exits the relay mode upon being unable to maintain the relay connection. Examiner respectfully disagrees based on his interpretation. Examiner interprets the terminology used “exits the relay mode” not to mean that the terminal completely exits its ability to perform a relay, but rather removes itself from the move. In the provided excerpt from Xu, the terminal attempts the seventh relay, finds that it is incapable of performing this task, provides feedback, and then, after moving out of the seventh relay mode, tries another mode that is acceptable given the circumstances. As such, the terminal “exits” the seventh relay mode in favor of another mode, which fulfills the above claimed limitation of Claim 20.
Regarding Claims 15 and 25, on page 15 Applicant argues that the provided reference does not disclose a first and second “communication link”. Examiner finds Applicant’s understanding of these links designating a link to a UE and a network respectively to be more narrow than the claim language itself provides, however, Examiner provides further context from Fan ¶0015 (determining a first communication frequency for communications between the device and the user equipment based on features determined to be present in an environment associated with the user equipment, the first communication frequency being different from a second communication frequency used by the communication network) which he interprets as adequately disclosing the claimed limitation in tandem with the previously presented citation and interpretation.
Regarding Claims 16 and 26, on page 15 applicant argues that the reference Fan is silent on “stored location information”. Examiner respectfully disagrees with this interpretation and provides his own. Applicant claims only that the location is stored within the memory and under a reasonable interpretation, Examiner does not understand this claim language to include that the location information is predefined and stored in the memory. When performing the process of moving from one location to another, under the disclosure found in Fan, the adaptive enhancer uses a GPS module to obtain positioning data which is sent to the UE and stored to be used for changing its location (¶0041 - The adaptive enhancer 40 can also include a GPS module 416 that can enable the adaptive enhancer 40 to obtain positioning data, e.g., in the form of geographic coordinates or the like, and deliver this positioning data to a UE 20 and/or other device). In performing this process the UE stores the instructions within its memory (¶0021 - the memory 16 can include a non-transitory computer readable storage medium that contains computer executable instructions, and the processor 14 can execute instructions stored by the memory 16) to execute the process. It appears that Applicant intends for the claim language to indicate that the position data is predefined and stored before connection is made, however this interpretation is not reflected in the claim language.
Regarding Claims 18 and 28, on page 16 Applicant argues that Fan does not explicitly teach moving by adjusting its velocity to avoid an area that does not nor will not meet the required threshold. Examiner has provided further context from Fan to indicate that the adaptive enhancer contains a module for propulsion (Fig. 4 428, Fig. 11 1144, ¶0045 - the adaptive enhancer 40 can include a rotor system 428 composed of, e.g., a rotor and blades and/or other suitable components, which can enable airborne movement of the adaptive enhancer 40.) and maintains the argument that inherently, to move with propulsion indicates a change in velocity. Regarding the argument for interpreting that moving to an area that is within the threshold is not the same as avoiding areas that are not within the threshold, Examiner notes that the claim language allows for “avoid entering an area where the quality of the first communication link does not meet a required threshold”. Examiner interprets this as a negative claim limitation, or claiming the absence of a process happening, which he is permitted to reject by either showing the absence or showing the process being performed in such a way that avoids the process in the negative claim. Since Fan discloses moving from a point that is not within the threshold to an area that is within the threshold, it can be best assumed that the relay would not, under Fan’s disclosure, move to an area that is worse or equal to where they previously were. As such, though Fan does not say the words “avoids an area of worse quality” it can be easily interpreted and understood that by moving to an area of better quality, the system would need to avoid moving to a worse one.
Regarding Claims 19 and 29, on page 16 Applicant repeats the argument provided with Claims 16 and 26. For the same reasons as outlined above, Examiner respectfully disagrees with this argument.
As such, regarding all arguments and for the stated reasons provided above, Examiner upholds the rejections on all claims under 35 U.S.C. § 102 (a)(1) and 103. While further context has been provided from the references, this does not constitute a change in the grounds of rejection. Furthermore, the inclusion of a material amendment within the independent claims would permit for a change in the grounds of rejection, however Examiner did not find this to be necessary in addressing the arguments presented.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Selvanesan et al. (2023/0171826) - ¶0130-0312
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 NOAH JAMES SUGDEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7406. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 9:00-6:00 ET, Fri 9:00-1:00 ET.
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, Khaled Kassim can be reached at (571) 270-3770. 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.
/N.J.S./Examiner, Art Unit 2475
/KHALED M KASSIM/supervisory patent examiner, Art Unit 2475
Prosecution Insights