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 .
DETAILED ACTION
RESPONSE TO AMENDMENT
Status of Application/Amendments/claims
Applicant’s amendment filed on 6/16/2026 is acknowledged. Claims 2-3, 5, 13, 15-16, 18, 21-50 were previously cancelled. Claims 1, 9, 14 are amended, claims 54-55 are newly added.
Claims 1, 4, 6-12, 14, 17, 19-20, 51-55 are pending and have been examined, of which claims 1 and 14 are independent.
Claim Objections/Rejections withdrawn
In view of amendment, the claim objections to claim 1, 9 and 14 are withdrawn.
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 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.
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.
Claims 1, 4, 6-12, 14, 17, 19-20, 52-53 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gao et al. (US 20160007229) in view of Freda et al. (US 20200296749)
Regarding claim 1, Gao teaches a method, performed by a wireless device (fig 1-2, 7), for uplink transmission to a network node (abstract: transmission data processing method and devices, including buffer status report from UE and uplink resource allocation from eNB), the method comprising:
transmitting, to the network node, a buffer status report (fig 1, step A20: the UE sends the buffer status report to an eNB) comprising first information indicative of an amount of data in a buffer of the wireless device (fig 3-4; para 139-141: buffer status report (BSR) format include a short BSR/truncated BSR whose format is shown in FIG. 3, which provides only a buffer size (Buffer Size) of a logic channel group, where an LCG ID indicates a logic channel group whose buffer size is reported and a long BSR whose format is shown in FIG. 4, which may provide buffer sizes of four logic channel groups: buffer size #0, buffer size #1, buffer size #2 and buffer size #3, which respectively represent buffer sizes of the 0th logic channel group, the 1st logic channel group, the 2nd logic channel group, and the 3rd logic channel group; para 178);
transmitting, to the network node second information further qualifying the data in the buffer (fig 1; para 120-121: step A10: UE determines processing indication information according to a type of buffered uplink data, and generates a buffer status report, where the buffer status report carries the processing indication information, step A20: The UE sends the buffer status report to an eNB); and
receiving, from the network node, control signalling indicative of an allocation of a resource for uplink transmission of the data (fig 1, step a20, fig 9 step b20; para 121, 173: the eNB performs scheduling and uplink transmission resource allocation on the UE according to the processing indication information; para 128-129, 150, 175-180),
wherein the second information comprises time information associated with at least one data packet in the buffer (para 127 describes to classify the uplink data in buffer to high or low priority according to delay requirement, and para 144: the buffer status report carrying processing indication information used to indicate that the uplink data is low-priority data).
Gao teaches the delay requirement of the packet in buffer, but does not teach the TTL, age or expiry information of the packet. Gao also does not teach that the second message is different than buffer status report. Freda is directed to handling user plane transmission with QoS requirements.
Freda further teaches wherein the second information is transmitted in a signaling message that is different from a message in which the buffer status report is transmitted (para 300: MAC layer control message may be associated with an enhanced buffer status report, the message may include one or more of the following: one or more pieces of information associated with an RR; para 265: the SI may indicate other control information such as buffer status reports; para 241: a WTRU configured with a ULL service may employ a 1-bit PHY layer RR mechanism to request resources for the ULL service, while the WTRU may employ a MAC layer RR if a buffer status in conjunction with RR at the PHY layer indicates a request for IBB-type services; these description indicate that the RR message is different and separate from buffer status report); the time information is a Time To Live (TTL) indicating an expiry of the at least one data packet in the buffer (para 223-224: a WTRU may send a resource request (RR) to the network, the RR may include a request for new or modified resources, an RR may be sent based on the one or more QoS parameters reaching a certain threshold (e.g., TTL reaching a threshold); para 231: a WTRU may include, in an RR, information associated with a TTL, the WTRU may include a minimum TTL, or a TTL for a packet, a PDU, etc., that is currently queued at the WTRU for transmission, the WTRU may maintain multiple transmission queues that may be latency critical, the WTRU may transmit a TTL for each head-of-queue of the multiple transmission queues). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine buffer status reporting method as taught by Gao with transmitting packet TTL related information as taught by Freda for the benefit of opportunistically accessing uplink resources with minimal latency as taught by Freda in para 181.
Regarding claim 14, Gao teaches a method, performed by a network node (fig 9-10), for uplink scheduling (abstract: transmission data processing method and devices, including buffer status report from UE and uplink resource allocation from eNB), the method comprising:
receiving, from a wireless device, a buffer status report (fig 1, step B10: an eNB receives a buffer status report sent by UE) comprising first information indicative of an amount of data in a buffer of the wireless device (fig 3-4; para 139-141: buffer status report (BSR) format include a short BSR/truncated BSR whose format is shown in FIG. 3, which provides only a buffer size (Buffer Size) of a logic channel group, where an LCG ID indicates a logic channel group whose buffer size is reported and a long BSR whose format is shown in FIG. 4, which may provide buffer sizes of four logic channel groups: buffer size #0, buffer size #1, buffer size #2 and buffer size #3, which respectively represent buffer sizes of the 0th logic channel group, the 1st logic channel group, the 2nd logic channel group, and the 3rd logic channel group; para 178), and receiving, from the wireless device, second information further qualifying the data in the buffer (fig 9; para 172: step B10: an eNB receives a buffer status report sent by UE, where the buffer status report carries processing indication information that is determined by the UE according to a type of buffered uplink data); and
transmitting, based on the buffer status report and the second information, control signalling indicative of an allocation of a resource for uplink transmission of the data (fig 1, step a20, fig 9 step b20; para 121, 173: the eNB performs scheduling and uplink transmission resource allocation on the UE according to the processing indication information; para 128-129, 150, 175-180),
wherein the second information comprises time information associated with at least one data packet in the buffer (para 127 describes to classify the uplink data in buffer to high or low priority according to delay requirement, and para 144: the buffer status report carrying processing indication information used to indicate that the uplink data is low-priority data).
Gao teaches the delay requirement of the packet in buffer, but does not teach the TTL, age or expiry information of the packet. Gao also does not teach that the second message is different than buffer status report. Freda is directed to handling user plane transmission with QoS requirements.
Freda further teaches wherein the second information is transmitted in a signaling message that is different from a message in which the buffer status report is transmitted (para 300: MAC layer control message may be associated with an enhanced buffer status report, the message may include one or more of the following: one or more pieces of information associated with an RR; para 265: the SI may indicate other control information such as buffer status reports; para 241: a WTRU configured with a ULL service may employ a 1-bit PHY layer RR mechanism to request resources for the ULL service, while the WTRU may employ a MAC layer RR if a buffer status in conjunction with RR at the PHY layer indicates a request for IBB-type services; these description indicate that the RR message is different and separate from buffer status report); the time information is a Time To Live (TTL) indicating an expiry of the at least one data packet in the buffer (para 223-224: a WTRU may send a resource request (RR) to the network, the RR may include a request for new or modified resources and/or may indicate a buffer status, an RR may be sent based on the one or more QoS parameters reaching a certain threshold (e.g., TTL reaching a threshold); para 231: a WTRU may include, in an RR, information associated with a TTL, the WTRU may include a minimum TTL, or a TTL for a packet, a PDU, etc., that is currently queued at the WTRU for transmission, the WTRU may maintain multiple transmission queues that may be latency critical, the WTRU may transmit a TTL for each head-of-queue of the multiple transmission queues). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine buffer status reporting method as taught by Gao with transmitting packet TTL related information as taught by Freda for the benefit of opportunistically accessing uplink resources with minimal latency as taught by Freda in para 181.
Regarding claim 4 and 17, Gao further teaches wherein the buffer comprises a plurality of data packets (para 127 describes uplink data at buffer, where data packets are classified based on size, delay and bit rate), and wherein the second information is indicative of a relation between at least two data packets of the plurality of data packets (para 127: the types of the signaling, large data packets, data packets with a relatively high delay requirement, and data packets with a relatively high bit error rate requirement may all be high-priority data packets, and the types of the small data packets, data packet with a relatively low delay requirement, and data packets with a relatively low bit error rate requirement may all be low-priority data packets; para 141, fig 4; fig 7 step A50,A10; para 159-166: determining, that the buffered uplink data includes the low-priority data and the high-priority data, generating, by the UE, a buffer status report carrying the first logic channel group identity and the second logic channel group identity).
Regarding claim 6 and 19, Gao further teaches wherein the second information comprises priority information (para 10: determining, that the buffered uplink data includes low-priority data, generating, by the UE, the buffer status report carrying processing indication information used to indicate that the uplink data is low-priority data).
Regarding claim 7 and 20, Gao further teaches wherein the buffer comprises a plurality of data packets in the buffer (para 127 describes uplink data at buffer, where data packets are classified based on size, delay and bit rate), and the priority information is indicative of a priority order between at least two data packets of the plurality of data packets (fig 7 step A50,A10; para 159-166: determining, that the buffered uplink data includes the low-priority data and the high-priority data, generating, by the UE, a buffer status report carrying the first logic channel group identity and the second logic channel group identity).
Regarding claim 8, Gao further teaches wherein the priority information is indicative of a priority order of the wireless device in a group of wireless devices (para 150: in buffer status reports that are sent by multiple UEs and received by the eNB, priorities corresponding to LCG IDs in the buffer status reports sent by two UEs are the same, if the two UEs are referred to as the first UE and the second UE, a buffer status report reported by the first UE carries processing indication information indicating that the uplink data to be sent by the UE is low-priority data, and the eNB may preferentially schedule the second UE).
Regarding claim 9, Gao further teaches transmitting, to the network node, the data from the buffer using the resource indicated in the control signalling (para 128: UE that sends high-priority data is preferentially scheduled, and relatively sufficient uplink transmission resources are allocated, to ensure transmission of the high-priority data).
Regarding claim 10, Gao further teaches the method comprising generating the buffer status report (para 120: step A10: UE determines processing indication information according to a type of buffered uplink data, and generates a buffer status report, where the buffer status report carries the processing indication information) and the second information based on an analysis of the data in the buffer (para 127-128: when the UE needs to send a buffer status report, the UE first determines a type of buffered uplink data, and determines corresponding processing indication information; and adds the processing indication information into the buffer status report and sends the buffer status report to the eNB).
Regarding claim 11, Gao further teaches wherein the receiving of the control signalling indicative of the allocation of the resource is performed after the transmission of the buffer status report and the second information (as shown in fig 1-2, steps A20; para 121: the UE sends the buffer status report to an eNB, so that the eNB performs scheduling and uplink transmission resource allocation on the UE according to the processing indication information).
Regarding claim 12, Gao further teaches wherein the control signalling indicative of the allocation of the resource is based on the transmitted buffer status report and the second information (as shown in fig 1-2, steps A20; para 121: the UE sends the buffer status report to an eNB, so that the eNB performs scheduling and uplink transmission resource allocation on the UE according to the processing indication information).
Regarding claim 52, Gao further teaches wherein the buffer status report comprising the first information is transmitted separately from the transmission of the second information (as shown in fig 3-4, 8, the buffer size (first information) is separately transmitted than the logic group ID or service type information).
Regarding claim 53, Gao further teaches wherein there is a time gap between transmission of the first information and transmission of a second transmission comprising the second information (fig 3 and 6; fig 3 shows the short BSR format including logical channel group identity and buffer size; further, fig 6 shows the MAC sub-header; para 153: as shown in FIG. 6, when the uplink data includes low-priority data, a reserved bit R, that is the second bit from left in a MAC layer sub-header shown in FIG. 5 may be set to 1; para 140, 142; here, the buffer size and the bit set to 1 are at least separated by bit E and logical channel identity).
Claim 51 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gao et al. (US 20160007229) in view of Freda et al. (US 20200296749) in further view of Li et al. (US 20200413285)
Regarding claim 51, Gao in view of Freda teaches the limitations of the parent claim. Gao teaches the determination of the buffered data type and information in the buffer status report, but Gao or Freda does not teach burst information in BSR. Li is directed to queuing latency aware BSR.
Li further teaches wherein the second information comprises burst information indicating at least two data packets belonging to a same burst (fig 5a; para 77: at 510, STA 120a generates the queuing latency aware buffer status report (BSR) based at least on the determined latency information, the queuing latency aware BSR includes one or more of a capability subfield, a control identifier (ID) associated with the queuing latency aware BSR, the number of packets of the queued data, the queuing time associated with the queued data, the time-to-live information associated with the queued data, and the next data burst arrival time for the buffer; here, the queuing time and time-to-live for the number of packets of the queued data is considered belonging to same burst). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine buffer status reporting method as taught by Gao in view of Freda with including burst information of packets in the buffer status report as taught by Li for the benefit of improving the uplink multi-user scheduling as taught by Li in para 19.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to Freda not teaching the amended claim limitations of claim 1 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The applicant argues that importing TTL information from Freda into Gao would still place that information inside same buffer status report. The examiner respectfully disagrees. Freda reference teaches the resource request (RR) message that is sent on the basis of QoS parameter reaching TTL for packet (para 231). Further, para 241, 265 and 300 (as described above with respect to claim), indicate that RR message is different and separate from the buffer status report. Thus, the Freda reference appears to teach the argued limitation.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 54 and 55 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
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 RINA C PANCHOLI whose telephone number is (571)272-2679. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30am-4pm.
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, Chirag Shah can be reached on 571-272-3144. 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.
/RINA C PANCHOLI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2477 6/30/2026
Prosecution Insights