DETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to claims filed on 03/13/2026 and Information Disclosure Statements filed on 30 October 2023, 24 June 2024, 25 February 2025, and 11 May 2026.
Claims 26-31 and 32-38 are pending for examination.
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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s arguments filed 03/13/2026 have been entered. The claims have been amended, and original as follows.
Claims are previously presented: 26-29 and 33-36.
Claims are currently amended: 30-31 and 37-38. Claims are cancelled: 1-25, 32 and 39.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see, filed on 03/13/2026. Remarks pages 09-13, with respect to
the rejection(s) of Claims 30, and 37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Agiwal (US 20230380003 A1), have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Tseng et al (US 20240015689 A1). Claim 31, 38 of Agiwal and further in view of You et al.(US 20240080699 A1). have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection of rejection is made in view of Agiwal et al. (US 20230380003A1) in view of Tseng et al (US 20240015689 A1).
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Firstly, Agiwal explicitly identifies and distinguishes two different timers. In ¶[0164], Agiwal states: “Upon initiation of SDT procedure, UE starts a timer for SDT Note that timer for SDT is different from the timer T319 which UE starts when it initiates RRC connection resume procedure.” This teaches a first timer (the SDT timer) and a second timer (T319) that are different from one another.Secondly, Agiwal ¶[0164] establishes a blanket rule for stopping the first timer: SDT procedure is completed/terminated if this timer is expired or UE receives RRCReject message Note that timer is stopped when the SDT procedure is completed or terminated.Regarding Claim 26, Applicant argues that Tseng only teaches initiating a location update procedure (RNAU) to acquire a UE-specific RRC signal (e.g., RRCResume, RRCReject), which is fundamentally different in message type and purpose from Ishii’s on-demand System information message.The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Tseng’s teaches to the specific payload of message (RNAU), rather than recognizing the generalized procedural state-management principle being claimed. Tseng teaches a framework for managing procedure collision and prioritization for UEs in the RRC_INACTIVE state. Specifically, Tseng ¶[0061] and [0116] disclose that when a UE is triggered with both an SDT procedure and implement the SDT procedure first, starting the other procedure only after the SDT procedure is finished. The rejections are maintained.
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.
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.
7. Claims 26 and 33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishii (US 20190349844 A1) in view of Tseng et al (US 20240015689 A1).
With regarding Claim 26, Ishii disclose a method of a User Equipment (UE), the method comprising: supporting a Small Data Transmission (SDT) procedure; and triggering a request for on demand system information to acquire a System Information (SI) message (See FIG. 8, 9A-C, 11, 20-22 and ¶[0083], [0090], [0045], [0087], [0093]-[0098], [0108], [00152]-[0155]. Disclosed the wireless terminal may proceed to the SI reception procedure if the SI request procedure is successful and the process of initiating acquisition of system information.), in a case where: the UE has not stored a valid version of a System Information Block (SIB) (See FIG. 20 and ¶[ [0137]-[0140], [0151], [0110]-[0112]. Disclosed that if UE has no stored version of SIB.) the SI message is not being broadcasted (See FIG. 19 and ¶[0137]-[0140], [0151], [0110]-[0112], [0114], [0316]. Disclosed termination conditions for SI acquisition when SI is not broadcast), and the SDT procedure is not ongoing . Ishii may not explicitly disclose a method of a User Equipment (UE), the method comprising: supporting a Small Data Transmission (SDT) procedure, and the SDT procedure is not ongoing. However, in analogous art, Tseng disclose a method of a User Equipment (UE), the method comprising: supporting a Small Data Transmission (SDT) procedure (See FIG. 1-3, 5 and ¶[0054]-[0055]. Disclosed UE may perform a SDT procedures), and the SDT procedure is not ongoing (See FIG. 4-5 and ¶[0007], [0012]-[0013], [0017], [0059]-[0061]. Disclosed UE conditional logic to procedure initiation in RRC_INACTIVE.). 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 Tseng to modify Ishii teachings. Ishii teaches the On-demand system information acquisition procedures and the specific conditions related to SIB validity and broadcast status. And Tseng teaches SDT procedures and establishes the procedure and prioritizations. This combination ensure the On-demand SI acquisition and SDT procedures. With regarding Claim 33, Ishii disclose a User Equipment (UE) comprising: a memory (See FIG. 23); and a processor coupled to the memory (See FIG. 23), wherein the processor is configured to: support a Small Data Transmission (SDT) procedure, and trigger a request for on demand system information to acquire a System Information (SI) message (See FIG. 9A-C, 11, 20-22 and ¶[0093]-[0098], [00152]-[0155]. Disclosed the wireless terminal may proceed to the SI reception procedure if the SI request procedure is successful and the process of initiating acquisition of system information.), in a case where: the UE has not stored a valid version of a System Information Block (SIB) (See FIG. 20 and ¶[ [0137]-[0140], [0151], [0110]-[0112]. Disclosed that if UE has no stored version of SIB.), the SI message is not being broadcasted, and the SDT procedure is not ongoing. Ishii may not explicitly disclose a method of a User Equipment (UE), the method comprising: supporting a Small Data Transmission (SDT) procedure, and the SDT procedure is not ongoing. However, in analogous art, Tseng disclose a method of a User Equipment (UE), the method comprising: supporting a Small Data Transmission (SDT) procedure (See FIG. 1-3 and ¶[0054]-[0055]. Disclosed UE may perform a SDT procedures), and the SDT procedure is not ongoing (See FIG. 5 and ¶[0007], [0012]-[0013], [0017]. Disclosed UE). 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 Tseng to modify Ishii teachings. Ishii teaches the On-demand system information acquisition procedures and the specific conditions related to SIB validity and broadcast status. And Tseng teaches SDT procedures and establishes the procedure and prioritizations. This combination ensure the On-demand SI acquisition and SDT procedures.
8. Claims 27, and 34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishii and Tseng et al. as applied to claims 26/33 above, and further in view of Agiwal et al (US 20230380003 A1).
With regarding Claim 27 Ishii and Tseng disclose the method according to claim 26, Ishii and Tseng may not explicitly disclose further comprising: starting a first timer related to the SDT procedure, in a case where the SDT procedure is initiated; receiving a Radio Resource Control (RRC) Reject message; and stopping the first timer, upon reception of the RRC Reject message. However, in analogous art, Agiwal disclose starting a first timer related to the SDT procedure, in a case where the SDT procedure is initiated (See FIG. 6 and ¶[0164]-[0167], [0182]-[0184]-[0301], [0317]. Disclosed starting a timer specifically related to the SDT procedure at the moment the SDT procedure is initiated, UE may start the timer and SDT procedure is initiated by the UE.); receiving a Radio Resource Control (RRC) Reject message; (See ¶[0164], [0179], [0183], [0197], [0301], [0297]. Disclosed identifies receiving an RRCReject message as one of the specific conditions that terminates the SDT procedure.)and stopping the first timer, upon reception of the RRC Reject message (¶[0164], [0179], [0183], [0197], [0301], [0297]. Disclosed that receiving RRCReject message terminates the SDT procedure, this explicitly establishes that the timer is stopped upon reception of the RRC reject message. So UE stop the timer upon reception of an RRC rejection message). 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 Agiwal to modify Ishii and Tseng teachings. Ishii teaches the On-demand system information acquisition procedures and the specific conditions related to SIB validity and broadcast status. And Tseng teaches SDT procedures and establishes the procedure and prioritizations¶[0099], [0113]. And Agiwal teaches starting timer specifically for SDT procedures and stopping timers upon reception of RRC messages. This combination ensure efficient UE operation during RRC inactive state procedures. Tseng’s RRC reject message handling to Agiwal’s SDT timer management would yield the stopping the SDT timer upon RRC rejection reception, preventing unnecessary resource usage during failed procedures. With regarding Claim 34, through of a different scope, the limitations of claim 34 are substantially similar or identical to those of claim 27, and is rejected under the same reasoning. 9. Claims 28-29, 35-36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the system of Ishii, Tseng, and Agiwal as applied to claim 27/34 above, and further in view of You et al.(US 20240080699 A1).
With regarding Claim 28 Ishii, Tseng and Agiwal disclose the method according to claim 27, Ishii, Tseng and Agiwal may not explicitly disclose further comprising: stopping the first timer, in a case where: a Radio Link Control (RLC) indicates that a maximum number of retransmissions has been reached, or a second timer related to the SDT procedure is expired. However, in analogous art, You disclose further comprising: stopping the first timer, in a case where: a Radio Link Control (RLC) indicates that a maximum number of retransmissions has been reached, or a second timer related to the SDT procedure is expired (See ¶[0081], [0110], [0112], [0118]-[0119], [0127], [0139]. Disclosed that RLC maximum retransmission causes SDT failure.). 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 You to modify Ishii, Tseng and Agiwal teachings. Ishii teaches principle of using counter timers as termination conditions for wireless procedures. And Tseng teaches coordination of timers during SDT-related procedures. Agiwal teaches the pattern of stopping timers when specific conditions, and You teaches that RLC maximum retransmissions causes SDT failure. This combination trigger conditions (RLC max retransmissions and second timer expiration) are known failure conditions for SDT procedures, and timer management principles exists for related procedures, and coordinated timer handling during procedure failures.
With regarding Claim 29, Ishii and Tseng disclose the method according to claim 26, Ishii, and Tseng may not explicitly disclose further comprising: starting a first timer related to the SDT procedure, in a case where the SDT procedure is initiated; and stopping the first timer, in a case where: a Radio Link Control (RLC) indicates that a maximum number of retransmissions has been reached, or a second timer related to the SDT procedure is expired. However, in analogous art, Agiwal disclose further comprising: starting a first timer related to the SDT procedure, in a case where the SDT procedure is initiated (See ¶[0301], [0183]. Disclosed upon initiation of SDT procedure, UE starts a timer for SDT. This timer can also be referred as SDT failure detection timer.); and stopping the first timer, in a case where: a Radio Link Control (RLC) indicates that a maximum number of retransmissions has been reached, or a second timer related to the SDT procedure is expired (See ¶[0301], [0324], [0183].Disclosed SDT procedure is completed/terminated if SDT timer expired or UE receives RRCRelease message from gNB or UE receives RRCresume message from gNB or UE receives RRCsetup message from gNB or UE receives RRC reject message from gNB or UE receives indication/MAC CE from gNB to terminate SDT procedure). Ishii, Tseng and Agiwal may not explicitly disclose a Radio Link Control (RLC) indicates that a maximum number of retransmissions has been reached, However, in analogous art You disclose a Radio Link Control (RLC) indicates that a maximum number of retransmissions has been reached (See ¶[0081], [0110], [0112], [0118]-[0119], [0127], [0139) Disclosed during the SDT process the RLC retransmission reaches the maximum number of retransmissions, the SDT is considered to have failed]. 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 You to modify Ishii, Tseng and Agiwal teachings. Ishii teaches principle of using counter timers as termination conditions for wireless procedures. And Tseng teaches coordination of timers during SDT-related procedures. Agiwal teaches the pattern of stopping timers when specific conditions, and You teaches starting a first timer and identifies both RLC maximum retransmissions and timer expiry as SDT failure conditions. With regarding Claim 35, through of a different scope, the limitations of claim 35 are substantially similar or identical to those of claim 28, and is rejected under the same reasoning. With regarding Claim 36, through of a different scope, the limitations of claim 36 are substantially similar or identical to those of claim 29, and is rejected under the same reasoning. 10. Claims 30, and 37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Agiwal et al. (US 20230380003A1) in view of Tseng et al (US 20240015689 A1). With regarding Claim 30 Agiwal disclose A method of a User Equipment (UE), the method comprising: starting a first timer related to a Small Data Transmission (SDT) procedure, in a case where the SDT procedure is initiated (See ¶[0301], [0183], [0317], [0162]. Disclosed upon initiation of SDT procedure, UE starts a timer for SDT. This timer can also be referred as SDT failure detection timer.); receiving a Radio Resource Control (RRC) Reject message (See ¶[0039], [0164], [0301], [0324], [0179]. Disclosed that receiving RRCReject message terminates the SDT procedure, this explicitly establishes that the timer is stopped upon reception of the RRC reject message. So UE stop the timer upon reception of an RRC rejection message)); and stopping the first timer, in a case where a second timer related to the SDT procedure is expired, wherein the second timer is different from the first timer. (See ¶[0301], [0297], [0164]. Disclosed SDT Procedure is completed/terminated if this timer is expired or UE receives RRCReject message or UE receives RRCRelease message. that timer is stopped when the SDT procedure is completed or terminated. [0164] Upon initiation of SDT procedure, UE starts a timer for SDT. This timer can also be referred as SDT failure detection timer. Note that timer for SDT is different from the timer T319 which UE starts when it initiates RRC connection resume procedure. The value of timer for SDT is configured/signaled by gNB in system information of camped cell or in RRCRelease message or in RRCReconfiguration message.[0164] Note that timer is stopped when the SDT procedure is completed or terminated.). Agiwal may not explicitly disclose stopping the first timer, in a case where a second timer related to the SDT procedure is expired, However, in analogous art, Tseng disclose stopping the first timer, in a case where a second timer related to the SDT procedure is expired(See FIG. 5 and ¶[0099] Table 6, [0111], [0124]-[0128]. Disclosed the coordination logic where expiry or completion of one procedure-related timer triggers stopping/restarting of other related timers to prevent state inconsistency and conserve UE power.).
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 Tseng to modify Agiwal teachings. Agiwal teaches initiating an SDT procedure, starting an SDT failure detection timer(first timer), receiving an RRCReject message, and stopping the SDT timer upon procedure termination, further recognizes that the SDT timer distinct from the RRC resume timer T319(second timer). Tseng teaches that where an SDT procedure terminates or related timer expires, the UE stops or restarts other concurrently running procedure timers(T380, SDT timers) to maintain consistent UE state and avoid unnecessary power consumption. This combination yields the clean protocol state transitions and prevents the UE form wasting battery running an SDT failure detection timer after the underlying RRC resume procedure has definitively failed.
With regarding Claim 37, through of a different scope, the limitations of claim 37 are substantially similar or identical to those of claim 30, and is rejected under the same reasoning.
11. Claims 31, and 38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the system of Tseng, and Agiwal as applied to claim 30/37 above, and further in view of YOU et al.(US 20240080699 A1).
With regarding Claim 31, Agiwal disclose the method according to claim 30, Agiwal may not explicitly disclose further comprising: stopping the first timer, in a case where: a Radio Link Control (RLC) indicates that a maximum number of retransmissions has been reached, or a second timer related to the SDT procedure is expired. However, in analogous art, You disclose further comprising: stopping the first timer, in a case where: a Radio Link Control (RLC) indicates that a maximum number of retransmissions has been reached.(See ¶[0080]-[0081], [0110], [0112], [0118]-[0119], [0127], [0139]. Disclosed that RLC maximum retransmission causes SDT failure.). 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 You to modify Agiwal teachings. Agiwal teaches starting a first timer when SDT is initiated and receiving RRC rejection message during SDT and stopping the first timer upon reception of RRC reject messages, and You teaches that RLC maximum retransmissions causes SDT failure. This combination trigger conditions (RLC max retransmissions and second timer expiration) are known failure conditions for SDT procedures, and timer management principles exists for related procedures, and coordinated timer handling during procedure failures.
With regarding Claim 38, through of a different scope, the limitations of claim 38 are substantially similar or identical to those of claim 31, and is rejected under the same reasoning.
Conclusion
12. 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.
13. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHIVAKRISHNA VALLAMDASU whose telephone number is (571)272-5249. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM EST.
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, Marcus R Smith can be reached at 5712701096. 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.
SHIVAKRISHNA . VALLAMDASU
Examiner
Art Unit 2468
/MARCUS SMITH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2468
Prosecution Insights