DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Objections
Claim 17 is objected to because of the following informalities: In 1 Line of claim 17, the claim limitation recites “the an apparatus according to claim 16”. The claim limitation should be corrected to recite “the . Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "the allocated radio network temporary identifier" in line 6 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim as claims 1 and 2, from which claim 6 depends, does not mention or claim “the allocated radio network temporary identifier”.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "stop the timer" in line 3 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim as claims 1, 2,and 6 from which claim 7 depends, does not mention or claim an “the timer”.
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.
Claims 1, 10-11, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang et al. US (2018/0160338) in view of LY et al. US (2022/0078693).
Regarding Claim 1, Huang discloses an apparatus (see Fig. 4 i.e., UE 4 & Para’s [0010] i.e., remote D2D UE & [0128] i.e., served D2D UE & [0185] i.e., terminal device to perform the method), comprising: at least one processor (see Para [0187] i.e., processor) and at least one memory storing instructions which, when executed, cause the at least one processor (see Para’s [0185-0186] i.e., the computer software product is stored in a storage medium (for example, an ROM/RAM, a magnetic disk, or a compact disk), including several instructions for enabling a terminal device to perform the method in an embodiments of the disclosure & [0187] i.e., a processor performs the system for switching a relay node according to the program codes stored in the storage medium) to: receive an indication indicating that a target base station of the apparatus for a handover does not support relaying, (see Para’s [0010] i.e., the relay UE has a cell handover and is switched from one base station to another base station, and a target base station to which the relay UE is switched may not support the D2D relay, [0014], [0046-0051] i.e., the target base station determines not to perform the handover, and replies a handover failed message to the source base station…the reason for that the target base station determines not to perform the handover include at least one of the following: the target base station does not support the relay function from the D2D UE to the network, [0053] i.e., the source base station sends indication information to the D2D relay node; and the source base station sends the indication information to the D2D relay node via an air interface handover command, and the indication information includes at least one of the following: an indication that the target base station does not support the D2D relay functions, [0054] i.e., after the D2D relay node receives the indication information sent by the source base station, the method includes: the D2D relay node sends the indication information to the served D2D UE, the indication information includes at least one of the following: an indication that the target base station not supports the D2D relay functions, [0067], & [0183] i.e., RRC reconfiguration message sent from source base station to the Relay UE)
wherein the apparatus is in a radio resource control connected state and has a relay link with a serving base station via a relay user equipment; (see Fig. 1 i.e., UE 4 is in a connected state based on a relay link via UE3 to eNB 1 & Para’ [0010] i.e., the D2D UE may be served as a relay node, such that a remote D2D UE at the edge of the coverage of the cellular network or out of the coverage can perform cellular communication with the network by means of the relay node UE (i.e., remote D2D UE is in a connected state) & [0053-0054] i.e., source base station of D2D relay node)
While Huang discloses the apparatus (i.e., remote D2D UE) receives the indication which may be an RRC reconfiguration message indicating that a target base station of the apparatus for a handover does not support relaying which is based on failure to handover to the target base station (see Para’s [0010], [0046-0051], [0053-0054], & [0183]), Huang does not disclose and pause the relay link based at least on the received indication and does not explicitly disclose the apparatus is in a radio resource control connected state. However the claim features would be rendered obvious in view of LY et al. US (2022/0078693).
LY discloses wherein an apparatus (see Fig. 4 i.e., remote UE) is in a radio resource control connected state and has a relay link with a serving base station (see Fig. 4 i.e., base station) via a relay user equipment (see Fig. 4, relay), (see Para’s [0061] i.e., the remote UE may be in an RRC connected state & [0066-0067] i.e., As shown in Fig. 4, the remote UE and the relay may initially be in an RRC connected state)
and pause the relay link based at least on a received indication (i.e., RRC reconfiguration sidelink message) based on a handover failure of the relay user equipment (see Fig. 4 & Para’s [0066] i.e., As shown in Fig. 4, the remote UE and the relay may initially be in an RRC connected state. The relay may detect a failure on a Uu link between the relay and the base station when the remote UE are connected to the relay. The failure may be, for example, due to a Uu handover failure (i.e., handover failure will be for a handover failure to a target base station)…The relay may send an RRC reconfiguration sidelink message (i.e., “indication”) to the remote UE to indicate that the remote UE has been suspended from the relay (i.e., “pause the relay link”) & [0067] i.e., When the relay experiences the failure (e.g., Uu handover failure), the relay may suspend (i.e., “pause”) a PC5 link with the remote UE…After the relay successfully reestablishes the Uu link with the base station, the relay UE may resume a suspended PC5 link with the remote UE & [0070]).
(LY suggests the remote UE pauses the relay link based on the received indication due to a handover failure of the relay UE in which the paused link may be resumed when the relay UE successfully reestablishes a Uu link with a base station for preserving the PC5 link in order to quickly resume the PC5 link resulting in saving signaling overhead from reestablishing the PC5 link, (see Para’s [0066-0067])).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date for the remote UE apparatus which receives the indication indicating that a target base station of the apparatus for a handover does not support relaying which is based on failure to handover to the target base station as disclosed in Huang to pause the relay link based at least on the received indication as disclosed in the teachings of Ly who discloses a remote UE pauses the relay link based at least on a received indication from a relay UE due to a handover failure of the relay user equipment, because the motivation lies in LY that the remote UE pauses the relay link based on the received indication due to a handover failure of the relay UE in which the paused link may be resumed when the relay UE successfully reestablishes a Uu link with a base station for preserving the PC5 link in order to quickly resume the PC5 link resulting in saving signaling overhead from reestablishing the PC5 link.
Regarding Claim 10, the combination of Huang in view of LY discloses the apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the instructions further cause the at least one processor to:Huang, see Para’s [0045-0051] i.e., reasons the target base station determines not to perform the handover include the target base station not supporting the relay function of the D2D UE to the network & [0053-0054] i.e., the indication information includes a D2D relay connection release indication (i.e., suggests the remote UE will release or terminate the D2D relay connection)…and available D2D relay node information)
Regarding Claim 11, the combination of Huang in view of LY discloses the apparatus according to claim 9, wherein the termination of the relay link comprises at least one of the following: initiating a re-selection of another relay user equipment (Huang, see Para’s [0053-0054] i.e., the indication information includes at least one of the following: a D2D relay connection release indication…and available D2D relay node information (i.e., suggests re-selection of another relay UE)); establishing a direct connection between the apparatus and a base station; and transitioning to a radio resource control idle state.
Regarding Claim 16, Huang discloses an apparatus (see Fig. 1 i.e., enB1), comprising at least one processor (see Fig. 1 i.e., eNB1 includes a processor & Para’s [0185] & [0188]) and at least one memory storing instructions which, when executed, cause the at least one processor (see Para’s [0185] & [0188] i.e., the steps may be implemented by program codes executable by the computing devices such that they may be stored in storage devices and performed by the computing devices) to: determine that a target base station for a handover of a relay user equipment does not support relaying; (see Para’s [0010] i.e., the relay UE has a cell handover and is switched from one base station to another base station, and a target base station to which the relay UE is switched may not support the D2D relay, [0014], [0046-0051] i.e., the target base station determines not to perform the handover, and replies a handover failed message to the source base station…the reason for that the target base station determines not to perform the handover include at least one of the following: the target base station does not support the relay function from the D2D UE to the network, [0053] i.e., the source base station sends indication information to the D2D relay node; and the source base station sends the indication information to the D2D relay node via an air interface handover command, and the indication information includes at least one of the following: an indication that the target base station does not support the D2D relay functions, [0054] i.e., after the D2D relay node receives the indication information sent by the source base station, the method includes: the D2D relay node sends the indication information to the served D2D UE, the indication information includes at least one of the following: an indication that the target base station not supports the D2D relay functions, [0067], & [0183] i.e., RRC reconfiguration message sent from source base station to the Relay UE)
and transmit, to a relay user equipment and/or a remote user equipment, an indication indicating that the target base station for the handover does not support relaying, (see Fig. 1 i.e., relay UE3 & Para’s [0053-0054] i.e., the source base station sends indication information to the D2D relay node which includes an indication that the target base station does not support the D2D relay functions)
wherein the remote user equipment is in a radio resource control connected state and has a relay link with the apparatus via the relay user equipment, (see Fig. 1 i.e., UE 4 is in a connected state based on a relay link via UE3 (i.e., “apparatus”) to eNB 1 & Para’ [0010] i.e., the D2D UE may be served as a relay node, such that a remote D2D UE at the edge of the coverage of the cellular network or out of the coverage can perform cellular communication with the network by means of the relay node UE (i.e., remote D2D UE is in a connected state) & [0053-0054] i.e., source base station of D2D relay node)
Huang does not explicitly disclose the claim feature of the remote user equipment is in a radio resource control connected state. However the claim features would be rendered obvious in view of LY et al. US (2022/0078693).
LY discloses wherein a remote UE (see Fig. 4 i.e., remote UE) is in a radio resource control connected state and has a relay link with a serving base station (see Fig. 4 i.e., base station) via a relay user equipment (see Fig. 4, relay), (see Para’s [0061] i.e., the remote UE may be in an RRC connected state & [0066-0067] i.e., As shown in Fig. 4, the remote UE and the relay may initially be in an RRC connected state)
(LY suggests the remote UE pauses the relay link based on a received indication due to a handover failure of the relay UE in which the paused link may be resumed when the relay UE successfully reestablishes a Uu link with a base station for preserving the PC5 link in order to quickly resume the PC5 link resulting in saving signaling overhead from reestablishing the PC5 link, (see Para’s [0066-0067])).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date for the remote UE apparatus which receives the indication indicating that a target base station of the apparatus for a handover does not support relaying which is based on failure to handover to the target base station as disclosed in Huang to be in a radio resource control connected state when connected to the base station via the relay UE as disclosed in the teachings of Ly who discloses a remote UE which is in a RRC connected state to a base station via a relay UE pauses the relay link based at least on a received indication from the relay UE due to a handover failure of the relay user equipment, because the motivation lies in LY that the remote UE in the RRC connected state pauses the relay link based on a received indication due to a handover failure of the relay UE in which the paused link may be resumed when the relay UE successfully reestablishes a Uu link with a base station, for preserving the PC5 link in order to quickly resume the PC5 link resulting in saving signaling overhead from reestablishing the PC5 link.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang et al. US (2018/0160338) in view of LY et al. US (2022/0078693) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ozturk et al. US (2024/0251382).
Regarding Claim 2, the combination of Huang in view of LY discloses the apparatus according to claim 1, including pausing the relay link (LY, see Para [0067] i.e. suspend a PC5 link) and wherein a context of the apparatus is associated with the relay user equipment and the relay link (Ly, see Para’s [0066-0067] i.e., context information of the relay and associated remote UEs will be stored when suspending and resuming the PC5 links), but does not disclose the claim features of wherein pausing the relay link comprises: transmitting to the serving base station, a radio resource control message to request a transition from the radio resource control connected state to a radio resource control inactive state, wherein a context of the apparatus in the radio resource control inactivate state is associated with the relay user equipment and the relay link; and transitioning from the radio resource control connected state to the radio resource control inactive state. However the claim features would be rendered obvious in view of Ozturk et al. US (2024/0251382).
Ozturk discloses wherein pausing the relay link comprises: transmitting to the serving base station, a radio resource control message to request a transition from the radio resource control connected state to a radio resource control inactive state, (In light of the applicants specification in Para [0066], pausing the relay link by transmitting a RRC message to request the transition from the RRC connected state to the RRC inactive state by the apparatus (i.e., remote UE) is performed by transmitting a RRC suspend request to the network, (Ozturk, see Para [0093] i.e., While in RRC connected state 706…the UE can transmit an RRC suspend request to move from the RRC connected state 706 to an RRC inactive state 708))
wherein a context of the apparatus in the radio resource control inactivate state is associated with the link, (see Para [0093] i.e., the UE can transmit an RRC suspend request to move from the RRC connected state 706 to an RRC inactive state 708… Upon receiving the RRC suspend request, the UE context can be stored in the last serving base station (e.g., gNB))
and transitioning from the radio resource control connected state to the radio resource control inactive state (see Para [0093] i.e., the UE can transmit an RRC suspend request to move from the RRC connected state 706 to an RRC inactive state 708).
(Ozturk suggests upon receiving the RRC suspend request from the UE, the UE context is stored in the serving base station in order for the UE to properly resume the RRC connection for preserving the connection in order to quickly resume the RRC connection (see Para’s [0093-0094])).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date for the pausing or suspending of the relay link performed by the apparatus as disclosed in Huang in view of LY to be performed by transmitting to the serving base station, a radio resource control message to request a transition from the radio resource control connected state to a radio resource control inactive state such as the RRC suspend request as disclosed in the teachings of Ozturk which results in the context of the apparatus in the radio resource control inactivate state being associated with the relay user equipment and the relay link, because the motivation lies in Ozturk that upon receiving the RRC suspend request from the UE, the UE context is stored in the serving base station in order for the UE to properly resume the RRC connection for preserving the connection in order to quickly resume the RRC connection.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang et al. US (2018/0160338) in view of LY et al. US (2022/0078693) as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Panteleev et al. US (2018/0206176).
Regarding Claim 3, the combination of Huang in view of LY discloses the apparatus according to claim 1, but does not disclose the claim feature of wherein the instructions further cause the at least one processor to: receive a radio network temporary identifier from the serving base station, wherein the radio network temporary identifier is to be used to identify a pair comprising the apparatus and the relay user equipment. However the claim feature would be rendered obvious in view of Panteleev et al. US (2018/0206176).
Panteleev discloses receiving a radio network temporary identifier from a serving base station, wherein the radio network temporary identifier is to be used to identify a pair comprising the apparatus and the relay user equipment, (see Para’s [0034-0036], [0114] i.e., To enable reception of a single DCI grant by at least two UEs (the relay UE 104 and the remote UE 106), the UEs may be configured with a common/paired RNTI, e.g. SL-RLY-RNTI (i.e., RNTI identifies the pair comprising the relay UE 104 and the remote UE 106). The DCI may be scrambled with this SL-RLY-RNTI, & [0116] i.e., eNB may or may not configure the common/paired RNTI).
(Panteleev suggests the remote UE and the relay UE is configured with the common paired RNTI to enable reception of a single DCI grant by the UEs in order to efficiently perform the sidelink transmission and reception according to the DCI grant, (see Para [0114])).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date for the remote UE apparatus which performs communication with the serving base station via the sidelink with the relay UE as disclosed in Huang in view of LY receive a radio network temporary identifier from a serving base station, wherein the radio network temporary identifier is to be used to identify a pair comprising the apparatus and the relay user equipment as disclosed in the teachings of Panteleev because the motivation lies in Panteleev that the remote UE and the relay UE is configured with a common paired RNTI to enable reception of a single DCI grant by the UEs in order to efficiently perform the sidelink transmission and reception according to the DCI grant.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang et al. US (2018/0160338) in view of LY et al. US (2022/0078693) and further in view of Ozturk et al. US (2024/0251382) as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Jackowski et al. US (2013/0304796).
Regarding Claim 4, the combination of Huang in view of LY discloses, and further in view of Ozturk discloses the apparatus according to claim 2, but does not disclose wherein the instructions further cause the at least one processor to buffer uplink data while the relay link is paused. However the claim feature would be rendered obvious in view of Jackowski et al. US (2013/0304796).
Jackowski discloses a UE to buffer uplink data while a link is paused (see Fig. 4C i.e., client 102 & Para’s [0214] & [0224] i.e., the data manager may attempt to pass the data to a peer unit via the tunnel interface. If the tunnel interface refuses the data, for example due to congestion or a paused connection, data manager 416 may store the data in a per-connection queue or buffer. This queue or buffer may then be added to a pending send list…Upon receipt of a connection resume from the tunnel interface, data manager 416 will attempt to send data from the queues or buffers in the pending send list).
(Jackowski suggests the tunnel interface of the UE refuses to send data due to congestion or a paused connection, the data manager of the UE may store the data in a per-connection queue or buffer until the connection is resumed in which the UE will send data from the buffer for efficiently sending the data when the connection is resumed, (see Para [0224])).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date for the remote UE apparatus which pauses the relay link as disclosed in Huang in view of LY discloses, and further in view of Ozturk to buffer uplink data while the relay link is paused based on the teachings of Jackowski who discloses a UE to buffer uplink data while a link is paused, because the motivation lies in Jackowski that the tunnel interface of the UE refuses to send data due to congestion or a paused connection, the data manager of the UE may store the data in a per-connection queue or buffer until the connection is resumed in which the UE will send data from the buffer for efficiently sending the data when the connection is resumed.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang et al. US (2018/0160338) in view of LY et al. US (2022/0078693), and further in view of Ozturk et al. US (2024/0251382) as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Ahmad et al. US (2023/0189059).
Regarding Claim 5, the combination of Huang in view of LY, and further in view of Ozturk discloses the apparatus according to claim 2, but does not disclose wherein the instructions further cause the at least one processor to: start a timer when pausing the relay link, wherein the timer is configured by the relay user equipment or the serving base station. However the claim feature would be rendered obvious in view of Ahmad et al. US (2023/0189059).
Ahmad discloses a remote WTRU to: start a timer when pausing the relay link, (see Para’s [0103] i.e., the remote WTRUs may be configured with a PC5 back-off timer and configured to refrain from initiating a PC5 connection (or otherwise communicating via the PC5 with) the relay WTRU until expiration of the PC back-off timer. The relay WTRU may provide to the remote WTRUs values for their respective PC5 back off timers, [0114] i.e., the relay WTRU may inform the remote WTRU of the congestion and the remote WTRU may refrain from initiating a PC5 connection (or otherwise communicating via the PC5) with the relay WTRU based on such information (i.e., “pausing the relay link”), [0115] i.e., the relay WTRU may provide an explicit congestion indication may be included with a signaled value of the PC5 back off timer, [0116] i.e., the relay WTRU may send the backoff indication and/or value of the PC5 back off timer, [0117-0118] i.e., remote WTRU resumes service based on cancelling the PC5 back off timer, & [0121] i.e., The remote WTRU may decide to preserve its connection with the current relay WTRU and stay inactive for a time period).
wherein the timer is configured by the relay user equipment or the serving base station see Para’s [0103] i.e., the remote WTRUs may be configured with a PC5 back-off timer and configured to refrain from initiating a PC5 connection (or otherwise communicating via the PC5 with) the relay WTRU until expiration of the PC back-off timer. The relay WTRU may provide to the remote WTRUs values for their respective PC5 back off timers, [0114-0115] i.e., the relay WTRU may provide an explicit congestion indication may be included with a signaled value of the PC5 back off timer, [0116] i.e., the relay WTRU may send the backoff indication and/or value of the PC5 back off timer).
(Ahmad suggests the remote WTRU uses the timer when pausing the relay link during congestion in order to resume the service over the relay link when the relay communication is available to be performed with the relay WTRU for preventing transmission failure, (see Para’s [0114-0118])
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date for the relay link paused between the remote UE and the relay UE which is resumed again when relay communications is available to be performed with the relay WTRU as disclosed in Huang in view of LY, and further in view of Ozturk to use and start the timer when pausing the relay link between the remote WTRU and relay WTRU as disclosed in the teachings of Ahmad, because the motivation lies in Ahmad that remote WTRU uses the timer when pausing the relay link during congestion in order to resume the service over the relay link when the relay communication is available to be performed with the relay WTRU for preventing transmission failure.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang et al. US (2018/0160338) in view of LY et al. US (2022/0078693), and further in view of Ozturk et al. US (2024/0251382) as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Panteleev et al. US (2018/0206176).
Regarding Claim 6, the combination of Huang in view of Ozturk discloses the apparatus according to claim 2 including receiving an indication indicating whether a target base station supports relaying (Huang, see Para’s [0044], [0053-0054], [0079], [0164-0165], & [0183]), but does not disclose the claim features of wherein the instructions further cause the at least one processor to: receive an indication indicating that a subsequent target base station for a subsequent handover supports relaying; and resume the relay link with the subsequent target base station via the relay user equipment. However the claim feature would be rendered obvious in view of LY et al. US (2022/0078693).
LY discloses a remote UE to receive an indication indicating that a subsequent target base station for a subsequent handover supports relaying; (see Para [0067] i.e., When the relay experiences failure (e.g., Uu handover failure), the relay may suspend a PC5 link with the remote UE…After the relay successfully reestablishes the Uu link with the base station, the relay UE may resume a suspended PC5 link with the remote UE and may resume advertising relay support in discovery messages transmitted by the relay (i.e., remote UE will receive signaling indication from the relay indicating that a subsequent target base station for a subsequent handover supports relaying in order to perform the resume the suspended PC5 link for a subsequent handover & [0070] i.e., the relay experiences the failure and suspends the PC5 link with the remote UE. Later, the relay may resume the PC5 link after the relay successfully recovers a Uu link with a base station (i.e., may be a subsequent target base station based on Uu handover failure) )
and resume the relay link with the subsequent target base station via the relay user equipment (see Para [0067] i.e., When the relay experiences failure (e.g., Uu handover failure), the relay may suspend a PC5 link with the remote UE…After the relay successfully reestablishes the Uu link with the base station, the relay UE may resume a suspended PC5 link with the remote UE and may resume advertising relay support in discovery messages transmitted by the relay & [0070])
(LY suggests the remote UE pauses the relay link based on the received indication due to a handover failure of the relay UE in which the paused link may be resumed when the relay UE successfully reestablishes a Uu link with a base station for preserving the PC5 link in order to quickly resume the PC5 link resulting in saving signaling overhead from reestablishing the PC5 link, (see Para’s [0066-0067])).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date for the remote UE that receives an indication indicating whether a target base station supports relaying as disclosed in Huang in view of Ozturk to receive an indication indicating that a subsequent target base station for a subsequent handover supports relaying and resume the relay link with the subsequent target base station via the relay user equipment as discloses in the teachings of LY because the motivation lies in LY that the remote UE pauses the relay link based on the received indication due to a handover failure of the relay UE in which the paused link may be resumed when the relay UE successfully reestablishes a Uu link with a base station for preserving the PC5 link in order to quickly resume the PC5 link resulting in saving signaling overhead from reestablishing the PC5 link
The combination of Huang in view of LY, and further in view of Ozturk does not disclose the claim feature of by using the allocated radio network temporary identifier. However the claim feature would be rendered obvious in view of Panteleev et al. US (2018/0206176).
Panteleev discloses using an allocated radio network temporary identifier for communication configured between a remote UE, relay UE, and a serving base station (see Para’s [0034-0036], [0114] i.e., To enable reception of a single DCI grant by at least two UEs (the relay UE 104 and the remote UE 106), the UEs may be configured with a common/paired RNTI, e.g. SL-RLY-RNTI (i.e., RNTI identifies the pair comprising the relay UE 104 and the remote UE 106). The DCI may be scrambled with this SL-RLY-RNTI, & [0116] i.e., eNB may or may not configure the common/paired RNTI).
(Panteleev suggests the remote UE and the relay UE is configured with the common paired RNTI to enable reception of a single DCI grant by the UEs in order to efficiently perform the sidelink transmission and reception according to the DCI grant, (see Para [0114])).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date for the communication performed between the remote UE and the relay UE via the target base station which is a serving base station as disclosed in Huang in view of LY, and further in view of Ozturk to use the allocated radio network temporary identifier used for communication configured between a remote UE, relay UE, and the serving base station as disclosed in Panteleev because the motivation lies in Panteleev that the remote UE and the relay UE is configured with the common paired RNTI to enable reception of a single DCI grant by the UEs in order to efficiently perform the sidelink transmission and reception according to the DCI grant.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang et al. US (2018/0160338) in view of LY et al. US (2022/0078693), further in view of Ozturk et al. US (2024/0251382), and further in view of Panteleev et al. US (2018/0206176) as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Ahmad et al. US (2023/0189059).
Regarding Claim 7, the combination of Huang in view of LY, further in view of Ozturk, and further in view of Panteleev discloses the apparatus according to claim 6 including receiving the indication indicating that the subsequent target base station for the subsequent handover supports relaying (LY, see Para’s [0067] & [0070]), but does not disclose wherein the instructions further cause the at least one processor to: stop the timer upon receiving the indication when the timer is running. However the claim feature would be rendered obvious in view of Ahmad et al. US (2023/0189059).
Ahmad discloses a remote WTRU stopping the timer upon receiving an indication indicating that relay communication is available to be resumed with the relay WTRU when the timer is running (see Para’s [0117] i.e., the relay WTRU may initiate another link modification procedure when the congestion has abated (e.g., prior to expiration of a PC back-off timer) (i.e., “when the timer is running”) to indicate to the remote WTRU that it may resume the service & [0118] i.e., the relay WTRU may initiate a cancelation procedure by sending a “cancel back off” indication to the remote WTRU, e.g., in the keep alive message and/or another PC5-S message, such as a link modification request. The remote WTRU may receive the “cancel back off” indication, and may reset the PC5 back off timer (e.g., set the value to zero) (i.e., “stop the timer”) and in turn, allow the remote WTRU to resume service and/or come out of dormant state).
(Ahmad suggests the remote WTRU uses the timer when pausing the relay link during congestion in order to resume the service over the relay link when the relay communication is available to be performed with the relay WTRU for preventing transmission failure, (see Para’s [0114-0118])).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date for the remote UE which receives the indication indicating that the subsequent target base station for the subsequent handover supports relaying for resuming the PC5 connection as disclosed in Huang in view of LY, further in view of Ozturk, and further in view of Panteleev to be performed by stopping a timer upon receiving the indication when the timer is running based on the teachings of Ahmad who discloses a remote WTRU stopping the timer upon receiving an indication indicating that relay communication is available to be resumed with the relay WTRU when the timer is running, because the motivation lies in Ahmad that the remote WTRU uses the timer when pausing the relay link during congestion in order to resume the service over the relay link when the relay communication is available to be performed with the relay WTRU for preventing transmission failure.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang et al. US (2018/0160338) in view of LY et al. US (2022/0078693), further in view of Ozturk et al. US (2024/0251382), and further in view of Ahmad et al. US (2023/0189059) as applied to claim 5 above, and further in view of Du et al. US (2014/0080531).
Regarding Claim 8, the combination of Huang in view of LY, further in view of Ozturk, and further in view of Ahmad discloses the apparatus according to claim 5 including a wait or backoff timer (Ahmad, see Para [0108]), but does not disclose the claim feature of wherein the instructions further cause the at least one processor to: request the relay user equipment or the serving base station to extend the timer. However the claim feature would be rendered obvious in view of Du et al. US (2014/0080531).
Du discloses a UE request the serving base station to extend a wait timer, (see Para [0004] i.e., where a “delay tolerant access” has been agreed to identify the delay tolerant request using one of the spare value of RRC establishment cause. When eNB detects the cause, it could set an extended wait timer when responding to the request message so that the UE could be delayed from access reattempt for a longer period of time up to 30 minutes)
(Du suggests the eNB sets an extended wait timer based on the RRC establishment cause received from the UE for flexible controlling the wait time for the UE based on the cause, (see Para [0004])).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date for the UE which does not perform communication with the relay link according to the configured back-off timer as disclosed in Huang in view of LY, further in view of Ozturk, and further in view of Ahmad to request the serving base station to extend the wait timer based on the teachings of Du who discloses a UE request the serving base station to extend a wait timer, because the motivation lies in Du that the eNB sets an extended wait timer based on the RRC establishment cause received from the UE for flexible controlling the wait time for the UE based on the cause.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang et al. US (2018/0160338) in view of LY et al. US (2022/0078693), further in view of Ozturk et al. US (2024/0251382), and further in view of Ahmad et al. US (2023/0189059) as applied to claim 5 above, and further in view of da Silva et al. US (2021/0127445).
Regarding Claim 9, the combination of Huang in view of LY, further in view of Ozturk, and further in view of Ahmad discloses the apparatus according to claim 5, but does not disclose the claim feature of wherein the instructions further cause the at least one processor to: upon expiration of the timer, terminate the relay link. However the claim feature would be rendered obvious in view of da Silva et al. US (2021/0127445).
da Silva discloses a WTR to upon expiration of the timer, terminate the current link (see Para’s [0078] & [0084] i.e., the UE may start the reject wait timer (e.g., T302)…Consequently, the UE may attempt to send that periodic RNAU as soon as it is able to perform another resume attempt including e.g. upon cell reselection and/or upon expiry of T302 (i.e., cell reselection will terminate the current link of the UE)).
(da Silva suggests the UE performs a resume attempt upon cell reselection and upon expiry of the T302 wait timer, for quickly resuming the connection without using additional signaling overhead required for reestablishing the connection, (see Para’s [0078] & [0084])).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date for the remote UE to perform upon expiration of the backoff timer as disclosed in Huang in view of LY, further in view of Ozturk, and further in view of Ahmad terminating of the relay link based on the teachings of da Silva who discloses a WTR to upon expiration of a T302 timer, terminate the current link based on performing a cell reselection procedure, because the motivation lies in da Silva that the UE performs a resume attempt upon cell reselection and upon expiry of the T302 wait timer, for quickly resuming the connection without using additional signaling overhead required for reestablishing the connection.
Claims 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang et al. US (2018/0160338) in view of LY et al. US (2022/0078693), and further in view of Ozturk et al. US (2024/0251382).
Regarding Claim 12, Huang discloses an apparatus (see Fig. 1 i.e., relay apparatus UE3 & Para’s [0053-0054] i.e., D2D relay node), comprising: at least one processor (see Para’s [0185-0187] i.e., UE processor) and at least one memory storing instructions which, when executed, cause the at least one processor (see Para’s [0185-0186] i.e., the computer software product is stored in a storage medium (for example, an ROM/RAM, a magnetic disk, or a compact disk), including several instructions for enabling a terminal device to perform the method in an embodiments of the disclosure & [0187] i.e., a processor performs the system for switching a relay node according to the program codes stored in the storage medium) to: receive, from a serving base station, an indication indicating that a target base station of the apparatus for a handover does not support relaying, (see Para’s [0010] i.e., the relay UE has a cell handover and is switched from one base station to another base station, and a target base station to which the relay UE is switched may not support the D2D relay, [0014], [0046-0051] i.e., the target base station determines not to perform the handover, and replies a handover failed message to the source base station…the reason for that the target base station determines not to perform the handover include at least one of the following: the target base station does not support the relay function from the D2D UE to the network, [0053] i.e., the source base station sends indication information to the D2D relay node; and the source base station sends the indication information to the D2D relay node via an air interface handover command, and the indication information includes at least one of the following: an indication that the target base station does not support the D2D relay functions, [0054] i.e., after the D2D relay node receives the indication information sent by the source base station, the method includes: the D2D relay node sends the indication information to the served D2D UE, the indication information includes at least one of the following: an indication that the target base station not supports the D2D relay functions, [0067], & [0183] i.e., RRC reconfiguration message sent from source base station to the Relay UE)
wherein the apparatus relays a relay link of a remote user equipment to the serving base station and the remote user equipment is in a radio resource control connected state; (see Fig. 1 i.e., UE 4 is in a connected state based on a relay link via UE3 (i.e., “apparatus”) to eNB 1 & Para’ [0010] i.e., the D2D UE may be served as a relay node, such that a remote D2D UE at the edge of the coverage of the cellular network or out of the coverage can perform cellular communication with the network by means of the relay node UE (i.e., remote D2D UE is in a connected state) & [0053-0054] i.e., source base station of D2D relay node)
forward the indication to the remote user equipment, (see [0054] i.e., after the D2D relay node receives the indication information sent by the source base station, the method includes: the D2D relay node sends the indication information to the served D2D UE, the indication information includes at least one of the following: an indication that the target base station not supports the D2D relay functions)
Huang does not explicitly disclose the claim feature of the remote user equipment is in a radio resource control connected state. However the claim features would be rendered obvious in view of LY et al. US (2022/0078693).
LY discloses wherein a remote UE (see Fig. 4 i.e., remote UE) is in a radio resource control connected state and has a relay link with a serving base station (see Fig. 4 i.e., base station) via a relay user equipment (see Fig. 4, relay), (see Para’s [0061] i.e., the remote UE may be in an RRC connected state & [0066-0067] i.e., As shown in Fig. 4, the remote UE and the relay may initially be in an RRC connected state)
(LY suggests the remote UE pauses the relay link based on a received indication due to a handover failure of the relay UE in which the paused link may be resumed when the relay UE successfully reestablishes a Uu link with a base station for preserving the PC5 link in order to quickly resume the PC5 link resulting in saving signaling overhead from reestablishing the PC5 link, (see Para’s [0066-0067])).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date for the remote UE apparatus which receives the indication indicating that a target base station of the apparatus for a handover does not support relaying which is based on failure to handover to the target base station as disclosed in Huang to be in a radio resource control connected state when connected to the relay UE apparatus as disclosed in the teachings of Ly who discloses a remote UE which is in a RRC connected state to a relay UE pauses the relay link based at least on a received indication from the relay UE due to a handover failure of the relay user equipment, because the motivation lies in LY that the remote UE in the RRC connected state pauses the relay link based on a received indication due to a handover failure of the relay UE in which the paused link may be resumed when the relay UE successfully reestablishes a Uu link with a base station, for preserving the PC5 link in order to quickly resume the PC5 link resulting in saving signaling overhead from reestablishing the PC5 link.
While the combination of Huang in view of LY discloses the remote UE pauses the relay link (LY, see Para’s [0066-0067] i.e., remote UE and relay UE suspend (i.e., “pause”) the PC5 link), the combination of Huang in view of LY does not disclose the claim feature of and receive, from the remote user equipment, a request for pause of the relay link. However the claim feature would be rendered obvious in view of Ozturk et al. US (2024/0251382).
Ozturk discloses receiving, from a user equipment, a request for pause of the link of the UE (In light of the applicants specification in Para [0066], the request for pausing the relay link is performed by the remote UE by transmitting a RRC suspend request to the relay UE and/or the network, (Ozturk, see Para’s [0093-0094] i.e., While in RRC connected state 706…the UE can transmit an RRC suspend request to move from the RRC connected state 706 to an RRC inactive state 708 (i.e., pauses the UEs link). Upon receiving the RRC suspend request, the UE context of the UE can be stored in the last serving base station))
(Ozturk suggests upon receiving the RRC suspend request from the UE, the UE context is stored in the serving base station in order for the UE to properly resume the RRC connection for preserving the connection in order to quickly resume the RRC connection (see Para’s [0093-0094])).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date for the pausing or suspending of the relay link performed by the remote UE and the relay UE as disclosed in Huang in view of LY to be performed by the remote UE transmitting an RRC suspend request to the network as disclosed in the teachings of Ozturk which results in the relay UE receiving, from the remote user equipment, a request for pause of the relay link, because the motivation lies in Ozturk that upon receiving the RRC suspend request from the UE, the UE context is stored in the serving base station in order for the UE to properly resume the RRC connection for preserving the connection in order to quickly resume the RRC connection.
Regarding Claim 13, the combination of Huang in view of LY discloses the apparatus according to claim 12 including pausing the relay link (LY, see Para [0067] i.e. suspend a PC5 link) and wherein a context of the apparatus is associated with the relay user equipment and the relay link (Ly, see Para’s [0066-0067] i.e., context information of the relay and associated remote UEs will be stored when suspending and resuming the PC5 links), but does not disclose the pause of the relay link comprising: transitioning the remote user equipment from the radio resource control connected state to a radio resource control inactive state, wherein a context of the remote user equipment in the radio resource control inactivate state is associated with the apparatus and the relay link. However the claim features would be rendered obvious in view of Ozturk et al. US (2024/0251382).
Ozturk discloses wherein pausing the relay link comprises: transitioning the remote UE from the radio resource control connected state to a radio resource control inactive state, (see Para [0093] i.e., While in RRC connected state 706…the UE can transmit an RRC suspend request to move from the RRC connected state 706 to an RRC inactive state 708))
wherein a context of the UE in the radio resource control inactivate state is associated with the link, (see Para [0093] i.e., the UE can transmit an RRC suspend request to move from the RRC connected state 706 to an RRC inactive state 708… Upon receiving the RRC suspend request, the UE context can be stored in the last serving base station (e.g., gNB))
(Ozturk suggests upon receiving the RRC suspend request from the UE, the UE context is stored in the serving base station in order for the UE to properly resume the RRC connection for preserving the connection in order to quickly resume the RRC connection (see Para’s [0093-0094])).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date for the pausing or suspending of the relay link performed by the remote UE and the relay UE as disclosed in Huang in view of LY to be performed transitioning the UE from the radio resource control connected state to a radio resource control inactive state as disclosed in the teachings of Ozturk which results in the context of the apparatus in the radio resource control inactivate state being associated with the relay user equipment and the relay link, because the motivation lies in Ozturk that upon receiving the RRC suspend request from the UE, the UE context is stored in the serving base station in order for the UE to properly resume the RRC connection for preserving the connection in order to quickly resume the RRC connection.
Regarding Claim 14, the combination of Huang in view of LY discloses the apparatus according to claim 12, but does not disclose wherein the instructions further cause the at least one processor to: transmit, to the serving base station, a radio resource control message to request for transitioning the remote user equipment from the radio resource control connected state to the radio resource control inactive state. However the claim features would be rendered obvious in view of Ozturk et al. US (2024/0251382).
Ozturk discloses wherein pausing the relay link comprises: transmitting to the serving base station, a radio resource control message to request a transition the UE from the radio resource control connected state to a radio resource control inactive state, (In light of the applicants specification in Para [0066], pausing the relay link by transmitting a RRC message to request the transition from the RRC connected state to the RRC inactive state by the apparatus (i.e., remote UE) is performed by transmitting a RRC suspend request to the network, (Ozturk, see Para [0093] i.e., While in RRC connected state 706…the UE can transmit an RRC suspend request to move from the RRC connected state 706 to an RRC inactive state 708))
(Ozturk suggests upon receiving the RRC suspend request from the UE, the UE context is stored in the serving base station in order for the UE to properly resume the RRC connection for preserving the connection in order to quickly resume the RRC connection (see Para’s [0093-0094])).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date for the pausing or suspending of the relay link performed by the remote UE as disclosed in Huang in view of LY to be performed by transmitting to the serving base station, a radio resource control message to request a transition from the radio resource control connected state to a radio resource control inactive state such as the RRC suspend request as disclosed in the teachings of Ozturk, because the motivation lies in Ozturk that upon receiving the RRC suspend request from the UE, the UE context is stored in the serving base station in order for the UE to properly resume the RRC connection for preserving the connection in order to quickly resume the RRC connection.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang et al. US (2018/0160338) in view of LY et al. US (2022/0078693), and further in view of Ozturk et al. US (2024/0251382) as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Panteleev et al. US (2018/0206176).
Regarding Claim 15, the combination of Huang in view of LY, and further in view of Ozturk discloses the apparatus according to claim 1, but does not disclose the claim feature of receive a radio network temporary identifier from the serving base station, wherein the radio network temporary identifier is to be used to identify a pair comprising the apparatus and the remote equipment. However the claim feature would be rendered obvious in view of Panteleev et al. US (2018/0206176).
Panteleev discloses receiving a radio network temporary identifier from a serving base station, wherein the radio network temporary identifier is to be used to identify a pair comprising a relay apparatus and a remote user equipment, (see Para’s [0034-0036], [0114] i.e., To enable reception of a single DCI grant by at least two UEs (the relay UE 104 and the remote UE 106), the UEs may be configured with a common/paired RNTI, e.g. SL-RLY-RNTI (i.e., RNTI identifies the pair comprising the relay UE 104 and the remote UE 106). The DCI may be scrambled with this SL-RLY-RNTI, & [0116] i.e., eNB may or may not configure the common/paired RNTI).
(Panteleev suggests the remote UE and the relay UE is configured with the common paired RNTI to enable reception of a single DCI grant by the UEs in order to efficiently perform the sidelink transmission and reception according to the DCI grant, (see Para [0114])).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date for the relay UE apparatus which performs communication with the serving base station and the remote UE via the sidelink as disclosed in Huang in view of LY and further in view of Ozturk to receive a radio network temporary identifier from a serving base station, wherein the radio network temporary identifier is to be used to identify a pair comprising the relay apparatus and the remote user equipment as disclosed in the teachings of Panteleev, because the motivation lies in Panteleev that the remote UE and the relay UE is configured with a common paired RNTI to enable reception of a single DCI grant by the UEs in order to efficiently perform the sidelink transmission and reception according to the DCI grant.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang et al. US (2018/0160338) in view of LY et al. US (2022/0078693) as applied to claim 16 above, further in view of Ozturk et al. US (2024/0251382), and further in view of Panteleev et al. US (2018/0206176).
Regarding Claim 17, the combination of Huang in view of LY discloses the apparatus according to claim 16, but does not disclose wherein the instructions further cause the at least one processor to: receive a radio resource control message to request a state transition for the remote user equipment from the radio resource control connected state to a radio resource control inactive state. However the claim feature would be rendered obvious in view of Ozturk et al. US (2024/0251382).
Ozturk discloses receive a radio resource control message to request a state transition for the remote user equipment from the radio resource control connected state to a radio resource control inactive state (Ozturk, see Para [0093] i.e., While in RRC connected state 706…the UE can transmit an RRC suspend request to move from the RRC connected state 706 to an RRC inactive state 708))
(Ozturk suggests upon receiving the RRC suspend request from the UE, the UE context is stored in the serving base station in order for the UE to properly resume the RRC connection for preserving the connection in order to quickly resume the RRC connection (see Para’s [0093-0094])).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date for the pausing or suspending of the relay link performed by the remote UE as disclosed in Huang in view of LY to be performed by transmitting from the remote UE to the serving base station, a radio resource control message to request a state transition for the remote UE from the radio resource control connected state to a radio resource control inactive state such as the RRC suspend request as disclosed in the teachings of Ozturk, because the motivation lies in Ozturk that upon receiving the RRC suspend request from the UE, the UE context is stored in the serving base station in order for the UE to properly resume the RRC connection for preserving the connection in order to quickly resume the RRC connection.
The combination of Huang in view of LY does not disclose the claim features of allocate a radio network temporary identifier, wherein the radio network temporary identifier is to be used to identify a pair comprising the remote user equipment and the relay user equipment; and send the radio network temporary identifier to the relay user equipment and/or the remote user equipment. However the claim feature would be rendered obvious in view of Panteleev et al. US (2018/0206176).
Panteleev discloses allocate a radio network temporary identifier, (see Para’s [0034-0036], [0114] i.e., To enable reception of a single DCI grant by at least two UEs (the relay UE 104 and the remote UE 106), the UEs may be configured with a common/paired RNTI, e.g. SL-RLY-RNTI (i.e., RNTI identifies the pair comprising the relay UE 104 and the remote UE 106). The DCI may be scrambled with this SL-RLY-RNTI, & [0116] i.e., eNB may or may not configure the common/paired RNTI).
wherein the radio network temporary identifier is to be used to identify a pair comprising the remote user equipment and the relay user equipment; (see Para’s [0034-0036], [0114] i.e., To enable reception of a single DCI grant by at least two UEs (the relay UE 104 and the remote UE 106), the UEs may be configured with a common/paired RNTI, e.g. SL-RLY-RNTI (i.e., RNTI identifies the pair comprising the relay UE 104 and the remote UE 106). The DCI may be scrambled with this SL-RLY-RNTI, & [0116] i.e., eNB may or may not configure the common/paired RNTI).
and send the radio network temporary identifier to the relay user equipment and/or the remote user equipment, (see Para’s [0034-0036], [0114], & [0116] i.e., eNB may or may not configure the common/paired RNTI).
(Panteleev suggests the remote UE and the relay UE is configured with the common paired RNTI to enable reception of a single DCI grant by the UEs in order to efficiently perform the sidelink transmission and reception according to the DCI grant, (see Para [0114])).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date for the relay UE apparatus which performs communication with the serving base station and the remote UE via the sidelink as disclosed in Huang in view of LY and further in view of Ozturk to receive the allocated radio network temporary identifier from a serving base station, wherein the radio network temporary identifier is to be used to identify a pair comprising the relay apparatus and the remote user equipment as disclosed in the teachings of Panteleev, because the motivation lies in Panteleev that the remote UE and the relay UE is configured with a common paired RNTI to enable reception of a single DCI grant by the UEs in order to efficiently perform the sidelink transmission and reception according to the DCI grant.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADNAN A BAIG whose telephone number is (571)270-7511. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00am-5:00pm.
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, Huy Vu can be reached at 571-272-3155. 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.
/ADNAN BAIG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2461