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 .
This Office Action is in response to communications filed on 12/2/2025.
Claims 1, 2, 13, 14, 16, 18, 19, 22, 25-28, 39 & 44 are pending and presented for examination.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. 20202840, filed on 10/20/2020.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/17/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
Claims 3-6, 8 & 9 have been cancelled. Claims 7, 9-12, 15, 17, 20, 21, 23, 24, 29-38, 40-43 & 45-47 have previously been cancelled.
Claims 1, 2, 13, 14, 16, 18, 19, 22, 25-28, 39 & 44 have been amended.
Objections to claims 1, 2, 13, 14, 16, 18, 19, 22, 25-28, 39 & 44 have been withdrawn based on amendments to these claims. Objections to claims 3-6, 8 & 9 are moot as these claims have been currently cancelled.
Rejections to claims 1, 13, 18, 19, 22, 25, 26, 28, 39 & 44 under 35 USC 112(b) have been withdrawn based on amendments to these claims. Rejections of claims 6, 8 & 9 under 35 USC 112(b) are moot as these claims have been currently cancelled.
Rejections to claims 1 & 44 under 35 USC 112(a) have been introduced based on amendments to these claims.
Rejections to claims 1, 2, 13, 14, 16, 18, 19, 22, 25-28, 39 & 44 under 35 USC 102 and 35 USC 103 have been withdrawn based on amendments to these claims. However, new grounds of rejections have been introduced under 35 USC 103 based on new references Lee et al. (US 2012/0044805)(herein after “Lee2”) and Jheng et al. (US 2018/0279168)(herein after “Jheng”). Rejections of claims 3-6, 8 & 9 under 35 USC 102 are moot as these claims have been currently cancelled.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see “Remarks”, filed 12/2/2025, with respect to objections to claims 1, 2, 13, 14, 16, 18, 19, 22, 25-28, 39 & 44 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Corrections to including parenthesis for recited abbreviations have been made and bullet lists have been removed. Claim 25 has been amended to recite proper English. The objections of claims 1, 2, 13, 14, 16, 18, 19, 22, 25-28, 39 & 44 have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see “Remarks”, filed 12/2/2025, with respect to rejections to claims 1, 13, 18, 19, 22, 25, 26, 28, 39 & 44 under 35 USC 112(b) have been fully considered and are persuasive.
Regarding claims 1 & 44, examiner agrees that amendments to change “the origin of the data” to “an origin of the data”, eliminate the claim language “…that may be triggered per logical channel or per LCG” and changing the word “like” to the word “including” eliminates the lack of antecedent basis and indefiniteness in these claims. Rejections to claims 1 & 44 under 35 USC 112(b) have been withdrawn.
Regarding claims 13 & 28, examiner agree that amendments to these claims to remove the word “like” eliminates the indefiniteness in these claims. Rejections to claims 13 & 28 under 35 USC 112(b) have been withdrawn.
Regarding claim 39, examiner agrees that this claims does not recite the word “like” and was erroneously rejected under 35 USC 112(b). Rejection to claim 39 under 35 USC 112(b) has been withdrawn.
Regarding claim 14, examiner agrees that amendments to this claim to change “the corresponding Quality of Service (QoS)” to “a corresponding Quality of Service (QoS)” eliminates the lack of antecedent basis in this claim. Rejection to claim 14 under 35 USC 112(b) has been withdrawn.
Regarding claim 18, examiner agrees that amendments to this claim to remove “e.g.” and the phrases “for example specified in standards or embedded into the UE” and “…activating the relaying functionality at the UE” eliminates the lack of antecedent basis and the indefiniteness in this claim. Rejection to claim 18 under 35 USC 112(b) has been withdrawn.
Regarding claim 19, examiner agrees that amendments to this claim to remove “e.g. using RRC signaling” eliminates the indefiniteness in this claim. Rejection to claim 19 under 35 USC 112(b) has been withdrawn.
Regarding claim 22, examiner agrees that amendments to this claim to remove “like a size or a certain percentage of the size of a transmission buffer of the UE” eliminates the indefiniteness in this claim. Rejection to claim 22 under 35 USC 112(b) has been withdrawn.
Regarding claim 25, examiner agrees that amendments to this claim to replace the word “like” with the word “including” eliminates the indefiniteness in this claim. Rejection to claim 25 under 35 USC 112(b) has been withdrawn.
Regarding claims 26 & 28, examiner agrees that amendments to this claim to remove the phrases “like a logical channel prioritization, LCP, procedure” and “like a radio access network, RAN, entity” eliminates the indefiniteness in these claims. Rejection to claims 26 & 28 under 35 USC 112(b) have been withdrawn.
Regarding claim 39, examiner agrees that amendments to this claim to rephrase the claim language eliminates the indefiniteness in this claim. Rejection to claim 39 under 35 USC 112(b) has been withdrawn.
Regarding claims 2, 13, 14, 16, 18, 19, 22, 25-28 & 39, rejection of these claims under 35 USC 112(b) due to their dependency on claims 1 & 13 have been withdrawn based on amendments to claims 1 & 13.
Applicant's arguments filed 12/2/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding claim 1, applicant argues that amendments to this claim to define that the first logical channels are associated with data originating at the one or more transmitting entities, while the second logical channels are associated with data originating at the UE are not disclosed, nor suggested, by Loehr. Examiner respectfully disagrees noting that [0275] of Loehr discloses that an RNTI is associated with one or more logical channels for carrying data and [0273] of Loehr discloses different scheduling RNTIs (scheduling identifications) configured for scheduling resources to a relay UE, one for the handling resource assignments to exchange the relay data (i.e. second logical channels associated with data originating at the UE) and the other for handling resource assignments to exchange the remote data (i.e. second logical channels associated with data originating at the one or more transmitting entities).
Based on the above discussion, examiner maintains that Loehr discloses that the first logical channels are associated with data originating at the one or more transmitting entities, while the second logical channels are associated with data originating at the UE.
Regarding claim 22, applicant submits that Loehr in view of Lee fails to disclose all of the limitations in this claim. Examiner respectfully disagrees noting that, per 35 U.S.C. 103, a patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained 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 (see §MPEP 2141).
Applicant argues that Lee’s triggering threshold fails to disclose the origin of the data of transmission or the data to be transmitted. Examiner notes that Lee does not need to teach the origin of the data of transmission or the data to be transmitted since Loehr discloses logical channels based on the origin of the data of transmission or the data to be transmitted. Thus, it would have been obvious to have a relay UE that relays data from a remote UE to an eNB, as disclosed by Loehr, and use the BSR triggering techniques taught by Lee to trigger a BSR when an amount of data at the remote UE reaches or exceeds a threshold. The rejection of claim 22 under 35 USC 103 has been amended to clarify this combination of disclosure from Loehr with teaching from Lee.
Based on the above discussion, examiner maintains that Loehr in view of Lee disclose all the dependent features of claim 22.
Applicant’s arguments, see “Remarks”, filed 12/2/2025, with respect to the rejections of claims 1, 2, 13, 14, 16, 18, 19, 25-28, 39 & 44 under 35 USC 102 based on Loehr et al. (US 2018/0069618)(herein after “Loehr”) and claim 22 under 35 USC 103 based on Loehr in view of Lee et al. (US 2018/0206147)(herein after “Lee”) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, these rejections have been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, new grounds of rejections are made to these claims in view of new references Lee et al. (US 2012/0044805)(herein after “Lee2”) and, regarding claim 25, further in view of new reference Jheng et al. (US 2018/0279168)(herein after “Jheng”).
Regarding claims 1 & 44, applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1 & 44 have been considered but are moot because the new grounds of rejections do not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Regarding claims 2, 13, 14, 16, 18, 19, 25-28 & 39, applicant submits that these claims traverse the rejections of these claims under 35 USC 102 based on Loehr based amendments to these claims and amendments and arguments made above to claim 1, and due to their dependency on claim 1. Examiner agrees and withdraws rejections to these claims under 35 USC 102 based on Loehr. However, after further consideration, examiner introduces rejections of these claims under 35 USC 103 based on Loehr in view of Lee2, and for claim 25 further in view of Jheng.
Regarding claim 22, applicant submits that this claim traverses the rejections of this claim under 35 USC 103 based on Loehr in view of Lee based amendments to this claim and amendments and arguments made above to claim 1, and due to its dependency on claim 1. Examiner agrees and withdraws rejection to this claim under 35 USC 103 based on Loehr in view of Lee. However, after further consideration, examiner introduces rejection of this claim under 35 USC 103 based on Loehr in view of new reference Lee2, and further in view of Lee.
Claim Interpretation
Claims 1 & 44 recite “wherein, each of the first and second logical channel is associated with or mapped to one or more first signal bearers to serve traffic classified to fulfill a first requirement, including a Guaranteed Bit Rate (GBR) and one or more second signal bearers to serve traffic classified to fulfill a second requirement, including a non-Guaranteed Bit Rate (non-GBR)”. According to the current application specification (see page 18, lines 5-10) a first signal bearer serves traffic classified as GBR and a second signal bearer serves traffic classified as non-GBR. Traffic may be considered either data traffic or signaling traffic. Thus, the examiner is interpreting a signal bearer as a bearer that can carry either data traffic, or signaling traffic, or both.
Several of the claims in the present application recite limitations in the format of “A and/or B)”. For the purpose of this review, the examiner is interpreting these claims as either A, or B, or A and B.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1 & 44 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. Thes claims contain subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventors, at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 & 44 recite “wherein the UE is to associate one or more first logical channels with data originating at the one or more transmitting entities; wherein the UE is to associate one or more second logical channels with data originating at the UE; wherein, each of the first and second logical channel is associated with or mapped to one or more first signal bearers to serve traffic classified to fulfill a first requirement, including a Guaranteed Bit Rate (GBR), and one or more second signal bearers associated with one or more transmitting entities are to serve traffic classified to fulfill a second requirement, including a non-Guaranteed Bit Rate (non-GBR)”. Page 18 of the current application specification recites “In accordance with embodiments,
one or more first signal bearers associated with one or more transmitting entities are to serve traffic classified to fulfill a first requirement, like a Guaranteed Bit Rate, GBR, and
one or more second signal bearers associated with one or more transmitting entities are to serve traffic classified to fulfill a second requirement, like a non-Guaranteed Bit Rate, non-GBR”
Thus, according to the current application specification, only signaling bearers associated with the one or more transmitting entities (i.e. the one or more first logical channels) are to serve traffic classified to fulfill both GBR and non-GBR requirements. The examiner could not find disclosure in the current application specification of second logical channels associated with data originating at the UE associated with or mapped to one or more first signal bearers to serve traffic classified to fulfill a first requirement, including a Guaranteed Bit Rate (GBR), and one or more second signal bearers associated with one or more transmitting entities are to serve traffic classified to fulfill a second requirement, including a non-Guaranteed Bit Rate (non-GBR).
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 pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter 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 pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) 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 under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a), the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned at the time any inventions covered therein were made absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and invention dates of each claim that was not commonly owned at the time a later invention was made in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(c) and potential pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(e), (f) or (g) prior art under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a).
Claims 1, 2, 13, 14, 16, 18, 19, 26-28, 39 & 44 rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Loehr et al. (US 2018/0069618)(herein after “Loehr”) in view of Lee et al. (US 2012/0044805)(herein after “Lee2”).
Regarding Claims 1 and 44, Loehr discloses a user device (UE) for a wireless communication network, and a method for operating a user device (UE) for a wireless communication network, wherein the UE is to act as a relaying entity so as to provide, and the method comprises providing, functionality to support connectivity between one or more transmitting entities and one or more receiving entities of the wireless communication network (Fig 11, [0260] & [0267] disclose a relay user equipment, for a ProSe wireless communication network, capable of serving as a relay. [0221] discloses that a ProSe UE-to-network relay can provide functionality to support UL unicast traffic from a Remote UE (i.e. transmitting entity) to a network (i.e. receiving entity).),
wherein the UE is to set up, and the method comprises setting up, logical channels for a transmission of data from the UE to the one or more receiving entities based on an origin of the data (Fig 3, [0025] & [0038] disclose a UE-side MAC entity with logical channels for transfer of control and user plane data. Fig 4 & [0043] disclose a plurality of radio bearers for transmission of data from a relay UE to receiving entities eNB, S-GW, P-GW and the Internet. [0042] discloses that radio bearers are mapped onto logical channels. [0273] & [0288] disclose a relay UE assisting in the setup of RNTIs for transmission of data from the relay UE to a receiving eNodeB with one RNTI configured to handle resource assignments to exchange relay data (i.e. data originating from the relay UE) and another RNTI configured to handle resource assignments to exchange data from a remote UE (i.e. data originating from the remote UE). [0275] discloses that an RNTI is associated with one or more logical channels for carrying data. Thus, disclosed is a relay UE assisting in the scheduling of RNTIs that setup logical channels which have radio bearers mapped onto the logical channels, for transmission of data from the relay UE to a receiving eNodeB based on whether the data originated from the relay UE or originated from a remote UE.);
wherein the UE is to associate, and the method comprises associating, one or more first logical channels with data originating at the one or more transmitting entities ([0273] discloses a relay UE assisting in the setup of RNTIs for transmission of data from the relay UE to an eNodeB with an RNTI configured to handle resource assignments to exchange data originating from a transmitting remote UE (i.e. a transmitting entity). [0275] discloses that an RNTI is associated with one or more logical channels for carrying data. Thus, disclosed is a relay UE assisting in the scheduling of an RNTI that sets up a first logical channel for transmission of data, originating from a remote UE, from the relay UE to an eNodeB.);
wherein the UE is to associate, and the method comprises associating, one or more second logical channels with data originating at the UE ([0273] & [0288] disclose a relay UE assisting in the setup of RNTIs for transmission of data from the relay UE to an eNodeB with an RNTI configured to handle resource assignments to exchange relay data (i.e. data originating from the relay UE). [0275] discloses that an RNTI is associated with one or more logical channels for carrying data. Thus, disclosed is a relay UE assisting in the scheduling of an RNTI that sets up a second logical channel for transmission of data, originating from a relay UE, from the relay UE to an eNodeB.); and
wherein, when data is available at one or more of the logical channels, the UE is to request resources for the transmission from the UE to the one or more receiving entities, using a buffer status report (BSR) ([0106] discloses when a BSR is triggered, a UE can send a scheduling request for allocation of resources between the UE and a receiving entity. [0099] discloses that a BSR may be triggered when data arrives for a logical channel. [0095]-[0097] disclose that an individual logical channel BSR may be triggered, or may be triggered based on LCG IDs #0-3.).
Loehr fails to disclose wherein, each of the first and second logical channel is associated with or mapped to one or more first signal bearers to serve traffic classified to fulfill a first requirement, including a Guaranteed Bit Rate (GBR) and one or more second signal bearers to serve traffic classified to fulfill a second requirement, including a non-Guaranteed Bit Rate (non-GBR).
However, Lee2 teaches wherein, each of the first and second logical channel is associated with or mapped to one or more first signal bearers to serve traffic classified to fulfill a first requirement, including a Guaranteed Bit Rate (GBR) and one or more second signal bearers to serve traffic classified to fulfill a second requirement, including a non-Guaranteed Bit Rate (non-GBR) (Fig 6 & [0054] discloses multiple logical channel groups (e.g. a first logical channel group and a second logical channel group) wherein each of the multiple logical channel groups may include (i.e. be associated with) one or more EPS bearers (i.e. signal bearers) that may be GBR bearers or non-GBR bearers. Thus, a first logical channel group, and all logical channels associated with the first logical channel group, may be associated with one or more first EPS bearers that may be GBR bearers and one or more EPS bearers that may be non-GBR bearers, and a second logical channel group, and all logical channels associated with the second logical channel group, may be associated with one or more first EPS bearers that may be GBR bearers and one or more EPS bearers that may be non-GBR bearers.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a user device (UE) for a wireless communication network, and a method for operating a user device (UE) for a wireless communication network, wherein the UE is to act as a relaying entity so as to provide, and the method comprises providing, functionality to support connectivity between one or more transmitting entities and one or more receiving entities of the wireless communication network, wherein the UE is to set up, and the method comprises setting up, logical channels for a transmission of data from the UE to the one or more receiving entities based on an origin of the data; wherein the UE is to associate, and the method comprises associating, one or more first logical channels with data originating at the one or more transmitting entities; and wherein the UE is to associate, and the method comprises associating, one or more second logical channels with data originating at the UE, as discloses by Loehr, wherein, each of the first and second logical channel is associated with or mapped to one or more first signal bearers to serve traffic classified to fulfill a first requirement, including a Guaranteed Bit Rate (GBR) and one or more second signal bearers to serve traffic classified to fulfill a second requirement, including a non-Guaranteed Bit Rate (non-GBR), as taught by Lee2. The motivation to do so would be to have a relay UE, and a method for operating a relay UE, that can setup first logical channels for sending traffic originating from a remote UE to an eNB, and second logical channels for sending traffic originating at the relay UE to the eNB, wherein each first and second logical channels are associated with both GBR classified EPS bearers and non-GBR classified EPS bearers, in order to provide a desired quality of service for different types of traffic (e.g. GBR classified EPS bearers for voice traffic and non-GBR classified EPS bearers for delay non-sensitive signaling traffic) originating at the remote UE or originating at the relay UE.
Regarding Claim 2, Loehr in view of Lee2 discloses the user device (UE) of claim 1.
Loehr discloses wherein the UE is to setup a plurality of first and second logical channels, and to group the plurality of first and second logical channels into one or more groups of logical channels (LCGs) (Fig 3, [0025] & [0038] disclose a UE-side MAC entity with logical channels for transfer of control and user plane data. [0273] & [0288] disclose a relay UE assisting in the setup of RNTIs for transmission of data from the relay UE to an eNodeB with one RNTI configured to handle resource assignments to exchange relay data (i.e. data originating from the relay UE) and another RNTI configured to handle resource assignments to exchange data from a remote UE (i.e. data originating from the remote UE). [0275] discloses that an RNTI is associated with one or more logical channels for carrying data. [0039] discloses that logical channels may grouped and associated with one of four LCGs with LCG IDs 0-3. Thus, disclosed is a relay UE assisting in the scheduling of RNTIs that setup a plurality of logical channels for transmission of data, based on whether the data originated at the relay UE (e.g. second logical channels) or originated at a remote UE (e.g. first logical channels), from a relay UE to an eNodeB, and the logical channels can be grouped into LCGs.).
Regarding Claim 13, Loehr in view of Lee2 discloses the user device (UE) of claim 1.
Loehr discloses wherein the UE is to associate a radio bearer with a specific UE or with a combined set of UEs using an identification received via a receiving entity ([0058] discloses allocation of transmission resources through RNTIs that identify an intended UE. [0275] discloses that an RNTI is associated with one or more logical channels for carrying data. [0042] discloses that radio bearers are mapped onto logical channels. [0273] discloses that the radio resource scheduling through RNTIs may be performed by an eNodeB.).
Regarding Claim 14, Loehr in view of Lee2 discloses the user device (UE) of claim 13.
Loehr discloses wherein responsive to receiving the identifications, the UE is to associate a particular packet data unit (PDU) session supported by the radio bearer with a corresponding Quality of Service (QoS) profile or link ID or service type for the one or more transmitting entities ([0273] & [0288] disclose an eNodeB scheduling radio resources through an RNTI for transmission of data from a relay UE to the eNodeB where the RNTI is configured to handle resource assignments to exchange data from a Remote UE transmitting entity (i.e. data originating from the Remote UE transmitting entity). [0063] discloses the process by which a UE creates MAC PDUs (i.e. a PDU session) is based on an LCP procedure that ensures the UE satisfies QoS of each radio bearer configured in the radio resources allocated.).
Regarding Claim 16, Loehr in view of Lee2 discloses the user device (UE) of claim 1.
Loehr discloses wherein data originating at the one or more transmitting entities comprises data originating at one of the transmitting entities, or data originating at a plurality of the transmitting entities ([0240] discloses that a relay UE may relay remote data originating from one or more remote UEs.).
Regarding Claim 18, Loehr in view of Lee2 discloses the user device (UE) of claim 1.
Loehr discloses wherein the UE is configured with the association of the one or more first and second logical channels with the origin of the data ([0273] & [0288] disclose a relay UE configured by an eNodeB through scheduling of RNTIs associated with the transmission of data from the relay UE to an eNodeB receiving entity with one RNTI configured to explicitly indicate resource assignments to exchange relay data (i.e. data originating from the relay UE and not originating from a Remote UE transmitting entity) and another RNTI configured to explicitly indicate resource assignments to exchange data from a Remote UE transmitting entity (i.e. data originating from a Remote UE transmitting entity). [0275] discloses that an RNTI is associated with one or more logical channels for carrying data. [0039] discloses that logical channels may grouped and associated with one of four LCGs with LCG IDs 0-3. [0041] discloses that RRC communication between a UE and an eNodeB covers all procedures related to radio resource configuration (e.g. RNTI, logical channel, LCG, configuration). Thus, disclosed is a relay UE configured by an eNodeB through RRC messaging including an RNTI associating one or more logical channels, or LCGs or radio bearers, explicitly indicating which RNTIs/logical channels/LCGs/radio bearers are associated with data originating from the relay UE (i.e. not originating from a remote UE transmitting entity) and which RNTIs/logical channels/LCGs/radio bearers are associated with data originating from a remote UE.), or preconfigured with the association of the one or more first and second logical channels with the origin of the data ([0063] discloses that the process by which UEs create MAC PDUs based on radio resources allocated is fully standardized. Fig 3 & [0025] discloses that logical channels are standardized in the 3GPP TS 36.321 standards. Fig 4 & [0086] disclose that bearer mapping to logical channels is defined in the 3GPP TS 36.331 standards. [0095] discloses that LCGs are defined in the 3GPP TS 36.321 standards. [0140] discloses that the 3GPP Rel-10 standards defines functionality for activating a relay node. Thus, all of the procedures for configuration and association of one or more logical channels (i.e. one or more first and second logical channels), one or more LCGs or the radio bearers with data, originating from a transmitting remote UE, from a relay UE to an eNodeB in response to activating relay functionality at the relay UE is standardized and can be preconfigured or embedded into the relay UE.).
Regarding Claim 19, Loehr in view of Lee2 discloses the user device (UE) of claim 1.
Loehr discloses wherein the UE is to signal which logical channel and/or which LCG and/or radio bearer is associated with data originating at the transmitting entities, and which LCG or radio bearer is not associated with data originating at the transmitting entities ([0140] discloses a relay UE can send a scheduling request to an eNB for transmission resources. [0041] discloses that RRC communication between a UE and an eNodeB covers all procedures related to radio resource configuration (e.g. a scheduling request). [0273] & [0288] disclose a relay UE can assist in radio resource scheduling one RNTI configured to explicitly indicate resource assignments to exchange relay data (i.e. data originating from the relay UE and not originating from a remote UE transmitting entity) and another RNTI configured to explicitly indicate resource assignments to exchange data from a remote UE transmitting entity (i.e. data originating from a remote UE transmitting entity). [0275] discloses that an RNTI is associated with one or more logical channels for carrying data. [0039] discloses that logical channels may grouped and associated with one of four LCGs with LCG IDs 0-3. Thus, disclosed is that a relay UE can provide assistance in the scheduling of RNTIs, through RRC signaling, that associate specific RNTIs/logical channels/LCGs/radio bearers for data originating at a remote UE transmitting entity and different RNTIs/logical channels/LCGs/radio bearers for data originating at the relay UE (i.e. not originating at a Remote UE transmitting entity).).
Regarding Claim 26, Loehr in view of Lee2 discloses the user device (UE) of claim 1.
Loehr discloses wherein the UE is configured or preconfigured with a priority for each of the logical channels and/or radio bearers ([0065] discloses a PBR configured for each logical channel providing a priority to transmit data in order of importance.); and
a prioritization procedure ([0063] discloses an LCP procedure.), to cause the UE to initially perform scheduling resources for data originating at the one or more transmitting UEs, followed by scheduling resources for data originating at the relaying entity ([0317] discloses an LCP procedure that first assigns radio resources to a remote UE and then to the relay logical channel.), or initially perform scheduling resources for data originating at the relaying entity, followed by scheduling resources for data originating at the one or more transmitting UEs ([0317] discloses a relay UE prioritizing a remote logical channel over a relay logical channel, or vice versa. In the vice versa scenario, the relay UE would be prioritizing the relay logical channel over the remote logical channel, and thus would initially perform scheduling of resources for the data originating at the relay UE followed by scheduling resources for data originating at the remote UE transmitting entity.).
Regarding Claim 27, Loehr in view of Lee2 discloses the user device (UE) of claim 1.
Loehr discloses wherein the data comprises user-plane (UP) data, and the set up first and second logical channels comprise dedicated traffic channels (DTCHs) ([0038] discloses traffic logical channels that carry user plane data and the traffic logical channels (e.g. first and second logical channels) are dedicated traffic channels (DTCHs).), and/or the data comprises control-plane (CP) data, and the set up first and second logical channels comprise dedicated control channels (DCCHs), common control channels (CCCHs) ([0038] discloses control logical channels that carry control data (e.g. first and second logical channels that carry control data) and the control logical channels comprise a dedicated control channel (DCCH) and a common control channel (CCCH).).
Regarding Claim 28, Loehr in view of Lee2 discloses the user device (UE) of claim 1.
Loehr discloses wherein the transmitting entity and the receiving entity comprises any one of a further UE, a relaying entity and a network entity (Fig 11 & [0221] disclose a transmitting entity comprising a remote UE (i.e. a further UE), and a receiving entity comprising an eNB network entity, and a relay entity comprising Relay UE.).
Regarding Claim 39, Loehr in view of Lee2 disclose a wireless communication network, comprising one or more relaying entities comprising a user device (UE) of Claim 1.
Loehr discloses one or more radio access network, RAN, entities for a wireless communication network (Fig 11, [0260] & [0267] disclose a ProSe wireless communication network, comprising a relay user equipment (relay UE) and an eNB RAN entity.), wherein the RAN entity is to communicate with one or more remote user devices (UEs) of the wireless communication network via the relaying entity providing functionality to support connectivity between the RAN entity and the one or more remote UEs ([0209] discloses an eNB RAN entity that can communicate with and control a UE to act as a relay entity. Fig 11 & [0221] discloses a Relay UE entity that provides functionality to support unicast services for remote UEs by relaying unicast traffic between the remote UE and the network (eNb).).
Claim 22 rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Loehr et al. (US 2018/0069618) in view of Lee et al. (US 2012/0044805)(herein after “Lee2”), as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Lee et al. (US 2018/0206147)(herein after “Lee”).
Regarding Claim 22, Loehr in view of Lee2 disclose the user device (UE) of Claim 1.
Loehr discloses data originating at the transmitting entities ([0273] discloses a relay UE assisting in the setup of RNTIs for transmission of data from the relay UE to an eNodeB with an RNTI configured to handle resource assignments to exchange data originating from a transmitting remote UE (i.e. a transmitting entity).
Loehr fails to disclose wherein the UE is to trigger a BSR responsive to an amount of data reaching or exceeding a threshold.
However, Lee teaches wherein the UE is to trigger a BSR responsive to an amount of data reaching or exceeding a threshold ([0011] discloses a UE triggering a BSR when an amount of data available for transmission is equal to or larger than a threshold for a period of time. [0135] discloses that the threshold may be defined as a number of bytes (e.g. a size or percentage of the size of a transmission buffer).)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the user device (UE) of Claim 1, with data originating at the transmitting entities, as disclosed by Loehr in view of Lee2, wherein the UE is to trigger a BSR responsive to an amount of data reaching or exceeding a threshold, as further taught by Lee. The motivation to do so would be to have a relay UE that can trigger a BSR when data from a remote UE, that needs to be relayed by the relay UE to an eNB, reaches a threshold for a period of time in order to enable the eNB to optimize UL resource allocations by only allocating logical channel resources for the relay UE when there is data to relay from the remote UE.
Claim 25 rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Loehr et al. (US 2018/0069618) in view of Lee et al. (US 2012/0044805)(herein after “Lee2”), as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Jheng et al. (US 2018/0279168)(herein after “Jheng”).
Regarding Claim 25, Loehr in view of Lee2 discloses the user device (UE) of claim 1.
Loehr discloses wherein the UE is to map data originating at the transmitting entities and being associated with one or more special requirements to a further logical channel associated with the one or more special requirements ([0273] & [0288] disclose a relay UE can assist in radio resource scheduling an RNTI configured to explicitly indicate resource assignments to exchange data from a Remote UE transmitting entity (i.e. data originating from a Remote UE transmitting entity). [0275] discloses that an RNTI is associated with one or more logical channels for carrying data. [0039] discloses that logical channels may grouped and associated with one of four LCGs with LCG IDs 0-3. [0042] discloses that radio bearers are mapped onto logical channels. [0044] discloses that bearers can be associated with special QoS requirements such as for supporting streaming video traffic. Thus, disclosed is a relay UE that can map data originating from a Remote UE transmitting entity through an RNTI with further logical channels or LCGs that have radio bearers, associated with special QoS requirements, mapped to the further logical channels.
Loehr fails to disclose wherein the special requirements include low latency and/or high reliability.
However, Jheng further teaches wherein the special requirements include low latency and/or high reliability (Fig 7 & [0070] disclose URLLC data transmitted on logical channels between a UE and a gNB that has QoS requirements for high reliability and low latency.).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the user device (UE) of Claim 1, wherein the UE is to map data originating at the transmitting entities and being associated with one or more special requirements to a further logical channel associated with the one or more special requirements, as disclosed by Loehr in view of Lee2, wherein the special requirements include low latency and/or high reliability, as further taught by Jheng. The motivation to do so would be to have a relay UE that can setup first logical channels for sending traffic originating from a remote UE to an eNB, wherein the UE maps data originating at the remote UE that is associated with one or more special requirements including low latency and/or high reliability, such as URLLC data, to a further logical channel associated with special QoS requirements, in order to provide a desired quality of service for the URLLC type of traffic originating at the remote UE.
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 JAMES P SEYMOUR whose telephone number is (571)272-7654. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5 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, Nishant Divecha can be reached at 571-270-3125. 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.
/JAMES P SEYMOUR/Examiner, Art Unit 2419
/Nishant Divecha/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2419