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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 03/11/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The following is a non-final office action in response to applicant’s amendment filed on 03/11/2026 for response of the office action mailed on 01/15/2026. Claims 1, 23 and 45 have been amended. Claims 1, 10, 14-15, 17, 23, 26, 43-45, 47 and 49-52 are pending in this application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 12/03/2025 with respect to Claim(s) 1, 10, 14-15, 17, 23, 26, 43-45, 47 and 49-52 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Main Argument(s):
Claim 1, as amended, recites specific features directed to the handling of integrity check failure, wherein such failure is indicated by the lower layer of the wireless terminal. Applicant respectfully submits that Tseng does not disclose or suggest detection of integrity check failure, nor does Tseng address any method for handling integrity check failure once detected. Accordingly, Tseng is silent regarding both the detection of integrity check failure and the response to such detection, as now claimed. Applicant submits that claim 23 is patentable over Tseng for at least the same reason set forth above for amended claim 1. All dependent claims are submitted to be patentable over the cited prior art references due to at least their dependencies on independent claims 1, 23, or 45.
Response: Examiner has considered the Applicant’s arguments and respectfully disagrees.
Due to the amended features in independent claims 1, 23 and 45, the Office no longer relies on Tseng and instead introduces Kim to cover or disclose the amended features claims 1, 23 and 45. Kim, using Fig. 19 and 24B, teaches small data transmission procedures and specifically, detection of an integrity check failure as well as subsequent steps after detecting the integrity failure such as releasing all resources and transitioning to an idle state in ¶0249 and ¶0340. This response applies to all independent and dependent claims.
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.
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 factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or non-obviousness.
Claims 1, 10, 14-15, 17, 23, 26, and 43-45, 47, and 49-52 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tseng et al. (US 2024/0040626), Tseng hereinafter, and further in view of Kim et al. (US 2023/0120096), Kim hereinafter.
Re. Claim 1, Tseng teaches a method performed by a wireless terminal in a wireless network, comprising: (¶0009 - a method for a user equipment for performing a small data transmission (SDT) procedure is provided) receiving a first message from a wireless communication node in the wireless network comprising a random-access channel (RACH) configuration parameter indicative of a RACH resource (Fig. 3-4 & ¶0132 - MSG2: a Random Access Response (RAR) of the 4-step RA procedure. The RAR may be a response to the MSG1 in the 4-step RA procedure, as illustrated in FIG. 3A. ¶0136 - MSGB: a response to the MSGA in the 2-step RA procedure. The MSGB may include response(s) for a contention resolution, a fallback indication(s), and/or a backoff indication, as illustrated in FIG. 3B. Please also see ¶0058), the RACH resource being on a same BWP of a preconfigured resource allocated by configured grant (CG); (¶0061 - In other words, the UE may stay on the initial DL-BWP/UL-BWP before/during/after the SDT procedure (e.g., when the UL-CG configurations and RA resource configuration for SDT are configured on the initial UL-BWP));
when the wireless terminal is in an inactive state, (¶0007 - a method of performing a SDT procedure for a UE in a RRC inactive state is provided);
initiating an SDT session by sending an SDT initiation message to the wireless communication node on the preconfigured resource allocated by (CG); (Fig. 1 & ¶0007 - …receiving, from a first serving cell, a SDT configuration, the SDT configuration including a plurality of uplink Configured Grant (UL-CG) configurations for the SDT procedure… selecting, by the UE, a first UL-CG configuration from the plurality of UL-CG configurations when the UE initiates a SDT procedure. Fig. 5A & ¶0140 - Based on the received SDT configuration, the UE 503 may initiate the 1.sup.st SDT procedure 513 (e.g., via the at least a first UL-CG configuration within the stored SDT configuration));
detecting an SDT session failure condition for the SDT session; in response to the SDT session failure condition, initiating a random access procedure (RAP) using the RACH resource that is on the same BWP of the preconfigured resource allocated by CG; (¶0074 - The UE may perform at least one of the following actions when an SDT failure event happens: … In some implementation, the UE may initiate an RA procedure (with 2-step/4- step RA type) if SDT failure event is declared in the UE. ¶0061 - the UE may stay on the initial DL-BWP/UL-BWP before/during/after the SDT procedure (e.g., when the UL-CG configurations and RA resource configuration for SDT are configured on the initial UL-BWP). Examiner interprets, the UE can perform a small data transmission (SDT) procedure without needing to switch to a different bandwidth part (BWP). It uses the existing initial BWP it is already on. Therefore, the network sets up SDT resources for both configured grants and random access within the BWP that the UE is already using in its inactive state. In other words, the RACH resource is on the same BWP as the preconfigured resource allocated by CG according to ¶0061);
Yet, Tseng does not explicitly teach receiving an integrity check failure indication from a lower layer of the wireless terminal; and in response to receiving the integrity check failure indication, releasing resources allocated to the SDT session and entering an idle state.
However, in the analogous art, Kim explicitly teaches receiving an integrity check failure indication from a lower layer of the wireless terminal; (Fig. 19, 24B & ¶0249 - A UE in an RRC connected state may detect a failure of a connection with a base station … The failure comprises at least one of: … an integrity check failure indication from lower layers (e.g., PDCP layer) …);
and in response to receiving the integrity check failure indication, releasing resources allocated to the SDT session and entering an idle state (¶0340 - Based on the integrity check failure and the RRC request message being an RRC resume request message, the UE in an RRC inactive state may perform at least one of: … release all radio resources and transition to an RRC idle state wherein the releasing all radio resource may comprise release of MAC configuration (parameters), RLC entity and PDCP entity and SDAP for the established one or more bearers; and transition to an RRC idle state).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of Kim to the teaching of Tseng. The motivation would be because the invention illustrates an example of an RRC procedure upon detecting a failure in an RRC connected state (¶0345, Kim).
Re. Claims 10, 26 and 47, Tseng and Kim teach Claims 1, 23 and 45.
Tseng further teaches the SDT session failure condition comprises a timing alignment failure with the wireless communication node (¶0071 - In some implementations, an SDT-CG Timing Advance Timer (e.g., CG-TAT) may be configured for the UE to identify a valid time period of an uplink configured grant configured for the SDT procedure (e.g., an SDT-CG configuration). ¶0074 - Details about the CG-TAT expiry triggers an SDT failure event and/or fallback mechanisms are illustrated in Table 2 below. Table 2 - For example, the “SDT-Failure cause” may include the following parameters: … ‘Timing advance Timer Expire’ … ‘Out-of-sync event (e.g., T310' expires during the SDT procedure or T311 expires when the UE stays in the RRC inactive state)’).
Re. Claims 14, 43 and 49, Tseng and Kim teach Claims 1, 23 and 45.
Tseng further teaches the random-access procedure comprises a contention based random access procedure (Fig. 3 & ¶0116 - Based on the 3GPP technical specifications, two types of random-access procedures are supported: ¶0117 - …4-step contention-based random access (CBRA). ¶0130 - FIGS. 3A, 3B, 3C and 3D are diagrams illustrating Contention-Based/Contention-Free (CB/CF) random access (RA) that include 2-step RA procedure and 4-step RA procedure…).
Re. Claims 15, 44 and 50, Tseng and Kim teach Claims 1, 43 and 49.
Tseng further teaches the random-access procedure comprises a Msg3 or a MsgA; the Msg3 comprise a C-RNTI MAC CE (cell Radio Network Temporary Identifier MAC control element); (Fig. 3 & ¶0133 - MSG3: a scheduled transmission of a message on an Uplink Shared Channel (UL-SCH) containing a Cell Radio Network Temporary Identifier (C-RNTI) Medium Access Control (MAC) Control Element (CE) … submitted from an upper layer and associated with a UE contention resolution identity, as a part of the 4-step RA procedure illustrated in FIG. 3A), and the MsgA comprise a C-RNTI MAC CE.
Re. Claims 17 and 51, Tseng and Kim teach Claims 1 and 45.
Tseng further teaches when the processor executes the computer instructions, the processor is configured to further cause the wireless terminal to: (Fig. 6 & ¶0147-¶0148, ¶0150-¶0154 – “processor”);
detecting/detect an SDT session failure condition; (¶0074 - The UE may perform at least one of the following actions when an SDT failure event happens:);
and in response to the SDT session failure condition: notifying/notify by a MAC entity of the wireless terminal an RRC layer of the wireless terminal to release resource dedicated to the SDT session; (¶0074 - 3. The UE may release (part of) the stored SDT-configuration (e.g., SDT-CG configuration and/or SDT-RA configuration). 4. In the MAC entity, the UE may release the buffered MAC PDUs if SDT failure event is declared in the UE… (e.g., the UE may indicate “SDT-Failure Report available” in a UL control signaling, such as RRC signal);
and transitioning/transition to idle state (¶0074 – 1. The UE may move from the RRC inactive state to RRC idle state. 2. The UE may start an … RRC establishment procedure if the UE moves to the RRC idle state after the SDT failure event is declared).
Re. Claim 23, Tseng teaches a method performed by a wireless terminal in a wireless network (¶0009 - a method for a user equipment for performing a small data transmission (SDT) procedure is provided), comprising: when the wireless terminal is in inactive state, initiating a Random Access Channel (RACH) based SDT session by sending an SDT initiation message to a wireless communication node in the wireless network on a RACH resource based on a random access procedure; (Fig. 1 & ¶0048 - In some examples, the RA procedure is initiated for an SDT-RA procedure (also known as an RA-SDT procedure in the 3GPP technical documents) with the first serving cell when the UE stays in the RRC inactive state. ¶0072 (“Table 1”) - …the UE may (e.g., be defined in the 3GPP technical specification or be enabled by the serving cell via a UE- specific RRC signal/UE-specific MAC CE or broadcasting system information) start the… SDT-RA procedure… Fig. 5A & ¶0140 - Based on the received SDT configuration, the UE 503 may initiate the 1.sup.st SDT procedure 513 (e.g., via the at least a first UL-CG configuration within the stored SDT configuration. Please also see ¶0066);
detecting an SDT session failure condition associated with the RACH based SDT session; in response to the SDT session failure condition, initiating a random access procedure (RAP); (¶0074 - The UE may perform at least one of the following actions when an SDT failure event happens: … In some implementation, the UE may initiate an RA procedure (with 2-step/4- step RA type) if SDT failure event is declared in the UE. ¶0074 (Table 2) - The content included in an SDT failure report may include … the information related to SDT-RA failure (e.g., a 2-step RA SDT failure or a 4-step RA SDT failure)…);
Yet, Tseng does not explicitly teach receiving an integrity check failure indication from a lower layer of the wireless terminal; and in response to receiving the integrity check failure indication, releasing resources allocated to the SDT session and entering an idle state.
However, in the analogous art, Kim explicitly teaches receiving an integrity check failure indication from a lower layer of the wireless terminal; (Fig. 19, 24B & ¶0249 - A UE in an RRC connected state may detect a failure of a connection with a base station … The failure comprises at least one of: … an integrity check failure indication from lower layers (e.g., PDCP layer) …);
and in response to receiving the integrity check failure indication, releasing resources allocated to the SDT session and entering an idle state (¶0340 - Based on the integrity check failure and the RRC request message being an RRC resume request message, the UE in an RRC inactive state may perform at least one of: … release all radio resources and transition to an RRC idle state wherein the releasing all radio resource may comprise release of MAC configuration (parameters), RLC entity and PDCP entity and SDAP for the established one or more bearers; and transition to an RRC idle state).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of Kim to the teaching of Tseng. The motivation would be because the invention illustrates an example of an RRC procedure upon detecting a failure in an RRC connected state (¶0345, Kim).
Re. Claim 45, Tseng teaches a wireless terminal comprising a memory for storing computer instructions and a processor in communication with the memory, wherein, when the processor executes the computer instructions, the processor is configured to cause the wireless terminal to: (Fig. 6 & ¶0147-¶0148, ¶0150-¶0154 – “processor”, “memory”);
receive a first message from a wireless communication node comprising a random access channel (RACH) configuration parameter indicative of a RACH resource, the RACH resource being on a same BWP of a preconfigured resource allocated by configured grant (CG); (Fig. 3B, 4 & ¶0136 - MSGB: a response to the MSGA in the 2-step RA procedure. The MSGB may include response(s) for a contention resolution, a fallback indication(s), and/or a backoff indication, as illustrated in FIG. 3B);
and when the wireless terminal is in an inactive state, (¶0007 - a method of performing a SDT procedure for a UE in a RRC inactive state is provided); initiate an SDT session by sending an SDT initiation message to the wireless communication node on the preconfigured resource allocated by (CG) (Fig. 1 & ¶0007 - …receiving, from a first serving cell, a SDT configuration, the SDT configuration including a plurality of uplink Configured Grant (UL-CG) configurations for the SDT procedure… selecting, by the UE, a first UL-CG configuration from the plurality of UL-CG configurations when the UE initiates a SDT procedure. Fig. 5A & ¶0140 - Based on the received SDT configuration, the UE 503 may initiate the 1.sup.st SDT procedure 513 (e.g., via the at least a first UL-CG configuration within the stored SDT configuration));
detect an SDT session failure condition for the SDT session; in response to the SDT session failure condition, initiate a random access procedure (RAP) using the RACH resource that is on the same BWP of the preconfigured resource allocated by CG (¶0074 - The UE may perform at least one of the following actions when an SDT failure event happens: … In some implementation, the UE may initiate an RA procedure (with 2-step/4- step RA type) if SDT failure event is declared in the UE. ¶0061 - the UE may stay on the initial DL-BWP/UL-BWP before/during/after the SDT procedure (e.g., when the UL-CG configurations and RA resource configuration for SDT are configured on the initial UL-BWP). Examiner interprets, the UE can perform a small data transmission (SDT) procedure without needing to switch to a different bandwidth part (BWP). It uses the existing initial BWP it is already on. Therefore, the network sets up SDT resources for both configured grants and random access within the BWP that the UE is already using in its inactive state. In other words, the RACH resource is on the same BWP as the preconfigured resource allocated by CG according to ¶0061);
Yet, Tseng does not explicitly teach receive an integrity check failure indication from a lower layer of the wireless terminal; and in response to receiving the integrity check failure indication, release resources allocated to the SDT session and enter an idle state.
However, in the analogous art, Kim explicitly teaches receive an integrity check failure indication from a lower layer of the wireless terminal; (Fig. 19, 24B & ¶0249 - A UE in an RRC connected state may detect a failure of a connection with a base station … The failure comprises at least one of: … an integrity check failure indication from lower layers (e.g., PDCP layer) …);
and in response to receiving the integrity check failure indication, release resources allocated to the SDT session and enter an idle state (¶0340 - Based on the integrity check failure and the RRC request message being an RRC resume request message, the UE in an RRC inactive state may perform at least one of: … release all radio resources and transition to an RRC idle state wherein the releasing all radio resource may comprise release of MAC configuration (parameters), RLC entity and PDCP entity and SDAP for the established one or more bearers; and transition to an RRC idle state).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of Kim to the teaching of Tseng. The motivation would be because the invention illustrates an example of an RRC procedure upon detecting a failure in an RRC connected state (¶0345, Kim).
Re. Claim 52, Tseng and Kim teach Claim 23.
Tseng further teaches a wireless terminal comprising a memory for storing computer instructions and a processor in communication with the memory, wherein the processor, when executing the computer instructions, is configured to implement a method of claim 23 (Fig. 6 & ¶0148 - The node 600 may be a UE… that performs various disclosed functions illustrated in FIG. 1 and examples in this disclosure. Please see ¶0147-¶0148, ¶0150-¶0154 – “processor”, “memory”).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Kim et al. (US 2023/0247720) – Please see Abstract, Fig. 25 and ¶0260-¶0324.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALYSSA WILLIAMS whose telephone number is (571)270-7673. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8-5pm. 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, Ayman Abaza can be reached on (571) 270-0422. 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.
/ALYSSA WILLIAMS/Examiner, Art Unit 2465B /AYMAN A ABAZA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2465