DETAILED ACTION
The following is a non final office action in response to applicant’s amendment filed on 04/29/2026 for response of the office action mailed on 12/30/2025. Interdependent claims 1 and 6-7 are amended. No claims are cancelled. A new claim 9 is added. Therefore, claims 1-9 are pending and addressed below.
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 < 2nd >
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 04/29/2026 has been entered.
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 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 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sammour et al. (2009/0103478 as submitted in IDS), Sammour hereinafter, in view of in view of Uchino et al. (2016/0338132 as submitted in IDS), Uchino hereinafter.
Re. Claim 1, Sammour teaches a transmitting device (Fig.1, WTRU/Fig. 8, 710) comprising: a buffer configured to store the transmission data (¶0062 - storing the packet in a buffer. Also, see ¶0151/¶0153); first layer processor circuitry (Fig.1/Fig. 8 & ¶0151 - The processor 815 is configured to perform PDCP discard and enhanced Layer 2 operations. Layer 2 consists of PDCP, RLC & MAC layer, well known in the analogous art. Also, see ¶0154) configured to execute processing (Fig.1/Fig. 8 & ¶0151-¶0155) for a first layer (Fig. 1, PDCP layer in WTRU) on the transmission data (Fig.1/Fig.8 & ¶0151 - transmitter 816 to facilitate the transmission and reception of wireless data); second layer processor circuitry (Fig.1/Fig. 8 & ¶0151 - The processor 815 is configured to perform PDCP discard and enhanced Layer 2 operations. Layer 2 consists of PDCP, RLC & MAC layer, well known in the analogous art. Also, see ¶0154) configured to execute processing (Fig.1/Fig. 8 & ¶0151-¶0155) for a second layer (Fig. 1, RLC/MAC layer in WTRU) on the transmission data (Fig.1/Fig.8 & ¶0151 - transmitter 816 to facilitate the transmission and reception of wireless data), the second layer being lower layer of the first layer (RLC/MAC layer is lower than PDCP layer, see Fig. 1); and a transmitter configured to transmit the transmission (Fig.1/Fig.8 & ¶0151 - transmitter 816 to facilitate the transmission and reception of wireless data) processed by the first layer processor circuitry and the second layer processor circuitry (Fig.1/Fig. 8 & ¶0151-¶0155); and a receiver (Fig.8, 817) configured to receive first information and second information (Fig. 1-11 - PDCP discard timer <DTP1/DRP2, new discard timer, see ¶0066 along with Fig. 9>, refers to first information, RLC discard timer <DTR>, refers to second information, see ¶0077, ¶0080-¶0085 along with Fig. 9), the first information being information for setting a first time for discarding the transmission data used by the first layer (Fig. 9-10 & ¶0068 - Option 1: In the transmitting PDCP entity, a new discard timer (DTP1) <i.e., first information/ PDCP discard timer> is started upon reception of a PDCP SDU from upper layers. When the discard timer (DTP1) expires, the transmitting PDCP entity discards the associated SDU/PDU. Fig. 9-10 & ¶0071 - Option 2: In the transmitting PDCP entity, a new discard timer (DTP2) <i.e., first information/ PDCP discard timer> is started upon sending a PDCP SDU/PDU to lower layers for transmission (i.e. to RLC). When the discard timer (DTP2) expires, the transmitting PDCP entity discards the associated SDU/PDU. Fig. 9-10 & ¶0082 - At 910, in the transmitting PDCP entity, a new discard timer, (e.g., DTP1) <i.e., first information/ PDCP discard timer>, is started upon reception of an PDCP SDU from upper layers, whereby DTP1 is initialized with value Z time units (assuming a decrementing timer implementation for DTP1). At 920, after X time units (where X is the amount of time the SDU/PDU has spent in the PDCP entity before being submitted to the RLC), the transmitting PDCP entity submits/sends the PDCP SDU/PDU to lower layers, (i.e., to RLC), for transmission. The transmitting PDCP entity may provide along with the submitted PDCP PDU, (i.e., the RLC SDU), an indication of the remaining overall timer value, (i.e., Z-X e.g. in the case of a decrementing timer implementation), or of the time spent in the PDCP entity, (i.e., X e.g. in the case of an incrementing timer implementation). Such an indication may be signaled via new parameters for primitives, such as a new parameter for the RLC primitive RLC-yy-Data-Req (which is used by upper layers e.g. PDCP, to request the transmission of an RLC SDU). Fig. 9 & ¶0084 - At 930, when the discard timer, (DTP1 or DTR), expires, the transmitting entity, (PDCP or RLC), discards the associated SDU/PDU, (or SDUs/PDUs in case more than one SDU are associated with the same timer) at 940. Also, see 1010/1020 in Fig. 10), the second information being information associated with the second layer and used to configure a second time for discarding the transmission data used by the second layer, (Fig. 9 & ¶0077 - The transmitting RLC entity may have its own timer-based discard operation. If so, it is possible that the LTE RLC will start its own discard timer upon receiving the RLC SDU, (i.e., the PDCP PDU), from the upper layer, (i.e., from PDCP). The RLC discard timer is referred to as DTR (i.e., second information/RLC discard timer). When the DTR (RLC discard timer) expires, the transmitting RLC entity discards the associated SDU/PDU (or SDUs/PDUs, in case more than one SDU/PDU is associated with the same timer). Fig. 9 & ¶0084 - At 930, when the discard timer, (DTP1 or DTR), expires, the transmitting entity, (PDCP or RLC), discards the associated SDU/PDU, (or SDUs/PDUs in case more than one SDU are associated with the same timer) at 940. Also, see 1040 in Fig. 10. Overall, the aforesaid disclosures by Sammour can be summarized by the snapshots of figures 4 and 10, as reproduced next),
PNG
media_image2.png
578
1007
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Yet, Sammour does not expressly teach the first layer processor circuitry is configured to discard, in the first layer, the transmission data stored in the buffer, upon expiration of a time corresponding to the second time that is for discarding the transmission data used by the second layer which is the lower layer of the first layer and that is configured by the second information.
However, in the analogous art, Uchino explicitly discloses the first layer processor circuitry (Fig.4/Fig. 6, 110) is configured to discard, in the first layer ,the transmission data stored in the buffer, upon expiration of a time corresponding to the second time that is for discarding the transmission data used by the second layer which is the lower layer of the first layer and that is configured by the second information (Fig. 1-6 & ¶0035 - the PDCP layer (i.e., first layer) processing unit 110 may have a PDCP discard timer (PDCP Discard Timer) to discard packets stored in the PDCP layer processing unit 110. The PDCP layer processing unit 110 stores already transmitted PDCP PDUs in a buffer for subsequent retransmission for a predefined time after transmitting the PDCP PDUs to the RLC layer (i.e., second layer) processing unit 120. When the PDCP discard timer configured for the respective PDCP PDUs has expired due to passage of the predefined time, the PDCP layer (i.e., first layer) processing unit 110 may discard the PDCP PDUs. Fig. 1-6 & ¶0041 - the RLC entity control unit 123 may stop the RLC discard timer corresponding to a packet for which the PDCP discard timer has expired. In other words, the packet for which the PDCP discard timer has expired is discarded in the PDCP layer (i.e., first layer) processing unit 110. Also, see claims 4 & 12, for example, in claim 4, Uchino recites, “wherein the PDCP layer processing unit has a PDCP discard timer configured to discard packets stored in the PDCP layer processing unit, and the RLC entity control unit stops the RLC discard timer corresponding to a packet for which the PDCP discard timer has expired.” In Summary, there is a strong correspondence between discard timers at PDCP layer (first layer) and at RLC layer (second layer) in order to alleviate overflow at the RLC layer correlating to data packets at PDCP layer (first layer) failing to be transmitted to the base station, in turns, improves overall transmission latency for uplink data, once discard timers at PDCP layer (first layer) and at RLC layer (second layer) are coordinated as disclosed supra. In fact, the aforesaid disclosures by Uchino, are similar to instant application, at least in ¶0075, where it recites, “first information defining discard conditions for a packet for the first layer is set in accordance with second information regarding transmission control for the second layer, and a packet satisfying the discard conditions is discarded from the buffer for the first layer. Therefore, it is possible to shorten a buffering time within which a packet is held in the buffer, and, even when low latency data is generated as new transmission data, it is possible to reduce latency until the low latency data is to be transmitted. As a result, it is possible to satisfy latency requirements for the low latency data.”, also, at least in ¶0067, where it recites, “first information defining conditions for discarding the packet.…the first layer processing unit 112 uses parameters for a different layer (e.g., a lower layer), that is, a second layer, and sets discard conditions for the packet.” Overall, the aforesaid disclosures by Uchino can be summarized by the snapshots of fig. 4 and fig. 6, as reproduced next).
PNG
media_image3.png
414
1155
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine Sammour’s invention of a system and a method for discarding a packet data convergence protocol (PDCP) service data unit (SDU) to include Uchino’s invention of user equipment (UE) having a dual connectivity function to communicate with multiple base stations simultaneously, because it provides an efficient mechanism for transmitting uplink data in the dual connectivity efficiently. (¶0002-¶0012, Uchino)
Re. Claim 2, Sammour and Uchino teach claim 1.
Sammour further teaches wherein the receiver is further configured to receive the first information and the second information via a Radio ResourceControl (RRC) signaling. (See ¶0080-¶0081).
Re. Claim 3, Sammour and Uchino teach claim 1.
Sammour further teaches wherein the first layer is a packet data convergence protocol (PDCP) layer (Fig. 1, PDCP layer in WTRU), and the second layer is a medium access control (MAC) layer (Fig. 1, MAC layer in WTRU, as per instant application, any layer other than PDCP layer, see ¶0067).
Re. Claim 4, Sammour and Uchino teach claim 1.
Yet, Sammour does not expressly teach wherein the second time is lower than the first time.
However, in the analogous art, Uchino explicitly discloses wherein the second time is lower than the first time. (Fig. 1-6 & ¶0035 - the PDCP layer processing unit 110 may have a PDCP discard timer (PDCP Discard Timer) to discard packets stored in the PDCP layer processing unit 110. The PDCP layer processing unit 110 stores already transmitted PDCP PDUs in a buffer for subsequent retransmission for a predefined time after transmitting the PDCP PDUs to the RLC layer processing unit 120. When the PDCP discard timer configured for the respective PDCP PDUs has expired due to passage of the predefined time, the PDCP layer processing unit 110 may discard the PDCP PDUs. Fig. 1-6 & ¶0041 - the RLC entity control unit 123 may set an expiration time for the RLC discard timer depending on a bearer type or a logical channel type of packets. For example, the expiration time of the RLC discard timer may be set to a relatively short time for a bearer type or a logical channel where long transmission latency is unacceptable. On the other hand, the expiration time of the RLC discard timer may be set to a relatively long time for a bearer type or a logical channel where a certain amount of latency is acceptable. …..the RLC entity control unit 123 may stop the RLC discard timer corresponding to a packet for which the PDCP discard timer has expired. In other words, the packet for which the PDCP discard timer has expired is discarded in the PDCP layer processing unit 110. As a result, even if the RLC entity control unit 123 continues counting the RLC discard timer, the RLC entity control unit 123 cannot cause the PDCP layer processing unit 110 to retransmit the staying packet and accordingly may stop the RLC discard timer so as to avoid unnecessarily counting the RLC discard timer)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine Sammour’s invention of a system and a method for discarding a packet data convergence protocol (PDCP) service data unit (SDU) to include Uchino’s invention of user equipment (UE) having a dual connectivity function to communicate with multiple base stations simultaneously, because it provides an efficient mechanism for transmitting uplink data in the dual connectivity efficiently. (¶0002-¶0012, Uchino)
Re. Claim 5, Sammour and Uchino teach claim 1.
Sammour further teaches wherein the transmitting device (Fig.1, WTRU/Fig. 8, 710 & ¶0151 - transmitter 816 to facilitate the transmission and reception of wireless data) is a mobile terminal. (See Fig. 1/Fig.7-8, WTRU, 710)
Re. Claim 6, Sammour teaches a base station device (Fig.1, eNB/Fig.8, eNB 720) that controls a terminal device (Fig. 1/Fig.7-8, WTRU, 710), the base station device (Fig.1, eNB/Fig.8, eNB 720) comprising: a memory (see ¶0152/¶0153); and processor circuitry (Fig. 8, 825) coupled to the memory and configured to: transmit first information and second information (Fig. 1-11 - PDCP discard timer <DTP1/DRP2, new discard timer, see ¶0066 along with Fig. 9>, refers to first information, RLC discard timer <DTR>, refers to second information, see ¶0077, ¶0080-¶0085 along with Fig. 9), the first information being information for setting a first time for discarding transmission data used by a first layer (Fig. 9-10 & ¶0068 - Option 1: In the transmitting PDCP entity, a new discard timer (DTP1) <i.e., first information/ PDCP discard timer> is started upon reception of a PDCP SDU from upper layers. When the discard timer (DTP1) expires, the transmitting PDCP entity discards the associated SDU/PDU. Fig. 9-10 & ¶0071 - Option 2: In the transmitting PDCP entity, a new discard timer (DTP2) <i.e., first information/ PDCP discard timer> is started upon sending a PDCP SDU/PDU to lower layers for transmission (i.e., to RLC). When the discard timer (DTP2) expires, the transmitting PDCP entity discards the associated SDU/PDU. Fig. 9-10 & ¶0082 - At 910, in the transmitting PDCP entity, a new discard timer, (e.g., DTP1) <i.e., first information/ PDCP discard timer>, is started upon reception of an PDCP SDU from upper layers, whereby DTP1 is initialized with value Z time units (assuming a decrementing timer implementation for DTP1). At 920, after X time units (where X is the amount of time the SDU/PDU has spent in the PDCP entity before being submitted to the RLC), the transmitting PDCP entity submits/sends the PDCP SDU/PDU to lower layers, (i.e., to RLC), for transmission. The transmitting PDCP entity may provide along with the submitted PDCP PDU, (i.e., the RLC SDU), an indication of the remaining overall timer value, (i.e., Z-X e.g., in the case of a decrementing timer implementation), or of the time spent in the PDCP entity, (i.e., X e.g., in the case of an incrementing timer implementation). Such an indication may be signaled via new parameters for primitives, such as a new parameter for the RLC primitive RLC-yy-Data-Req (which is used by upper layers e.g., PDCP, to request the transmission of an RLC SDU). Fig. 9 & ¶0084 - At 930, when the discard timer, (DTP1 or DTR), expires, the transmitting entity, (PDCP or RLC), discards the associated SDU/PDU, (or SDUs/PDUs in case more than one SDU are associated with the same timer) at 940. Also, see 1010/1020 in Fig. 10), the second information being information associated with a second layer which is lower layer of the first layer and used to configure a second time for discarding the transmission data used by the second layer (Fig. 9 & ¶0077 - The transmitting RLC entity may have its own timer-based discard operation. If so, it is possible that the LTE RLC will start its own discard timer upon receiving the RLC SDU, (i.e., the PDCP PDU), from the upper layer, (i.e., from PDCP). The RLC discard timer is referred to as DTR (i.e., second information/RLC discard timer). When the DTR (RLC discard timer) expires, the transmitting RLC entity discards the associated SDU/PDU (or SDUs/PDUs, in case more than one SDU/PDU is associated with the same timer). Fig. 9 & ¶0084 - At 930, when the discard timer, (DTP1 or DTR), expires, the transmitting entity, (PDCP or RLC), discards the associated SDU/PDU, (or SDUs/PDUs in case more than one SDU are associated with the same timer) at 940. . Also, see 1040 in Fig. 10. Overall, the aforesaid disclosures by Sammour can be summarized by the snapshots of figures 4 and 10, as reproduced next),
PNG
media_image2.png
578
1007
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Yet, Sammour does not expressly teach wherein the processor circuitry is further configured to cause the terminal device to discard, in the first layer, the transmission data stored in a buffer relating with the first layer of the terminal device, upon expiration of a time corresponding to the second time that is for discarding the transmission data used by the second layer which is the lower layer of the first layer and that is configured by the second information.
However, in the analogous art, Uchino explicitly discloses wherein the processor circuitry (Fig.4/Fig. 6, 110) is further configured to cause the terminal device to discard, in the first layer, the transmission data stored in a buffer relating with the first layer of the terminal device, upon expiration of a time corresponding to the second time that is for discarding the transmission data used by the second layer which is the lower layer of the first layer and that is configured by the second information. (Fig. 1-6 & ¶0035 - the PDCP layer (i.e., first layer) processing unit 110 may have a PDCP discard timer (PDCP Discard Timer) to discard packets stored in the PDCP layer processing unit 110. The PDCP layer processing unit 110 stores already transmitted PDCP PDUs in a buffer for subsequent retransmission for a predefined time after transmitting the PDCP PDUs to the RLC layer (i.e., second layer) processing unit 120. When the PDCP discard timer configured for the respective PDCP PDUs has expired due to passage of the predefined time, the PDCP layer (i.e., first layer) processing unit 110 may discard the PDCP PDUs. Fig. 1-6 & ¶0041 - the RLC entity control unit 123 may stop the RLC discard timer corresponding to a packet for which the PDCP discard timer has expired. In other words, the packet for which the PDCP discard timer has expired is discarded in the PDCP layer (i.e., first layer) processing unit 110. Also, see claims 4 & 12, for example, in claim 4, Uchino recites, “wherein the PDCP layer processing unit has a PDCP discard timer configured to discard packets stored in the PDCP layer processing unit, and the RLC entity control unit stops the RLC discard timer corresponding to a packet for which the PDCP discard timer has expired.” In Summary, there is a strong correspondence between discard timers at PDCP layer (first layer) and at RLC layer (second layer) in order to alleviate overflow at the RLC layer correlating to data packets at PDCP layer (first layer) failing to be transmitted to the base station, in turns, improves overall transmission latency for uplink data, once discard timers at PDCP layer (first layer) and at RLC layer (second layer) are coordinated as disclosed supra. In fact, the aforesaid disclosures by Uchino, are similar to instant application, at least in ¶0075, where it recites, “first information defining discard conditions for a packet for the first layer is set in accordance with second information regarding transmission control for the second layer, and a packet satisfying the discard conditions is discarded from the buffer for the first layer. Therefore, it is possible to shorten a buffering time within which a packet is held in the buffer, and, even when low latency data is generated as new transmission data, it is possible to reduce latency until the low latency data is to be transmitted. As a result, it is possible to satisfy latency requirements for the low latency data.”, also, at least in ¶0067, where it recites, “first information defining conditions for discarding the packet.…the first layer processing unit 112 uses parameters for a different layer (e.g., a lower layer), that is, a second layer, and sets discard conditions for the packet.” Overall, the aforesaid disclosures by Uchino can be summarized by the snapshots of fig. 4 and fig. 6, as reproduced next).
PNG
media_image3.png
414
1155
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine Sammour’s invention of a system and a method for discarding a packet data convergence protocol (PDCP) service data unit (SDU) to include Uchino’s invention of user equipment (UE) having a dual connectivity function to communicate with multiple base stations simultaneously, because it provides an efficient mechanism for transmitting uplink data in the dual connectivity efficiently. (¶0002-¶0012, Uchino)
Re. Claim 7, Sammour teaches a wireless communication system (Fig. 7-8) comprising: a terminal (Fig.1, WTRU/Fig. 8, 710); and a base station (Fig.1, eNB/Fig.8, eNB 720) configured to transmit first information and second information (Fig. 1-11 - PDCP discard timer <DTP1/DRP2, new discard timer, see ¶0066 along with Fig. 9>, refers to first information, RLC discard timer <DTR>, refers to second information, see ¶0077, ¶0080-¶0085 along with Fig. 9), the first information being information for setting a first time for discarding the transmission data used by a first layer (Fig. 9-10 & ¶0068 - Option 1: In the transmitting PDCP entity, a new discard timer (DTP1) <i.e., first information/ PDCP discard timer> is started upon reception of a PDCP SDU from upper layers. When the discard timer (DTP1) expires, the transmitting PDCP entity discards the associated SDU/PDU. Fig. 9-10 & ¶0071 - Option 2: In the transmitting PDCP entity, a new discard timer (DTP2) <i.e., first information/ PDCP discard timer> is started upon sending a PDCP SDU/PDU to lower layers for transmission (i.e., to RLC). When the discard timer (DTP2) expires, the transmitting PDCP entity discards the associated SDU/PDU. Fig. 9-10 & ¶0082 - At 910, in the transmitting PDCP entity, a new discard timer, (e.g., DTP1) <i.e., first information/ PDCP discard timer>, is started upon reception of an PDCP SDU from upper layers, whereby DTP1 is initialized with value Z time units (assuming a decrementing timer implementation for DTP1). At 920, after X time units (where X is the amount of time the SDU/PDU has spent in the PDCP entity before being submitted to the RLC), the transmitting PDCP entity submits/sends the PDCP SDU/PDU to lower layers, (i.e., to RLC), for transmission. The transmitting PDCP entity may provide along with the submitted PDCP PDU, (i.e., the RLC SDU), an indication of the remaining overall timer value, (i.e., Z-X e.g., in the case of a decrementing timer implementation), or of the time spent in the PDCP entity, (i.e., X e.g. in the case of an incrementing timer implementation). Such an indication may be signaled via new parameters for primitives, such as a new parameter for the RLC primitive RLC-yy-Data-Req (which is used by upper layers e.g., PDCP, to request the transmission of an RLC SDU). Fig. 9 & ¶0084 - At 930, when the discard timer, (DTP1 or DTR), expires, the transmitting entity, (PDCP or RLC), discards the associated SDU/PDU, (or SDUs/PDUs in case more than one SDU are associated with the same timer) at 940. Also, see 1010/1020 in Fig. 10), the second information being information associated with a second layer and used to configure a second time for discarding the transmission data by the second layer (Fig. 9 & ¶0077 - The transmitting RLC entity may have its own timer-based discard operation. If so, it is possible that the LTE RLC will start its own discard timer upon receiving the RLC SDU, (i.e., the PDCP PDU), from the upper layer, (i.e., from PDCP). The RLC discard timer is referred to as DTR (i.e., second information/RLC discard timer). When the DTR (RLC discard timer) expires, the transmitting RLC entity discards the associated SDU/PDU (or SDUs/PDUs, in case more than one SDU/PDU is associated with the same timer). Fig. 9 & ¶0084 - At 930, when the discard timer, (DTP1 or DTR), expires, the transmitting entity, (PDCP or RLC), discards the associated SDU/PDU, (or SDUs/PDUs in case more than one SDU are associated with the same timer) at 940. Also, see 1040 in Fig. 10. Overall, the aforesaid disclosures by Sammour can be summarized by the snapshots of figures 4 and 10, as reproduced next), wherein the terminal (Fig.1, WTRU/Fig. 8, 710) includes: a buffer configured to store the transmission data (¶0062 - storing the packet in a buffer. Also, see ¶0151/¶0153); first layer processor circuitry (Fig.1/Fig. 8 & ¶0151 - The processor 815 is configured to perform PDCP discard and enhanced Layer 2 operations. Layer 2 consists of PDCP, RLC & MAC layer, well known in the analogous art. Also, see ¶0154) configured to execute processing (Fig.1/Fig. 8 & ¶0151-¶0155) for the first layer (Fig. 1, PDCP layer in WTRU) on the transmission data (Fig.1/Fig.8 & ¶0151 - transmitter 816 to facilitate the transmission and reception of wireless data), second layer processor circuitry (Fig.1/Fig. 8 & ¶0151 - The processor 815 is configured to perform PDCP discard and enhanced Layer 2 operations. Layer 2 consists of PDCP, RLC & MAC layer, well known in the analogous art. Also, see ¶0154) configured to execute processing (Fig.1/Fig. 8 & ¶0151-¶0155) for the second layer (Fig. 1, RLC/MAC layer in WTRU) on the transmission data (Fig.1/Fig.8 & ¶0151 - transmitter 816 to facilitate the transmission and reception of wireless data), and a transmitter configured to transmit the transmission data (Fig.1/Fig.8 & ¶0151 - transmitter 816 to facilitate the transmission and reception of wireless data) processed by the first layer processor circuitry and the second layer processor circuitry (Fig.1/Fig. 8 & ¶0151-¶0155); and a receiver (Fig.8, 817) configured to receive the first information and the second information (Fig. 1-11 - PDCP discard timer <DTP1, new discard timer>, refers to first information, RLC discard timer <DTR>, refers to second information, see ¶0077, ¶0080-¶0085 along with Fig. 9),
PNG
media_image2.png
578
1007
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Yet, Sammour does not expressly teach wherein the first layer processor circuitry is configured to discard, in the first layer, the transmission data stored in the buffer, upon expiration of time corresponding to the second time that is for discarding the transmission data used by the second layer which is the lower layer of the first layer and that is configured by the second information.
However, in the analogous art, Uchino explicitly discloses wherein the first layer processor circuitry (Fig.4/Fig. 6, 110) is configured to discard, in the first layer, the transmission data stored in the buffer, upon expiration of time corresponding to the second time that is for discarding the transmission data used by the second layer which is the lower layer of the first layer and that is configured by the second information. (Fig. 1-6 & ¶0035 - the PDCP layer (i.e., first layer) processing unit 110 may have a PDCP discard timer (PDCP Discard Timer) to discard packets stored in the PDCP layer processing unit 110. The PDCP layer processing unit 110 stores already transmitted PDCP PDUs in a buffer for subsequent retransmission for a predefined time after transmitting the PDCP PDUs to the RLC layer (i.e., second layer) processing unit 120. When the PDCP discard timer configured for the respective PDCP PDUs has expired due to passage of the predefined time, the PDCP layer (i.e., first layer) processing unit 110 may discard the PDCP PDUs. Fig. 1-6 & ¶0041 - the RLC entity control unit 123 may stop the RLC discard timer corresponding to a packet for which the PDCP discard timer has expired. In other words, the packet for which the PDCP discard timer has expired is discarded in the PDCP layer (i.e., first layer) processing unit 110. Also, see claims 4 & 12, for example, in claim 4, Uchino recites, “wherein the PDCP layer processing unit has a PDCP discard timer configured to discard packets stored in the PDCP layer processing unit, and the RLC entity control unit stops the RLC discard timer corresponding to a packet for which the PDCP discard timer has expired.” In Summary, there is a strong correspondence between discard timers at PDCP layer (first layer) and at RLC layer (second layer) in order to alleviate overflow at the RLC layer correlating to data packets at PDCP layer (first layer) failing to be transmitted to the base station, in turns, improves overall transmission latency for uplink data, once discard timers at PDCP layer (first layer) and at RLC layer (second layer) are coordinated as disclosed supra. In fact, the aforesaid disclosures by Uchino, are similar to instant application, at least in ¶0075, where it recites, “first information defining discard conditions for a packet for the first layer is set in accordance with second information regarding transmission control for the second layer, and a packet satisfying the discard conditions is discarded from the buffer for the first layer. Therefore, it is possible to shorten a buffering time within which a packet is held in the buffer, and, even when low latency data is generated as new transmission data, it is possible to reduce latency until the low latency data is to be transmitted. As a result, it is possible to satisfy latency requirements for the low latency data.”, also, at least in ¶0067, where it recites, “first information defining conditions for discarding the packet.…the first layer processing unit 112 uses parameters for a different layer (e.g., a lower layer), that is, a second layer, and sets discard conditions for the packet.” Overall, the aforesaid disclosures by Uchino can be summarized by the snapshots of fig. 4 and fig. 6, as reproduced next.)
PNG
media_image3.png
414
1155
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine Sammour’s invention of a system and a method for discarding a packet data convergence protocol (PDCP) service data unit (SDU) to include Uchino’s invention of user equipment (UE) having a dual connectivity function to communicate with multiple base stations simultaneously, because it provides an efficient mechanism for transmitting uplink data in the dual connectivity efficiently. (¶0002-¶0012, Uchino)
Re. Claim 8, Sammour and Uchino teach claim 1.
Sammour further teaches wherein the transmission data discarded by the first layer processor circuitry is data before the processing for the second layer by the second layer processor circuitry. (Fig. 9-10 & ¶0091: ¶0094 - At 1010, the transmitting PDCP entity determines whether to discard a packet (PDCP SDU/PDU) based on a trigger event ; At 1020, the transmitting PDCP entity discards the packet; At 1030, the transmitting PDCP entity notifies the lower layer, (i.e., the transmitting RLC entity of the discard decision and of the discarded packet), via a signal, (e.g., a primitive and its parameters); and At 1040, upon receiving the signal, (e.g., a primitive and its parameters), the transmitting RLC entity discards the identified packet, (i.e., the RLC SDU and/or its associated RLC PDUs). It is evident from the aforesaid disclosures by Sammour, the transmission data/packet is discarded by the first layer (PDCP layer) is data before the processing for the second layer (RLC layer). See snapshots below).
PNG
media_image2.png
578
1007
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 9 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 9 - wherein the first time is selected from any of a plurality of first candidates, the second discard time is selected from any of a plurality of second candidates, and a first minimum value among the plurality of first candidates is larger than a first maximum value among the plurality of second candidates.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 04/29/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding remarks in pages 6-8 for independent claim 1, applicant argues that Uchino fails to teach, “the first layer processor circuitry is configured to discard, in the first layer, the transmission data stored in the buffer, upon expiration of a time corresponding to the second time that is for discarding the transmission data used by the second layer which is the lower layer of the first layer and that is configured by the second information. “. See at least at Page 8 of remarks as submitted on 04/29/2026.
Examiner respectfully disagrees with the applicant. For example, Uchino discloses that the PDCP layer (i.e., first layer) processing unit 110 may have a PDCP discard timer (PDCP Discard Timer) to discard packets stored in the PDCP layer processing unit 110. The PDCP layer processing unit 110 stores already transmitted PDCP PDUs in a buffer for subsequent retransmission for a predefined time after transmitting the PDCP PDUs to the RLC layer (i.e., second layer) processing unit 120. When the PDCP discard timer configured for the respective PDCP PDUs has expired due to passage of the predefined time, the PDCP layer (i.e., first layer) processing unit 110 may discard the PDCP PDUs. … the RLC entity control unit 123 may stop the RLC discard timer corresponding to a packet for which the PDCP discard timer has expired. In other words, the packet for which the PDCP discard timer has expired is discarded in the PDCP layer (i.e., first layer) processing unit 110. See ¶0035/¶0041 along with Fig. 1-6.
Also, see claims 4 and 12, for example, in claim 4, Uchino recites, “wherein the PDCP layer processing unit has a PDCP discard timer configured to discard packets stored in the PDCP layer processing unit, and the RLC entity control unit stops the RLC discard timer corresponding to a packet for which the PDCP discard timer has expired.”.
In Summary as mentioned by the examiner in previous office actions, there is a strong correspondence between discard timers at PDCP layer (first layer) and at RLC layer (second layer) in order to alleviate overflow at the RLC layer correlating to data packets at PDCP layer (first layer) failing to be transmitted to the base station, in turns, improves overall transmission latency for uplink data, once discard timers at PDCP layer (first layer) and at RLC layer (second layer) are coordinated as disclosed supra. In fact, the aforesaid disclosures by Uchino, are similar to instant application, at least in ¶0075, where it recites, “first information defining discard conditions for a packet for the first layer is set in accordance with second information regarding transmission control for the second layer, and a packet satisfying the discard conditions is discarded from the buffer for the first layer. Therefore, it is possible to shorten a buffering time within which a packet is held in the buffer, and, even when low latency data is generated as new transmission data, it is possible to reduce latency until the low latency data is to be transmitted. As a result, it is possible to satisfy latency requirements for the low latency data.”, also, at least in ¶0067, where it recites, “first information defining conditions for discarding the packet.…the first layer processing unit 112 uses parameters for a different layer (e.g., a lower layer), that is, a second layer, and sets discard conditions for the packet.” Overall, the aforesaid disclosures by Uchino can be summarized by the snapshots of fig. 4 and fig. 6, as reproduced next.
PNG
media_image3.png
414
1155
media_image3.png
Greyscale
There are NO further specific allegations for any another references, hence, moot.
For these reasons, it is maintained that independent claim 1 is unpatentable over Sammour, in view of Uchino.
For similar reasons, it is maintained that independent claims 6 and 7 are unpatentable over Sammour, in view of Uchino.
As all other dependent claims depend either directly or indirectly from the independent claim 1, similar rationale also applies to all respective dependent claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMMED SHAMSUL CHOWDHURY whose telephone number is (571)272-0485. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday 9 AM- 6 PM EST (Friday Var.).
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, Hassan Phillips can be reached on 571-272-3940. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MOHAMMED S CHOWDHURY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2467
Prosecution Insights