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 .
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.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 2, 4-6, and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 4, 5, 6, and 8 recite the limitation “the wireless connection.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 2 recites the limitation “a wireless terminal configured to perform wireless communication with the network node.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim because “a wireless terminal” is recited in the parent claim and said wireless terminal communicates with the network node.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1 and 3-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Abedini (US 20220053433 A1, wherein all cited portions are supported by provisional applications 63067790 and 63138046).
Regarding claim 1, Abedini discloses:
“A communication control method comprising: establishing, by a repeater control wireless terminal, a wireless connection to a network node,” ([¶ 0072]: “Smart repeater devices can acquire side control information via a control-interface to a network access node (e.g., scheduling entity, an eNode B (eNB), a gNode B (gNB), a base station). However, this requires the smart repeater device to establish a communication link (e.g., a radio resource control (RRC) connection) with the network access node. The establishment of the RRC connection may be similar to the way a user equipment (UE) establishes an RRC connection with a network access node.”)
“the repeater control wireless terminal being configured to control a network controlled repeater configured to relay wireless communication between the network node and a wireless terminal; and” (
[¶ 0027]: “Subsequently, the network access node may transmit UE-data 1614 that is received by the repeater device a time later (as represented by UE-data 1616). The repeater device may forward the UE-data to the UE and the UE-data may be received at UE a short time later (as represented by UE-data 1618).”)
“transmitting, by the repeater control wireless terminal to the network node, repeater control wireless terminal information indicating that the repeater control wireless terminal itself is the repeater control wireless terminal, when the repeater control wireless terminal establishes the wireless connection to the network node.” ([¶ 0436]: “Referring again to the sub-options of Option A.1, a second sub-option (Alt a.1.2) may involve adding a new indication (e.g., “smart-repeater device-node indication”) in an RRCSetupComplete message (Msg5). As indicated at 3916 of FIG. 39, the Msg5 may include a repeater device indication (Rptrind).”)
Regarding claim 3, Abedini discloses all the features of the parent claim.
Abedini further discloses “the repeater control wireless terminal information is included in a Msg 5 for a random access procedure.” ([¶ 0436]: “Referring again to the sub-options of Option A.1, a second sub-option (Alt a.1.2) may involve adding a new indication (e.g., “smart-repeater device-node indication”) in an RRCSetupComplete message (Msg5). As indicated at 3916 of FIG. 39, the Msg5 may include a repeater device indication (Rptrind).”)
Regarding claim 4, Abedini discloses:
“A wireless terminal for performing wireless communication with a network node in a mobile communication system, the wireless terminal comprising: a circuitry configured to control a network controlled repeater configured to relay wireless communication between a network node and another wireless terminal; and a transmitter configured to transmit, to the network node through wireless communication, repeater control wireless terminal information indicating that the wireless terminal itself is the repeater control wireless terminal, when establishing the wireless connection with the network node.” (¶¶ 27, 72, and 436)
Regarding claim 5, Abedini discloses:
“A network node for performing wireless communication with a wireless terminal in a mobile communication system, the network node comprising: a receiver configured to receive, from a wireless terminal configured to control a network controlled repeater configured to relay wireless communication between the network node and another wireless terminal, repeater control wireless terminal information indicating that the wireless terminal itself is the repeater control wireless terminal, when establishing the wireless connection with the wireless terminal.” (¶¶ 27, 72, and 436)
Regarding claim 6, Abedini discloses:
“A chipset for a wireless terminal for performing wireless communication with a network node in a mobile communication system, the chipset configured to execute processing of: controlling a network controlled repeater configured to relay wireless communication between a network node and another wireless terminal; and transmitting, to the network node through wireless communication, repeater control wireless terminal information indicating that the wireless terminal itself is the repeater control wireless terminal, when establishing the wireless connection with the network node.” (¶¶ 27, 72, 436, and 1080)
Regarding claim 7, Abedini discloses:
“A mobile communication system comprising: a network; and a repeater control wireless terminal configured to control a network controlled repeater configured to relay wireless communication between the network node and a wireless terminal, wherein the repeater control wireless terminal is configured to: establish, a wireless connection to a network node, the repeater control wireless terminal being configured to control a network controlled repeater configured to relay wireless communication between the network node and a wireless terminal; and transmit, to the network node, repeater control wireless terminal information indicating that the repeater control wireless terminal itself is the repeater control wireless terminal, when the repeater control wireless terminal establishes the wireless connection to the network node.” (¶¶ 27, 72, and 436)
Regarding claim 8, Abedini discloses:
“A non-transitory computer-readable medium comprising, stored thereupon, computer program instructions for execution by a wireless terminal for performing wireless communication with a network node in a mobile communication system, the program instructions being configured to cause the wireless device to execute processing of: controlling a network controlled repeater configured to relay wireless communication between a network node and another wireless terminal; and transmitting, to the network node through wireless communication, repeater control wireless terminal information indicating that the wireless terminal itself is the repeater control wireless terminal, when establishing the wireless connection with the network node.” (¶¶ 27, 72, 436, and 1080)
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Abedini (US 20220053433 A1) in view of Fujishiro (US 20230089150 A1).
Regarding claim 2, Abedini discloses all the features of the parent claim.
Abedini does not explicitly disclose “broadcasting, by the network node, access restriction information to restrict an access from a wireless terminal configured to perform wireless communication with the network node; and ignoring, by the repeater control wireless terminal, the access restriction information.”
However, Fujishiro discloses the missing feature “broadcasting, by the network node, access restriction information to restrict an access from a wireless terminal configured to perform wireless communication with the network node; and ignoring, by the repeater control wireless terminal, the access restriction information.” ([¶ 0071]: “As illustrated in FIG. 9, in step S11, the node 500 (cell #1) broadcasts a first information element (cellBarred) indicating whether the selection of the cell #1 is barred, and a second information element (intraFreqReselection) regarding whether selection of another cell belonging to the same frequency as that of the cell #1 is allowed when the selection of the cell #1 is barred.” ; [¶ 0084]: “When the IAB-MT of the IAB node 300 ignores the second information element (intraFreqReselection), the restriction of the second information element (intraFreqReselection) is not applied to the IAB-MT.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, having the teachings of Abedini and Fujishiro, to modify the technique as disclosed by Abedini, to ignore broadcasted restriction information as disclosed by Fujishiro. The motivation for doing so is that it allows avoidance of unnecessarily applied restrictions, thus improving service quality . Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Abedini with Fujishiro to obtain the invention as specified in the instant claim.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAAD KHAWAR whose telephone number is (571)272-7948. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00am - 5:00pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Charles Jiang can be reached at (571)-270-7191. 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.
/SAAD KHAWAR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2412