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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 6/02/2026 has been accepted and entered. Accordingly, claims 1 and 11 have been amended.
Claims 1, 3-11, and 13-20 are pending in this application.
Due to the amendments filed 1/16/2026, the objection to claim 11 has been cured. Therefore, the objection to claim 11 has been withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ arguments with respect to claims 1 and 11 on Pgs. 7-12 regarding the cited prior art reference Fujishiro have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Examiner notes that there were no arguments presented regarding the cited prior art reference Kowalski not teaching any of the amended limitations. Updated mapping for these amendments is shown below in the updated Office Action.
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 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.
Claims 1, 3, 5, 9-11, 13, 15, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kowalski et al. (US 2023/0239768 A1), hereinafter referred to as Kowalski, in view of Moon et al. (US 2024/0429994 A1), hereinafter referred to as Moon.
Claims 1, 3, 5, and 9-10 recite similar features to device claims 11, 13, 15, and 19-20. Therefore, the device claims teach the method. As such, for claims 1, 3, 5, and 9-10, the rejections are directed towards the same reasons which are stated in claims 11, 13, 15, and 19-20.
Re. Claim 11, Kowalski teaches:
A Smart Node (SN) (Fig. 5 SMART REPEATER NODE 28) including a processor (Fig. 5 (50) & ¶0075 The repeater node processor(s) 50 may serve, e.g., in conjunction with aspect 2-5, to include a customized control signal in the frame of information received from the parent node)
and comprising: a SN Communication Unit (SN CU) configured to receive and decode side control information from a Base Station (BS) via communication links, (Fig. 2 aspects 2-1 thru 2-7 & Fig. 5 (50) & ¶0010 A smart repeater is an enhancement over conventional RF repeaters with the capability to receive and process side control information from the network. & ¶0075 The repeater node processor(s) 50 may serve, e.g., in conjunction with aspect 2-5, to include a customized control signal in the frame of information received from the parent node & ¶0060 As used herein, “customized control signal” and “repeater customized control signal” may refer to one or more control signals, such as side control signals, which are customized by or for the repeater node 28. & ¶0074 FIG. 3 further illustrates that repeater node 28 may comprise repeater node processor(s) 50; repeater node transceiver circuitry 52 which serves as an interface to parent node 22 and communication over wireless backhaul link 32 [i.e. the transceiver 52 and processor 50 of the smart node repeater of Fig. 5 serve as the functional equivalent to a communication unit of a smart node, such as serving as a means to communicate with the base station over a backhaul link (communication links)]; & ¶0078 For simplicity the details of the parent node transceiver 44, repeater node transceiver circuitry 52, repeater node transceiver circuitry 54, and wireless terminal transceiver circuitry 62 may not be fully illustrated in FIG. 4 and FIG. 5 but are understood from the description of FIG. 3.)
a SN Forwarding Unit (SN FU) configured to carry out amplify-and-forward operation between the BS and a user equipment (UE), (Fig. 2 (smart repeater node): aspects 2-1 thru 2-7 & Fig. 5 SMART REPEATER NODE 28, Transceiver 52,54 & ¶0009 Concerning smart repeaters, the 3GPP Study Item Description draft document RP-212703 explains: [0010] A smart repeater is an enhancement over conventional RF repeaters with the capability to receive and process side control information from the network. Side control information could allow a smart repeater to perform its amplify-and-forward operation in a more efficient manner. & ¶0074 The repeater node transceiver circuitry 52 and repeater node transceiver circuitry 54 may be separate circuits which are dedicated to communication over the wireless backhaul link 32 and wireless access link 34, respectively, or may be same circuits which serve for transmitting and receiving [i.e. repeater node circuitry interpreted as an SN FU, as in the functional equivalent to a forwarding unit of a smart node] over both wireless backhaul link 32 and wireless access link 34 but in accordance with the timing and radio resources allocations of the respective links.)
via forwarding links between the BS and the SN FU, (Fig. 3 & ¶0074 The repeater node transceiver circuitry 52 and repeater node transceiver circuitry 54 may be separate circuits which are dedicated to communication over the wireless backhaul link 32 and wireless access link 34, respectively, or may be same circuits which serve for transmitting and receiving over both wireless backhaul link 32 and wireless access link 34 [i.e. backhaul link 32, shown in Fig, 3, is equivalent to a forwarding link between the BS and SN FU])
and via forwarding links between the SN FU and the UE, (¶0074 The repeater node transceiver circuitry 52 and repeater node transceiver circuitry 54 may be separate circuits which are dedicated to communication over the wireless backhaul link 32 and wireless access link 34, respectively, or may be same circuits which serve for transmitting and receiving over both wireless backhaul link 32 and wireless access link 34 [i.e. service/access link 34, shown in Fig, 3, is equivalent to a forwarding link between the UE and SN FU].)
using the side control information received by the SN CU, (Fig. 6 steps 6-2 and 6-3 receiving side control information & ¶0009 Concerning smart repeaters, the 3GPP Study Item Description draft document RP-212703 explains: [0010] A smart repeater is an enhancement over conventional RF repeaters with the capability to receive and process side control information from the network. Side control information could allow a smart repeater to perform its amplify-and-forward operation in a more efficient manner. & ¶0060 As used herein, “customized control signal” and “repeater customized control signal” may refer to one or more control signals, such as side control signals, which are customized by or for the repeater node 28.)
Yet, Kowalski does not explicitly teach: wherein, in response to the SN CU being in BFR state, the processor is configured to set a status of the SN FU to an off status, wherein the off status indicates the SN FU to turn off a forwarding functionality; wherein the SN CU remains operational to perform a BFR procedure to re-establish the communication links between the SN CU and the BS.
However, in the analogous art, Moon teaches such limitations:
wherein, in response to the SN CU being in BFR state, the processor is configured to set a status of the SN FU to an off status, (¶0093-¶0095 The present disclosure proposes cell coverage extension methods using a relay node, in particular, a repeater and intelligent reflecting surface (IRS). a relay node may be composed of a plurality of entities. Each entity may perform its own function for relay communication. For example, a repeater may include a first entity and a second entity. The first entity may perform a function of exchanging control information (e.g., side control information) with the base station. The first entity may be referred to as a ‘mobile termination (MT)’ or a ‘repeater MT’. [i.e. the first entity, also called mobile termination (MT) entity, is equivalent to SN CU (communication unit)] The first entity may perform communication for exchanging the above-described control information with the base station through the above-described control link. In addition, the first entity may control operations (e.g., signal relaying operations) of the second entity based on the control information. The control link may be the Uu link or Uu interface. The second entity may perform a function of relaying signals from the base station to the terminal or from the terminal to the base station. The second entity may be referred to as ‘forwarding (Fwd)’ or ‘repeater Fwd’. [i.e. the second entity, also called Forwarding entity is equivalent to SN FU (forwarding unit)] The signal relaying operation may be performed through the above-described backhaul link and access link. The operations (e.g., signal relaying operations) of the second entity may be controlled by the control information (e.g., side control information) received from the base station. For example, the operations of the second entity may be controlled by the first entity constituting the same repeater based on the control information received from the base station. [i.e. the first entity (SN CU) uses side control information to control the operation of the first entity (SN FU)] & ¶0138 when determining that a beam failure has occurred with respect to the backhaul beam, the relay node may not perform or stop access link transmission with the terminal. & ¶0148 The base station may transmit information instructing the relay node (e.g., MT of repeater) to stop (or, start or resume) the off operation or the non-relaying operation. [i.e. when beam failure is determined (being in BFR state), the MT entity (SN CU) indicates to forwarding entity (SN FU) to enter non-relaying operation and stop access link transmission (set status of SN FU to off status)])
wherein the off status indicates the SN FU to turn off a forwarding functionality. (¶0138 when determining that a beam failure has occurred with respect to the backhaul beam, the relay node may not perform or stop access link transmission with the terminal. & ¶0148 the relay node may be selectively indicate to perform one of the off operation and the non-relaying operation (i.e., partial off operation). The base station may transmit information instructing the relay node (e.g., MT of repeater) to stop (or, start or resume) the off operation or the non-relaying operation. For example, the MT entity of the repeater node may instruct a forwarding entity of the repeater to stop the off operation or the non-relaying operation based on the indication information, and the forwarding entity may start or resume the relaying operation based on the indication. [i.e. MT entity (SN CU) indicates to forwarding entity (SN FU) to stop access link transmission during a partial off operation (off status), equivalent to an indication of off status turning off a forwarding functionality])
wherein the SN CU remains operational to perform a BFR procedure to re-establish the communication links between the SN CU and the BS. (¶0138 when determining that a beam failure has occurred with respect to the backhaul beam, the relay node may not perform or stop access link transmission with the terminal. For example, the relay node may identify a new valid beam and perform a beam failure recovery procedure based thereon, and may resume the access link transmission with the terminal after completing the beam recovery procedure. When the relay node receives a response signal (or message) to a beam recovery request or beam change request from the base station, the relay node may consider that the beam recovery procedure has been successfully completed & ¶0148 the relay node may be selectively indicate to perform one of the off operation and the non-relaying operation (i.e., partial off operation). Even while the off operation of the relay node is being performed, the relay node may transmit and receive signals to and from the base station. For example, while a forwarding entity of a repeater performs the off operation, an MT entity of the repeater may perform transmission/reception operation with the base station through the control link. The base station may transmit information instructing the relay node (e.g., MT of repeater) to stop (or, start or resume) the off operation or the non-relaying operation. For example, the MT entity of the repeater node may instruct a forwarding entity of the repeater to stop the off operation or the non-relaying operation based on the indication information, and the forwarding entity may start or resume the relaying operation based on the indication. [i.e. the MT entity (SN CU) remains operational so it can receive control information during non-relaying operation until a beam recovery procedure is performed to restore the access link transmission (re-establish communication links between SN CU and BS)])
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Kowalski’s invention of a Network-controlled repeater device to include Moon’s teaching of determining the status of the SN FU is off indicating to turn off a forwarding functionality of the device in response to the communication unit being in RLF, because it would enable the device to reduce power consumption by partially turning off the relay node. (see Moon ¶0139)
Re. Claim 13, Kowalski combined with Moon teaches claim 11.
Moon further teaches:
wherein the off status indicates the SN FU to disable both transmitting and receiving operation. (¶0139 the relay node may not perform the signal transmission operation with the terminal. That is, the relay node may not perform a signal relaying operation from the base station to the terminal or a signal relaying operation from the terminal to the base station (hereinafter, this is referred to as a ‘non-relaying operation’). & ¶0148 The base station may transmit information instructing the relay node (e.g., MT of repeater) to stop (or, start or resume) the off operation or the non-relaying operation.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Kowalski’s invention of a Network-controlled repeater device to include Moon’s teaching of determining the status of the SN FU is off indicating to turn off a forwarding functionality of the device in response to the communication unit being in RLF, because it would enable the device to reduce power consumption by partially turning off the relay node. (see Moon ¶0139)
Re. Claim 15, Kowalski combined with Moon teaches claim 11.
Kowalski further teaches:
wherein the SN is a network-controlled repeater. (Fig. 2 Smart Repeater Node & ¶0008 As used herein, the term “smart repeater” will be used interchangeably with “Network Controlled Repeater” or “NCR)
Re. Claim 19, Kowalski combined with Moon teaches claim 11.
Kowalski further teaches:
wherein the SN FU is a Radio Unit (RU) or a Re-configurable Intelligent Surface (RIS). (Repeater node transceiver circuit 54 may comprise repeater node wireless access link transmitter circuitry 55′, also known as repeater node wireless access link transmitter [i.e. a Radio Unit], and repeater node wireless access link receiver circuitry 56′, also known as repeater node wireless access link receiver 56′.)
Re. Claim 20, Kowalski combined with Moon discloses claim 11.
Kowalski further teaches:
wherein the SN CU is a Mobile Terminal (MT), part of a User Equipment (UE) or a third-party Internet of Things (IoT) device. (¶0117 In accordance with an aspect of the technology described herein, a network-controlled relay would look to a parent node 22 like a user equipment, UE, and would identify itself as a UE [i.e. a mobile terminal] via capability information.)
Claims 4, 6-8, 14, and 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kowalski combined with Moon, further in view of McMenamy et al. (US 2024/0187085 A1), hereinafter referred to as McMenamy.
Claims 4 and 6-8 recite similar features to device claims 14 and 16-18. Therefore, for claims 4 and 6-8, the rejections are directed towards the same reasons which are stated in claims 14 and 16-18.
Re. Claim 14, Kowalski combined with Moon teaches claim 13.
Yet, the combined references do not explicitly teach: wherein the off status indicates the off status of forwarding links between SN FU and BS and forwarding links between SN FU and UE are off.
However, in the analogous art, McMenamy teaches such a limitation:
wherein the off status indicates that forwarding links between the SN FU and the BS and forwarding links between SN FU and a user equipment (UE) are off. (¶0211 by use of the antenna arrangement 142 and the RF unit 144 the apparatus 140 may obtain information about an on/off mode [i.e. off status indication], e.g., by monitoring a control channel. Such a control channel may be established between one or more entities of the network and apparatus 140, i.e., its MT part for exchange of configuration and control messages including, alternatively or in addition to an on/off configuration a status report or the like. An on/off information or control may be beneficial for network-controlled repeater to control the behaviour of NCR-Fwd, referring to the radio unit, i.e., antennas and the RF unit and configured as forwarding unit or forwarding part of the SR/NCR. Embodiments provide for a detailed mechanism of on/off indication and determination, e.g., to temporarily use or deactivate an NCR [i.e. forwarding links between SN FU and BS, as well as between SN FU and UE are off], e.g., based on a use of measurements. Embodiments relate to an explicit indication or implicit indication of such an on/off information. The ON/OFF information or control may be a part of information transmitted over the control channel or side information.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Kowalski and Moon’s invention of a Network-controlled repeater device to include McMenamy’s teaching of an ON/OFF status indication for forwarding link between SN FU and BS or between SN FU and UE, because it would allow its control during beam failure recovery or radio link failure scenarios. (see McMenamy ¶200-¶203 & ¶0211 & ¶0416-¶0417)
Re. Claim 16, Kowalski combined with Moon teaches claim 11.
Yet, the combined references do not explicitly teach: the SN CU further configured to: receive, by the SN, status indication information, wherein the status indication information indicates an on status, the on status corresponds to beam index.
However, in the analogous art, McMenamy teaches such a limitation:
the SN CU (Fig. 5 (50) & ¶0074 FIG. 3 further illustrates that repeater node 28 may comprise repeater node processor(s) 50; repeater node transceiver circuitry 52 which serves as an interface to parent node 22 and communication over wireless backhaul link 32 [i.e. the transceiver 52 and processor 50 of the smart node repeater of Fig. 5 serve as the functional equivalent to a communication unit of a smart node, such as serving as a means to communicate with the base station over a backhaul link];)
further configured to: receive, by the SN, status indication information, wherein the status indication information indicates an on status. (Fig. 5b shown below & ¶103 Based on an ON/OFF signalling or other mechanisms, a SR according to an embodiment, e.g., of Type 1 may be, in view of transmitting a signal using a beam 192 [i.e. multiple beams with separate index], active or ON during some time intervals Δt.sub.ON and inactive or OFF during other time intervals Δt.sub.OFF where possible no beam is generated at least for TX purposes in the relevant frequency range.)
the on status corresponds to beam index (¶0446 Beams targeted for users served by the repeater [i.e. beam index] may be forwarded while one, some or all other beams are not forwarded or maybe muted (at the repeater) [i.e. ON status information corresponding to specific beams], which allows to enhance the overall throughput. & ¶0423 For example, for implementing an access link beam indication, an access link beam can be indicated by: a beam index. Such an index may be supplemented by information indicating a corresponding time domain resource of the beam. Alternatively or in addition, the index may carry said information already)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Kowalski and Moon’s invention of a Network-controlled repeater device to include McMenamy’s teaching of an ON/OFF status indication for forwarding link between SN FU and BS or between SN FU and UE, because it would allow its control during beam failure recovery or radio link failure scenarios. (see McMenamy ¶200-¶203 & ¶0211 & ¶0416-¶0417)
PNG
media_image1.png
502
736
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Re. Claim 17, Kowalski combined with Moon and McMenamy teaches claim 16.
McMenamy further teaches:
wherein the status indication information indicates a duration of the on status. (¶0102 FIG. 5b shows a schematic illustration of a behaviour of a SR according to embodiments and in an illustration to be compared with FIG. 5a, the repeater may be OFF during specified time units [i.e. ON duration, knowing the time period in which the repeater is off, implies the duration it is ON as well]—e.g. slots, symbols and the like. & ¶0232 A Type 2A repeater may, based on the reception of a control signal [i.e. status indication information], e.g., via a control channel, [0232] mute transmission of reference signals during specific time-slots/symbols [i.e. ON/OFF duration] on the access link)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Kowalski and Moon’s invention of a Network-controlled repeater device to include McMenamy’s teaching of an ON/OFF status indication information including a duration of the status, because it would allow its control during beam failure recovery or radio link failure scenarios. (see McMenamy ¶200-¶203 & ¶0211 & ¶0416-¶0417)
Re. Claim 18, Kowalski combined with Moon and McMenamy teaches claim 16.
McMenamy further teaches:
wherein the on status of the status indication information indicates the SN to amplify and forward received signals. (¶0211 by use of the antenna arrangement 142 and the RF unit 144 the apparatus 140 may obtain information about an on/off mode [i.e. ON status], e.g., by monitoring a control channel. Such a control channel may be established between one or more entities of the network and apparatus 140, i.e., its MT part for exchange of configuration and control messages including, alternatively or in addition to an on/off configuration a status report or the like. An on/off information or control may be beneficial for network-controlled repeater to control the behaviour of NCR-Fwd, referring to the radio unit, i.e., antennas and the RF unit and configured as forwarding unit or forwarding part of the SR/NCR. Embodiments provide for a detailed mechanism of on/off indication and determination, e.g., to temporarily use or deactivate an NCR [i.e. indicate to SN to amplify and forward received signals], e.g., based on a use of measurements. & ¶0213 apparatus 150 may decode a transmit power control command that is, by performing such a signal processing, e.g., on a control channel, the smart repeater may be controlled in view of an amplification to be implemented when forwarding a signal [i.e. SN amplifies and forwards signal], with regard to an output power, e.g., a minimum output power and/or a maximum output power, in view of a band filtering, a spectral, temporal, and/or spatial receive and/or transmit filter, an implemented shaping, a beam forming, or any other specific input/output relationships.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Kowalski and Moon’s invention of a Network-controlled repeater device to include McMenamy’s teaching of an ON/OFF status indication information for amplifying and forwarding signals, because it would allow its control during beam failure recovery or radio link failure scenarios. (see McMenamy ¶200-¶203 & ¶0211 & ¶0416-¶0417)
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 GARY A MILLER whose telephone number is (571)272-4423. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8 to 5.
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, Rebecca Song can be reached at 571-270-3667. 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.
/G.A.M./Examiner, Art Unit 2417
/REBECCA E SONG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2417
Prosecution Insights