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
This is in response to an amendment/response/communication filed 9/5/2024.
No claims have been cancelled.
No claims have been added.
Claims(s) 1-30 is/are currently pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS(s)) submitted on 9/5/2024 is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the Examiner.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 1/29/2024. These drawings are accepted.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant's cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations as noted in claim 29 in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an 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 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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 11, 19, 20, 29 and 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fu et al. US 20250142402 in view of Liu et al. US 20200358570.
As to claim 1:
Fu et al. discloses:
A user equipment (UE) for wireless communication, comprising:
one or more memories storing processor-executable code;
and
one or more processors coupled with the one or more memories and
individually or collectively operable to execute the code to cause the UE to:
establish a configuration for a first quality of service flow, the configuration establishing a plurality of radio link control entities;
(“…establishing an RLC entity corresponding to a second path for the QoS flow”; Fu et al.; 0398)
(“In S0, the RRC configures the mapping relationship between one QoS flow and a plurality of paths, wherein one QoS flow corresponds to a plurality of DRBs, one PDCP entity corresponds to a plurality of RBs, and one PDCP corresponds to a plurality of RLCs.”; Fu et al.; 0151)
(“In some embodiments, different RLCs are correspondingly configured with different indications (such as I/P-frames), or different RLCs are correspondingly configured with different flags (e.g., reliable or unreliable, important or non-important, different importance levels, different reliability levels, or different priorities).”; Fu et al.; 0153)
(where
“In S0, the RRC configures the mapping relationship between one QoS flow” maps to “establish a configuration for a first quality of service flow”, where “in S0, the RRC configures” maps to “establish a configuration”, “QoS flow” maps to “first quality of service flow”
“establishing an RLC entity corresponding”/”configures…plurality of paths…plurality of RLCs”/”different RLCs are correspondingly configured” maps to “the configuration establishing a plurality of radio link control entities”, where “configures”/”configured” maps to “configuration”, “establishing” maps to “establishing”, “RLCs” maps to “plurality of radio link control entities”
map protocol data units of a first protocol data unit set associated
with the first quality of service flow to a first radio link control entity of the
plurality of radio link control entities based at least in part on first characteristics associated with the first protocol data unit set and map protocol data units of a
second protocol data unit set associated with the first quality of service flow to a
second radio link control entity of the plurality of radio link control entities based at least in part on second characteristics associated with the second protocol data unit set; and
(“Action 1: In the case of submitting one PDCP PDU to the lower layer, the PDCP entity at the transmitter end acts as follows: in the case where the PDCP entity at the transmitter end is associated with at least two RLC entities, and the PDCP entity at the transmitter end is associated with the first RB (the first RB being an RB with a special identifier, or an RB with an XR identifier, or an RB with a differentiated processing identifier, or the like); or in the case where the PDCP entity at the transmitter end is associated with at least two RLC entities, and different RLC entities associated with the PDCP entity at the transmitter end correspond to different RBs; or in the case where the PDCP entity at the transmitter end is associated with at least two RLC entities, and the PDCP entity at the transmitter end differentiates the processing of different PDU sets or data; or in the case where the joint PDCP entity is associated with different RLC entities and transmits different PDU sets (corresponding to one QoS flow), then different PDCP PDUs are submitted to different RLC entities. Specifically, the first PDCP PDU is submitted to the first RLC entity, and the second PDCP PDU is submitted to the second RLC entity. Whether the PDCP PDU is the first or the second PDCP PDU is determined by the PDCP entity at the transmitter end based on the indication from the SDAP or the routing result of the SDAP. The mapping relationship between the first and second RLC entities and the first and second PDCP PDUs is configured by the RRC. The PDCP PDU includes PDCP data PDUs and/or PDCP control PDUs.”; Fu et al.; 0160)
(“The technical solutions according to the embodiments are applicable to cases where different data (such as different PDU sets, different encoded slices, and different frames) are mapped to the same QoS flow. The different data (such as different PDU sets) may be data with different importance, data with different associations, data with different dependencies, or data with different priorities. By the technical solutions according to the embodiments, a method for establishing or releasing a PDCP function in the case of configuring or changing the mapping between the QoS flow and the DRB is provided, such that the above-mentioned independent processing and/or joint processing of different data by the PDCP are supported.”; Fu et al.; 0277)
(where
“in the case where the joint PDCP entity is associated with different RLC entities and transmits different PDU sets (corresponding to one QoS flow), … The mapping relationship between the first and second RLC entities and the first and second PDCP PDUs is configured by the RRC. The PDCP PDU includes PDCP data PDUs and/or PDCP control PDU” maps to “map protocol data units of a first protocol data unit set associated
with the first quality of service flow to a first radio link control entity of the
plurality of radio link control entities”, where “mapping” maps to “map”, “first…PDCP PDUs” maps to “first protocol data unit set”, “corresponding to one QoS flow” maps to “associated with the first quality of service flow”, “first…RLC entities” maps to “to a first radio link entity”, “different RLC entities” maps to “plurality of radio link entities”
“The technical solutions according to the embodiments are applicable to cases where different data (such as different PDU sets, different encoded slices, and different frames) are mapped to the same QoS flow. The different data (such as different PDU sets) may be data with different importance, data with different associations, data with different dependencies, or data with different priorities.” Maps to “based at least in part on first characteristics associated with the first protocol data unit set”, where “PDU sets”/”different importance”/”different priorities” maps to “first characteristics associated with the first protocol data unit set”
“mapping”/”second PDCP PDUs” maps to “map protocol data units of a second protocol data unit set”, “corresponding to one QoS flow” maps to “associated with the first quality of service flow”, “second RLC entities” maps to “second radio link control entity”, “different RLC entities” maps to “plurality of radio link control entities”, “PDU sets”/”different importance”/”different priorities” maps to “based at least in part on second characteristics associated with the second protocol data unit set”
communicate at least a subset of the protocol data units of the first protocol data unit set, the second protocol data unit set, or both …based at least in part on the mapping.
(“For example, for an SDAP SDU of a QoS flow received from the higher layer, the SDAP entity at the transmitter end performs at least one of the following actions: generating an SDAP PDU; distributing the PDU to the corresponding or correct lower layer path based on the mapping relationship configured by the RRC; and indicating different information of different data to the lower layer (PDCP). For example, the different information may be: importance, an association, a priority, a dependency, a frame type, or a packet type.”; Fu et al.; 0158)
(see FIG. 3)
(where
“joint PDCP entity is associated with different RLC entities and transmits different PDU sets (corresponding to one QoS flow)”/” generating an SDAP PDU; distributing the PDU to the corresponding or correct lower layer path based on the mapping relationship configured by the RRC; and indicating different information of different data to the lower layer (PDCP). For example, the different information may be: importance, an association, a priority” maps to “communicate at least a subset of the protocol data units of the first protocol data unit set, the second protocol data unit set, or both …based at least in part on the mapping”, where “transmits” maps to “communicate”, “PDU sets” includes “at least a subset of the protocol data units of the first protocol data unit set, the second protocol data unit set, or both”, “distributing the PDU to the corresponding or correct lower layer path based on the mapping relationship configured by the RRC” maps to “based at least in part on the mapping”
Fu et al. teaches establishing RLC entities via configuration, where the configuration maps PDUs with RLCs associated with one QoS flow, where the mapping is configurated based on importance and priority.
Fu et al. as described above does not explicitly teach:
via one or more time-frequency resources
However, Liu et al. further teaches a time-frequency resources capability which includes:
via one or more time-frequency resources
(“In one embodiment, the UE may directly use indication information or use different time-frequency resources to indicate a reliability level of a required resource to the base station. Alternatively, the base station may configure a correspondence between indication information and a reliability level in advance, and the UE sends a request, where each request corresponds to a resource of a different reliability level. The base station receives the request from the UE, and allocates resources of different reliability levels based on different requests. For example, the UE requests a resource of a common reliability level in a normal case, and when a quantity of retransmission times exceeds a specific value, the UE requests a resource of a special reliability level.”; Liu et al.; 0157)
(“S520: The MAC entity generates N MAC PDUs based on a QoS flow corresponding to each of the M RLC PDUs, so that any two RLC PDUs corresponding to a same flow that are obtained in consecutive order are carried in different MAC PDUs, where N is an integer greater than or equal to 2.”; Liu et al.; 0115)
(“The UE actively initiates ARQ retransmission for the first data packet, and is not limited to using the first retransmission manner or the second retransmission manner. In addition, reliability of the second data packet is improved. In one embodiment, in the communications system shown in FIG. 1, when the receive end device is located within coverage of one or more cells (carriers) provided by a macro base station or a small cell, and there are one or more cells that serve the receive end device (for example, the UE), the RLC entity may perform ARQ retransmission on the second data through one or more other cells.”; Liu et al.; 0151)
(“After receiving an RLC SDU from the PDCP layer, the RLC entity stores the RLC SDU in a sending buffer. After receiving a sending occasion (such as a UL grant) from the MAC layer, the RLC entity segments the RLC SDU based on a size provided by using the sending occasion, and then adds an RLC header to form an RLC PDU. All RLC PDUs need to be stored in a retransmission buffer before being sent. The PDU in the retransmission buffer is retransmitted or removed after a STATUS PDU is received. After receiving a PDU from a peer end, a receive end first determines whether the PDU is a control PDU or a data PDU. If the PDU is a control PDU, the receive end sends the PDU to an RLC control module to determine which PDUs at a transmit end need to be retransmitted. If the PDU is a data PDU, the receive end sends the PDU to a receiving buffer. An RLC header is removed after resorting, and then an RLC SDU is reassembled.”; Liu et al.; 0146)
(where
“time-frequency resources”/”UE actively initiates ARQ retransmission”/”All RLC PDUs need to be stored in a retransmission buffer before being sent.” maps to “via one or more time-frequency resources”
Liu et al. teaches a UE performing RLC PDU retransmission using time-frequency resources.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the time-frequency resources capability of Liu et al. into Fu et al. By modifying the processing/communications of Fu et al. to include the time-frequency resources capability as taught by the processing/communications of Liu et al., the benefits of improved granularity (Fu et al.; 0003) with improved reliability (Liu et al.; Abstract) are achieved.
As to claim 2:
Fu et al. discloses:
wherein the first radio link control entity is associated with a first logical channel of a plurality of logical channels and the second radio link control entity is associated with a second logical channel of the plurality of logical channels, the plurality of logical channels associated with the first quality of service flow.
(“Action 1: In the case of submitting one PDCP PDU to the lower layer, the PDCP entity at the transmitter end acts as follows: in the case where the PDCP entity at the transmitter end is associated with at least two RLC entities, and the PDCP entity at the transmitter end is associated with the first RB (the first RB being an RB with a special identifier, or an RB with an XR identifier, or an RB with a differentiated processing identifier, or the like); or in the case where the PDCP entity at the transmitter end is associated with at least two RLC entities, and different RLC entities associated with the PDCP entity at the transmitter end correspond to different RBs; or in the case where the PDCP entity at the transmitter end is associated with at least two RLC entities, and the PDCP entity at the transmitter end differentiates the processing of different PDU sets or data; or in the case where the joint PDCP entity is associated with different RLC entities and transmits different PDU sets (corresponding to one QoS flow), then different PDCP PDUs are submitted to different RLC entities. Specifically, the first PDCP PDU is submitted to the first RLC entity, and the second PDCP PDU is submitted to the second RLC entity. Whether the PDCP PDU is the first or the second PDCP PDU is determined by the PDCP entity at the transmitter end based on the indication from the SDAP or the routing result of the SDAP. The mapping relationship between the first and second RLC entities and the first and second PDCP PDUs is configured by the RRC. The PDCP PDU includes PDCP data PDUs and/or PDCP control PDUs.”; Fu et al.; 0160)
(“Radio-link control (RLC) is responsible for data segmentation and retransmission. RLC provides services to PDCP in the form of RLC channels (or referred to as logical channels). Each of the RLC channels (corresponding to each radio bearer) configures one RLC entity for one terminal device.”; Fu et al.; 0048)
(“For the PDCP layer, the PDCP layer routes different data corresponding to the same QoS flow to different RLC entities or logical channels. For example, the PDCP layer routes data of different DRBs of one PDCP entity to different RLC entities, or routes different data to different RLC entities.”; Fu et al.; 0112)
As to claim 11:
Fu et al. as described above does not explicitly teach:
wherein the first radio link control entity and the second radio link control entity are associated with a first logical channel of a plurality of logical channels, the plurality of logical channels associated with the first quality of service flow.
However, Liu et al. further teaches an RLC/same logical channel/QoS flow capability which includes:
wherein the first radio link control entity and the second radio link control entity are associated with a first logical channel of a plurality of logical channels, the plurality of logical channels associated with the first quality of service flow.
(“A service data adaptation protocol SDAP entity receives data packets from the application layer. The data packets may be data packets from one service. On a wireless network side, a service is represented in different forms, such as a form of a flow (Quality of Service flow, QoS flow), a form in which the service is mapped to a bearer formed by a PDCP entity, and a form of a logical channel. FIG. 2 shows different service representation forms. A right part of FIG. 2 shows a case in which one service corresponds to one logical channel, and different services may correspond to different logical channels. A left part shows a case in which a service is represented as a QoS flow, and a plurality of QoS flows are mapped to different PDCP entities at the SDAP layer.”; Liu et al.; 0066)
(“It should be understood that the first RLC PDU and the second RLC PDU herein are merely an example instead of a limitation, and refer to at least two RLC PDUs placed into one MAC PDU that are of a same logical channel and that have nonconsecutive RLC sequence numbers. A quantity of RLC PDUs is not limited. For example, there are T RLC PDUs, where every two of the T RLC PDUs have nonconsecutive RLC sequence numbers. An optimal situation is that a MAC PDU resource is fully used.”; Liu et al.; 0101)
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the RLC/same logical channel/QoS flow capability of Liu et al. into Fu et al. By modifying the processing/communications of Fu et al. to include the RLC/same logical channel/QoS flow capability as taught by the processing/communications of Liu et al., the benefits of improved granularity (Fu et al.; 0003) with improved reliability (Liu et al.; Abstract) are achieved.
As to claim 19:
Fu et al. discloses:
A method for wireless communication by a user equipment (UE), comprising:
establish a configuration for a first quality of service flow, the configuration establishing a plurality of radio link control entities;
(“…establishing an RLC entity corresponding to a second path for the QoS flow”; Fu et al.; 0398)
(“In S0, the RRC configures the mapping relationship between one QoS flow and a plurality of paths, wherein one QoS flow corresponds to a plurality of DRBs, one PDCP entity corresponds to a plurality of RBs, and one PDCP corresponds to a plurality of RLCs.”; Fu et al.; 0151)
(“In some embodiments, different RLCs are correspondingly configured with different indications (such as I/P-frames), or different RLCs are correspondingly configured with different flags (e.g., reliable or unreliable, important or non-important, different importance levels, different reliability levels, or different priorities).”; Fu et al.; 0153)
(where
“In S0, the RRC configures the mapping relationship between one QoS flow” maps to “establish a configuration for a first quality of service flow”, where “in S0, the RRC configures” maps to “establish a configuration”, “QoS flow” maps to “first quality of service flow”
“establishing an RLC entity corresponding”/”configures…plurality of paths…plurality of RLCs”/”different RLCs are correspondingly configured” maps to “the configuration establishing a plurality of radio link control entities”, where “configures”/”configured” maps to “configuration”, “establishing” maps to “establishing”, “RLCs” maps to “plurality of radio link control entities”
map protocol data units of a first protocol data unit set associated
with the first quality of service flow to a first radio link control entity of the
plurality of radio link control entities based at least in part on first characteristics associated with the first protocol data unit set and map protocol data units of a
second protocol data unit set associated with the first quality of service flow to a
second radio link control entity of the plurality of radio link control entities based at least in part on second characteristics associated with the second protocol data unit set; and
(“Action 1: In the case of submitting one PDCP PDU to the lower layer, the PDCP entity at the transmitter end acts as follows: in the case where the PDCP entity at the transmitter end is associated with at least two RLC entities, and the PDCP entity at the transmitter end is associated with the first RB (the first RB being an RB with a special identifier, or an RB with an XR identifier, or an RB with a differentiated processing identifier, or the like); or in the case where the PDCP entity at the transmitter end is associated with at least two RLC entities, and different RLC entities associated with the PDCP entity at the transmitter end correspond to different RBs; or in the case where the PDCP entity at the transmitter end is associated with at least two RLC entities, and the PDCP entity at the transmitter end differentiates the processing of different PDU sets or data; or in the case where the joint PDCP entity is associated with different RLC entities and transmits different PDU sets (corresponding to one QoS flow), then different PDCP PDUs are submitted to different RLC entities. Specifically, the first PDCP PDU is submitted to the first RLC entity, and the second PDCP PDU is submitted to the second RLC entity. Whether the PDCP PDU is the first or the second PDCP PDU is determined by the PDCP entity at the transmitter end based on the indication from the SDAP or the routing result of the SDAP. The mapping relationship between the first and second RLC entities and the first and second PDCP PDUs is configured by the RRC. The PDCP PDU includes PDCP data PDUs and/or PDCP control PDUs.”; Fu et al.; 0160)
(“The technical solutions according to the embodiments are applicable to cases where different data (such as different PDU sets, different encoded slices, and different frames) are mapped to the same QoS flow. The different data (such as different PDU sets) may be data with different importance, data with different associations, data with different dependencies, or data with different priorities. By the technical solutions according to the embodiments, a method for establishing or releasing a PDCP function in the case of configuring or changing the mapping between the QoS flow and the DRB is provided, such that the above-mentioned independent processing and/or joint processing of different data by the PDCP are supported.”; Fu et al.; 0277)
(where
“in the case where the joint PDCP entity is associated with different RLC entities and transmits different PDU sets (corresponding to one QoS flow), … The mapping relationship between the first and second RLC entities and the first and second PDCP PDUs is configured by the RRC. The PDCP PDU includes PDCP data PDUs and/or PDCP control PDU” maps to “map protocol data units of a first protocol data unit set associated
with the first quality of service flow to a first radio link control entity of the
plurality of radio link control entities”, where “mapping” maps to “map”, “first…PDCP PDUs” maps to “first protocol data unit set”, “corresponding to one QoS flow” maps to “associated with the first quality of service flow”, “first…RLC entities” maps to “to a first radio link entity”, “different RLC entities” maps to “plurality of radio link entities”
“The technical solutions according to the embodiments are applicable to cases where different data (such as different PDU sets, different encoded slices, and different frames) are mapped to the same QoS flow. The different data (such as different PDU sets) may be data with different importance, data with different associations, data with different dependencies, or data with different priorities.” Maps to “based at least in part on first characteristics associated with the first protocol data unit set”, where “PDU sets”/”different importance”/”different priorities” maps to “first characteristics associated with the first protocol data unit set”
“mapping”/”second PDCP PDUs” maps to “map protocol data units of a second protocol data unit set”, “corresponding to one QoS flow” maps to “associated with the first quality of service flow”, “second RLC entities” maps to “second radio link control entity”, “different RLC entities” maps to “plurality of radio link control entities”, “PDU sets”/”different importance”/”different priorities” maps to “based at least in part on second characteristics associated with the second protocol data unit set”
communicate at least a subset of the protocol data units of the first protocol data unit set, the second protocol data unit set, or both …based at least in part on the mapping.
(“For example, for an SDAP SDU of a QoS flow received from the higher layer, the SDAP entity at the transmitter end performs at least one of the following actions: generating an SDAP PDU; distributing the PDU to the corresponding or correct lower layer path based on the mapping relationship configured by the RRC; and indicating different information of different data to the lower layer (PDCP). For example, the different information may be: importance, an association, a priority, a dependency, a frame type, or a packet type.”; Fu et al.; 0158)
(see FIG. 3)
(where
“joint PDCP entity is associated with different RLC entities and transmits different PDU sets (corresponding to one QoS flow)”/” generating an SDAP PDU; distributing the PDU to the corresponding or correct lower layer path based on the mapping relationship configured by the RRC; and indicating different information of different data to the lower layer (PDCP). For example, the different information may be: importance, an association, a priority” maps to “communicate at least a subset of the protocol data units of the first protocol data unit set, the second protocol data unit set, or both …based at least in part on the mapping”, where “transmits” maps to “communicate”, “PDU sets” includes “at least a subset of the protocol data units of the first protocol data unit set, the second protocol data unit set, or both”, “distributing the PDU to the corresponding or correct lower layer path based on the mapping relationship configured by the RRC” maps to “based at least in part on the mapping”
Fu et al. teaches establishing RLC entities via configuration, where the configuration maps PDUs with RLCs associated with one QoS flow, where the mapping is configurated based on importance and priority.
Fu et al. as described above does not explicitly teach:
via one or more time-frequency resources
However, Liu et al. further teaches a time-frequency resources capability which includes:
via one or more time-frequency resources
(“In one embodiment, the UE may directly use indication information or use different time-frequency resources to indicate a reliability level of a required resource to the base station. Alternatively, the base station may configure a correspondence between indication information and a reliability level in advance, and the UE sends a request, where each request corresponds to a resource of a different reliability level. The base station receives the request from the UE, and allocates resources of different reliability levels based on different requests. For example, the UE requests a resource of a common reliability level in a normal case, and when a quantity of retransmission times exceeds a specific value, the UE requests a resource of a special reliability level.”; Liu et al.; 0157)
(“S520: The MAC entity generates N MAC PDUs based on a QoS flow corresponding to each of the M RLC PDUs, so that any two RLC PDUs corresponding to a same flow that are obtained in consecutive order are carried in different MAC PDUs, where N is an integer greater than or equal to 2.”; Liu et al.; 0115)
(“The UE actively initiates ARQ retransmission for the first data packet, and is not limited to using the first retransmission manner or the second retransmission manner. In addition, reliability of the second data packet is improved. In one embodiment, in the communications system shown in FIG. 1, when the receive end device is located within coverage of one or more cells (carriers) provided by a macro base station or a small cell, and there are one or more cells that serve the receive end device (for example, the UE), the RLC entity may perform ARQ retransmission on the second data through one or more other cells.”; Liu et al.; 0151)
(“After receiving an RLC SDU from the PDCP layer, the RLC entity stores the RLC SDU in a sending buffer. After receiving a sending occasion (such as a UL grant) from the MAC layer, the RLC entity segments the RLC SDU based on a size provided by using the sending occasion, and then adds an RLC header to form an RLC PDU. All RLC PDUs need to be stored in a retransmission buffer before being sent. The PDU in the retransmission buffer is retransmitted or removed after a STATUS PDU is received. After receiving a PDU from a peer end, a receive end first determines whether the PDU is a control PDU or a data PDU. If the PDU is a control PDU, the receive end sends the PDU to an RLC control module to determine which PDUs at a transmit end need to be retransmitted. If the PDU is a data PDU, the receive end sends the PDU to a receiving buffer. An RLC header is removed after resorting, and then an RLC SDU is reassembled.”; Liu et al.; 0146)
(where
“time-frequency resources”/”UE actively initiates ARQ retransmission”/”All RLC PDUs need to be stored in a retransmission buffer before being sent.” maps to “via one or more time-frequency resources”
Liu et al. teaches a UE performing RLC PDU retransmission using time-frequency resources.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the time-frequency resources capability of Liu et al. into Fu et al. By modifying the processing/communications of Fu et al. to include the time-frequency resources capability as taught by the processing/communications of Liu et al., the benefits of improved granularity (Fu et al.; 0003) with improved reliability (Liu et al.; Abstract) are achieved.
As to claim 20:
Fu et al. discloses:
wherein the first radio link control entity is associated with a first logical channel of a plurality of logical channels and the second radio link control entity is associated with a second logical channel of the plurality of logical channels, the plurality of logical channels associated with the first quality of service flow.
(“Action 1: In the case of submitting one PDCP PDU to the lower layer, the PDCP entity at the transmitter end acts as follows: in the case where the PDCP entity at the transmitter end is associated with at least two RLC entities, and the PDCP entity at the transmitter end is associated with the first RB (the first RB being an RB with a special identifier, or an RB with an XR identifier, or an RB with a differentiated processing identifier, or the like); or in the case where the PDCP entity at the transmitter end is associated with at least two RLC entities, and different RLC entities associated with the PDCP entity at the transmitter end correspond to different RBs; or in the case where the PDCP entity at the transmitter end is associated with at least two RLC entities, and the PDCP entity at the transmitter end differentiates the processing of different PDU sets or data; or in the case where the joint PDCP entity is associated with different RLC entities and transmits different PDU sets (corresponding to one QoS flow), then different PDCP PDUs are submitted to different RLC entities. Specifically, the first PDCP PDU is submitted to the first RLC entity, and the second PDCP PDU is submitted to the second RLC entity. Whether the PDCP PDU is the first or the second PDCP PDU is determined by the PDCP entity at the transmitter end based on the indication from the SDAP or the routing result of the SDAP. The mapping relationship between the first and second RLC entities and the first and second PDCP PDUs is configured by the RRC. The PDCP PDU includes PDCP data PDUs and/or PDCP control PDUs.”; Fu et al.; 0160)
(“Radio-link control (RLC) is responsible for data segmentation and retransmission. RLC provides services to PDCP in the form of RLC channels (or referred to as logical channels). Each of the RLC channels (corresponding to each radio bearer) configures one RLC entity for one terminal device.”; Fu et al.; 0048)
(“For the PDCP layer, the PDCP layer routes different data corresponding to the same QoS flow to different RLC entities or logical channels. For example, the PDCP layer routes data of different DRBs of one PDCP entity to different RLC entities, or routes different data to different RLC entities.”; Fu et al.; 0112)
As to claim 29:
Fu et al. discloses:
A user equipment (UE) for wireless communication, comprising:
means for establishing a configuration for a first quality of service flow, the configuration establishing a plurality of radio link control entities;
(“…establishing an RLC entity corresponding to a second path for the QoS flow”; Fu et al.; 0398)
(“In S0, the RRC configures the mapping relationship between one QoS flow and a plurality of paths, wherein one QoS flow corresponds to a plurality of DRBs, one PDCP entity corresponds to a plurality of RBs, and one PDCP corresponds to a plurality of RLCs.”; Fu et al.; 0151)
(“In some embodiments, different RLCs are correspondingly configured with different indications (such as I/P-frames), or different RLCs are correspondingly configured with different flags (e.g., reliable or unreliable, important or non-important, different importance levels, different reliability levels, or different priorities).”; Fu et al.; 0153)
(where
“In S0, the RRC configures the mapping relationship between one QoS flow” maps to “establish a configuration for a first quality of service flow”, where “in S0, the RRC configures” maps to “establish a configuration”, “QoS flow” maps to “first quality of service flow”
“establishing an RLC entity corresponding”/”configures…plurality of paths…plurality of RLCs”/”different RLCs are correspondingly configured” maps to “the configuration establishing a plurality of radio link control entities”, where “configures”/”configured” maps to “configuration”, “establishing” maps to “establishing”, “RLCs” maps to “plurality of radio link control entities”
means for mapping protocol data units of a first protocol data unit set associated with the first quality of service flow to a first radio link control entity of the plurality of radio link control entities based at least in part on first characteristics associated with the first protocol data unit set and map protocol data units of a second protocol data unit set associated with the first quality of service flow to a second radio link control entity of the plurality of radio link control entities based at least in part on second characteristics associated with the second protocol data unit set; and
(“Action 1: In the case of submitting one PDCP PDU to the lower layer, the PDCP entity at the transmitter end acts as follows: in the case where the PDCP entity at the transmitter end is associated with at least two RLC entities, and the PDCP entity at the transmitter end is associated with the first RB (the first RB being an RB with a special identifier, or an RB with an XR identifier, or an RB with a differentiated processing identifier, or the like); or in the case where the PDCP entity at the transmitter end is associated with at least two RLC entities, and different RLC entities associated with the PDCP entity at the transmitter end correspond to different RBs; or in the case where the PDCP entity at the transmitter end is associated with at least two RLC entities, and the PDCP entity at the transmitter end differentiates the processing of different PDU sets or data; or in the case where the joint PDCP entity is associated with different RLC entities and transmits different PDU sets (corresponding to one QoS flow), then different PDCP PDUs are submitted to different RLC entities. Specifically, the first PDCP PDU is submitted to the first RLC entity, and the second PDCP PDU is submitted to the second RLC entity. Whether the PDCP PDU is the first or the second PDCP PDU is determined by the PDCP entity at the transmitter end based on the indication from the SDAP or the routing result of the SDAP. The mapping relationship between the first and second RLC entities and the first and second PDCP PDUs is configured by the RRC. The PDCP PDU includes PDCP data PDUs and/or PDCP control PDUs.”; Fu et al.; 0160)
(“The technical solutions according to the embodiments are applicable to cases where different data (such as different PDU sets, different encoded slices, and different frames) are mapped to the same QoS flow. The different data (such as different PDU sets) may be data with different importance, data with different associations, data with different dependencies, or data with different priorities. By the technical solutions according to the embodiments, a method for establishing or releasing a PDCP function in the case of configuring or changing the mapping between the QoS flow and the DRB is provided, such that the above-mentioned independent processing and/or joint processing of different data by the PDCP are supported.”; Fu et al.; 0277)
(where
“in the case where the joint PDCP entity is associated with different RLC entities and transmits different PDU sets (corresponding to one QoS flow), … The mapping relationship between the first and second RLC entities and the first and second PDCP PDUs is configured by the RRC. The PDCP PDU includes PDCP data PDUs and/or PDCP control PDU” maps to “map protocol data units of a first protocol data unit set associated
with the first quality of service flow to a first radio link control entity of the
plurality of radio link control entities”, where “mapping” maps to “map”, “first…PDCP PDUs” maps to “first protocol data unit set”, “corresponding to one QoS flow” maps to “associated with the first quality of service flow”, “first…RLC entities” maps to “to a first radio link entity”, “different RLC entities” maps to “plurality of radio link entities”
“The technical solutions according to the embodiments are applicable to cases where different data (such as different PDU sets, different encoded slices, and different frames) are mapped to the same QoS flow. The different data (such as different PDU sets) may be data with different importance, data with different associations, data with different dependencies, or data with different priorities.” Maps to “based at least in part on first characteristics associated with the first protocol data unit set”, where “PDU sets”/”different importance”/”different priorities” maps to “first characteristics associated with the first protocol data unit set”
“mapping”/”second PDCP PDUs” maps to “map protocol data units of a second protocol data unit set”, “corresponding to one QoS flow” maps to “associated with the first quality of service flow”, “second RLC entities” maps to “second radio link control entity”, “different RLC entities” maps to “plurality of radio link control entities”, “PDU sets”/”different importance”/”different priorities” maps to “based at least in part on second characteristics associated with the second protocol data unit set”
means for communicating at least a subset of the protocol data units of the first protocol data unit set, the second protocol data unit set, or both …based at least in part on the mapping.
(“For example, for an SDAP SDU of a QoS flow received from the higher layer, the SDAP entity at the transmitter end performs at least one of the following actions: generating an SDAP PDU; distributing the PDU to the corresponding or correct lower layer path based on the mapping relationship configured by the RRC; and indicating different information of different data to the lower layer (PDCP). For example, the different information may be: importance, an association, a priority, a dependency, a frame type, or a packet type.”; Fu et al.; 0158)
(see FIG. 3)
(where
“joint PDCP entity is associated with different RLC entities and transmits different PDU sets (corresponding to one QoS flow)”/” generating an SDAP PDU; distributing the PDU to the corresponding or correct lower layer path based on the mapping relationship configured by the RRC; and indicating different information of different data to the lower layer (PDCP). For example, the different information may be: importance, an association, a priority” maps to “communicate at least a subset of the protocol data units of the first protocol data unit set, the second protocol data unit set, or both …based at least in part on the mapping”, where “transmits” maps to “communicate”, “PDU sets” includes “at least a subset of the protocol data units of the first protocol data unit set, the second protocol data unit set, or both”, “distributing the PDU to the corresponding or correct lower layer path based on the mapping relationship configured by the RRC” maps to “based at least in part on the mapping”
Fu et al. teaches establishing RLC entities via configuration, where the configuration maps PDUs with RLCs associated with one QoS flow, where the mapping is configurated based on importance and priority.
Fu et al. as described above does not explicitly teach:
via one or more time-frequency resources
However, Liu et al. further teaches a time-frequency resources capability which includes:
via one or more time-frequency resources
(“In one embodiment, the UE may directly use indication information or use different time-frequency resources to indicate a reliability level of a required resource to the base station. Alternatively, the base station may configure a correspondence between indication information and a reliability level in advance, and the UE sends a request, where each request corresponds to a resource of a different reliability level. The base station receives the request from the UE, and allocates resources of different reliability levels based on different requests. For example, the UE requests a resource of a common reliability level in a normal case, and when a quantity of retransmission times exceeds a specific value, the UE requests a resource of a special reliability level.”; Liu et al.; 0157)
(“S520: The MAC entity generates N MAC PDUs based on a QoS flow corresponding to each of the M RLC PDUs, so that any two RLC PDUs corresponding to a same flow that are obtained in consecutive order are carried in different MAC PDUs, where N is an integer greater than or equal to 2.”; Liu et al.; 0115)
(“The UE actively initiates ARQ retransmission for the first data packet, and is not limited to using the first retransmission manner or the second retransmission manner. In addition, reliability of the second data packet is improved. In one embodiment, in the communications system shown in FIG. 1, when the receive end device is located within coverage of one or more cells (carriers) provided by a macro base station or a small cell, and there are one or more cells that serve the receive end device (for example, the UE), the RLC entity may perform ARQ retransmission on the second data through one or more other cells.”; Liu et al.; 0151)
(“After receiving an RLC SDU from the PDCP layer, the RLC entity stores the RLC SDU in a sending buffer. After receiving a sending occasion (such as a UL grant) from the MAC layer, the RLC entity segments the RLC SDU based on a size provided by using the sending occasion, and then adds an RLC header to form an RLC PDU. All RLC PDUs need to be stored in a retransmission buffer before being sent. The PDU in the retransmission buffer is retransmitted or removed after a STATUS PDU is received. After receiving a PDU from a peer end, a receive end first determines whether the PDU is a control PDU or a data PDU. If the PDU is a control PDU, the receive end sends the PDU to an RLC control module to determine which PDUs at a transmit end need to be retransmitted. If the PDU is a data PDU, the receive end sends the PDU to a receiving buffer. An RLC header is removed after resorting, and then an RLC SDU is reassembled.”; Liu et al.; 0146)
(where
“time-frequency resources”/”UE actively initiates ARQ retransmission”/”All RLC PDUs need to be stored in a retransmission buffer before being sent.” maps to “via one or more time-frequency resources”
Liu et al. teaches a UE performing RLC PDU retransmission using time-frequency resources.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the time-frequency resources capability of Liu et al. into Fu et al. By modifying the processing/communications of Fu et al. to include the time-frequency resources capability as taught by the processing/communications of Liu et al., the benefits of improved granularity (Fu et al.; 0003) with improved reliability (Liu et al.; Abstract) are achieved.
As to claim 30:
Fu et al. discloses:
A non-transitory computer-readable medium st01ing code for wireless communication at a wireless device, the code comprising instructions executable by one or more processors to:
establish a configuration for a first quality of service flow, the configuration establishing a plurality of radio link control entities;
(“…establishing an RLC entity corresponding to a second path for the QoS flow”; Fu et al.; 0398)
(“In S0, the RRC configures the mapping relationship between one QoS flow and a plurality of paths, wherein one QoS flow corresponds to a plurality of DRBs, one PDCP entity corresponds to a plurality of RBs, and one PDCP corresponds to a plurality of RLCs.”; Fu et al.; 0151)
(“In some embodiments, different RLCs are correspondingly configured with different indications (such as I/P-frames), or different RLCs are correspondingly configured with different flags (e.g., reliable or unreliable, important or non-important, different importance levels, different reliability levels, or different priorities).”; Fu et al.; 0153)
(where
“In S0, the RRC configures the mapping relationship between one QoS flow” maps to “establish a configuration for a first quality of service flow”, where “in S0, the RRC configures” maps to “establish a configuration”, “QoS flow” maps to “first quality of service flow”
“establishing an RLC entity corresponding”/”configures…plurality of paths…plurality of RLCs”/”different RLCs are correspondingly configured” maps to “the configuration establishing a plurality of radio link control entities”, where “configures”/”configured” maps to “configuration”, “establishing” maps to “establishing”, “RLCs” maps to “plurality of radio link control entities”
map protocol data units of a first protocol data unit set associated
with the first quality of service flow to a first radio link control entity of the
plurality of radio link control entities based at least in part on first characteristics associated with the first protocol data unit set and map protocol data units of a
second protocol data unit set associated with the first quality of service flow to a
second radio link control entity of the plurality of radio link control entities based at least in part on second characteristics associated with the second protocol data unit set; and
(“Action 1: In the case of submitting one PDCP PDU to the lower layer, the PDCP entity at the transmitter end acts as follows: in the case where the PDCP entity at the transmitter end is associated with at least two RLC entities, and the PDCP entity at the transmitter end is associated with the first RB (the first RB being an RB with a special identifier, or an RB with an XR identifier, or an RB with a differentiated processing identifier, or the like); or in the case where the PDCP entity at the transmitter end is associated with at least two RLC entities, and different RLC entities associated with the PDCP entity at the transmitter end correspond to different RBs; or in the case where the PDCP entity at the transmitter end is associated with at least two RLC entities, and the PDCP entity at the transmitter end differentiates the processing of different PDU sets or data; or in the case where the joint PDCP entity is associated with different RLC entities and transmits different PDU sets (corresponding to one QoS flow), then different PDCP PDUs are submitted to different RLC entities. Specifically, the first PDCP PDU is submitted to the first RLC entity, and the second PDCP PDU is submitted to the second RLC entity. Whether the PDCP PDU is the first or the second PDCP PDU is determined by the PDCP entity at the transmitter end based on the indication from the SDAP or the routing result of the SDAP. The mapping relationship between the first and second RLC entities and the first and second PDCP PDUs is configured by the RRC. The PDCP PDU includes PDCP data PDUs and/or PDCP control PDUs.”; Fu et al.; 0160)
(“The technical solutions according to the embodiments are applicable to cases where different data (such as different PDU sets, different encoded slices, and different frames) are mapped to the same QoS flow. The different data (such as different PDU sets) may be data with different importance, data with different associations, data with different dependencies, or data with different priorities. By the technical solutions according to the embodiments, a method for establishing or releasing a PDCP function in the case of configuring or changing the mapping between the QoS flow and the DRB is provided, such that the above-mentioned independent processing and/or joint processing of different data by the PDCP are supported.”; Fu et al.; 0277)
(where
“in the case where the joint PDCP entity is associated with different RLC entities and transmits different PDU sets (corresponding to one QoS flow), … The mapping relationship between the first and second RLC entities and the first and second PDCP PDUs is configured by the RRC. The PDCP PDU includes PDCP data PDUs and/or PDCP control PDU” maps to “map protocol data units of a first protocol data unit set associated
with the first quality of service flow to a first radio link control entity of the
plurality of radio link control entities”, where “mapping” maps to “map”, “first…PDCP PDUs” maps to “first protocol data unit set”, “corresponding to one QoS flow” maps to “associated with the first quality of service flow”, “first…RLC entities” maps to “to a first radio link entity”, “different RLC entities” maps to “plurality of radio link entities”
“The technical solutions according to the embodiments are applicable to cases where different data (such as different PDU sets, different encoded slices, and different frames) are mapped to the same QoS flow. The different data (such as different PDU sets) may be data with different importance, data with different associations, data with different dependencies, or data with different priorities.” Maps to “based at least in part on first characteristics associated with the first protocol data unit set”, where “PDU sets”/”different importance”/”different priorities” maps to “first characteristics associated with the first protocol data unit set”
“mapping”/”second PDCP PDUs” maps to “map protocol data units of a second protocol data unit set”, “corresponding to one QoS flow” maps to “associated with the first quality of service flow”, “second RLC entities” maps to “second radio link control entity”, “different RLC entities” maps to “plurality of radio link control entities”, “PDU sets”/”different importance”/”different priorities” maps to “based at least in part on second characteristics associated with the second protocol data unit set”
communicate at least a subset of the protocol data units of the first protocol data unit set, the second protocol data unit set, or both …based at least in part on the mapping.
(“For example, for an SDAP SDU of a QoS flow received from the higher layer, the SDAP entity at the transmitter end performs at least one of the following actions: generating an SDAP PDU; distributing the PDU to the corresponding or correct lower layer path based on the mapping relationship configured by the RRC; and indicating different information of different data to the lower layer (PDCP). For example, the different information may be: importance, an association, a priority, a dependency, a frame type, or a packet type.”; Fu et al.; 0158)
(see FIG. 3)
(where
“joint PDCP entity is associated with different RLC entities and transmits different PDU sets (corresponding to one QoS flow)”/” generating an SDAP PDU; distributing the PDU to the corresponding or correct lower layer path based on the mapping relationship configured by the RRC; and indicating different information of different data to the lower layer (PDCP). For example, the different information may be: importance, an association, a priority” maps to “communicate at least a subset of the protocol data units of the first protocol data unit set, the second protocol data unit set, or both …based at least in part on the mapping”, where “transmits” maps to “communicate”, “PDU sets” includes “at least a subset of the protocol data units of the first protocol data unit set, the second protocol data unit set, or both”, “distributing the PDU to the corresponding or correct lower layer path based on the mapping relationship configured by the RRC” maps to “based at least in part on the mapping”
Fu et al. teaches establishing RLC entities via configuration, where the configuration maps PDUs with RLCs associated with one QoS flow, where the mapping is configurated based on importance and priority.
Fu et al. as described above does not explicitly teach:
via one or more time-frequency resources
However, Liu et al. further teaches a time-frequency resources capability which includes:
via one or more time-frequency resources
(“In one embodiment, the UE may directly use indication information or use different time-frequency resources to indicate a reliability level of a required resource to the base station. Alternatively, the base station may configure a correspondence between indication information and a reliability level in advance, and the UE sends a request, where each request corresponds to a resource of a different reliability level. The base station receives the request from the UE, and allocates resources of different reliability levels based on different requests. For example, the UE requests a resource of a common reliability level in a normal case, and when a quantity of retransmission times exceeds a specific value, the UE requests a resource of a special reliability level.”; Liu et al.; 0157)
(“S520: The MAC entity generates N MAC PDUs based on a QoS flow corresponding to each of the M RLC PDUs, so that any two RLC PDUs corresponding to a same flow that are obtained in consecutive order are carried in different MAC PDUs, where N is an integer greater than or equal to 2.”; Liu et al.; 0115)
(“The UE actively initiates ARQ retransmission for the first data packet, and is not limited to using the first retransmission manner or the second retransmission manner. In addition, reliability of the second data packet is improved. In one embodiment, in the communications system shown in FIG. 1, when the receive end device is located within coverage of one or more cells (carriers) provided by a macro base station or a small cell, and there are one or more cells that serve the receive end device (for example, the UE), the RLC entity may perform ARQ retransmission on the second data through one or more other cells.”; Liu et al.; 0151)
(“After receiving an RLC SDU from the PDCP layer, the RLC entity stores the RLC SDU in a sending buffer. After receiving a sending occasion (such as a UL grant) from the MAC layer, the RLC entity segments the RLC SDU based on a size provided by using the sending occasion, and then adds an RLC header to form an RLC PDU. All RLC PDUs need to be stored in a retransmission buffer before being sent. The PDU in the retransmission buffer is retransmitted or removed after a STATUS PDU is received. After receiving a PDU from a peer end, a receive end first determines whether the PDU is a control PDU or a data PDU. If the PDU is a control PDU, the receive end sends the PDU to an RLC control module to determine which PDUs at a transmit end need to be retransmitted. If the PDU is a data PDU, the receive end sends the PDU to a receiving buffer. An RLC header is removed after resorting, and then an RLC SDU is reassembled.”; Liu et al.; 0146)
(where
“time-frequency resources”/”UE actively initiates ARQ retransmission”/”All RLC PDUs need to be stored in a retransmission buffer before being sent.” maps to “via one or more time-frequency resources”
Liu et al. teaches a UE performing RLC PDU retransmission using time-frequency resources.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the time-frequency resources capability of Liu et al. into Fu et al. By modifying the processing/communications of Fu et al. to include the time-frequency resources capability as taught by the processing/communications of Liu et al., the benefits of improved granularity (Fu et al.; 0003) with improved reliability (Liu et al.; Abstract) are achieved.
Claim(s) 3, 4, 21 and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fu et al. US 20250142402 in view of Liu et al. US 20200358570 and in further view of Kwon, “APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR TRANSMITTING DATA IN HETEROGENEOUS NETWORK RADIO COMMUNICATION SYSTEM”, 2015-02-12, WO, WO 2015020344 (citations are from English translation).
As to claim 3:
Fu et al. as described above does not explicitly teach:
map the protocol data units of the first protocol data unit set to a first subset of the one or more time-frequency resources based at least in part on a first logical channel prioritization restriction policy associated with the first logical channel; and
map the protocol data units of the second protocol data unit set to a second subset of the one or more time-frequency resources based at least in part on a second logical channel prioritization restriction policy associated with the second logical channel.
However, Kwon et al. further teaches a mapping capability which includes:
map the protocol data units of the first protocol data unit set to a first subset of the one or more time-frequency resources based at least in part on a first logical channel prioritization restriction policy associated with the first logical channel; and
map the protocol data units of the second protocol data unit set to a second subset of the one or more time-frequency resources based at least in part on a second logical channel prioritization restriction policy associated with the second logical channel.
(“Referring to FIG. 10, a terminal consisting of a plurality of serving cells acquires an uplink grant that allocates uplink resources of each serving cell. The terminal classifies (or individually) the physical layer resources allocated to each serving cell. The UE allocates data of logical channels processed by each RB according to the LCP procedure based on each serving cell uplink resource. For example, in the embodiment of FIG. 10, a first logical channel (channel 1), a second logical channel (channel 2), a second logical channel (channel 3) are configured in a terminal, and a main serving cell (PCell), Assume that the first secondary serving cell SCell1 is configured. Uplink resources of the primary serving cell and the first secondary serving cell are separated and allocated to MAC PDUs for each serving cell. According to the LCP procedure, the portion corresponding to the first logical channel PBR of the uplink data in the first logical channel having priority 1 is first mapped to the MAC PDU of the primary serving cell, and then to the second logical channel having priority 2. A portion of the uplink data corresponding to the second logical channel PBR is next mapped to the MAC PDU of the primary serving cell. Since uplink resources of the primary serving cell are limited, only a part of the PBRs of the second logical channel are mapped to the MAC PDU. Next, the data mapped to the MAC PDU for the first secondary serving cell is a portion remaining after being mapped to the main serving cell of the uplink data in the first logical channel having priority number 1. At this time, only the uplink resources of the first secondary serving cell are mapped.”; Kwon; p.10, bottom of page)
(“In addition, data is transmitted over a physical channel between different physical layers (ie, between physical layers of a transmitter and a receiver). The physical channel may be modulated by an orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (OFDM) scheme and utilizes space generated by time, frequency, and a plurality of antennas as radio resources.”; Kwon; p.4, bottom of page)
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the mapping capability of Kwon et al. into Fu et al. By modifying the processing/communications of Fu et al. to include the mapping capability as taught by the processing/communications of Kwon et al., the benefits of improved granularity (Fu et al.; 0003) with improved dual connectivity (Kwon; Abstract) are achieved.
As to claim 4:
Fu et al. as described above does not explicitly teach:
wherein the first logical channel is associated with a first logical channel prioritization priority and the second logical channel is associated with a second logical channel prioritization priority.
However, Kwon et al. further teaches a priority capability which includes:
wherein the first logical channel is associated with a first logical channel prioritization priority and the second logical channel is associated with a second logical channel prioritization priority.
(“Referring to FIG. 10, a terminal consisting of a plurality of serving cells acquires an uplink grant that allocates uplink resources of each serving cell. The terminal classifies (or individually) the physical layer resources allocated to each serving cell. The UE allocates data of logical channels processed by each RB according to the LCP procedure based on each serving cell uplink resource. For example, in the embodiment of FIG. 10, a first logical channel (channel 1), a second logical channel (channel 2), a second logical channel (channel 3) are configured in a terminal, and a main serving cell (PCell), Assume that the first secondary serving cell SCell1 is configured. Uplink resources of the primary serving cell and the first secondary serving cell are separated and allocated to MAC PDUs for each serving cell. According to the LCP procedure, the portion corresponding to the first logical channel PBR of the uplink data in the first logical channel having priority 1 is first mapped to the MAC PDU of the primary serving cell, and then to the second logical channel having priority 2. A portion of the uplink data corresponding to the second logical channel PBR is next mapped to the MAC PDU of the primary serving cell. Since uplink resources of the primary serving cell are limited, only a part of the PBRs of the second logical channel are mapped to the MAC PDU. Next, the data mapped to the MAC PDU for the first secondary serving cell is a portion remaining after being mapped to the main serving cell of the uplink data in the first logical channel having priority number 1. At this time, only the uplink resources of the first secondary serving cell are mapped.”; Kwon; p.10, bottom of page)
(“In addition, data is transmitted over a physical channel between different physical layers (ie, between physical layers of a transmitter and a receiver). The physical channel may be modulated by an orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (OFDM) scheme and utilizes space generated by time, frequency, and a plurality of antennas as radio resources.”; Kwon; p.4, bottom of page)
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the priority capability of Kwon et al. into Fu et al. By modifying the processing/communications of Fu et al. to include the priority capability as taught by the processing/communications of Kwon et al., the benefits of improved granularity (Fu et al.; 0003) with improved dual connectivity (Kwon; Abstract) are achieved.
As to claim 21:
Fu et al. as described above does not explicitly teach:
map the protocol data units of the first protocol data unit set to a first subset of the one or more time-frequency resources based at least in part on a first logical channel prioritization restriction policy associated with the first logical channel; and
map the protocol data units of the second protocol data unit set to a second subset of the one or more time-frequency resources based at least in part on a second logical channel prioritization restriction policy associated with the second logical channel.
However, Kwon et al. further teaches a mapping capability which includes:
map the protocol data units of the first protocol data unit set to a first subset of the one or more time-frequency resources based at least in part on a first logical channel prioritization restriction policy associated with the first logical channel; and
map the protocol data units of the second protocol data unit set to a second subset of the one or more time-frequency resources based at least in part on a second logical channel prioritization restriction policy associated with the second logical channel.
(“Referring to FIG. 10, a terminal consisting of a plurality of serving cells acquires an uplink grant that allocates uplink resources of each serving cell. The terminal classifies (or individually) the physical layer resources allocated to each serving cell. The UE allocates data of logical channels processed by each RB according to the LCP procedure based on each serving cell uplink resource. For example, in the embodiment of FIG. 10, a first logical channel (channel 1), a second logical channel (channel 2), a second logical channel (channel 3) are configured in a terminal, and a main serving cell (PCell), Assume that the first secondary serving cell SCell1 is configured. Uplink resources of the primary serving cell and the first secondary serving cell are separated and allocated to MAC PDUs for each serving cell. According to the LCP procedure, the portion corresponding to the first logical channel PBR of the uplink data in the first logical channel having priority 1 is first mapped to the MAC PDU of the primary serving cell, and then to the second logical channel having priority 2. A portion of the uplink data corresponding to the second logical channel PBR is next mapped to the MAC PDU of the primary serving cell. Since uplink resources of the primary serving cell are limited, only a part of the PBRs of the second logical channel are mapped to the MAC PDU. Next, the data mapped to the MAC PDU for the first secondary serving cell is a portion remaining after being mapped to the main serving cell of the uplink data in the first logical channel having priority number 1. At this time, only the uplink resources of the first secondary serving cell are mapped.”; Kwon; p.10, bottom of page)
(“In addition, data is transmitted over a physical channel between different physical layers (ie, between physical layers of a transmitter and a receiver). The physical channel may be modulated by an orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (OFDM) scheme and utilizes space generated by time, frequency, and a plurality of antennas as radio resources.”; Kwon; p.4, bottom of page)
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the mapping capability of Kwon et al. into Fu et al. By modifying the processing/communications of Fu et al. to include the mapping capability as taught by the processing/communications of Kwon et al., the benefits of improved granularity (Fu et al.; 0003) with improved dual connectivity (Kwon; Abstract) are achieved.
As to claim 22:
Fu et al. as described above does not explicitly teach:
wherein the first logical channel is associated with a first logical channel prioritization priority and the second logical channel is associated with a second logical channel prioritization priority.
However, Kwon et al. further teaches a priority capability which includes:
wherein the first logical channel is associated with a first logical channel prioritization priority and the second logical channel is associated with a second logical channel prioritization priority.
(“Referring to FIG. 10, a terminal consisting of a plurality of serving cells acquires an uplink grant that allocates uplink resources of each serving cell. The terminal classifies (or individually) the physical layer resources allocated to each serving cell. The UE allocates data of logical channels processed by each RB according to the LCP procedure based on each serving cell uplink resource. For example, in the embodiment of FIG. 10, a first logical channel (channel 1), a second logical channel (channel 2), a second logical channel (channel 3) are configured in a terminal, and a main serving cell (PCell), Assume that the first secondary serving cell SCell1 is configured. Uplink resources of the primary serving cell and the first secondary serving cell are separated and allocated to MAC PDUs for each serving cell. According to the LCP procedure, the portion corresponding to the first logical channel PBR of the uplink data in the first logical channel having priority 1 is first mapped to the MAC PDU of the primary serving cell, and then to the second logical channel having priority 2. A portion of the uplink data corresponding to the second logical channel PBR is next mapped to the MAC PDU of the primary serving cell. Since uplink resources of the primary serving cell are limited, only a part of the PBRs of the second logical channel are mapped to the MAC PDU. Next, the data mapped to the MAC PDU for the first secondary serving cell is a portion remaining after being mapped to the main serving cell of the uplink data in the first logical channel having priority number 1. At this time, only the uplink resources of the first secondary serving cell are mapped.”; Kwon; p.10, bottom of page)
(“In addition, data is transmitted over a physical channel between different physical layers (ie, between physical layers of a transmitter and a receiver). The physical channel may be modulated by an orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (OFDM) scheme and utilizes space generated by time, frequency, and a plurality of antennas as radio resources.”; Kwon; p.4, bottom of page)
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the priority capability of Kwon et al. into Fu et al. By modifying the processing/communications of Fu et al. to include the priority capability as taught by the processing/communications of Kwon et al., the benefits of improved granularity (Fu et al.; 0003) with improved dual connectivity (Kwon; Abstract) are achieved.
Claim(s) 5, 6, 23 and 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fu et al. US 20250142402 in view of Liu et al. US 20200358570 and in further view of Rao et al. US 20250119785.
As to claim 5:
Fu et al. as described above does not explicitly teach:
wherein the first logical channel and the second logical channel are associated with a first logical channel prioritization parameter, the first logical channel prioritization parameter based at least in part on one or more characteristics of the first quality of service flow.
However, Rao et al. further teaches a parameters capability which includes:
wherein the first logical channel and the second logical channel are associated with a first logical channel prioritization parameter, the first logical channel prioritization parameter based at least in part on one or more characteristics of the first quality of service flow.
(“The triggering events/conditions may include a change in configuration(s) at the WTRU. The WTRU may be triggered to perform one or more WTRU action(s) (e.g., sending an indication/report to network) when changing the mapping configuration and/or forwarding configuration, including changing at least one of the parameters at the mapping configuration (e.g., mapping a QoS flow to a new forwarding configuration), at the DRB/LCHs (e.g., priority, PDB, PBR) and/or at LCP configuration. For example, the WTRU may be triggered to perform one or more WTRU action(s) when the CDRX/DRX configuration and/or any of the associated parameters applied at the WTRU is modified/updated, which may impact the transmission/reception pattern and/or achievable QoS during data transmission.”; Rao et al.; 0165)
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the parameters capability of Rao et al. into Fu et al. By modifying the processing/communications of Fu et al. to include the parameters capability as taught by the processing/communications of Rao et al., the benefits of improved granularity (Fu et al.; 0003) with improved LCP (Rao et al.; Abstract) are achieved.
As to claim 6:
Fu et al. as described above does not explicitly teach:
wherein the first logical channel prioritization parameter comprises a first prioritized bit rate, a first bucket size duration, or both.
However, Rao et al. further teaches a PBR/BSD capability which includes:
wherein the first logical channel prioritization parameter comprises a first prioritized bit rate, a first bucket size duration, or both.
(“The triggering events/conditions may include a change in configuration(s) at the WTRU. The WTRU may be triggered to perform one or more WTRU action(s) (e.g., sending an indication/report to network) when changing the mapping configuration and/or forwarding configuration, including changing at least one of the parameters at the mapping configuration (e.g., mapping a QoS flow to a new forwarding configuration), at the DRB/LCHs (e.g., priority, PDB, PBR) and/or at LCP configuration. For example, the WTRU may be triggered to perform one or more WTRU action(s) when the CDRX/DRX configuration and/or any of the associated parameters applied at the WTRU is modified/updated, which may impact the transmission/reception pattern and/or achievable QoS during data transmission.”; Rao et al.; 0165)
(“The WTRU may receive an indication from the network in AS layer signaling (e.g., RRC, control PDU, MAC CE, DCI), where the received indication may indicate one or more of the following: a deactivation indication for deactivating the first mapping configuration (ID), an activation indication for activating the second mapping configuration (ID), IDs of the mapping parameters to be activated/deactivated, validity conditions for activating the second mapping configuration (e.g., time period/duration or detection of another QoS event), and/or any updated parameters associated with forwarding configurations (e.g., updated LCP, priority, PBR, BSD), radio resources (e.g., configured grants, dynamic grants, BWPs, CCs) for addressing the QoS event, etc.”; Rao et al.; 0195)
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the PBR/BSD capability of Rao et al. into Fu et al. By modifying the processing/communications of Fu et al. to include the PBR/BSD capability as taught by the processing/communications of Rao et al., the benefits of improved granularity (Fu et al.; 0003) with improved LCP (Rao et al.; Abstract) are achieved.
As to claim 23:
Fu et al. as described above does not explicitly teach:
wherein the first logical channel and the second logical channel are associated with a first logical channel prioritization parameter, the first logical channel prioritization parameter based at least in part on one or more characteristics of the first quality of service flow.
However, Rao et al. further teaches a parameters capability which includes:
wherein the first logical channel and the second logical channel are associated with a first logical channel prioritization parameter, the first logical channel prioritization parameter based at least in part on one or more characteristics of the first quality of service flow.
(“The triggering events/conditions may include a change in configuration(s) at the WTRU. The WTRU may be triggered to perform one or more WTRU action(s) (e.g., sending an indication/report to network) when changing the mapping configuration and/or forwarding configuration, including changing at least one of the parameters at the mapping configuration (e.g., mapping a QoS flow to a new forwarding configuration), at the DRB/LCHs (e.g., priority, PDB, PBR) and/or at LCP configuration. For example, the WTRU may be triggered to perform one or more WTRU action(s) when the CDRX/DRX configuration and/or any of the associated parameters applied at the WTRU is modified/updated, which may impact the transmission/reception pattern and/or achievable QoS during data transmission.”; Rao et al.; 0165)
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the parameters capability of Rao et al. into Fu et al. By modifying the processing/communications of Fu et al. to include the parameters capability as taught by the processing/communications of Rao et al., the benefits of improved granularity (Fu et al.; 0003) with improved LCP (Rao et al.; Abstract) are achieved.
As to claim 24:
Fu et al. as described above does not explicitly teach:
wherein the first logical channel prioritization parameter comprises a first prioritized bit rate, a first bucket size duration, or both.
However, Rao et al. further teaches a PBR/BSD capability which includes:
wherein the first logical channel prioritization parameter comprises a first prioritized bit rate, a first bucket size duration, or both.
(“The triggering events/conditions may include a change in configuration(s) at the WTRU. The WTRU may be triggered to perform one or more WTRU action(s) (e.g., sending an indication/report to network) when changing the mapping configuration and/or forwarding configuration, including changing at least one of the parameters at the mapping configuration (e.g., mapping a QoS flow to a new forwarding configuration), at the DRB/LCHs (e.g., priority, PDB, PBR) and/or at LCP configuration. For example, the WTRU may be triggered to perform one or more WTRU action(s) when the CDRX/DRX configuration and/or any of the associated parameters applied at the WTRU is modified/updated, which may impact the transmission/reception pattern and/or achievable QoS during data transmission.”; Rao et al.; 0165)
(“The WTRU may receive an indication from the network in AS layer signaling (e.g., RRC, control PDU, MAC CE, DCI), where the received indication may indicate one or more of the following: a deactivation indication for deactivating the first mapping configuration (ID), an activation indication for activating the second mapping configuration (ID), IDs of the mapping parameters to be activated/deactivated, validity conditions for activating the second mapping configuration (e.g., time period/duration or detection of another QoS event), and/or any updated parameters associated with forwarding configurations (e.g., updated LCP, priority, PBR, BSD), radio resources (e.g., configured grants, dynamic grants, BWPs, CCs) for addressing the QoS event, etc.”; Rao et al.; 0195)
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the PBR/BSD capability of Rao et al. into Fu et al. By modifying the processing/communications of Fu et al. to include the PBR/BSD capability as taught by the processing/communications of Rao et al., the benefits of improved granularity (Fu et al.; 0003) with improved LCP (Rao et al.; Abstract) are achieved.
Claim(s) 7 and 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fu et al. US 20250142402 in view of Liu et al. US 20200358570 and in further view of Rao et al. US 20250119785 and Li et al. US 20220376879.
As to claim 7:
Fu et al. discloses:
…of the first protocol data unit set, the second protocol data unit set, or both.
(“Action 1: In the case of submitting one PDCP PDU to the lower layer, the PDCP entity at the transmitter end acts as follows: in the case where the PDCP entity at the transmitter end is associated with at least two RLC entities, and the PDCP entity at the transmitter end is associated with the first RB (the first RB being an RB with a special identifier, or an RB with an XR identifier, or an RB with a differentiated processing identifier, or the like); or in the case where the PDCP entity at the transmitter end is associated with at least two RLC entities, and different RLC entities associated with the PDCP entity at the transmitter end correspond to different RBs; or in the case where the PDCP entity at the transmitter end is associated with at least two RLC entities, and the PDCP entity at the transmitter end differentiates the processing of different PDU sets or data; or in the case where the joint PDCP entity is associated with different RLC entities and transmits different PDU sets (corresponding to one QoS flow), then different PDCP PDUs are submitted to different RLC entities. Specifically, the first PDCP PDU is submitted to the first RLC entity, and the second PDCP PDU is submitted to the second RLC entity. Whether the PDCP PDU is the first or the second PDCP PDU is determined by the PDCP entity at the transmitter end based on the indication from the SDAP or the routing result of the SDAP. The mapping relationship between the first and second RLC entities and the first and second PDCP PDUs is configured by the RRC. The PDCP PDU includes PDCP data PDUs and/or PDCP control PDUs.”; Fu et al.; 0160)
(“The technical solutions according to the embodiments are applicable to cases where different data (such as different PDU sets, different encoded slices, and different frames) are mapped to the same QoS flow. The different data (such as different PDU sets) may be data with different importance, data with different associations, data with different dependencies, or data with different priorities. By the technical solutions according to the embodiments, a method for establishing or releasing a PDCP function in the case of configuring or changing the mapping between the QoS flow and the DRB is provided, such that the above-mentioned independent processing and/or joint processing of different data by the PDCP are supported.”; Fu et al.; 0277)
(“For example, for an SDAP SDU of a QoS flow received from the higher layer, the SDAP entity at the transmitter end performs at least one of the following actions: generating an SDAP PDU; distributing the PDU to the corresponding or correct lower layer path based on the mapping relationship configured by the RRC; and indicating different information of different data to the lower layer (PDCP). For example, the different information may be: importance, an association, a priority, a dependency, a frame type, or a packet type.”; Fu et al.; 0158)
Fu et al. as described above does not explicitly teach:
decrement a state variable that is associated with the plurality of logical channels based at least in part on communicating at least the subset of the protocol data units
However, Li et al. further teaches a Bj subtraction capability which includes:
decrement a state variable that is associated with the plurality of logical channels based at least in part on communicating at least the subset of the protocol data units
(“In Act2, the resources that can be further allocated to the logical channels are updated, i.e., the size of all MAC service data units (SDU) of the logical channel j that are multiplexed onto the MAC PDU in Act1 is subtracted from Bj.”; Li et al.; 0100)
(“Specifically, for all candidate logical channel with Bj>0 in the first set of candidate logical channels, the terminal device first performs the primary first round of resource allocation in an order of logical channel priority from high to low. The resources allocated to each logical channel can only meet the requirements on the PBR. Then, for the candidate logical channel j, to which the resources are allocated, in the first set of candidate logical channels, the size of all MAC SDUs of the candidate logical channel j that are multiplexed onto an MAC PDU in the primary first round of resource allocation, is subtracted from Bj of the candidate logical channel j.”; Li et al.; 0197)
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the Bj subtraction capability of Li et al. into Fu et al. By modifying the processing/communications of Fu et al. to include the Bj subtraction capability as taught by the processing/communications of Li et al., the benefits of improved granularity (Fu et al.; 0003) with improved experience (Li et al.; Abstract) are achieved.
As to claim 25:
Fu et al. discloses:
…of the first protocol data unit set, the second protocol data unit set, or both.
(“Action 1: In the case of submitting one PDCP PDU to the lower layer, the PDCP entity at the transmitter end acts as follows: in the case where the PDCP entity at the transmitter end is associated with at least two RLC entities, and the PDCP entity at the transmitter end is associated with the first RB (the first RB being an RB with a special identifier, or an RB with an XR identifier, or an RB with a differentiated processing identifier, or the like); or in the case where the PDCP entity at the transmitter end is associated with at least two RLC entities, and different RLC entities associated with the PDCP entity at the transmitter end correspond to different RBs; or in the case where the PDCP entity at the transmitter end is associated with at least two RLC entities, and the PDCP entity at the transmitter end differentiates the processing of different PDU sets or data; or in the case where the joint PDCP entity is associated with different RLC entities and transmits different PDU sets (corresponding to one QoS flow), then different PDCP PDUs are submitted to different RLC entities. Specifically, the first PDCP PDU is submitted to the first RLC entity, and the second PDCP PDU is submitted to the second RLC entity. Whether the PDCP PDU is the first or the second PDCP PDU is determined by the PDCP entity at the transmitter end based on the indication from the SDAP or the routing result of the SDAP. The mapping relationship between the first and second RLC entities and the first and second PDCP PDUs is configured by the RRC. The PDCP PDU includes PDCP data PDUs and/or PDCP control PDUs.”; Fu et al.; 0160)
(“The technical solutions according to the embodiments are applicable to cases where different data (such as different PDU sets, different encoded slices, and different frames) are mapped to the same QoS flow. The different data (such as different PDU sets) may be data with different importance, data with different associations, data with different dependencies, or data with different priorities. By the technical solutions according to the embodiments, a method for establishing or releasing a PDCP function in the case of configuring or changing the mapping between the QoS flow and the DRB is provided, such that the above-mentioned independent processing and/or joint processing of different data by the PDCP are supported.”; Fu et al.; 0277)
(“For example, for an SDAP SDU of a QoS flow received from the higher layer, the SDAP entity at the transmitter end performs at least one of the following actions: generating an SDAP PDU; distributing the PDU to the corresponding or correct lower layer path based on the mapping relationship configured by the RRC; and indicating different information of different data to the lower layer (PDCP). For example, the different information may be: importance, an association, a priority, a dependency, a frame type, or a packet type.”; Fu et al.; 0158)
Fu et al. as described above does not explicitly teach:
decrement a state variable that is associated with the plurality of logical channels based at least in part on communicating at least the subset of the protocol data units
However, Li et al. further teaches a Bj subtraction capability which includes:
decrement a state variable that is associated with the plurality of logical channels based at least in part on communicating at least the subset of the protocol data units
(“In Act2, the resources that can be further allocated to the logical channels are updated, i.e., the size of all MAC service data units (SDU) of the logical channel j that are multiplexed onto the MAC PDU in Act1 is subtracted from Bj.”; Li et al.; 0100)
(“Specifically, for all candidate logical channel with Bj>0 in the first set of candidate logical channels, the terminal device first performs the primary first round of resource allocation in an order of logical channel priority from high to low. The resources allocated to each logical channel can only meet the requirements on the PBR. Then, for the candidate logical channel j, to which the resources are allocated, in the first set of candidate logical channels, the size of all MAC SDUs of the candidate logical channel j that are multiplexed onto an MAC PDU in the primary first round of resource allocation, is subtracted from Bj of the candidate logical channel j.”; Li et al.; 0197)
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the Bj subtraction capability of Li et al. into Fu et al. By modifying the processing/communications of Fu et al. to include the Bj subtraction capability as taught by the processing/communications of Li et al., the benefits of improved granularity (Fu et al.; 0003) with improved experience (Li et al.; Abstract) are achieved.
Claim(s) 8, 9, 26 and 27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fu et al. US 20250142402 in view of Liu et al. US 20200358570 and in further view of Park et al. US 20210258865.
As to claim 8:
Fu et al. as described above does not explicitly teach:
the first logical channel is associated with a first logical channel
prioritization parameter and the second logical channel is associated with a second logical channel prioritization parameter; and
the first logical channel prioritization parameter, the second logical
channel prioritization parameter, or both is based at least in part on one or more
characteristics of the first quality of service flow.
However, Park et al. further teaches a parameter/priority capability which includes:
the first logical channel is associated with a first logical channel
prioritization parameter and the second logical channel is associated with a second logical channel prioritization parameter; and
the first logical channel prioritization parameter, the second logical
channel prioritization parameter, or both is based at least in part on one or more
characteristics of the first quality of service flow.
(“FIG. 24 shows an example of cell selection for a wireless device. A wireless device 2410 may determine whether to use an uplink configuration for a logical channel associated with a network slice. The wireless device 2410 may select which of several logical channels it may use as a communication link where such a determination may be based on at least one of: a network condition, a frequency, a network slice requirement, throughput, latency, quality of service, and/or the like. The base station 2405 may send, to the wireless device 2410, at least one message 2415 (e.g., RRC message). The at least one message may comprise a first parameter 2415A indicating that a first logical channel (e.g., logical channel1) is allowed to use a first uplink (e.g., normal uplink) of a first cell (e.g., cell1) and a second cell (e.g., cell2). The at least one RRC message may comprising a second parameter 2415B indicating that a second logical channel (e.g., logical channel2) is allowed to use a second uplink (e.g., supplementary uplink) of the first cell (e.g., cell1). The at least one RRC message may comprise a third parameter 2415C indicating that a third logical channel (e.g., logical channel3) is allowed to use the first uplink (e.g., normal uplink) of the first cell (e.g., cell1), the second uplink (e.g., supplementary uplink) of the first cell (e.g., cell1), and the second cell (e.g., cell2). The at least one message 2415 may comprise any quantity of parameters, one or more of which may indicate that quantity of logical channels that may be allowed to use fro any quantity of communication links (e.g., uplinks, downlinks, uplink/downlink, etc.).”; Park et al.; 0264)
(“The second configuration parameters (e.g., LogicalChannelConfig, allowedServingCells, allowedUplinks, etc.) may indicate whether the logical channel (e.g., and/or logical channel group comprising the logical channel) is mapped to (e.g., allowed to use) the first uplink of the cell and/or whether the logical channel (e.g., and/or logical channel group comprising the logical channel) is mapped to (e.g., allowed to use) the second uplink of the cell. The second configuration parameters may comprise at least one of: a bucket size duration, a configured grant allowed indication, logical channel priority information, scheduling request identifier, SDAP/PDCP/RLC/MAC configuration parameters of the logical channel (e.g., the logical channel group, radio bearer, one or more QoS flows, PDU session, etc.), and/or the like. The second configuration parameters may indicate that the logical channel is for the network slice. The second configuration parameters may indicate that the logical channel is for a radio bearer of one or more QoS flows. The second configuration parameters may indicate that the one or more QoS flows are mapped to a PDU session for the network slice.”; Park et al.; 0259)
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the parameter/priority capability of Park et al. into Fu et al. By modifying the processing/communications of Fu et al. to include the parameter/priority capability as taught by the processing/communications of Park et al., the benefits of improved granularity (Fu et al.; 0003) with improved cell selection (Park et al.; 0004) are achieved.
As to claim 9:
Fu et al. as described above does not explicitly teach:
wherein the first logical channel prioritization
parameter comprises …, a first bucket size duration, or … and
the second logical channel prioritization parameter comprises …, a second bucket size duration, or ….
However, Park et al. further teaches a bucket size duration capability which includes:
wherein the first logical channel prioritization
parameter comprises …, a first bucket size duration, or … and
the second logical channel prioritization parameter comprises …, a second bucket size duration, or ….
(“wherein the first logical channel prioritization
parameter comprises …, a first bucket size duration, or … and
the second logical channel prioritization parameter comprises …, a second bucket size duration, or ….”; Park et al.; 0259)
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the bucket size duration capability of Park et al. into Fu et al. By modifying the processing/communications of Fu et al. to include the bucket size duration capability as taught by the processing/communications of Park et al., the benefits of improved granularity (Fu et al.; 0003) with improved cell selection (Park et al.; 0004) are achieved.
As to claim 26:
Fu et al. as described above does not explicitly teach:
the first logical channel is associated with a first logical channel
prioritization parameter and the second logical channel is associated with a second logical channel prioritization parameter; and
the first logical channel prioritization parameter, the second logical
channel prioritization parameter, or both is based at least in part on one or more
characteristics of the first quality of service flow.
However, Park et al. further teaches a parameter/priority capability which includes:
the first logical channel is associated with a first logical channel
prioritization parameter and the second logical channel is associated with a second logical channel prioritization parameter; and
the first logical channel prioritization parameter, the second logical
channel prioritization parameter, or both is based at least in part on one or more
characteristics of the first quality of service flow.
(“FIG. 24 shows an example of cell selection for a wireless device. A wireless device 2410 may determine whether to use an uplink configuration for a logical channel associated with a network slice. The wireless device 2410 may select which of several logical channels it may use as a communication link where such a determination may be based on at least one of: a network condition, a frequency, a network slice requirement, throughput, latency, quality of service, and/or the like. The base station 2405 may send, to the wireless device 2410, at least one message 2415 (e.g., RRC message). The at least one message may comprise a first parameter 2415A indicating that a first logical channel (e.g., logical channel1) is allowed to use a first uplink (e.g., normal uplink) of a first cell (e.g., cell1) and a second cell (e.g., cell2). The at least one RRC message may comprising a second parameter 2415B indicating that a second logical channel (e.g., logical channel2) is allowed to use a second uplink (e.g., supplementary uplink) of the first cell (e.g., cell1). The at least one RRC message may comprise a third parameter 2415C indicating that a third logical channel (e.g., logical channel3) is allowed to use the first uplink (e.g., normal uplink) of the first cell (e.g., cell1), the second uplink (e.g., supplementary uplink) of the first cell (e.g., cell1), and the second cell (e.g., cell2). The at least one message 2415 may comprise any quantity of parameters, one or more of which may indicate that quantity of logical channels that may be allowed to use fro any quantity of communication links (e.g., uplinks, downlinks, uplink/downlink, etc.).”; Park et al.; 0264)
(“The second configuration parameters (e.g., LogicalChannelConfig, allowedServingCells, allowedUplinks, etc.) may indicate whether the logical channel (e.g., and/or logical channel group comprising the logical channel) is mapped to (e.g., allowed to use) the first uplink of the cell and/or whether the logical channel (e.g., and/or logical channel group comprising the logical channel) is mapped to (e.g., allowed to use) the second uplink of the cell. The second configuration parameters may comprise at least one of: a bucket size duration, a configured grant allowed indication, logical channel priority information, scheduling request identifier, SDAP/PDCP/RLC/MAC configuration parameters of the logical channel (e.g., the logical channel group, radio bearer, one or more QoS flows, PDU session, etc.), and/or the like. The second configuration parameters may indicate that the logical channel is for the network slice. The second configuration parameters may indicate that the logical channel is for a radio bearer of one or more QoS flows. The second configuration parameters may indicate that the one or more QoS flows are mapped to a PDU session for the network slice.”; Park et al.; 0259)
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the parameter/priority capability of Park et al. into Fu et al. By modifying the processing/communications of Fu et al. to include the parameter/priority capability as taught by the processing/communications of Park et al., the benefits of improved granularity (Fu et al.; 0003) with improved cell selection (Park et al.; 0004) are achieved.
As to claim 27:
Fu et al. as described above does not explicitly teach:
wherein the first logical channel prioritization
parameter comprises …, a first bucket size duration, or … and
the second logical channel prioritization parameter comprises …, a second bucket size duration, or ….
However, Park et al. further teaches a bucket size duration capability which includes:
wherein the first logical channel prioritization
parameter comprises …, a first bucket size duration, or … and
the second logical channel prioritization parameter comprises …, a second bucket size duration, or ….
(“wherein the first logical channel prioritization
parameter comprises …, a first bucket size duration, or … and
the second logical channel prioritization parameter comprises …, a second bucket size duration, or ….”; Park et al.; 0259)
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the bucket size duration capability of Park et al. into Fu et al. By modifying the processing/communications of Fu et al. to include the bucket size duration capability as taught by the processing/communications of Park et al., the benefits of improved granularity (Fu et al.; 0003) with improved cell selection (Park et al.; 0004) are achieved.
Claim(s) 8, 9, 26 and 27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fu et al. US 20250142402 in view of Liu et al. US 20200358570 and in further view Kuo et al. US 20210399846.
As to claim 8:
Fu et al. as described above does not explicitly teach:
the first logical channel is associated with a first logical channel
prioritization parameter and the second logical channel is associated with a second logical channel prioritization parameter; and
the first logical channel prioritization parameter, the second logical
channel prioritization parameter, or both is based at least in part on one or more
characteristics of the first quality of service flow.
However, Kuo et al. further teaches a parameter/priority capability which includes:
the first logical channel is associated with a first logical channel
prioritization parameter and the second logical channel is associated with a second logical channel prioritization parameter; and
the first logical channel prioritization parameter, the second logical
channel prioritization parameter, or both is based at least in part on one or more
characteristics of the first quality of service flow.
(“The MAC layer of a UE may adaptively adjust the LCP parameters (including priority, PBR, BSD, and LCP restrictions) for a secondary Logical channel, based on the status of the primary LCH. For example, when the original packets of the primary LCH are deemed to be transmitted reliably via the primary link, then the priority of the secondary LCH corresponding to the replica may be lowered to relax uplink resource usage, in favour of other traffic present at the UE.”; Kuo et al.; 0225)
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the parameter/priority capability of Kuo et al. into Fu et al. By modifying the processing/communications of Fu et al. to include the parameter/priority capability as taught by the processing/communications of Kuo et al., the benefits of improved granularity (Fu et al.; 0003) with improved efficiency (Kuo et al.; 0253) are achieved.
As to claim 9:
Fu et al. as described above does not explicitly teach:
wherein the first logical channel prioritization parameter comprises a first prioritized bit rate, a first bucket size duration, or both and the second logical channel prioritization parameter comprises a second prioritized bit rate, a second bucket size duration, or both.
However, Kuo et al. further teaches a PBR/BSD capability which includes:
wherein the first logical channel prioritization parameter comprises a first prioritized bit rate, a first bucket size duration, or both and the second logical channel prioritization parameter comprises a second prioritized bit rate, a second bucket size duration, or both.
(“The MAC layer of a UE may adaptively adjust the LCP parameters (including priority, PBR, BSD, and LCP restrictions) for a secondary Logical channel, based on the status of the primary LCH. For example, when the original packets of the primary LCH are deemed to be transmitted reliably via the primary link, then the priority of the secondary LCH corresponding to the replica may be lowered to relax uplink resource usage, in favour of other traffic present at the UE.”; Kuo et al.; 0225)
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the PBR/BSD capability of Kuo et al. into Fu et al. By modifying the processing/communications of Fu et al. to include the PBR/BSD capability as taught by the processing/communications of Kuo et al., the benefits of improved granularity (Fu et al.; 0003) with improved efficiency (Kuo et al.; 0253) are achieved.
As to claim 26:
Fu et al. as described above does not explicitly teach:
the first logical channel is associated with a first logical channel
prioritization parameter and the second logical channel is associated with a second logical channel prioritization parameter; and
the first logical channel prioritization parameter, the second logical
channel prioritization parameter, or both is based at least in part on one or more
characteristics of the first quality of service flow.
However, Kuo et al. further teaches a parameter/priority capability which includes:
the first logical channel is associated with a first logical channel
prioritization parameter and the second logical channel is associated with a second logical channel prioritization parameter; and
the first logical channel prioritization parameter, the second logical
channel prioritization parameter, or both is based at least in part on one or more
characteristics of the first quality of service flow.
(“The MAC layer of a UE may adaptively adjust the LCP parameters (including priority, PBR, BSD, and LCP restrictions) for a secondary Logical channel, based on the status of the primary LCH. For example, when the original packets of the primary LCH are deemed to be transmitted reliably via the primary link, then the priority of the secondary LCH corresponding to the replica may be lowered to relax uplink resource usage, in favour of other traffic present at the UE.”; Kuo et al.; 0225)
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the parameter/priority capability of Kuo et al. into Fu et al. By modifying the processing/communications of Fu et al. to include the parameter/priority capability as taught by the processing/communications of Kuo et al., the benefits of improved granularity (Fu et al.; 0003) with improved efficiency (Kuo et al.; 0253) are achieved.
As to claim 27:
Fu et al. as described above does not explicitly teach:
wherein the first logical channel prioritization parameter comprises a first prioritized bit rate, a first bucket size duration, or both and the second logical channel prioritization parameter comprises a second prioritized bit rate, a second bucket size duration, or both.
However, Kuo et al. further teaches a PBR/BSD capability which includes:
wherein the first logical channel prioritization parameter comprises a first prioritized bit rate, a first bucket size duration, or both and the second logical channel prioritization parameter comprises a second prioritized bit rate, a second bucket size duration, or both.
(“The MAC layer of a UE may adaptively adjust the LCP parameters (including priority, PBR, BSD, and LCP restrictions) for a secondary Logical channel, based on the status of the primary LCH. For example, when the original packets of the primary LCH are deemed to be transmitted reliably via the primary link, then the priority of the secondary LCH corresponding to the replica may be lowered to relax uplink resource usage, in favour of other traffic present at the UE.”; Kuo et al.; 0225)
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the PBR/BSD capability of Kuo et al. into Fu et al. By modifying the processing/communications of Fu et al. to include the PBR/BSD capability as taught by the processing/communications of Kuo et al., the benefits of improved granularity (Fu et al.; 0003) with improved efficiency (Kuo et al.; 0253) are achieved.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fu et al. US 20250142402 in view of Liu et al. US 20200358570 and in further view of Xu et al. US 20250344098.
As to claim 10:
Fu et al. as described above does not explicitly teach:
wherein the first quality of service flow, the first radio link control entity, the second radio link control entity, the first logical channel, and the second logical channel, are associated with a same data radio bearer.
However, Xu et al. further teaches a same DRB capability which includes:
wherein the first quality of service flow, the first radio link control entity, the second radio link control entity, the first logical channel, and the second logical channel, are associated with a same data radio bearer.
(“In an example, as shown in FIG. 26, the request message may indicate that a first radio link control (RLC) channel or a first logic channel (LCH) is associated with a first PDU set; a second RLC channel or a second LCH is associated with a second PDU set; the first PDU set and the second PDU set are mapped to a first/same data radio bearer (DRB); and/or the first RLC channel and the second RLC channel are mapped to a first/same DRB, and/or the first LCH and the second LCH are mapped to a first/same DRB. The request message may further comprise a field indicating to set up RLC channel and/or LCH channel per PDU set of a first/same DRB, wherein a first PDU set and a second PDU set may be mapped to the first/same DRB.”; Xu et al.; 0286)
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the DRB capability of Xu et al. into Fu et al. By modifying the processing/communications of Fu et al. to include the DRB capability as taught by the processing/communications of Xu et al., the benefits of improved granularity (Fu et al.; 0003) with improved performance (Xu et al.; 0267) are achieved.
Claim(s) 12 and 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fu et al. US 20250142402 in view of Liu et al. US 20200358570 and in further view Fu et al. US 20250023964 (hereinafter “Fu2”).
As to claim 12:
Fu et al. as described above does not explicitly teach:
the plurality of radio link control entities are associated with respective
importance levels of a plurality of importance levels associated with the first quality of service flow;
the first characteristics associated with the first protocol data unit set
indicate that the first protocol data unit set is associated with a first importance level of the plurality of importance levels; and
the second characteristics associated with the second protocol data unit
set indicate that the second protocol data unit set is associated with a second importance level of the plurality of importance levels.
However, Fu2 further teaches a priority/QoS flow/RLC capability which includes:
the plurality of radio link control entities are associated with respective
importance levels of a plurality of importance levels associated with the first quality of service flow;
the first characteristics associated with the first protocol data unit set
indicate that the first protocol data unit set is associated with a first importance level of the plurality of importance levels; and
the second characteristics associated with the second protocol data unit
set indicate that the second protocol data unit set is associated with a second importance level of the plurality of importance levels.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the priority/QoS flow/RLC capability of Fu2 into Fu et al. By modifying the processing/communications of Fu et al. to include the priority/QoS flow/RLC capability as taught by the processing/communications of Fu2, the benefits of improved granularity (Fu et al.; 0003) with improved efficiency (Fu2; 0105) are achieved.
As to claim 28:
Fu et al. as described above does not explicitly teach:
the plurality of radio link control entities are associated with respective
importance levels of a plurality of importance levels associated with the first quality of service flow;
the first characteristics associated with the first protocol data unit set
indicate that the first protocol data unit set is associated with a first importance level of the plurality of importance levels; and
the second characteristics associated with the second protocol data unit
set indicate that the second protocol data unit set is associated with a second importance level of the plurality of importance levels.
However, Fu2 further teaches a priority/QoS flow/RLC capability which includes:
the plurality of radio link control entities are associated with respective
importance levels of a plurality of importance levels associated with the first quality of service flow;
the first characteristics associated with the first protocol data unit set
indicate that the first protocol data unit set is associated with a first importance level of the plurality of importance levels; and
the second characteristics associated with the second protocol data unit
set indicate that the second protocol data unit set is associated with a second importance level of the plurality of importance levels.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the priority/QoS flow/RLC capability of Fu2 into Fu et al. By modifying the processing/communications of Fu et al. to include the priority/QoS flow/RLC capability as taught by the processing/communications of Fu2, the benefits of improved granularity (Fu et al.; 0003) with improved efficiency (Fu2; 0105) are achieved.
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fu et al. US 20250142402 in view of Liu et al. US 20200358570 and in further view Fu et al. US 20250023964 (hereinafter “Fu2”) and Apple R2-2211719 (Non-Patent Literature Documents citation #001, listed on IDS dated 2024-09-05).
As to claim 13:
Fu et al. as described above does not explicitly teach:
drop one or more first protocol data units of the first protocol data unit
set based at least in part on the second importance level being higher than the first importance level; or
drop one or more second protocol data units of the second protocol data unit set based at least in part on the first importance level being higher than the second importance level.
However, Apple further teaches a priority/discard capability which includes:
drop one or more first protocol data units of the first protocol data unit
set based at least in part on the second importance level being higher than the first importance level; or
drop one or more second protocol data units of the second protocol data unit set based at least in part on the first importance level being higher than the second importance level.
(“Whether to drop a PDU Set in case PSDB is exceeded”/“PDU Set Priority”; Apple; p.2, section 2.1)
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the priority/discard capability of Apple into Fu et al. By modifying the processing/communications of Fu et al. to include the priority/discard capability as taught by the processing/communications of Apple, the benefits of improved granularity (Fu et al.; 0003) with improved user experience (Apple; p.5) are achieved.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fu et al. US 20250142402 in view of Liu et al. US 20200358570 and in further view Fu et al. US 20250023964 (hereinafter “Fu2”) and Zhao et al., “INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD AND APPARATUS, TRANSMISSION METHOD AND APPARATUS, TERMINAL AND NETWORK SIDE DEVICE”, 2024-07-04, WO, WO 2024139879 (citations are from English translation) .
As to claim 14:
Fu et al. as described above does not explicitly teach:
schedule one or more first protocol data units of the first protocol data unit set for transmission via the one or more time-frequency resources; and
schedule, after scheduling the one or more first protocol data units, one or more second protocol data units of the second protocol data unit set for transmission via the one or more time-frequency resources, wherein the one or more second protocol data units are scheduled after the one or more first protocol data units based at least in part on the first importance level being higher than the second importance level.
However, Zhao et al. further teaches a priority capability which includes:
schedule one or more first protocol data units of the first protocol data unit set for transmission via the one or more time-frequency resources; and
schedule, after scheduling the one or more first protocol data units, one or more second protocol data units of the second protocol data unit set for transmission via the one or more time-frequency resources, wherein the one or more second protocol data units are scheduled after the one or more first protocol data units based at least in part on the first importance level being higher than the second importance level.
(“If there are remaining resources after the first round of resource allocation, a second round of resource allocation is performed for the PDU sets that require resources in the PDU sets that are allowed to use the scheduling permission except the first PDU set in descending order of priority of the PDU sets, until the resources are exhausted or all PDU sets have been allocated resources;”; Zhao et al.; p.6, middle of page)
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the priority capability of Zhao et al. into Fu et al. By modifying the processing/communications of Fu et al. to include the priority capability as taught by the processing/communications of Zhao et al., the benefits of improved granularity (Fu et al.; 0003) with improved user experience (Zhao et al.; p.16) are achieved.
Claim(s) 15 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fu et al. US 20250142402 in view of Liu et al. US 20200358570 and in further view Fu et al. US 20250023964 (hereinafter “Fu2”) and Tang US 20200128605.
As to claim 15:
Fu et al. as described above does not explicitly teach:
wherein, to establish the configuration for the first quality of service flow, the one or more processors are individually or collectively operable to execute the code to cause the UE to:
establish a third radio link control entity of the plurality of radio link control entities based at least in part on the first importance level being selected for
duplication of one or more protocol data units; and
the one or more processors are individually or collectively further
operable to execute the code to cause the UE to:
duplicate the protocol data units of the first protocol data unit set; and
map the duplicated protocol data units of the first protocol data unit set to the third radio link control entity.
However, Tang further teaches a PDCP/RLC/priority capability which includes:
wherein, to establish the configuration for the first quality of service flow, the one or more processors are individually or collectively operable to execute the code to cause the UE to:
establish a third radio link control entity of the plurality of radio link control entities based at least in part on the first importance level being selected for
duplication of one or more protocol data units; and
the one or more processors are individually or collectively further
operable to execute the code to cause the UE to:
duplicate the protocol data units of the first protocol data unit set; and
map the duplicated protocol data units of the first protocol data unit set to the third radio link control entity.
(“In the embodiments of the present disclosure, when the data duplication function of the PDCP layer is in an activated state, the PDU of the PDCP layer (i.e., PDCP PDU) and duplicated data of the PDCP PDU are mapped to different physical layer carriers through different RLC entities, which can effectively improve the reliability of data transmission.”; Tang; 0065)
(“Therefore, when the data duplication function of the PDCP layer is disabled, to ensure the network to continue obtaining the BSR of the selected RLC entity, an RLC entity mapped onto a certain LCG should be selected to transmit the PDU of the PDCP layer, rather an RLC entity not mapped onto a certain LCG should not be selected to transmit the PDCP PDU. That is, if the terminal device transmits the PDCP PDU with an RLC entity that is not mapped onto a certain LCG, this may cause failure of data transmission, thereby reducing the success rate of data transmission. Referring to FIG. 1, it is assumed that when the data duplication function of the PDCP layer is in the activated state, the network device maps an RLC entity a onto a certain LCG, but does not map an RLC entity b onto the LCG. If the terminal device selects to transmit the PDCP PDU with the RLC entity b, this may likely cause failure of data transmission.”; Tang; 0067)
(“In some possible implementation manners, the first order is a sequence formed by sorting the at least one second entity from high to low according to a priority of a logical channel corresponding to the RLC entity.”; Tang; 0020)
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the PDCP/RLC/priority capability of Tang into Fu et al. By modifying the processing/communications of Fu et al. to include the PDCP/RLC/priority capability as taught by the processing/communications of Tang, the benefits of improved granularity (Fu et al.; 0003) with improved success rate (Tang; 0006) are achieved.
As to claim 16:
Fu et al. as described above does not explicitly teach:
the first radio link control entity is associated with a first logical channel and the third radio link control entity is associated with a third logical channel; and
the first logical channel and the third logical channel are associated with a first logical channel prioritization parameter.
However, Liu et al. further teaches a LCP/sizes of transmission resources capability which includes:
the first logical channel and the third logical channel are associated with a first logical channel prioritization parameter.
(“A channel between the RLC layer and the media access control MAC layer is referred to as a logical channel (LCH). A logical channel type set provides different types of data transmission services for a MAC entity, and the logical channel can be identified at the PDCP layer, the RLC layer, and the MAC layer. The MAC entity provides a data transmission service on the logical channel, receives the data packet from the RLC entity, and implements mapping from the logical channel to a transport channel. The MAC entity receives service data units MAC SDUs from a plurality of logical channels, and completes multiplexing and demultiplexing of the MAC SDUs. A protocol data unit MAC PDU of the MAC entity is a data unit transmitted inside the MAC entity. In addition, the MAC entity can further complete management on priorities of different logical channels priority (LCP) of a same receive end device, priority management performed between different receive end devices through dynamic scheduling, an error correction function based on a Hybrid Automatic Repeat reQuest (HARD) mechanism, and the like. The LCP means a process in which the MAC entity allocates resources to different logical channels based on sizes of the transmission resources and priorities of the logical channels. After the LCP process ends, zero or more resources are allocated to each logical channel. In an existing protocol, after a resource is allocated to each logical channel, data packets are placed on the allocated resource in order.”; Liu et al.; 0069)
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the LCP/sizes of transmission resources capability of Liu et al. into Fu et al. By modifying the processing/communications of Fu et al. to include the LCP/sizes of transmission resources capability as taught by the processing/communications of Liu et al., the benefits of improved granularity (Fu et al.; 0003) with improved reliability (Liu et al.; Abstract) are achieved.
However, Tang further teaches a LCG/RLC capability which includes:
the first radio link control entity is associated with a first logical channel and the third radio link control entity is associated with a third logical channel;
(“To solve the above problem, the concept of logical channel group (LCG) is introduced into the long term evolution (LTE) technology. Specifically, supposing the data duplication function of the PDCP is in the activated state, a network device maps a first RLC entity onto a certain LCG (that is, a logical channel corresponding to the first RLC entity is placed onto this LCG), but does not map a second RLC entity onto a certain LCG (that is, a logical channel corresponding to the second RLC entity is not placed onto this LCG). That is, the first RLC entity is included in the BSR, whereas the second RLC entity is not included in the BSR.”; Tang; 0004)
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the LCG/RLC capability of Tang into Fu et al. By modifying the processing/communications of Fu et al. to include the LCG/RLC capability as taught by the processing/communications of Tang, the benefits of improved granularity (Fu et al.; 0003) with improved success rate (Tang; 0006) are achieved.
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fu et al. US 20250142402 in view of Liu et al. US 20200358570 and in further view Xu et al., “DATA TRANSMISSION METHOD AND COMMUNICATION APPARATUS”, 2023-04-20, WO, WO 2023061339 (citations are from English translation).
As to claim 17:
Fu et al. as described above does not explicitly teach:
wherein each radio link control entity of the plurality of radio link control entities is associated with a respective set of radio link control parameters of a plurality of sets of radio link control parameters.
However, Tang further teaches a RLC/parameters capability which includes:
wherein each radio link control entity of the plurality of radio link control entities is associated with a respective set of radio link control parameters of a plurality of sets of radio link control parameters.
(“In another possible implementation, the handover confirmation message further includes one or more of the following items: the handover confirmation message includes DAPS handover response indication information, and the handover response indication information is used to indicate that the second access network device Receive a DAPS switching request for the first DRB; configuration information of the first DRB associated with the second access network device, the configuration information of the first DRB includes one or more of the following items: radio bearer identifier (for indicating The first DRB), DAPS configuration information (used to indicate whether the first DRB is a DAPS bearer), PDCP configuration information of the second access network device (used to configure the protocol parameters of the PDCP layer), the second access network device RLC configuration information (for configuring the protocol parameters of the RLC layer, which may include configuration information of one or more RLC entities, the one or more RLCs are associated with the first DRB or the PDCP entity associated with the first DRB), the second MAC configuration information of the access network device (for configuring protocol parameters of the MAC layer), indication information (for instructing the terminal device to retransmit the first data packet on the second access network device).”; Xu et al.; p.20, top of page)
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the RLC/parameters capability of Xu et al. into Fu et al. By modifying the processing/communications of Fu et al. to include the RLC/parameters capability as taught by the processing/communications of Xu et al., the benefits of improved granularity (Fu et al.; 0003) with improved reliability (Xu et al.; p.25, top of page) are achieved.
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fu et al. US 20250142402 in view of Liu et al. US 20200358570 and in further view Olsson et al. US 20060164981.
As to claim 18:
Fu et al. as described above does not explicitly teach:
wherein each radio link control entity of the plurality of radio link control entities is associated with a respective segmentation buffer and a respective reassembly buffer.
However, Olsson further teaches a RLC/buffering/segmentation/reassembly capability which includes:
wherein each radio link control entity of the plurality of radio link control entities is associated with a respective segmentation buffer and a respective reassembly buffer.
(“The foregoing description of a RLC transmitting entity and the improved RLC data discard process in accordance with the invention was provided in relation to the RLC operating in TM transmission. It should be noted, however, that in the case of UM transmission, the UM RLC entities (not shown) managing the logical channels 216 perform the same basic operations of buffering, segmentation and reassembly as the TM RLC entities 400. Whilst, the UM RLC entities may also be arranged to perform additional operations such as concatenation, ciphering/deciphering and to add a header to each RLC PDU transferred to the MAC layer 210, the improved process of the present invention is equally applicable to UM transmission. Similarly, in the case of AM transmission, whilst the AM RLC entity (not shown) comprises a single entity having a transmitting side and a receiving side and whilst the arrangement and operations performed by the single AM RLC entity are more complex than either of the TM RLC entities 400 or the UM RLC entities, it still performs the same basic operations of buffering, segmentation and reassembly and thus the improved process of the present invention is equally applicable thereto.”; Olsson et al.; 0080)
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the RLC/buffering/segmentation/reassembly capability of Olsson et al. into Fu et al. By modifying the processing/communications of Fu et al. to include the RLC/buffering/segmentation/reassembly capability as taught by the processing/communications of Olsson et al., the benefits of improved granularity (Fu et al.; 0003) with improved traffic processing (Olsson et al.; 0001) are achieved.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US 20160285716 – teaches mapping data to a RLC associated with quality (see para. 0176).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL K PHILLIPS whose telephone number is (571)272-1037. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-10am, 1pm-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, Ricky Ngo can be reached on 571-272-3139. 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.
MICHAEL K. PHILLIPS
Examiner
Art Unit 2464
/MICHAEL K PHILLIPS/Examiner, Art Unit 2464