DETAILED ACTION
This Office action is in response to Applicant’s amendment filed on 3/17/2026. Claims 1-4, 7-9, 11-17 and 20-22 are now pending. This action is made FINAL.
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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1, 2, 7, 9, 13-17 and 20-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dees et al (US 20220369215 A1,hereinafter Dees) in view of Wei et al (US 20230309004 A1, hereinafter Wei).
Consider claim 1, Dees discloses a communication method, comprising:
receiving, by a relay terminal device, a request message from a remote terminal device, wherein the request message is used to request to communicate with an access network device through the relay terminal device, the request message comprises first slice information, and the first slice information comprises information about a slice that the remote terminal device intends to access (In the mobile device, the relay function may be arranged to perform the following. First a request message (M) is sent to at least one relay device (UEx). The request message may include a requested identifier (ID1) indicating a network slice which the mobile device is requesting access to, paragraph 130);
performing, by the relay terminal device, access control based on at least the first slice information and second slice information, or performing, by the relay terminal device, access control based on at least the first slice information and third slice information, wherein the second slice information comprises information about a slice supported by a cell on which the relay terminal device currently camps or a cell that currently serves the relay terminal device, and the third slice information comprises information about a slice supported by the relay terminal device or information about an air interface capability corresponding to the relay terminal device (In the relay device, the relay processor may be arranged to perform the following. First the request message (M) is received from the mobile device. Then, a transfer request message (M′) is sent to the cellular communication system in dependence of the request message, paragraph 131; The response message may also include information about additional slices that can be supported from which the remote UE may make a selection, paragraph 130; See also Discovery request comprising NSSAI in Fig. 4; NSSAI is a set of up to 8 slice IDs, paragraph 175); and
sending, by the relay terminal device, a response message to the remote terminal device after the access control is performed (Then, a transfer response message (N′) is received from the cellular communication system, the message being elucidated below. Then the response message (N) is sent to the mobile device in dependence of the transfer response message, paragraphs 132-133).
However Dees does not expressly disclose
determining, by the relay terminal device, whether the cell on which the relay terminal device currently camps supports the slice that the remote terminal device intends to access; and
reselecting, by the relay terminal device, a cell that supports the slice that the remote terminal device intends to access in response to the cell on which the relay terminal device currently camps not supporting the slice that the remote terminal device intends to access.
In the same field of endeavor, Wei discloses
determining, by the relay terminal device, whether the cell on which the relay terminal device currently camps supports the slice that the remote terminal device intends to access (the UE identifies a service to be requested, for example a service (e.g. a service, network slice, application) that the UE wishes to initiate, paragraph 106; if the relay cannot provide the desired service, the relay can notify this to base station, paragraph 194); and
reselecting, by the relay terminal device, a cell that supports the slice that the remote terminal device intends to access in response to the cell on which the relay terminal device currently camps not supporting the slice that the remote terminal device intends to access (the base station may instruct the relay to hand-over to another base station which may provide such services. This type of handover instruction might be helpful if for example the base station directly and other relay(s) for this base station cannot support this service for the UE, paragraph 194).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the teachings of Wei with the teachings of Dees to provide a service requested by a UE when a base station directly and other relay(s) for this base station cannot support this service for the UE.
Consider claim 2, and as applied to claim 1 above, Dees discloses wherein the performing, by the relay terminal device, of the access control is based on the first slice information, the second slice information, and the third slice information (The request message may include a requested identifier (ID1) indicating a network slice which the mobile device is requesting access to… The response message may also include information about additional slices that can be supported from which the remote UE may make a selection, paragraph 130).
Consider claim 7, Dees discloses the communication method according to claim 1, wherein the method further comprises: sending, by the relay terminal device, the second slice information and/or the third slice information. (In the relay device, the relay processor may be arranged to perform the following. First the request message (M) is received from the mobile device. Then, a transfer request message (M′) is sent to the cellular communication system in dependence of the request message, paragraph 130; The response message may also include information about additional slices that can be supported from which the remote UE may make a selection, paragraph 130; Then, a transfer response message (N′) is received from the cellular communication system, the message being elucidated below. Then the response message (N) is sent to the mobile device in dependence of the transfer response message, paragraphs 132-133).
Consider claim 9, Dees discloses a communication method; comprising:
sending, by a remote terminal device, a request message, wherein the request message is used to request to communicate with an access network device through a relay terminal device, the request message comprises first slice information, and the first slice information comprises information about a slice that the remote terminal device intends to access (In the mobile device, the relay function may be arranged to perform the following. First a request message (M) is sent to at least one relay device (UEx). The request message may include a requested identifier (ID1) indicating a network slice which the mobile device is requesting access to, paragraph 130); and
receiving, by the remote terminal device, a response message from the relay terminal device (Next, at least one response message (N) is received from at least one relay device, paragraph 130), and
receiving, by the remote terminal device, second slice information and/or third slice information from the relay terminal device, wherein the second slice information comprises information about a slice supported by a cell on which the relay terminal device currently camps or a cell that currently serves the relay terminal device, and the third slice information comprises information about a slice supported by the relay terminal device or information about an air interface capability corresponding to the relay terminal device (In the relay device, the relay processor may be arranged to perform the following. First the request message (M) is received from the mobile device. Then, a transfer request message (M′) is sent to the cellular communication system in dependence of the request message, paragraph 131; The response message may also include information about additional slices that can be supported from which the remote UE may make a selection, paragraph 130).
However Dees does not expressly disclose
determining, by the relay terminal device, whether the cell on which the relay terminal device currently camps supports the slice that the remote terminal device intends to access; and
reselecting, by the relay terminal device, a cell that supports the slice that the remote terminal device intends to access in response to the cell on which the relay terminal device currently camps not supporting the slice that the remote terminal device intends to access.
In the same field of endeavor, Wei discloses
determining, by the relay terminal device, whether the cell on which the relay terminal device currently camps supports the slice that the remote terminal device intends to access (the UE identifies a service to be requested, for example a service (e.g. a service, network slice, application) that the UE wishes to initiate, paragraph 106; if the relay cannot provide the desired service, the relay can notify this to base station, paragraph 194); and
reselecting, by the relay terminal device, a cell that supports the slice that the remote terminal device intends to access in response to the cell on which the relay terminal device currently camps not supporting the slice that the remote terminal device intends to access (the base station may instruct the relay to hand-over to another base station which may provide such services. This type of handover instruction might be helpful if for example the base station directly and other relay(s) for this base station cannot support this service for the UE, paragraph 194).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the teachings of Wei with the teachings of Dees to provide a service requested by a UE when a base station directly and other relay(s) for this base station cannot support this service for the UE.
Consider claim 13, and as applied to claim 10 above, Dees discloses wherein the sending, by the remote terminal device, of the request message comprises: sending, by the remote terminal device, the request message to the relay terminal device with reference to the second slice information and/or the third slice information (See Discovery request comprising NSSAI in Fig. 4; NSSAI is a set of up to 8 slice IDs, paragraph 175).
Consider claim 14, Dees discloses a communication apparatus comprising:
a processor coupled to a memory; the memory is configured to store a computer program; and the processor is configured to execute the computer program stored in the memory such that the communication apparatus is at least configured to (the mobile device, the relay device and the NRF, each comprise a processor coupled to a memory containing appropriate software code stored at the devices, paragraph 302):
receive a request message from a remote terminal device, wherein the request message is used to request to communicate with an access network device through the communication apparatus, the request message comprises first slice information, and the first slice information comprises information about a slice that the remote terminal device intends to access (In the mobile device, the relay function may be arranged to perform the following. First a request message (M) is sent to at least one relay device (UEx). The request message may include a requested identifier (ID1) indicating a network slice which the mobile device is requesting access to, paragraph 130);
perform access control based on the first slice information and second slice information, or perform access control based on the first slice information and third slice information, wherein the second slice information comprises information about a slice supported by a cell on which the communication apparatus currently camps or a cell that currently serves the communication apparatus, and the third slice information comprises information about a slice supported by the communication apparatus or information about an air interface capability corresponding to the communication apparatus (In the relay device, the relay processor may be arranged to perform the following. First the request message (M) is received from the mobile device. Then, a transfer request message (M′) is sent to the cellular communication system in dependence of the request message, paragraph 131; The response message may also include information about additional slices that can be supported from which the remote UE may make a selection, paragraph 130); and
send a response message to the remote terminal device after the access control is performed (Then, a transfer response message (N′) is received from the cellular communication system, the message being elucidated below. Then the response message (N) is sent to the mobile device in dependence of the transfer response message., paragraphs 132-133).
However Dees does not expressly disclose the communication apparatus is further configured to:
determine whether the cell on which the communication apparatus currently camps supports the slice that the remote terminal device intends to access; and
reselect a cell that supports the slice that the remote terminal device intends to access in response to the cell on which the communication apparatus currently camps not supporting the slice that the remote terminal device intends to access.
In the same field of endeavor, Wei discloses the communication apparatus is further configured to:
determine whether the cell on which the communication apparatus currently camps supports the slice that the remote terminal device intends to access (the UE identifies a service to be requested, for example a service (e.g. a service, network slice, application) that the UE wishes to initiate, paragraph 106; if the relay cannot provide the desired service, the relay can notify this to base station, paragraph 194); and
reselect a cell that supports the slice that the remote terminal device intends to access in response to the cell on which the communication apparatus device currently camps not supporting the slice that the remote terminal device intends to access (the base station may instruct the relay to hand-over to another base station which may provide such services. This type of handover instruction might be helpful if for example the base station directly and other relay(s) for this base station cannot support this service for the UE, paragraph 194).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the teachings of Wei with the teachings of Dees to provide a service requested by a UE when a base station directly and other relay(s) for this base station cannot support this service for the UE.
Consider claim 15, and as applied to claim 14 above, Dees discloses wherein the performing, by the communication apparatus , of the access control is based on the first slice information, the second slice information, and the third slice information (The request message may include a requested identifier (ID1) indicating a network slice which the mobile device is requesting access to… The response message may also include information about additional slices that can be supported from which the remote UE may make a selection, paragraph 130).
Consider claim 16, and as applied to claim 14 above, Dees discloses wherein: the communication apparatus is configured to send the response message to the remote terminal device after the communication apparatus performs the access control based on the first slice information, the second slice information, and the third slice information (In the relay device, the relay processor may be arranged to perform the following. First the request message (M) is received from the mobile device. Then, a transfer request message (M′) is sent to the cellular communication system in dependence of the request message, paragraph 130; The response message may also include information about additional slices that can be supported from which the remote UE may make a selection, paragraph 130; See also Discovery request comprising NSSAI in Fig. 4; NSSAI is a set of up to 8 slice IDs, paragraph 175); and the response message indicates whether the remote terminal device is allowed to communicate with the access network device through the communication apparatus (Then, a transfer response message (N′) is received from the cellular communication system, the message being elucidated below. Then the response message (N) is sent to the mobile device in dependence of the transfer response message., see Fig. 4 and paragraphs 132-133; See also Discovery response comprising allowed NSSAIs in Fig. 4).
Consider claim 17, and a applied to claim 1 Dees discloses wherein: the relay terminal device sends the response message to the remote terminal device after the relay terminal device performs the access control based on the first slice information, the second slice information, and the third slice information; and the response message indicates whether the remote terminal device is allowed to communicate with the access network device through the relay terminal device ((Then, a transfer response message (N′) is received from the cellular communication system, the message being elucidated below. Then the response message (N) is sent to the mobile device in dependence of the transfer response message, see Fig. 4 and paragraphs 132-133).
Consider claims 20, 21 and 22 and as applied to claims 1, 9 and 14 respectively above Wei discloses wherein the reselecting of the cell that supports the slice that the remote terminal device intends to access allows the relay terminal device to provide communication between the remote terminal device and the access network device through the relay terminal device, and omit a process in which the remote terminal device resends the request message (Another alternative is that remote UE can request the service via a Relay. The relay can then forward the service request to the base station and the base station can perform the handover for the relay itself if the serving base station does not support the requested slice or service but the relay supports the slice or service, paragraph 196).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the teachings of Wei with the teachings of Dees to provide a service requested by a UE when a base station directly and other relay(s) for this base station cannot support this service for the UE.
Claims 3-4 and 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dees in view of Wei, and further in view of Ahmad (US 20190349951 A1).
Consider claim 3, and as applied to claim 1 above, the combination of Dees and Wei does not expressly disclose wherein the access control performed by the relay terminal device is based on the first slice information and the third slice information, and the third slice information further comprises information about a slice corresponding to an on-going protocol data unit (PDU) session of the relay terminal device.
In the same field of endeavor, Ahmad discloses wherein the access control performed by the relay terminal device is based on the first slice information and the third slice information, and the third slice information further comprises information about a slice corresponding to an on-going protocol data unit (PDU) session of the relay terminal device (A relay WTRU may support multiple slices or APNs. However, the relay WTRU may not have an active session management/PDU connection to some or all of the network slices. The relay WTRU may inform a remote WTRU whether an active session management/PDU connection to a supported slice/APN is being maintained, paragraph 95).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the teachings of Ahmad with the teachings of Dees and Wei to inform a remote terminal to determine whether a relay terminal is suitable for relay services.
Consider claim 4 and as applied to claim 1 above, the combination Dees and Wei does not expressly disclose wherein the access control performed by the relay terminal device is based on the first slice information and the third slice information, and the third slice information further comprises information about a slice corresponding to a suspended protocol data unit (PDU) session of the relay terminal device.
In the same field of endeavor, Ahmad discloses wherein the access control performed by the relay terminal device is based on the first slice information and the third slice information, and the third slice information further comprises information about a slice corresponding to a suspended protocol data unit (PDU) session of the relay terminal device (A relay WTRU may support multiple slices or APNs. However, the relay WTRU may not have an active session management/PDU connection to some or all of the network slices. The relay WTRU may inform a remote WTRU whether an active session management/PDU connection to a supported slice/APN is being maintained, paragraph 95).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the teachings of Ahmad with the teachings of Dees and Wei to inform a remote terminal to determine whether a relay terminal is suitable for relay services.
Consider claim 11, and as applied to claim 9 above, the combination of Dees and Wei does not expressly disclose wherein at least the third slice information is received by the remote terminal device from the relay terminal device, and the third slice information further comprises information about a slice corresponding to an on-going protocol data unit (PDU) session of the relay terminal device.
In the same field of endeavor, Ahmad discloses wherein at least the third slice information is received by the remote terminal device from the relay terminal device, and the third slice information further comprises information about a slice corresponding to an on-going protocol data unit (PDU) session of the relay terminal device (A relay WTRU may support multiple slices or APNs. However, the relay WTRU may not have an active session management/PDU connection to some or all of the network slices. The relay WTRU may inform a remote WTRU whether an active session management/PDU connection to a supported slice/APN is being maintained, paragraph 95).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the teachings of Ahmad with the teachings of Dees to inform a remote terminal to determine whether a relay terminal is suitable for relay services.
Consider claim 12 and as applied to claim 9 above, the combination of Dees and Wei does not expressly disclose wherein at least the third slice information is received by the remote terminal device from the relay terminal device, and the third slice information further comprises information about a slice corresponding to a suspended protocol data (PDU) session of the relay terminal device.
In the same field of endeavor, Ahmad discloses wherein at least the third slice information is received by the remote terminal device from the relay terminal device, and the third slice information further comprises information about a slice corresponding to a suspended protocol data (PDU) session of the relay terminal device (A relay WTRU may support multiple slices or APNs. However, the relay WTRU may not have an active session management/PDU connection to some or all of the network slices. The relay WTRU may inform a remote WTRU whether an active session management/PDU connection to a supported slice/APN is being maintained, paragraph 95).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the teachings of Ahmad with the teachings of Dees and Wei to inform a remote terminal to determine whether a relay terminal is suitable for relay services.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dees in view of Wei, and further in view of Tseng et al (US 20180054237 A1, hereinafter Tseng).
Consider claim 8, and as applied to claim 1 above, the combination of Dees and Wei does not expressly disclose wherein the method further comprises: sending, by the relay terminal device, configuration information of a resource pool corresponding to the second slice information and/or configuration information of a resource pool corresponding to the third slice information.
In the same field of endeavor, Tseng discloses wherein the method further comprises: sending, by the relay terminal device, configuration information of a resource pool corresponding to the second slice information and/or configuration information of a resource pool corresponding to the third slice information (relay UE 704 may forward Relay network slice configuration (Remote UE) to Remote UE 706, see Fig. 7)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the teachings of Tseng with the teachings of Dees and Wei to provide a relaying network slice instance provisioning mechanism.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
/GERMAN VIANA DI PRISCO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2642
Prosecution Insights