DETAILED ACTION
This office action is a response to an amendment filed on 02/10/2026.
Claims 1- 20 are pending for examination.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) was filed. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application.
Drawings
The Examiner contends that the drawings submitted on 10/23/2023 are acceptable for examination proceedings.
Response to Amendments
Claims 1, 6, 17 and 20 have been amended.
The objection to title has been withdrawn in view of the amendment to the title of the Specification.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to claims have been fully considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or non-obviousness.
Claims 1- 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Callard et al. (US 20220232606 A1), hereinafter “Callard”; and in further view of Quan et al. (US 20170208607 A1), hereinafter “Quan”.
Regarding claim 1, Callard teaches A communication method, comprising:
determining, by a first access node, scheduling information
[Callard: Fig. 4; Par. 92- 9 teaches process of receiving scheduling assignments from cell]
wherein the scheduling information indicates resource information to be used by a second access node to receive data or send data[Callard: Fig. 9; 4; Par. 94 further teaches scheduling information include DCI and UE transmit portion of the data to second cell];
PNG
media_image1.png
628
404
media_image1.png
Greyscale
However, Callard does not teach wherein the scheduling information contains a buffer status report; and sending, by the first access node, the scheduling information to the second access node.
Nevertheless, Quan, in the similar filed of endeavor, teaches wherein the scheduling information contains a buffer status report [Quan: Par. 146 disclosed sending buffer status report]; and sending, by the first access node, the scheduling information to the second access node [Quan: Par. 95; 126 and 356 teaches two type of access devices where second access device sends the scheduling information to a first access device].
PNG
media_image2.png
498
622
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill at the time the invention was made to utilize the teachings of Quan for transmitting scheduling information across multi RATs system. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to utilize the teachings of Quan in the Callard system in order to enhance data transmission [Quan: Par. 95].
Regarding claim 2, the combined Callard in view of Quan teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 1. Callard in view of Quan further teaches wherein the scheduling information is dynamic scheduling information or semi-persistent scheduling information [Callard: Par. 156 teaches uplink information are dynamically indicated].
Regarding claim 3, the combined Callard in view of Quan teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 1. Callard in view of Quan further teaches wherein the scheduling information comprises one or more downlink control information (DCI) elements, and the one or more DCI elements are used to generate DCI, or the scheduling information comprises DCI [Callard: Par. 156 disclosed scheduling information comprise DCI].
Regarding claim 4, the combined Callard in view of Quan teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 1. Callard in view of Quan further teaches receiving, by the first access node, the DCI from the second access node; and sending, by the first access node, the DCI to a terminal device [Callard: Par. 156 disclosed scheduling information comprise DCI].
Regarding claim 5, the combined Callard in view of Quan teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 1. Callard in view of Quan further teaches wherein the scheduling information comprises uplink scheduling information [Callard: Par. 70-78 teaches scheduling information include uplink scheduling requests and buffer status reports].
Regarding claim 6, the combined Callard in view of Quan teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 5. Callard in view of Quan further teaches wherein the uplink scheduling information comprises one or more of: scheduling information of a random access channel, scheduling information of a scheduling request, scheduling information of a buffer status report, or scheduling information of a channel state [Callard: Par. 77].
Regarding claim 7, the combined Callard in view of Quan teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 5. Callard in view of Quan further teaches receiving, by the first access node, uplink information, wherein the uplink information comprises one or more of: random access channel information, the scheduling request, the buffer status report, or channel state information [Callard: Par. 77].
Regarding claim 8, the combined Callard in view of Quan teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 1. Callard in view of Quan further teaches sending, by the first access node, data information to the second access node, wherein the data information is downlink data information [Quan: Par. 95 teaches of sending downlink data information and scheduling information].
Regarding claim 9, the combined Callard in view of Quan teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 8. Callard in view of Quan further teaches wherein the data information is one of: user data, a radio link control (RLC) protocol data unit (PDU) obtained by the first access node processing user data, a medium access control (MAC) sub-protocol data unit (SubPDU) obtained by the first access node processing user data, a MAC PDU obtained by the first access node processing user data, or redundancy version (RV) version data obtained by the first access node processing user data [Callard: Par. 162 teaches of PDU performing data process].
Regarding claim 10, the combined Callard in view of Quan teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 8. Callard in view of Quan further teaches receiving, by the first access node, second request information, wherein the second request information is for requesting the data information [Quan: Fig. 5].
Regarding claim 11, the combined Callard in view of Quan teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 9. Callard in view of Quan further teaches sending, by the first access node, logical channel information to the second access node, wherein the logical channel information is related to a logical channel of a user to which the user data belongs [Callard: par. 79; 97 further teaches HARQ feedback and logical channel data in DCI coordination].
Regarding claim 12, the combined Callard in view of Quan teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 1. Callard in view of Quan further teaches receiving, by the first access node, data information from the second access node, wherein the data information is downlink data information [Quan: Par. 95]; and sending, by the first access node, the data information to the terminal device [Callard: Par. 77]
Regarding claim 13, the combined Callard in view of Quan teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 12. Callard in view of Quan further teaches the method further comprises:
when the data information is one of: user data, an RLC PDU obtained by the second access node processing user data, a MAC SubPDU obtained by the second access node processing user data, or a MAC PDU obtained by the second access node processing user data, sending, by the first access node, retransmission scheduling information to the second access node [Callard: Par. 162 teaches of PDU performing data process].
Regarding claim 14, the combined Callard in view of Quan teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 8. Callard in view of Quan further teaches receiving, by the first access node from the second access node, feedback information for the data information, wherein the feedback information is used to feed back a data information sending success or failure [Callard: 126 further teaches of UE expecting ACK/NACK information].
Regarding claim 15, the combined Callard in view of Quan teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 1. Callard in view of Quan further teaches sending, by the first access node, first request information to the second access node, wherein the first request information is for requesting the scheduling information, and the first request information comprises a scheduling result; and receiving, by the first access node, the scheduling information from the second access node [Callard: Par. 164-165 teaches of receiving information and transmitting across multi nodes].
Regarding claim 16, the combined Callard in view of Quan teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 1. Callard in view of Quan further teaches a MAC entity of the first access node is separately connected to a PHY entity of the first access node and a PHY entity of the second access node [Quan: Par. 190].
Regarding claim 17, Callard teaches A communication method, comprising:
receiving, by a second access node, scheduling information [Callard: Fig. 4; Par. 92- 9 teaches process of receiving scheduling assignments from cell];
wherein the scheduling information indicates resource information to be used by the second access node to receive data or send data [Callard: Fig. 9; 4; Par. 94 further teaches scheduling information include DCI and UE transmit portion of the data to second cell];
However, Callard does not teach wherein the scheduling information contains a buffer status report; and sending, by the first access node, the scheduling information to the second access node.
Nevertheless, Quan, in the similar filed of endeavor, teaches wherein the scheduling information contains a buffer status report [Quan: Par. 146 disclosed sending buffer status report]; and sending, by the first access node, the scheduling information to the second access node [Quan: Par. 95; 126 and 356 teaches two type of access devices where second access device sends the scheduling information to a first access device].
PNG
media_image2.png
498
622
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill at the time the invention was made to utilize the teachings of Quan for transmitting scheduling information across multi RATs system. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to utilize the teachings of Quan in the Callard system in order to enhance data transmission [Quan: Par. 95].
Regarding claim 18, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth for claim 2.
Regarding claim 19, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth for claim 3.
Regarding claim 20, Callard A communication apparatus, wherein the communication apparatus comprises a processor, wherein
the processor is configured to read a computer program or instructions stored in a memory, and execute the computer program or the instructions [Callard: Fig. 2], to enable the communication apparatus to perform a method comprising determining, by a first access node, scheduling information [Callard: Fig. 4; Par. 92- 9 teaches process of receiving scheduling assignments from cell]
wherein the scheduling information indicates resource information to be used by a second access node to receive data or send data [Callard: Fig. 9; 4; Par. 94 further teaches scheduling information include DCI and UE transmit portion of the data to second cell];
PNG
media_image1.png
628
404
media_image1.png
Greyscale
However, Callard does not teach wherein the scheduling information contains a buffer status report; and sending, by the first access node, the scheduling information to the second access node.
Nevertheless, Quan, in the similar filed of endeavor, teaches wherein the scheduling information contains a buffer status report [Quan: Par. 146 disclosed sending buffer status report]; and sending, by the first access node, the scheduling information to the second access node [Quan: Par. 95; 126 and 356 teaches two type of access devices where second access device sends the scheduling information to a first access device].
PNG
media_image2.png
498
622
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill at the time the invention was made to utilize the teachings of Quan for transmitting scheduling information across multi RATs system. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to utilize the teachings of Quan in the Callard system in order to enhance data transmission [Quan: Par. 95].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record (see attached PTO-892) and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
A shortened statutory period for reply to this action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of the action. An extension of time may be obtained under 37 CFR 1.136(a). However, in no event, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this action.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KYAW Z SOE whose telephone number is (571)270-0304. The examiner can normally be reached 9am-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, Charles C Jiang can be reached at 5712707191. 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.
/KYAW Z SOE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2412
Prosecution Insights