DETAILED ACTION
This office action is a response to the application filed 8 November 2023, claiming benefit of CN 202211432685.8 filed 16 November 2022, wherein claims 1-20 are pending and ready for examination.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis 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.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed as CN 2022114326858 on 16 November 2022. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Should applicant desire to obtain the benefit of foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d) prior to declaration of an interference, a certified English translation of the foreign application must be submitted in reply to this action. 37 CFR 41.154(b) and 41.202(e).
Failure to provide a certified translation may result in no benefit being accorded for the non-English application.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Instant Application
Reference Application 18/386,258
A first node for wireless communications, comprising:
A first node for wireless communications, characterized in comprising:
a first receiver, receiving a first message, the first message being used to configure at least a first RLC bearer;
a first receiver, which receives a first message, the first message configuring at least first RLC bearer; and
receiving a second message, the second message indicating that the at least first RLC bearer is a candidate of multiple radio bearers;
receives a second message, the second message indicating that the at least first RLC bearer is/are a candidate of multiple radio bearers; and
monitoring whether any RLC bearer in multiple RLC bearers is failed, the multiple RLC bearers being associated with the multiple radio bearers; and
receives a third message, the third message indicating that the at least first RLC bearer is associated with a first radio bearer,
a first processor, as a response to monitoring failure of a second RLC bearer, transmitting a first data unit set through the first RLC bearer, the first data unit set belonging to a first radio bearer; the second RLC bearer being associated with the first radio bearer, and the first radio bearer being one of the multiple radio bearers; the second RLC bearer being one of the multiple RLC bearers;
the first radio bearer being one of the multiple radio bearers; and a first processor, which transmits a data unit of the first radio bearer via the at least first RLC bearer as a response to receiving the third message;
3) the fifth message configuring a second RLC bearer to be associated with the first radio bearer;
wherein the second message is an RRC-layer signaling; the first data unit set comprises at least one data unit.
wherein the second message is an RRC layer signaling, while the third message is a signaling of a protocol layer below the RRC layer.
Claims 1, 8, and 14 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 and 3 of copending Application No. 18/386,258 in view of Pan et al. (US 2025/0227508 A1), hereafter referred Pan, in view of Bergstrom et al. (US 2021/0153276 A1), hereafter referred Bergstrom cited below. Claims 8 and 14 are found to be parallel to claim 1, therefore the double patenting rejection is applied mutatis mutandis. This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1, 4-8, 11-14, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pan in view of Bergstrom.
Regarding claim 1, Pan teaches a first node for wireless communications, comprising:
a first receiver, receiving a first message, the first message being used to configure at least a first RLC bearer (Pan, [0006]-[0007]; the first network unit receives configuration information from the second network unit, where the configuration information includes a configuration of a first RLC bearer);
receiving a second message, the second message indicating that the at least first RLC bearer is a candidate of multiple radio bearers (Pan, [0006]-[0011]; when the first radio bearer is newly set up, the first network unit may indicate the configuration type of the first radio bearer to the second network unit so that the second network unit determines whether to provide the configuration of the first RLC bearer corresponding to the first radio bearer to correctly provide the configuration of the first radio bearer for the remote terminal device).
Pan does not expressly teach monitoring whether any RLC bearer in multiple RLC bearers is failed, the multiple RLC bearers being associated with the multiple radio bearers; and
a first processor, as a response to monitoring failure of a second RLC bearer, transmitting a first data unit set through the first RLC bearer, the first data unit set belonging to a first radio bearer; the second RLC bearer being associated with the first radio bearer, and the first radio bearer being one of the multiple radio bearers; the second RLC bearer being one of the multiple RLC bearers, wherein the second message is an RRC-layer signaling; the first data unit set comprises at least one data unit.
However, Bergstrom teaches monitoring whether any RLC bearer in multiple RLC bearers is failed, the multiple RLC bearers being associated with the multiple radio bearers (Bergstrom, [0079]-[0083]; the wireless device configures the two RLC entities and their associated logical channels, maps the logical channels to first cell and second cell and assigns one of the logical channels as the primary logical channel and the other of the logical channels as the second logical channel for PDCP duplication. At some point in time, the wireless device determines failure of a radio link that supports the secondary logical channel); and
a first processor, as a response to monitoring failure of a second RLC bearer, transmitting a first data unit set through the first RLC bearer, the first data unit set belonging to a first radio bearer; the second RLC bearer being associated with the first radio bearer, and the first radio bearer being one of the multiple radio bearers; the second RLC bearer being one of the multiple RLC bearers, wherein the second message is an RRC-layer signaling; the first data unit set comprises at least one data unit (Bergstrom, [0079]-[0083]; the wireless device notifies the radio network node about the failure of the radio link that supports the secondary logical channel. In addition to notifying the radio network node about the failure of the radio link supporting the second logical channel, the wireless device may suspend the second RLC entity associated with the second logical channel while keeping the first RLC entity associated with the primary logical channel active, which the wireless device can exchange data of RLC PDUs with the first cell through the primary logical channel that is still active, where the message can be a RRC configuration message that the wireless device received from the radio network node via RRCConnectionReconfiguration message).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Pan to include the above recited limitations as taught by Bergstrom in order to enabling the radio network to define transmission restrictions of each RLC entity flexibly and independently of each other (Bergstrom, [0073]).
Regarding claim 8, Pan teaches a second node for wireless communications, comprising:
a first transmitter, transmitting a first message, the first message being used to configure at least a first RLC bearer (Pan, [0006]-[0007]; the first network unit receives configuration information from the second network unit, where the configuration information includes a configuration of a first RLC bearer);
transmitting a second message, the second message indicating that the at least first RLC bearer is a candidate of multiple radio bearers (Pan, [0006]-[0011]; when the first radio bearer is newly set up, the first network unit may indicate the configuration type of the first radio bearer to the second network unit so that the second network unit determines whether to provide the configuration of the first RLC bearer corresponding to the first radio bearer to correctly provide the configuration of the first radio bearer for the remote terminal device).
Pan does not expressly teach wherein whether any RLC bearer in multiple RLC bearers is failed is monitored, and the multiple RLC bearers are associated with the multiple radio bearers; and
when second RLC bearer failure is monitored, a first data unit set is transmitted through the first RLC bearer, the first data unit set belongs to a first radio bearer; the second RLC bearer is associated with the first radio bearer, and the first radio bearer is one of the multiple radio bearers; the second RLC bearer is one of the multiple RLC bearers, wherein the second message is an RRC-layer signaling; the first data unit set comprises at least one data unit.
However, Bergstrom teaches wherein whether any RLC bearer in multiple RLC bearers is failed is monitored, and the multiple RLC bearers are associated with the multiple radio bearers (Bergstrom, [0079]-[0083]; the wireless device configures the two RLC entities and their associated logical channels, maps the logical channels to first cell and second cell and assigns one of the logical channels as the primary logical channel and the other of the logical channels as the second logical channel for PDCP duplication. At some point in time, the wireless device determines failure of a radio link that supports the secondary logical channel); and
when second RLC bearer failure is monitored, a first data unit set is transmitted through the first RLC bearer, the first data unit set belongs to a first radio bearer; the second RLC bearer is associated with the first radio bearer, and the first radio bearer is one of the multiple radio bearers; the second RLC bearer is one of the multiple RLC bearers, wherein the second message is an RRC-layer signaling; the first data unit set comprises at least one data unit (Bergstrom, [0079]-[0083]; the wireless device notifies the radio network node about the failure of the radio link that supports the secondary logical channel. In addition to notifying the radio network node about the failure of the radio link supporting the second logical channel, the wireless device may suspend the second RLC entity associated with the second logical channel while keeping the first RLC entity associated with the primary logical channel active, which the wireless device can exchange data of RLC PDUs with the first cell through the primary logical channel that is still active, where the message can be a RRC configuration message that the wireless device received from the radio network node via RRCConnectionReconfiguration message).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Pan to include the above recited limitations as taught by Bergstrom in order to enabling the radio network to define transmission restrictions of each RLC entity flexibly and independently of each other (Bergstrom, [0073]).
Regarding claim 14, Pan teaches a method in a first node for wireless communications, comprising:
receiving a first message, the first message being used to configure at least a first RLC bearer (Pan, [0006]-[0007]; the first network unit receives configuration information from the second network unit, where the configuration information includes a configuration of a first RLC bearer);
receiving a second message, the second message indicating that the at least first RLC bearer is a candidate of multiple radio bearers (Pan, [0006]-[0011]; when the first radio bearer is newly set up, the first network unit may indicate the configuration type of the first radio bearer to the second network unit so that the second network unit determines whether to provide the configuration of the first RLC bearer corresponding to the first radio bearer to correctly provide the configuration of the first radio bearer for the remote terminal device).
Pan does not expressly teach monitoring whether any RLC bearer in multiple RLC bearers is failed, the multiple RLC bearers being associated with the multiple radio bearers; and
as a response to monitoring failure of a second RLC bearer, transmitting a first data unit set through the first RLC bearer, the first data unit set belonging to a first radio bearer; the second RLC bearer being associated with the first radio bearer, and the first radio bearer being one of the multiple radio bearers; the second RLC bearer being one of the multiple RLC bearers, wherein the second message is an RRC-layer signaling; the first data unit set comprises at least one data unit.
However, Bergstrom teaches monitoring whether any RLC bearer in multiple RLC bearers is failed, the multiple RLC bearers being associated with the multiple radio bearers (Bergstrom, [0079]-[0083]; the wireless device configures the two RLC entities and their associated logical channels, maps the logical channels to first cell and second cell and assigns one of the logical channels as the primary logical channel and the other of the logical channels as the second logical channel for PDCP duplication. At some point in time, the wireless device determines failure of a radio link that supports the secondary logical channel); and
as a response to monitoring failure of a second RLC bearer, transmitting a first data unit set through the first RLC bearer, the first data unit set belonging to a first radio bearer; the second RLC bearer being associated with the first radio bearer, and the first radio bearer being one of the multiple radio bearers; the second RLC bearer being one of the multiple RLC bearers, wherein the second message is an RRC-layer signaling; the first data unit set comprises at least one data unit (Bergstrom, [0079]-[0083]; the wireless device notifies the radio network node about the failure of the radio link that supports the secondary logical channel. In addition to notifying the radio network node about the failure of the radio link supporting the second logical channel, the wireless device may suspend the second RLC entity associated with the second logical channel while keeping the first RLC entity associated with the primary logical channel active, which the wireless device can exchange data of RLC PDUs with the first cell through the primary logical channel that is still active, where the message can be a RRC configuration message that the wireless device received from the radio network node via RRCConnectionReconfiguration message).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Pan to include the above recited limitations as taught by Bergstrom in order to enabling the radio network to define transmission restrictions of each RLC entity flexibly and independently of each other (Bergstrom, [0073]).
Regarding claims 4, 11, and 17, Pan in view of Bergstrom teaches the first node according to claim 1, the second node according to claim 8, and the method according to claim 14 above. Pan does not expressly teach wherein the first RLC bearer and the second RLC bearer belong to different cell groups.
However, Bergstrom teaches wherein the first RLC bearer and the second RLC bearer belong to different cell groups (Bergstrom, [0049]-[0054]; the logical channels are established and mapped to different cells, the logical channels are supported by different radio links).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Pan to include the above recited limitations as taught by Bergstrom in order to enabling the radio network to define transmission restrictions of each RLC entity flexibly and independently of each other (Bergstrom, [0073]).
Regarding claims 5, 12, and 18, Pan in view of Bergstrom teaches the first node according to claim 1, the second node according to claim 8, and the method according to claim 14 above. Pan does not expressly teach comprising: the first processor, transmitting a third message, the third message indicating the second RLC bearer failure; wherein the third message is an RRC message.
However, Bergstrom teaches comprising: the first processor, transmitting a third message, the third message indicating the second RLC bearer failure; wherein the third message is an RRC message (Bergstrom, [0072]-[0083]; the wireless device notifies the radio network node about the failure of the radio link that supports the secondary logical channel by sending a message in a failure report, where the message can be a RRC configuration message that the wireless device received from the radio network node via RRCConnectionReconfiguration message).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Pan to include the above recited limitations as taught by Bergstrom in order to enabling the radio network to define transmission restrictions of each RLC entity flexibly and independently of each other (Bergstrom, [0073]).
Regarding claims 6 and 19, Pan in view of Bergstrom teaches the first node according to claim 5 and the method according to claim 18 above. Pan does not expressly teach wherein the third message indicates the first RLC bearer.
However, Bergstrom teaches wherein the third message indicates the first RLC bearer (Bergstrom, [0072]-[0076]; the message can be the PDCP-DuplicationFailureInformation, where the PDCP-DuplicationFailureInformation has a field failedBearerIdentity, where for DRBs, the identity is provided in the field failedDRB. For SRBs, the identity is provided in the field failedSRB).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Pan to include the above recited limitations as taught by Bergstrom in order to enabling the radio network to define transmission restrictions of each RLC entity flexibly and independently of each other (Bergstrom, [0073]).
Regarding claims 7, 13, and 20, Pan in view of Bergstrom teaches the first node according to claim 5, the second node according to claim 12, and the method according to claim 18 above. Pan does not expressly teach comprising:
the first receiver, receiving a fourth message, the fourth message confirming that the first RLC bearer is associated with the first radio bearer; wherein the third message is used to trigger the fourth message; a transmission of the first data unit set is earlier than a reception of the fourth message.
However, Bergstrom teaches comprising:
the first receiver, receiving a fourth message, the fourth message confirming that the first RLC bearer is associated with the first radio bearer; wherein the third message is used to trigger the fourth message; a transmission of the first data unit set is earlier than a reception of the fourth message (Bergstrom, [0072]-[0083]; upon being notified of the failure of the radio link supporting the secondary logical channel, the radio network node may suspend the second RLC entity associated with the secondary logical channel while keeping the first RLC entity associated with the primary logical channel active and may deconfigure or deactivate PDCP duplication and deconfigure the cell associated with the failed radio link).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Pan to include the above recited limitations as taught by Bergstrom in order to enabling the radio network to define transmission restrictions of each RLC entity flexibly and independently of each other (Bergstrom, [0073]).
Claims 2, 9, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pan in view of Bergstrom as applied to claims 1, 8, and 14 above, and further in view of Wei et al. (US 2020/0236734 A1), hereafter referred Wei.
Regarding claims 2, 9, and 15, Pan in view of Bergstrom teaches the first node according to claim 1, the second node according to claim 8, and the method according to claim 14 above. Pan in view of Bergstrom does not expressly teach wherein each data unit in the first data unit set is used to generate a MAC subPDU, the MAC subPDU comprises a MAC subheader, the MAC subheader comprises a first field, a second field and a third field, the first field indicates that there exists the second field, and the second field indicates the first radio bearer; the third field indicates the first RLC bearer.
However, Wei teaches wherein each data unit in the first data unit set is used to generate a MAC subPDU, the MAC subPDU comprises a MAC subheader, the MAC subheader comprises a first field, a second field and a third field, the first field indicates that there exists the second field, and the second field indicates the first radio bearer; the third field indicates the first RLC bearer (Wei, [0076], [0084], and [0091]-[0094]; the MAC CE is identified by a header of MAC subPDU with a specific LCID, where the MAC subheader have different fields that indicate the corresponding RLC Bearer of PDCP duplication is activated or deactivated as well as indicating the radio bearer).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Pan in view of Bergstrom to include the above recited limitations as taught by Wei in order to achieve higher reliability (Wei, [0004]).
Claims 3, 10, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pan in view of Bergstrom as applied to claims 1, 8, and 14 above, and further in view of Palat et al. (US 2021/0014923 A1), hereafter referred Palat.
Regarding claims 3, 10, and 16, Pan in view of Bergstrom teaches the first node according to claim 1, the second node according to claim 8, and the method according to claim 14 above. Pan in view of Bergstrom does not expressly teach wherein at least one of serving cells allowed by the first RLC bearer does not belong to serving cells allowed by the second RLC bearer; wherein the first RLC bearer and the second RLC bearer belong to a same cell group.
However, Palat teaches wherein at least one of serving cells allowed by the first RLC bearer does not belong to serving cells allowed by the second RLC bearer; wherein the first RLC bearer and the second RLC bearer belong to a same cell group (Palat, [0062]-[0066]; at the RLC layers, both RLC AM and UM can be configured for all bearer types MCG, SCG or split bearers, where the UE measures the measurement results on a per cell basis for the bearer types).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Pan in view of Bergstrom to include the above recited limitations as taught by Palat in order to determine if a channel is occupied or clear (Palat, [0098]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RODRICK MAK whose telephone number is (571)270-0284. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:30 am - 5:30 pm.
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, Noel Beharry can be reached at 571-270-5630. 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.
/R.M./Examiner, Art Unit 2416
/NOEL R BEHARRY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2416