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 .
DETAILED ACTION
a. Claims 1-3, 13, 16, 17, 24-26, 36, 39, 40, and 49-52 in the present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA :
- claims 1-3, 16, 24, 26, 36, 39, and 49 are amended
- claims 4-12, 14, 15, 18-23, 27-35, 37, 38, and 41-48 are canceled
b. This is a final action on the merits based on Applicant’s claims submitted on 03/26/2026.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 03/24/2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
Regarding Independent claims 1, 24, and 49 previously rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103, Applicant's arguments, see “As discussed during the Interview, neither Tseng, nor Lin, nor Wang, whether taken alone or in combination, discloses or suggests at least "a reference signal received power (RSRP)-based timing advance validity condition," nor any sort of evaluation of such an RSRP-based timing advance validity condition for a small data transmission," nor any sort of determination of whether such an evaluation RSRP-based timing advance validity condition for the small data transmission "is applicable in the subsequent configured grant occasion," nor still that such an evaluation is "based on a validity timer and the resource configuration" or governed "according to the validity timer."” on pages 10-11, filed on 03/26/2026, with respect to Tseng et al. US Pub 2024/0040626, claiming provisional application 63117956 priority 2020-11-24 (hereinafter “Tseng”), and in view of Lin et al. US Pub 2023/0397298 (hereinafter “Lin”), have been fully considered but are moot, over the limitations of “performing an evaluation of a reference signal received power (RSRP)-based timing advance validity condition for the small data transmission”. Said limitations are newly added to the amended Claims 1, 24, and 49, and have been addressed in instant office action, as shown in section 35 USC 103 rejection below, with newly identified prior art teaching from newly found reference LG Electronics NPL “CG Resource validity and MAC PDU rebuilding on SDT”, 3GPP R2-2100784, Jan 25 – Feb 5, 2021 (hereinafter “LG”), in combination with previously applied reference Tseng, thus rendering said Applicant’s arguments moot.
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 of this title, 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.
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.
Claims 1-3, 13, 16-17, 24-26, 36, 39-40, and 49 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tseng et al. US Pub 2024/0040626, claiming provisional application 63117956 priority 2020-11-24 (hereinafter “Tseng”), and in view of LG Electronics NPL “CG Resource validity and MAC PDU rebuilding on SDT”, 3GPP R2-2100784, Jan 25 – Feb 5, 2021 (hereinafter “LG”).
Regarding claim 1 (Currently Amended)
Tseng discloses a first device (e.g. “UE 503” in Fig. 5; [0140]) comprising:
at least one processor (“The UE includes a processor configured to execute a computer-executable program” [0008]); and
at least one memory comprising program codes (“a memory coupled to the processor and configured to store the computer-executable program” [0008]) stored therein that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the first device to perform at least:
receiving a resource configuration of configured grant transmission (“the UE 503 may firstly receive the SDT configuration from the serving cell #1 505 (e.g., step 511)… In some implementations, the UE 503 may receive one or more SDT-CG configuration(s) with/without an SDT-RA configuration.” [0140]) from a second device (e.g. “anchor cell 505” in Fig. 5; [0140]);
Tseng does not specifically teach determining whether a timing advance is valid in a subsequent configured grant occasion for a small data transmission based on a time alignment timer and the resource configuration;
performing an evaluation of a reference signal received power (RSRP)-based timing advance validity condition for the small data transmission;
determining whether the evaluation of the RSRP-based timing advance validity condition for the small data transmission is applicable in the subsequent configured grant occasion based on a validity timer and the resource configuration,
wherein the evaluation of the RSRP-based timing advance validity condition remains valid for a certain period according to the validity timer after the evaluation of the RSRP- based timing advance validity condition is performed; and
in an instance in which the timing advance is valid and the evaluation of the RSRP- based timing advance validity condition for the small data transmission is applicable in the subsequent configured grant occasion, initiating the small data transmission in the subsequent configured grant occasion.
In an analogous art, LG discloses determining whether a timing advance is valid in a subsequent configured grant occasion for a small data transmission based on a time alignment timer and the resource configuration (“A new TA timer for TA maintenance specified for configured grant based small data transfer in RRC_INACTIVE should be introduced. FFS on the procedure, the validity of TA, and how to handle expiration of TA timer. The TA timer is configured together with the CG configuration in the RRCRelease message.” On page 1, section 1);
performing an evaluation of a reference signal received power (RSRP)-based timing advance validity condition (“SSB with SS-RSRP is above configured threshold and the new TA timer is running” on page 1, section 2) for the small data transmission (“The UE can use configured grant based small data transfer if at least the following criteria is fulfilled (1) user data is smaller than the data volume threshold; (2) configured grant resource is configured and valid; (3) UE has valid TA.” On page 1, section 1) ;
determining whether the evaluation of the RSRP-based timing advance validity condition for the small data transmission is applicable in the subsequent configured grant occasion based on a validity timer and the resource configuration (“when the UE determines to use SDT, if SSB with SS-RSRP is above configured threshold and the new TA timer is running, the CG resource is considered valid and the UE always selects CG-SDT” on page 1, section 2),
wherein the evaluation of the RSRP-based timing advance validity condition remains valid for a certain period according to the validity timer after the evaluation of the RSRP- based timing advance validity condition is performed (“when the UE determines to use SDT, if SSB with SS-RSRP is above configured threshold and the new TA timer is running, the CG resource is considered valid and the UE always selects CG-SDT” on page 1, section 2); and
in an instance in which the timing advance is valid and the evaluation of the RSRP- based timing advance validity condition for the small data transmission is applicable in the subsequent configured grant occasion, initiating the small data transmission in the subsequent configured grant occasion (“The TA timer is configured together with the CG configuration in the RRCRelease message.” On page 1, section 1 and furthermore “when the UE determines to use SDT, if SSB with SS-RSRP is above configured threshold and the new TA timer is running, the CG resource is considered valid and the UE always selects CG-SDT” on page 1, section 2).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Tseng’s method for performing a small data transmission (SDT) procedure to include LG’s RSRP-based timing advance validity condition, in order to compensate for timing advance value (LG [Introduction]). Thus, a person of ordinary skill would have appreciated the ability to incorporate LG’s RSRP-based timing advance validity condition into Tseng’s method for performing a small data transmission (SDT) procedure since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 2 (Currently Amended)
Tseng, as modified by LG, previously discloses the first device of claim 1, wherein the program codes stored in the at least one memory, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the first device to perform the determining whether the timing advance is valid by further causing the first device to perform:
LG further discloses determining whether the time alignment remains running until the subsequent configured grant occasion (“when the UE determines to use SDT, if SSB with SS-RSRP is above configured threshold and the new TA timer is running, the CG resource is considered valid and the UE always selects CG-SDT” on page 1, section 2);
in accordance with a determination that the time alignment remains running until the subsequent configured grant occasion, determining that the timing advance is valid (“when the UE determines to use SDT, if SSB with SS-RSRP is above configured threshold and the new TA timer is running, the CG resource is considered valid and the UE always selects CG-SDT” on page 1, section 2).
Regarding claim 3 (Currently Amended)
Tseng, as modified by LG, previously discloses the first device of claim 1, wherein the program codes stored in at least one memory when executed by the at least one processor, cause the first device to perform the determining whether the timing advance is valid by causing the first device to perform:
Tseng further discloses in accordance with a determination that the small data transmission is initiated, determining whether the timing advance is valid during selecting a transmission type for the small data transmission, the transmission type comprising one of: the configured grant transmission or a random access transmission (“an SDT configuration including a plurality of uplink configured grant (UL-CG) configurations for the SDT procedure, each of the plurality of UL-CG configurations being associated with a downlink reference signal received power (DL-RSRP) threshold; receive, from the UE, one or more UL transmissions on one of the plurality of UL-CG configurations for the SDT procedure in a case that a DL-RSRP measurement result of a synchronization signal block (SSB) associated with the one of the plurality of UL-CG configurations is higher than one of a plurality of DL-RSRP thresholds; and transmit, to the UE during the SDT procedure, a random access response in response to a random access (RA) procedure in a case that none of a plurality of DL-RSRP measurement results of a plurality of SSBs associated with the plurality of UL-CG configurations is higher than any of the plurality of DL-RSRP thresholds. The SDT procedure includes a configured grant (CG) SDT procedure.” [0018]).
Regarding claim 13
Tseng, as modified by LG, previously discloses the first device of claim 1, wherein the program codes stored in at least one memory when executed by the at least one processor, further cause the first device to perform:
Tseng further discloses in accordance with a determination that the timing advance is invalid, performing the small data transmission in a random access procedure or initiating a non-small data transmission procedure (“It should be noted that the UE may re-validate an invalid SDT- CG configuration by triggering a (2-step/4-step) RA procedures, so that the SDT-CG configuration may become valid again after the UE re-obtains the UL- TA. c. In some implementations, the UE triggers a (2-step/4-step) RA procedure for the SDT-RA procedure when the CG-TAT is running. In this condition, the UE may transmit the preamble (e.g., the MSG1 in the 4-step RA procedure) or the MSGA in the 2-step RA procedure based on the maintained UL-TA (e.g., the stored N.sub.TA) when the CG-TAT is still running.” Table 1).
Regarding claim 16 (Currently Amended)
Tseng, as modified by LG, previously discloses the first device of claim 1, wherein the program codes stored in at least one memory when executed by the at least one processor, further cause the first device to perform the initiating the small data transmission in the subsequent configured grant occasion based further on at least one of:
Tseng further discloses the subsequent configured grant occasion based further on the determination is an RSRP (the SDT configuration including a plurality of uplink Configured Grant (UL-CG) configurations for the SDT procedure, wherein each UL-CG configuration is associated with a first downlink Reference Signal Received Power (DL-RSRP) threshold “ [0007])“.
Regarding claim 17
Tseng, as modified by LG, previously discloses the first device of claim 1,
Tseng further discloses in Fig. 5 wherein the first device comprises a terminal device (i.e. “UE 503”) and the second device comprises a network device (i.e. “anchor cell 505”).
Regarding claim 24 (Currently Amended)
A method comprising:
receiving, at a first device, a resource configuration of configured grant transmission from a second device;
determining, at the first device whether a timing advance is valid in a subsequent configured grant occasion for a small data transmission based on a time alignment timer and the resource configuration;
performing an evaluation of a reference signal received power (RSRP)-based timing advance validity condition for the small data transmission;
determining whether the evaluation of the RSRP-based timing advance validity condition for the small data transmission is applicable in the subsequent configured grant occasion based on a validity timer and the resource configuration,
wherein the evaluation of the RSRP-based timing advance validity condition remains valid for a certain period according to the validity timer after the evaluation of the RSRP-based timing advance validity condition is performed; and
in an instance in which the timing advance is valid and the evaluation of the RSRP-based timing advance validity condition for the small data transmission is applicable in the subsequent configured grant occasion, initiating, by the first device, the small data transmission in the subsequent configured grant occasion.
The scope and subject matter of method claim 24 is drawn to the method of using the corresponding apparatus claimed in claim 1. Therefore method claim 24 corresponds to apparatus claim 1 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 1 rejection above.
Regarding claim 25
The method of claim 24, wherein the determining whether the timing advance is valid comprises:
determining whether the timing alignment timer remains running until the subsequent configured grant occasion; and
in accordance with a determination that the timing alignment timer remains running until the subsequent configured grant occasion, determining that the timing advance is valid.
The scope and subject matter of method claim 25 is drawn to the method of using the corresponding apparatus claimed in claim 2. Therefore method claim 25 corresponds to apparatus claim 2 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 2 rejection above.
Regarding claim 26 (Currently Amended)
The method of claim 24, wherein the determining whether the timing advance is valid comprises:
in accordance with a determination that the small data transmission is initiated, determining whether the timing advance is valid during selecting a transmission type for the small data transmission, the transmission type comprising one of: the configured grant transmission or a random access transmission.
The scope and subject matter of method claim 26 is drawn to the method of using the corresponding apparatus claimed in claim 3. Therefore method claim 26 corresponds to apparatus claim 3 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 3 rejection above.
Regarding claim 36 (Currently Amended)
The method of claim 24, further comprising:
in accordance with a determination that the timing advance is invalid, performing, by the first device, the small data transmission in a random access procedure or initiating, by the first device, a non-small data transmission procedure.
The scope and subject matter of method claim 36 is drawn to the method of using the corresponding apparatus claimed in claim 13. Therefore method claim 36 corresponds to apparatus claim 13 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 13 rejection above.
Regarding claim 39 (Currently Amended)
The method of claim 24, wherein the initiating the small data transmission in the subsequent configured grant occasion comprises:
initiating, by the first device, the small data transmission in the subsequent configured grant occasion based further on at least one of:
a data volume of the small data transmission, or
an RSRP.
The scope and subject matter of method claim 39 is drawn to the method of using the corresponding apparatus claimed in claim 16. Therefore method claim 39 corresponds to apparatus claim 16 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 16 rejection above.
Regarding claim 40
The method of claim 24, wherein the first device comprises a terminal device and the second device comprises a network device.
The scope and subject matter of method claim 40 is drawn to the method of using the corresponding apparatus claimed in claim 17. Therefore method claim 40 corresponds to apparatus claim 17 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 17 rejection above.
Regarding claim 49 (Currently Amended)
Tseng discloses in Fig. 5 a system comprising a network device (i.e. “anchor cell 505”) and a terminal device (i.e. “UE 503”),
wherein the network device (“a base station (BS) for performing a small data transmission (SDT) procedure” [0018]) comprises:
at least one processor (“The BS includes one or more processors” [0018]); and
at least one memory comprising program codes (“at least one memory coupled to the one or more processors, wherein the program codes stored in at least one memory stores one or more computer-executable instructions” [0018]) stored therein that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the network device to perform at least:
transmitting a resource configuration of a configured grant transmission to the terminal device; and
receiving a small data transmission from the terminal device in a subsequent configured grant occasion, and
wherein the terminal device (“a UE for performing a SDT procedure in a RRC inactive state is provided” [0008]) comprises:
at least one processor (“The UE includes a processor configured to execute a computer-executable program” [0008]); and
at least one memory comprising program codes (“a memory coupled to the processor and configured to store the computer-executable program” [0008]) stored therein that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the terminal device to perform at least:
determining whether a timing advance is valid in the subsequent configured grant occasion for a small data transmission based on a time alignment timer and the resource configuration;
performing an evaluation of a reference signal received power (RSRP)- based timing advance validity condition for the small data transmission;
determining whether the evaluation of the RSRP-based timing advance validity condition for the small data transmission is applicable in the subsequent configured grant occasion based on a validity timer and the resource configuration,
wherein the evaluation of the RSRP-based timing advance validity condition remains valid for a certain period according to the validity timer after the evaluation of the RSRP-based timing advance validity condition is performed; and
in an instance in which the timing advance is valid and the evaluation of the RSRP-based timing advance validity condition for the small data transmission is applicable in the subsequent configured grant occasion, initiating the small data transmission in the subsequent configured grant occasion.
The scope and subject matter of apparatus claim 49 is drawn to the apparatus of using the corresponding method claimed in claims 24 and 41. Therefore apparatus claim 49 corresponds to method claims 24 and 41 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claims 24 and 41 rejections above.
Claim 50-52 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tseng, in view of LG, and further in view of Wang et al. US Pub 2022/0393957, claiming domestic priority 2020-10-19 (hereinafter “Wang”).
Regarding claim 50
Tseng, as modified by LG, previously discloses the first device of claim 1,
Tseng and LG do not specifically teach wherein the validity timer is up to 640 ms.
In an analogous art, Wang discloses wherein the second timer is up to 640 ms (“A common compensation timing advance value or a common timing advance value corresponding to a start moment of a next update cycle may be sent at a start moment of an update cycle (i.e. timing advance based timer), to avoid ISI. In this way, the sent common compensation timing advance value or the sent common timing advance value is small, and the preamble or the uplink data sent by the UE arrives at the network side late, to avoid ISI. For example, if the update cycle is 640 ms, the delay does not exceed 33.28 μs.” [0407]).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Tseng’s method for performing a small data transmission (SDT) procedure, as modified by LG, to include Wang’s timer running method in order to compensate for timing advance value (Wang [407]). Thus, a person of ordinary skill would have appreciated the ability to incorporate Wang’s timer running method into Tseng’s method for performing a small data transmission (SDT) procedure since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 51
Tseng, as modified by LG, previously discloses the method of claim 24,
Tseng and LG do not specifically teach wherein the validity timer is up to 640 ms.
In an analogous art, Wang discloses wherein the second timer is up to 640 ms (“A common compensation timing advance value or a common timing advance value corresponding to a start moment of a next update cycle may be sent at a start moment of an update cycle (i.e. timing advance based timer), to avoid ISI. In this way, the sent common compensation timing advance value or the sent common timing advance value is small, and the preamble or the uplink data sent by the UE arrives at the network side late, to avoid ISI. For example, if the update cycle is 640 ms, the delay does not exceed 33.28 μs.” [0407]).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Tseng’s method for performing a small data transmission (SDT) procedure, as modified by LG, to include Wang’s timer running method in order to compensate for timing advance value (Wang [407]). Thus, a person of ordinary skill would have appreciated the ability to incorporate Wang’s timer running method into Tseng’s method for performing a small data transmission (SDT) procedure since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 52
Tseng, as modified by LG, previously discloses the method of claim 49,
Tseng and LG do not specifically teach wherein the validity timer is up to 640 ms.
In an analogous art, Wang discloses wherein the second timer is up to 640 ms (“A common compensation timing advance value or a common timing advance value corresponding to a start moment of a next update cycle may be sent at a start moment of an update cycle (i.e. timing advance based timer), to avoid ISI. In this way, the sent common compensation timing advance value or the sent common timing advance value is small, and the preamble or the uplink data sent by the UE arrives at the network side late, to avoid ISI. For example, if the update cycle is 640 ms, the delay does not exceed 33.28 μs.” [0407]).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Tseng’s method for performing a small data transmission (SDT) procedure, as modified by LG, to include Wang’s timer running method in order to compensate for timing advance value (Wang [407]). Thus, a person of ordinary skill would have appreciated the ability to incorporate Wang’s timer running method into Tseng’s method for performing a small data transmission (SDT) procedure since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHUONG M NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-8184. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10:00am - 6:30pm.
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, Derrick Ferris can be reached at 571-272-3123. 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.
/CHUONG M NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2411
Prosecution Insights