Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Election/Restrictions
Newly submitted claim 31 is directed to an invention that is independent or distinct from the invention originally claimed for the following reasons: receiving, from a first network node that functions as a relay node between the BS and a user equipment (UE), assistant information associated with the first network node; initiating a replacement procedure to replace the first network node with a second network node based at least in part on the received assistant information; receiving, from an idle UE via the first network node, a radio resource control (RRC) setup request message after the replacement procedure is initiated; and transmitting, to the idle UE via the first network node, an RRC reject message in response to the RRC setup request message, the RRC reject message including a cause value of cell replacement.
Since applicant has received an action on the merits for the originally presented invention, this invention has been constructively elected by original presentation for prosecution on the merits. Accordingly, claim 31 withdrawn from consideration as being directed to a non-elected invention. See 37 CFR 1.142(b) and MPEP § 821.03.
To preserve a right to petition, the reply to this action must distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the restriction requirement. Otherwise, the election shall be treated as a final election without traverse. Traversal must be timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are subsequently added, applicant must indicate which of the subsequently added claims are readable upon the elected invention.
Should applicant traverse on the ground that the inventions are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other invention.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5, 15-19, 22-24, 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 as being patentable over Xu US 20210168682 further in view of Chika US 20160081055 further in view of Aydin EP 2978258
15. A base station (BS) for wireless communication (Xu: fig. 7 - BS), comprising:
at least [[one memory]]; and at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory and configured to cause the BS to:
receive, from a first network node that functions as a relay node between the BS and a user equipment (UE), assistant information associated with a first network node (Xu: [0085-0086, 0092-0100] UE 112 may be a relay UE and In 810, the UE 112 transmits a measurement report to the gNB 120A; gNb perform link management and the relay UE may be configured to provide this measurement data periodically in accordance with a schedule or a timer. The relay UE may also be configured to provide this measurement data in response to a predetermined condition….[0094]); and
deactivate the first network node and activate a second network node as the relay node in response to a replacement procedure initiated to replace the first network node based on the assistant information (Xu: [0087, 0094] In 720, the network determines that the serving link for the UE 110 is to be switched from the relay link with the UE 112 to a relay link with the UE 422. This determination may be performed on the basis of the measurement report).
wherein, to activate the second network node, the at least one processor is configured to cause the BS to transmit, to the second network node, an indication of an identifier of the second network node (Xu: [0088, 0094] In 725, the gNB 120A transmits a message to the UE 422 including configuration information for the UE 110. This message may enable the UE 422 to serve as a relay for the UE 110 “gNB transmits to the second relay (422) the config to bring it up as serving relay”)
Xu merely disclose the term “memory & the identifier of the second network node being the same as an identifier used by the first network node for functioning as the relay node”
Chika teaches the term memory (Chika: fig. 3, unit 340)
Chika further teaches receive, from a first network node that functions as a relay node between the BS and a user equipment (UE), assistant information associated with a first network node (Chika: [0097] the information gathering section 310); and
deactivate the first network node and activate a second network node as the relay node in response to a replacement procedure initiated to replace the first network node based on the assistant information (Chika: [0097] The controller 320 may automatically determine whether to activate or deactivate the relay apparatuses or automatically determine operation of the relay apparatuses, based on the information gathered by the information gathering section 310 from at least one of the communication terminals and the relay apparatuses).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to include the above recited limitation into Xu’s invention in order to deactivate the relay function of a relay apparatus mounted in a mobile object that is moving or has a high probability to move, as taught by Chika.
Aydin further teaches the identifier of the second network node being the same as an identifier used by the first network node for functioning as the relay node (Aydin: fig. 7 - e.g., both drones, having the same cell identifier, CellID1 – PCI-1/ECGI)
Thus, it would have been obvious to one skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to include the above recited limitation into Xu’s invention in order to make user data transmissions continue as the connections to the user terminals are seamlessly handed over to the replacement Drone-BS-B from Drone BS-A, as taught by Aydin.
16. The BS of claim 15, wherein the first network node and the second network node are each at least one of a drone or a vehicle (Chika: fig. 1 unit 122-128 – Taxi(s)).
17. The BS of claim 15, wherein the assistant information comprises at least one of: a request to deactivate a function as relay between the BS and the UE at the first network node; a remaining power of the first network node; a remaining serving time of the first network node; or an acknowledgement that no UEs are being served by the first network node (Xu: [0085-0086, 0094] no longer prefers to be connected; a power drain; switched off/on; offload all UEs).
18. The BS of claim 15, wherein, to deactivate the first network node, the at least one processor is configured to cause the BS to transmit, to the first network node, an indication of at least one of: an identifier (ID) of the second network node; a condition for deactivating a function as a relay between the BS and the UE at the first network node; or time information to deactivate the function of the relay between the BS and the UE at the first network node, the time information indicating an absolute time value or a timer value (Xu: [0089] In 735, the gNB 120A transmits an RRC reconfiguration message to the UE 110…, Chika: [0044] deactivating the relay function of the relay apparatus 122).
19. The BS of claim 18, wherein the indication comprises the condition, and wherein the condition indicates at least one of: additional time information for handing over a predetermined number of UEs served by the first network node to the second network node; a plurality of UEs to be handed over by the first network node to the second network node; or a remaining power of the first network node (Xu: [0094] offload all currently camped remote UEs; a power drain).
22. The BS of claim 15, wherein the identifier of the second network node is physical cell identifier (PCID) (Aydin: fig. 7 – PCI-1).
23. The BS of claim 15, wherein, to activate the second network node, the at least one processor is configured to cause the BS to transmit, to the second network node, a second indication of at least one of: time information to activate a function of a relay at the second network node, the time information indicating an absolute time value or a timer value; or a position of the second network node to activate the function of the relay at the second network node (Chika: [0079] a time span during which the relay function is to be activated in the area).
24. The BS of claim 15, wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the BS to transmit a UE context of the UE served by the first network node to the second network node (Aydin: fig. 5, step 5 - the transfer of the current users' contexts).
30. The BS of claim 15, wherein, to deactivate the first network node, the at least one processor is configured to cause the BS to: transmit, to the first network node, a first indication to deactivate the first network node as the relay node, the first indication being for the first network node to perform a handover procedure for each UE served by the first network node (Aydin: fig. 2 – Drine A trigger handovers, and the UEs are handed over to Drone B); receive, from the first network node, a report that each UE served by the first network node has been handed over (Aydin: step 14 – the completion report from the second node, “Drone B has now taken over all wireless service”); and transmit, to the first network node, a second indication to stop a function as the relay node at the first network node in response to the report (Aydin: step 15 -, right after step 14 completion report: “The drone management stage 38 instructs Drone A to fly to different location,” Step 7 and 11 stop uplink reception and pilot signals, with an acknowledgment).
Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 as being patentable over Xu-Chika-Aydin further in view of Chen US 20150131618
21. The BS of claim 15, wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the BS to transmit a UE context of an additional UE to the second network node in response to the additional UE served by the first network node being handed over to a different network node other than the second network node (Chen: fig. 5-7 [0181-0185] source DeNB sends S1AP Backhaul Context Change Response message to Relay Node to indicate Relay Node to update the associated Backhaul RN Context for the UE).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to include the above recited limitation into Xu’s invention in order to sends S1AP Backhaul Context Change Response message to Relay Node to indicate Relay Node to update the associated Backhaul RN Context for the UE, as taught by Chen.
Claim(s) 25-27, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 as being anticipated by Xu-Chika-Aydin further in view of Kim US 20230120096
25. The BS of claim 15, wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the BS to: receive, from an idle UE via the first network node, a radio resource control (RRC) setup request message in response to the replacement procedure being initiated to replace the first network node; and transmit, to the idle UE via the first network node, an RRC reject message in response to the RRC setup request message that comprises least one of an identifier (ID) of the second network node, or a cause value of cell replacement (Kim: [0244-0245, 0334, 0345, 0388] A UE-RRC layer in an RRC inactive or idle state may receive an RRC reject message in response to an RRC setup request message or an RRC resume request message).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to include the above recited limitation into Xu’s invention in order to perform a cell (re)selection procedure during RRC inactive or idle state, as taught by Kim.
26. The BS of claim 15, wherein, in response to the replacement procedure being initiated to replace the first network node, the at least one processor is configured to cause the BS to transmit a radio resource control (RRC) release message to the UE connected to the BS via the first network node, the RRC release message comprising an identifier (ID) of the second network node (Xu: fig. 7 [0089] The RRC release message; Kim: [0307]).
27. The BS of claim 15, wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the BS to: receive, from an inactive UE via the first network node, a radio resource control (RRC) resume request message after the replacement procedure is initiated to replace the first network node; and transmit, to the inactive UE via the first network node, an RRC release message that comprises an identifier (ID) of the second network node (Kim: [0307] A UE-RRC layer in an RRC inactive or idle state may receive an response message for the RRC request message may comprise at least one of: an RRC release message)
Regarding claims 1-5, the independent claim and each dependent claim are related to the same limitation set for hereinabove in claims 15-19, 21-27, 30 where the difference used is a “method” and the wordings of the claims were interchanged within the claim itself or some of the claims were presented as a combination of two or more previously presented limitations. This change does not affect the limitation of the above treated claims. Adding these phrases to the claims and interchanging the wording did not introduce new limitations to these claims. Therefore, these claims were rejected for similar reasons as stated above.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5, 15-19, 22-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 as being patentable over Xu US 20210168682 further in view of Chika US 20160081055 further in view of Xu US 20230261738 (herein after as Xu2)
15. A base station (BS) for wireless communication (Xu: fig. 7 - BS), comprising:
at least [[one memory]]; and at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory and configured to cause the BS to:
receive, from a first network node that functions as a relay node between the BS and a user equipment (UE), assistant information associated with a first network node (Xu: [0085-0086, 0092-0100] UE 112 may be a relay UE and In 810, the UE 112 transmits a measurement report to the gNB 120A; gNb perform link management and the relay UE may be configured to provide this measurement data periodically in accordance with a schedule or a timer. The relay UE may also be configured to provide this measurement data in response to a predetermined condition….[0094]); and
deactivate the first network node and activate a second network node as the relay node in response to a replacement procedure initiated to replace the first network node based on the assistant information (Xu: [0087, 0094] In 720, the network determines that the serving link for the UE 110 is to be switched from the relay link with the UE 112 to a relay link with the UE 422. This determination may be performed on the basis of the measurement report).
wherein, to activate the second network node, the at least one processor is configured to cause the BS to transmit, to the second network node, an indication of an identifier of the second network node (Xu: [0088, 0094] In 725, the gNB 120A transmits a message to the UE 422 including configuration information for the UE 110. This message may enable the UE 422 to serve as a relay for the UE 110 “gNB transmits to the second relay (422) the config to bring it up as serving relay”), the identifier of the second network node being the same as an identifier used by the first network node for functioning as the relay node
Xu merely disclose the term “memory & the identifier of the second network node being the same as an identifier used by the first network node for functioning as the relay node”
Chika teaches the term memory (Chika: fig. 3, unit 340)
Chika further teaches receive, from a first network node that functions as a relay node between the BS and a user equipment (UE), assistant information associated with a first network node (Chika: [0097] the information gathering section 310); and
deactivate the first network node and activate a second network node as the relay node in response to a replacement procedure initiated to replace the first network node based on the assistant information (Chika: [0097] The controller 320 may automatically determine whether to activate or deactivate the relay apparatuses or automatically determine operation of the relay apparatuses, based on the information gathered by the information gathering section 310 from at least one of the communication terminals and the relay apparatuses).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to include the above recited limitation into Xu’s invention in order to deactivate the relay function of a relay apparatus mounted in a mobile object that is moving or has a high probability to move, as taught by Chika.
Xu2 further teaches the identifier of the second network node being the same as an identifier used by the first network node for functioning as the relay node (Xu2: fig. 5 [0028-0041, 0064-0065] the geographic physical cell is identified by a physical cell identity, and it is served first one satellite and then by a different “second satellite serving the physical cell,” while the “first satellite is no longer serving the physical cell” – the physical cell identity is preserved across the serving node change (fig. 5 data structures: physical-cell CGI constant at T=1…4 as satellite 1->2->3 rotate through))
Thus, it would have been obvious to one skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to include the above recited limitation into Xu’s invention in order to assign the replacement (second) relay the same cell identity the first relay used (fig. 5, claim 1-3), as taught by Xu2.
16. The BS of claim 15, wherein the first network node and the second network node are each at least one of a drone or a vehicle (Chika: fig. 1 unit 122-128 – Taxi(s)).
17. The BS of claim 15, wherein the assistant information comprises at least one of: a request to deactivate a function as relay between the BS and the UE at the first network node; a remaining power of the first network node; a remaining serving time of the first network node; or an acknowledgement that no UEs are being served by the first network node (Xu: [0085-0086, 0094] no longer prefers to be connected; a power drain; switched off/on; offload all UEs).
18. The BS of claim 15, wherein, to deactivate the first network node, the at least one processor is configured to cause the BS to transmit, to the first network node, an indication of at least one of: an identifier (ID) of the second network node; a condition for deactivating a function as a relay between the BS and the UE at the first network node; or time information to deactivate the function of the relay between the BS and the UE at the first network node, the time information indicating an absolute time value or a timer value (Xu: [0089] In 735, the gNB 120A transmits an RRC reconfiguration message to the UE 110…, Chika: [0044] deactivating the relay function of the relay apparatus 122).
19. The BS of claim 18, wherein the indication comprises the condition, and wherein the condition indicates at least one of: additional time information for handing over a predetermined number of UEs served by the first network node to the second network node; a plurality of UEs to be handed over by the first network node to the second network node; or a remaining power of the first network node (Xu: [0094] offload all currently camped remote UEs; a power drain).
22. The BS of claim 15, wherein the identifier of the second network node is physical cell identifier (PCID) (Xu2: fig. 5 - PCI).
23. The BS of claim 15, wherein, to activate the second network node, the at least one processor is configured to cause the BS to transmit, to the second network node, a second indication of at least one of: time information to activate a function of a relay at the second network node, the time information indicating an absolute time value or a timer value; or a position of the second network node to activate the function of the relay at the second network node (Chika: [0079] a time span during which the relay function is to be activated in the area).
Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 as being patentable over Xu-Chika-Xu2 further in view of Chen US 20150131618
21. The BS of claim 15, wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the BS to transmit a UE context of an additional UE to the second network node in response to the additional UE served by the first network node being handed over to a different network node other than the second network node (Chen: fig. 5-7 [0181-0185] source DeNB sends S1AP Backhaul Context Change Response message to Relay Node to indicate Relay Node to update the associated Backhaul RN Context for the UE).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to include the above recited limitation into Xu’s invention in order to sends S1AP Backhaul Context Change Response message to Relay Node to indicate Relay Node to update the associated Backhaul RN Context for the UE, as taught by Chen.
Claim(s) 24-27, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 as being anticipated by Xu-Chika-Xu2 further in view of Kim US 20230120096
24. The BS of claim 15, wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the BS to transmit a UE context of the UE served by the first network node to the second network node (Kim: [0265] to provide the UE context to the target base station, the source base station may respond to the target base station with a retrieve UE context response message)
Thus, it would have been obvious to one skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to include the above recited limitation into Xu’s invention in order to perform a cell (re)selection procedure during RRC inactive or idle state, as taught by Kim.
25. The BS of claim 15, wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the BS to: receive, from an idle UE via the first network node, a radio resource control (RRC) setup request message in response to the replacement procedure being initiated to replace the first network node; and transmit, to the idle UE via the first network node, an RRC reject message in response to the RRC setup request message that comprises least one of an identifier (ID) of the second network node, or a cause value of cell replacement (Kim: [0244-0245, 0334, 0345, 0388] A UE-RRC layer in an RRC inactive or idle state may receive an RRC reject message in response to an RRC setup request message or an RRC resume request message).
26. The BS of claim 15, wherein, in response to the replacement procedure being initiated to replace the first network node, the at least one processor is configured to cause the BS to transmit a radio resource control (RRC) release message to the UE connected to the BS via the first network node, the RRC release message comprising an identifier (ID) of the second network node (Xu: fig. 7 [0089] The RRC release message; Kim: [0307]).
27. The BS of claim 15, wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the BS to: receive, from an inactive UE via the first network node, a radio resource control (RRC) resume request message after the replacement procedure is initiated to replace the first network node; and transmit, to the inactive UE via the first network node, an RRC release message that comprises an identifier (ID) of the second network node (Kim: [0307] A UE-RRC layer in an RRC inactive or idle state may receive an response message for the RRC request message may comprise at least one of: an RRC release message).
Claim(s) 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 as being anticipated by Xu-Chika-Xu2 further in view of Aydin EP 2978258
30. The BS of claim 15, wherein, to deactivate the first network node, the at least one processor is configured to cause the BS to: transmit, to the first network node, a first indication to deactivate the first network node as the relay node, the first indication being for the first network node to perform a handover procedure for each UE served by the first network node (Aydin: fig. 2 – Drine A trigger handovers, and the UEs are handed over to Drone B); receive, from the first network node, a report that each UE served by the first network node has been handed over (Aydin: step 14 – the completion report from the second node, “Drone B has now taken over all wireless service”); and transmit, to the first network node, a second indication to stop a function as the relay node at the first network node in response to the report (Aydin: step 15 -, right after step 14 completion report: “The drone management stage 38 instructs Drone A to fly to different location,” Step 7 and 11 stop uplink reception and pilot signals, with an acknowledgment).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to include the above recited limitation into Xu’s invention in order to make user data transmissions continue as the connections to the user terminals are seamlessly handed over to the replacement Drone-BS-B from Drone BS-A, as taught by Aydin.
Regarding claims 1-5, the independent claim and each dependent claim are related to the same limitation set for hereinabove in claims 15-19, 21-27, 30, where the difference used is a “method” and the wordings of the claims were interchanged within the claim itself or some of the claims were presented as a combination of two or more previously presented limitations. This change does not affect the limitation of the above treated claims. Adding these phrases to the claims and interchanging the wording did not introduce new limitations to these claims. Therefore, these claims were rejected for similar reasons as stated above.
Response to Amendment
Applicant's arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-5, 15-19, 21-27, 30-31 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Remark:
The examiner stresses that the claims are too broad and require detail or specialization of the steps as recited in the claims. Alone and as claimed, the limitations are too open.
Examiner has cited particular portions of the references as applied to each claim limitation for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner.
Regarding all other arguments presented by applicant, the arguments are substantially the same as those which have already been addressed above and in the interest of brevity; the Examiner directs the applicant to those responses above.
In addition, an interview could expedite the prosecution.
Conclusion
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Sulaiman Nooristany whose telephone number is 571-270-1929. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday thru Friday: 8:30am to 5:00pm (EST). If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jeff Rutkowski can be reached on 571-270-1215. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/SULAIMAN NOORISTANY/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2415
Prosecution Insights