DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Response to amendment
This is a Final Office action in response to applicant's remarks/arguments filed on 05/19/2026.
The objection of claim 9 has been withdrawn in response to Applicant’s amendment filed on 05/19/2026.
The rejection of claim 11 under 35 U.S.C. § 101 has been withdrawn in response to Applicant’s amendment filed on 05/19/2026.
5. Status of the claims:
• Claims 1, 8, 9, and 11 have been amended.
• Claim 12 has been canceled.
• Claims 1-11 are currently pending and have been examined.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
6. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
7. Claim 11 recites “a computer program comprising a non-transitory computer-readable medium having stored thereon instructions which …”. It is not clear how a medium be part of a computer program. The claim is indefinite, so one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is suggested to amend the claim to recite “a non-transitory computer-readable medium having stored thereon instructions which, when the instructions are executed by a computer, cause the computer to carry out the method of claim 1”.
Response to remarks/arguments
8. Applicant’s remarks/arguments filed on 05/19/2026 with respect to the rejection of claims 1-11 have been fully considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection. Upon further search and consideration, a new ground(s) of obviousness rejection is made in view of SON et al. (US 2019/0132222 A1).
9. In response to Applicant’s remarks/arguments filed on 05/19/2026 regarding claims 1-11, the Examiner acknowledges that Patil does not explicitly teach that “the Relay UE to make a selection from the information associated with the Service Catalogue and meta-data” as argued by Applicant. However, the system of SON et al. (US 2019/0132222 A1) cures this deficiency.
Please see the rejection below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
10. 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.
11. 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.
12. 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.
13. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
14. Claims 1, 4-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Patil et al. (US 2015/0081840 A1) in view of SON et al. (US 20190/132222 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Patil discloses method for Service Relaying in a Relay UE (Method of Fig. 3):
receiving, by a Relay UE, a Service Catalogue (SC) of a Remote Service Provider (Patil, Fig. 3, para. 45-47, 70-74: Service Provider STA 304 transmits to the Proxy STA 302 (e.g., considered as the relay UE) a Service Advertisement message. Moreover, paragraph 62 discloses the Service Advertisement message is used to inform other devices about the list of available services. That is, said Service Advertisement message is considered as a Service Catalogue),
establishing, by the Relay UE, a connection between the Relay UE and a UE (Patil, Fig. 3, para. 70-74: Seeker STA 306 (considered as a UE) establishes a connection with the Proxy STA 302), wherein the Remote Service Provider is arranged for providing services to a UE (Patil, Fig. 3, para. 70-74: Seeker STA 306 (considered as a UE) establishes a connection with the Proxy STA 302. Moreover, paragraph 72 discloses that the Seeker STA can establish a connection with the Proxy STA before having received the Service Advertisement message from the Proxy STA);
wherein the Service Catalogue comprises information about the services (Patil, Fig. 3, para. 62: the Service Advertisement message is used to inform other devices about the list of available services. That is, said Service Advertisement message is considered as a Service Catalogue); wherein the Relay UE is arranged for relaying one or more of the services from the Remote Service Provider to the UE (Patil, Fig. 3, para. 72: the Service Provider STA transmits service data to the Proxy STA, relays the same service data to the Seeker STA, i.e., the Remote Service Provider is arranged for providing services to the UE);
generating, by the Relay UE, meta-data (Patil, Fig. 3, para. 69-74: Service Provider STA 304 transmits to the Proxy STA a Service Advertisement message that is considered as a Service Catalogue (para. 62). Moreover, paragraphs 100, 106 disclose that the Service Advertisement message includes additional parameters providing additional information as shown in Fig. 4C wherein said additional parameters are considered as meta-data), wherein the meta-data comprises additional information about the services for the UE (Patil, Fig. 3, para. 69-74: Service Provider STA 304 transmits to the Proxy STA a Service Advertisement message that is considered as a Service Catalogue (para. 62). Moreover, paragraphs 100, 106 disclose that the Service Advertisement message includes additional parameters providing additional information as shown in Fig. 4C wherein said additional parameters are considered as meta-data);
providing, by the Relay UE, information about the Service Catalogue and about the meta-data to the UE (Patil, Fig. 3, para. 69-74: the Proxy STA, i.e., the Relay UE, transmits to the Seeker STA the Service Advertisement message. Paragraph 62 discloses that the Service Advertisement message is used to inform other devices about the list of available services. That is, said Service Advertisement message is considered as a Service Catalogue. Moreover, paragraph 100 discloses that the Service Advertisement message includes additional parameters providing additional information as shown in Fig. 4C wherein said additional parameters are considered as meta-data); and,
when the UE selects one of the services based on the provided information (Patil, Figs. 3, 4A para. [0087]: This topology is identical to cluster 410, except that the cluster 415 comprises a new seeker STA 414 that may have recently received either one of the limited broadcast transmissions from the limited proxy STA 405, a service advertisement from provider STA 402, or a broadcast from the proxy STA 406. In accordance with FIG. 3, the seeker STA 414 may then transmit a discovery request 314 to connect with the desired services of the provider STA 402), relaying the selected service from the Remote Service Provider to the UE (Patil, Figs. 3, 4A, para. [0087]: the cluster 420 depicts the provider STA 402 with the proxy STA 404 and the proxy STA 406 that may serve to relay information and services to the seeker STAs 408, 412, 414. As mentioned above, the seeker STAs 408, 412, 414 may subsequently become additional proxy STAs subject to any limitations, providing further range and multi-hop services to STAs not currently members of the cluster 420).
Patil does not appear to explicitly teach wherein the Relay UE is arranged for making a selection from said information.
In the same field of endeavor, SON teaches wherein the Relay UE is arranged for making a selection from said information (SON, para. [0247] [0248]: The CSB selects a cloud that is capable of providing a service that meets the requirements of the CSC from a list of available services and provides information about the selected cloud to the CSC. That is, the CSB selects a suitable service cloud, from which the CSC may be provided with a service that meets the requirements, and relays the connection to the selected service cloud).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Patil with the teaching of SON by using the above features such that the Relay UE is arranged for making a selection from the information about the Service Catalogue as taught by SON. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide an environment in which various application services based on a cloud may be easily accessed and in which application services may continue to be extended (SON, para. [0005]).
Regarding claim 4, Patil and SON disclose method according to claim 1, wherein the Service Catalogue is received from at least one of a group comprising: a cloud system; a V2X server; a Remote Service Provider; and another UE (Patil, Fig. 3, para. 69-74: Service Provider STA 304 as the Remote Service Provider).
Regarding claim 5, Patil and SON disclose method according to claim 1, further comprising: receiving, by the Relay UE another Service Catalogue from another Remote Service Provider (Patil, Fig. 3, para. 45-47, 70-74: Service Provider STA 304 transmits to the Proxy STA 302 (e.g., considered as the relay UE) a Service Advertisement message. Moreover, paragraph 62 discloses the Service Advertisement message is used to inform other devices about the list of available services. That is, said Service Advertisement message is considered as a Service Catalogue), wherein the other Remote Service Provider is arranged for providing other services to said the UE (Patil, Fig. 3, para. 70-74: Seeker STA 306 (considered as a UE) establishes a connection with the Proxy STA 302. Moreover, paragraph 72 discloses that the Seeker STA can establish a connection with the Proxy STA before having received the Service Advertisement message from the Proxy STA); wherein the other Service Catalogue comprises information about the other services (Patil, Fig. 3, para. 62: the Service Advertisement message is used to inform other devices about the list of available services. That is, said Service Advertisement message is considered as a Service Catalogue); wherein the Relay UE is arranged for relaying one or more of the other services from the other Remote Service Provider to the UE (Patil, Fig. 3, para. 72: the Service Provider STA transmits service data to the Proxy STA, relays the same service data to the Seeker STA, i.e., the Remote Service Provider is arranged for providing services to the UE); generating, by the Relay UE, other meta-data, wherein the other meta-data comprises additional information about the other services for the UE (Patil, Fig. 3, para. 69-74: Service Provider STA 304 transmits to the Proxy STA a Service Advertisement message that is considered as a Service Catalogue (para. 62). Moreover, paragraphs 100, 106 disclose that the Service Advertisement message includes additional parameters providing additional information as shown in Fig. 4C wherein said additional parameters are considered as meta-data); and providing, by the Relay UE, information about the other Service Catalogue and about the other meta-data to the UE (Patil, Fig. 3, para. 69-74: the Proxy STA, i.e., the Relay UE, transmits to the Seeker STA the Service Advertisement message. Paragraph 62 discloses that the Service Advertisement message is used to inform other devices about the list of available services. That is, said Service Advertisement message is considered as a Service Catalogue. Moreover, paragraph 100 discloses that the Service Advertisement message includes additional parameters providing additional information as shown in Fig. 4C wherein said additional parameters are considered as meta-data).
Regarding claim 6, Patil and SON disclose method according to claim 5, further comprising: creating, by the Relay UE, one or more further services based on at least one of a selection or combination of at least one of services provided by the Remote Service Provider or the other services provided by the other Remote Service Provider (Patil, Fig. 3, para. 45-47, 70-74: Service Provider STA 304 transmits to the Proxy STA 302 (e.g., considered as the relay UE) a Service Advertisement message. Moreover, paragraph 62 discloses the Service Advertisement message is used to inform other devices about the list of available services. Patil further discloses the Service Provider STA transmits service data to the Proxy STA, relays the same service data to the Seeker STA, i.e., the Remote Service Provider is arranged for providing services to the UE), generating, by the Relay UE, a further Service Catalogue comprising information about the further services (Patil, Fig. 3, para. 62: the Service Advertisement message is used to inform other devices about the list of available services. That is, said Service Advertisement message is considered as a Service Catalogue); generating, by the Relay UE, further meta-data (Patil, para. 100, 106: the Service Advertisement message includes additional parameters, wherein said additional parameters are considered as meta-data), wherein the further meta-data comprises additional information about the further services for the UE (Patil, Fig. 3, para. 69-74: Service Provider STA 304 transmits to the Proxy STA a Service Advertisement message that is considered as a Service Catalogue (para. 62). Moreover, paragraphs 100, 106 disclose that the Service Advertisement message includes additional parameters providing additional information as shown in Fig. 4C wherein said additional parameters are considered as meta-data); and providing, by the Relay UE, information about the further Service Catalogue and about the further meta-data to the UE (Patil, Fig. 3, para. 69-74: the Proxy STA, i.e., the Relay UE, transmits to the Seeker STA the Service Advertisement message. Paragraph 62 discloses that the Service Advertisement message is used to inform other devices about the list of available services. That is, said Service Advertisement message is considered as a Service Catalogue. Moreover, paragraph 100 discloses that the Service Advertisement message includes additional parameters providing additional information as shown in Fig. 4C wherein said additional parameters are considered as meta-data).
Regarding claim 7, Patil and SON disclose method according to claim 1, further comprising generating, by the Relay UE, the information about at least one of services, other services or further services, in which the information is at least one of logically structured or provided with a hierarchy (Patil, Fig. 4C, para. 100-111: the Service Advertisement message and the additional parameters, i.e., the metadata, are logically structured and/or provided with a hierarchy).
Regarding claim 8, Patil discloses method for selecting a relayed Service in UE (Method of Fig. 3), comprising: establishing, by a UE, a connection between the UE and a Relay UE (Patil, Fig. 3, para. 70-74: Seeker STA 306 (considered as a UE) establishes a connection with the Proxy STA 302. Moreover, paragraph 72 discloses that the Seeker STA can establish a connection with the Proxy STA before having received the Service Advertisement message from the Proxy STA); receiving, by the UE, information about a Service Catalogue of a Remote Service Provider and about meta-data from a Relay UE (Patil, Fig. 3, para. 45-47, 70-74: Service Provider STA 304 transmits to the Proxy STA 302 (e.g., considered as the relay UE) a Service Advertisement message. Moreover, paragraph 62 discloses the Service Advertisement message is used to inform other devices about the list of available services. That is, said Service Advertisement message is considered as a Service Catalogue); wherein the Service Catalogue comprises information about services provided by the Remote Service Provider (Patil, Fig. 3, para. 72: the Service Provider STA transmits service data to the Proxy STA, relays the same service data to the Seeker STA, i.e., the Remote Service Provider is arranged for providing services to the UE) and wherein the meta-data is generated by the Relay UE and comprises additional information about the services (Patil, Fig. 3, para. 72: the Service Provider STA transmits service data to the Proxy STA, relays the same service data to the Seeker STA, i.e., the Remote Service Provider is arranged for providing services to the UE. Moreover, Patil, Fig. 3, para. 69-74: discloses Service Provider STA 304 transmits to the Proxy STA a Service Advertisement message that is considered as a Service Catalogue (para. 62). Moreover, paragraphs 100, 106 disclose that the Service Advertisement message includes additional parameters providing additional information as shown in Fig. 4C wherein said additional parameters are considered as meta-data); selecting, by the UE, one of the services based on the provided information (Patil, Figs. 3, 4A para. [0087]: This topology is identical to cluster 410, except that the cluster 415 comprises a new seeker STA 414 that may have recently received either one of the limited broadcast transmissions from the limited proxy STA 405, a service advertisement from provider STA 402, or a broadcast from the proxy STA 406. In accordance with FIG. 3, the seeker STA 414 may then transmit a discovery request 314 to connect with the desired services of the provider STA 402); and, receiving, by the UE, the selected service from the Remote Service Provider relayed by the Relay UE (Patil, Figs. 3, 4A, para. [0087]: the cluster 420 depicts the provider STA 402 with the proxy STA 404 and the proxy STA 406 that may serve to relay information and services to the seeker STAs 408, 412, 414. As mentioned above, the seeker STAs 408, 412, 414 may subsequently become additional proxy STAs subject to any limitations, providing further range and multi-hop services to STAs not currently members of the cluster 420).
Patil does not appear to explicitly teach wherein the Relay UE is arranged for making a selection from said information.
In the same field of endeavor, SON teaches wherein the Relay UE is arranged for making a selection from said information (SON, para. [0247] [0248]: The CSB selects a cloud that is capable of providing a service that meets the requirements of the CSC from a list of available services and provides information about the selected cloud to the CSC. That is, the CSB selects a suitable service cloud, from which the CSC may be provided with a service that meets the requirements, and relays the connection to the selected service cloud).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Patil with the teaching of SON by using the above features such that the Relay UE is arranged for making a selection from the information about the Service Catalogue as taught by SON. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide an environment in which various application services based on a cloud may be easily accessed and in which application services may continue to be extended (SON, para. [0005]).
Regarding claim 9, Patil and SON disclose a Relay UE (Fig. 3, para. [0072]: proxy STA 302 acting as a relay) for Service Relaying, comprising: a first communication unit comprising electronic hardware for communication with a Remote Service Provider and a second communication unit comprising electronic hardware for communicating with a UE; a processing unit comprising electronic hardware connected to the first and second communication units and arranged for carry out the method of claim 1 (Patil, para. 33-36: disclose different communication networks that can carry out the method of claim 1).
Regarding claim 10, Patil and SON disclose a UE for receiving a relayed Service (Fig. 3, para. [0072]: Seeker STA 306), comprising: a communication unit comprising electronic hardware for communicating with a Relay UE; a processing unit comprising electronic hardware connected to the communication unit and arranged for carry out the method of claim 8 (Patil, para. 62: the communication system 100 to carry out the method of claim 8).
Regarding claim 11, Patil and SON disclose a computer program comprising a non-transitory computer-readable medium having stored thereon instructions which, when the instructions are executed by a computer, cause the computer to carry out the method of claim 1 (Patil, para. 11: a computer program to carry out the method of claim 1).
15. Claims 2, 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Patil et al. (US 20150081840 A1) in view of SON et al. (US 20190132222 A1) and further in view of Russell et al. (US 20190037518 A1).
Regarding claim 2, Patil and SON disclose all the subject matter of the Method according to claim 1, but the references fail to teach wherein the meta-data comprises additional information regarding at least one of a group comprising: Quality of Service of a respective service; estimated processing load of the Relay UE; estimated use of a network bandwidth; estimated energy consumption; battery status of the Relay UE; costs of a respective service; and, rating of the Remote Service Provider.
In the same field of endeavor, Russell teaches wherein the meta-data comprises additional information regarding at least one of a group comprising: Quality of Service of a respective service; estimated processing load of the Relay UE; estimated use of a network bandwidth; estimated energy consumption (Russell, para. 432: energy management devices); battery status of the Relay UE (Russell, para. 454: charging a battery on the user equipment); costs of a respective service; and, rating of the Remote Service Provider.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Patil and SON with the teaching of Russell by using the above features such that the meta-data comprises additional information regarding estimated energy consumption and/or battery status of the Relay UE as taught by Russell. The motivation for doing so would have been to implement systems and methods for providing connectivity through the relay user equipment (Russell, para. [0001]).
Regarding claim 3, Patil and SON disclose all the subject matter of the Method according to claim 1, but the references fail to teach wherein the services comprise at least one of services at a connection layer or services at an application layer, wherein the services at an application-layer comprise at least one of a group comprising: remote computing, for Artificial Intelligence calculations or Machine Learning calculations; remote storage of data; and infotainment.
In the similar field of endeavor, Russell teaches wherein the services comprise at least one of services at a connection layer or services at an application layer, wherein the services at an application-layer comprise at least one of a group comprising: remote computing, for Artificial Intelligence calculations or Machine Learning calculations; remote storage of data (Russell, para. 207, 214, 219: The relay UE may store the received remote UE user identity against the remote UE local connection ID address); and infotainment (Patil, para. 117, 136: an infotainment system may be associated with the relay UE).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Patil and SON with the teaching of Russell by using the above features such that the services at an application-layer comprise a remote storage of data and infotainment as taught by Russell. The motivation for doing so would have been to implement systems and methods for providing connectivity through the relay user equipment (Russell, para. [0001]).
Conclusion
16. 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.
17. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEAN F VOLTAIRE whose telephone number is (571)272-3953. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-6:30 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, REBECCA E. SONG can be reached at (571)270-3667. 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.
/JEAN F VOLTAIRE/Examiner, Art Unit 2417
/REBECCA E SONG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2417
Prosecution Insights