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 .
Priorities and Examiner Remarks
This application is a National Stage entry of PCT/US2022/037068 (International Filing Date: 07/14/2022) that claims priority from provisional application 63222303
(filed 07/15/2021).
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or non-obviousness.
Claims 1-3, 5-10, and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Richard Lee-Chee Kuo (US 11490448 B1, hereinafter Kuo), in view of SHARMA et al. (US 20230086337 A1, hereinafter SHARMA).
Regarding claim 1, Kuo teaches a relay user equipment (UE) device comprising (in general, see fig. 17 and fig. 24 along with their corresponding sections or paragraphs including, but not limited to, column 17 line 51 to column 18 line 37, as well as column 24 line 22 to column 25 line 34):
a transmitter configured to transmit a signal to a remote UE device while the relay UE device is in a Radio Resource Control (RRC) INACTIVE connection state (Kuo, see at least column 24 line 22-64 in view of column 20 line 25-33, e.g. “...the Remote UE may then transmits a measurement report to gNB. The measurement report may include measurement results of multiple Relay UEs. ... In case the Relay UE is not in RRC CONNECTED mode/state, the gNB needs to page the Relay UE so that the relay UE can connect with the gNB to receive the RRC Reconfiguration message from the gNB...”, note that sections of column 20 discloses that, in part, paging is performed when a UE is in RRC_INACTIVE);
a controller configured to maintain the relay UE device in the RRC INACTIVE connection state with a base station that has received a measurement report from the remote UE device over a Uu communication link (Kuo, see at least column 24 line 22-64 in view of column 14 line 39-41, e.g. “...the Remote UE may then transmits a measurement report to gNB. The measurement report may include measurement results of multiple Relay UEs. ... In case the Relay UE is not in RRC CONNECTED mode/state, the gNB needs to page the Relay UE so that the relay UE can connect with the gNB to receive the RRC Reconfiguration message from the gNB...”, note that sections of column 14 discloses that direct (Uu) path and indirect (via the relay) path, also note that above sections of column 20 discloses that, in part, paging is performed when a UE is in RRC_INACTIVE),
and
a receiver configured to receive a Radio Access Network (RAN)-based page from the base station after the base station received the measurement report (Kuo, see at least column 24 line 22-64 along with fig. 17, for example in fig. 17 step 2 RRC Reconfiguration comes after step 1 Measurement, note that “...In case the Relay UE is not in RRC CONNECTED mode/state, the gNB needs to page the Relay UE so that the relay UE can connect with the gNB to receive the RRC Reconfiguration message from the gNB...”),
the controller configured to perform, in response to the RAN-based page, an RRC Resume procedure with the base station to transition the relay UE device from the RRC INACTIVE connection state to an RRC Connected (CONN) connection state (Kuo, see at least column 24 line 22-64 in view of column 20 line 9-33, e.g. “...In case the Relay UE is not in RRC CONNECTED mode/state, the gNB needs to page the Relay UE so that the relay UE can connect with the gNB to receive the RRC Reconfiguration message from the gNB...”, note that sections of column 20 discloses that, in part, paging is performed when a UE is in RRC_INACTIVE, and is to initiate the RRC connection resumption procedure);
the receiver configured to receive, after reception of the RAN-based page, an RRC Reconfiguration Complete message directed to the base station from the remote UE device over a PC5 communication link (Kuo, see at least column 24 line 22-64 in view of fig. 17, for example steps 4-5 PC5 connection establishment and RRC Reconfiguration Complete message, send from Remote UE to Relay UE),
the transmitter configured to transmit the RRC Reconfiguration Complete message to the base station over another Uu communication link established in response to the RRC Resume procedure (Kuo, see at least column 24 line 22-64 in view of fig. 17, for example steps 5 RRC Reconfiguration Complete message, send from Relay UE to gNB).
Kuo does not specifically teach the measurement report comprising a measurement of the signal.
SHARMA teaches the measurement report comprising a measurement of the signal (SHARMA, see at least 93 of fig.7 along with para. 109, “...The remote UE 93 sends 710 a measurement report of the relay UE 82. The measurement report may include, but is not limited to, an identity of the relay UE, a quality of a physical channel between the remote UE and the relay UE and/or cell measurements based on reference signals...”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to a person having ordinary skill in the art to incorporate SHARMA into Kuo can therefore ensure or improve a likelihood of service continuity when a remote UE switches from communicating with an infrastructure equipment to communicating with a relay UE (SHARMA, see para. 14).
Regarding claim 2, Kuo in view of SHARMA teaches claim 1.
Kuo further teaches wherein the RRC Reconfiguration Complete message is transmitted by the remote UE device in response to receipt of an RRC Reconfiguration message at the remote UE device transmitted from the base station over the Uu communication link between the base station and the remote UE device, the RRC Reconfiguration message initiating a path switch from the Uu communication link between the remote UE device and the base station to an indirect communication link between the remote UE device and the base station through the relay UE device. (Kuo, see at least column 24 line 22-64 in view of fig. 17, for example steps 3, 5, and 6; note that step 3: RRC Reconfiguration message to Remote UE)
Regarding claim 3, Kuo in view of SHARMA teaches claim 1.
Kuo further teaches wherein the RAN-based page is transmitted by the base station to initiate a path switch from the Uu communication link between the remote UE device and the base station to an indirect communication link between the remote UE device and the base station through the relay UE device. (Kuo, see at least column 24 line 22-64 in view of fig. 17, note that fig. 17 discloses “...procedure for Remote UE switching from direct to indirect communication path...”; also note that fig. 17 discloses “...gNB transmits a RRC Reconfiguration message to the Relay UE to indicate the Uu and/or PC5 (or SL) configurations to be applied by the Relay UE for supporting UE-to-Network Relay operation after the path switching. In case the Relay UE is not in RRC CONNECTED mode/state, the gNB needs to page the Relay UE so that the relay UE can connect with the gNB to receive the RRC Reconfiguration message from the gNB...”)
Regarding claim 5, Kuo in view of SHARMA teaches claim 1.
Kuo further teaches the transmitter and receiver are configured to operate in accordance with at least one revision of the 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) New Radio (NR) Vehicle-to-Everything (V2X) communication specification. (Kuo, see at least column 17 line 51 to column 18 line 37, for example, for NR V2X PC5)
Regarding claim 6, Kuo in view of SHARMA teaches claim 1.
Kuo further teaches wherein the signal is a discovery message. (Kuo, see at least column 17 line 51 to column 18 line 37 in view of fig. 17, e.g. “...Step 1: Remote UE reports one or multiple candidate Relay UE(s), after Remote UE measures/discoveries the candidate Relay UE(s)...”, note that “...Discovery message sent by the Relay UE so that the Remote UE can include the NG-5G-S-TMSI or the full I-RNTI of the Relay UE in the measurement report...”)
Regarding claim 7, this claim is rejected for the same reasoning as claim 1. To be more specific, although reciting subject matters slightly different, one skilled in the art would have known claim 7 performs reverse (or corresponding) procedures of claim 1. For example, it would be a base station of claim 7 that performs the reverse (or corresponding) receiving from and transmitting to the relay UE of claim 1. Hence, the examiner applies the same rejection reasoning as set forth in claim 1.
Regarding claim 8, Kuo in view of SHARMA teaches claim 7.
Kuo further teaches the receiver is further configured to receive the RRC Reconfiguration Complete message that is transmitted from the remote UE device and relayed by the relay UE device. (Kuo, see at least column 24 line 22-64 in view of fig. 17, for example steps 5 RRC Reconfiguration Complete message)
Regarding claims 9, 10, and 12, in view of claim 7 above, these claims are rejected for the same reasoning as claims 2, 3, and 5, respectively.
Regarding claim 13, this claim is rejected for the same reasoning as claim 1 except this claim is in method claim format.
Claims 4 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kuo in view of SHARMA, further in view of Freda et al. (US 20230180313 A1, hereinafter Freda).
Regarding claim 4, Kuo in view of SHARMA teaches claim 1.
Kuo further teaches RRC resume procedures (Kuo, see at least column 24 line 22-64 in view of column 20 line 9-33, for example, perform paging to initiate the RRC connection resumption procedure [according to section 5.3.13]).
Kuo in view of SHARMA does not teach wherein: the receiver is further configured to receive an RRC Resume message after transmitting an RRC Resume Request message, and the transmitter is further configured to transmit an RRC Resume Complete message after receiving the RRC Resume message.
Freda teaches wherein: the receiver is further configured to receive an RRC Resume message after transmitting an RRC Resume Request message, and the transmitter is further configured to transmit an RRC Resume Complete message after receiving the RRC Resume message. (Freda, see at least para. 277 and fig. 9 in view of para. 288, e.g. steps 918-920 for RRC Resume procedure)
Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to a person having ordinary skill in the art to incorporate Freda into Kuo in view of SHARMA to address SL/network coverage extension and power efficiency improvements in order to handle a wide range of applications and services (Freda, see para. 73).
Regarding claim 11, in view of claim 7 above, this claim is rejected for the same reasoning as claim 4.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/26/2026 have been fully considered. Regarding independent claims 1, 7, and 13, since applicant's amendment necessitated new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action, previous Office action's rejections are moot. Accordingly, corresponding dependent claims have also been rejected in this Office action.
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 YEE F LAM whose telephone number is (571)270-7577. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-5pm. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ayman Abaza can be reached on 571-270-0422. 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.
/YEE F LAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2465
Prosecution Insights