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
Amendments filed on 04/13/2026 are entered. The amendments change the scopes of the previously presented claims. New grounds of rejections are applied to the currently amended claims. The current Office Action is made FINAL as necessitated by the claim amendments.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-12 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5, 10-12 and 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu (US 2024/0064593) in view of Cheng ‘922 (US 2024/0007922).
Wu discloses the following features.
Regarding claim 1, a remote UE device (see UE 401A in Fig. 4 and UE 501A in Fig. 5) comprising:
a controller (see processor 806 in Fig. 8) configured to maintain a connection with a serving base station over a current indirect communication path (see serving cell 502 in Fig. 5 and BS 402, which connects to the UE 401A via a relay UE 401B), the current indirect communication path through a current relay UE device (see Fig. 4, wherein the UE 401A connects with the BS 402 via relay UE 401B; “source relay link” recited in paragraph [0046] and see “UE 501A may access serving cell 502 via a relay UE” recited in paragraph [0049]);
a receiver (see receiving circuitry 802 in Fig. 8) configured to receive, from the serving base station over the current indirect communication path (see step 513 in Fig. 5 and see “In operation 513, serving cell 502 may transmit an RRC reconfiguration message to UE 501A” recited in paragraph [0053], wherein the UE access the serving cell 502 via a relay UE as shown in paragraph [0049], which constitutes a source relay link as shown in paragraph [0046]), a conditional reconfiguration message instructing the remote UE device to switch from the current indirect communication path to an alternate indirect communication path when a condition is met (see “The RRC reconfiguration message may include at least one conditional path switch configuration associated with at least one execution condition…at least one execution condition for at least one candidate relay…” recited in paragraph [0053]), the alternate communication path through a target relay UE device not in the current indirect communication path (see “target relay link (e.g., between UE 401A and UE 401C)” recited in paragraph [0046] and shown in Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 2, wherein the condition comprises an alternate quality level of radio link to the target relay UE device exceeding an alternate quality link threshold (see “the execution condition may be a condition event (hereinafter, “event #B2”) that the channel quality of the PC5 link between the UE and the serving relay of the UE becomes worse than a threshold (threshold #B1) and the channel quality between the UE and a candidate cell becomes better than another threshold (threshold #B2)” recited in paragraph [0062]).
Regarding claim 3, wherein the condition further comprises a current quality level of a current indirect link to the current relay UE device being below a current quality link threshold (see “the execution condition may be a condition event (hereinafter, “event #B2”) that the channel quality of the PC5 link between the UE and the serving relay of the UE becomes worse than a threshold (threshold #B1) and the channel quality between the UE and a candidate cell becomes better than another threshold (threshold #B2)” recited in paragraph [0062]).
Regarding claim 4, wherein: the alternate quality level of the radio link to the target relay UE device is a measured alternate RSRP, the alternate quality link threshold is an alternate link RSRP threshold, the current quality level of the current indirect link to the current relay UE device is a measured current link RSRP, and the current quality link threshold is a current link RSRP threshold (paragraph [0062] as applied in the rejection above shows the use of the channel quality of the serving relay, the candidate relay and the channel quality thresholds; and see “sidelink channel quality (e.g., reference signal received power (RSRP))” recited in paragraph [0051] and paragraph [0067], which shows that the “channel quality” may be determined in RSRP).
Regarding claim 5, wherein the measured alternate RSRP is one of a SD-RSRP and a SL-RSRP (see “candidate relay UE…sidelink channel quality (e.g., reference signal received power (RSRP))” recited in paragraph [0051]).
Regarding claim 10, wherein the receiver, the serving base station and the at least one relay UE device are configured to operate in accordance with at least one revision of the 3GPP NR V2X communication specification (see “NR sidelink communications (e.g., specified in 3GPP specification TS 38.311) may refer to access stratum (AS) functionality enabling at least vehicle-to-everything (V2X) communications as defined in 3GPP specification TS 23.287 between neighboring UEs, using NR technology but not traversing any network node…” recited in paragraph [0022]).
Regarding claim 11, wherein the target relay UE device is served by the serving base station (see Fig. 4, wherein the target relay UE 401C is served by the same base station 402 serving the source relay UE 401B).
Regarding claim 12, wherein the target relay UE device is served by a target base station different from the serving base station (see Fig. 1, wherein the target relay UE may be UE 101B that is served by a target base station 103 different from a serving base station 102).
Regarding claim 13, a method performed by a remote UE device (see UE 401A in Fig. 4 and UE 501A in Fig. 5), the method comprising:
maintaining, by the remote UE device, a connection with a serving base station over a current indirect communication path (see serving cell 502 in Fig. 5 and BS 402, which connects to the UE 401A via a relay UE 401B), the current indirect communication path through a current relay UE device (see Fig. 4, wherein the UE 401A connects with the BS 402 via relay UE 401B; “source relay link” recited in paragraph [0046] and see “UE 501A may access serving cell 502 via a relay UE” recited in paragraph [0049]);
receiving, from the serving base station over the current indirect communication path (see step 513 in Fig. 5 and see “In operation 513, serving cell 502 may transmit an RRC reconfiguration message to UE 501A” recited in paragraph [0053], wherein the UE access the serving cell 502 via a relay UE as shown in paragraph [0049], which constitutes a source relay link as shown in paragraph [0046]), a conditional reconfiguration message instructing the remote UE device to switch from the current indirect communication path to an alternate indirect communication path when a condition is met (see “The RRC reconfiguration message may include at least one conditional path switch configuration associated with at least one execution condition…at least one execution condition for at least one candidate relay…” recited in paragraph [0053]), the alternate communication path through a target relay UE device not in the current indirect communication path (see “target relay link (e.g., between UE 401A and UE 401C)” recited in paragraph [0046] and shown in Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 14, a serving base station (see BS 402 in Fig. 4) comprising:
a controller (see processor 806 in Fig. 8) configured to:
maintain a connection with a remote UE device (see UE 401A in Fig. 4 and UE 501A in Fig. 5) over a current indirect communicating path (see serving cell 502 in Fig. 5 and BS 402, which connects to the UE 401A via a relay UE 401B), the current indirect communication path through a current relay UE device (see Fig. 4, wherein the UE 401A connects with the BS 402 via relay UE 401B; “source relay link” recited in paragraph [0046] and see “UE 501A may access serving cell 502 via a relay UE” recited in paragraph [0049]); and
configure a target relay UE device to provide relay service to the remote UE device (see step 513 in Fig. 5 and see “In operation 513, serving cell 502 may transmit an RRC reconfiguration message to UE 501A” recited in paragraph [0053], wherein the UE access the serving cell 502 via a relay UE as shown in paragraph [0049], which constitutes a source relay link as shown in paragraph [0046]), wherein the target relay device is not in the current indirect communication path (see “target relay link (e.g., between UE 401A and UE 401C)” recited in paragraph [0046] and shown in Fig. 4); and
a transmitter (see transmitting circuitry 804 in Fig. 8) configured to transmit a conditional reconfiguration message to the remote UE device over the current indirect path, the conditional reconfiguration message instructing the remote UE device to switch from the current indirect communication path to an alternate indirect communication path through the target relay UE device when a condition is met (see “The RRC reconfiguration message may include at least one conditional path switch configuration associated with at least one execution condition…at least one execution condition for at least one candidate relay…” recited in paragraph [0053]).
Wu does not disclose the following features: regarding claims 1 and 13-14, the target relay UE device having been configured, by the base station prior to sending the conditional reconfiguration message, to provide relay service to the remote UE device.
Cheng ‘922 discloses the following features.
Regarding claims 1 and 13-14, the target relay UE device having been configured, by the base station prior to sending the conditional reconfiguration message, to provide relay service to the remote UE device (see Fig. 3 and paragraphs [0103]-[0105], wherein a PC5-to-PC5 path switch is triggered and the path switch is configured in a RRC Reconfiguration Message 320; that is, the UE switch from one PC5 path connected to a current relay UE to another PC5 path connected via another candidate relay UE, the another PC5 path via a candidate relay UE being configured prior to the transmission of the RRC Reconfiguration Message in step 320; wherein the RRC Reconfiguration Message may include conditional path switch information as shown in Wu paragraph [0053] as shown above).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the current Application to modify the system of Wu using features, as taught by Cheng ‘922, in order to improve connection quality, throughput and communication reliability (see paragraph [0005] of Cheng).
Claim(s) 6-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu and Cheng ‘922 as applied to claims 3 above, and further in view of Cheng ‘809 (US 2024/0015809).
Wu and Cheng ‘922 disclose the features as shown above.
Wu does not disclose the following features: regarding claim 6, wherein: the alternate quality level, the alternate quality link threshold, the current quality level, and the current quality link threshold are RSRQ values; regarding claim 7, wherein: the alternate quality level, the alternate quality link threshold, the current quality level, and the current quality link threshold are SINR values.
Cheng ‘809 discloses the following features.
Regarding claim 6, wherein: the alternate quality level, the alternate quality link threshold, the current quality level, and the current quality link threshold (see paragraph [0106], wherein the UE determines that the signal strength being below a threshold and see paragraph [0111], wherein measurements are performed for the relay UE candidates and compared against thresholds) are RSRQ values (see paragraph [0111], which shows that the measure quantity may be the “RSRP/RSRQ/SINR quantities associated with the PC5 relay link”).
Regarding claim 7, wherein: the alternate quality level, the alternate quality link threshold, the current quality level, and the current quality link threshold (see paragraph [0106], wherein the UE determines that the signal strength being below a threshold and see paragraph [0111], wherein measurements are performed for the relay UE candidates and compared against thresholds) are SINR values (see paragraph [0111], which shows that the measure quantity may be the “RSRP/RSRQ/SINR quantities associated with the PC5 relay link”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the current Application to modify the system of Wu and Cheng ‘922 using features, as taught by Cheng ‘809, in order to configure measurement of different metrics (see paragraph [0111] of Cheng).
Claim(s) 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu and Cheng ‘922 as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Zhao (US 2023/0397075).
Wu and Cheng ‘922 discloses the features as shown above.
Wu does not disclose the following features: regarding claim 8, a transmitter configured to transmit an RRC Reconfiguration Complete message to the target relay UE device in response to the controller determining the alternate quality level of radio link to the target relay device exceeds the alternate quality link threshold; regarding claim 9, a transmitter configured to transmit an RRC reconfiguration complete message to the relay UE device in response to the controller determining the current quality level of the current indirect link to the current relay UE device is below a current quality link threshold and determining the alternate quality level of the radio link to the target relay device UE exceeds the alternate quality link threshold.
Zhao discloses the following features.
Regarding claim 8, a transmitter configured to transmit an RRC Reconfiguration Complete message to the target relay UE device (see “the terminal may transmit, through the second target relay, an RRC reconfiguration complete message to the network device to which the second target cell belongs” recited in paragraph [0193]) in response to the controller determining the alternate quality level of radio link to the target relay device exceeds the alternate quality link threshold (Wu discloses the RRC reconfiguration having the conditional path switch configuration determined based on the alternate quality level exceeding the quality link threshold in paragraphs [0053] and [0062]).
Regarding claim 9, a transmitter configured to transmit an RRC reconfiguration complete message to the relay UE device (see “the terminal may transmit, through the second target relay, an RRC reconfiguration complete message to the network device to which the second target cell belongs” recited in paragraph [0193]) in response to the controller determining the current quality level of the current indirect link to the current relay UE device is below a current quality link threshold and determining the alternate quality level of the radio link to the target relay device UE exceeds the alternate quality link threshold (Wu discloses the RRC reconfiguration having the conditional path switch configuration determined based on the alternate quality level exceeding the quality link threshold and quality level of source relay falling below a quality level threshold in paragraphs [0053] and [0062]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the current Application to modify the system of Wu and Cheng ‘922 using features, as taught by Zhao, in order to inform the network device of the RRC reconfiguration (see paragraph [0193] of Zhao).
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 JUTAI KAO whose telephone number is (571)272-9719. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00-17:00 EST.
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, Kwang Yao can be reached at (571)272-3182. 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.
/JUTAI KAO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2473
Prosecution Insights