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 .
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
The limitations in claims 1, 3, 5-8 performed by “transmission unit”, “connection unit” (In this application, the recited “unit” have no structural meanings and are considered as generic placeholders, and the generic placeholders are not preceded by structural modifiers (transmission and connection are not structural modifiers)).
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
A review of the specification shows that the following appears to be the corresponding structure described in the specification for the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph limitations: figs 2-3, paragraph 25-28.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Objections
Claims 2, 4-6, 8-9, 14 are objected to because of the following reasons:
For claim 4, it’s unclear if the phrase “the message” refer to “a message concerning stop of relay” (claim 2) or “a message that notifies a Backhaul Radio Link Failure (BH RLF)” (claim 2).
For claim 5, it’s unclear if the phrase “the message” refer to “a message concerning stop of relay” (claim 1) or “a message that notifies a Backhaul Radio Link Failure (BH RLF)” (claim 1) or “a message that announces stop of relay beforehand” (claim 3).
For claim 6, it’s unclear if the phrase “the message” refer to “a message concerning stop of relay” (claim 1) or “a message that notifies a Backhaul Radio Link Failure (BH RLF)” (claim 1) or “a message that announces stop of relay beforehand” (claim 3).
For claim 8, it’s unclear if the phrase “the message” refer to “a message concerning stop of relay” (claim 1) or “a message that notifies a Backhaul Radio Link Failure (BH RLF)” (claim 1) or “a message that announces stop of relay beforehand” (claim 3).
For claim 14, it’s unclear if the phrase “the message” refer to “a message concerning stop of relay” (claim 9) or “a message that notifies the BH RLF” (claim 13).
For claims 2, 9, from the claim language, Examiner assumes that it is the at least one processor that perform the functional steps.
However, Examiner recommends Applicants to further clarify the claim language by changing the phrase “causing the relay apparatus to perform operations” to “causing the at least one processor to perform operations”.
Otherwise, if Applicants intends for some other hardware components of the relay apparatus to perform the steps, then please amend the claims to include those hardware components and clearly indicate that those hardware components perform the steps.
If Applicants intends for any unknown hardware components of the relay apparatus to perform the steps, then please clearly states so on record. However, Applicants are reminded that doing so will raise 112 issues since then the claim language would impose no limits as to a particular structure for performing the claimed invention; hence the claims may cover all devices for/ways for performing the claimed functions. As thus, there is a failure to provide a clear-cut indication of claim scope because the functional language is not sufficiently precise and definite, resulting in no boundaries on the claim limitation.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 3, 5-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claims 3, 5-8 are indefinite because there are insufficient antecedent basis for the following limitations:
“The relay apparatus according to” (claims 3, 5-8).
“the operations” (claim 6)
From the claim language it seems claim 3 (and its dependent claims 5-8) should depend on claim 2 (A relay apparatus) instead of claim 1 (A communication system).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Fujishiro, US 20230345346.
For claim 1. Fujishiro teaches: A communication system including at least an Integrated Access and Backhaul (IAB) donor connectable to a network, and an IAB node that is connected to the IAB donor and relays communication between a User Equipment (UE) and the IAB donor, (Fujishiro, fig 1, paragraph 55, IAB donor (gNB) connects to 5GC network; fig 1, paragraph 3, 58-59, the two IAB-nodes connect to IAB donor and relays communication between UE and IAB donor)
wherein the IAB donor comprises a transmission unit configured to (Fujishiro, fig 3, paragraph 64-68, gNB comprises transmitter) transmit, to the IAB node as a destination and before relay processing is stopped, a message concerning stop of relay, (Fujishiro, fig 20, paragraph 158, IAB donor transmit a message indicating a stop instruction of the local rerouting (relaying) to the IAB node; paragraph 160, IAB node stops local rerouting in response to receiving the message thus the message is transmitted before relay processing is stopped)
and the message concerning stop of the relay is different from a message that notifies a Backhaul Radio Link Failure (BH RLF). (Fujishiro, paragraph 158, the message indicating the stop instruction is transmitted by an F1-AP message or an RRC message and is based on route load status thus is not a message that notifies a Backhaul Radio Link Failure)
the IAB node comprises a connection unit configured to execute, based on reception of the message, processing for connection to another IAB donor connectable to the network before the IAB donor stops relay, (Fujishiro, paragraph 160, stopping the local rerouting include reselecting the path and moving data transmission to the reselected path; paragraph 337-342, starting/stopping local rerouting is used in handover; paragraph 385-387, handover includes migrating to another IAB donor)
For claim 2. Fujishiro teaches: A relay apparatus included in a relay path that relays communication between a network and a terminal, (Fujishiro, fig 1, paragraph 55, 57-58, IAB donor (gNB) relays communication between 5GC network and UE) comprising: at least one memory that stores a set of instructions; and at least one processor that executes the instructions, the instructions, when executed, causing the relay apparatus to perform operations comprising: (Fujishiro, fig 3, paragraph 64-68, gNB comprises memory stores a program to be executed by the processor to perform operations)
transmitting, before the relay apparatus stops relay, a message concerning stop of relay to a first another relay apparatus provided on a first relay path that relays wireless communication between the relay apparatus and the terminal on the relay path and connected to the relay apparatus, (Fujishiro, fig 20, paragraph 158, IAB donor transmit a message indicating a stop instruction of the local rerouting (relaying) to the IAB node; fig 1, paragraph 3, 58-59, the two IAB-nodes connect to IAB donor and relays communication between UE and IAB donor)
wherein the message is not transmitted to a second another relay apparatus provided on a second relay path that relays wireless communication between the relay apparatus and the network on the relay path and connected to the relay apparatus, (Fujishiro, fig 20, paragraph 158, IAB donor transmit a message indicating a stop instruction of the local rerouting (relaying) to the IAB node; paragraph 58-59, the two IAB-nodes connect to IAB donor and relays communication between UE and IAB donor; there is no discussion of the message being transmitted to another IAB node on a different relay path thus the message is not transmitted to a second another relay apparatus provided on a second relay path that relays wireless communication between the relay apparatus and the network on the relay path and connected to the relay apparatus)
and the message is different from a message that notifies a Backhaul Radio Link Failure (BH RLF). (Fujishiro, paragraph 158, the message indicating the stop instruction is transmitted by an F1-AP message or an RRC message and is based on route load status thus is not a message that notifies a Backhaul Radio Link Failure)
For claim 3. Fujishiro discloses all the limitations of claim 1, and Fujishiro further teaches: wherein the message concerning stop of the relay is a message that announces stop of relay beforehand. (Fujishiro, fig 20, paragraph 158, IAB donor transmit a message indicating a stop instruction of the local rerouting (relaying) to the IAB node; paragraph 160, IAB node stops local rerouting in response to receiving the message thus the message is a message that announces stop of relay beforehand; paragraph 159, the message indicating the stop instruction may include a valid period of the stop instruction, the valid period may be represented by a timer value or the like)
For claim 4. Fujishiro discloses all the limitations of claim 2, and Fujishiro further teaches: wherein the message further includes information of the second other relay apparatus. (Fujishiro, paragraph 159, destination ID, path ID, alterative path ID are included in the message; destination ID, path ID, alterative path ID are information of the second other relay apparatus)
For claim 5. Fujishiro discloses all the limitations of claim 3, and Fujishiro further teaches: wherein the message further includes information regarding a scheduled time to stop the relay. (Fujishiro, paragraph 159, the message indicating the stop instruction may include a valid period of the stop instruction, the valid period may be represented by a timer value or the like)
For claim 6. Fujishiro discloses all the limitations of claim 3, and Fujishiro further teaches: wherein the operations further comprise controlling, in a case where a connection request from one of a communication apparatus and another relay apparatus is received after transmission of the message, not to accept the connection request. (Fujishiro, paragraph 325, RAN (IAB donor) stopped scheduling request after sending the indication)
For claim 7. Fujishiro discloses all the limitations of claim 3, and Fujishiro further teaches: wherein the relay apparatus is an IAB node that performs relay based on Integrated Access and Backhaul (IAB) defined in the Third Generation Partnership Project (3GPP). (Fujishiro, paragraph 3, 3GPP standard introduce new relay node referred to as an IAB node; paragraph 58-59, the two IAB-nodes connect to IAB donor and relays communication between UE and IAB donor)
For claim 8. Fujishiro discloses all the limitations of claim 7, and Fujishiro further teaches: wherein the message is a Backhaul Adaptation Protocol (BAP) PDU (Fujishiro, paragraph 88, the DU of the donor gNB includes a Backhaul Adaptation Protocol (BAP) layer as a higher layer than the RLC layer, the IP layer is transmitted via the BAP layer to allow routing through a plurality of hops) in which a value indicating beforehand announcement of relay stop is set in a Protocol Data Unit (PDU) type field. (Fujishiro, paragraph 159, the message indicating the stop instruction may include a valid period of the stop instruction, the valid period may be represented by a timer value or the like)
For claim 9. Fujishiro teaches: A relay apparatus included in a relay path that relays communication between a network and a terminal, (Fujishiro, paragraph 3, 58-59, IAB-node connects to IAB donor and relays communication between UE and IAB donor) comprising: at least one memory that stores a set of instructions; and at least one processor that executes the instructions, the instructions, when executed, causing the relay apparatus to perform operations comprising: (Fujishiro, fig 4, paragraph 70-73, IAB node comprises memory stores a program to be executed by the processor to perform operations)
receiving a message concerning stop of relay from a first another relay apparatus provided on a first relay path that relays wireless communication between the relay apparatus and the network on the relay path and connected to the relay apparatus; (Fujishiro, fig 20, paragraph 158, IAB node receives a message indicating a stop instruction of the local rerouting (relaying) from IAB donor; fig 1, paragraph 55, 57-58, IAB donor (gNB) relays communication between 5GC network and IAB node)
and executing, based on reception of the message, connection processing for connection to a second another relay apparatus connectable to the network before the first other relay apparatus stops relay. (Fujishiro, paragraph 160, in response to receiving the message, stops the local rerouting, stopping the local rerouting include reselecting the path and moving data transmission to the reselected path; paragraph 337-342, starting/stopping local rerouting is used in handover; paragraph 385-387, handover includes migrating to another IAB donor)
For claim 10. Fujishiro discloses all the limitations of claim 9, and Fujishiro further teaches: wherein the connection processing is processing for switching a connection destination from the first other relay apparatus to the second other relay apparatus before the first other relay apparatus stops relay. (Fujishiro, paragraph 160, in response to receiving the message, stops the local rerouting, stopping the local rerouting include reselecting the path and moving data transmission to the reselected path; paragraph 337-342, starting/stopping local rerouting is used in handover; paragraph 385-387, handover includes migrating to another IAB donor)
For claim 11. Fujishiro discloses all the limitations of claim 9, and Fujishiro further teaches: wherein the connection processing is processing for searching for the second other relay apparatus before the first other relay apparatus stops relay, and switching a connection destination from the first other relay apparatus to the second other relay apparatus in accordance with stop of relay by the first other relay apparatus. (Fujishiro, paragraph 160, in response to receiving the message, stops the local rerouting, stopping the local rerouting include reselecting the path and moving data transmission to the reselected path; paragraph 337-342, starting/stopping local rerouting is used in handover; paragraph 385-387, handover includes migrating to another IAB donor; paragraph 338, IAB node select highest priority cells from CHO candidates)
For claim 12. Fujishiro discloses all the limitations of claim 9, and Fujishiro further teaches: wherein the relay apparatus is an IAB node that performs relay based on Integrated Access and Backhaul (IAB) defined in the Third Generation Partnership Project (3GPP). (Fujishiro, paragraph 3, 3GPP standard introduce new relay node referred to as an IAB node; paragraph 58-59, the two IAB-nodes connect to IAB donor and relays communication between UE and IAB donor)
For claim 13. Fujishiro discloses all the limitations of claim 12, and Fujishiro further teaches: wherein the operations further comprises transmitting, in a case where a Backhaul Radio Link Failure (BH RLF) is received from the first other relay apparatus, a message that notifies the BH RLF to a third another relay apparatus provided on a second relay path that relays wireless communication between the relay apparatus and the terminal on the relay path and connected to the relay apparatus. (Fujishiro, paragraph 171, IAB node receives BH RLF from IAB donor, implicit that if there is an intermediate IAB node in between the IAB node and IAB donor (as shown in fig 1 for example), the intermediate IAB node would forward such message to the IAB node)
For claim 14. Fujishiro discloses all the limitations of claim 13, and Fujishiro further teaches: wherein in a case where the message is received, the relay apparatus does not transmit the message to the third another relay apparatus. (Fujishiro, fig 20, paragraph 158, IAB node receives a message indicating a stop instruction of the local rerouting (relaying) from IAB donor, there is no discussion of the IAB node transmit such message to another node)
For claim 15. Fujishiro discloses all the limitations of claim 9, and Fujishiro further teaches: wherein in a case where information indicating a candidate of the connection destination is included in the message, the second other relay apparatus that is a connection target is decided based on the information, and processing for connection to the decided second another relay apparatus is executed in the connection processing. (Fujishiro, paragraph 159, destination ID, path ID, alterative path ID are included in the message; paragraph 160, stopping the local rerouting include reselecting the path and moving data transmission to the reselected path)
For claim 16. Fujishiro discloses all the limitations of claim 15, and Fujishiro further teaches: wherein in a case where the information indicating a candidate of the connection destination is not included in the message, the second other relay apparatus is selected from among other communication apparatuses based on reception strength of signals transmitted from the other communication apparatuses. (Fujishiro, paragraph 160, stopping the local rerouting include reselecting the path and moving data transmission to the reselected path; paragraph 337-342, starting/stopping local rerouting is used in handover; paragraph 385-387, handover includes migrating to another IAB donor; paragraph 338, IAB node selects the highest priority cell from all triggered CHO candidates that satisfy a certain radio quality)
For claim 17. Fujishiro discloses all the limitations of claim 9, and Fujishiro further teaches: wherein in a case where information indicating a scheduled time to stop relay by the first other relay apparatus is included in the message, the relay apparatus completes the connection processing until the scheduled time. (Fujishiro, paragraph 159, the message indicating the stop instruction may include a valid period of the stop instruction, the valid period may be represented by a timer value or the like; paragraph 160, stopping the local rerouting include reselecting the path and moving data transmission to the reselected path; implicit that the reselecting is completed within the valid period)
For claim 18. Fujishiro discloses all the limitations of claim 9, and Fujishiro further teaches: wherein the message concerning stop of the relay is a message that announces stop of relay. (Fujishiro, fig 20, paragraph 158, IAB donor transmit a message indicating a stop instruction of the local rerouting (relaying) to the IAB node)
For claim 19. Fujishiro teaches: A method for providing a function as a relay node included in a relay path that relays communication between a network and a terminal, comprising: (Fujishiro, fig 1, paragraph 55, 57-58, IAB donor (gNB) relays communication between 5GC network and UE)
transmitting, before the relay is stopped, a message concerning stop of relay to a first another relay apparatus provided on a first relay path that relays wireless communication between the relay node and the terminal on the relay path and connected to the relay apparatus, (Fujishiro, fig 20, paragraph 158, IAB donor transmit a message indicating a stop instruction of the local rerouting (relaying) to the IAB node; fig 1, paragraph 3, 58-59, the two IAB-nodes connect to IAB donor and relays communication between UE and IAB donor)
wherein the message is not transmitted to a second another relay apparatus provided on a second relay path that relays wireless communication between the relay node and the network on the relay path and connected to the relay node, (Fujishiro, fig 20, paragraph 158, IAB donor transmit a message indicating a stop instruction of the local rerouting (relaying) to the IAB node; paragraph 58-59, the two IAB-nodes connect to IAB donor and relays communication between UE and IAB donor; there is no discussion of the message being transmitted to another IAB node on a different relay path thus the message is not transmitted to a second another relay apparatus provided on a second relay path that relays wireless communication between the relay apparatus and the network on the relay path and connected to the relay apparatus)
and the message is different from a message that notifies a Backhaul Radio Link Failure (BH RLF). (Fujishiro, paragraph 158, the message indicating the stop instruction is transmitted by an F1-AP message or an RRC message and is based on route load status thus is not a message that notifies a Backhaul Radio Link Failure)
For claim 20. Fujishiro discloses all the limitations of claim 19, and Fujishiro further teaches: wherein the message concerning stop of the relay is a message that announces stop of relay beforehand, (Fujishiro, fig 20, paragraph 158, IAB donor transmit a message indicating a stop instruction of the local rerouting (relaying) to the IAB node; paragraph 160, IAB node stops local rerouting in response to receiving the message thus the message is a message that announces stop of relay beforehand; paragraph 159, the message indicating the stop instruction may include a valid period of the stop instruction, the valid period may be represented by a timer value or the like) and the function as the relay node is a function for performing relay based on Integrated Access and Backhaul (IAB) defined in the Third Generation Partnership Project (3GPP). (Fujishiro, paragraph 3, 3GPP standard introduce new relay node referred to as an IAB node; paragraph 58-59, the two IAB-nodes connect to IAB donor and relays communication between UE and IAB donor)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KHOA B HUYNH whose telephone number is (571)270-7185. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 1:00 PM - 9:35 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, Yemane Mesfin can be reached at (571) 272-3927. 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.
/KHOA HUYNH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2462