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 Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claims 1-2, 4, 12, 18-19, 21, and 29-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Liu et al. (US 2019/0306871 A1).
Regarding claim 1 and 29, Liu discloses an apparatus for wireless communication at a user equipment (UE) (fig. 1), comprising: at least one memory (904); and at least one processor (901) coupled to the at least one memory and, based at least in part on information stored in the at least one memory, the at least one processor, individually or in any combination, is configured to cause method of wireless communication at the UE to: receive, from a network entity, a configuration comprising a mapping relationship binding a first set of packet data convergence protocol (PDCP) sequence numbers (SNs) respectively to a second set of radio link control (RLC) SNs (paragraph [0043]; [0062]; [0066]; [0079]-[0083]; [0059]-[0071]; [0085]; [0097]-[0098]; [0114]-[0115]; [0139]-[0140]; [0152]-[0157]; [0169]-[0172]; [0024]-[0032]; and so on, illustrating that allocating or scheduling a binding mapping relationship between the PDCP and RLC SNs by the eNB or network entity); and communicate, based on the mapping relationship, a data packet with the network entity (paragraph [0079]-[0086]; [0007]; [0041]-[0043]; and so on, the UE and eNB are communicated based on the mapping relationship).
Regarding claim 2, Liu further discloses comprising a transceiver coupled to the at least one processor, wherein to receive the configuration, the at least one processor, individually or in any combination, is configured to cause the UE to receive the configuration via the transceiver, and wherein the at least one processor, individually or in any combination, is further configured to cause the UE to: receive at least one of the first set of PDCP SNs and the second set of RLC SNs, wherein the first set of PDCP SNs respectively correspond to PDCP transmissions of the data packet, and the second set of RLC SNs respectively correspond to RLC transmissions of the data packet (paragraph [0079]-[0083]; [0059]-[0071]; [0085]; [0097]-[0098]; [0114]-[0115]; [0139]-[0140]; [0152]-[0157]; [0169]-[0172]; [0007]; [0041]-[0043]; and etc.).
Regarding claim 4 and 21, Liu discloses wherein the mapping relationship includes each PDCP SN in the first set of PDCP SNs maps to a corresponding RLC SN in the second set of RLC SNs, and each PDCP SN in the first set of PDCP SNs and the corresponding RLC SN in the second set of RLC SNs differ by an offset, and wherein the offset includes an integer number (paragraph [0090]; [0099]-[0101]; [0094]; [0117]; [0145]; [0150]; [0079]-[0083]; and so on).
Regarding claim 12 and 24, Liu discloses wherein the configuration comprising the mapping relationship is included in a mapping field in an RLC header of a data protocol data unit (PDU) associated with the data packet (paragraph [0090]; [0114]; [0071]; and so on).
Regarding claim 18, Liu aa apparatus for wireless communication at a network entity (fig. 1), comprising: at least one memory (804); and at least one processor (801) coupled to the at least one memory and, based at least in part on information stored in the at least one memory, the at least one processor, individually or in any combination, is configured to cause the network entity to: transmit, for a user equipment (UE), a configuration comprising a mapping relationship binding a first set of packet data convergence protocol (PDCP) sequence numbers (SNs) respectively to a second set of radio link control (RLC) SNs (paragraph [0079]-[0083]; [0059]-[0071]; [0085]; [0097]-[0098]; [0114]-[0115]; [0139]-[0140]; [0152]-[0157]; [0169]-[0172]; and so on); and communicate, based on the mapping relationship, a data packet with the UE (paragraph [0079]-[0086]; [0007]; [0041]-[0043]; and so on).
Regarding claim 19 and 30, Liu further discloses comprising a transceiver coupled to the at least one processor, wherein to transmit the configuration, the at least one processor, individually or in any combination, is configured to transmit the configuration via the transceiver, and wherein the at least one processor, individually or in any combination, is further configured to cause a method of wireless communication at the network entity to: transmit at least one of the first set of PDCP SNs and the second set of RLC SNs, wherein the first set of PDCP SNs respectively correspond to PDCP transmissions of the data packet, and the second set of RLC SNs respectively correspond to RLC transmissions of the data packet (paragraph [0079]-[0083]; [0059]-[0071]; [0085]; [0097]-[0098]; [0114]-[0115]; [0139]-[0140]; [0152]-[0157]; [0169]-[0172]; [0007]; [0041]-[0043]; and etc.).
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 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.
Claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view of Kang et al. (US 2025/0247838 A1).
Regarding claim 3 and 20, Liu discloses data packet. However, Liu does not explicitly disclose wherein the data packet is associated with an extended reality (XR) application.
Kang teaches wherein the data packet is associated with an extended reality (XR) application (paragraph [0034]-[0036]; [0013]; and so on).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use wherein the data packet is associated with an extended reality (XR) application entity as taught by Kang into Liu in order to reduce wasting resource and allows network to efficiently manage resources.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view of Yao et al. (US 2021/0099930 A1).
Regarding claim 5, as applied above, Liu discloses wherein to communicate the data packet with the network entity, the at least one processor, individually or in any combination, is configured to cause the UE to: the mapping relationship and one of the first set of PDCP SNs and the second set of RLC SNs. However, Liu does not disclose identify, based on the mapping relationship and one of the first set of PDCP SNs and the second set of RLC SNs, a transmission status associated with another one of the first set of PDCP SNs and the second set of RLC SN; and communicate, based on the transmission status, the data packet with the network entity.
Yao teaches identify, based on the mapping relationship and one of the first set of PDCP SNs and the second set of RLC SNs, a transmission status associated with another one of the first set of PDCP SNs and the second set of RLC SN (paragraph [0012]-[0013]; [0012]-[0022]; [0075]-[0076]; [0089]-[0097]; and communicate, based on the transmission status, the data packet with the network entity (paragraph [0024]-[0025]; [0028]-[0029]; [0032]-[0033]; [0038]; [0088]; and so on).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use identify, based on the mapping relationship and one of the first set of PDCP SNs and the second set of RLC SNs, a transmission status associated with another one of the first set of PDCP SNs and the second set of RLC SN; and communicate, based on the transmission status, the data packet with the network entity as taught by Yao into Liu in order to reduce loss of packets.
Claims 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view of Hofmann et al. (US 2024/0106571 A1).
Regarding claim 6-7, as applied above, Liu discloses wherein the at least one processor, individually or in any combination, is further configured to cause the UE to: the mapping relationship and the second set of RLC SNs. Liu does not disclose identify, based on the mapping relationship and the second set of RLC SNs, a PDCP reordering window for the PDCP transmissions of the data packet, wherein to identify the PDCP reordering window, the at least one processor, individually or in any combination, is configured to cause the UE to: identify, in response to a received PDCP SN mapping to a mapped RLC SN greater than a next received RLC SN, an advancement of the PDCP reordering window; and wherein the at least one processor, individually or in any combination, is further configured to cause the UE to: move, in response to the advancement of the PDCP reordering window, the next received RLC SN to a first RLC SN in the second set of RLC SNs equal to or greater than the mapped RLC SN, wherein the first RLC SN corresponds to the RLC transmissions that have not been received.
Hofmann teaches identify, based on the mapping relationship and the second set of RLC SNs, a PDCP reordering window for the PDCP transmissions of the data packet, wherein to identify the PDCP reordering window, the at least one processor, individually or in any combination, is configured to cause the UE to: identify, in response to a received PDCP SN mapping to a mapped RLC SN greater than a next received RLC SN, an advancement of the PDCP reordering window; and wherein the at least one processor, individually or in any combination, is further configured to cause the UE to: move, in response to the advancement of the PDCP reordering window, the next received RLC SN to a first RLC SN in the second set of RLC SNs equal to or greater than the mapped RLC SN, wherein the first RLC SN corresponds to the RLC transmissions that have not been received (e.g. paragraph [0062]-[0067]; [0105]-[0107]; [0113]-[0114]; [0089]-[0091]; and etc.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use identify, based on the mapping relationship and the second set of RLC SNs, a PDCP reordering window for the PDCP transmissions of the data packet, wherein to identify the PDCP reordering window, the at least one processor, individually or in any combination, is configured to cause the UE to: identify, in response to a received PDCP SN mapping to a mapped RLC SN greater than a next received RLC SN, an advancement of the PDCP reordering window; and wherein the at least one processor, individually or in any combination, is further configured to cause the UE to: move, in response to the advancement of the PDCP reordering window, the next received RLC SN to a first RLC SN in the second set of RLC SNs equal to or greater than the mapped RLC SN, wherein the first RLC SN corresponds to the RLC transmissions that have not been received as taught by Hofmann into Liu in order to reduce congestion.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view of Hofmann, and further in view of Hayashi et al. (US 2018/0241516 A1).
Regarding claim 8, Liu discloses wherein the at least one processor, individually or in any combination, is further configured to cause the UE to: transmit, for the network entity, an acknowledgement (paragraph [0096]; [0142]; and so on). However, Liu does not disclose the transmission of acknowledgement is of the advancement of the PDCP reordering window.
Hayashi teaches the transmission of acknowledgement is of the advancement of the PDCP reordering window (paragraph [0117]-[0119]; [0126]-[0129]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the transmission of acknowledgement is of the advancement of the PDCP reordering window as taught by Hayashi into Liu in order to reduce overflowing.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view of Lee at al. (US 2020/0059823 A1).
Regarding claim 9, as applied above, Liu discloses wherein the at least one processor, individually or in any combination, is further configured to cause the UE to: transmissions of the data packet. Liu does not disclose update, in response to the advancement of the PDCP reordering window, a reassembly timer associated with the transmissions of the data packet.
Lee teaches update, in response to the advancement of the PDCP reordering window, a reassembly timer associated with the transmissions of the data packet (paragraph [0089]; [0093]; [0102]; [0129]; [0135]; [0136]; and so on).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use update, in response to the advancement of the PDCP reordering window, a reassembly timer associated with the transmissions of the data packet as taught by Lee into Liu in order to minimize latency.
Claims 10-11 and 22-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view of Sammour et al. (US 2007/0291788 A1).
Regarding claim 10, as applied above, Liu discloses wherein the at least one processor, individually or in any combination, is further configured to cause the UE to: communicate mapping relationship and offset. Liu does not disclose receive, from the network entity, an update of the mapping relationship, wherein the update includes an adjustment to the offset.
Sammour teaches receive, from the network entity, an update of the mapping relationship, wherein the update includes an adjustment to the offset (e.g. paragraph [0042]-[0043]; [0050]-[0057]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use receive, from the network entity, an update of the mapping relationship, wherein the update includes an adjustment to the offset as taught by Sammour into Liu in order to reduce interference.
Regarding claim 22, as applied above, Liu discloses wherein the at least one processor, individually or in any combination, is further configured to cause the network entity to: communicate mapping relationship and offset. Liu does not disclose transmit, for the UE, an update of the mapping relationship, wherein the update includes an adjustment to the offset.
Sammour teaches transmit, for the UE, an update of the mapping relationship, wherein the update includes an adjustment to the offset (e.g. paragraph [0042]-[0043]; [0050]-[0057]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use transmit, for the UE, an update of the mapping relationship, wherein the update includes an adjustment to the offset as taught by Sammour into Liu in order to reduce interference.
Regarding claim 11, Liu discloses wherein to receive the update to the mapping relationship, the at least one processor, individually or in any combination, is configured to cause the UE to: receive the update to the mapping relationship via one of: radio resource control (RRC) signaling, medium access control (MAC) signaling, RLC control signaling, or PDCP control signaling (paragraph [0083]-[0084]; [0139]; and so on).
Regarding claim 23, Liu discloses wherein to transmit the update to the mapping relationship, the at least one processor, individually or in any combination, is configured to cause the UE to: transmit the update to the mapping relationship via one of: radio resource control (RRC) signaling, medium access control (MAC) signaling, RLC control signaling, or PDCP control signaling (paragraph [0083]-[0084]; [0139]; and so on).
Claims 13 and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view of Sebire et al. (US 2020/0015118 A1).
Regarding claim 13 and 25, as applied above, Liu discloses mapping and indicating one or more of: a presence of the first set of PDCP SNs, the presence of the first set of PDCP SNs and an establishment of the mapping relationship between the first set of PDCP SNs and the second set of RLC SNs, or a usage or a continuation of the mapping relationship between the first set of PDCP SNs and the second set of RLC SNs (paragraph [0079]-[0083]; [0059]-[0071]; [0085]; [0097]-[0098]; [0114]-[0115]; [0139]-[0140]; [0152]-[0157]; [0169]-[0172]; and so on). However, Liu does not disclose the mapping field has a size of two bits and the one or more indicating.
Sebire teaches the mapping field has a size of two bits and the one or more indicating (such as paragraph [0039]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the mapping field has a size of two bits and the one or more indicating as taught by Sebire into Liu in order to improve efficiency and quality of communication.
Claims 14 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view of Kim et al. (US 2023/0370925 A1).
Regarding claim 14 and 26, Liu discloses wherein the configuration further a gap indication between a current PDCP SN and a previous PDCP SN transmitted on a same RLC entity, logical entity, or cell group (paragraph [0139]; [0142]-[0146]; [0159]; and so on). Liu does not disclose including the gap indication field.
Kim teaches including the gap indication field (e.g. paragraph [0210]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use including the gap indication field as taught by Kim into Liu in order to reduce delay.
Claims 15-16 and 27-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view of Kim, and further in view of Luo (US 2022/0272578 A1).
Regarding claim 15, as applied above, Liu discloses wherein to communicate the data packet with the network entity, the at least one processor, individually or in any combination, is configured to cause the UE to: communicate the data packet with the network entity, a first subset of the second set of RLC SNs, a second subset of the second set of RLC SNs, and the network entity in operating in an RLC acknowledge mode (AM). Liu does not disclose the communication is via a dual connectivity (DC) mode comprising a first connection and a second connection, wherein the first connection is associated with a first subset of the second set of RLC SNs, and the second connection is associated with a second subset of the second set of RLC SNs.
Luo teaches the communication is via a dual connectivity (DC) mode comprising a first connection and a second connection, wherein the first connection is associated with a first subset of the second set of RLC SNs, and the second connection is associated with a second subset of the second set of RLC SNs (paragraph [0080]; [0089]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the communication is via a dual connectivity (DC) mode comprising a first connection and a second connection, wherein the first connection is associated with a first subset of the second set of RLC SNs, and the second connection is associated with a second subset of the second set of RLC SNs as taught by Luo into Liu in order to improve communication rate.
Regarding claim 27, as applied above, Liu discloses wherein to communicate the data packet with the UE, the at least one processor, individually or in any combination, is configured to cause the network entity to: communicate the data packet with the network entity, a first subset of the second set of RLC SNs, a second subset of the second set of RLC SNs, and the network entity in operating in an RLC acknowledge mode (AM). Liu does not disclose the communication is via a dual connectivity (DC) mode comprising a first connection and a second connection, wherein the first connection is associated with a first subset of the second set of RLC SNs, and the second connection is associated with a second subset of the second set of RLC SNs.
Luo teaches the communication is via a dual connectivity (DC) mode comprising a first connection and a second connection, wherein the first connection is associated with a first subset of the second set of RLC SNs, and the second connection is associated with a second subset of the second set of RLC SNs (paragraph [0080]; [0089]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the communication is via a dual connectivity (DC) mode comprising a first connection and a second connection, wherein the first connection is associated with a first subset of the second set of RLC SNs, and the second connection is associated with a second subset of the second set of RLC SNs as taught by Luo into Liu in order to improve communication rate.
Regarding claim 16-17 and 28, as applied above, Liu discloses wherein to communicate the data packet with the network entity, the at least one processor, individually or in any combination comprising a gap. However, Liu does not explicitly disclose wherein the RLC header for the first subset of the second set of RLC SNs includes a first gap indicator indicating a first gap between a first current PDCP SN and a first previous PDCP SN for the first connection, and the RLC header for the second subset of the second set of RLC SNs includes a second gap indicator indicating the second gap between a second current PDCP SN and a second previous PDCP SN for the second connection, and configured to cause the UE to: identify, based on the first gap indicator and the second gap indicator, a loss of transmissions associated with the first subset of the second set of RLC SNs and the second subset of the second set of RLC SN, respectively.
Kim teaches wherein the RLC header for the first subset of the second set of RLC SNs includes a first gap indicator indicating a first gap between a first current PDCP SN and a first previous PDCP SN for the first connection, and the RLC header for the second subset of the second set of RLC SNs includes a second gap indicator indicating the second gap between a second current PDCP SN and a second previous PDCP SN for the second connection, and configured to cause the UE to: identify, based on the first gap indicator and the second gap indicator, a loss of transmissions associated with the first subset of the second set of RLC SNs and the second subset of the second set of RLC SN, respectively (e.g. paragraph [0210]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use wherein the RLC header for the first subset of the second set of RLC SNs includes a first gap indicator indicating a first gap between a first current PDCP SN and a first previous PDCP SN for the first connection, and the RLC header for the second subset of the second set of RLC SNs includes a second gap indicator indicating the second gap between a second current PDCP SN and a second previous PDCP SN for the second connection, and configured to cause the UE to: identify, based on the first gap indicator and the second gap indicator, a loss of transmissions associated with the first subset of the second set of RLC SNs and the second subset of the second set of RLC SN, respectively as taught by Kim into Liu in order to reduce delay and to improve resource utilization.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KIBROM T HAILU whose telephone number is (571)270-1209. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 AM to 5:30 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, HUY D VU can be reached at (571)272-3155. 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.
/KIBROM T HAILU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2461
Prosecution Insights