DETAILED ACTION
This communication is in response to applicant’s response filed under 37 C.F.R. §1.111 in response to a non-final office action. Claim 13 has been amended. Claims 1-14 are subject to examination.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 5/26/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive for the following reasons:
Applicant’s Argument:
The Applicant argues in substance that the combination of Chiu and Wu “fails to teach, disclose, or suggest, at least, ‘in a case that the at least one UL resource is available for the MAC CE for the first DR, generating the MAC CE and including delay information that indicates a first delay range for the first LCG in the MAC CE, and transmitting the MAC CE on the at least one UL resource’”.
The Applicant further submits that “there is no suggestion or motivation, whatsoever, to modify Chiu by Wu ... because such modification would render Chiu being modified unsatisfactory for its intended purpose,” arguing that “Chiu describes that the buffer status report (BSR) is for reporting a specific delay value to achieve finer granularity. According to the teachings of Chiu, any modification that transforms such specific reporting into a "range" would undermine Chiu's original design purpose of enabling precise QoS control. In contrast, Wu expressly teaches away from reporting a specific delay value to achieve finer granularity.”
Examiner’s Response:
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. As outlined in the previous office action (pg. 3), Chiu teaches “in a case that the at least one UL resource is available for the MAC CE for the first DR, generating the MAC CE and including delay information for the first LCG in the MAC CE, and transmitting the MAC CE on the at least one UL resource” (Chiu: in response to the triggering condition being met, transmitting the status report message including the remaining delay budget information; the radio resource control configuration further indicates … a media access control element format of the status report message; a UE may transmit a BSR to a base station through UL radio resources of the base station if the UL radio resources are available, see paragraphs [0005], [0009], [0065]), while Wu teaches “delay information that indicates a first delay range” (Wu: the UE reports the remaining PDB of the data packet in the buffer of the LCH (or LCG), see paragraph [0092]; a range of the remaining PDB is reported to the base station, see paragraph [0119]).
In response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
In this case, Chiu does not teach anywhere that reporting delay information as a range would undermine the invention; rather Chiu merely states that “a finer granularity manner for providing XR buffer status is required” [0003]. A “finer granularity” could just as easily be accomplished by reporting a narrow range of values as by reporting a single value. When Chiu teaches at paragraph [0086] that “the UE of the present disclosure may provide XR buffer status to the base station in a finer granularity manner (e.g., per delay value)”, Chiu clearly uses “e.g.” to signify “for example” and not as the only possible way to achieve this goal. Evidence of reporting more than one delay value can be found throughout the reference, for example in paragraph [0020] “the radio resource control configuration further indicates at least one of the following: a number of delay value combinations to be reported by the status report message,” and paragraph [0059] “the RRC configuration may indicate the UE to report remaining delay budget information such as one or more remaining delay budgets of one or more LCHs (or LCGs) through BSR.” That is, the goal of this invention is to achieve more granular buffer status reporting, but achieving finer granularity is still possible by reporting a smaller range. By this rationale, it is indeed possible to achieve both the desired outcomes of “finer granularity” of Chiu and the “reduced overhead” of Wu by combining the two teachings and reporting delay values as a narrow range.
Regarding all other arguments presented by the applicant, the arguments are substantially the same as those which have already been addressed above and in the interest of brevity, the examiner directs the applicant to those responses above.
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.
Claims 1-3, 6-10, and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chiu et al. (US 2024/0155421 A1, hereinafter “Chiu”) in view of Wu et al. (US 2025/0008508 A1, hereinafter “Wu”).
Regarding Claim 1, Chiu teaches a method performed by a user equipment (UE), the method comprising: receiving a first threshold via radio resource control (RRC) signaling (Chiu: A method for reporting a remaining delay budget information, adapted to a user equipment, wherein the method including: receiving a radio resource control configuration; the threshold of remaining delay budget … is configured by the radio resource control configuration, see paragraphs [0005] and [0008]);
determining whether at least one of one or more delay budgets of one or more packets buffered in a first logical channel group (LCG) is below the first threshold (Chiu: the radio resource control configuration indicates the user equipment to report the remaining delay budget information of a logical channel or a logical channel group through a status report message; determining whether a triggering condition is met includes: a remaining delay budget is below or equal to the threshold of remaining delay budget, see paragraphs [0005] and [0006]); and
in a case that the at least one of the one or more delay budgets of the one or more packets buffered in the first LCG is below the first threshold: triggering a first delay information reporting (DR), determining whether at least one uplink resource is available for a medium access control (MAC) control element (CE) for the first DR, and in a case that the at least one UL resource is available for the MAC CE for the first DR, generating the MAC CE and including delay information for the first LCG in the MAC CE, and transmitting the MAC CE on the at least one UL resource (Chiu: in response to the triggering condition being met, transmitting the status report message including the remaining delay budget information; the radio resource control configuration further indicates … a media access control element format of the status report message; a UE may transmit a BSR to a base station through UL radio resources of the base station if the UL radio resources are available, see paragraphs [0005], [0009], [0065]).
Chiu does not explicitly teach delay information that indicates a first delay range.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Wu teaches delay information that indicates a first delay range (Wu: the UE reports the remaining PDB of the data packet in the buffer of the LCH (or LCG), see paragraph [0092]; a range of the remaining PDB is reported to the base station, see paragraph [0119]; the base station instructs the UE to report the remaining PDB of the data packet in the current buffer through a dedicated signaling ...The dedicated signaling may be borne by an MAC CE, see paragraph [0170]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Chiu to include the features as taught by Wu above in order to reduce signaling overhead (Wu: see paragraph [0129]).
Regarding Claim 2, Chiu-Wu teaches the method of claim 1.
Wu further teaches, the delay information that indicates the first delay range for the first LCG indicates a smallest delay budget within the first LCG (Wu: a range of the remaining PDB is reported to the base station, see paragraph [0119]; The smallest remaining PDB values among remaining PDB values of various data packets are reported to the base station, see paragraph [0150]).
The rationale and motivation for adding the teaching of Wu is the same as the rationale and motivation for Claim 1.
Regarding Claim 3, Chiu-Wu teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the MAC CE includes information associated with a number of LCGs corresponding to the delay information (Chiu: A UE may provide a new MAC control element (CE) to a base station ... to report remaining delay budget information such as one or more remaining delay budgets of one or more LCHs (or LCGs), see paragraph [0059]).
Regarding Claim 6, Chiu-Wu teaches the method of claim 1, and determining whether the at least one uplink resource is available for the MAC CE for the first DR comprises determining whether the at least one uplink resource is available for the MAC CE for the first DR and the second DR (Chiu: A UE may provide a new MAC control element (CE) to a base station ... to report remaining delay budget information such as one or more remaining delay budgets of one or more LCHs (or LCGs), see paragraph [0059]; a UE may transmit a BSR to a base station through UL radio resources of the base station if the UL radio resources are available, see paragraph [0065]);
and in a case that the at least one UL resource is available for the MAC CE for the first DR and the second DR, further including, in the MAC CE, the delay information for the second LCG (Chiu: A UE may provide a new MAC control element (CE) to a base station ... to report remaining delay budget information such as one or more remaining delay budgets of one or more LCHs (or LCGs), see paragraph [0059]).
Wu further teaches receiving a second threshold via the RRC signaling (Wu: the threshold is predefined as a fixed value, or preconfigured by the base station through an RRC signaling, see paragraph [0239]);
determining whether at least one of one or more delay budgets of one or more packets buffered in a second LCG is below the second threshold (Wu: the base station configures a dedicated SR resource for a case where there is a data packet, having a remaining PDB with a remaining PDB value smaller than the predetermined threshold, in the buffer of each LCG, see paragraph [0211]; The values of remaining PDBs smaller than a second predetermined threshold ... are reported to the base station, see paragraph [0148]); and
in a case that the at least one of the one or more delay budgets of the one or more packets buffered in the second LCG is below the second threshold: triggering a second DR (Wu: The values of remaining PDBs smaller than a second predetermined threshold ... are reported to the base station, see paragraph [0148]), wherein delay information indicates a second delay range for the second LCG (Wu: a range of the remaining PDB is reported to the base station, see paragraph [0119]).
The rationale and motivation for adding the teaching of Wu is the same as the rationale and motivation for Claim 1.
Regarding Claim 7, Chiu-Wu teaches the method of claim 6.
Though Chiu teaches delay information for the second LCG (Chiu: A UE may ... report remaining delay budget information ... of one or more LCHs (or LCGs), see paragraph [0059]), Chiu does not explicitly teach delay information that indicates a delay range for the LCG indicates a smallest delay budget.
Wu further teaches, the delay information that indicates the delay range for the LCG indicates a smallest delay budget within the LCG (Wu: a range of the remaining PDB is reported to the base station, see paragraph [0119]; The smallest remaining PDB values among remaining PDB values of various data packets are reported to the base station, see paragraph [0150]).
The rationale and motivation for adding the teaching of Wu is the same as the rationale and motivation for Claim 1.
Regarding Claim 8, Chiu teaches a user equipment (UE), comprising: at least one processor (Chiu: The UE may include a processor, a storage medium, and a transceiver, see paragraph [0082]);
and at least one non-transitory computer-readable medium coupled to the at least one processor and storing one or more computer-executable instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the UE to: receive a first threshold via radio resource control (RRC) signaling (Chiu: The processor is coupled to the storage medium and the transceiver and is configured to access and execute a plurality of modules stored in the storage medium; The processor is coupled to the transceiver and configured to: receive, via the transceiver, a radio resource control configuration; the threshold of remaining delay budget … is configured by the radio resource control configuration, see paragraphs [0082], [0024], and [0008]).
Regarding all other limitations of claim 8, the limitations are substantially the same as the limitations of claim 1, and are therefore rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding Claim 9, the limitations of claim 9 are substantially the same as the limitations of claim 2, and claim 9 is therefore rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding Claim 10, the limitations of claim 10 are substantially the same as the limitations of claim 3, and claim 10 is therefore rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding Claim 13, the limitations of claim 13 are substantially the same as the limitations of claim 6, and claim 13 is therefore rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding Claim 14, the limitations of claim 14 are substantially the same as the limitations of claim 7, and claim 14 is therefore rejected for the same reasons.
Claims 4-5 and 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chiu-Wu in view of Khoshkholgh Dashtaki et al. (US 2024/0284375 A1, hereinafter “KD”).
Regarding Claim 4, Chiu-Wu teaches the method of claim 1.
Wu further teaches, before transmitting the MAC CE: determining buffer information indicating an amount of data for transmission in the first LCG based on the amount of data (Wu: The BSR counts the total size of all data packets in the corresponding buffer, see paragraph [0187]); and
including, in addition to the delay information, the buffer information in the MAC CE (Wu: one MAC CE contains at least one of ... the total amount of data of the buffer of the LCG (Buffer size), the remaining PDB of data packets in the buffer of the LCG (Remaining PDB), see paragraph [0249]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Chiu to include the features as taught by Wu above in order to reduce signaling overhead (Wu: see paragraph [0129]).
Chiu-Wu does not explicitly teach, determining buffer information based a first mapping table.
However, in the same field of endeavor, KD teaches, determining buffer information based on a first mapping table (KD: the buffer size, corresponding to the first logical channel being in the at least one logical channel, is based on the first BSR table, see paragraph [0470]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Chiu-Wu to include the features as taught by KD above in order to generate enhanced BSR reports and enable more efficient allocation of UL resources to the wireless device for transmission of the UL data (KD: see paragraph [0289]).
Regarding Claim 5, Chiu-Wu-KD teaches the method of claim 4.
KD further teaches, selecting the first mapping table from a plurality of pre-defined mapping tables (KD: the one or more radio resource control configuration parameters indicate a first buffer status report (BSR) table of a plurality of BSR tables, see paragraph [0470]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Chiu-Wu to include the features as taught by KD above in order to select a table that allows for the most refined BSR mapping (KD: see paragraph [0470]).
Regarding Claim 11, the limitations of claim 11 are substantially the same as the limitations of claim 4, and claim 11 is therefore rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding Claim 12, the limitations of claim 12 are substantially the same as the limitations of claim 5, and claim 12 is therefore rejected for the same reasons.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Hu et al (US 2025/0310825 A1) teaches that a minimum remaining PDB is used to determine a remaining PDB range corresponding to the buffered data (see paragraph [0212]). Wang (US 2025/0071609 A1) teaches that different ranges of delay information can represent different units of granularity (see paragraph [0100]).
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 PHILLIP J EGAN KEARNS whose telephone number is 571-272-4869. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 10-6 MST.
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, NOEL BEHARRY can be reached at 571-270-5630. 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.
/P.K./Examiner, Art Unit 2416
/NOEL R BEHARRY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2416
Prosecution Insights