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 .
Terminal Disclaimer
The terminal disclaimer filed on August 3, 2026 disclaiming the terminal portion of any patent granted on this application which would extend beyond the expiration date of U.S. Patent No. 11,272,345 and 11,997,579 has been reviewed and is accepted. The terminal disclaimer has been recorded.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed August 3, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The Applicant argues at page 13 of Remarks that Miskiewicz does not establish the claimed relay-side generation and transmission of an output message based on a received PWS message. The Examiner respectfully disagrees.
The Applicant points out that paragraphs 0049, 0052, and 0055-0058 describes the eNB transmitting a primary notification, which may be conveyed in an SIB#17 activation message, to UEs in an alert region, not a relay UE transmitting a received PWS message to a remote UE. While the Examiner agrees with the Applicant about this teaching of Miskiewicz; however, it is more important to note that in addition to the teaching of the eNB transmits to UEs in an alert region, Miskiewicz also discloses D2D mode. That is, when the cellular network is impaired, these UEs are ready for D2D operation (see paragraph 0058). The UE is capable and authorized for public safety relay based on the notification (paragraph 0068). In other words, the UE first receives a notification message, in turn, this UE acts as a relay UE and forwards the received notification, which is the PWS message, to another UE using D2D technology. The Applicant incorrectly states that these paragraphs describe establishing D2D and relay capability, not a relay UE generating and transmitting an output message based on the received PWS message. Again, Miskiewicz discloses that in addition to a primary notification in a first-type SIB message transmitted by the eNB to UE 134 in step 310 of Fig. 3, a secondary notification in a second-type SIB message is also transmitted to the UE 134 that enable the UE 134 to activate the D2D functionalities in step 330 of Fig. 3. In other words, the UE 134 is now capable of forwarding the received PWS message received from the eNB to another UE. Thus, these teachings of Miskiewicz reads on a relay UE generates and transmits an output message based on the received PWS message because the UE 134 first received the PWS message from eNB, and in turn, the UE 134 acts as a relay to forward the received message to another UE.
The Applicant argues at page 15 that Ryu is directed to network broadcast and group messaging, and discloses a Message Identifier and a Serial Number in a network-generated warning message; it does not, however, disclose a relay UE receiving those fields as part of a PWS message and then generating the claimed first output message for transmission to a remote UE over a second communication technology different from the first. The Examiner respectfully disagrees with the Applicant’s arguments as claim does not require the relay UE receives those fields as part of the PWS message. Claim simply recites the output message includes a first parameter and a second parameter, and it should be clear to the Applicant that Ryu does in fact teach or suggest the first parameter and the second parameters as acknowledge by the Applicant.
Lastly, 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).
Based on the above discussion, it should be clear to the Applicant that the combination of Miskiewicz and Ryu still reads on the argued features. Therefore, the Examiner maintains previous rejections.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3-8, 10-15, and 17-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miskiewicz et al. (hereinafter “Miskiewicz”, US 2015/0215757) in view of Ryu et al. (hereinafter “Ryu”, US 10,440,524) as cited in IDS dated August 1, 2024.
Regarding claims 1, 8, and 15, Miskiewicz discloses a method for relaying Public Warning System (PWS) messages, a relay user equipment (UE), and a computer program product comprising computer-executable instructions stored on a non-transitory computer-readable medium, comprising:
receiving, at a relay user equipment (UE) (i.e., a user equipment (UE) 220 as shown in Fig. 2), a PWS message from a base station (i.e., a PWS as described in paragraphs 0050-0051), wherein the relay UE receives the PWS message from the base station over a first communication technology (i.e., the UE receives the PWS via the eNB 124 using LTE as described in paragraphs 0050-0052);
generating, by the relay UE, a first output message comprising all or part of the PWS message (i.e., the UE forwards the received PWS message to another UE using D2D as described in paragraphs 0005, 0027-0028, 0052, 0055-0058, and 0068. Also, see step 330 of Fig. 3 and its descriptions);
consulting, at the relay UE, a policy comprising configuration information, the policy determining actions to be performed by the relay UE (i.e., configuring the UE for D2D operation. That is, setting up relay functionality when the UE is capable and authorized for public safety relaying as described in paragraphs 0066-0068); and
based on the policy, transmitting, by the relay UE, the first output message to a remote UE, wherein the relay UE transmits the first output message to the remote UE over a second communication technology, the second communication technology being different from the first communication technology (i.e., D2D is different communication technology from LTE as described in paragraphs 0005, 0027-0028, 0052, 0055-0058, and 0068).
Miskiewicz, however, does not expressly disclose:
the first output message including at least a first parameter and a second parameter, wherein the first parameter is used to indicate that the PWS message corresponds to a certain type of warning message, wherein the second parameter is used to distinguish between different PWS messages, and wherein the first parameter and the second parameter are based on the PWS message.
In a similar endeavor, Ryu discloses a method for transmitting and receiving a group message in wireless communication system, and device. Ryu also discloses:
the first output message including at least a first parameter (i.e., a “type” indicated by the Message Identifier as described in col. 31, lines 9-14) and a second parameter (i.e., a “Serial Number” as shown in Table 8, and as described in col. 31, lines 12-14), wherein the first parameter is used to indicate that the PWS message corresponds to a certain type of warning message (i.e., a “type” indicated by the Message Identifier as described in col. 31, lines 9-14), wherein the second parameter is used to distinguish between different PWS messages (i.e., the “Serial Number” distinguishes a specific warning message as described in col. 31, lines 12-14), and wherein the first parameter and the second parameter are based on the PWS message (i.e., both the type and the Serial Number are part of the warning message as described in col. 31, lines 54-64).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art to modify the teachings of the cited references, and arrive at the present invention.
The motivation/suggestion for doing so would have been to enable the communication devices to easily decode the received and in compliance with the 3GPP standards.
With further regarding claim 8, Miskiewicz discloses relay user equipment (UE) (i.e., UE 220 as shown in Fig. 2 or UE 500 as shown in Fig. 5), comprising:
a memory containing instructions (i.e., memory/storage 516); and
a processor coupled to the memory (i.e., memory/storage 516 coupled to application circuitry 512, baseband circuitry 508, and RF circuitry 504, and/or processing circuitry 226).
Regarding claims 3, 10, and 17, Miskiewicz and Ryu disclose all limitations recited within claims as described above. Miskiewicz also discloses wherein the configuration information comprises: information stored on at least one subscriber identity module (SIM) card, information stored on a universal integrated circuit card (UICC), information made available via a network interface, or information stored in a memory of the relay UE (i.e., SIM and/or UICC as described in paragraphs 0046-0048).
Regarding claims 4, and 11, Miskiewicz and Ryu disclose all limitations recited within claims as described above. Miskiewicz also discloses wherein the first communication technology comprises a radio access technology (RAT) (i.e., LTE as described in paragraph 0052) and wherein the second communication technology comprises a short-range communication technology (i.e., D2D technology as described in paragraphs 0028, and 0058-0060).
Regarding claims 5, 12, and 18, Miskiewicz and Ryu disclose all limitations recited within claims as described above. Miskiewicz also discloses wherein the PWS message is received over the first communication technology in a telecommunications network, the telecommunications network comprising a Global System for Mobile communications (GSM)/Enhanced Data rates for GSM Evolution (EDGE) Radio Access Network (GERAN), a Universal Mobile Telecommunications System (UMTS), Universal Terrestrial Radio Access Network (UTRAN), an Evolved UTRAN (E-UTRAN), or a new generation Radio Access Network (NR) (i.e., LTE as described in paragraph 0004).
Regarding claims 6, 13, and 19, Miskiewicz and Ryu disclose all limitations recited within claims as described above. Miskiewicz also discloses wherein transmitting comprises the relay UE relaying all or part of the PWS message over the second communication technology to the remote UE via a Device to Device (D2D) interface (i.e., forwarding the received PWS message from the UE to another UE via D2D as described in paragraph 0055).
Regarding claims 7, 14, and 20, Miskiewicz and Ryu disclose all limitations recited within claims as described above. Miskiewicz also discloses wherein the second communication technology is any one of PC5, Sidelink, Device to Device (D2D), Vehicle-to-Everything (V2X), IEEE 802.11-based technology, or Bluetooth (i.e., D2D technology as described in paragraphs 0028, and 0058-0060).
Claim(s) 2, 9, and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miskiewicz in view of Ryu, and further in view of Jung et al. (hereinafter “Jung”, US 2018/0077608).
Regarding claims 2, 9, and 16, Miskiewicz and Ryu disclose all limitations recited within claims as described above, but do not expressly disclose features of this claim.
In a similar endeavor, Jung discloses source ID-based packet filtering method in wireless communication system and terminal using method. Jung also discloses wherein the configuration information comprises a destination Layer-2 identifier (ID) (i.e., L2 destination ID as described in paragraphs 0300-0301).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art to modify the teachings of the cited references, and arrive at the present invention.
The motivation/suggestion for doing so would have been to enable the packets to be transmitted to the correct destination.
Conclusion
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 WAYNE CAI whose telephone number is (571)272-7798. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday, 7:00 AM-5:00 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, KATHY WANG-HURST can be reached on (571)270-5371. 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.
/Wayne H Cai/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2644
