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 Arguments
Applicant’s arguments and amendment filed on 5/4/26, with respect to claims 1, 5-6, 8-12, 15-16, 18-21, 30-31, 36-37 and 67 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejections have been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration and discovery of new prior art Lee et al (WO 20211182812) and Hong (WO 2020256420 A1), a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Ericsson-104 (Ericsson - “Discussion on RAN1 aspects for NR small data transmission on INACTIVE state” - 3GPP TSG-RAN WG1 Meeting #104) in view of Intel-114 (Intel – “Failure and successful handling for an SDT session” - 3GPP TSG WG2 Meeting #114) and Lee et al (WO 20211182812) and Hong (WO 2020256420 A1) .
Furthermore, examiner confirms that the correct reference number for the Ericsson-104 reference is R1-2103678 as recognized by the applicant in the response.
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, 5-6, 8-12, 15, 18-21 and 30-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ericsson-104 (Ericsson - “Discussion on RAN1 aspects for NR small data transmission on INACTIVE state” - 3GPP TSG-RAN WG1 Meeting #104b-e- R1-2103678) in view of Intel-114 (Intel – “Failure and successful handling for an SDT session” - 3GPP TSG WG2 Meeting #114-R22104881), Lee et al (WO 20211182812) (hereinafter referred to as Lee) and Hong (WO 2020256420 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Ericsson-104 teaches a wireless communication method for execution by a user equipment (UE), comprising:
receiving a radio resource control (RRC) message with a small data transmission (SDT) configuration for the UE (See section 2.2 subsection 1 which teaches sending to UE an RRC Release msg including SDT configuration) wherein the RRC release message comprise suspense configuration (the purpose of an RRC release is to release or stop, i.e. suspend, the connection);
measuring and storing a first reference signal received power (RSRP) value and measuring a second RSRP value upon initiating small data transmission (SDT) (see section 2.2.1 and 2.2.2, fig 1 & fig 3, which teaches recording RSRP at time t1 and t2 wherein t1 is the time UE receives from network and t2 is the time UE has SDT data to send);
starting the SDT TAT upon receiving the RRC msg (See section 2.2, subsection 4 which teaches that the TAT-SDT is started upon receiving RRC release msg);
Ericsson-104 further teaches using a RSRP change threshold and TAT (time alignment timer) as two criteria for TA validation for CG-SDT transmission (see section 2.2.1). In this case CG-SDT transmission would be enabled if both criteria are met.
However, Ericsson-104 does not explicitly teach transmitting uplink small data via CG-SDT when the first criteria is satisfied and the RSRP difference between the first RSRP value and the second RSRP value satisfy the second portion of the criteria associated with SDT threshold and transmitting uplink small data via RA-SDT when a first portion of criteria associated with an SDT threshold for RA-SDT is satisfied, but an RSRP difference between the first RSRP value and the second RSRP value does not satisfy a second portion of the criteria associated with SDT threshold.
However, such fall back feature is well known in the art for providing a fallback feature in case the condition for CG-SDT transmission is not met. Specifically, Intel-114 teaches that when a first portion of criteria associated with an SDT threshold for RA-SDT is satisfied (step 5 in figure 1) and the RSRP difference between the first RSRP value and the second RSRP value satisfy a second portion of the criteria associated with SDT threshold (step 6 in figure 1), then transmit via CG-SDT (step 7 in figure 1) and when a first portion of criteria associated with an SDT threshold for RA-SDT is satisfied (step 5 in figure 1) and the RSRP difference between the first RSRP value and the second RSRP value does not satisfy a second portion of the criteria associated with SDT threshold (step 6 in figure 1), then transmit via RA-SDT (See the RA-SDT output branch in step 8 of figure 1). It is noted that in this scenario, the Intel system does not check whether or not TAT is running when opting for RA-SDT transmission. Thus, the RA-SDT is performed regardless whether TAT is running or not. This mechanism allows the system to utilize the RA-SDT in case the CS-SDT condition is not met for enhance the efficiency of SDT transmission.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply Intel-114’s teaching of transmitting uplink small data via CG-SDT when a first portion of criteria associated with an SDT threshold for RA-SDT is satisfied and a second portion of the criteria associated with SDT threshold is also satisfied and transmitting uplink small data via RA-SDT when a first portion of criteria is satisfied, but the second portion of the criteria is not satisfied associated with SDT threshold in Ericsson-104’s system with the motivation being to enhance SDT communication reliability by enabling RA-SDT transmission in case the condition for CG-SDT transmission is not met.
However, Ericsson-104 teaches that the 1st RSRP value is measured upon receiving the TAC instead of being measured upon receiving RRC message as claimed. However, Lee teaches that TAC is sent via RRC message. Thus, in Lee’s system, receiving the TAC and RRC msg are one and the same. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply Lee’s teaching of sending TAC via RRC msg in the system of Ericsson-104 in view of Intel-114 with the motivation being to enhance the efficiency using RRC and TAC messaging.
Ericsson-104 also does not explicitly teach that the UE receives the RSRP threshold for the UE from the network. However, such feature is known in the art. For example, Hong teaches that for SDT transmission, the base station may send the UE the RSRP threshold for the UE (See 4-step RACH procedure-based processing method in the last paragraph of page 29 which teaches that the base station provides the UE with the rsrp threshold). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply Hong’s teaching of the base station sending the UE the RSRP threshold for the UE in the system of Ericsson-104 in view of Intel-114 and Lee with the motivation being to improve reliability in SDT transmission.
Regarding claim 5, Ericsson-104 further teaches that the SDT threshold comprises an RSRP difference threshold (see section 2.2.1) and that the criteria associated with SDT threshold comprises a criterion associated with the RSRP difference threshold; the RSRP difference between the first RSRP value and the second RSRP value satisfies the second portion of the criteria associated with SDT threshold when the RSRP difference between the first RSRP value and the second RSRP value satisfies the criterion associated with the RSRP difference threshold (see section 2.2.1); and the RSRP difference between the first RSRP value and the second RSRP value does not satisfy the second portion of the criteria associated with SDT threshold when the RSRP difference does not satisfy the criterion associated with the RSRP difference threshold.
Regarding claim 6, in Ericsson-104’s system, all RSRP measurements and thresholds are performed and utilized per UE.
Regarding claim 8, Intel-114 teaches that UE transmits small data and (N)ACK as feedback information using CG-SDT (see figure 3). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply Intel-114’s teaching of using CG-SDT transmit small data and (N)ACK as feedback information to the base station in the system of Ericsson-104 in view of Lee and Hong with the motivation being to improve efficiency in SDT transmission.
Regarding claim 9, in Ericsson-104’s system, the UE starts a timer (TAT) to time a waiting window upon initiating the CG-SDT and monitors, during the waiting window, a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) for a response that responds the CG-SDT (see section 2.2).
Regarding claim 10, In Intel-114 teaches that dynamic grant SDT (DG-SDT) could be performed following a failure of CG-SDT. This teaching implies that the network sends a dynamic grant assignment for SDT to the UE beforehand. Thus, 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 system of Ericsson-104 in view of Intel-114 to receive a dynamic grant assignment for the UE during the waiting window with the motivation being to enable DG-SDT following a failure of CG-SDT, thereby improving SDT communication reliability.
Regarding claim 11, Ericsson-104 teaches synchronization signal block (SSB) level RSRP threshold; and the UE selects a subset of SSBs for small data transmission based on the SSB level RSRP threshold (see section 2.2.1; proposal 3).
Regarding claim 12, in Ericsson-104’s system the SSB level RSRP threshold is UE-specific (see section 2.2.1 and 2.2.2).
Regarding claim 15, Intel-114 teaches that the future resource assignment based on UE’s feedback information (see Intel-114, section 2.2). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply Intel-114’s teaching of resource assignment based on UE’s feedback information in the system of Ericsson-104 in view of Lee and Hong with the motivation being to improve efficiency in SDT transmission.
Regarding claim 18, Ericsson does not teach that the SDT threshold comprises at least one data volume threshold. However, keeping a low data volume as one of the conditions for CG-SDT is well known in the art. Intel-114 does teach that one portion of the criteria for CG-SDT is data volume (See section 2.2, step 6b). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply Intel-114’s teaching of using data volume threshold as one of the criteria for CG-SDT in the system of Ericsson-104 in view of Lee and Hong with the motivation being to save bandwidth and preserve SDT communication reliability by keeping the data volume low for CG-SDT transmission.
Regarding claim 19, in Intel-114’s system, the UE performs the RA-SDT multiplexed with feedback information for subsequent SDT (DG-SDT) from the UE (see section 2.1.4.3 & figure 5). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply Intel-114’s teaching of the UE performing the RA-SDT multiplexed with feedback information for subsequent SDT (DG-SDT) from the UE using data volume threshold as one of the criteria for CG-SDT in Ericsson-104 in view of Lee and Hong’s system with the motivation being to enable the subsequent SDT transmission and enhance SDT communication reliability.
Regarding claims 20 and 21, Intel-114 teaches that wherein the UE receives a response (figure 5; step N) that responds to the feedback information (figure 5, step 3); and the UE performs a subsequent SDT (DG-SDT) according to the response. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply Intel-114’s teaching of the UE’s receiving a response that responds to the feedback information and performing a subsequent SDT (DG-SDT) according to the response in the system of Ericsson-104 in view of Lee and Hong with the motivation being to enable the successful subsequent SDT transmission and enhance SDT communication reliability.
Regarding claim 30, the UE transmits an initiating uplink message for random access small data transmission (RA-SDT), and the initiating uplink message carries at least a portion of uplink small data of the RA-SDT and comprises common control channel (CCCH) information. Hong further teaches the 2-step RACH procedure which has message A and 4-step RACH procedure which has message 3 for SDT transmission. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply Hong’s teaching of the 2-step RACH procedure which has message A and 4-step RACH procedure which has message 3 for SDT transmission in the system of Ericsson-104 in view of Intel-114 and Lee with the motivation being to improve the accessibility in SDT transmission.
Regarding claim 31, since a processor is old and well known in the art, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a processor in the user equipment of Ercisson-104 in view of Intel-114 to execute the communication method with the motivation being to improve the efficiency and execution of the communication method.
Claims 36-37 and 67 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ericsson-104 (Ericsson - “Discussion on RAN1 aspects for NR small data transmission on INACTIVE state” - 3GPP TSG-RAN WG1 Meeting #104b-e- R1-2103678) in view of Intel-114 (Intel – “Failure and successful handling for an SDT session” - 3GPP TSG WG2 Meeting #114-R22104881) and Hong (WO 2020256420 A1).
Regarding claim 36, Ericsson teaches a small data transmission method for execution by a base station, comprising:
configuring pre-configured SDT resources for uplink SDT; transmitting a radio resource control (RRC) message with a small data transmission (SDT) configuration for the UE (See section 2.2 step 1 which teaches sending to UE an RRC Release msg including SDT configuration) wherein the RRC release message comprise suspense configuration (the purpose of an RRC release is to release or stop, i.e. suspend, the connection).
Ericsson further teaches that the UE measuring and storing a first reference signal received power (RSRP) value upon receiving the RRC and measuring a second RSRP value upon initiating small data transmission (SDT) and the base station will receive CG-SDT from the UE if the CG-SDT conditions are met (see section 2.2.1 and 2.2.2, fig 1 & fig 3, which teaches recording RSRP at time t1 and t2 wherein t1 is the time UE receives from network and t2 is the time UE has SDT data to send).
However, Ericsson-104 does not explicitly teach receiving uplink small data via CG-SDT when the first criteria is satisfied and the RSRP difference between the first RSRP value and the second RSRP value satisfy the second portion of the criteria associated with SDT threshold and receiving uplink small data via RA-SDT when a first portion of criteria associated with an SDT threshold for RA-SDT is satisfied, but an RSRP difference between the first RSRP value and the second RSRP value does not satisfy a second portion of the criteria associated with SDT threshold.
However, such fall back feature is well known in the art for providing a fallback feature in case the condition for CG-SDT transmission is not met. Specifically, Intel-114 teaches that when a first portion of criteria associated with an SDT threshold for RA-SDT is satisfied (step 5 in figure 1) and the RSRP difference between the first RSRP value and the second RSRP value satisfy a second portion of the criteria associated with SDT threshold (step 6 in figure 1), then UE transmits via CG-SDT (step 7 in figure 1) and when a first portion of criteria associated with an SDT threshold for RA-SDT is satisfied (step 5 in figure 1) and the RSRP difference between the first RSRP value and the second RSRP value does not satisfy a second portion of the criteria associated with SDT threshold (step 6 in figure 1), then UE transmits via RA-SDT (See the RA-SDT output branch in step 8 of figure 1). This mechanism allows the system to utilize the RA-SDT in case the CS-SDT condition is not met for enhance the efficiency of SDT transmission.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply Intel-114’s teaching of base station receiving uplink small data via CG-SDT when a first portion of criteria associated with an SDT threshold for RA-SDT is satisfied and a second portion of the criteria associated with SDT threshold is also satisfied and receiving uplink small data via RA-SDT when a first portion of criteria is satisfied, but the second portion of the criteria is not satisfied associated with SDT threshold in Ericsson-104’s system with the motivation being to enhance SDT communication reliability by enabling RA-SDT transmission in case the condition for CG-SDT transmission is not met.
Ericsson-104 also does not explicitly teach that the base station transmit the SDT threshold for the UE from the network. However, such feature is known in the art. For example, Hong teaches that for SDT transmission, the base station may send the UE the threshold for the UE (See 4-step RACH procedure-based processing method in the last paragraph of page 29 which teaches that the base station provides the UE with the threshold). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply Hong’s teaching of the base station sending the UE the SDT threshold for the UE in the system of Ericsson-104 in view of Intel-114 with the motivation being to improve reliability in SDT transmission .
Regarding claim 37, Intel-114 teaches that the base station receives small data and (N)ACK as feedback information using CG-SDT (see figure 3). Intel-114 also teaches that the future resource assignment based on UE’s feedback information (see Intel-114, section 2.2). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply Intel-114’s teaching of receiving small data & (N)ACK as feedback information from UE and performing CG-SDT resource assignment based on UE’s feedback information in the system of Ericsson-104 in view of Hong with the motivation being to improve efficiency in SDT transmission.
Regarding claim 67, Although Ericsson-104 does not mention that the base station comprises a processor, such feature is old and well known in the art as evidenced by Hong (See last paragraph of page 28). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to Hong’s teaching to use a processor in the base station of Ercisson-104 in view of Intel-114 to execute the communication method with the motivation being to improve the efficiency and execution of the communication method.
Claims 16 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ericsson-104 Ericsson-104 (Ericsson - “Discussion on RAN1 aspects for NR small data transmission on INACTIVE state” - 3GPP TSG-RAN WG1 Meeting #104b-e-R12103994) in view of Intel-114 (Intel – “Failure and successful handling for an SDT session” - 3GPP TSG WG2 Meeting #114-R22104881) Lee et al (WO 20211182812) (hereinafter referred to as Lee) and Hong (WO 2020256420 A1), and further in view of Huang et al (US 2022/0086946) (hereinafter referred to as Huang).
Regarding claims 16 and 23, Ericsson-104 in view Intel-114, Lee and Hong does not explicitly teach the feedback information comprising power headroom reporting information. However, Huang teaches the feedback of power headroom reporting information to improve subsequent SDT transmission (See par [272]). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply Huang’s teaching of sending feedback of power headroom reporting information in the system of Ercisson-104 in view of Intel-114, Lee and Hong with the motivation being to improve the reliability of the SDT transmission.
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 HUY D VU whose telephone number is (571)272-3155. The examiner can normally be reached 7:00a-to 5:00p Mon-Thurs.
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, Deborah Reynolds can be reached at (571)272-0734. 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.
HUY D. VU
Supervisory Patent Examiner
Art Unit 2461
/HUY D VU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2461
Prosecution Insights