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 .
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it appears to be a complete published patent document rather than a properly formatted standalone abstract page as required. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
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.
Claim(s) 1-3 and 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by (Rapporteur (ZTE) 3GPP TSG-RAN WG3 #111-e 25 January – 4 February 2021: Discussion on support of small data transmission in INACTIVE state R3-210192).
Regrading claim 1, Rapporteur teaches an apparatus for performing a network function, the apparatus comprising: at least one memory; and at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory and configured to cause the apparatus to (Section 2.2.2. and Fig. 4 describes performing a network function):
transmit an indication associated with small data transmission (SDT) scheme selection for a user equipment (UE) from a central unit (CU) to a distributed unit (DU) (Section 2.2.3. and 2.2.4., proposal 7 describes the CU transmitting a request/indication to the DU relating to whether CG-SDT should be configured. An indication associated with SDT scheme selection (CG vs. RACH). The CU’s request to the DU to configure the CG is a transmission of an indication associated with selecting between CG-SDT and RACH-SDT schemes);
receive, by the CU from the DU, first configured grant (CG)-SDT resource configuration information for the UE in response to CG-SDT being configured (Section 2.2.4., Proposal 7 and Method 1 describes that gNB-DU responds to the CU with a message containing CG configuration results. “CG-SDT resource configuration information” received by the CU from the DU);
and transmit, by the CU to the DU, a radio resource control (RRC) release message for causing the UE to enter into a non-connected state with the first CG-SDT resource configuration information (Section 2.2.3., Proposal 4 and Fig. 4 describes that the CU sends to the DU an RRC release message carrying CG resource configuration, which causes the UE to enter RRC_INACTIVE (a “non-connected state”)).
Regrading claim 2, Rapporteur teaches wherein the indication associated with SDT scheme selection is an SDT indication indicating the DU whether a data radio bearer (DRB) or a quality of service (QOS) flow or a protocol data unit (PDU) session is subject to an SDT (Section 2.2.4., Proposal and method 1 describes the indication being sent “in response to the CU determining that CG-SDT is to be configured.” Proposal 1 and 2 establishing that CU-CP makes the SDT scheme determination, after which it transmits the indication to the DU ).
Regrading claim 3, Rapporteur teaches wherein the indication associated with SDT scheme selection is an SDT indication indicating the DU whether a data radio bearer (DRB) or a quality of service (QoS) flow or a protocol data unit (PDU) session is subject to an SDT (Section 2.2.1., 2.2.2., 2.2.3 and Proposal 2 describes an indication from the CU to the DU conveying which DRBs are subject to SD).
Regrading claim 11, Rapporteur teaches wherein the indication associated with SDT scheme selection is an SDT indication indicating the DU whether a data radio bearer (DRB) or a quality of service (QOS) flow or a protocol data unit (PDU) session is subject to an SDT (Section 2.2.1., 2.2.2., 2.2.3 and Proposal 2 describes an indication from the CU to the DU conveying which DRBs are subject to SD),
and the at least one processor is configured to cause the apparatus to determine whether CG-SDT is to be configured by the DU (Section 2.2.3. describes CG-SDT is to be configured by the DU).
Claim 9 is rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 1 respectively.
Claim 10 is rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 2 respectively.
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) 4 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rapporteur in view of Jeon et al. (US 2024/0080833).
Regarding claim 4, Rapporteur doesn’t teach wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the apparatus to: store, by the CU, the first CG-SDT resource configuration information received from the DU; receive, by the CU from the DU, an indication of random access (RA)-SDT which indicates that RA-SDT is performed by the UE which has entered into the non-connected state caused by the RRC release message; and transmit, by the CU to the DU, the first CG-SDT resource configuration information so that CG-SDT resource configuration information is to be reconfigured for the UE based on the first CG-SDT resource configuration information after the RA-SDT.
In analogous art Jeon teaches wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the apparatus to: store, by the CU, the first CG-SDT resource configuration information received from the DU (Paragraphs [0258]; [0271] describes the storing of CG-SDT configuration parameters the pre-configured grants upon receipt of an RRC message. Although framed from the wireless device perspective, the disclosure establishes the network-side CG-SDT resource configuration information being stored);
receive, by the CU from the DU, an indication of random access (RA)-SDT which indicates that RA-SDT is performed by the UE which has entered into the non-connected state caused by the RRC release message (Paragraphs [0232]; [0228]; [0235]; [0239] describes the UE performing RA-based SDT (RA-SDT) from the Non-RRC_CONNECTED state. When a UE performs RA-SDT, the base station (via the DU) detects and processes this random access);
and transmit, by the CU to the DU, the first CG-SDT resource configuration information so that CG-SDT resource configuration information is to be reconfigured for the UE based on the first CG-SDT resource configuration information after the RA-SDT (Paragraphs [0260]-[0261]; [0271] describes storing the CG configuration, re-initiating/activating it, in the RRC_INACTIVE state. The re-initiation in RRC_INACTIVE state after RRC release).
Therefore, it would have been, obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Rapporteur to incorporate the teachings of Jeon a UE in an inactive/idle state can efficiently transmit small data using pre-configured resources (CG-SDT) or random access (Ra-SDT) to manage the transition between these modes, timer controls to prevent unnecessary connection establishment.
Regarding claim 5, Rapporteur in view of Jeon wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the apparatus to: receive, by the CU from the DU, an indication of random access (RA)-SDT which indicates that RA-SDT is performed by the UE which has entered into the non-connected state caused by the RRC release message (Paragraphs [0232]; [0228]; [0235]; [0239] describes the UE performing RA-based SDT (RA-SDT) from the Non-RRC_CONNECTED state. When a UE performs RA-SDT, the base station (via the DU) detects and processes this random access);
and transmit, by the CU to the DU, an identity of the first CG-SDT resource configuration information so that CG-SDT resource configuration information is to be reconfigured for the UE based on the first CG-SDT resource configuration information after the RA-SDT (Paragraphs [0261]; [0273]; [0316]-[0317] describes DCI comprising identifier/index of pre-configured grant configuration; identity based activation/reconfiguration mechanism).
Claim(s) 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rapporteur in view of Kim et al. (US 2023/0247721).
Regarding claim 6, Rapporteur doesn’t teach wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the apparatus to: receive, by the CU from the DU, a time alignment timer (TAT)-SDT; start, by the CU, the TAT-SDT in response to triggering a UE context release procedure; and stop, by the CU, the TAT-SDT in response to receiving small data or receiving a resume request message.
In analogous art Kim teaches wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the apparatus to: receive, by the CU from the DU, a time alignment timer (TAT)-SDT (Paragraphs [0370]; [0373] describes TAT-SDT being received via an RRC release message from DU);
start, by the CU, the TAT-SDT in response to triggering a UE context release procedure (Paragraphs [0307]; [0373]; [0375] describes starting of TAT-SDT to the receipt of an RRC release message. The RRC release message is the precise mechanisms by which a UE context release procedure is triggered, the base station (CU) sends the RRC Release to move the UE to RRC_INACTIVE, which is the UE context release procedure. Starting the TAT-SDT in response to the RRC release procedure);
and stop, by the CU, the TAT-SDT in response to receiving small data or receiving a resume request message (Paragraphs [0374]; [0376]; [0394] describes that upon SDT completion (small data is successfully received by the base station), the SDT procedure is terminated which inherently involves stopping the associated TAT-SDT, as there is no longer an active SDT window requiring TA validation).
Therefore, it would have been, obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Rapporteur to incorporate the teachings of Kim enabling a wireless device (UE) to transmit and receive small amounts of data without transitioning to a fully connected RRC state, avoiding the overhead of full RRC connection establishment.
Regarding claim 7, Rapporteur in view of Kim, Kim teaches wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the apparatus to release, by the CU, logic F1 connection associated with the UE and related UE context in response to expiry of the TAT-SDT (Paragraphs [0108]; [0339]; [0373]-[0374] describes the release of CG-SDT resources upon TAT-SDT expiry, the CU instructing the DU over the F1 interface to release the UE-associated logical connection. The CG-SDT resources reside at the DU, and the only path for the CU to release them is through the F1 logical conception making F1 connection release an inherent consequence of TAT-SDT expiry -triggered resource release).
Regarding claim 8, Rapporteur in view of Kim, Kim teaches wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the apparatus to release, by the CU from the DU, a UE context release request message for requesting the CU to release logic F1 connection associated with the UE, wherein the UE context release request message comprises a cause value indicating that the UE context release request message is caused by expiry of a time alignment timer (TAT)-SDT (Paragraphs [0108]; [0285]; [0309]; [0373]-[0374] describes CU/DU split architecture with F1 interface; DU detects TAT-SDT expiry and must notify CU via F1 request message. F1 logical connection binds DU/CU resources for each UE; release of all UE resources necessarily involves F1 connection release. TAT-SDT expiry established as discrete trigger for resource release).
Claim(s) 15 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view of Chen (US 2024/0292328).
Regarding claim 15 , Kim teaches a user equipment (UE), comprising: at least one memory; and at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory and configured to cause the UE to (Paragraphs [0083]-[0084] describes a wireless device):
receive, by the UE from a network side, a radio resource control (RRC) release message with first configured grant (CG)-SDT resource configuration information (Fig. 6a, Paragraphs [0238]-[0246] describes the UE receiving an RRC release message from gNB-DU that contains SDT configuration information);
enter into a non-connected state in response to receiving from the RRC release message (Paragraphs [0246]; [0399] describes the UE entering RRC_INACTIVE (the “non-connected state”) upon receiving the RRC release message);
Kim doesn’t teach and release the first CG-SDT resource configuration information in response to one of the following: receiving another RRC release message; falling back to random access (RA)-SDT or non-SDT; receiving a network indication indicating releasing the first CG-SDT resource configuration information; and expiry of a time alignment timer (TAT)-SDT associated with the first CG-SDT resource configuration information.
However, in analogous art Chen teaches and release the first CG-SDT resource configuration information in response to one of the following: receiving another RRC release message; falling back to random access (RA)-SDT or non-SDT; receiving a network indication indicating releasing the first CG-SDT resource configuration information; and expiry of a time alignment timer (TAT)-SDT associated with the first CG-SDT resource configuration information (Paragraph [0044] describes when the TAT-SDT expires, release the CG_SDT resource).
Therefore, it would have been, obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Rapporteur to incorporate the teachings of Chen Small data transmission (SDT) by random access channel (RACH) or configured grant (CG), and release the CG_SDT when TAT-SDT expires to reduce the UE's power consumption.
Claim 16 is rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 15 respectively.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MEHERET WOLDEGEBREAL KIDANE whose telephone number is (571)270-3642. The examiner can normally be reached M-F8:30-5.
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, Ricky Ngo can be reached at 571-272-3139. 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.
/Chandrahas B Patel/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2464
/M.W.K./Examiner, Art Unit 2464