DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in reply communication filed on 03/21/2024.
Claims 37-56 are pending.
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 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 37-40, 43, 47-48, 50-53, and 56 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Lin et al. (US 2022/0095411).
Regarding claim 37, Lin discloses a method for a relay User Equipment (relay UE) [see Fig. 4D, ¶ 157; a method for a relay User Equipment (relay UE 402)] to handle a first System Information (SI) request received from a remote User Equipment (remote UE) [see Fig. 4D, ¶ 157; to handle a first System Information (SI) request/(SRB0 message (e.g., RRCSystemInfoReq)) received from a remote User Equipment (remote UE 401)] while a prohibit timer in the relay UE for requesting SI from a base station is running [see ¶ 95; when the prohibit timer for the network or for a relay/destination UE is running], the method comprising:
obtaining SI requested by the first SI request [see Fig. 4D, ¶ 157; obtaining SI requested by the SRB0 message (e.g., RRCSystemInfoReq)/first SI request (step 411)];
sending the SI to the remote UE, once the SI is obtained [see Fig. 4D, ¶ 157; at step 414, sending/forwarding the SI to the remote UE 401, once the SI is obtained (step 413)].
Regarding claim 38, Lin discloses the method of claim 37.
Lin further discloses wherein the prohibit timer is one of multiple prohibit timers in the relay UE defined for the relay UE itself and one or more remote UEs including the remote UE [see ¶ 96; the prohibit timer is kept per relay UE or per UE (refers as the remote UE 401) who sends system information request to this relay UE/(the relay UE 402)].
Regarding claim 39, Lin discloses the method of claim 37.
Lin further discloses wherein obtaining the SI refers to waiting for and receiving the SI from a base station, if an SI request causing current running of the prohibit timer already requested the SI from the base station [¶ 95; the timer may or may not be stopped when UE receive the requested system information from the base station or from a relay/destination UE].
Regarding claim 40, Lin discloses the method of claim 38.
Lin further discloses wherein the prohibit timer is the only prohibit timer in the relay UE [see ¶ 95; wherein the prohibit timer is the only prohibit timer in the relay UE (402)] and wherein obtaining the SI refers to forwarding the first SI request or sending a second SI request for requesting the SI to a base station once the prohibit timer expires, and receiving the SI from the base station [see ¶ 96; before the timer expires, the relay UE does not provide system information to any UE/this requesting UE (receiving the SI (at step 413) from gNB 403 and forwarding the SI (at step 414)].
Regarding claim 43, Lin discloses the method of claim 37.
Lin further discloses wherein when the relay UE sends an SI request to a base station, the relay UE will inform one or more remote UEs that the SI request has been sent and/or what SI has been requested and/or the duration of the prohibit timer started due to the SI request which has been sent [¶ 96; when a relay UE provides system information to any UE/to a specific UE, the timer specific to all UEs/this requesting UE is started].
Regarding claim 46, the claim recites a relay User Equipment (relay UE) comprising: a processor; and a memory [Fig. 4B, ¶ 144; wireless device 201 (e.g., a relay UE) comprising Processor 203 and Memory 202] to perform method for a relay User Equipment (relay UE) recited as in claim 37; therefore, claim 46 is rejected along the same rationale that rejected in claim 37.
Regarding claim 47, Lin discloses a method for a remote User Equipment (remote UE), the method comprising:
based on one or more prohibit timers defined in the remote UE, sending a System Information (SI) request to a relay User Equipment (relay UE) for requesting SI from the relay UE or for requesting SI via the relay UE from a base station [see ¶ 95; based on a prohibit timers defined in the remote UE, sending a System Information (SI) request to a relay User Equipment (relay UE) for requesting SI from the relay UE or for requesting SI via the relay UE from a base station].
Regarding claim 48, Lin discloses the method of claim 47.
Lin further discloses wherein the remote UE does not send the SI request to the relay UE while at least one of the one or more prohibit timers in the remote UE is running [see ¶ 96; before the timer expires, the relay UE does not provide system information to any UE/this requesting UE].
Regarding claims 50 and 51, the claims recite the method of claim 47 to perform method for a relay User Equipment (relay UE) recited as in claims 43 and 45 respectively; therefore, claims 50 and 51 are rejected along the same rationale that rejected in claims 43 and 45 respectively.
Regarding claim 52, Lin discloses the method of claim 47.
Lin further discloses wherein the one or more of the prohibit timers in the remote UE comprise at least one of the following: a first prohibit timer defined for the remote UE to request SI via the relay UE from a base station; a second prohibit timer defined for the remote UE to request SI from the relay UE [see ¶ 95; a prohibit timer defined for the remote UE to request SI via the relay UE from a base station].
Regarding claim 53, Lin discloses the method of claim 52.
Lin further discloses wherein the first prohibit timer and/or the second prohibit timer is configured by the relay UE [see ¶ 96; wherein the prohibit timer is configured by the relay UE].
Regarding claim 56, the claim recites a relay User Equipment (relay UE) comprising: a processor; and a memory [Fig. 4B, ¶ 145; wireless device 211 (e.g., a remote UE) comprising Processor 213 and Memory 212] to perform method for a relay User Equipment (relay UE) recited as in claim 47; therefore, claim 56 is rejected along the same rationale that rejected in claim 47.
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) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 41-42 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 unpatentable over Lin et al. (US 2022/0095411) in view of ZHENG (WO 2022/033531).
Regarding claim 41, Lin discloses the method of claim 38, but does not explicitly disclose wherein the prohibit timer is the only prohibit timer in the relay UE and wherein obtaining the SI refers to sending a second SI request for requesting the SI and other SI to a base station once the prohibit timer expires, and receiving the SI and the other SI from the base station.
However, ZHENG discloses wherein the prohibit timer is the only prohibit timer in the relay UE and wherein obtaining the SI refers to sending a second SI request for requesting the SI and other SI to a base station once the prohibit timer expires, and receiving the SI and the other SI from the base station [page 7 lines 12-13; S423, the relay terminal sends a second request for SI or SIB to the network device to acquire the target SI or SIB].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to provide “wherein the prohibit timer is the only prohibit timer in the relay UE and wherein obtaining the SI refers to sending a second SI request for requesting the SI and other SI to a base station once the prohibit timer expires, and receiving the SI and the other SI from the base station” as taught by ZHENG in the system of Lin, so that it would to use Relay technology provide in expand cell coverage and make up for blind spots in cell coverage, and also improve cell capacity through spatial resource reuse and overcoming penetration loss and improving indoor coverage quality [see ZHENG; page 3 lines 12-15].
Regarding claim 42, Lin discloses the method of claim 38, but does not explicitly disclose wherein obtaining the SI refers to forwarding the first SI request or sending a second SI request for requesting the SI, immediately after receiving the first SI request if the prohibit timer defined for the remote UE is not running, or once the prohibit timer defined for the remote UE expires if the prohibit timer defined for the remote UE is running.
However, ZHENG discloses wherein obtaining the SI refers to forwarding the first SI request or sending a second SI request for requesting the SI, immediately after receiving the first SI request if the prohibit timer defined for the remote UE is not running [Fig. 5, page 8 lines 23-34; S522, when the second trigger condition is satisfied, the target SI or SIB sent by the network device through dedicated RRC signaling is received, an inhibit timer is configured to allow dedicated SI or SIB requests to be made and the inhibit timer is not running].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to provide “wherein obtaining the SI refers to forwarding the first SI request or sending a second SI request for requesting the SI, immediately after receiving the first SI request if the prohibit timer defined for the remote UE is not running, or once the prohibit timer defined for the remote UE expires if the prohibit timer defined for the remote UE is running” as taught by ZHENG in the system of Lin, so that it would to use Relay technology provide in expand cell coverage and make up for blind spots in cell coverage, and also improve cell capacity through spatial resource reuse and overcoming penetration loss and improving indoor coverage quality [see ZHENG; page 3 lines 12-15].
Claims 44-55 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 unpatentable over Lin et al. (US 2022/0095411) in view of ZHENG (WO 2022/033531).
Regarding claim 44, Lin discloses the method of claim 37, but does not explicitly disclose wherein the relay UE includes at least one of the following information elements in an SI request to a base station: what SI is requested by the relay UE.
However, ZHENG discloses wherein the relay UE includes at least one of the following information elements in an SI request to a base station: what SI is requested by the relay UE [Fig. 8, page 12 lines 42-44; the relay UE 14 transmits a request for the area specific system information or update for system information to its serving gNB/TRP 1 10, wherein the request include an indication of the required SIBs, and a target cell id].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to provide wherein the relay UE includes at least one of the following information elements in an SI request to a base station: what SI is requested by the relay UE” as taught by ZHENG in the system of Lin, so that it would make efficient use of available spectrum, and/or for any other reason, communications devices may be configured to communicate using a sidelink connection with, or via, a relay communications device [see ZHENG; page 2 lines 40-42].
Regarding claim 45, Lin discloses the method of claim 37, but does not explicitly disclose wherein the remote UE includes an indication in the first SI request that the request and corresponding requested SI are for the remote UE.
However, ZHENG discloses wherein the remote UE includes an indication in the first SI request that the request and corresponding requested SI are for the remote UE [Fig. 8, page 15 lines 19-20; the request for the system information includes the indication of the cell identifier for which the remote device is requesting the system information].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to provide wherein the remote UE includes an indication in the first SI request that the request and corresponding requested SI are for the remote UE” as taught by ZHENG in the system of Lin, so that it would make efficient use of available spectrum, and/or for any other reason, communications devices may be configured to communicate using a sidelink connection with, or via, a relay communications device [see ZHENG; page 2 lines 40-42].
Claims 49 and 55 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 unpatentable over Lin et al. (US 2022/0095411) in view of YANG et al. (CN 113396611).
Regarding claim 49, Lin discloses the method of claim 47, but does not explicitly disclose wherein at least one of the one or more prohibit timers in the remote UE is based on information on duration of a prohibit timer in the relay UE.
However, YANG discloses wherein at least one of the one or more prohibit timers in the remote UE is based on information on duration of a prohibit timer in the relay UE [Fig. 12, page 18 lines 38-49; wherein the prohibit timer in the remote terminal device is based on a timer duration configuration of a prohibit timer in the relay terminal device].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to provide “wherein at least one of the one or more prohibit timers in the remote UE is based on information on duration of a prohibit timer in the relay UE” as taught by YANG in the system of Lin, so that it would forbids access within a certain time period after receiving the notification, if it does not repeatedly transmit the access request to the relay remote terminal device in the time period; it can avoid the unnecessary access attempt, so as to save resource and avoid resource waste [see YANG; page 2 lines 24-27].
Regarding claim 55, Lin discloses the method of claim 47, but does not explicitly disclose wherein the remote UE sends the SI request within a configured time window.
However, YANG discloses wherein the remote UE sends the SI request within a configured time window [see, page 9 line 49 to page 10 line 3; the remote terminal device after receiving the notification for a certain time period in inhibiting access, such as not repeatedly sending the access request to the relay remote terminal device in the time period].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to provide “wherein the remote UE sends the SI request within a configured time window” as taught by YANG in the system of Lin, so that it would avoid the unnecessary access attempt, so as to save resource and avoid resource waste [see YANG; page 10 lines 2-3].
Claim 54 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 unpatentable over Lin et al. (US 2022/0095411) in view of Raleigh et al. (US 2020/0045519).
Regarding claim 54, Lin discloses the method of claim 47, but does not explicitly disclose wherein at least one of the one or more of the prohibit timers in the remote UE depend on service type or traffic type.
However, Raleigh discloses wherein at least one of the one or more of the prohibit timers in the remote UE depend on service type or traffic type [see, ¶ 1543; based upon the service class (e.g., conversational, streaming, interactive, background, or some other service class) requested or needed for a service (service class use at a given time)].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to provide “wherein at least one of the one or more of the prohibit timers in the remote UE depend on service type or traffic type” as taught by Raleigh in the system of Lin, so that it would provide for communication of control messages for device authorization, device activation, service plan selection and customization, service plan provisioning, service usage monitoring, service notifications, service control, service accounting/charging/billing, and service plan design using one or more APIs [see Raleigh; ¶ 11].
Conclusion
In additional to references cited that are used for rejection as set forth above, Chen et al. (US 2019/0124715) is also considered as relevant prior arts for rejection of in claims 37, 46-47, and 56 (see Fig. 1, ¶¶ 376, 413-417).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHONG LA whose telephone number is (571)272-2588. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday from 7:30 A.M. to 4:00 P.M. (EST).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, IAN MOORE can be reached on 571-272-3085. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/PHONG LA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2469