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 .
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Drawings are accepted.
IDS is considered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 5, 15, 9, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 5, 15, 9, and 19 recites “the relay node”. Since their respective base claims allow for scenarios of multiple relay nodes, thus the singular language “the relay node” lacks proper antecedent basis when multiple relays can exist. Clarification is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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.
The factual inquiries 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.
Claim(s) 1-9, 11-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over He et al. (US 2021/0298034) in view of Jung et al. (US 2016/0337889).
As to claim 1:
He discloses:
A method, (See Abstract) comprising:
detecting, by a user equipment (UE), at least one relay node;
(See ¶0225, remote UE 115 performs discovery procedure wherein the UE discovers the relay UE node)
receiving, by the UE, a configuration for controlling the at least one relay node from the network node; (¶0184-0186, the base station configures transmission parameters (resources sets, QoS, priority etc.) for communication using the relay node. This configuration information is received at the UE and is used for employing the relay UE to transmit subsequent communication to the base station)
receiving, by the UE, a scheduling from the network node, wherein the scheduling is scheduled based on the configuration; (See ¶0186, 0187, 0237-0238based on analysis of resources configured in the configuration, the base station performs scheduling by sending scheduling information to the remote UE).
and performing, by the UE, data transmission or data reception with the at least one relay node and the network node based on the scheduling. (See ¶0182, Fig. 5, 0264-0267, 0305, 0316, 0317, transmission to/from the UE to the network node (base station) then occur based on scheduling by the base station)
Regarding the step transmitting, by a user equipment (UE), a relay node information to a network node, wherein the relay node information comprises information of the at least one relay node; While reference He in ¶0225, discloses the remote UE 115 performs discovery procedure wherein the UE discovers the relay UE node, however is silent on the step of reporting to a network node of the relay node information of the detected node.
Jung, in a related field of endeavor, for a system of configuring side links with relay nodes, wherein (see ¶0291-0297, also, claims 1, 8/9) a UE to perform relay node discovery to detect nearby UEs as to whether they are suitable as relay node and then to send a report to the network node having information such as ID of the detected UE relay(s).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing time of the invention that the discovery procedure described in He to include the step of transmitting to another node, such as a base station, the report having information of the detected relaying UE(s). Given that He’s system requiring the base station to configure and schedule communication with the relaying UE in mind, it is necessary for the base station to know which relaying it needs to configure resources for. Furthermore, per ¶0008 and 0009 of Jung, the implementation seeks to solve issues of unnecessary relay resource usage due to incorrect relay activation, and such a report allows the network to know which exact UE that will be acting as relay.
As to claim 11:
A user equipment (UE), comprising:
a transmitter, (¶0708, 0271, processor, transmitter, receiver)
a receiver, receiving a configuration for controlling the at least one relay node from the network node (¶0184-0186, the base station configures transmission parameters (resources sets, QoS, priority etc.) for communication using the relay node. This configuration information is received at the UE and is used for employing the relay UE to transmit subsequent communication to the base station) and receiving a scheduling from the network node, wherein the scheduling is scheduled based on the configuration; (See ¶0186, 0187, 0237-0238based on analysis of resources configured in the configuration, the base station performs scheduling by sending scheduling information to the remote UE).
and a processor, detecting the at least one node (See ¶0225, remote UE 115 performs discovery procedure wherein the UE discovers the relay UE node)
and performing data transmission or data reception with the at least one relay node and the network node based on the scheduling. (See ¶0182, Fig. 5, 0264-0267, 0305, 0316, 0317, transmission to/from the UE to the network node (base station) then occur based on scheduling by the base station)
Regarding the step transmitting, by a user equipment (UE), a relay node information to a network node, wherein the relay node information comprises information of the at least one relay node; While reference He in ¶0225, discloses the remote UE 115 performs discovery procedure wherein the UE discovers the relay UE node, however is silent on the step of reporting to a network node of the relay node information of the detected node.
Jung, in a related field of endeavor, for a system of configuring side links with relay nodes, wherein (see ¶0291-0297, also, claims 1, 8/9) a UE to perform relay node discovery to detect nearby UEs as to whether they are suitable as relay node and then to send a report to the network node having information such as ID of the detected UE relay(s).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing time of the invention that the discovery procedure described in He to include the step of transmitting to another node, such as a base station, the report having information of the detected relaying UE(s). Given that He’s system requiring the base station to configure and schedule communication with the relaying UE in mind, it is necessary for the base station to know which relaying it needs to configure resources for. Furthermore, per ¶0008 and 0009 of Jung, the implementation seeks to solve issues of unnecessary relay resource usage due to incorrect relay activation, and such a report allows the network to know which exact UE that will be acting as relay.
As to claims 2, 12:
He in view of Jung discloses all limitations of claim 1/11, further comprising: transmitting, by the UE/transmitter, the configuration to the at least one relay node; wherein the configuration comprises a relay node identification (ID) of the at least one relay node. (See He, ¶0307, receiving by the relay UE over the sidelink from the remote UE an indication of channel resources configured by the base station for sidelink transmission. Per ¶0297 of Jung, configuration from base station includes ID of the prospective relay UE(s))
As to claims 3, 13:
He in view of Jung discloses all limitations of claim 2/12, wherein the relay node ID is unique in a cell or in an area. (¶0279 of Jung, ID can be physical cell ID (i.e. unique to a cell))
As to claims 4, 14:
He in view of Jung discloses all limitations of claim 2/12, wherein the relay node ID is associated with the UE. (See ¶0279 of Jung, IP address of the UE. Also since the relay ID is of the relay UE is performing relaying function with the remote UE, they have association)
As to claims 5, 15:
He in view of Jung discloses all limitations of claim 1/11, wherein the relay node comprises a semi-static relay node identification (ID). (See ¶0279 of Jung, IP address of the UE is a type of semi-static ID as they are static until ISP reassignment or reset)
As to claim 6, 16:
He in view of Jung discloses all limitations of claim 5/15, further comprising: receiving, by the UE/receiver, the semi-static relay node ID from the at least one relay node; (See ¶0232-0235 of Jung, exchange of IDs between the UEs during discovery procedure) and transmitting, by the UE, the relay node information with the semi-static relay node ID to the network node. (See Jung- ¶0318, report includes ID of relay UE and is transmitted to the base station)
As to claims 7, 17:
He in view of Jung discloses all limitations of claim 1/11, wherein the relay node information comprises a capability information of an aggregated group formed by the at least one relay node or a capability information of an aggregated group formed by the UE and the at least one relay node. (See Jung, ¶0232, the terminals 1-4 are of a specific group. ¶0307-0310, the information includes whether a given UE in the group has capability to provide relay function)
As to claims 8, 18:
He in view of Jung discloses all limitations of claim 7/17, wherein the configuration for controlling the at least one relay node is configured based on the capability information. (This claimed limitation is simply natural/intrinsic because a node that cannot perform relay function will not be configured as one, thus the configuration is based on whether the node can perform the relay function. See Jung, ¶0232, the terminals 1-4 are of a specific group. ¶0307-0310, the information includes whether a given UE in the group has capability to provide relay function. In context of Jung, naturally, the base station of He would only allocate and schedule communication resource only if the given UE can perform relay function. See also Jung, table 4 in ¶0309 which indicates to the network whether the given UE should be given resource configuration for performing relay function. )
As to claims 9, 19:
He in view of Jung discloses all limitations of claim 7/17, wherein the relay node comprises a unique local identification (ID) within the aggregated group. (¶0297 of Jung, ID can be physical cell ID (i.e. unique to a cell), or IP address which is unique within a pool)
Claim(s) 10, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over He et al. (US 2021/0298034) in view of Jung et al. (US 2016/0337889) and in further view of Lee et al. (US 2020/0389900).
As to claims 10, 20:
He in view of Jung discloses all limitations of claim 9/19, however is silent on the unique local ID is assigned by the network node, the UE or a master relay node.
In a related field of endeavor, Lee discloses a network with UEs performing relaying functions, wherein ID of each UE can be a local ID type that is assigned by the base station itself (See Fig. 7, step S710 and ¶0125 of Lee).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing time of the invention that the relay UEs in the system of He/Jung wherein ID of each UE can be a local ID type that is assigned by the base station itself. Lee states in ¶0125, “The local ID of the remote UE may be used for uniquely identifying the remote UE among all connected UEs including the relay UE and all remote UEs connected thereto.”, as such advantageously serves to distinguish one relay from another.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
WO 2011074555 - A mobile communication system wherein it is arranged that "Macro eNB ID" used for identifying a relay node (RN) be identical with "eNB ID" used for identifying a radio base station (DeNB) and wherein the radio base station (DeNB) comprises an allocation unit (22) that is adapted to allocate, upon activation of the relay node (RN), a "Cell Identity" used for identifying any cell under the charge of the relay node (RN) in such a manner that the "Cell Identity" is neither identical with a "Cell Identity" used as the "Cell Identity" used for identifying any cell under the charge of another relay node (RN) connected to the radio base station (DeNB) nor identical with a "Cell Identity" used as the "Cell Identity" used for identifying any cell under the charge of the radio base station (DeNB).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to QUAN M HUA whose telephone number is (571)270-7232. The examiner can normally be reached 10:30-6:30.
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, Anthony Addy can be reached at 571-272-7795. 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.
/QUAN M HUA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2645
Prosecution Insights