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 .
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.
Claim(s) 1-5 and 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Esswie (US 20240251284 A1) in view of Paladugu (US 20240260075 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Esswie teaches a method by a first remote user equipment (UE) comprising:
establishing an end-to-end connection with a second remote UE via a UE-to-UE (U2U) relay UE; ([0057]: the sidelink E2E QoS between the source UE and destination UE may be impacted by the multiple hops of a multi-hop sidelink communication, (e.g., a communication link from the source device to a first relay UE device, a communication link from the first relay UE to a second relay UE device, and so on, to the destination UE device).)
transmitting, to the relay UE, end-to-end quality of service (QoS) information related to the end-to-end connection; ([0101]: transmits an E2E QoS report request to a first sidelink relay device, which may be referred to as a primary UE, or a primary relay UE. [0058]: dynamically splitting E2E QoS reporting into partial E2E QoS reports that are adaptively compiled at a selected set of intermediate relay UE device facilitates a reduction of resources used to notify, or make aware, a source device of an overall E2E QoS channel condition, or conditions.)
receiving split QoS information from the U2U relay UE; and ([0100]-[0101]: adaptive, split E2E QoS reporting, that results in an E2E QoS report being requested by a source UE but with a significant control channel overhead use reduction compared to each intermediate relay UE receiving from a source UE, and transmitting to the source UE, a QoS report request and a corresponding QoS report, respectively. A partial QoS report request may comprise an indication requesting that a relay UE device, which has received the partial QoS report request, report QoS metrics that correspond to a certain number of sidelink hops (e.g., hops that correspond to the relay UE devices that are part of the determined set of intermediate sidelink relay devices).)
communicating with a base station (BS) of the first UE. (Fig. 1 and [0068]: Communication links 125 shown in wireless communication system 100 may include uplink transmissions from a UE 115 to a base station 105, or downlink transmissions from a base station 105 to a UE 115.)
Esswie does not explicitly disclose transmitting, to the base station (BS), a message including the split QoS information to request the BS to assign a U2U relay communication resource.
However, Paladugu teaches transmitting, to the base station (BS), a message including the split QoS information to request the BS to assign a U2U relay communication resource. ([0053]: determining a QoS split between the first connection and the second connection. [0138]: a RAN may be configured to split the E2E QoS into PC5 QoS and Uu QoS. [0080]: a relay UE may request resources from the base station for establishing a sidelink connection with a remote UE, where the request may indicate the remote UE and a QoS associated with the remote UE. Accordingly, the relay UE, the remote UE, or both may be configured to indicate additional information to the base station to enable the base station to configure appropriate resources to maintain an E2E QoS between the base station and remote UE (via the relay UE).)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include above limitation into Esswie. One would have been motivated to do so because to further improve QoS maintenance, such as E2E QoS maintenance, a remote UE or a relay UE may be configured to transmit information to the base station. However, in some cases, such as in mode 1 resource allocation, a relay UE may request resources from the base station for establishing a sidelink connection with a remote UE, where the request may indicate the remote UE and a QoS associated with the remote UE. As taught by Paladugu, [0080].
Regarding claim 2, Esswie and Paladugu teach the method of claim 1.
Esswie teaches wherein the QoS information includes at least one of a PC5 QoS identifier (PQI), a QoS flow identifier (ID), or a packet delay budget (PDB). ([0101]: An E2E QOS request may comprise information regarding QoS metrics to be calculated and reported such as expected packet delay budgets (“PDB”) or expected packet error rates (“PER”).)
Regarding claim 3, Esswie and Paladugu teach the method of claim 1.
Esswie teaches wherein the split QoS information includes a packet delay budget (PDB) split based on a PDB related to the end-to-end QoS information. ([0110]: partial PDB = PDB_hop_1 + PDB_hop_2 +…+ PDB_hop_N. [0114]: A partial QoS report request may comprise a request for QoS performance parameter metric information that should be included in a partial QoS report corresponding to links of the communication path (e.g., a partial QoS report may be requested to comprise per hop PER and/or PDB metrics or aggregated/blended metrics).
Regarding claim 4, Esswie and Paladugu teach the method of claim 1.
Esswie teaches wherein the end-to-end connection includes a first hop between the first remote UE and the U2U relay UE and a second hop between the U2U relay UE and the second remote UE, and [0057]: For sidelink communications, where a source device communicates with another device, which other device is not in proximity of the source UE, sidelink traffic may flow via multiple links, or ‘hops’, between multiple relay devices until the sidelink traffic reaches the intended destination device.)
wherein an end-to-end QoS included in the end-to-end QoS information is split into a first split QoS for the first hop and a second split QoS for the second hop (based on a channel quality related to the first hop and a channel quality related to the second hop). ([0110]: partial PDB = PDB_hop_1 + PDB_hop_2 +…+ PDB_hop_N. [0114]: A partial QoS report request may comprise a request for QoS performance parameter metric information that should be included in a partial QoS report corresponding to links of the communication path (e.g., a partial QoS report may be requested to comprise per hop PER and/or PDB metrics or aggregated/blended metrics).
Regarding claim 5, Esswie and Paladugu teach the method of claim 4.
Esswie teaches wherein the split QoS information is information on the first split QoS for the first hop. ([0110]: partial PDB = PDB_hop_1 + PDB_hop_2 +…+ PDB_hop_N. [0114]: A partial QoS report request may comprise a request for QoS performance parameter metric information that should be included in a partial QoS report corresponding to links of the communication path (e.g., a partial QoS report may be requested to comprise per hop PER and/or PDB metrics or aggregated/blended metrics).
Same rationales apply to claim 11 (user equipment) because it is substantially similar to claim 1 (method).
Same rationales apply to claim 12 (user equipment) because it is substantially similar to claim 2 (method).
Claim(s) 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Esswie (US 20240251284 A1) in view of Paladugu (US 20240260075 A1), and in view of Bharadwaj (US 20200351826 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Esswie and Paladugu teach the method of claim 1.
Esswie and Paladugu do not explicitly disclose receiving, from the BS, resource allocation information allocated for a connection between the first remote UE and the U2U relay UE based on a packet delay budget (PDB) included in the split QoS information.
However, Bharadwaj teaches receiving, from the BS, resource allocation information allocated for a link between the first UE and the relay UE based on a packet delay budget (PDB) included in the split QoS information. ([0036]: Controller/processor 240 of base station 110, controller/processor 280 of UE 120, and/or any other component(s) of FIG. 2 may perform one or more techniques associated with resource allocation with packet delay budget (PDB) constraint.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include above limitation into Esswie and Paladugu. One would have been motivated to do so because a resource allocation mechanism for such a communications system should take into account delay budgets associated with a given packet, such as a packet delay budget (PDB) and a hybrid automatic repeat request (HARD) delay budget (HDB). A PDB is a constraint dictating a maximum delay between a time of packet arrival and a time of a last transmission of the packet. As taught by Bharadwaj, [0040].
Claim(s) 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Esswie (US 20240251284 A1) in view of Paladugu (US 20240260075 A1), and in view of Back (WO2021206462A1).
Regarding claim 7, Esswie and Paladugu teach the method of claim 1.
Esswie and Paladugu do not explicitly disclose receiving a local identifier (ID) related to the end-to-end connection from the U2U relay UE.
However, Back teaches receiving a local identifier (ID) related to the end-to-end connection from the U2U relay UE. (Page 12: The identification value used at this time may be an identification value received from the remote UE or an identification value newly assigned by the relay UE.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include above limitation into Esswie and Paladugu. One would have been motivated to do so because multiple remote UEs may exist in the relay UE, and since each remote UE will transmit sidelinkUEInformation of different contents, identity for distinguishing them is required. The identification value used at this time may be an identification value received from the remote UE or an identification value newly assigned by the relay UE. This is because the relay UE can be identified as long as it can map the newly assigned value and the value used by the remote UE. As taught by Back, Page 12.
Regarding claim 8, Esswie and Paladugu teach the method of claim 1.
Esswie and Paladugu do not explicitly disclose wherein the split QoS information is received in an RRCReconfigurationCompleteSidelink message.
However, Back teaches wherein the split QoS information is received in an RRCReconfigurationCompleteSidelink message. (Page 11: The SidelinkUEInformation-related information of the remote UE may include SidelinkUEInformation received by the relay UE from the remote UE in SidelinkUEInformation of the relay UE. When the relay UE transmits SidelinkUEInformationNR to the base station, the base station allocates a resource pool to be used by the relay UE for sidelink transmission/reception and informs it with an RRC message. Page 9: The transmitting terminal may transmit some or all of the following information to the receiving terminal through SCI, including (transmission traffic/packet related) QoS information.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include above limitation into Esswie and Paladugu. One would have been motivated to do so because multiple remote UEs may exist in the relay UE, and since each remote UE will transmit sidelinkUEInformation of different contents, identity for distinguishing them is required. The identification value used at this time may be an identification value received from the remote UE or an identification value newly assigned by the relay UE. This is because the relay UE can be identified as long as it can map the newly assigned value and the value used by the remote UE. As taught by Back, Page 12.
Regarding claim 9, Esswie and Paladugu teach the method of claim 1.
Esswie and Paladugu do not explicitly disclose wherein the end-to-end QoS information is transmitted to the U2U relay UE in an RRCReconfigurationSidelink message.
However, Back teaches wherein the end-to-end QoS information is transmitted to the U2U relay UE in an RRCReconfigurationSidelink message. (Page 12: Upon receiving the SidelinkUEInformation message including the SidelinkRemoteUEInformation of the remote UE from the relay UE, the base station transmits the RRCreconfiguration message for the relay UE and the remote UEs to the relay UE. The relay UE receiving this transmits only the RRCreconfiguration message corresponding to each remote UE according to the identification of the remote UE.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include above limitation into Esswie and Paladugu. One would have been motivated to do so because multiple remote UEs may exist in the relay UE, and since each remote UE will transmit sidelinkUEInformation of different contents, identity for distinguishing them is required. The identification value used at this time may be an identification value received from the remote UE or an identification value newly assigned by the relay UE. This is because the relay UE can be identified as long as it can map the newly assigned value and the value used by the remote UE. As taught by Back, Page 12.
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 (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 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.
Claim(s) 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 as being anticipated by Paladugu (US 20240260075 A1).
Regarding claim 14, Paladugu teaches a method by a base station (BS) comprising: ([0080] and [0140].)
receiving a message including split quality of service (QoS) information from the first remote UE establishing an end-to-end connection with a second remote UE through a UE-to-UE (U2U) relay UE; and (Fig. 1 and [0108]: a network device (e.g., first remote UE) establishing an E2E connection with a remote UE 115 (e.g., second remote UE) via a relay UE 115, where the E2E connection may include a first connection and a second connection. The network device may be in communication with the relay UE 115 via the second connection and the relay UE 115 may be in communication with the remote UE 115 via the first connection. [0053]: determining a QoS split between the first connection and the second connection. [0138]: a RAN may be configured to split the E2E QoS into PC5 QoS and Uu QoS. [0080]: a relay UE may request resources from the base station for establishing a sidelink connection with a remote UE, where the request may indicate the remote UE and a QoS associated with the remote UE. Accordingly, the relay UE, the remote UE, or both may be configured to indicate additional information to the base station to enable the base station to configure appropriate resources to maintain an E2E QoS between the base station and remote UE (via the relay UE). [0140]: a relay UE, or a remote UE, or both may perform mode 1 resource allocation in which the RAN may configure and indicate the resources to the respective UEs. For example, such as in mode 1 resource allocation, a relay UE may request resources from the base station for establishing a sidelink connection with a remote UE, where the request may indicate the remote UE and a QoS associated with the remote UE.)
transmitting, to the first remote UE, resource allocation information allocated for a connection between the U2U relay UE and the first remote UE based on the split QoS information. ([0080]: in mode 1 resource allocation, a relay UE may request resources from the base station for establishing a sidelink connection with a remote UE, where the request may indicate the remote UE and a QoS associated with the remote UE. The relay UE, the remote UE, or both may be configured to indicate additional information to the base station to enable the base station to configure appropriate resources to maintain an E2E QoS between the base station and remote UE (via the relay UE).)
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 5-9, filed 06/11/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claims 1-9, 11-12 and 14 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 have been fully considered but are moot in of new ground(s) of rejection.
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 ZI YE whose telephone number is (571)270-1039. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:00am - 4:00pm.
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, Emmanuel Moise can be reached at 5712723865. 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.
/ZI YE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2455
Prosecution Insights