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 Remarks
This Office action is considered fully responsive to the amendments filed 08/21/2026.
a) Claims 1, 3-4, 7-8, and 12-13 are pending in the application. Claims 1, 3-4, 7 and 12-13 have been amended, claims 2, 5-6, and 9-11 have been canceled and claim 8 was previously presented.
b) The objection to the claims is withdrawn in light of Applicant’s amendments.
c) The claim rejection under 35 USC § 101 is withdrawn in light of Applicant’s amendments.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 08/21/2026 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of (WO-2022127644-A1).
Regarding the independent claims 1, 12, and 13 see the U.S.C. 103 rejection below.
Regarding all dependent claims 3-4 and 7-8, see the U.S.C. 103 rejection below.
The Claim Rejections section below details the rejections of the instant claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
5. Claims 1, 4, 7, 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (US-20210336688-A1) in view of Li et al. (WO-2023201521-A1), please, refer to citation of “U” in the PTO-892 of the clarified Google translation of (WO-2023201521-A1), and further in view of Liu (WO-2022127644-A1), please, refer to citation of “V” in the PTO-892 of the clarified Google translation of (WO-2022127644-A1).
Regarding claim 1 (Currently Amended), Lee teaches a method performed by (The method illustrates how the UE can be used as a relay in SL communication, as [0132] states “the vehicle itself may serve as one UE or a relay UE that relays signals, which has a plurality of antenna panels. “[0189] states “RELAYING/TETHERING operation may be performed using MM-WAVE based sidelink (SL) as an access link (for example, communication link between relay UE and remote UE). In this case, the relay UE may be a vehicle (for example, vehicle having no limitation to battery supply), and the remote UE may be a mobile/smart phone (for example, phone having a limited amount of battery) and further states “it may be assumed that the relay UE and the remote UE form connection (or RRC connection) with the BS (or same BS). Also, the following rules (or some rules) may restrictively be applied to the remote UE (and/or relay UE).” [0001], [0003] and [0110] describe the method is designed for wireless communication systems that supporting SL D2D and M2M communication, which includes relay scenario. [0008] and [0024] discusses how the UE performs, monitors and detect beam failure in the SL/radio link for at least one beam corresponding to each service on the basis of a block error ratio (BLER) threshold value and beam failure instance (BFI) times included in the BFR parameter, see also [0134]-[0135] and [0144] and Table 3. Moreover, the method provides that the use of multiple distributed antenna units, in vehicles, inherently generates or creates multipath environment, as described in Fig. 15, [0042], [0128-[0134], where the method may perform a beam recovery procedure for discovering new beam for a service corresponding to at least one beam in which the beam failure is detected, as stated in [0216], see also [0171] which describes beam failure (or RLF)), the method comprising: establishing, a connection with a remote UE ([0020], [0188] and [0204] state “UE performs sidelink communication through PC5 interface with another UE, the UE may report control information related to at least one beam management related to the PC5 interface to the BS.” That implies PC5 (sidelink) connection is used for exchange control information, beam management and resources allocation between the UEs, where [0189] provides that the relay UE and the remote UE form connection (or RRC connection) with the BS (or same BS)., see also Fig. 9, [0115], [0178] and claim 13); transmitting a signal transmitted by the remote UE to a base station (BS) ([0204] states “the beam management related control information on communication between the UE and another UE through the PC5 interface may be delivered from the UE to another UE through the BS (or by using the BS as a relay).” and [0190] states “the UE may additionally report, to the BS, its identifier, an identifier of another UE that performs communication (or relay/tethering communication) with itself, an identifier of a UE that has transmitted SL BEAM (RS) measured by itself, and/or an identifier of UE related to RS where SL beam failure (or SL RLF) has occurred.” That implies the UE can transmit the signals transmitted by the remote UE to the BS);
Lee dose not explicitly teaches detecting beam failure in a Uu link with the BS; and; transmitting, to the remote UE, a notification message including information related to detection of the beam failure in the Uu link,
However, Li teaches detecting beam failure in a Uu link with the BS; and; transmitting, to the remote UE, a notification message including information related to detection of the beam failure in the Uu link, ( Para. 1 Page 2 states “NR Uu is used on the Uu link of the relay user equipment, and NR sidelink is used on the PC5 interface between the remote user equipment and the relay user equipment. In the scenario of UE-to-Network Relay, relay UE is also called UE-to-Network relay UE.” That implies the Uu interface/link is the link between the relay UE and the BS, see Figs. 2-3. Para. 4 Page 2 also states ” Relay UE will monitor the wireless link of its own Uu interface. If Uu RLF is detected, the relay UE will send a message to the remote UE to notify the remote UE that the relay UE's Uu RLF has occurred. This message will trigger the RRC connection reestablishment process of the remote UE.” That provides if the Uu link , which is between the relay UE and the BS/ network node, can be monitored by the relay UE and in case of beam failure detection, the relay UE can inform the remote UE about that failure by a message to initiate RRC connection process).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lee to incorporate the teachings of Li (in analogous art) by adding detecting, by the relay UE, beam failure in a Uu link with the BS, then the service interruption time of the user equipment can be reduced (Li, Para. 2 Page 2 and Para. 11 Page 12)).
Lee and Li fail to teach wherein, based on first bearers for the connection being multiplexed and mapped to a second bearer for the Uu link, the notification message further includes an identifier (ID) of the second bearer and is transmitted through each of the first bearers.
However, Liu teaches wherein, based on first bearers for the connection being multiplexed and mapped to a second bearer for the Uu link, the notification message further includes an identifier (ID) of the second bearer and is transmitted through each of the first bearers ( Fig. 4 and Para. 3 Page 8 depict two remote UEs connecting to the network through one relay UE as stated “As shown in Figure 4, on the PC5 interface, there may be legacy PC5SRBs, PC5DRBs, RLC channels for Uu SRBs and RLC channels for Uu DRBs, etc. between each remote UE and relay UE. Each type of bearer can be an independent pipeline, which is convenient for relay UE to distinguish data.” Para. 4 Page 8 also describes the logical channels between the two UEs and the PC5 logical channels identify the SL pipelines. Paras. 5-6 Page 16 describe the including of multiplexing and mapping process for the connection through sending a configuration information/ message, see also Para. 7 Page 12. Step 302 Page 6 confirms that the terminal identifier UE ID and/or bearer identifier RB ID of the first remote terminal are carried in the data packet header of the first message. Paras. 9-11 Page 11 and Table 1 (refer to citation of “W” in the PTO-892 of the clarified Google translation of Table 1 in (WO-2022127644-A1)), show an example of the mapping. Para. 1 Page 16 provides “According to the UE ID and/or RB ID carried in the data packet header of the first message, the network side device can distinguish the bearers from different remote UEs, thereby realizing the identification of the services of the remote terminal remote UE.” See also Step 301 and Paras. 6-8 that also confirm mapping and multiplexing several identified remote bearers over shared relay Uu data path resources.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lee in view of Li to incorporate the teachings of Liu (in analogous art) by adding the notification message further includes an identifier (ID) of the second bearer and is transmitted through each of the first bearers to reduce the number of bearers and schedule transmission. The complexity of the remote UE guarantees the service experience and system efficiency of the remote UE (Liu, Para. 12 Page 24 ).
Regarding claim 4 (Currently Amended), Lee, Li and Liu teach the method of claim 1,
Lee does not explicitly teach where the notification message triggers
However, Li teaches wherein, when the notification message is a last bearer between the relay UE and the remote UE, the notification message triggers one of relay reselection or RRCReestablishment of the remote UE (Para. 4 Page 2 states “Relay UE will monitor the wireless link of its own Uu interface. If Uu RLF is detected, the relay UE will send a message to the remote UE to notify the remote UE that the relay UE's Uu RLF has occurred. This message will trigger the RRC connection reestablishment process of the remote UE” that implies the notification message triggers one of relay reselection or RRCReestablishment of the remote UE, see also Para. 5 Page 12).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lee in view of Liu to incorporate the teachings of Li (in analogous art) by adding detecting, by the relay UE, beam failure in a Uu link with the BS, then the service interruption time of the user equipment can be reduced (Li, Para. 2 Page 2 and Para. 11 Page 12).
Regarding to claim 7 (Currently Amended), Lee, Li and Liu teach the method of claim 1,
Lee does not explicitly disclose wherein the relay UE reports information includes IDs of the bearers mapped to the second bearer for the Uu link and an ID of the relay UE to the BS.
However, Liu teaches wherein the relay UE reports information includes IDs of the bearers mapped to the second bearer for the Uu link and an ID of the relay UE to the BS ( Paras. 8-17 Page 28 and Para. 3 Page 29 provide that the BS/network can receive information message that included IDs for relay/remote UE and the SL bearers IDs).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lee in view of Li to incorporate the teachings of Liu (in analogous art) by adding the notification message further includes an identifier (ID) of the second bearer and is transmitted through each of the first bearers to reduce the number of bearers and schedule transmission. The complexity of the remote UE guarantees the service experience and system efficiency of the remote UE (Liu, Para. 12 Page 24 ).
Regarding claim 12 (Currently Amended), Lee teaches a relay user equipment (UE) (The method illustrates how the UE can be used as a relay in SL communication, as [0132] states “the vehicle itself may serve as one UE or a relay UE that relays signals, which has a plurality of antenna panels. “[0189] states “RELAYING/TETHERING operation may be performed using MM-WAVE based sidelink (SL) as an access link (for example, communication link between relay UE and remote UE). In this case, the relay UE may be a vehicle (for example, vehicle having no limitation to battery supply), and the remote UE may be a mobile/smart phone (for example, phone having a limited amount of battery) and further states “it may be assumed that the relay UE and the remote UE form connection (or RRC connection) with the BS (or same BS)) comprising: at least one processor; and at least one computer memory operably connected to the at least one processor and configured to store instructions that, when executed, cause the at least one processor to perform operations (Fig. 21, [0024], [0215]-[0218], [0221 and [0232] describe the UE may include one or more processors 102 and one or more memories, where the program stored in the memory and when executed, cause the at least one processor to perform the functions of the method) including: establishing a P([0020], [0188] and [0204] state “UE performs sidelink communication through PC5 interface with another UE, the UE may report control information related to at least one beam management related to the PC5 interface to the BS.” That implies PC5 (sidelink) connection is used for exchange control information, beam management and resources allocation between the UEs, where [0189] provides that the relay UE and the remote UE form connection (or RRC connection) with the BS (or same BS)., see also Fig. 9, [0115], [0178] and claim 13); transmitting a signal transmitted by the remote UE to a base station (BS) ([0204] states “the beam management related control information on communication between the UE and another UE through the PC5 interface may be delivered from the UE to another UE through the BS (or by using the BS as a relay).” and [0190] states “the UE may additionally report, to the BS, its identifier, an identifier of another UE that performs communication (or relay/tethering communication) with itself, an identifier of a UE that has transmitted SL BEAM (RS) measured by itself, and/or an identifier of UE related to RS where SL beam failure (or SL RLF) has occurred.” That implies the UE can transmit the signals transmitted by the remote UE to the BS);
Lee dose not explicitly teach detecting beam failure in a Uu link with the BS; and transmitting, to the remote UE, a notification message including information related to detection of the beam failure in the Uu link.
However, Li teaches and detecting beam failure in a Uu link to the BS and transmitting, to the remote UE, a notification message including information related to detection of the beam failure in the Uu link ( Para. 1 Page 2 states “NR Uu is used on the Uu link of the relay user equipment, and NR sidelink is used on the PC5 interface between the remote user equipment and the relay user equipment. In the scenario of UE-to-Network Relay, relay UE is also called UE-to-Network relay UE.” That implies the Uu interface/link, which is standard air interface, is the link between the relay UE and the BS, see Figs. 2-3. Para. 4 Page 2 also states ” Relay UE will monitor the wireless link of its own Uu interface. If Uu RLF is detected, the relay UE will send a message to the remote UE to notify the remote UE that the relay UE's Uu RLF has occurred. This message will trigger the RRC connection reestablishment process of the remote UE.” That provides if the Uu link , which is between the relay UE and the BS/ network node, can be monitored by the relay UE and in case of beam failure detection, the relay UE can inform the remote UE about that by a message to initiate RRC connection reestablishment process).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lee to incorporate the teachings of Li (in analogous art) by adding detecting, by the relay UE, beam failure in a Uu link with the BS, then the service interruption time of the user equipment can be reduced (Li, Para. 2 Page 2 and Para. 11 Page 12)).
Lee and Li fail to teach wherein, based on first bearers for the connection being multiplexed and mapped to a second bearer for the Uu link, the notification message further includes an identifier (ID) of the second bearer and is transmitted through each of the first bearers.
However, Liu teaches wherein, based on first bearers for the connection being multiplexed and mapped to a second bearer for the Uu link, the notification message further includes an identifier (ID) of the second bearer and is transmitted through each of the first bearers ( Fig. 4 and Para. 3 Page 8 depict two remote UEs connecting to the network through one relay UE as stated “As shown in Figure 4, on the PC5 interface, there may be legacy PC5SRBs, PC5DRBs, RLC channels for Uu SRBs and RLC channels for Uu DRBs, etc. between each remote UE and relay UE. Each type of bearer can be an independent pipeline, which is convenient for relay UE to distinguish data.” Para. 4 Page 8 also describes the logical channels between the two UEs and the PC5 logical channels identify the SL pipelines. Paras. 5-6 Page 16 describe the including of multiplexing and mapping process for the connection through sending a configuration information/ message, see also Para. 7 Page 12. Step 302 Page 6 confirms that the terminal identifier UE ID and/or bearer identifier RB ID of the first remote terminal are carried in the data packet header of the first message. Paras. 9-11 Page 11 and Table 1 (refer to citation of “W” in the PTO-892 of the clarified Google translation of Table 1 in (WO-2022127644-A1)), show an example of the mapping. Para. 1 Page 16 provides “According to the UE ID and/or RB ID carried in the data packet header of the first message, the network side device can distinguish the bearers from different remote UEs, thereby realizing the identification of the services of the remote terminal remote UE.” See also Step 301 and Paras. 6-8 that also confirm mapping and multiplexing several identified remote bearers over shared relay Uu data path resources.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lee in view of Li to incorporate the teachings of Liu (in analogous art) by adding the notification message further includes an identifier (ID) of the second bearer and is transmitted through each of the first bearers to reduce the number of bearers and schedule transmission. The complexity of the remote UE guarantees the service experience and system efficiency of the remote UE (Liu, Para. 12 Page 24 ).
Regarding claim 13 (Currently Amended), Lee teaches a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing at least one computer program including an instruction that, when executed by at least one processor, causes the at least one processor to perform operations (Fig. 21, [0024], [0215]-[0218], [0221] and [0232] describe the UE may include computer-readable storage media, and/or combinations with one or more processors 102 and one or more memories, where the program stored in the memory and when executed, cause the at least one processor to perform the functions of the method) including: establishing a connection with a remote UE ([0020], [0188] and [0204] state “UE performs sidelink communication through PC5 interface with another UE, the UE may report control information related to at least one beam management related to the PC5 interface to the BS.” That implies PC5 (sidelink) connection is used for exchange control information, beam management and resources allocation between the UEs, where [0189] provides that the relay UE and the remote UE form connection (or RRC connection) with the BS (or same BS)., see also Fig. 9, [0115], [0178] and claim 13); transmitting a signal transmitted by the remote UE to a base station (BS) ([0204] states “the beam management related control information on communication between the UE and another UE through the PC5 interface may be delivered from the UE to another UE through the BS (or by using the BS as a relay).” and [0190] states “the UE may additionally report, to the BS, its identifier, an identifier of another UE that performs communication (or relay/tethering communication) with itself, an identifier of a UE that has transmitted SL BEAM (RS) measured by itself, and/or an identifier of UE related to RS where SL beam failure (or SL RLF) has occurred.” That implies the UE can transmit the signals transmitted by the remote UE to the BS);
Lee dose not explicitly teach and detecting beam failure in a Uu link with the BS, and, transmitting, to the remote UE, a notification message including information related to detection of the beam failure in the Uu link.
However, Li teaches and detecting beam failure in a Uu link to the BS, and, transmitting, to the remote UE, a notification message including information related to detection of the beam failure in the Uu link ( Para. 1 Page 2 states “NR Uu is used on the Uu link of the relay user equipment, and NR sidelink is used on the PC5 interface between the remote user equipment and the relay user equipment. In the scenario of UE-to-Network Relay, relay UE is also called UE-to-Network relay UE.” That implies the Uu interface/link, which is standard air interface, is the link between the relay UE and the BS, see Figs. 2-3. Para. 4 Page 2 also states ” Relay UE will monitor the wireless link of its own Uu interface. If Uu RLF is detected, the relay UE will send a message to the remote UE to notify the remote UE that the relay UE's Uu RLF has occurred. This message will trigger the RRC connection reestablishment process of the remote UE.” That provides if the Uu link , which is between the relay UE and the BS/ network node, can be monitored by the relay UE and in case of beam failure detection, the relay UE can inform the remote UE about that by a message to initiate RRC connection reestablishment process).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lee to incorporate the teachings of Li (in analogous art) by adding detecting, by the relay UE, beam failure in a Uu link with the BS, then the service interruption time of the user equipment can be reduced (Li, Para. 2 Page 2 and Para. 11 Page 12)).
Lee and Li fail to teach wherein, based on first bearers for the connection being multiplexed and mapped to a second bearer for the Uu link, the notification message further includes an identifier (ID) of the second bearer and is transmitted through each of the first bearers.
However, Liu teaches wherein, based on first bearers for the connection being multiplexed and mapped to a second bearer for the Uu link, the notification message further includes an identifier (ID) of the second bearer and is transmitted through each of the first bearers ( Fig. 4 and Para. 3 Page 8 depict two remote UEs connecting to the network through one relay UE as stated “As shown in Figure 4, on the PC5 interface, there may be legacy PC5SRBs, PC5DRBs, RLC channels for Uu SRBs and RLC channels for Uu DRBs, etc. between each remote UE and relay UE. Each type of bearer can be an independent pipeline, which is convenient for relay UE to distinguish data.” Para. 4 Page 8 also describes the logical channels between the two UEs and the PC5 logical channels identify the SL pipelines. Paras. 5-6 Page 16 describe the including of multiplexing and mapping process for the connection through sending a configuration information/ message, see also Para. 7 Page 12. Step 302 Page 6 confirms that the terminal identifier UE ID and/or bearer identifier RB ID of the first remote terminal are carried in the data packet header of the first message. Paras. 9-11 Page 11 and Table 1 (refer to citation of “W” in the PTO-892 of the clarified Google translation of Table 1 in (WO-2022127644-A1)), show an example of the mapping. Para. 1 Page 16 provides “According to the UE ID and/or RB ID carried in the data packet header of the first message, the network side device can distinguish the bearers from different remote UEs, thereby realizing the identification of the services of the remote terminal remote UE.” See also Step 301 and Paras. 6-8 that also confirm mapping and multiplexing several identified remote bearers over shared relay Uu data path resources.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lee in view of Li to incorporate the teachings of Liu (in analogous art) by adding the notification message further includes an identifier (ID) of the second bearer and is transmitted through each of the first bearers to reduce the number of bearers and schedule transmission. The complexity of the remote UE guarantees the service experience and system efficiency of the remote UE (Liu, Para. 12 Page 24 ).
6. Claims 3, 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (US-20210336688-A1) in view of Li et al. (WO-2023201521-A1), please, refer to citation of “U” in the PTO-892 of the clarified Google translation of (WO-2023201521-A1), in view of Liu (WO-2022127644-A1), please, refer to citation of “V” in the PTO-892 of the clarified Google translation of (WO-2022127644-A1), and further in view of Kuo et al. (US-20220159753-A1).
Regarding claim 3 (Currently Amended) Lee, Li and Liu teach the method of claim 1,
Lee and Li do not explicitly teach wherein the notification message triggers RLC deactivation related to the first bearers.
However, Kuo teaches wherein the notification message triggers RLC deactivation related to the first bearers ([0331]-[0332] provide “ [0331] 1> if sl-RadioBearerToReleaseList or sl-RLC-BearerToReleaseList is included in sl-ConfigDedicatedNR within RRCReconfiguration: [0332] 2> perform sidelink DRB release as specified in 5.8.9.1a.1”. That implies the UE must release /deactivate the associated RLC entity and the related logical channels. [0176] and [0363] also confirms the process of release triggering is the SL RLC bearer configuration index in the release list).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lee in view of Li in view of Liu to incorporate the teachings of Kuo (in analogous art) by adding wherein the report is performed through sidelink UE information (SUI) to ensure the network is correctly informed of SL failure to enable the recovery process action. (Kuo, Para. 11 Page 12).
Regarding claim 8 (Original), Lee and Li teach the method of claim 7,
Lee and Li do not explicitly teach wherein the report is performed through sidelink UE information (SUI).
However, Kuo teaches wherein the report is performed through sidelink UE information (SUI) ([0117] describes that he UE may set to include radio link failure (beam failure) in the contents of the SidelinkUEInformationNR message, [0124] states “5> set sl-Failure as rlf for the associated destination for the NR sidelink communication transmission, if the sidelink RLF is detected as specified in sub-clause; 5> set sl-Failure as configFailure for the associated destination for the NR sidelink communication transmission, if RRCReconfigurationFailureSidelink is received”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lee in view of Li in view of Liu to incorporate the teachings of Kuo (in analogous art) by adding wherein the report is performed through sidelink UE information (SUI) to ensure the network is correctly informed of SL failure to enable the recovery process action. (Kuo, Para. 11 Page 12).
Relevant Prior Art
7. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's
disclosure.
Pan et al. (US-20240015619-A1), Hong et al. (US-20200029384-A1), Wang et al. (US-20220295375-A1), and Kang et al. (WO-2022158822-A1) teach methods to perform radio link monitoring that support the SL in wireless communication systems.
Conclusion
8. 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 SANAA S AL SAMAHI whose telephone number is (571)272-4171. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5 EST.
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, Asad Nawaz can be reached at (571) 272-3988. 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.
/SANAA AL SAMAHI/Examiner, Art Unit 2463
/ASAD M NAWAZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2463
Prosecution Insights