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 § 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 12 and 18 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.
Claim 12 recites the limitation "the resources" on page 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 18 recites the limitation “the second threshold criterion” on page 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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.
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.
Claims 1-5, 7-14, and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over 3GPP, BSR and delay status reporting for XR (R2-2304711; hereinafter 3GPP) in view of Kuo et al. (US 2024/0284253 A1; hereinafter Kuo).
Regarding claims 1, 10 and 20, 3GPP teaches a method, comprising:
initiating, by the UE, a discard timer responsive to the PDU being received in the buffer (§2.2, Proposal 7, Remaining time of a PDU is the residual time of its associated PDCP discard timer.); and
transmitting, by the UE to the base station, a delay status report corresponding to the PDU, responsive to a remaining time for the discard timer satisfying a threshold criterion (§2.2, Proposal 7, UE triggers a DSR when its associated L2 buffer has data whose remaining time drops below a configured triggering threshold.; § 2.2, Proposal 8, The remaining time of a PDU is defined as the residual value of its associated PDCP discard timer.; §2.2, Proposal 10, A DSR is transmitted over PUSCH.; §2.2, Proposal 11, The remaining time reported in a DSR of the corresponding data.).
3GPP does not explicitly teach receiving, at a buffer of a user equipment (UE), a protocol data unit (PDU) for transmission to a base station.
In analogous art, Kuo teaches receiving, at a buffer of a user equipment (UE), a protocol data unit (PDU) (read as packet) for transmission to a base station (read as uplink packets) (¶ [0028] The BS may receive uplink packets from the UE through the DRBs.; ¶ [0032] A packet, which may also be referred to as a PDU.; ¶ [0082] The discard timer may start when the PDU enters the buffer.; ¶ [0110] The UE discards PDU sets determined to reside in the buffer.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the reception of a PDU at a buffer as taught by Kuo with buffer status report (BSR) and delay status reporting as taught by 3GPP. One would have been motivated to do so in order to reduce latency, improve resource efficiency, and improve uplink scheduling reliability for delay sensitive traffic, which would improve the user experience, by allowing the base station to account for both buffered uplink data and the remaining time before such data becomes stale or subject to discard (Kuo: ¶¶ [0003-0005]).
Regarding claims 2 and 11, 3GPP teaches receiving, by the UE, from the base station, an indication of resources allocated for transmitting the PDU (§2.1, Network can schedule UL grants whose sizes better match UE’s buffered data.; §2.2, Proposal 7, gNB should decide when to schedule a PDU based on when the PDU may be discarded.); and
transmitting, by the UE, the PDU to the base station responsive to receiving the indication and prior to expiration of the discard timer (§2.1, Network can schedule UL grants whose sizes better match UE’s buffered data.; §2.2, Proposal 7, gNB should decide when to schedule a PDU based on when the PDU may be discarded.; § 2.2, Proposal 8, The remaining time of a PDU is defined as the residual value of its associated PDCP discard timer.).
Regarding claims 3 and 12, 3GPP teaches wherein the resources are allocated by the base station based at least in part on the delay status report (§2.2, Proposal 7, gNB should decide when to schedule a PDU based on when the PDU may be discarded.; §2.2, Proposal 10, The reported remaining time should be defined as the duration between the time/slot when a DSR is transmitted and the delay deadline.).
Regarding claims 4 and 13, 3GPP teaches wherein the value for the discard timer is set based on a type of traffic carried in the PDU (§2.2, An XR application may generate different types of flows. Some flows have tight delay requirements, while others do not.; §2.2, Proposal 7, A more direct way to define the remaining time of a PDU is the residual time of its associated PDCP discard timer. Network can set PDCP discard timer based on, say, PSDB or something else.).
Regarding claims 5 and 14, 3GPP teaches discarding, by the UE, the PDU responsive to expiration of the discard timer (§2.2, Proposal 7, gNB should decide when to schedule a PDU based on when the PDU may be discarded.; §2.2, Proposal 8, The remaining time of a PDU is defined as the residual value of its associated PDCP discard timer.; §2.2, Proposal 10, Delay deadline (which is the full duration of the corresponding PDCP discard timer.).
Regarding claims 7 and 16, 3GPP teaches transmitting, by the UE, a plurality of delay status reports for a plurality of PDUs in the buffer, responsive to remaining times of respective discard timers for the PDUs satisfying the threshold criterion (§2.2, Proposal 9, UE then reports the amount of data whose remaining time is below a reporting threshold.; §2.2, Proposal 10, A DSR is transmitted over PUSCH.; §2.2, Proposal 6, Data buffered in the layer-2 buffers corresponding to the LCG.; §2.2, Proposal 7, Remaining time of a PDU is the residual time of its associated PDCP discard timer.; §2.2, Proposal 9, For each reporting threshold, UE reports the amount of data whose remaining time is below that threshold.; §3, Proposal 9, Network can also configure an LCG to periodically report its delay status.).
Regarding claims 8 and 17, 3GPP teaches wherein the threshold criterion is a first threshold criterion, the method further comprising determining, by the UE, that a value corresponding to the discard timer satisfies a second threshold criterion for transmitting delay status reports (§2.2, Proposal 6, Network can configure a time threshold for an LCG to trigger DSR, i.e. UE triggers a DSR if the maximum remaining time among data buffered drops below the configured time threshold.; §2.2, Proposal 8, The remaining time of a PDU is defined as the residual value of its associated PDCP discard timer.; §2.2, Proposal 10, Network can configure one or more reporting threshold for an LCG. For each reporting threshold, UE reports the amount of data whose remaining time is below that threshold.),
wherein the UE transmits the delay status report corresponding to the PDU to the base station responsive to the value of the discard timer satisfying the second threshold criterion and the remaining time satisfying the first threshold criterion (§2.2, Proposal 7, UE triggers a DSR when an LCG configured for reporting has data whose remaining time drops below a configured triggering threshold. Ultimately gNB should decide when to schedule a PDU based on when the PDU may be discarded.; §2.2, Proposal 10, For each reporting threshold UE reports the amount of data whose remaining time is below that threshold. The remaining time used in determining the amount of data for each reporting threshold can be different from the remaining time which triggered the DSR. There is additional delay between the time when a DSR is triggered and the time when a DSR is transmitted over PUSCH. ; §2.2, Proposal 11, The remaining time reported in a DSR is the duration between the time when the DSR is transmitted and the delay deadline of the corresponding data.).
Regarding claims 9 and 18, 3GPP teaches receiving, by the UE, a second PDU in the buffer for transmission to the base station (§2.2, Proposal 6, Data buffered in the layer-2 buffers corresponding to the LCG.; §2.2, Proposal 7, gNB should decide when to schedule a PDU based on when the PDU may be discarded.);
initiating, by the UE, a second discard timer responsive to the second PDU being received in the buffer (§2.2, Proposal 8, The remaining time of a PDU is defined as the residual value of its associated PDCP discard timer.);
determining, by the UE, that a second value corresponding to the second discard timer fails to satisfy the second threshold criterion (§2.2, Proposal 8, The remaining time of a PDU is defined as the residual value of its associated PDCP discard timer.; §2.2, Proposal 10, For each reporting threshold, UE reports the amount of data whose remaining time is below that threshold. The remaining time used in determining the amount of data for each reporting threshold can be different.); and
forego transmission of, by the UE, any delay status report corresponding to the second PDU (§2.2, There probably is no need for them to report their delay status, even when such a report is triggered by another flow. Not every LCG needs to report their delay status in a DSR.; §2.2, Proposal 10, UE reports the amount of data whose remaining time is below that threshold.).
Regarding claim 19, 3GPP teaches wherein the one or more processors comprise one or more processors of a packet data convergence protocol (PDCP) layer of the UE (§2.2, Proposal 7, A more direct way to define the remaining time of a PDU is the residual time of its associated PDCP discard timer. Network can set PDCP discard timer.; §2.2, Proposal 8, The remaining time of a PDU is defined as the residual value of its associated PDCP discard timer.).
Claims 6 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over 3GPP in view of Kuo further in view of 3GPP, Discussion on XR awareness (R2-2302938; hereinafter R2-2302938).
Regarding claims 6 and 15, 3GPP and Kuo do not explicitly teach determining, by the UE, a count of PDUs in the buffer for transmission to the base station; and transmitting, by the UE, a buffer status report to the base station responsive to the count satisfying a threshold criterion.
In analogous art, R2-2302938 teaches determining, by the UE, a count of PDUs in the buffer for transmission to the base station (§2.3.3, Buffers of all other LCGs of the UE are empty. The presence of the Empty Buffer MAC CE indicates, to the gNB, that buffers of all LCGs of the UE are empty.); and
transmitting, by the UE, a buffer status report to the base station responsive to the count satisfying a threshold criterion (§2.3.3, An Empty Buffer MAC CE can be sent to the gNB. The presence of the Empty Buffer MAC CE indicates, to the gNB, that buffers of all LCGs of the UE are empty.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine determining the count of PDUs in the buffer as taught by R2-2302938 with the reception of a PDU at a buffer as taught by Kuo and buffer status report (BSR) and delay status reporting as taught by 3GPP. One would have been motivated to do so in order to improve resource allocation, reduce unnecessary delay and packet discard, and enhance operation of time sensitive wireless devices by enabling the UE to inform the base station when buffered uplink data satisfies a reporting threshold and by allowing the base station to allocate uplink resources based on the amount and urgency of data awaiting transmission (Kuo: ¶¶ [0003-0005]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Chun et al. (US 2025/0184279 A1) discloses “Data Unit Discard Report”
Ye (US 2019/0387540 A1) discloses “Reporting Buffer Status in Wireless Communication Systems”
Yu et al. (US 2024/0049047 A1) discloses “Device and Method for Managing Congestion and Burst State in Wireless Communication System”
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID M KAYAL whose telephone number is (703)756-4576. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:30 ET.
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.
/D.M.K./Examiner, Art Unit 2464
/RICKY Q NGO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2464
Prosecution Insights