DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
2. Claims 1-5 are pending wherein claims 1-5 are in independent form.
3. Claims 1-5 have been amended.
Response to Arguments
4. Applicant's arguments filed on 08/18/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The reasons are set forth below.
5. On page 6 of the remarks, applicant argues, “Applicant respectfully submits Ma fails to disclose or suggest that the first and fifth indication messages include information relating to radio link failure, and that the information relating to radio link failure included in the first indication message and the information relating to radio link failure included in the fifth indication message are different.”
In response, examiner respectfully disagrees because:
Ma discloses that the remote terminal sends a first indication message/third indication message/preset random access preamble message (Par 0136-0140) when a D2D link between the remote terminal and a relay UE fails. Ma further discloses that the remote terminal sends a fifth indication message/second RRC connection reestablishment request message when a direct cellular link between the remote terminal and the base station fails. The first indication message/third indication message/preset random access preamble message provides the D2D link failure information and the fifth indication message/second RRC connection reestablishment request message provides the direct cellular link failure information. Therefore, the first indication message/third indication message/preset random access preamble message and the fifth indication message/second RRC connection reestablishment request message provide different link failure information.
Duplicate claims warning
6. Applicant is advised that should claim 2 be found allowable, claim 5 will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate thereof. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 706.03(k).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
7. 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.
8. Claims 1-5 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 1 recites that a remote UE transmits a PC5 link failure message (first abnormality message) via a direct link between the remote UE and the base station. The remote UE again transmits a direct link failure message (second abnormality message) via the indirect link including the failed PC5 link. Claim does not specify that the PC5 link is recovered before transmitting the second abnormality message via the indirect link. Therefore, it is not clear how the remote UE is able to transmit the second abnormality message via the indirect link when a part of the indirect link (PC5 Link) is not working.
Claim recites the failure of both the direct link and the indirect link, and therefore, it is not clear how the remote UE can be able to transmit the first and the second abnormality message.
Claims 2-5 recite limitations similar to claim 1 above and thereby, are rejected for the reasons discussed above with respect to claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
9. 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
10. Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ma et al (US 20190141771 A1, hereinafter referred to as Ma).
Re claim 1, Ma teaches a communication control method in a mobile communication system configured to be capable of performing a first communication on a direct link between a remote user equipment and a base station (remote UE and base station communicating over the cellular link, Fig. 3-5), and a second communication on an indirect link between the remote user equipment and the base station via a relay user equipment (remote UE communicating with the base station via the relay UE, Fig. 3-5), the communication control method comprising:
(i) transmitting, by the remote user equipment, a first abnormality notification message, via the direct link (remote UE notifying link failure information to the base station), in response to detecting a radio link failure in a PC5 link between the remote user equipment and the relay user equipment (D2D link failure between the remote UE and the relay UE) (Fig. 3-5, Par 0132-0133, Par 0136-0139, Par 0166-0167); and
(ii) transmitting, by the remote user equipment, a second abnormality notification message (fifth indication message/second RRC connection reestablishment request message), via the indirect link (relay link), in response to detecting a radio link failure in the direct link between the remote user equipment and the base station (failure of the direct cellular link between the remote UE and the base station) (Fig. 5-6, Par 0160-0162, Par 0166-0169, Par 0177-0179, Par 0182),
(iii) wherein information relating to the radio link failure included in the first abnormality message (notifying D2D link failure information between the remote UE and the relay UE) and information relating to the radio link failure included in the second abnormality message (notifying the failure of the direct cellular link between the remote UE and the base station) are different information (D2D link failure information and direct cellular link failure information are different) (Fig. 3-6, Par 0132-0133, Par 0136-0139, Par 0160-0162, Par 0166-0169, Par 0177-0179, Par 0182).
Claim 4 recites a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a program to be executed by a computer to perform the steps recited in claim 1 and thereby, is rejected for the reasons discussed above with respect to claim 1. Ma further teaches that the remote UE comprises a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium (memory, 802) storing a program (Fig. 8, Par 0211-0214).
Claim 5 recites a chipset for a remote user equipment performing the steps recited in claim 1 and thereby, is rejected for the reasons discussed above with respect to claim 1.
Re claim 2, Ma teaches a remote user equipment in a mobile communication system, the mobile communication system configured to be capable of performing a first communication on a direct link between a remote user equipment and a base station (remote UE and base station communicating over the cellular link, Fig. 3-5), and a second communication on an indirect link between the remote user equipment and the base station via a relay user equipment (remote UE communicating with the base station via the relay UE, Fig. 3-5), the remote user equipment comprising a transceiver circuitry (communication module, 803, Fig. 8, Par 0211-0213) and a processing circuitry (Processor 801, Fig. 8, Par 0211-0213) operatively associated with the transceiver circuitry and configured to execute processing of:
(i) transmitting a first abnormality notification message, via the direct link (remote UE notifying link failure information to the base station), in response to detecting a radio link failure in a PC5 link between the remote user equipment and the relay user equipment (D2D link failure between the remote UE and the relay UE) (Fig. 3-5, Par 0132-0133, Par 0136-0139, Par 0166-0167); and
(ii) transmitting a second abnormality notification message (fifth indication message/second RRC connection reestablishment request message), via the indirect link (relay link), in response to detecting a radio link failure in the direct link between the remote user equipment and the base station (failure of the direct cellular link between the remote UE and the base station) (Fig. 5-6, Par 0160-0162, Par 0166-0169, Par 0177-0179, Par 0182),
(iii) wherein information relating to the radio link failure included in the first abnormality message (notifying D2D link failure information between the remote UE and the relay UE) and information relating to the radio link failure included in the second abnormality message (notifying the failure of the direct cellular link between the remote UE and the base station) are different information (D2D link failure information and direct cellular link failure information are different) (Fig. 3-6, Par 0132-0133, Par 0136-0139, Par 0160-0162, Par 0166-0169, Par 0177-0179, Par 0182).
Re claim 3, Ma teaches a mobile communication system (Fig. 3-5) comprising:
(i) a remote user equipment (remote UE, Fig. 3-5);
(ii) a base station (base station, Fig. 3-5); and
(iii) a relay user equipment (Relay UE, Fig. 3-5), wherein
(iv) the mobile communication system is configured to be capable of performing a first communication on a direct link between the remote user equipment and the base station (remote UE and base station communicating over the cellular link, Fig. 3-5), and a second communication on an indirect link between the remote user equipment and the base station via the relay user equipment (remote UE communicating with the base station via the relay UE, Fig. 3-5) (Par 0132-0133, Par 0136-0139, Par 0166-0167), and
(v) the remote user equipment is configured to transmit a first abnormality notification message, via the direct link (remote UE notifying link failure information to the base station), in response to detecting a radio link failure in a PC5 link between the remote user equipment and the relay user equipment (D2D link failure between the remote UE and the relay UE) (Fig. 3-5, Par 0132-0133, Par 0136-0139, Par 0166-0167), and
(vi) transmit a second abnormality notification message (fifth indication message/second RRC connection reestablishment request message), via the indirect link (relay link), in response to detecting a radio link failure in the direct link between the remote user equipment and the base station (failure of the direct cellular link between the remote UE and the base station) (Fig. 5-6, Par 0160-0162, Par 0166-0169, Par 0177-0179, Par 0182), and
(vii) information relating to the radio link failure included in the first abnormality message (notifying D2D link failure information between the remote UE and the relay UE) and information relating to the radio link failure included in the second abnormality message (notifying the failure of the direct cellular link between the remote UE and the base station) are different information (D2D link failure information and direct cellular link failure information are different) (Fig. 3-6, Par 0132-0133, Par 0136-0139, Par 0160-0162, Par 0166-0169, Par 0177-0179, Par 0182).
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 HARUN UR R CHOWDHURY whose telephone number is (571)270-3895. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9AM-5PM.
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, Kwang B Yao can be reached at 5712723182. 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.
/HARUN CHOWDHURY/Examiner, Art Unit 2473
Prosecution Insights