CTNF 18/797,351 CTNF 88479 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. This action is in response to the application filed on 8/7/2024. The IDS filed on 11/3/2024, and 1/13/2026 has been considered. Claims 1-20 are examined and rejected. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-02 AIA 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. Claim 6 is 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. This claim recites in part: “… the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to: identify a network congestion level based at least in part on an indication, or identify that PDU set importance (PSI) discarding is enabled, or both, wherein at least one condition of the one or more conditions comprises the identified network congestion level, or the identified discarding for the RLC entity of the UE being enabled, wherein the subsequent autonomous retransmission for the RLC entity is prohibited based at least in part on the identified network congestion level, or the identified discarding for the RLC entity of the UE being enabled . ” Claim 6 recites multiple nested options, separated by multiple conditional flows, making this claim very confusing, unclear and hence indefinite. Allowable Subject Matter 12-151-08 AIA 07-43 12-51-08 Claim s 6, 9 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. 07-43-02 AIA Claim 6 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 1-5, 7-8, 10-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hoang (WO2025212372 A1, hereinafter “Hoang”) . Regarding Claim 1, Hoang teaches a user equipment (UE) (see para 44, FIG. 1B. WTRU) for wireless communication, comprising: at least one memory; and at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory and configured to cause the UE to: receive a first configuration associated with a radio link control (RLC) entity of the UE (see para 155, the WTRU is configured with the first set of RLC parameters, used as a set of RLC parameters (e.g., the default RLC parameters) for an RLC operation (e.g., a normal RLC operation, a default RLC operation, or a regular RLC operation), wherein autonomous retransmission for the RLC entity of the UE is enabled or disabled according to the first configuration and based at least in part on one or more conditions (see 156, the WTRU disables the autonomous RLC retransmission for an RLC procedure (e.g., a default, normal, and/or standard RLC procedure)), receive a second configuration associated with the RLC entity of the UE (see para 155, the WTRU is configured with the second set of RLC parameters may be used as a set of RLC parameters for RLC enhancement operation/i.e., RLC retransmission as indicated at para 108, uplink enhancement is to perform retransmission of the RLC PDU ) , wherein the second configuration indicates a timer associated with the autonomous retransmission for the RLC entity; autonomously retransmit a first subset of one or more RLC protocol data units (PDUs) based at least in part on the one or more conditions (see para 155, the WTRU may be configured with an RLC parameter and/or a timer (e.g., prohibit-timer) to restrict the WTRU from performing or prohibited to retransmit an RLC POU if the t PollRetransmit timer is running; also see para 214, the WTRU may perform WTRU autonomous RLC retransmission for PDUs in a PDU set if the number of PDUs in the PDU set is smaller than a configured threshold)) ; start the timer in accordance with the second configuration and in response to the autonomously retransmitted first subset of one or more RLC PDUs; and prohibit a subsequent autonomous retransmission for the RLC entity until expiry of the timer (see para 155, the WTRU is allowed (e.g., only be allowed) to switch to the second set of RLC parameters for a configured time duration, which the WTRU may receive as part of the RLC enhancement configuration that the WTRU receives from the network. In some examples, the WTRU is configured with an RLC parameter and/or a timer (e.g., prohibit-timer) to restrict the WTRU from performing or prohibited to retransmit an RLC POU if the t PollRetransmit timer is running). Hoang does not specify the underlined limitation “ autonomous retransmission for the RLC entity of the UE is enabled or disabled according to the first configuration”. However, Hoang teaches a switching from the first RLC configuration to the second RLC configuration for RLC PDU retransmission. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the system of Hoang, to specify that the first configuration has RLC retransmission disabled, since Hoang teaches a second configuration with for RLC autonomous retransmission enabled. Regarding Claim 2, Hoang teaches the UE of claim 1, wherein: the second configuration further indicates a threshold number of autonomous retransmissions, the one or more conditions comprise the threshold number of autonomous retransmissions, and the first subset of one or more RLC PDUs is autonomously retransmitted based at least in part on the threshold number of autonomous retransmissions (see para 214, the WTRU may perform WTRU autonomous RLC retransmission for PDUs in a PDU set if the number of PDUs in the PDU set is smaller than a configured threshold). Regarding Claim 3, Hoang teaches the UE of claim 1, wherein the first configuration comprises a parameter for enabling or disabling the autonomous retransmission for the RLC entity ( Examiners Note: Using BRI consistent with the specification, this limitation has been interpreted to mean: switching from the first configuration for enabling autonomous configuration. Based on this interpretation, see para 155, the WTRU is allowed (e.g., only be allowed) to switch/i.e., representing a parameter to switch to the second configuration, to the second set of RLC parameters for a time duration (e.g., for a specified or configured time duration), which the WTRU may receive as part of the RLC enhancement configuration that the WTRU receives from the network… the WTRU may adapt/override the following parameters for RLC enhancement: WTRU autonomous RLC retransmission enabled/disabled parameters; HARQ NACK- based RLC retransmission enabled/disabled parameters; override RLC window size parameters). Regarding Claim 4, Hoang teaches the UE of claim 3, wherein the first configuration comprising the parameter for enabling or disabling the autonomous retransmission for the RLC entity is received via a radio resource control (RRC) message (see para 160, the WTRU performs RLC enhancement by continuing to transmit one or more RLC PDUs if the transmission window is stalled/i.e., while retransmission was enabled in the RLC enhancement, The WTRU may determine whether to increase the window size to continue transmitting one or more RLC PDUs by indicating to the network the new RLC window size. The indication may be sent via a RRC message (e.g., WTRU Assistant Information)). Regarding Claim 5, Hoang teaches the UE of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to cause the UE to determine that the autonomous retransmission for the RLC entity of the UE is disabled based at least in part on an absence of a parameter in the received first configuration (see para 157, The WTRU adapts and/or overrides HARQ NACK-based RLC retransmission enabled/disabled parameters. For example, the WTRU may disable HARQ NACK-based WTRU autonomous RLC retransmission for an RLC procedure (e.g., a default, normal, and/or standard RLC procedure)/i.e., disable RLC retransmission based on the first set of parameter configuration when the RLC enhancement parameter is absent. The WTRU may enable HARQ NACK based RLC retransmission for RLC enhancement/i.e., enable RLC retransmission based on the second set of parameter configuration when the RLC enhancement parameter is present). Regarding Claim 7, Hoang teaches the UE of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to: identify that the autonomous retransmission for the RLC entity of the UE is applicable for RLC PDUs associated with a priority, wherein at least one condition of the one or more conditions comprises the priority, wherein the first subset of one or more RLC PDUs is autonomously retransmitted based at least in part on a corresponding priority associated with each RLC PDU of the first subset of one or more RLC PDUs satisfying the priority ( see para 120, the WTRU to retransmit (e.g., dynamically retransmit) a high-importance RLC PDU instead of waiting for NACK feedback from the base station; also see para 149, the WTRU to retransmit (e.g., dynamically retransmit) a high-importance RLC PDU instead of waiting for NACK feedback from the base station). Regarding Claim 8, Hoang teaches the UE of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to: identify that the autonomous retransmission for the RLC entity of the UE is applicable for RLC PDUs associated with a corresponding PDU set importance (PSI) value, wherein the corresponding PSI value is greater than a PSI threshold value, wherein the first subset of one or more RLC PDUs is autonomously retransmitted based at least in part on a respective PSI value of each RLC PDU of the first subset of one or more RLC PDUs satisfying the PSI threshold value ( see FIG. 2., As illustrated, the WTRU may perform an uplink enhancement procedure (e.g., RLC enhancement) for a data set (e.g., a PDU segment, PDU, a subset of a PDU set, a PDU set, data burst, an RLC PDU or a PDU segment) e.g., as a function of the QoS/i.e., threshold, of the data set, the configured parameters for the triggering condition; also see para 151, the WTRU may retransmit the RLC PDU or PDU segment if (e.g., only if) the RLC PDU or PDU segment belongs to a high-importance PDU set (e.g., a PDU set of PDU set importance (PSI) level 0, 1, or 2)). . Regarding Claim 9, Hoang teaches the UE of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to: receive an acknowledgement (ACK) for a second subset of one or more RLC PDUs; and discard the second subset of one or more RLC PDUs based at least in part on the received ACK, wherein the second subset of one or more RLC PDUs comprises of one or more RLC PDUs for which autonomous retransmission has been triggered prior to reception of the ACK. Regarding Claim 10, Hoang teaches the UE of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to prioritize the first subset of one or more RLC PDUs for the autonomous retransmission over a second subset of one or more RLC PDUs pending a non-autonomous retransmission and one or more initial RLC PDU transmissions (see para 109, the WTRU receives a triggering condition to perform uplink enhancement (e.g., RLC, MAC enhancement) for transmission of the data set. For example, the WTRU receives a configuration (e.g., configuration information) of a threshold value associated with an importance of the data set (e.g., the importance of at least one of an RLC PDU or a PDU segment) , the number of Hybrid Automatic Repeat Request (HARQ) NACKs for the RLC PDU or PDU segment to trigger the retransmission of the RLC PDU/i.e., implying that non-prioritized PDSs and other received PDUs will be pending). Regarding Claim 11, Hoang teaches the UE of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to prioritize allocation of uplink resources for one or more logical channels carrying one or more autonomously retransmitted RLC PDUs over allocation of uplink resources for one or more logical channels carrying non-autonomously retransmitted RLC PDUs (see paras 109-110, the configuration information includes one or more of the following: a timer, a threshold value associated with the importance of at least one of an RLC PDU or a PDU segment, a threshold value associated with a quality of service (QoS) parameter for the data set, a threshold value associated with a parameter for a resource block (RB), a threshold value associated with a parameter for a logical channel (LCH) , or a triggering condition associated with the performance of the uplink enhancement … The threshold value associated with the parameter for the LCH has: a priority parameter, a parameter associated with a prioritized bit rate (PBR), or a discard timer). Regarding Claim 12, Hoang teaches the UE of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to prioritize a hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) process associated with one or more autonomously retransmitted RLC PDUs over one or more other HARQ processes (see para 109, the WTRU receives a triggering condition to perform uplink enhancement (e.g., RLC, MAC enhancement) for transmission of the data set. For example, the WTRU receives a configuration (e.g., configuration information) of a threshold value associated with an i mportance of the data set (e.g., the importance of at least one of an RLC PDU or a PDU segment), the number of Hybrid Automatic Repeat Request (HARQ) NACKs for the RLC PDU or PDU segment to trigger the retransmission of the RLC PDU ). Regarding Claim 15, Hoang teaches a processor (see para 44, FIG. 1B. processor of WTRU) for wireless communication, comprising: at least one controller coupled with at least one memory and configured to cause the processor to: receive a first configuration associated with a radio link control (RLC) entity of the UE (see para 155, the WTRU is configured with the first set of RLC parameters, used as a set of RLC parameters (e.g., the default RLC parameters) for an RLC operation (e.g., a normal RLC operation, a default RLC operation, or a regular RLC operation), wherein autonomous retransmission for the RLC entity of the UE is enabled or disabled according to the first configuration and based at least in part on one or more conditions (see 156, the WTRU disables the autonomous RLC retransmission for an RLC procedure (e.g., a default, normal, and/or standard RLC procedure)), receive a second configuration associated with the RLC entity of the UE (see para 155, the WTRU is configured with the second set of RLC parameters may be used as a set of RLC parameters for RLC enhancement operation/i.e., RLC retransmission as indicated at para 108, uplink enhancement is to perform retransmission of the RLC PDU ) , wherein the second configuration indicates a timer associated with the autonomous retransmission for the RLC entity; autonomously retransmit a first subset of one or more RLC protocol data units (PDUs) based at least in part on the one or more conditions (see para 155, the WTRU may be configured with an RLC parameter and/or a timer (e.g., prohibit-timer) to restrict the WTRU from performing or prohibited to retransmit an RLC POU if the t PollRetransmit timer is running; also see para 214, the WTRU may perform WTRU autonomous RLC retransmission for PDUs in a PDU set if the number of PDUs in the PDU set is smaller than a configured threshold) ; start the timer in accordance with the second configuration and in response to the autonomously retransmitted first subset of one or more RLC PDUs; and prohibit a subsequent autonomous retransmission for the RLC entity until expiry of the timer (see para 155, the WTRU is allowed (e.g., only be allowed) to switch to the second set of RLC parameters for a configured time duration, which the WTRU may receive as part of the RLC enhancement configuration that the WTRU receives from the network. In some examples, the WTRU is configured with an RLC parameter and/or a timer (e.g., prohibit-timer) to restrict the WTRU from performing or prohibited to retransmit an RLC POU if the t PollRetransmit timer is running). Hoang does not specify the underlined limitation “ autonomous retransmission for the RLC entity of the UE is enabled or disabled according to the first configuration”. However, Hoang teaches a switching from the first RLC configuration to the second RLC configuration for RLC PDU retransmission. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the system of Hoang, to specify that the first configuration has RLC retransmission disabled, since Hoang teaches a second configuration with for RLC autonomous retransmission enabled. Regarding Claim 16, Hoang teaches a network equipment for wireless communication (see FIG. 1C., RAN with eNode-Bs, para 54), comprising: at least one memory; and at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory and configured to cause the network equipment to: transmit a first configuration associated with a radio link control (RLC) entity of a user equipment (UE) (see para 155, the WTRU is configured/i.e., by the network equipment, with the first set of RLC parameters, used as a set of RLC parameters (e.g., the default RLC parameters) for an RLC operation (e.g., a normal RLC operation, a default RLC operation, or a regular RLC operation), to enable or disable autonomous retransmission for the RLC entity of the UE according to the first configuration and based at least in part on one or more conditions (see 156, the WTRU disables the autonomous RLC retransmission for an RLC procedure (e.g., a default, normal, and/or standard RLC procedure) also see para 214, the WTRU may perform WTRU autonomous RLC retransmission for PDUs in a PDU set if the number of PDUs in the PDU set is smaller than a configured threshold), and transmit a second configuration associated with the RLC entity of the UE (see para 155, the WTRU is configured with the second set of RLC parameters may be used as a set of RLC parameters for RLC enhancement operation; also see para 108, uplink enhancement is to perform retransmission of the RLC PDU ) , wherein the second configuration indicates a timer associated with the autonomous retransmission for the RLC entity (see para 155, the WTRU may be configured with an RLC parameter and/or a timer (e.g., prohibit-timer) to restrict the WTRU from performing or prohibited to retransmit an RLC POU if the t PollRetransmit timer is running) . Hoang does not specify the underlined limitation “ autonomous retransmission for the RLC entity of the UE is enabled or disabled according to the first configuration”. However, Hoang teaches a switching from the first RLC configuration to the second RLC configuration for RLC PDU retransmission. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the system of Hoang, to specify that the first configuration has RLC retransmission disabled, since Hoang teaches a second configuration with for RLC autonomous retransmission enabled. Regarding Claim 17, Hoang teaches the network equipment of claim 16, wherein the first configuration comprises a parameter configured to enable or disable autonomous retransmission functionality of the RLC entity ( Examiners Note: Using BRI consistent with the specification, this limitation has been interpreted to mean: switching from the first configuration for enabling autonomous configuration. Based on this interpretation, see para 155, the WTRU is allowed (e.g., only be allowed) to switch/i.e., representing a parameter to switch to the second configuration, to the second set of RLC parameters for a time duration (e.g., for a specified or configured time duration), which the WTRU may receive as part of the RLC enhancement configuration that the WTRU receives from the network… the WTRU may adapt/override the following parameters for RLC enhancement: WTRU autonomous RLC retransmission enabled/disabled parameters; HARQ NACK- based RLC retransmission enabled/disabled parameters; override RLC window size parameters). Regarding Claim 19, Hoang teaches the network equipment of claim 16, wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the network equipment to transmit an indication of one or more conditions for performing autonomous retransmission, and wherein the one or more conditions indicate at least one of: autonomous retransmission is constrained to one or more RLC PDUs that are indicated as high-importance RLC PDUs ; or autonomous retransmission is constrained to one or more RLC PDUs that have a PDU set importance (PSI) value greater than a PSI threshold (see para 151, the WTRU may retransmit the RLC PDU or PDU segment if (e.g., only if) the RLC PDU or PDU segment belongs to a high-importance PDU set (e.g., a PDU set of PDU set importance (PSI) level 0, 1, or 2)). Regarding Claim 20, Hoang teaches a method performed by a user equipment (UE), the method comprising: receiving a first configuration associated with a radio link control (RLC) entity of the UE (see para 155, the WTRU is configured with the first set of RLC parameters, used as a set of RLC parameters (e.g., the default RLC parameters) for an RLC operation (e.g., a normal RLC operation, a default RLC operation, or a regular RLC operation), wherein autonomous retransmission for the RLC entity of the UE is enabled or disabled according to the first configuration and based at least in part on one or more conditions (see 156, the WTRU disables the autonomous RLC retransmission for an RLC procedure (e.g., a default, normal, and/or standard RLC procedure)), receiving a second configuration associated with the RLC entity of the UE (see para 155, the WTRU is configured with the second set of RLC parameters may be used as a set of RLC parameters for RLC enhancement operation/i.e., RLC retransmission as indicated at para 108, uplink enhancement is to perform retransmission of the RLC PDU ) , wherein the second configuration indicates a timer associated with the autonomous retransmission for the RLC entity; autonomously retransmit a first subset of one or more RLC protocol data units (PDUs) based at least in part on the one or more conditions (see para 155, the WTRU may be configured with an RLC parameter and/or a timer (e.g., prohibit-timer) to restrict the WTRU from performing or prohibited to retransmit an RLC POU if the t PollRetransmit timer is running; also see para 214, the WTRU may perform WTRU autonomous RLC retransmission for PDUs in a PDU set if the number of PDUs in the PDU set is smaller than a configured threshold)) ; starting the timer in accordance with the second configuration and in response to the autonomously retransmitted first subset of one or more RLC PDUs; and prohibiting subsequent autonomous retransmission for the RLC entity until expiry of the timer (see para 155, the WTRU is allowed (e.g., only be allowed) to switch to the second set of RLC parameters for a configured time duration, which the WTRU may receive as part of the RLC enhancement configuration that the WTRU receives from the network. In some examples, the WTRU is configured with an RLC parameter and/or a timer (e.g., prohibit-timer) to restrict the WTRU from performing or prohibited to retransmit an RLC POU if the t PollRetransmit timer is running). Hoang does not specify the underlined limitation “ autonomous retransmission for the RLC entity of the UE is enabled or disabled according to the first configuration”. However, Hoang teaches a switching from the first RLC configuration to the second RLC configuration for RLC PDU retransmission. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the system of Hoang, to specify that the first configuration has RLC retransmission disabled, since Hoang teaches a second configuration with for RLC autonomous retransmission enabled . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hoang in view of Singh (US 20230422235 A1, hereinafter “Singh”) . Regarding Claim 13, Hoang teaches the UE of claim 1 and teaches a prohibit timer, but does not teach details regarding: cause the UE to: communicate information identifying the first subset of one or more RLC PDUs that are autonomously retransmitted; receive an indication of a hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) acknowledgement (ACK) for a transport block (TB) associated with the first subset of one or more RLC PDUs; and prohibit, based at least in part on the HARQ ACK, triggering an additional autonomous retransmission of the one or more first RLC PDUs. Singh teaches these limitations: see para 30, the feedback policy includes an acknowledgement, ACK, feedback condition which is met if, during or after the repetition set time gap, ACK feedback is received for any previously transmitted repetitive transmissions of the transport block, and, in response to determining the ACK feedback condition is met, the wireless communications device skipping transmissions using the remaining repetitive transmissions for that transport block; also see FIG. 4b, paras 140-143. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the RLC PDU retransmission using a prohibit timer in Hoang, to include the condition that if a HARQ ACK is received for a set of PDUs after repeating a transmission, then skip further retransmission of the same PDUs, as taught by Singh, the motivation being to reduce signaling overhead (see Singh, paras 5-6) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hoang in view of Singh, in view of Lu (US 20250373358 A1, hereinafter “Lu”) . Regarding Claim 14, Hoang teaches the UE of claim 1, and teaches a prohibit timer, but does not teach details regarding: to cause the UE to: receive, via inter-layer communication, an indication of a hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) acknowledgement (ACK) for the one or more first RLC PDUs; and prohibit, based at least in part on the HARQ ACK, triggering an autonomous retransmission of the one or more first RLC PDUs. Singh teaches these limitations: see para 30, the feedback policy includes an acknowledgement, ACK, feedback condition which is met if, during or after the repetition set time gap, ACK feedback is received for any previously transmitted repetitive transmissions of the transport block, and, in response to determining the ACK feedback condition is met, the wireless communications device skipping transmissions using the remaining repetitive transmissions for that transport block; also see FIG. 4b, paras 140-143. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the RLC PDU retransmission using a prohibit timer in Hoang, to include the condition that if a HARQ ACK is received for a set of PDUs after repeating a transmission, then skip further retransmission of the same PDUs, as taught by Singh, the motivation being to reduce signaling overhead (see Singh, paras 5-6). Hoang in view of Singh do not teach the underlined limitation: receive, via inter-layer communication , an indication of a hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) In the same field of endeavor, Lu teaches this limitation: see paras 222-223, the MAC entity introduces a new inter-layer interaction process to transfer the calculation result (configured grant (CG) occasions based on the amount of to-be-transmitted data) to the physical layer, or the MAC entity may reuse an existing inter-layer interaction process, to transfer the calculation result and information such as a HARQ corresponding to any CG occasion and the MAC PDU to the physical layer. The physical layer encapsulates information received from the MAC layer into UCI and sends the UCI to the base station. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the combined teachings of Hoang and Singh, to include receiving the HARQ via inter-layer communication, as taught by Lu, the motivation being to have a flexible configured grant based on the amount of to-be-transmitted data, to conserve resources (see Lu, paras 4-5) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hoang in view of De (WO 2024206798 A1) . Regarding Claim 18, Hoang teaches the network equipment of claim 16, but doe not teach details regarding: the one or more conditions comprise one or more of an indication of network congestion or an indication that PDU set importance (PSI) discarding is enabled. De teaches this limitation: see para 133, in a UPF a base station may transmit downlink PDU sets until a congestion event occurs. If a transmission fails for a PDU of a PDU set, the base station may decide not to transmit another PDU in this PDU set and may send NACK(s)/ACK(s) accordingly to the UPF. The UPF may decide which PDUs (from which PDU sets) to retransmit to the base station, for example, by applying global load balancing and taking into consideration the importance of the PDU sets, the type of the PDU sets, the presence of a PSII indication in a PDU set, network congestion information, user profiles, application profiles, etc. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the RLC PDU retransmission in Hoang, to include the condition retransmit PDUs in case of network congestion as taught by De, the motivation being to ensure reliable transmission of PDUs (see De, Abstract) . Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Yacine (GB 2640343 A) teaches stopping retransmission of a protocol data unit, PDU, to the receiver in dependence on a number of retransmissions of the PDU exceeding a predetermined discard threshold value, wherein the predetermined discard threshold value is less than a threshold value associated with a radio link failure (RLF) of the network. The retransmission of the PDU may be stopped if a discard timer associated with the PDU exceeds a discard timer threshold value. The PDU may be associated with a PDU Set, and the discard timer is started when a first PDU of the PDU Set is received by the transmitter. The method may comprise, upon determining that retransmission of the PDU is stopped, transmitting a discard notification to the receiver. The method may comprise, upon determining that retransmission of the PDU is stopped, transmitting a PDU of a subsequent PDU Set (Abstract) … to achieve timely retransmissions on RLC layer for XR traffic, the following options may be considered: Autonomous retransmission (i.e. without status report) of PDUs based on some triggers (either existing triggers or new triggers can be considered); Retransmission based on enhanced status report; and Retransmission based on enhanced polling. Further consideration may relate to whether enhancements are needed, or whether the issue can be solved with proper configuration of existing mechanisms. Further consideration may be directed towards the impact of these options on the capacity (e.g., of a network), and possible enhancements for UL traffic . Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DEEPA BELUR whose telephone number is (571)270-3722. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 am - 4:30 pm. 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, Kevin Bates can be reached at 571-272-3980. 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. /DEEPA BELUR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2472 Application/Control Number: 18/797,351 Page 2 Art Unit: 2472 Application/Control Number: 18/797,351 Page 3 Art Unit: 2472 Application/Control Number: 18/797,351 Page 4 Art Unit: 2472 Application/Control Number: 18/797,351 Page 5 Art Unit: 2472 Application/Control Number: 18/797,351 Page 6 Art Unit: 2472 Application/Control Number: 18/797,351 Page 7 Art Unit: 2472 Application/Control Number: 18/797,351 Page 8 Art Unit: 2472 Application/Control Number: 18/797,351 Page 9 Art Unit: 2472 Application/Control Number: 18/797,351 Page 10 Art Unit: 2472
Prosecution Insights