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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to the Applicants' communication filed on 8/26/2024. In virtue of this communication, claims 1-20 are currently presented in the instant application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-6, 10-15, 19, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US Patent Application Publication 20220053587 (hereinafter referred to as Geng).
Consider claim 1, Geng teaches a wireless communication method, applied to a terminal device, wherein there are a plurality of connections between the terminal device and a network device (see at least ¶ [0107], Fig. 1, 3, 4 “…a terminal device may perform dual-connectivity (DC) with two access network devices simultaneously. In an example, the two access network devices are respectively a master node and a secondary node…”), and the method comprises:
performing, in a case where a radio link failure (RLF) occurs on a first connection of the plurality of connections (see at least ¶ [0149], “…The RLF occurs on the terminal device in the source cell A…”), a connection recovery related operation and/or a connection switching related operation (see at least ¶ [0151], “…The terminal device attempts to reestablish a connection in a target cell B, and sends an RLF report…” and further see at least ¶ [0179], “…The terminal device attempts to reestablish a connection in the source cell A, and sends an RLF report…” and see at least ¶ [0194], “…The base station A to which the source cell A belongs sends an RLF indication to a base station B to which the target cell B belongs…” and see at least ¶ [0195], “…the base station A that receives the RLF report determines, based on (1) the cell information of the failed primary cell identifier B recorded in the RLF report, the base station B to which the cell B belongs. Then, the base station A sends the RLF indication to the base station B, where the RLF indication carries the RLF report…” and see at least ¶ [0214], “…an RRC reconfiguration message, and may be specifically any one of a handover command message, a reconfiguration message, a reconfiguration with synchronization (reconfiguration with sync) message, or a reconfiguration message including a mobility control parameter…”).
Consider claim 10, Geng teaches a terminal device (see at least ¶ [0107], Fig. 1, “…terminal device…”), comprising a processor and a memory (see at least ¶ [0600], Fig. 16, “…the terminal device 1600 includes a processor, a memory…”), wherein the memory is configured to store a computer program, and the processor is configured to invoke (see at least ¶ [0601], “…The memory is mainly configured to store the software program and the data…”) and execute the computer program stored in the memory to causes the terminal device to perform following step:
perform, in a case where a radio link failure (RLF) occurs on a first connection of a plurality of connections between the terminal device (see at least ¶ [0107], Fig. 1, 3, 4 “…a terminal device may perform dual-connectivity (DC) with two access network devices simultaneously. In an example, the two access network devices are respectively a master node and a secondary node…” and see at least ¶ [0149], “…The RLF occurs on the terminal device in the source cell A…”) and a network device, a connection recovery related operation and/or a connection switching related operation (see at least ¶ [0151], “…The terminal device attempts to reestablish a connection in a target cell B, and sends an RLF report…” and further see at least ¶ [0179], “…The terminal device attempts to reestablish a connection in the source cell A, and sends an RLF report…” and see at least ¶ [0194], “…The base station A to which the source cell A belongs sends an RLF indication to a base station B to which the target cell B belongs…” and see at least ¶ [0195], “…the base station A that receives the RLF report determines, based on (1) the cell information of the failed primary cell identifier B recorded in the RLF report, the base station B to which the cell B belongs. Then, the base station A sends the RLF indication to the base station B, where the RLF indication carries the RLF report…” and see at least ¶ [0214], “…an RRC reconfiguration message, and may be specifically any one of a handover command message, a reconfiguration message, a reconfiguration with synchronization (reconfiguration with sync) message, or a reconfiguration message including a mobility control parameter…”).
Consider claim 19, Geng teaches a chip (see at least ¶ [0076], “…The chip includes a processor and a communication interface.…”), comprising:
a processor configured to invoke and execute a computer program from a memory to cause a device equipped (see at least ¶ [0076], “…The chip includes a processor and a communication interface.…” and see at least ¶ [0077], “…the chip may further include a memory. The memory stores instructions. The processor is configured to execute the instructions stored in the memory or instructions from another module. When the instructions are executed, the processor is configured to implement the method …” and see at least ¶ [0078], “…the chip may be integrated into a terminal device or an access network device…”) with the chip to perform following step:
perform, in a case where a radio link failure (RLF) occurs on a first connection of a plurality of connections between the device and a network device (see at least ¶ [0107], Fig. 1, 3, 4 “…a terminal device may perform dual-connectivity (DC) with two access network devices simultaneously. In an example, the two access network devices are respectively a master node and a secondary node…” and see at least ¶ [0149], “…The RLF occurs on the terminal device in the source cell A…”), a connection recovery related operation and/or a connection switching related operation (see at least ¶ [0151], “…The terminal device attempts to reestablish a connection in a target cell B, and sends an RLF report…” and further see at least ¶ [0179], “…The terminal device attempts to reestablish a connection in the source cell A, and sends an RLF report…” and see at least ¶ [0194], “…The base station A to which the source cell A belongs sends an RLF indication to a base station B to which the target cell B belongs…” and see at least ¶ [0195], “…the base station A that receives the RLF report determines, based on (1) the cell information of the failed primary cell identifier B recorded in the RLF report, the base station B to which the cell B belongs. Then, the base station A sends the RLF indication to the base station B, where the RLF indication carries the RLF report…” and see at least ¶ [0214], “…an RRC reconfiguration message, and may be specifically any one of a handover command message, a reconfiguration message, a reconfiguration with synchronization (reconfiguration with sync) message, or a reconfiguration message including a mobility control parameter…”).
Consider claims 2, 11, 20 (depends on at least claims 1, 10, 19), Geng discloses the limitations of claims 1, 10, 19 as applied to claim rejection 1, 10, 19 above and further discloses:
Geng teaches performing a radio resource control (RRC) connection reestablishment process between the terminal device and the network device; or suspending transmission on the first connection (“…the terminal device attempts to reestablish the connection in the source cell A …when the terminal device attempts to reestablish the connection in the cell C…” and see at least ¶ [0214], “…an RRC reconfiguration message, and may be specifically any one of a handover command message, a reconfiguration message, a reconfiguration with synchronization (reconfiguration with sync) message, or a reconfiguration message including a mobility control parameter…”).
Consider claims 3, 12 (depends on at least claims 1, 10), Geng discloses the limitations of claims 1, 10 as applied to claim rejection 1, 10 above and further discloses:
Geng teaches wherein performing the connection switching related operation comprises at least one of following: transmitting indication information to the network device through a remaining connection of the plurality of connections except the first connection, wherein the indication information is used to indicate that the RLF occurs on the first connection; or switching transmission between the terminal device and the network device to the remaining connection of the plurality of connections except the first connection (see at least ¶ [0112], “…the terminal device still remains in connected mode, and may report connection failure information of the SCG by using the MCG, and attempt to recover a connection between the terminal device and the SCG. When the connection failure occurs in the MCG, in a possible case, the terminal device performs a reestablishment procedure…” and see at least ¶ [0120], “…the terminal device remains in connected mode in the current serving cell. Quality of the current serving cell deteriorates, but the terminal device receives no handover command. Therefore, the terminal device detects the connection failure in the current serving cell, and then the terminal device attempts to reestablish the connection in the another cell…”).
Consider claims 4, 13 (depends on at least claims 1, 10), Geng discloses the limitations of claims 1, 10 as applied to claim rejection 1, 10 above and further discloses:
Geng teaches wherein switching the transmission between the terminal device and the network device to the remaining connection of the plurality of connections except the first connection comprises: switching signaling radio bearers (SRB) to the remaining connection of the plurality of connections except the first connection (see at least ¶ [0117], “…a terminal device performs data transmission with a master node by using a split SRB 1 between the terminal device and a secondary node and a connection between the secondary node and the master node…, … the terminal device may further receive, by using an SCG, at least one of a reconfiguration message, a reconfiguration with synchronization 0 message, and a reconfiguration message including a mobility control parameter that are sent by the master node…”).
Consider claims 5, 14 (depends on at least claims 1, 10), Geng discloses the limitations of claims 1, 10 as applied to claim rejection 1, 10 above and further discloses:
Geng teaches wherein the connection switching related operation is performed in a case where a first condition is satisfied, and the first condition comprises: configuring a radio link control (RLC) channel for SRB on the remaining connection (see at least ¶ [0116], “…the terminal device may indicate an MCG connection failure to the MCG by using an SCG split signaling radio bearer (SRB) 1, an SRB 3, or a new SCG SRB, to perform MCG fast recover…” and see at least ¶ [0117], “…performing MCG fast recovery by using a split SRB 1. After MCG fast recovery, a terminal device performs data transmission with a master node by using a split SRB 1 between the terminal device and a secondary node and a connection between the secondary node and the master node…”).
Consider claims 6, 15 (depends on at least claims 1, 10), Geng discloses the limitations of claims 1, 10 as applied to claim rejection 1, 10 above and further discloses:
Geng teaches wherein the first connection is a direct connection between the terminal device and the network device (see at least ¶ [0107], “…a terminal device may perform dual-connectivity (DC) with two access network devices simultaneously …”), and the remaining connection comprises a relay connection between the terminal device and the network device (see at least ¶ [0102], “… the access network device may be a relay station, an access point, a vehicle-mounted device, a wearable device, an access network device in the 5G network, or an access network device in the future evolved PLMN network, may be an access point (AP) in a WLAN, or may be a gNB in the new radio (new radio, NR) system…”).
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 7, 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Application Publication 20220053587 (hereinafter referred to as Geng) in view of US Patent Application Publication 20230188410 (hereinafter referred to as Zhou).
Consider claims 7, 16 (depends on at least claims 1, 10), Geng in view of Zhou discloses the limitations of claim 1, 10 as applied to claim rejection 1, 10 above and further discloses:
Geng disclose all the subject matters of the claimed invention concept. However, Geng does not particularly disclose wherein a triggering event of the RLF occurring on the first connection comprises at least one of following: a timer T310 on a primary cell timing out; a timer T312 on the primary cell timing out; in a case where timers T300, T301, T304, T311 and T319 are not running, receiving a random access problem indication from a master cell group (MCG) media access control (MAC); determining that a maximum number of retransmissions has been reached according to an MCG RLC indication; or in a case where the timer T304 is not running, receiving a continuous uplink listen before talk (LBT) failure indication from the MCG MAC. In an analogous field of endeavor, attention is directed to Zhou, which teaches wherein a triggering event of the RLF occurring on the first connection comprises at least one of following: a timer T310 on a primary cell timing out; a timer T312 on the primary cell timing out; in a case where timers T300, T301, T304, T311 and T319 are not running, receiving a random access problem indication from a master cell group (MCG) media access control (MAC); determining that a maximum number of retransmissions has been reached according to an MCG RLC indication; or in a case where the timer T304 is not running, receiving a continuous uplink listen before talk (LBT) failure indication from the MCG MAC (see Zhou, at least ¶ [0196], “…the maximum number of NR RLC retransmissions has been reached associated with the SCG, or if an access problem on a PSCell during a SCG addition or a SCG change occurs or is detected, then an RRC connection re-establishment procedure may not be triggered, UL transmissions towards cells of the SCG may be stopped, a master gNB may be informed by the wireless device of a SCG failure type, and for a split bearer the DL data transfer over the master gNB may be maintained…” and see at least ¶ [0231], “…The random number N may be used in the LBT procedure to determine the duration of time that the channel is sensed to be idle, e.g., before the transmitting entity transmits on the channel …” and see at least ¶ [0308], “…drx-RetransmissionTimer may indicate a maximum duration for which a wireless device may be monitoring a PDCCH for a retransmission, for example, from a base station. The wireless device may expect to receive, from a base station (e.g., an eNodeB, a gNB, etc.), an indication of a retransmission if a timer (e.g., drx-RetransmissionTimer) is running…”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious a finding that one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention could have combined the elements as claimed by the know method, and that in combination. Each element merely performs the same function as it does separately; Geng disclosed invention, and have wherein a triggering event of the RLF occurring on the first connection comprises at least one of following: a timer T310 on a primary cell timing out; a timer T312 on the primary cell timing out; in a case where timers T300, T301, T304, T311 and T319 are not running, receiving a random access problem indication from a master cell group (MCG) media access control (MAC); determining that a maximum number of retransmissions has been reached according to an MCG RLC indication; or in a case where the timer T304 is not running, receiving a continuous uplink listen before talk (LBT) failure indication from the MCG MAC, as taught by Zhou, thereby, to provide a wireless device for determining whether the MAC entity is in a DRX active time based on one or more: DRX parameters, and/or timers, as discussed by Zhou, (see at least ¶ [0004]).
Claims 8, 9, 17, 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Application Publication 20220053587 (hereinafter referred to as Geng) in view of US Patent Application Publication 20240214900 (hereinafter referred to as Chang).
Consider claims 8, 17 (depends on at least claims 1, 10), Geng in view of Zhou discloses the limitations of claim 1, 10 as applied to claim rejection 1, 10 above and further discloses:
Geng disclose all the subject matters of the claimed invention concept. However, Geng does not particularly disclose wherein the first connection is a relay connection between the terminal device and the network device, and a remaining connection comprises a direct connection between the terminal device and the network device. In an analogous field of endeavor, attention is directed to Chang, which teaches wherein the first connection is a relay connection between the terminal device and the network device, and a remaining connection comprises a direct connection between the terminal device and the network device (see Chang, at least ¶ [0018], “…when radio link failure (RLF) of the relayed connection occurs, the remote UE device should try to connect to the gNB via a different relay UE device. This process is typically referred to as relay reselection…” and see at least ¶ [0068], “…the relay UE device performs a relay reselection procedure to establish a new relay connection to the base station. In some situations, the relay reselection procedure includes determining whether a direct connection to the base station 108 can be established…”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious a finding that one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention could have combined the elements as claimed by the know method, and that in combination. Each element merely performs the same function as it does separately; Geng disclosed invention, and have wherein the first connection is a relay connection between the terminal device and the network device, and a remaining connection comprises a direct connection between the terminal device and the network device, as taught by Chang, thereby, to provide a systems that employ several base stations that provide wireless service to user equipment (UE) devices enable sidelink communication between two or more UE devices where the UE devices can communicate directly with other UE devices. With sidelink communication, UE devices transmit data signals to each other over a communication link using the cellular resources instead of through a base station, as discussed by Chang, (see at least ¶ [0003]).
Consider claims 9, 18 (depends on at least claims 1, 10), Geng in view of Zhou discloses the limitations of claim 1, 10 as applied to claim rejection 1, 10 above and further discloses:
Geng disclose all the subject matters of the claimed invention concept. However, Geng does not particularly disclose wherein a triggering event of the RLF occurring on the first connection comprises at least one of following: determining that a maximum number of retransmissions has been reached according to an indication of a sidelink RLC entity; a timer T400 for a specific destination timing out; determining a maximum number of consecutive hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) discontinuous transmission (DTX) that have reached a specific destination according to an indication of an MAC entity; or receiving an integrity check failure indication of a sidelink packet data convergence protocol (PDCP) entity, wherein the PDCP entity is associated with a sidelink SL-SRB2 or SL-SRB3 for the specific destination. In an analogous field of endeavor, attention is directed to Chang, which teaches wherein a triggering event of the RLF occurring on the first connection comprises at least one of following: determining that a maximum number of retransmissions has been reached according to an indication of a sidelink RLC entity; a timer T400 for a specific destination timing out; determining a maximum number of consecutive hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) discontinuous transmission (DTX) that have reached a specific destination according to an indication of an MAC entity; or receiving an integrity check failure indication of a sidelink packet data convergence protocol (PDCP) entity, wherein the PDCP entity is associated with a sidelink SL-SRB2 or SL-SRB3 for the specific destination (see Chang, at least ¶ [0018], “…when radio link failure (RLF) of the relayed connection occurs, the remote UE device should try to connect to the gNB via a different relay UE device. This process is typically referred to as relay reselection. However, the remote UE device behavior for relay reselection may differ depending on whether the RLF occurs on the Uu link or the PC5 link…” and at least ¶ [0080], “…it is determined whether the timer has expired. The timer provides a mechanism for the remote UE device to avoid a situation where the Uu link has not been reestablishment for longer than a time period that is acceptable to the remote UE device…”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious a finding that one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention could have combined the elements as claimed by the know method, and that in combination. Each element merely performs the same function as it does separately; Geng disclosed invention, and have wherein a triggering event of the RLF occurring on the first connection comprises at least one of following: determining that a maximum number of retransmissions has been reached according to an indication of a sidelink RLC entity; a timer T400 for a specific destination timing out; determining a maximum number of consecutive hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) discontinuous transmission (DTX) that have reached a specific destination according to an indication of an MAC entity; or receiving an integrity check failure indication of a sidelink packet data convergence protocol (PDCP) entity, wherein the PDCP entity is associated with a sidelink SL-SRB2 or SL-SRB3 for the specific destination, as taught by Chang, thereby, to provide a systems that employ several base stations that provide wireless service to user equipment (UE) devices enable sidelink communication between two or more UE devices where the UE devices can communicate directly with other UE devices. With sidelink communication, UE devices transmit data signals to each other over a communication link using the cellular resources instead of through a base station, as discussed by Chang, (see at least ¶ [0003]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHUONG A NGO whose telephone number is (571)270-7264. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday from 5:30AM-3:30PM.
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, Anthony S Addy can be reached at (571) 272-7795. 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.
/CHUONG A NGO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2645
Prosecution Insights