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 Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitations uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
Such claim limitations are: transmission unit, reception unit and control unit in claims 1-2 and 5.
Because these claim limitations are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, they are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have these limitations interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitations recite sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
A review of the specification shows that the following appears to be the corresponding structure described in the specification for the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph limitation: Figs. 23-24 and hardware structure section [0176].
For the purpose of examination: a transmission, reception or control unit is taken to be any module that performs transmission, reception and/or control.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(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 1-3 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Vargas et al. (US 20200322774 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Vargas teaches a terminal (UE of Fig. 11 executing method of Figs. 5-6) comprising:
a transmission unit (transceiver 1120) configured to transmit, in a first link, a message for establishing a connection in a second link in which the connection is not established (At 508, having determined to establish an SLRB sidelink in FR2 with target device 530, the initiator device 520 sends an RRC reconfiguration message (e.g., an RRCDirectConnectionReconfiguration message) to the target device 530 over the previously established SRB, [0107]; this previously established sidelink in FR1 is used to establish the new sidelink in FR2, [01036]; The devices 520 and 530 perform PHY/MAC procedures in FR2 to determine the serving BPL and synchronization and to initiate a mmW QoS-based V2V unicast link as requested in stage 508, [0108]);
a reception unit (transceiver 1120) configured to receive a response corresponding to the message for establishing the connection in the second link (The devices 520 and 530 perform PHY/MAC procedures in FR2 to determine the serving BPL and synchronization and to initiate a mmW QoS-based V2V unicast link as requested in stage 508. The PHY/MAC procedures may include determining the direction of the transmit beam(s) used by the initiator device 520 and the receive beam(s) used by the target device 530. Specifically, in stages 502 and/or 504, the devices 520 and 530 exchange their geographic locations (e.g., GPS coordinates) and possibly information describing their current paths, [0108]); and
a control unit (processor 1130) configured to assume that the establishing of the connection in the second link is completed when the response is received (At 512, the initiator device 520 sends an RRC reconfiguration complete message (e.g., RRCDirectConnectionReconfigurationComplete) to the target device 530 informing the target device 530 that the FR2 sidelink has been established, [0109]).
Regarding claim 2, Vargas teaches the terminal as claimed in claim 1, wherein the transmission unit transmits the message for establishing the connection in the second link in a band different from the second link, in an application layer, and in the first link that is a link that has already been established or a link whose connection has been established before (At 508, having determined to establish an SLRB sidelink in FR2 with target device 530, the initiator device 520 sends an RRC reconfiguration message (e.g., an RRCDirectConnectionReconfiguration message) to the target device 530 over the previously established SRB, [0107]).
Regarding claim 3, Vargas teaches the terminal as claimed in claim 1, wherein the message for establishing the connection in the second link includes information related to a beam in the second link (In addition to normal PDCP/RLC/MAC layer configuration, the radio bearer configuration process includes mmW physical layer configurations for beam direction(s) and resource, timing, location, and/or sequence ID parameters for L1/L2 layer procedures, [0107]).
Regarding claim 6, Vargas teaches a communication method performed by a terminal (UE of Fig. 11 executing method of Figs. 5-6), the communication method comprising:
transmitting, in a first link, a message for establishing a connection in a second link in which the connection is not established (At 508, having determined to establish an SLRB sidelink in FR2 with target device 530, the initiator device 520 sends an RRC reconfiguration message (e.g., an RRCDirectConnectionReconfiguration message) to the target device 530 over the previously established SRB, [0107]; this previously established sidelink in FR1 is used to establish the new sidelink in FR2, [01036]; The devices 520 and 530 perform PHY/MAC procedures in FR2 to determine the serving BPL and synchronization and to initiate a mmW QoS-based V2V unicast link as requested in stage 508, [0108]);
receiving a response corresponding to the message for establishing the connection in the second link (The devices 520 and 530 perform PHY/MAC procedures in FR2 to determine the serving BPL and synchronization and to initiate a mmW QoS-based V2V unicast link as requested in stage 508. The PHY/MAC procedures may include determining the direction of the transmit beam(s) used by the initiator device 520 and the receive beam(s) used by the target device 530. Specifically, in stages 502 and/or 504, the devices 520 and 530 exchange their geographic locations (e.g., GPS coordinates) and possibly information describing their current paths, [0108]); and
assuming that the establishing of the connection in the second link is completed when the response is received (At 512, the initiator device 520 sends an RRC reconfiguration complete message (e.g., RRCDirectConnectionReconfigurationComplete) to the target device 530 informing the target device 530 that the FR2 sidelink has been established, [0109]).
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.
Claims 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vargas et al. (US 20200322774 A1) in view of Li et al. (US 20220286184 A1).
Regarding claim 4, Vargas teaches the terminal as claimed in claim 1.
However, Vargas does not teach wherein the message for establishing the connection in the second link includes information related to measurement in the second link.
In an analogous art, Li teaches wherein the message for establishing the connection in the second link includes information related to measurement in the second link (For example, UE2 may indicate the beam index of the prefer beam and the corresponding RSRP or RSRQ value to UE1, [0119]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the link establishment of Vargas with the measurement of Li to provide terminal to meet the needed data rate, latency, reliability, communication range as suggested, Li [0045].
Regarding claim 5, Vargas as modified by Li teaches the terminal as claimed in claim 4, wherein the control unit assumes that the establishing of the connection in the second link is completed in a case where a result of the measurement in the second link that is performed based on the information related to the measurement satisfies a condition (UE2 may identify one preferred beam, e.g., the beam on which the RS having the best measurement result is transmitted, Li [0068]; UE2 indicates the identified preferred beam or beam list to UE1. Based on the response provided by UE2, UE1 may form one or multiple initial beam pair links with UE2, Li [0069]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the link establishment of Vargas with the measurement of Li to provide terminal to meet the needed data rate, latency, reliability, communication range as suggested, Li [0045].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Kim et al. (US 20230103810 A1): According to various embodiments, a multi-link device (MLD) operating in a plurality of links including a first link can transmit a request frame to a first AP of an AP MLD through a first STA (station), wherein the request frame includes an information field for requesting every element included in an element set designated for a second link. The MLD can, on the basis of the request frame, receive every element included in the element set designated for the second link.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICOLE M LOUIS-FILS whose telephone number is (571)270-0671. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday.
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, Charles Appiah can be reached at 571-272-7904. 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.
/NICOLE M LOUIS-FILS/Examiner, Art Unit 2641
/CHARLES N APPIAH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2641
Prosecution Insights