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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 9/8/26, with respect to claim(s) 1-2, 4-7, 9-10, and 17-22 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Please see the provided rejection below, which has been updated based on applicants amendments changing the scope of independent claims 1 and 6, and their dependent claims. However, please see the new grounds of rejection below in view of the newly found prior art Chang et al. (US 20220264280).
Applicant's arguments, filed 9/8/26, with respect to claim(s) 11-16 have been fully considered and have been found persuasive. The previous rejection of claims 11-16 is hereby withdrawn. However, please see the new grounds of rejection below in view of the newly found prior art Chang et al. (US 20220264280).
This action is non final based on the change in grounds of rejection of claims 11-16.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4-7, 9-10, 18-20, and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chang et al. (US 20220264280, hereinafter Chang), in view of Wu et al. (US 2025/0119976, hereinafter Wu, previously cited on 892 by examiner).
Regarding claims 1 and 6. Chang teaches user equipment (UE) and method for wireless communication (Chang figure 1, figure 5; remote terminal), comprising: a transceiver (figure 2, item 230) that enables the UE to communicate with a sidelink relay device (figure 5, relay terminal) via a sidelink communication channel (figure 5, sidelink interface) and a controller communicatively coupled to the transceiver, and which is configured to cause the UE to (figure 2, item 210): transmit, to the sidelink relay device, a first request for at least one system information (par. 89, 95-96, 101, 106, 118-121; remote terminal requests on-demand system information); receive, from the sidelink relay device, the at least one (par. 100-101, 120, 126, 129-131; the relay terminal receives system information from the base station and transmits/delivers the system information to the remote terminal via PC5, including using broadcast-type or unicast-type control messages.);
transmit, to the sidelink relay device, an indication releasing relaying of system information by the sidelink relay device (par. 141-143; the remote terminal transmits a relay function control message/control field including a relay stop request to the relay terminal, and the relay terminal receives it. A relay stop request for system information reads on an indication releasing relaying of system information by the sidelink relay device.); transmit, to a serving network device, a second request for at least one (par. 118-124; Chang teaches the remote terminal can request the relay terminal for on demand system information. Par. 119 then specifically discusses how the remote terminal may transmit, to the relay terminal, the request information for requesting on-demand system information from the base station (i.e. serving network device) by using a control message of the PC5 interface (this would be the first request explained above)….Thereafter, the relay terminal may transmit the request information for requesting on-demand system information to the base station by using a control message of the Uu interface. Thus, one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing would have found it obvious that Chang teaches a second request for system information being sent to the serving network device based on par. 199 explaining what happens “thereafter” the first request.); and receive, via the sidelink communication channel from the sidelink relay device, system information originating at the serving network device. (par. 120-121, 126, 130-131; teaches the relay terminal delivers system information (that it received from the base sation) to the remote terminal through PC5/sidelink.) However, although Chang teaches “system information”, as noted above he does not specifically disclose that it is a system information block (SIB). Further, although teaches the “second request” as noted above. This second request is not a request from the remote terminal, as it is a “second” request from the relay terminal that is different from the “first” request from the remote terminal. Thus, Chang does not specifically disclose the remote terminal transmitting, to a serving network device, a second request for at least one SIB. Wu, in a similar field of endeavor of on demand system information, specifically teaches the system information is a system information block (SIB) (par. 46, 81; SIB). Wu further teaches that a remote UE sends a relay system information request to the relay node, then later sends an RRC message from the remote UE to the base station via the relay UE, where the RRC message comprises a dedicated SIB request (Par. 78, which discusses the method of figure 13, teaches a remote UE generates a system information request to send to the relay UE (this reads on a first request as claimed). Par. 81 then notes that “in certain embodiments, the method further includes…” (the examiner notes that further including means, in addition to, and not an alternative embodiment). Wu teaches in par. 81 the method further including entering an RRC connected state with the base station and sending an RRC message from the remote UE to the base station…the RRC message comprising a dedicated SIB request. This reads on the remote terminal transmitting, to a serving network device, a second request for at least one SIB.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing, to incorporate Wu’s network-directed SIB request procedure, which can include a second SIB request, into Chang’s relay system information method/system because both references address obtaining system information on demand for a remote UE through a relay UE, and Wu provides a known mechanism for requesting SIB information from the serving network device via the relay path after prior relay-side SI handling.
Regarding claims 2 and 7. The combination teaches claims 1 and 6. Chang further teaches wherein the second request is subsequent to the first request (par. 98-101, 141-146; Chang teaches an initial on-demand system-information request from the remote terminal to the relay terminal (i.e. first request) and later RRC-connected-state system-information request behavior (i.e. second request, subsequent to first request), and the controller is configured to cause the UE to:
transmit, via the transceiver to the sidelink relay device, the first request for system information before the UE enters the radio resource control connected state; (par. 98-100, 105-108, figures 4a-4b; Chang teaches that the remote terminal may request system information from the relay terminal before performing a subsequent sidelink connection/access establishment procedure. Chang par. 99 specifically discusses the remote terminal in the RRC idle state requesting system information for sidelink access, which is before entering radio resource control connected state, RRC_CONNECTED) and
receive, from the sidelink relay device, the at least one SIB requested by the first request as essential system information, in response to the first request; (par. 85-89, 98-100, 106-108, 129-131; Chang teaches that the relay terminal transmits requested on-demand system information to the remote terminal in response to the remote terminal’s request and that the received system information includes parameters required for sidelink access and access to the base station via the relay terminal. Thus, system information required for access/establishment reasonably reads on “essential system information”).
However, although Chang teaches in par. 101 and 117-121 that the remote terminal in RRC connected state may request system information and receive system information through the relay path, Chang does not specifically disclose: receive the system information originating at the serving network device while the UE is in the radio resource control connected state.
Wu, in a similar field of endeavor of on demand system information, teaches receive the system information originating at the serving network device while the UE is in the radio resource control connected state. (par. 67 and 81; Wu expressly teaches that the remote UE enters RRC_CONNECTED, sends an RRC message to the base station via the relay UE comprising a dedicated SIB request, and receives an RRC response comprising system information from the base station.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing, to incorporate Wu’s connected-state SIB request/response procedure with Chang’s pre-connected relay system-information acquisition procedure because both references address providing system information to a remote UE through a sidelink relay. The remote UE may first obtain essential system information from the relay terminal before connection establishment, as taught by Chang, and later obtain additional system information from the serving network device while in RRC_CONNECTED, as taught by Wu, thereby predictably supporting system-information acquisition across different RRC states.
Regarding claims 4 and 9. The combination of Chang and Wu further teaches wherein the first request for the at least one SIB transmitted to the sidelink relay device comprises a radio resource control message (Chang teaches the first and second requests as noted in the rejection of claims 1 and 6 above in par. 119-124. Wu par. 64 teaches that the first request transmitted from the remote UE to the sidelink relay UE comprises a radio resource control message, specifically a PC5-RRC message including a relay SI request. The motivation to combine can be found in the independent claim rejection above.)
Regarding claims 5 and 10. The combination of Chang and WU further teaches wherein the second request to the serving network device for the at least one SIB and the response containing the at least one SIB from the serving network device comprise radio resource control messages. (Chang teaches the first and second requests as noted in the rejection of claims 1 and 6 above in par. 119-124. Wu par. 81 further teaches sending an RRC message from the remote UE to the base station via the relay UE, the RRC message comprising a dedicated SIB request, and receiving an RRC response message comprising system information from the base station. Therefore, the combination teaches that the second request to the serving network device and the response containing the system information comprise radio resource control messages. The motivation to combine can be found in the independent claim rejection above.)
Regarding claim 18. The combination teaches claim 1 above. Chang further teaches wherein the sidelink relay device is a second UE (figure 5, relay terminal).
Regarding claims 19 and 22. The combination teaches claims 1 and 6 above. Chang further teaches wherein: the request for at least one SIB is transmitted as a request for system information (par. 89, 101, 106, 118-121; Chang teaches that the remote terminal transmits request information/request messages to the relay terminal requesting on-demand system information. Under BRI, the claimed first request for at least one SIB being transmitted as a request for system information is met because SIBs are system information); the system information originates at the serving network device (par. 117-121, 126, 129-131; Chang teaches that the relay terminal forwards request information to the base station, receives on-demand system information from the base station, and delivers the system information to the remote terminal; thus, the system information originates at the serving network device/base station); Wu further teaches the system information is provided in response to the second request for at least one SIB after the UE enters the radio resource control connected state (Chang teaches the first and second request as explained above. Wu, in par. 81, teaches “entering an RRC connected state with the base station,” then sending an RRC message from the remote UE to the base station via the relay UE, the RRC message comprising a dedicated SIB request, and receiving an RRC response message comprising system information from the base station. This directly teaches system information provided in response to the second SIB request after the UE enters RRC_CONNECTED.) The motivation to combine can be found in the independent claim rejection above.
Regarding claim 20. The combination teaches claim 6 above. Chang further teaches communicating, via a transceiver of the UE, with the sidelink relay device via a sidelink communication channel. (figure 5, sidelink interface)
Claim(s) 11-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chang, in view of OPPO ("Summary of [AT116bis-e][618][Relay] Remaining issues on relay control plane (OPPO)", 3GPP DRAFT; R2-2201936, 25 January 2022; XP052103287; cited in applicants IDS filed 9/7/24, hereinafter OPPO).
Regarding claim 11. Chang teaches user equipment (UE) for wireless communication (Chang figure 1, figure 5; relay terminal), the user equipment comprising:
a transceiver (figure 2 item 230) that enables the UE to communicate with a serving network device via a communication channel and with a remote UE via a sidelink communication channel (figure 5, Uu interface with base station, sidelink interface with remote terminal); and
a controller communicatively coupled to the transceiver, and which is configured to cause the UE to (figure 2 item 210):
receive, via the transceiver, a release from relaying, to the remote UE, system information originating at the serving network device (par. 141-143; the remote terminal transmits a relay function control message/control field including a relay stop request to the relay terminal, and the relay terminal receives it. A relay stop request for system information reads on an release from relaying to the remote UE, system information by the sidelink relay device from the base station (i.e. serving network device);
subsequently receive, via the transceiver from the remote UE, a request for system information (par. 89, 95-96, 101, 106, 118-121, 125-127; the remote terminal may request system information from the relay terminal and that the relay terminal receives the request via PC5); and
in response to receiving the request:
ignore the release from relaying system information (par. 142-146; Chang teaches that in broadcast mode the relay terminal stops SI relaying only when all connected remote terminals send relay stop requests; thus a stop request from fewer than all connected terminals (i.e. from one terminal) does not preclude continued SI relaying from the relay terminal. Since the relay terminal still broadcasts the system information, even after receiving a relay stop request from a terminal (but not ALL terminals), this reads on ignoring the release from relaying system information.) ***(Further, although not relied upon, another interpretation from Chang shows that he teaches that a prior stop request may be followed by a relay initiation request, after which the relay terminal resumes SI transmission. Under BRI, this teaches or suggests ignoring/disregarding the release from relaying when an initiation request is received.)***
relay the request to the serving network device (par. 117-121, 125-127; the relay terminal receives request information from the remote terminal and transmits the request information to the base station through Uu);
receive the system information from the serving network device (par. 118-121, 126; the base station transmits on-demand system information to the relay terminal and the relay terminal receives it); and
transmit the system information to the remote UE (par. 120-121, 126, 129-131; the relay terminal delivers the system information to the remote terminal through PC5, including by unicast or broadcast control message).
However, Chang does not specifically disclose the release being a required communication from a sidelink-connected remote UE when the remote UE is transitioning to a radio resource control (RRC) connected state or identify that the release is one that is required to be transmitted by RRC connected state protocol, but is not controlling of a need for system information by the remote UE.
OPPO discloses issues on the relay control plane and SIB updating in remote UE with relay UEs (section 1 and 2) and is therefore analogous to Chang. OPPO discloses:
the release being a required communication from a sidelink-connected remote UE when the remote UE is transitioning to a radio resource control (RRC) connected state; (page 15, Remote UE de-configure SI-request w.r.t relay UE implicitly when entering into RRC connected state…thus when entering RRC connected (i.e. when transitioning), the remote UE de configures the relay UE from relaying the SI (i.e. a release from relaying SI to the remote UE))
identify that the release is one that is required to be transmitted by RRC connected state protocol, but is not controlling of a need for system information by the remote UE. (page 15, OPPO, mainly for RRC_CONNECTED to notify relay UE it does not need to forward the SIB since network is to be relied…thus it is identified as RRC connected protocol, and not controlling of a need for system information by the remote UE). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of (effective) filing to incorporate the teachings of OPPO into the system/method of Chang. The motivation for doing so would have been to ensure that the relay UE receives an indication to update its relay SI state upon the remote UE’s RRC_CONNECTED transition. This would predictably reduce stale SI-relay context and avoid unnecessary relaying while preserving the ability to later request system information.
Regarding claim 12. The combination teaches the limitations of claim 11. Chang further teaches wherein the request comprises a second request that is received after a first request (par. 98-101, 141-146; Chang teaches an initial on-demand system-information request from the remote terminal to the relay terminal (i.e. first request) and later RRC-connected-state system-information request behavior (i.e. second request, subsequent to first request), and wherein the controller is further configured to cause the UE to:
receive, via the transceiver from the remote device UE, the first request for system essential information that originates at a serving network device (par. 98-101, 105-108, 117-118, 121; Chang teaches that the relay terminal receives, from the remote terminal, request information requesting on-demand system information from the base station; the requested system information originates at the base station/serving network device)
the first request is transmitted before the remote device enters the radio resource control connected state (Chang par. 98-100, Chang teaches that in the RRC idle state, the remote terminal may request system information for sidelink access to the relay terminal or base station, which occurs before the remote UE enters RRC_CONNECTED.)
relay the first request to the serving network device (Chang par. 117-121, 125-127; Chang teaches that the relay terminal receives request information from the remote terminal and transmits/forwards the request information to the base station through Uu.);
receive the system information from the serving network device (Chang par. 118-121, 126; Chang teaches that the relay terminal receives on-demand system information for the remote terminal from the base station.); and
transmit the system information to the remote device, in response to the first request (Chang par. 120-121, 126, 129-131; Chang teaches that the relay terminal delivers/transmits the received on-demand system information to the remote terminal through PC5, including by unicast or broadcast control message, in response to the request.)
Regarding claim 13. The combination teaches the UE of claim 12. The combination further teaches wherein the system information comprises at least one system information block (SIB). (OPPO page 15, SIB. The motivation to combine can be found in the independent claim rejection above.) Regarding claim 14. The combination of Chang and Oppo teach the UE of claim 13. The combination further teaches wherein the first request is for the at least one SIB. (Chang teaches the first and second requests as noted in the rejection of claims 1 and 6 above in par. 119-124, OPPO teaches the request is for at least on SIB, page 15 SIB) OPPO teaches wherein the first request is for the at least one SIB and comprises a radio resource control message. (page 2, Remote UE provides his interested SIBs to Relay UE within the same PC5-RRC message carrying the Paging Monitoring Request.)
Regarding claim 15. The combination teaches the UE of claim 13, wherein the second request is for the at least one SIB and a response contains the at least one SIB wherein the second request and the response comprise radio resource control messages. (Chang teaches the first and second requests as noted in the rejection of claims 1 and 6 above in par. 119-124. OPPO teaches that, for RRC_CONNECTED remote UEs, SIB delivery may rely on the network sending updated SIBs and that SI can be updated via the remote UE’s dedicated RRC message, including legacy Uu SIB delivery via RRCReconfiguration. See OPPO, Section 2.1, Huawei Proposal 3 and related comments; see also OPPO discussion noting that RRCReconfiguration includes dedicated SIB delivery containers such as dedicatedSIB1-Delivery and dedicatedSystemInformationDelivery. Therefore, OPPO teaches that the request and network response containing the requested SIB/system information comprises an RRC message. The motivation to combine can be found in the independent claim rejection above.)
Regarding claim 16. The combination teaches claim 11. The combination further teaches wherein the controller logs the release (Chang par. 141-143; the remote terminal transmits a relay function control message/control field including a relay stop request to the relay terminal, and the relay terminal receives it. Accordingly, the relay terminal may no longer relay system information transmitted from the base station to the remote terminal. The controller must inherently “log” or store the release to later know to not relay the information. Further, OPPO teaches a the de-configure SI-request, which reads on logging the release as it is de configured. The motivation to combine can be found in the independent claim rejection above.)
Claim(s) 17 and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chang in view of Wu in further view of OPPO.
Regarding claims 17 and 21. The combination of Chang and Wu teach claims 1 and 6 above.
Chang further teaches wherein:
the serving network device is a scheduling network device; (Chang par. 52-56, 76, 117-121; Chang’s base station communicates over Uu with the relay terminal and provides on-demand system information)
transmittal of the indication (Chang par. 141-143; Chang teaches transmitting an express relay stop request); and
the sidelink relay device and the serving network device are configured to ignore the indication releasing relaying of system information (Chang par. 142-146; Chang teaches in broadcast mode, the relay terminal stops SI relaying only when stop requests are received from all connected remote terminals; thus a stop request from fewer than all connected terminals (i.e. from one terminal) does not preclude continued SI relaying from the relay terminal. Since the relay terminal still broadcasts the system information, even after receiving a relay stop request from a terminal (but not ALL terminals), this reads on ignoring the relaying system information.) ***(Further, although not relied upon, another interpretation from Chang shows that he teaches that a prior stop request may be followed by a relay initiation request, after which the relay terminal resumes SI transmission. Under BRI, this teaches or suggests ignoring/disregarding the release from relaying when an initiation request is received. Wu further teaches that, after the remote UE enters RRC_CONNECTED, the remote UE sends an RRC message to the base station via the relay UE comprising a dedicated SIB request, and receives an RRC response comprising system information from the base station. See Wu ¶ [0081]. Thus, the base station responds to the later SIB request notwithstanding any earlier deconfiguration/release of the relay SI-request relationship, which suggests that the serving network device is configured to ignore the earlier release indication for purposes of determining whether to provide system information. Thus rendering the limitation obvious in view of the combination.)
However, the combination of Chang and WU do not specifically disclose transmittal of the indication is a requirement for the UE to enter into the radio resource control connected state.
OPPO discloses issues on the relay control plane and SIB updating in remote UE with relay UEs and is therefore analogous to Chang/Wu. OPPO discloses:
transmittal of the indication is a requirement for the UE to enter into the radio resource control connected state; (Chang teaches that the remote terminal transmits a relay stop request to the relay terminal. OPPO teaches on page 15, Remote UE de-configure SI-request w.r.t relay UE implicitly when entering into RRC connected state…thus when entering RRC connected (i.e. when transitioning), the remote UE de configures the relay UE from relaying the SI (i.e. a release from relaying SI to the remote UE). Thus, when this happens, the UE enters RRC connected state, rendering the “requirement” obvious in view of the combination.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of (effective) filing to incorporate the teachings of OPPO into the combined system/method of Chang/Wu. The motivation for doing so would have been to ensure that the relay UE receives an indication to update its relay SI state upon the remote UE’s RRC_CONNECTED transition. This would predictably reduce stale SI-relay context and avoid unnecessary relaying while preserving the ability to later request system information.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Michael Thier whose telephone number is (571)272-2832. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 6:30 AM - 4:00 PM, Fri 7:00 AM-10:00 AM.
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.
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.
/Michael Thier/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2474
Michael Thier
Supervisory Patent Examiner
Art Unit 2474
