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 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)(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, 2, 4, 5 and 11-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by YI et al PG PUB 2024/0163951.
Re Claims 1 and 11, YI et al teaches in figure 4D, a IAB-MT3 (a IAB node comprises a transceiver and processor) operating in a dual connectivity (NR-DC) [0077-0079] and supports split signaling radio bearers; when there is no RLF, the IAB node identifies that the SRB3 is established and transmitting IABOtherinformation [0155] to a Donor-CU (a secondary node) via SRB3; in a case where no SRB3 has been established due to RLF [0072], to mitigate for the failure, by transmitting a RRC message with the IABOtherinformation to a MeNB (a master node) via SRB 1 [0080 0083].
Re Claims 2, 12, See Claim 1 and 11 respectively.
Re Claims 4, 13, YI et al teaches the RRC message comprises a ULInformationTransferMRDC message [0140].
Re Claims 5, 14, YI et al teaches in figure 4C, the ULInformationTransferMRDC message is transferred to the Donor-CU (the SN).
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 3, 6-10 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over YI et al PG PUB 2024/0163951 in view of TSENG et al PG PUB 2023/0088189.
Re Claims 3, 6 and 15, YI teaches in figure 4D, a IAB-MT3 (a IAB node comprises a transceiver and processor) operating in a dual connectivity (NR-DC) [0077-0079] and supports split signaling radio bearers; when there is no RLF, the IAB node identifies that the SRB3 is established and transmitting IABOtherinformation [0155] to a Donor-CU (a secondary node comprising a transceiver and processor) via SRB3; in a case where no SRB3 has been established due to RLF [0072], to mitigate for the failure, by transmitting a RRC message with the IABOtherinformation to a MeNB (a master node) via SRB 1 [0080 0083].
YI et al fails to explicitly teach “wherein the IABotherinformaton message is used to request assignment of IP address of the IAB node…”. However, TSENG et al teaches using the IABotherinformation message to request for an IP address to initiate SDT procedure or network service [0185]. One skilled in the art would have been motivated to have requested the IP address using the IABotherinformation message in YI et al to initiate the network service for the IAB node. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to have combined the teachings.
Re Claim 7, See Claim 6.
Re Claim 8, YI et al teaches in figure 4C, the ULInformationTransferMRDC message is received by MeMB (the Master node) and transferred to the Donor-CU (the SN).
Re Claim 9, YI et al teaches the RRC message comprises a ULInformationTransferMRDC message [0140] and received via SRB1.
Re Claim 10, TSENG et al teaches the IABotherinformation message is used to report/inform the assigned IP address of the IAB node [0185].
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-3130. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30AM-5PM ET.
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, KASSIM KHALAD can be reached at 5712703770. 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.
/ANDREW LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2475
Prosecution Insights