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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
2. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/01/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
3. The drawings were received on 10/01/2024. These drawings are considered by examiner.
Preliminary Amendment
Applicant summits the Preliminary Amendment filed on 10/01/2024.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. 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.
6. 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.
7. Claims 1-2, 7-10, 13-17, 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dai et al (US 2024/0373497), hereinafter “Dai“, in view of Park et al (US 2023/0087615), hereinafter “Park“.
Regarding claim 1, Dai teaches a method, implemented in a distributed unit (DU) communicating with a central unit (CU), for managing small data transmission (SDT) configuration for a user equipment (UE) (fig. 6, pars [0113-0116]), the method comprising:
receiving, at the DU, a first SDT configuration for the UE pars [0116-0118]);
receiving, at the DU and from the CU (pars [0116-0118]), a UE context modification message including an SDT configuration request (pars [0116-0118]); and
transmitting, from the DU to the CU and responsive to the receiving of the UE context modification message (pars [0116-0118]),
Dai does not explicitly teach a UE context modification response including a second SDT configuration based on the first SDT configuration.
Park, in the same field of endeavor, teaches a UE context modification response including a second SDT configuration based on the first SDT configuration (see figs. 27-29, and pars [0265] [0272] [0349] teach a UE context modification/setup required message, a UE context setup/ modification message, e.g., RRC release message comprises configuration parameters for the RRC reconfiguration message, a notify message, and an access success message).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the above teaching of Dai to Park, in order to avoid causing interruption during SDT procedures and prevent decrease in communication reliability and/or an increase in signaling overhead (as suggested by Park in paragraph [0256]).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Dai and Park teach the method of claim 1, Dai does not clearly teach the method comprising: generating, at the DU, the second SDT configuration; wherein the transmitting is further responsive to the generating.
Park, in the same field of endeavor, teaches generating, at the DU, the second SDT configuration; wherein the transmitting is further responsive to the generating (par [0351 teaches the configuration message comprises an information element requesting to report the completion of the SDT procedure).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the above teaching of Dai to Park, in order to avoid causing interruption during SDT procedures and prevent decrease in communication reliability and/or an increase in signaling overhead (as suggested by Park in paragraph [0256]).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Dai and Park teach the method of claim 1, Dai does not clearly teach the method comprising: transmitting, from the DU to the UE, a downlink message including the second SDT configuration to indicate that the UE is to update the first SDT configuration.
Park, in the same field of endeavor, teaches transmitting, from the DU to the UE, a downlink message including the second SDT configuration to indicate that the UE is to update the first SDT configuration (par [0350] teaches the SDT procedure comprises the initial uplink data transmission, and the downlink data transmission).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the above teaching of Dai to Park, in order to avoid causing interruption during SDT procedures and prevent decrease in communication reliability and/or an increase in signaling overhead (as suggested by Park in paragraph [0256]).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Dai and Park teach the method of claim 7, Dai further teaches wherein the downlink message is a release message for a protocol associated with controlling radio resources (pars [0125] [0130-0131]).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Dai and Park teach the method of claim 1, Dai does not clearly teach wherein the first SDT configuration is a first SDT DU configuration and the second SDT configuration is a second SDT DU configuration.
Park, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the first SDT configuration is a first SDT DU configuration and the second SDT configuration is a second SDT DU configuration (pars [0346] [0349]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the above teaching of Dai to Park, in order to avoid causing interruption during SDT procedures and prevent decrease in communication reliability and/or an increase in signaling overhead (as suggested by Park in paragraph [0256]).
Regarding claim 10, Dai teaches a method, implemented in a central unit (CU) communicating with a distributed unit (DU), for managing small data transmission (SDT) configuration for a user equipment (UE) (fig. 6, pars [0113-0116]), the method comprising:
providing, to the DU, a first SDT configuration pars [0116-0118]);
transmitting, from the CU to the DU, a UE context modification message pars [0116-0118]);
receiving, at the CU and responsive to the transmitting of the UE context modification message pars [0116-0118]),
Park, in the same field of endeavor, teaches a UE context modification response including a second SDT configuration from the DU; and transmitting, from the CU to the UE via the DU (see figs. 27-29, and pars [0265] [0272] teach a UE context modification/setup required message, a UE context setup/ modification message, e.g., RRC release message comprises configuration parameters, RRC reconfiguration message, a notify message, and an access success message), a downlink message including the second SDT configuration (pars [0278-0279] [0346], [0349]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the above teaching of Dai to Park, in order to avoid causing interruption during SDT procedures and prevent decrease in communication reliability and/or an increase in signaling overhead (as suggested by Park in paragraph [0256]).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Dai and Park teach the method of claim 10, Dai further teaches wherein the providing includes transmitting the first SDT configuration in the UE context modification message (pars [0116-0118]).
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Dai and Park teach the method of claim 10, Dai does not clearly teach wherein the first SDT configuration is a first SDT DU configuration and the second SDT configuration is a second SDT DU configuration.
Park, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the first SDT configuration is a first SDT DU configuration and the second SDT configuration is a second SDT DU configuration (pars [0346] [0349]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the above teaching of Dai to Park, in order to avoid causing interruption during SDT procedures and prevent decrease in communication reliability and/or an increase in signaling overhead (as suggested by Park in paragraph [0256]).
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Dai and Park teach the method of claim 10, the method Dai further teaches comprising: receiving of the first SDT configuration for the UE pars [0116-0118]);
Regarding claim 16 Dai teaches an apparatus, functioning as a distributed unit (DU) of a radio access network (RAN) node and configured to manage small data transmission (SDT) configuration for a user equipment (UE), the apparatus (see fig. 6, par [0273]) comprising;
a transceiver (par [0273] teach configured for the wireless device or UE); and
processing hardware, configured to;
receive, at the DU, a first SDT configuration for the UE pars [0116-0118]);
receive, at the DU and from the CU, a UE context modification message including an SDT configuration request pars [0116-0118]); and
transmit, from the DU to the CU and responsive to the reception of the UE context modification message pars [0116-0118]),
a UE context modification response including a second SDT configuration based on the first SDT configuration.
Dai does not explicitly teach a UE context modification response including a second SDT configuration based on the first SDT configuration.
Park, in the same field of endeavor, teaches a UE context modification response including a second SDT configuration based on the first SDT configuration (see figs. 27-29, and pars [0265] [0272] teach a UE context modification/setup required message, a UE context setup/ modification message, e.g., RRC release message comprises configuration parameters, RRC reconfiguration message, a notify message, and an access success message).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the above teaching of Dai to Park, in order to avoid causing interruption during SDT procedures and prevent decrease in communication reliability and/or an increase in signaling overhead (as suggested by Park in paragraph [0256]).
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Dai and Park teach the apparatus of claim 16, Dai does not clearly teach wherein the processing hardware is further configured to: generate, at the DU, the second SDT configuration; wherein the processing hardware configured to transmit the UE context modification response is further responsive to generation of the second SDT configuration.
Park, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the processing hardware is further configured to: generate, at the DU, the second SDT configuration; wherein the processing hardware configured to transmit the UE context modification response is further responsive to generation of the second SDT configuration (see figs. 27-29, and pars [0265] [0272] teach a UE context modification/setup required message, a UE context setup/ modification message, e.g., RRC release message comprises configuration parameters, RRC reconfiguration message, a notify message, and an access success message).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the above teaching of Dai to Park, in order to avoid causing interruption during SDT procedures and prevent decrease in communication reliability and/or an increase in signaling overhead (as suggested by Park in paragraph [0256]).
Regarding claim 19, the combination of Dai and Park teach the apparatus of claim 16, Dai does not clearly teach wherein the processing hardware is further configured to: transmit, from the DU to the UE, a downlink message including the second SDT configuration to indicate that the UE is to update the first SDT configuration.
Park, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the processing hardware is further configured to: transmit, from the DU to the UE, a downlink message including the second SDT configuration to indicate that the UE is to update the first SDT configuration (pars [0346] [0349]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the above teaching of Dai to Park, in order to avoid causing interruption during SDT procedures and prevent decrease in communication reliability and/or an increase in signaling overhead (as suggested by Park in paragraph [0256]).
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Dai and Park teach the apparatus of claim 16, Dai does not clearly teach wherein the first SDT configuration is a first SDT DU configuration and the second SDT configuration is a second SDT DU configuration.
Park, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the first SDT configuration is a first SDT DU configuration and the second SDT configuration is a second SDT DU configuration (pars [0346] [0349]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the above teaching of Dai to Park, in order to avoid causing interruption during SDT procedures and prevent decrease in communication reliability and/or an increase in signaling overhead (as suggested by Park in paragraph [0256]).
Allowable Subject Matter
8. Claims 3-6, 11-12, 18 are 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.
As to claims 3, the prior art of record fails to disclose wherein the generating includes: generating, at the DU, the second SDT configuration such that the second SDT configuration modifies at least a portion of the first SDT configuration as specified in the claim.
As to claims 5, the prior art of record fails to disclose wherein the generating includes: generating, at the DU, the second SDT configuration such that the second SDT configuration replaces the first SDT configuration as specified in the claim.
As to claims 11, the prior art of record fails to disclose wherein the UE context modification response includes a CU indication that the second SDT configuration is to modify the first SDT configuration, and the downlink message includes a DU indication that the second SDT configuration is to modify the first SDT configuration as specified in the claim.
As to claims 12, the prior art of record fails to disclose wherein the UE context modification response includes a CU indication that the second SDT configuration is to replace the first SDT configuration, and the downlink message includes a DU indication that the second SDT configuration is to replace the first SDT configuration as specified in the claim.
As to claims 18, the prior art of record fails to disclose wherein the processing hardware is further configured to: generate, at the DU, the second SDT configuration such that the second SDT configuration modifies at least a portion of the first SDT configuration as specified in the claim.
Conclusion
9. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Park (WO 2022/147289) teaches base station distributed unit receives, by a base station distributed unit, from a wireless device not in a radio resource control (RRC) connected state, an RRC request message for a small data transmission (SDT) procedure, and uplink data associated with the SDT procedure. The base station distributed unit receives, from a base station central unit, a message indicating the SDT procedure.
10. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL T VU whose telephone number is (571)272-8131. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:00AM to 6:00PM.
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 on (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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MICHAEL T VU/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2641
Prosecution Insights