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 .
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.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/27/2024 and 12/3/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims should be avoided. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 17-18, 21-22, 24-25 and 28-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. These claims recite “greater than or equal to the threshold” or “less than or equal to the threshold”. However, paragraph [191] of the specification only describes “greater than equal to” and “less than equal to” which is different than the claimed “greater than or equal” and “less than or equal” as amended.
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 16-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US 2022/0400490 (hereinafter Ji).
Regarding claims 16, 20, 23 and 27, Ji discloses a method performed by a terminal in a wireless communication system, the method comprising: transmitting, to a base station, a first message comprising information on a capability to support a dual logical channel (LCH) priority (FIG. 1, 107; [0006]: details two sets of logical channel prioritization; may contain dual mode capable LCHs); receiving, from the base station, a second message comprising information on the dual LCH priority for at least one LCH (FIG. 1, 109: details modify LCH configuration and LCP); based on the information on the dual LCH priority for the at least one LCH, identifying an LCH configured with the dual LCH priority ([0044][0055][0066]: details based on received reconfiguration information, the SL TX UE may reconfigure its SL LCHs and perform the transmission accordingly); and based on a threshold associated with remaining delivery time, applying a primary LCH priority or a secondary LCH priority for the LCH ([0014][0059][0060][0073]: details configure each dual-mode SL LCH with two sets of LCP configurations… the configuring of the triggers and/or behaviors of dual-mode SL LCH(s) SL BSR may include configuring different dual-mode SL LCHs with different events, based on their QoS requirements… a dual-mode SL LCH with a low packet delay budget can be configured with a low threshold for the data volume in the buffer to trigger the BSR).
Regarding claims 17, 21, 24 and 28, Ji discloses wherein the applying the primary LCH priority or the secondary LCH priority for the LCH comprises: in case that the remaining delivery time of any uplink (UL) data of the LCH is greater than the threshold, applying the primary priority for the LCH in a logical channel prioritization (LCP) procedure; and in case that the remaining delivery time of any UL data of the LCH is less than or equal to the threshold, applying the secondary priority for the LCH in the LCP procedure ([0014][0059][0060][0073]: details configure each dual-mode SL LCH with two sets of LCP configurations, i.e., one LCP configuration for mode 1 operation and the other LCP configuration for mode 2 operation. For example, the LCP configuration for mode 1 may indicate how the data from the dual-mode SL LCH should be multiplexed with the data from other SL LCH(s) by using the mode 1 resource. It is noted that the LCP configuration for mode 1 may also be applied when the SL TX UE constructs its SL BSR. Meanwhile, the LCP configuration for mode 2 may show the policy regarding the priority on multiplexing the data from the dual-mode SL LCH and the data from other SL LCH(s) by using the mode-2 resource… a dual-mode SL LCH with a low packet delay budget can be configured with a low threshold for the data volume in the buffer to trigger the BSR).
Regarding claims 18, 22, 25 and 29, Ji discloses wherein the applying the primary LCH priority or the secondary LCH priority for the LCH comprises: in case that the remaining delivery time of any uplink (UL) data of the LCH is greater than or equal to the threshold, applying the primary priority for the LCH in a logical channel prioritization (LCP) procedure: and in case that the remaining delivery time of any UL data of the LCH is less than the threshold, applying the secondary priority for the LCH in the LCP procedure ([0014][0059][0060][0073]: details configure each dual-mode SL LCH with two sets of LCP configurations, i.e., one LCP configuration for mode 1 operation and the other LCP configuration for mode 2 operation. For example, the LCP configuration for mode 1 may indicate how the data from the dual-mode SL LCH should be multiplexed with the data from other SL LCH(s) by using the mode 1 resource. It is noted that the LCP configuration for mode 1 may also be applied when the SL TX UE constructs its SL BSR. Meanwhile, the LCP configuration for mode 2 may show the policy regarding the priority on multiplexing the data from the dual-mode SL LCH and the data from other SL LCH(s) by using the mode-2 resource… a dual-mode SL LCH with a low packet delay budget can be configured with a low threshold for the data volume in the buffer to trigger the BSR).
Regarding claims 19, 22, 26 and 30, Ji discloses wherein the capability comprises at least one of a terminal basis capability, a frequency range basis capability, or a frequency band basis capability (FIG. 1, 107; [0006] [0014][0059][0060][0073]: details two sets of logical channel prioritization; may contain dual mode capable LCHs; configure each dual-mode SL LCH with two sets of LCP configurations, i.e., one LCP configuration for mode 1 operation and the other LCP configuration for mode 2 operation), and wherein the second message further comprises information on the threshold associated with the remaining delivery time (FIG. 1, 109; [0014][0059][0060][0073]: details modify LCH configuration and LCP; a dual-mode SL LCH with a low packet delay budget can be configured with a low threshold for the data volume in the buffer to trigger the BSR).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Shaheen (US 2018/0368173) details an enhanced scheduling request for 5G NR.
Chin (US 2020/0053820) details generating MAC PDU.
Sun (US 2020/0275294) details monitoring for DL control messaged based on multiple monitoring durations.
Yi (US 12,470,977) details transmitting BSR based on CG in wireless communication system.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jasper Kwoh whose telephone number is (408)918-7644. The examiner can normally be reached Tuesday through Friday, 10am to 4pm Pacific.
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, Jeffrey Rutkowski can be reached at (571) 270-1215. 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.
/JASPER KWOH/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2415
Prosecution Insights