DETAILED ACTION
1. The following Office Action is based on the application filed on 20 September 2024, having claims 1-20 and drawing figures 1-13.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
2. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Specification
3. The title of the invention is not descriptive. The current title: “Method, Device, and Computer Program Product for Wireless Communication” broadly describes most inventions in Wireless Communications field. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
4. The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
The abstract is too short. 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).
5. 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 Objections
6. Claims 2-16 and 18-19 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 2 recites the limitation “terminal identifiers, IDs,” must be written as “terminal identifiers (IDs)” in line 4 to render it clear that IDs is the acronym of the preceding word(s).
Claim 3 recites the limitation “a Cell Radio Network Temporary Identifier, C-RNTI, a System Architecture Evolution Temporary Mobile Subscriber Identity, S-TMSI, or an aggregation ID received from the wireless communication node; and/or the aggregation mode configuration comprises at least one of: a radio bearer, RB, level aggregation; a Dual Active Protocol Stack, DAPS, like aggregation; or a Radio Link Control, RLC, channel level aggregation.” It is suggested that the acronyms C-RNTI, S-TMSI, RB, DAPS, RLC be placed in parentheses to render it clear that the acronyms are not separate from the preceding words they describe.
For claim 4, it is suggested that QoS be written as “Quality of Service (QoS).” It is also suggested that the acronyms RB, QFI, RLC and LCID be enclosed in parentheses to render it clear that the acronyms are not separate from the preceding words they describe.
Claim 5 recites the limitation “packet data convergence protocol, PDCP, sequence number, SN.” The limitation must be written as “Packet Data Convergence Protocol (PDCP) sequence number (SN)” to make it clear that the acronyms are not separate from the preceding words. The acronym RB must also be defined as “Radio Bearer (RB).”
Claim 6 recites the limitation “Buffer Status Reporting, BSR” in line 8. The limitation must be written as “Buffer Status Report (BSR)”
The phrase “and/or” recited in line 6 of claim 7 must be replaced by the word “or.”
In claim 7, the acronyms LCID, RB, and RACH must be enclosed in parentheses.
In claim 9, the acronyms AMBR, QoS, UL, DL, and PDB must be enclosed in parentheses.
In claim 11, the acronym PDB must be written as “Packet Delay Budget (PDB).” The phrase “and/or” recited in line 3 must be replaced by the word “or.”
In claim 12, the acronyms QoS, RB, and RLC must be written as “Quality of Service (QoS),” “Radio Bearer (RB),” and “Radio Link Control (RLC)” at least once in the claim.
The acronyms RLC, PDCP SN, ROHC, and PDCP SDUs must be defined at least once in claim 13.
The acronyms ROHC, PDCP, SN, BSR, RB, and LCG must be defined at least once in claim 14.
The acronyms RB, SDAP, PDCP, PDU, and RLC must be defined at least once in claim 15.
The acronyms RB and RLC recited in line 3 of claim 16 must be written as “Radio Bearer (RB)” and “Radio Link Control (RLC)” at least once in the claim.
The acronym ID recited in line 4 of claim 18 should be written as “identifier (ID).”
Claim 18 recites the limitation “one or more wireless communication terminal (sic)” in line 4. The word “terminal” should be written as “terminals” (plural).
In claim 19, the acronyms AMBR, QoS, UL, DL, and PDB must be enclosed in parentheses to render it clear that the acronyms are not separate from the preceding words they describe.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
7. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 4 recites the limitation “a mapping between an RB of the first wireless communication terminal and an RB of the first or second wireless communication terminal” in lines 3-4. The bold words render the claim vague and indefinite. It is unclear why there is mapping between the RB of the first terminal and an RB of the first terminal again.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
8. 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 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.
Claims 1-3, 6, 11, 16-17, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim et al. (US 2019/0253926 A1).
For claims 1 and 20, Kim discloses a wireless communication method comprising: receiving, by a first wireless communication terminal (Fig 1G, UE 1g) from a wireless communication node (Fig 1C, NR gNB), an aggregation configuration ([0141] gNB configures UE with carrier aggregation information); and performing, by the first wireless communication terminal, the aggregation configuration ([0141] UE configures a bearer (DRB or SRB) based on configuration information received from gNB).
For claim 2, Kim discloses the aggregation configuration comprises at least one of: an aggregation index; one or more terminal identifiers, IDs, for aggregation; an aggregation mode; a bearer mapping configuration; a configuration for at least one of data duplication or data split ([0141] the configuration information comprises PDCP packet duplication configuration); a path indication; aggregation assistance information to be used by aggregated terminals; or aggregation criteria.
For claim 3, Kim discloses the terminal ID can be at least one of the following: a Cell Radio Network Temporary Identifier, C-RNTI, a System Architecture Evolution Temporary Mobile Subscriber Identity, S-TMSI, or an aggregation ID received from the wireless communication node; and/or the aggregation mode configuration comprises at least one of: a radio bearer, RB, level aggregation; a Dual Active Protocol Stack, DAPS, like aggregation; or a Radio Link Control, RLC, channel level aggregation ([0141] configuration information comprises logical channel ID (LCID) and RLC entity (primary or secondary) information based on the LCID for the UE).
For claim 6, Kim discloses the configuration for at least one of data duplication or data split ([0134] packet duplication function) comprises at least one of: an indication for data duplication being enabled or disabled, an indication for data split being enabled or disabled, a data split threshold ([0134] split data bearer threshold), a split ratio, a number of duplications a Buffer Status reporting, BSR, report indication, or a terminal ID for the BSR report.
For claim 11, Kim discloses the aggregation criteria comprise at least one of a threshold of data rate, a threshold of reliability, or a threshold of PDB; and/or the first wireless communication terminal performs the aggregation configuration comprises the first wireless communication terminal performs aggregation data communication comprising at least one of: a communication directly with the wireless communication node ([0141] the UE performs the aggregation based on communicating directly with a gNB to receive the aggregation configuration information); or a communication though a second wireless communication terminal relaying data between first wireless communication terminal and the wireless communication node.
For claim 16, Kim discloses performing the aggregation configuration comprises at least one of: setting up, by the first wireless communication terminal, at least one of an RB, an RLC channel, or a logical channel, making duplicates for a data packet, and delivering the data packet to the at least one of the RB, the RLC channel, or the logical channel according to an indication for enabling ([0141] configuration information comprises logical channel ID (LCID) and RLC entity (primary or secondary) information based on the LCID for the UE); suspend or release, by the first wireless communication terminal, the at least one of the RB, the RLC channel, or the logical channel according to an indication for disabling; delivering, by the first wireless communication terminal, a data packet to at least one of an RB, an RLC channel, or a logical channel, based on a split ratio in response to an indication for data split being enabled ([0141] the configuration information comprises configuration for at least one of data duplication or data split); or refraining from, by the first wireless communication terminal, splitting the data packet according to an indication for disabling.
For claim 17, Kim discloses a wireless communication method comprising: receiving, by a wireless communication node (Fig 1C, NR gNB) from a core network, terminal aggregation information (page 32, [0088] NR CN (core network) performs sends bearer configuration to gNB for managing mobility of the UE); and performing, by the wireless communication node, an aggregation configuration.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
9. 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 4, 7-8, 14-15, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 2019/0253926 A1) in view of Xu et al. (US 2022/0304083 A1).
For claim 4, Kim does not expressly disclose the bearer mapping configuration comprises at least one of: a mapping between a Radio Bearer, RB, of the first wireless communication terminal and an RB of the first or a second wireless communication terminal; a mapping between a Radio Bearer, RB, of the first wireless communication terminal and a terminal ID for aggregation of the first or second wireless communication terminal; a mapping between a QoS Flow Identifier, QFI, of the first wireless communication terminal and a Radio Bearer, RB, of the first or second wireless communication terminal; a mapping between a QoS Flow Identifier, QFI, of the first wireless communication terminal and a terminal ID for aggregation of the first or second wireless communication terminal; or a mapping between an RB of the first wireless communication terminal and a Uu RLC channel of a second wireless communication terminal, wherein the Uu RLC channel of the second wireless communication terminal is identified by a terminal ID, a Logical Channel ID, LCID or an RLC channel ID.
Xu, from the same or similar field of endeavor, discloses the bearer mapping configuration comprises at least one of: a mapping between a Radio Bearer, RB, of the first wireless communication terminal and an RB of the first or a second wireless communication terminal; a mapping between a Radio Bearer, RB, of the first wireless communication terminal and a terminal ID for aggregation of the first or second wireless communication terminal; a mapping between a QoS Flow Identifier, QFI, of the first wireless communication terminal and a Radio Bearer, RB, of the first or second wireless communication terminal; a mapping between a QoS Flow Identifier, QFI, of the first wireless communication terminal and a terminal ID for aggregation of the first or second wireless communication terminal; or a mapping between an RB of the first wireless communication terminal and a Uu RLC channel of a second wireless communication terminal, wherein the Uu RLC channel of the second wireless communication terminal is identified by a terminal ID, a Logical Channel ID, LCID or an RLC channel ID ([0127] the network configures a mapped relay DRB in the Uu link and configure the relay UE’s with the mapped RLC bearer ID or Logical channel ID (LCID), the bearer ID may corresponding with the remote UE). Thus, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art implement the bearer configuration method of Xu in the communication network of Kim at the time of the invention to map the RB of the relay UE with the RB of the remote UE.
For claim 7, Xu discloses the path indication comprises at least one of: a path ID ([0126] local path mode identifier); a primary path or secondary path indication; a combination of a terminal ID, and a Logical Channel ID, LCID; or a combination of a terminal ID and an RB ID ([0126] RLC bearer ID); and/or the aggregation assistance information to be used by aggregated terminal comprises at least one of: a dedicated Random Access Channel, RACH, preamble; or a cause value from the wireless communication node.
For claim 8, Xu discloses the first wireless communication terminal transmits terminal aggregation information to the wireless communication node, and the terminal aggregation information comprises at least one of: a terminal ID ([0119] remote UE ID); a terminal ID request for aggregation; a serving cell ID of the wireless communication terminal; a capability of the wireless communication terminal; an indication of supported aggregation mode of the wireless communication terminal; a number of candidate wireless communication terminals; terminal aggregation information of the candidate wireless communication terminals; or a terminal status report.
For claim 14, Xu discloses performing the aggregation configuration comprises at least one of: receiving, by the first wireless communication terminal from the wireless communication node, downlink data ([0119] the base station transmits downlink data to the relay UE); performing, by the first wireless communication terminal, security and ROHC decompression functions by a PDCP entity to the downlink data separately from security and ROHC compression functions performed by a PDCP entity of a second wireless communication terminal; performing, by the first wireless communication terminal, PDCP reordering, duplicate detection and discard functions to the downlink data according to a common PDCP SN and the aggregation configuration; receiving, by the first wireless communication terminal from the wireless communication node, a BSR report indication for an RB, a Logical channel, an LCG involving an aggregation; transmitting, by the first wireless communication terminal to the wireless communication node, a BSR report; or transmitting, by the first wireless communication terminal, a BSR report comprising a PDCP data volume of a PDCP entity to a wireless communication node serving the PDCP entity.
For claim 15, Xu discloses performing the aggregation configuration comprises at least one of: determining, by the first wireless communication terminal, a data packet is mapped to a Uu RB of the first wireless communication terminal according to an SDAP configuration ([0127] bearer mapping information for Uu link and SDAP instance #1 for local path); performing, by the first wireless communication terminal, a PDCP processing to the data packet to generate a PDCP PDU; determining, by the first wireless communication terminal, the PDCP PDU is mapped to an RLC channel of a second wireless communication terminal according to a bearer mapping configuration; transmitting, by the first wireless communication terminal to the RLC channel of the second wireless communication terminal, the PDCP PDU; transmitting, by the first wireless communication terminal to RLC channels of multiple wireless communication terminals, duplicates of a PDCP PDU respectively according to the aggregation configuration; determining, by the first wireless communication terminal, wireless communication terminals to be involved for aggregated transmission in response to aggregation criteria being met; or activating or deactivating, by the first wireless communication terminal, an aggregation path according to an indication for a path to be enabled or disabled.
For claim 18, Xu discloses the terminal aggregation information comprises at least one of: aggregation authorization information for a wireless communication terminal; a terminal ID for one or more wireless communication terminal ([0127] RLC bearer ID for remote UE or relay UE); a capability of one or more wireless communication terminal; or a supported aggregation mode.
Allowable Subject Matter
10. Claims 5, 9-10, 12-13 and 19 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.
Conclusion
11. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892 form.
12. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Elisabeth B Magloire whose telephone number is (571)272-5601. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 AM-5 PM 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, Sujoy K Kundu can be reached at 571-272-8586. 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.
/ELISABETH BENOIT MAGLOIRE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2471
Prosecution Insights