DETAILED ACTION
Claim(s) 1-12 have been examined and are pending.
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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim 2 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12, 167, 488 in view of SAMSUNG (“SRB Type for Segmented UECapabilityInformation”, cited in October 25, 2024 IDS).
Claim 2 of the Instant Application
Claim 1 of US Patent 12, 167, 488 (Pat ‘488)
1. A method, in a user device configured to communicate with a base station, for managing communication of a segmented radio resource control (RRC) message that includes N segments, the method comprising:
1. A method, in a base station configured to communicate with a user device, for managing communication of a segmented radio resource control (RRC) message that includes N segments, the method comprising:
transmitting a first M segments of the segmented RRC message to the base station, M being an integer greater than zero and less than N;
receiving a first M segments of the segmented RRC message from the user device, M being an integer greater than zero and less than N;
detecting, before transmitting an (M+1)-th segment of the segmented RRC message, an intervening event that triggers an RRC reconfiguration procedure;
detecting, before receiving an (M+1)-th segment of the segmented RRC message, an intervening event that triggers an RRC procedure;
and after detecting the intervening event, transmitting the (M+1)-th segment through an N-th segment of the segmented RRC message to the base station before the RRC reconfiguration procedure has completed, wherein transmitting the (M+1)-th segment through the N-th segment to the base station before the RRC reconfiguration procedure has completed includes suspending the RRC reconfiguration procedure until after transmitting the (M+1)-th segment through the N-th segment to the base station..
and after detecting the intervening event, (i) receiving the (M+1)-th segment through an N-th segment of the segmented RRC message from the user device, and (ii) suspending the RRC procedure until after the base station receives the N-th segment.
Claim 1 of Pat ‘488 differs from Claim 2 of the Instant Application, primarily in that Claim 1 of Pat’488 is directed to managing communication of a segmented radio resource control (RRC) message from a network side (i.e. “…A method, in a base station configured to communicate with a user device…”) whereas Claim 2 of the Instant Application is directed to managing communications of a segmented RRC message from a user side (i.e. “…A method, in a user device configured to communicate with a base station…”). However, these differences are considered obvious in light of SAMSUNG (“SRB Type for Segmented UECapabilityInformation”, cited in October 25, 2024 IDS).
Samsung shows a method for RRC segmentation from the perspective of a user. For example see [Figure 1] which illustrates a user device, UE, configured to communicate with a base station, for managing communication of a segmented radio resource control (RRC) message that includes N segments, the method comprising: transmitting a first M segments of the segmented RRC message to the base station, M being an integer greater than zero and less than N(Refer to [Fig. 1] where it illustrates transmitting “UECapabilityInformation message Segmentation 1”, “UECapabilityInformation message Segmentation 2” ); detecting, before transmitting an (M+1)-th segment of the segmented RRC message, an intervening event that triggers an RRC (Refer to [Fig. 1] “Other RRC msg to be transmitted by SRB1 is triggered”); and after detecting the intervening event, transmitting the (M+1)-th segment through an N-th segment of the segmented RRC message to the base station before the RRC procedure has completed(See [Section 2.2, Solutions for blocking problem of SRB1 caused by the segmented RRC message] “Option 1: Transmitting the SRB1 after all segmented UE CapabilityInformation are transmitted”).
Thus, based upon the teachings of SAMSUNG, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify claim 1 of Pat ‘488 to arrive at claim 2 of the Instant Application, in order provide a more complete implementation of the RRC segmentation feature of Pat ‘488, by implementing features from both the user-side (i.e. user device/UE) and network side (i.e. base station)
Claim 8 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12, 167, 488 in view of SAMSUNG (“SRB Type for Segmented UECapabilityInformation”, cited in October 25, 2024 IDS).
Claim 8 of the Instant Application
Claim 1 of US Patent 12, 167, 488 (Pat ‘488)
7. A user device comprising processing hardware and configured to:
1. A method, in a base station configured to communicate with a user device, for managing communication of a segmented radio resource control (RRC) message that includes N segments, the method comprising:
Transmit a first M segments of the segmented RRC message to the base station, M being an integer greater than zero and less than N;
receiving a first M segments of the segmented RRC message from the user device, M being an integer greater than zero and less than N;
detect, before transmitting an (M+1)-th segment of the segmented RRC message, an intervening event that triggers an RRC reconfiguration procedure;
detecting, before receiving an (M+1)-th segment of the segmented RRC message, an intervening event that triggers an RRC procedure;
and after detecting the intervening event, transmit the (M+1)-th segment through an N-th segment of the segmented RRC message to the base station before the RRC reconfiguration procedure has completed, wherein transmitting the (M+1)-th segment through the N-th segment to the base station before the RRC reconfiguration procedure has completed includes suspending the RRC reconfiguration procedure until after transmitting the (M+1)-th segment through the N-th segment to the base station..
and after detecting the intervening event, (i) receiving the (M+1)-th segment through an N-th segment of the segmented RRC message from the user device, and (ii) suspending the RRC procedure until after the base station receives the N-th segment.
Claim 1 of Pat ‘488 differs from Claim 8 of the Instant Application, primarily in that Claim 1 of Pat’488 is directed to a method managing communication of a segmented radio resource control (RRC) message from a network side (i.e. “…A method, in a base station configured to communicate with a user device…”) whereas Claim 8 of the Instant Application is directed to an apparatus managing communications of a segmented RRC message from a user side (i.e. “…A user device comprising processing hardware and configured to …”). However, these differences are considered obvious in light of SAMSUNG (“SRB Type for Segmented UECapabilityInformation”, cited in October 25, 2024 IDS).
Samsung shows a feature for RRC segmentation from the perspective of a user. For example see [Figure 1] which illustrates a user device, UE, configured to communicate with a base station, for managing communication of a segmented radio resource control (RRC) message that includes N segments, the user device being configured to (Note that although processing hardware is not explicitly recited, it is intrinsic to the operation of the UE of Samsung): transmit a first M segments of the segmented RRC message to the base station, M being an integer greater than zero and less than N(Refer to [Fig. 1] where it illustrates transmitting “UECapabilityInformation message Segmentation 1”, “UECapabilityInformation message Segmentation 2” ); detect, before transmitting an (M+1)-th segment of the segmented RRC message, an intervening event that triggers an RRC (Refer to [Fig. 1] “Other RRC msg to be transmitted by SRB1 is triggered”); and after detecting the intervening event, transmit the (M+1)-th segment through an N-th segment of the segmented RRC message to the base station before the RRC procedure has completed(See [Section 2.2, Solutions for blocking problem of SRB1 caused by the segmented RRC message] “Option 1: Transmitting the SRB1 after all segmented UE CapabilityInformation are transmitted”).
Thus, based upon the teachings of SAMSUNG, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify claim 1 of Pat ‘488 to arrive at claim 9 of the Instant Application, in order provide a more complete implementation of the RRC segmentation feature of Pat ‘488, by implementing features from both the user-side (i.e. user device/UE) and network side (i.e. base station)
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.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 7, and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SAMSUNG (“SRB Type for Segmented UECapabilityInformation”, cited in October 25, 2024 IDS) in view of Schmidt (USPGPub No. 2018/0324617, cited in October 25, 2024 IDS)
In regards to claim(s) 1, SAMSUNG (“SRB Type for Segmented UECapabilityInformation”, cited in October 25, 2024 IDS) teaches a method, in a user device configured to communicate with a base station, for managing communication of a segmented radio resource control (RRC) message that includes N segments, the method comprising:
transmitting a first M segments of the segmented RRC message to the base station, M being an integer greater than zero and less than N(Refer to [Fig. 1] where it illustrates transmitting “UECapabilityInformation message Segmentation 1”, “UECapabilityInformation message Segmentation 2” );
detecting, before transmitting an (M+1)-th segment of the segmented RRC message, an intervening event that triggers an RRC (Refer to [Fig. 1] “Other RRC msg to be transmitted by SRB1 is triggered”);
and after detecting the intervening event, transmitting the (M+1)-th segment through an N-th segment of the segmented RRC message to the base station before the RRC (See [Section 2.2, Solutions for blocking problem of SRB1 caused by the segmented RRC message] “Option 1: Transmitting the SRB1 after all segmented UE CapabilityInformation are transmitted”).
The feature concerning radio resource configuration (RRC) of Samsung differs from that of claim 1, in that SAMSUNG is silent on where the RRC procedure comprises an RRC reconfiguration procedure.
Despite these differences similar features have been seen in other prior art involving transmission of Radio Resource Configuration (RRC) messages. Schmidt (USPGPub No. 2018/0324617) [Par. 96] teaches detecting by hardware of a base station an event that triggers an RRC procedure for measurement, the RRC procedure comprising an RRC reconfiguration procedure, “[0096] According to the state-of-art MDT deployment, MME triggers the respective eNB to start tracing a UE's (or a group of UEs′) measurement(s) and the eNB configures the respective measurement(s) via appropriate RRC-level messages (cf. FIG. 1).”.
Thus based upon the teachings of Schmidt it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Samsung’s RRC procedure such that is an RRC reconfiguration procedure as similarly seen in Schmidt to thus arrive at claim 1. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to perform this modification in order to take advantage of benefits yielded by a RRC Reconfiguration procedure.
In regards to claim 7, SAMSUNG (“SRB Type for Segmented UECapabilityInformation”, cited in October 25, 2024 IDS) teaches a user device comprising processing hardware and configured to (Note that although it is not explicitly recited, the user device, UE, described throughout Samsung, having processing hardware is implicit in its operation):
transmit a first M segments, of a segmented radio resource control (RRC) message that includes N segments, to a base station, M being an integer greater than zero and less than N (Refer to [Fig. 1] where it illustrates transmitting “UECapabilityInformation message Segmentation 1”, “UECapabilityInformation message Segmentation 2” );
detect, before transmitting an (M+1)-th segment of the segmented RRC message, an intervening event that triggers an RRC (Refer to [Fig. 1] “Other RRC msg to be transmitted by SRB1 is triggered”);
and after detecting the intervening event, transmit the (M+1)-th segment through an N-th segment of the segmented RRC message to the base station before the RRCSee [Section 2.2, Solutions for blocking problem of SRB1 caused by the segmented RRC message] “Option 1: Transmitting the SRB1 after all segmented UE CapabilityInformation are transmitted”). The feature concerning radio resource configuration (RRC) of Samsung differs from that of claim 7, in that SAMSUNG is silent on where the RRC procedure comprises an RRC reconfiguration procedure.
Despite these differences similar features have been seen in other prior art involving transmission of Radio Resource Configuration (RRC) messages. Schmidt (USPGPub No. 2018/0324617) [Par. 96] teaches detecting by hardware of a base station an event that triggers an RRC procedure for measurement, the RRC procedure comprising an RRC reconfiguration procedure, “[0096] According to the state-of-art MDT deployment, MME triggers the respective eNB to start tracing a UE's (or a group of UEs′) measurement(s) and the eNB configures the respective measurement(s) via appropriate RRC-level messages (cf. FIG. 1).”.
Thus, based upon the teachings of Schmidt it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Samsung’s RRC procedure such that is an RRC reconfiguration procedure as similarly seen in Schmidt to thus arrive at claim 7. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to perform this modification in order to take advantage of benefits yielded by a RRC Reconfiguration procedure.
In regards to claim 3, SAMSUNG (“SRB Type for Segmented UECapabilityInformation”, cited in October 25, 2024 IDS) in view of SCHMIDT teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving an RRC message from the base station, wherein transmitting the first M segments is in response to receiving the RRC message (See SAMSUNG, Section 2.1, Fig. 1where transmitting the first M segments of the UECapabilityInformation is in response to receiving the RRC message, UECapabilityEnquiry message).
In regards to claim 9, SAMSUNG (“SRB Type for Segmented UECapabilityInformation”, cited in October 25, 2024 IDS) in view of SCHMIDT teaches the user device of claim 7, wherein: the user device is further configured to receive an RRC message from the base station; and transmitting the first M segments is in response to receiving the RRC message(See SAMSUNG, Section 2.1, Fig. 1where transmitting the first M segments of the UECapabilityInformation is in response to receiving the RRC message, UECapabilityEnquiry message).
Claim(s) 6 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SAMSUNG (“SRB Type for Segmented UECapabilityInformation”, cited in October 25, 2024 IDS) in view of Schmidt (USPGPub No. 2018/0324617) in view of LIANG (US 20210218535 A1)
In regards to claim 6, the combined teachings of SAMSUNG in view of SCHMIDT are silent on the method of claim 1, wherein the segmented RRC message is included in a segmented RRC protocol data unit (PDU). Despite these differences similar features have seen in other prior art involving the communication of a segmented RRC message.
LIANG (US 20210218535 A1) for example teaches where a segmented RRC message is included in a segmented RRC PPDU (“[0053] For example, it is assumed that an RRC message generated by UE is segmented into an RRC PDU 1, an RRC PDU 2, an RRC PDU 3, and an RRC PDU 4, and respective SI indicates that the RRC PDU 1 is at the first of the RRC message, the RRC PDU 2 is in the middle of the RRC message, the RRC PDU 3 is in the middle of the RRC message, and the RRC PDU 4 is at the last of the RRC message. In this case, after receiving the RRC PDU 2 and the RRC PDU 3, the receiver cannot differentiate sequential locations of the RRC PDU 2 and the RRC PDU 3 (but only knows that the RRC PDU 2 and the RRC PDU 3 are in the middle of the RRC message). However, the sequential locations of the RRC PDU 2 and the RRC PDU 3 can be differentiated based on an offset location indicated by an SO, that is, the RRC PDU 2 is located before the RRC PDU 3, so as to complete reassembly of the RRC message.”).
Thus, based upon the teachings of LIANG it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the segmented RRC message suggested by the combined teachings of SAMSUNG in view of SCHMIDT, by including the segmented RRC message in a segmented RRC PDU as similarly seen in LIANG, in order to provide a reliable data format for delivering the segmented RRC message of SAMSUNG in view of SCHMIDT.
In regards to claim 12, the combined teachings of SAMSUNG in view of SCHMIDT are silent on the user device of claim 7, wherein the segmented RRC message is included in a segmented RRC protocol data unit (PDU). Despite these differences similar features have seen in other prior art involving the communication of a segmented RRC message.
LIANG (US 20210218535 A1) for example teaches where a segmented RRC message is included in a segmented RRC PPDU (“[0053] For example, it is assumed that an RRC message generated by UE is segmented into an RRC PDU 1, an RRC PDU 2, an RRC PDU 3, and an RRC PDU 4, and respective SI indicates that the RRC PDU 1 is at the first of the RRC message, the RRC PDU 2 is in the middle of the RRC message, the RRC PDU 3 is in the middle of the RRC message, and the RRC PDU 4 is at the last of the RRC message. In this case, after receiving the RRC PDU 2 and the RRC PDU 3, the receiver cannot differentiate sequential locations of the RRC PDU 2 and the RRC PDU 3 (but only knows that the RRC PDU 2 and the RRC PDU 3 are in the middle of the RRC message). However, the sequential locations of the RRC PDU 2 and the RRC PDU 3 can be differentiated based on an offset location indicated by an SO, that is, the RRC PDU 2 is located before the RRC PDU 3, so as to complete reassembly of the RRC message.”).
Thus, based upon the teachings of LIANG it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the segmented RRC message suggested by the combined teachings of SAMSUNG in view of SCHMIDT, by including the segmented RRC message in a segmented RRC PDU as similarly seen in LIANG, in order to provide a reliable data format for delivering the segmented RRC message of SAMSUNG in view of SCHMIDT.
Claim(s) 4-5 and 10-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SAMSUNG (“SRB Type for Segmented UECapabilityInformation”, cited in October 25, 2024 IDS) in view of Schmidt (USPGPub No. 2018/0324617) in view of KIM (US Patent No. 11330661).
In regards to claim 4, the combined teachings of SAMSUNG in view of SCHMIDT are silent on the method of claim 1, wherein: transmitting the first M segments includes, for each segment of the first M segments, transmitting a message including the segment and a segment number indicating an order of the segment in the segmented RRC message; and transmitting the (M+1)-th segment through the N-th segment includes, for each segment of at least the (M+1)-th segment through the (N−1)-th segment, transmitting a message including the segment and a segment number indicating an order of the segment in the segmented RRC message. Despite these differences similar features have been seen in other prior art involving RRC segmentation.
KIM (US Patent No. 11330661) [Col. 28] teaches where a segment including a segment and a segment number, S field, indicating an order of the segment in a segmented RRC message, “…The S field 1131 may be defined for four cases of 00, 01, 11, and 10, to indicate complete data that is not segmented, a first segment, an intermediate segment (or a segment other than the first segment and last segments), and a last segment….”
Thus, based upon the teachings of KIM it would have been obvious to modify the segmentation feature of Samsung in view of SCHMIDT, by including a segment number with a transmitted segment as similarly seen in KIM, to thus to arrive at the method of claim 1, wherein: transmitting the first M segments includes, for each segment of the first M segments, transmitting a message including the segment and a segment number indicating an order of the segment in the segmented RRC message; and transmitting the (M+1)-th segment through the N-th segment includes, for each segment of at least the (M+1)-th segment through the (N−1)-th segment, transmitting a message including the segment and a segment number indicating an order of the segment in the segmented RRC message, in order to support re-ordering of transmitted/received segments.
In regards to claim 10, the combined teachings of SAMSUNG in view of SCHMIDT are silent on the user device of claim 7, wherein: transmitting the first M segments includes, for each segment of the first M segments, transmitting a message including the segment and a segment number indicating an order of the segment in the segmented RRC message; and transmitting the (M+1)-th segment through the N-th segment includes, for each segment of at least the (M+1)-th segment through the (N−1)-th segment, transmitting a message including the segment and a segment number indicating an order of the segment in the segmented RRC message. Despite these differences similar features have been seen in other prior art involving RRC segmentation.
KIM (US Patent No. 11330661) [Col. 28] teaches where a segment including a segment and a segment number, S field, indicating an order of the segment in a segmented RRC message, “…The S field 1131 may be defined for four cases of 00, 01, 11, and 10, to indicate complete data that is not segmented, a first segment, an intermediate segment (or a segment other than the first segment and last segments), and a last segment….”
Thus, based upon the teachings of KIM it would have been obvious to modify the segmentation feature of Samsung in view of SCHMIDT, by including a segment number with a transmitted segment as similarly seen in KIM, to thus to arrive at the user device of claim 7, wherein: transmitting the first M segments includes, for each segment of the first M segments, transmitting a message including the segment and a segment number indicating an order of the segment in the segmented RRC message; and transmitting the (M+1)-th segment through the N-th segment includes, for each segment of at least the (M+1)-th segment through the (N−1)-th segment, transmitting a message including the segment and a segment number indicating an order of the segment in the segmented RRC message, in order to support re-ordering of transmitted/received segments.
In regards to claim 5, the combined teachings of SAMSUNG in view of SCHMIDT are silent on the method of claim 1, wherein transmitting the (M+1)-th segment through the N-th segment includes transmitting a message including the N-th segment and an indication that the message includes a last segment of the segmented RRC message. Despite these differences similar features have been seen in other prior art involving RRC segmentation.
KIM (US Patent No. 11330661) [Col. 28] teaches receiving a message including an N-th segment and an indicating that the message includes a last segment of a segmented RRC message, “…The S field 1131 may be defined for four cases of 00, 01, 11, and 10, to indicate complete data that is not segmented, a first segment, an intermediate segment (or a segment other than the first segment and last segments), and a last segment….”
Thus, based upon the teachings of KIM it would have been obvious to modify the segmentation feature of Samsung in view of SCHMIDT, by including a segment number with a transmitted segment as similarly seen in KIM, to thus to arrive the method of claim 1, wherein transmitting the (M+1)-th segment through the N-th segment includes transmitting a message including the N-th segment and an indication that the message includes a last segment of the segmented RRC message., in order to support re-ordering of transmitted/received segments.
In regards to claim 11, , the combined teachings of SAMSUNG in view of SCHMIDT are silent on the user device of claim 7, wherein transmitting the (M+1)-th segment through the N-th segment includes transmitting a message including the N-th segment and an indication that the message includes a last segment of the segmented RRC message. Despite these differences similar features have been seen in other prior art involving RRC segmentation.
KIM (US Patent No. 11330661) [Col. 28] teaches receiving a message including an N-th segment and an indicating that the message includes a last segment of a segmented RRC message, “…The S field 1131 may be defined for four cases of 00, 01, 11, and 10, to indicate complete data that is not segmented, a first segment, an intermediate segment (or a segment other than the first segment and last segments), and a last segment….”
Thus, based upon the teachings of KIM it would have been obvious to modify the segmentation feature of Samsung in view of SCHMIDT, by including a segment number with a transmitted segment as similarly seen in KIM, to thus to arrive the user device of claim 7, wherein transmitting the (M+1)-th segment through the N-th segment includes transmitting a message including the N-th segment and an indication that the message includes a last segment of the segmented RRC message, in order to support re-ordering of transmitted/received segments.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 2 and 8 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
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TARELL A HAMPTON whose telephone number is (571)270-7162. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM.
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, Ayaz Sheikh can be reached at 5712723795. 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.
/TARELL A HAMPTON/Examiner, Art Unit 2476 /AYAZ R SHEIKH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2476
Prosecution Insights