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 § 103
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.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al (hereinafter Li) US PGPUB 2026/0019867 in view of Saiwai et al (hereinafter Saiwai) US PGPUB 2018/0070264.
In considering claim1, Li discloses a method, comprising:
sending, by a user equipment (UE) to a base station, a status report about data packets stored in a buffer of the UE ([0125]), the data packets associated with a logical channel group (LCG), the data packets including a first set of data packets (urgent uplink data) and a second set of data packets ([0126]-[0132], also see Fig. 8),
receiving, by the UE from the base station, scheduling information, [0092]; and
transmitting, by the UE to the base station, at least the first set of data packets stored in the buffer in accordance with the scheduling information, [0132].
While Li discloses substantial features of the claimed invention, Li fails to expressly disclose the status report indicating at least a first total size of the first set of data packets. Nevertheless, it was well known in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that buffer status reports were used to indicate a total size of data packets. This is evidenced in the teachings of Saiwai, where Saiwai discloses a buffer status report including a buffer amount associated with an identifier of a logical channel group, ([0007]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Li to expressly disclose the status report indicating at least a first total size of the first set of data packets as this would have facilitated prioritizing data while meeting latency requirements (see Li, [0003]).
In considering claim 2, Li discloses classifying, by the UE, each data packet of the
data packets as urgent or non-urgent based on comparing a first time threshold with a corresponding remaining time until a respective delivery deadline of the each data packet, ([0132]-[0135]).
In considering claim 3, Li discloses classifying, by the UE, a first packet as urgent
based on a first remaining time until a first delivery deadline of the first packet being less than or equal to the first time threshold, ([0132]-[0135]) ; and
classifying, by the UE, a second packet as non-urgent based on a second remaining time until a second delivery deadline of the second packet being greater than the first time threshold ([0132]; [0136]-[0138]),
or
wherein the classifying the each data packet comprises:
classifying, by the UE, the first packet as urgent based on the first remaining time until the first delivery deadline of the first packet being less than the first time threshold, ([0132]-[0135]); and
classifying, by the UE, the second packet as non-urgent based on the second remaining time until the second delivery deadline of the second packet being greater than or equal to the first time threshold, ([0132]; [0136]-[0138]).
In considering claim 4, Li discloses the first set of data packets including all urgent
data packets of the data packets, the second set of data packets including all non-urgent data packets of the data packets ([0128]).
In considering claim 5, Li discloses the first time threshold being LCG-specific,
([0132]-[0135]).
In considering claim 6, the combination of Li and Saiwai suggest the status report
being sent in one or more media access control (MAC) control elements (CEs), wherein the one or more MAC CEs include a first MAC CE, the first MAC CE including a first buffer size field indicating the first total size, (see Li [0136]-[0138]; see Saiwai [0007]). One of ordinary skill in the art would combine the teachings of Li with Saiwai for reasons indicated above in considering claim 1.
In considering claim 7, the combination of Li and Saiwai suggest the status report
further indicating a second total size of the second set of data packets, the first MAC CE further including a second buffer size field indicating the second total size., (see Li [0136]-[0138]; see Saiwai [0007]). One of ordinary skill in the art would combine the teachings of Li with Saiwai for reasons indicated above in considering claim 6.
In considering claim 8, Li suggests sending, by the UE to the base station, capability
information indicating a capability of the UE with regards to performing classification and reporting, ([0102]-[0103], also see Fig. 5); and receiving, by the UE from the base station, configuration information for the UE to classify the each data packet, the configuration information indicating the first time threshold, ([0092], [0132]-[0135]) .
In considering claim 9, Li discloses the first MAC CE including an LCG identifier (ID)
field indicating the LCG, ([0136]-[0138]).
In considering claim 10, Li suggests the first MAC CE further including a remaining
time duration field indicating a remaining time until a delivery deadline of the first set of data packets, ([0132]-[0138]).
In considering claim 11, the claim recites substantially the same limitations as
those recited in claim 1 with communications between the base station and the UE going in the opposite direction. Claim 11 is therefore rejected under the same rationale used to reject claim 1.
In considering claim 12, Li suggests obtaining, by the base station, information about
a first remaining time until a first delivery deadline of the first set of data packets and a second remaining time until a second delivery deadline of the second set of data packets, ([0132]-[0137]).
In considering claims 13 and 14, the claims recite substantially the same limitations
as those recited in claim 2 and are thus rejected under the same rationale used to reject claim 2.
In considering claims 15-18, the claims recite substantially the same limitations
as those recited in claims 4, 6, 7 and 10 respectively and are thus rejected under the same rationale used to reject claims 4, 6, 7, and 10.
In considering claims 19 and 20, while the statutory category of invention is
different, the claims recite substantially the same limitations as those recited in claim 1. (See Li, Fig.’s 14 and 15 for specific structure not mentioned in claim 1). Thus, claims 19 and 20 are rejected under the same rationale used to reject claim 1.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HASSAN A PHILLIPS whose telephone number is (571)272-3940. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00am to 5:00pm.
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, Deborah Reynolds can be reached at 571-272-0734. 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.
/HASSAN A PHILLIPS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2467
Prosecution Insights