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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on 06/30/2026 have been fully considered. Applicant’s arguments and Examiner’s response are provided below.
Rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103:
Applicant argues in point A that the cited references fail to teach “performing a resource selection”.
Examiner’s response: Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are not persuasive. Contrary to Applicant’s assertion that SHIN merely discloses determining whether to suppress an SL-CSI report after a resource has been selected, SHIN expressly relates the resource-selection process itself to the latency bound. Specifically, SHIN ¶ [0161] discloses that the UE should perform the SL-CSI report to satisfy latency bound X and expressly refers to receiving an allocation of “resources satisfying the latency bound X.” Further, SHIN ¶ [0299] discloses that, when a UE operating in Mode 2 selects resources for the SL-CSI report, an upper bound T2 of a resource selection window may be determined “in order to satisfy a latency bound for the SL CSI report.” SHIN ¶ [0300] further explains that the resource selection window is used for (re-)selecting and re-evaluating resources by the UE in Mode 2. Thus, SHIN does not merely disclose selecting an otherwise unconstrained resource and subsequently suppressing an SL-CSI report if the selected resource is too late; rather, SHIN teaches that the resource selection window used for selecting resources for the SL-CSI report is bounded based on the latency requirement. Accordingly, SHIN teaches or at least suggests performing resource selection for transmitting the SL-CSI report from among available resources occurring within a time-period defined by the latency bound, as recited in the claim.
Applicant further argues that the stated motivation of improving sidelink transmission efficiency is too general to supply the claimed resource-selection limitation. This argument is not persuasive because the stated rationale is not relied upon to supply the claimed limitation. As discussed above, SHIN itself teaches determining the upper bound of the resource selection window for selecting SL-CSI resources in order to satisfy the latency bound. The rationale instead explains why a person of ordinary skill in the art would have modified Yoshioka’s SL-CSI resource-selection teachings in view of SHIN’s latency-constrained resource-selection teachings. Applying SHIN’s resource-selection window to Yoshioka would have predictably constrained the resources available for SL-CSI transmission in accordance with the applicable latency requirement, thereby facilitating timely SL-CSI transmission and improving sidelink transmission efficiency.
Applicant argues in point B that the cited references fail to teach “wherein the resource selection comprises: (i) determining a remaining packet delay budget (PDB) corresponding to a remaining latency from a time of receiving the indication to transmit the SL-CSI report until expiration of the time period defined by the latency bound;(ii) determining a subset of the available resources that satisfy the remaining PDB; and(iii) selecting at least one resource from among the subset of available resources for transmitting the SL-CSI report.
Examiner’s response: Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are not persuasive. Applicant’s arguments focus on whether Khoryaev, standing alone, expressly identifies receipt of an SL-CSI-report indication as the timing origin for its remaining-PDB determination. The rejection, however, is based on the combined teachings of Yoshioka, Shin, and Khoryaev. Yoshioka teaches receiving an indication to transmit the SL-CSI report, while Shin expressly teaches that, when a Mode 2 UE selects resources for the SL-CSI report, an upper bound of the resource selection window may be determined in order to satisfy the latency bound for the SL-CSI report (Shin ¶[0299]), and further describes the resource selection window used for selecting and re-evaluating resources (Shin ¶[0300]). Khoryaev teaches a known PDB-based mechanism for performing such latency-constrained sidelink resource selection, including determining a remaining PDB, bounding the resource selection window based on the remaining PDB, forming candidate resources satisfying the remaining PDB, and selecting a resource therefrom (Khoryaev ¶¶[0129]-[0139]). Thus, the rejection does not equate Khoryaev’s resource-(re)selection trigger with the claimed SL-CSI-report indication; rather, Khoryaev’s PDB-based resource-selection technique is applied to the SL-CSI resource-selection process taught by Yoshioka and Shin. In the resulting combination, the resource selection is initiated in response to the indication to transmit the SL-CSI report and is constrained by the remaining portion of the applicable SL-CSI latency bound, thereby yielding a remaining PDB corresponding to the remaining latency from receipt of the SL-CSI-report indication until expiration of the latency-bound period, a subset of resources satisfying that remaining PDB, and selection of an SL-CSI transmission resource from that subset.
Applicant’s argument that the rationale merely reflects a general desire for timely transmission is also not persuasive. Shin expressly teaches performing Mode 2 resource selection for an SL-CSI report using a resource selection window whose upper bound is determined to satisfy the SL-CSI latency bound. Khoryaev teaches using the remaining PDB to constrain a sidelink resource selection window and the candidate resources available for selection. Accordingly, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have had reason to apply Khoryaev’s remaining-PDB-based resource-selection technique to the latency-constrained SL-CSI resource selection taught by Yoshioka and Shin in order to ensure that candidate resources selected for the SL-CSI report remain capable of satisfying the remaining latency requirement. Such a modification represents the application of Khoryaev’s known latency-aware sidelink resource-selection technique to Shin’s expressly latency-constrained sidelink CSI resource-selection process and would predictably facilitate timely transmission of the SL-CSI report.
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.
Claims 16-17, 21, 24-25, 29, 38-41 and 44-47 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being
unpatentable over Yoshioka et al. (US 2022/0287006 A1) in view of SHIN et al. (US
20220201528 A1) and further in view of Khoryaev et al. (US 20200229171 A1).
Regarding claim 16,
Yoshioka discloses “A method for use in a first wireless transmit/receive unit (WTRU), the
method comprising” (See ¶ [0008] According to the disclosed technique, there is provided a
terminal, receives the channel state information report with at least one of following
conditions: in a specific duration, in a predetermined resource): “receiving, from a second
WTRU, a message indicating a latency bound for sending a sidelink- channel state
information (SL-CSI) report” (See ¶ [0035] As embodiment A of the present invention, if
transmission timings/resources of the SL-CSI report is “option 2”, it is considered that an SL-
CSI report window is defined, configured in a PC5-RRC. ¶ [0036] The SL-CSI report window
may be configured as a duration/period from the trigger timing of the CSI report (for example, time X) to the time X+Z or a duration/period from completion of CSI
calculation/preparation time (for example, the time X+Y) to the time X+Y+Z, as illustrated in
FIG. 3); “receiving, from the second WTRU, an indication to transmit the SL-CSI report to
the second WTRU” (See [0029] the terminal 20A (UE #A) transmits a reference signal for
measuring an SL-CSI (SL-CSI-RS) and a CSI request to the terminal 20B (UE #B). [0026] Also, a
CSI request may be replaced with an SL-CSI request); “and performing a resource selection
for transmitting the SL-CSI report” (See ¶ [0033] For transmission timings/resources of the
SL-CSI report, as option 2, it is considered that they are up to a terminal transmitting a CSI
report (the terminal 20B in the example in FIG. 2) (referred to as “option 2” hereinafter). In
other words, the terminal transmitting a CSI report may select a resource for the CSI report
similar to data (SL-SCH) transmission timing).
Yoshioka discloses performing a resource selection for transmitting the SL-CSI report, [0033], Yoshioka further teaches transmitting and receiving the CSI report within the CSI window [0037]. However, Yoshioka does not explicitly disclose that the resource selection for transmitting the SL-CSI report is performed from among available resources that occur within a time period defined by a latency bound.
However, SHIN discloses “performing a resource selection for transmitting the SL-CSI
report from among available resources that occur within a time period defined by the
latency bound” (See [0097] The transmission UE may make a request for SL-CSI to the
reception UE. Further, SL CSI feedback request includes a channel selection method
according to a transmission channel configuration of the SL CSI and a transmission resource
allocation mode (mode 1/2). [0147] the reception UE may select the channel through which
the SL CSI is reported to the transmission UE, the UE reporting the SL CSI may use a method
of selecting and transmitting a channel for more rapid transmission among valid PSSCH and PSFCH resources. [0159] the UE performing the SL CSI report should perform the SL CSI
report to satisfy the latency bound by using the value configured through PC5-RRC. [0161] 0161] When the latency bound X for the SL CSI report is determined through the method, the UE should perform the SL CSI report to satisfy the same. Refer to the operation of Mode 1 and the operation of Mode 2 proposed in the disclosure for a method of receiving allocation of resources satisfying the latency bound X. [0299] Further, the following method may be applied to the case in which the UE operating in Mode 2 selects resources for the SL CSI report. Specifically, an upper bound T2 of a resource selection window may be determined in the following detailed operation in order to satisfy a latency bound for the SL CSI report).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified Yoshioka’s SL-CSI resource-selection process according to SHIN such that the available resources from which the UE selects the resource for transmitting the SL-CSI report occur within a resource-selection window constrained by the latency bound for the SL-CSI report, and the motivation to do so would have been in order to ensure that the resource selected for transmission of the SL-CSI report permits the report to satisfy its applicable latency requirement, thereby providing timely SL-CSI reporting.
Yoshioka in view of SHIN does not explicitly disclose determining a remaining PDB
corresponding to remaining latency, determining a subset of resources satisfying the PDB,
and selecting at least one resource from the subset of resources.
However, Khoryaev discloses “wherein the resource selection comprises: (i) determining a
remaining packet delay budget (PDB) corresponding to a remaining latency from a time of
receiving the indication to transmit the SL-CSI report until expiration of the time period
defined by the latency bound” (See [0129] The resource selection window interval may
be bounded by packet delay budget (PDB) requirement. [0131] if the PDB is less than the
RSW, then the RSW should be bounded by the PDB. [0132] The resource selection window is
defined as a time interval during which the UE selects sidelink resources for transmission.
The resource selection window starts after (e.g., right after) resource (re)-selection trigger
and may be bounded by min (T.sub.PDB, T.sub.RSW), where [0133] T.sub.PDB—remaining packet delay budget); “(ii) determining a subset of the available resources that satisfy the remaining PDB” (See [0131] if the PDB is less than the RSW, then the RSW should be bounded by the PDB. [0132] The resource selection window starts after (e.g., right after) resource (re)-selection trigger and may be bounded by min (T.sub.PDB, T.sub.RSW), where [0133] T.sub.PDB—remaining packet delay budget. [0139] Once resource (re)selection is triggered, UE is expected to form candidate resource set composed from at least M candidate resources. [0131]- [0132] disclose constraining the resource selection window based on the remaining PDB, such that only resources that satisfy the remaining PDB are eligible. [0139] discloses forming a candidate resource set from the eligible resources, thus the candidate resource set corresponds to the subset of resources satisfying the remaining PDB); “and (iii) selecting at least one resource from among the subset of available resources for transmitting the SL- CSI report” (See [0139] Once resource (re)selection is triggered, UE is expected to form candidate resource set composed from at least M candidate resources and selects R tentative candidate resources for sidelink transmission).
Thus, Khoryaev teaches constraining the resource-selection interval according to the remaining PDB, forming a candidate resource set within the resource-selection process, and selecting one or more candidate resources therefrom for sidelink transmission.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the SL-CSI resource-selection process of Yoshioka as modified by Shin according to the remaining-PDB-based resource-selection teachings of Khoryaev by applying the remaining-PDB-based resource-selection technique to the latency-constrained SL-CSI resource-selection process of Yoshioka and Shin, and the motivation for doing so would have been to ensure that resource selection accounts for the amount of the latency budget remaining when the SL-CSI report is triggered, thereby avoiding selection of resources that would not permit the SL-CSI report to satisfy its applicable latency requirement and improving timely transmission and QoS.
Regarding claim 17,
Yoshioka in view of SHIN and Khoryaev discloses “The method of claim 16, wherein the
message indicating the latency bound is received via PC5- radio resource control (PC5-RRC)
signaling” (See Yoshioka ¶ [0035] As embodiment A of the present invention, if
transmission timings/resources of the SL-CSI report is “option 2”, it is considered that an SL-
CSI report window is defined, configured in a PC5-RRC).
Regarding claim 21,
Yoshioka in view of SHIN and Khoryaev discloses “The method of claim 16, further
comprising transmitting, to the second WTRU, a computed latency for the SL-CSI report”
(See Yoshioka ¶ [0036] The SL-CSI report window may be configured as a duration/period
from the trigger timing of the CSI report (for example, time X) to the time X+Z or a
duration/period from completion of CSI calculation/preparation time (for example, the time
X+Y) to the time X+Y+Z, as illustrated in FIG. 3. The time Z may be defined in the
specification, (pre)configured, configured in a PC5- RRC, indicated in a MAC-CE (Media
Access Control- Control Element), DCI or SCI. Note: According to spec. [0178] The computed
latency maybe the same as CSI reporting latency).
Regarding claim 24,
Yoshioka discloses “A first wireless transmit/receive unit comprising: a processor; and a transceiver; wherein the processor and transceiver are configured to” (See Fig. 8-9):
“receive, from a second WTRU, a message indicating a latency bound for sending a
sidelink-channel state information (SL-CSI) report” (See ¶ [0035] As embodiment A of the
present invention, if transmission timings/resources of the SL-CSI report is “option 2”, it is
considered that an SL- CSI report window is defined, configured in a PC5-RRC. ¶ [0036] The
SL- CSI report window may be configured as a duration/period from the trigger timing of the
CSI report (for example, time X) to the time X+Z or a duration/period from completion of CSI
calculation/preparation time (for example, the time X+Y) to the time X+Y+Z, as illustrated in
FIG. 3); “receive, from the second WTRU, an indication to transmit the SL-CSI to the second
WTRU” (See ¶[0029] the terminal 20A (UE #A) transmits a reference signal for measuring an
SL-CSI (SL-CSI-RS) and a CSI request to the terminal 20B (UE #B). ¶ [0026] Also, a CSI request
may be replaced with an SL-CSI request); “and perform a resource selection for
transmitting the SL-CSI report” (See ¶ [0033] For transmission timings/resources of the SL-
CSI report, as option 2, it is considered that they are up to a terminal transmitting a CSI
report (the terminal 20B in the example in FIG. 2) (referred to as “option 2” hereinafter). In
other words, the terminal transmitting a CSI report may select a resource for the CSI report
similar to data (SL-SCH) transmission timing).
Yoshioka discloses performing a resource selection for transmitting the SL-CSI report, [0033], Yoshioka further teaches transmitting and receiving the CSI report within the CSI window [0037]. However, Yoshioka does not explicitly disclose that the resource selection for transmitting the SL-CSI report is performed from among available resources that occur within a time period defined by a latency bound.
However, SHIN discloses “perform a resource selection for transmitting the SL-CSI
report from among available resources that occur within a time period defined by the
latency bound” (See [0097] The transmission UE may make a request for SL-CSI to the
reception UE. Further, SL CSI feedback request includes a channel selection method
according to a transmission channel configuration of the SL CSI and a transmission resource
allocation mode (mode 1/2). [0147] the reception UE may select the channel through which
the SL CSI is reported to the transmission UE, the UE reporting the SL CSI may use a method
of selecting and transmitting a channel for more rapid transmission among valid PSSCH and PSFCH resources. [0159] the UE performing the SL CSI report should perform the SL CSI
report to satisfy the latency bound by using the value configured through PC5-RRC. [0161] 0161] When the latency bound X for the SL CSI report is determined through the method, the UE should perform the SL CSI report to satisfy the same. Refer to the operation of Mode 1 and the operation of Mode 2 proposed in the disclosure for a method of receiving allocation of resources satisfying the latency bound X. [0299] Further, the following method may be applied to the case in which the UE operating in Mode 2 selects resources for the SL CSI report. Specifically, an upper bound T2 of a resource selection window may be determined in the following detailed operation in order to satisfy a latency bound for the SL CSI report).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified Yoshioka’s SL-CSI resource-selection process according to SHIN such that the available resources from which the UE selects the resource for transmitting the SL-CSI report occur within a resource-selection window constrained by the latency bound for the SL-CSI report, and the motivation to do so would have been in order to ensure that the resource selected for transmission of the SL-CSI report permits the report to satisfy its applicable latency requirement, thereby providing timely SL-CSI reporting.
Yoshioka in view of SHIN does not explicitly disclose determining a remaining PDB
corresponding to remaining latency, determining a subset of resources satisfying the PDB,
and selecting at least one resource from the subset of resources.
However, Khoryaev discloses “wherein the resource selection comprises: (i) determining a
remaining packet delay budget (PDB) corresponding to a remaining latency from a time of
receiving the indication to transmit the SL-CSI report until expiration of the time period
defined by the latency bound” (See [0129] The resource selection window interval may
be bounded by packet delay budget (PDB) requirement. [0131] if the PDB is less than the
RSW, then the RSW should be bounded by the PDB. [0132] The resource selection window is
defined as a time interval during which the UE selects sidelink resources for transmission.
The resource selection window starts after (e.g., right after) resource (re)-selection trigger
and may be bounded by min (T.sub.PDB, T.sub.RSW), where [0133] T.sub.PDB—remaining packet delay budget); “(ii) determining a subset of the available resources that satisfy the remaining PDB” (See [0131] if the PDB is less than the RSW, then the RSW should be bounded by the PDB. [0132] The resource selection window starts after (e.g., right after) resource (re)-selection trigger and may be bounded by min (T.sub.PDB, T.sub.RSW), where [0133] T.sub.PDB—remaining packet delay budget. [0139] Once resource (re)selection is triggered, UE is expected to form candidate resource set composed from at least M candidate resources. [0131]- [0132] disclose constraining the resource selection window based on the remaining PDB, such that only resources that satisfy the remaining PDB are eligible. [0139] discloses forming a candidate resource set from the eligible resources, thus the candidate resource set corresponds to the subset of resources satisfying the remaining PDB); “and (iii) selecting at least one resource from among the subset of available resources for transmitting the SL- CSI report” (See [0139] Once resource (re)selection is triggered, UE is expected to form candidate resource set composed from at least M candidate resources and selects R tentative candidate resources for sidelink transmission).
Thus, Khoryaev teaches constraining the resource-selection interval according to the remaining PDB, forming a candidate resource set within the resource-selection process, and selecting one or more candidate resources therefrom for sidelink transmission.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the SL-CSI resource-selection process of Yoshioka as modified by Shin according to the remaining-PDB-based resource-selection teachings of Khoryaev by applying the remaining-PDB-based resource-selection technique to the latency-constrained SL-CSI resource-selection process of Yoshioka and Shin, and the motivation for doing so would have been to ensure that resource selection accounts for the amount of the latency budget remaining when the SL-CSI report is triggered, thereby avoiding selection of resources that would not permit the SL-CSI report to satisfy its applicable latency requirement and improving timely transmission and QoS.
Regarding claim 25,
Yoshioka in view of SHIN and Khoryaev discloses “The first WTRU claim 24, wherein the
message indicating the latency bound is received via PC5-radio resource control (PC5-
RRC)” (See Yoshioka ¶[0035] As embodiment A of the present invention, if transmission
timings/resources of the SL-CSI report is “option 2”, it is considered that an SL- CSI report
window is defined, configured in a PC5-RRC).
Regarding claim 29,
Yoshioka in view of SHIN and Khoryaev discloses “The first WTRU of claim 24, wherein the
transceiver is further configured to: transmit, to the second WTRU, a computed latency for
the SL-CSI report” (See Yoshioka ¶[0036] The SL-CSI report window may be configured as a
duration/period from the trigger timing of the CSI report (for example, time X) to the time
X+Z or a duration/period from completion of CSI calculation/preparation time (for example,
the time X+Y) to the time X+Y+Z, as illustrated in FIG. 3. The time Z may be defined in the specification, (pre)configured, configured in a PC5-RRC, indicated in a MAC-CE (Media
Access Control- Control Element), DCI or SCI. Note: According to spec. [0178] The computed
latency maybe the same as CSI reporting latency).
Regarding claim 38,
Yoshioka in view of SHIN and Khoryaev discloses “The method of claim 16, further
comprising: transmitting, to the second WTRU, the SL-CSI report” (See Yoshioka Fig. 2, ¶
[0029] Upon receiving the CSI request, the terminal 20B transmits the SL-CSI report to the
terminal 20A by means of the PSSCH).
Regarding claim 39,
Yoshioka in view of SHIN and Khoryaev discloses “The method of claim 16, further
comprising: on a condition that no resources are available to transmit the SL-CSI report
within the latency bound, canceling the SL-CSI report transmission” (See SHIN ¶ [0146]
When PSSCH resources selected to transmit the SL CSI through sensing and resource
selection in Mode 2 exceeds the SL CSI window on the basis of the valid SL CSI window and
thus the feedback delay is not satisfied, the reception UE may not report the SL CSI to the
transmission UE. [0161] when the UE reporting the SL CSI does not receive allocation of
resources satisfying the latency bound X after receiving an indication of triggering the CSI
report, the UE may not expect an operation of performing the SL CSI report).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Yoshioka
with the teachings of SHIN, and the motivation to do so would have been in order to ensure that the resource selected for transmission of the SL-CSI report permits the report to satisfy its applicable latency requirement, thereby providing timely SL-CSI reporting.
Regarding claim 40,
Yoshioka in view of SHIN and Khoryaev discloses “The method of claim 16, wherein
performing the resource selection is based on the first WTRU having no available
resources” (See SHIN ¶ [0302] A condition for triggering resource (re-)selection may
correspond to the case in which one of the following conditions is satisfied. ¶ [0303] When
there is no configured sidelink grant).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Yoshioka
with the teachings of SHIN, and the motivation to do so would have been in order to ensure that the resource selected for transmission of the SL-CSI report permits the report to satisfy its applicable latency requirement, thereby providing timely SL-CSI reporting.
Regarding claim 41,
Yoshioka in view of SHIN and Khoryaev discloses “The method of claim 16, wherein
performing the resource selection is based on the first WTRU having no available resources
within the time period defined by the latency bound” (See SHIN [0302] A condition for
triggering resource (re-)selection may correspond to the case in which one of the following
conditions is satisfied. ¶ [0303] When there is no configured sidelink grant. ¶ [0305] When
the current configured sidelink grant does not satisfy a latency requirement for data in a
logical channel).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Yoshioka
with the teachings of SHIN, and the motivation to do so would have been in order to ensure that the resource selected for transmission of the SL-CSI report permits the report to satisfy its applicable latency requirement, thereby providing timely SL-CSI reporting.
Regarding claim 44, these limitations are rejected on the same ground as claim 38.
Regarding claim 45, these limitations are rejected on the same ground as claim 39.
Regarding claim 46, these limitations are rejected on the same ground as claim 40.
Regarding claim 47, these limitations are rejected on the same ground as claim 41.
Claims 19 and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshioka et
al. (US 2022/0287006 A1) in view of SHIN et al. (US 20220201528 A1) and further in view of
Khoryaev et al. (US 20200229171 A1) and further in view of Cheng et al. (US 20190394758
A1).
Regarding claims 19 and 27,
Yoshioka in view of SHIN and Khoryaev discloses claim 19 of “The method of claim 16”, and
claim 27 of “The first WTRU of claim 24”, but does not explicitly disclose a mapping
between SR configurations and CSI latency values.
However, Cheng discloses “wherein the first WTRU is configured with a mapping between
scheduling request (SR) configurations and corresponding CSI reporting latency values”
(See ¶ [0099] Even though UE is configured with PUCCH resources of PUCCH format 2,
PUCCH format 3 and PUCCH format 4, UE may only select PUCCH format 2 to fulfill the
latency requirement if the CSI report is for high reliability service. Note: This means there is a mapping/ correspondence between PUCCH resources and CSI reporting latency values.
According to applicant’s spec. [0196], the SR configurations are PUCCH resources).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Yoshioka,
SHIN and Khoryaev with the teachings of Cheng, and the motivation to do so would have
been to enhance dynamic adaptation to network conditions.
Claims 42 and 48 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Yoshioka et al. (US 2022/0287006 A1) in view of SHIN et al. (US 20220201528 A1) and
further in view of Khoryaev et al. (US 20200229171 A1) and further in view of LEE et al. (US
2022/0007388 A1).
Regarding claims 42 and 48,
Yoshioka in view of SHIN and Khoryaev discloses claim 42 of “The method of claim 16”, and
claim 48 of “The first WTRU of claim 24”, but does not explicitly disclose that the SL-CSI
report is transmitted in a MAC CE.
However, LEE discloses “wherein the SL-CSI report is transmitted using a sidelink medium
access control element (SL MAC CE)” (See ¶ [0140] the UE may use the container based on
PHY signaling (or the container of the MAC CE format) when reporting the SL A- CSI to
another UE (which has triggered the SL A-CSI reporting)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Yoshioka,
SHIN and Khoryaev with the teachings of LEE, and the motivation to do so would have been
to have efficient resource utilization.
Claims 50-51 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshioka et al.
(US 2022/0287006 A1) in view of SHIN et al. (US 20220201528 A1) and further in view of
Khoryaev et al. (US 20200229171 A1) and further in view of LIU et al. (US 20200137738 A1).
Regarding claims 50 and 51,
Yoshioka in view of SHIN and Khoryaev discloses claim 50 of “The method of claim 16”, and
claim 51 of “The WTRU of claim 24”, but does not explicitly disclose providing the remaining
PDB to a physical layer, and receiving a subset of the available resources that satisfy the
remaining PDB.
However, LIU discloses “wherein the determining the subset of available resources that
satisfy the remaining PDB comprises: providing the remaining PDB to a physical later of
the first WTRU” (See [0135] a media access control layer (Media Access Control, MAC) of
the terminal 1 may deliver the service latency information, and the service reliability
information of the first data to a physical layer (PHY). The latency information may be, but is
not limited to, the latency requirement information); “and receiving, from the physical
layer, a subset of the available resources that satisfy the remaining PDB” (See [0135]
The physical layer selects a candidate resource set from the first subpool, and then delivers
the candidate resource set to the MAC layer. Then the MAC layer selects the first time-
frequency resource from the candidate resource set. Note: The physical layer receives latency requirement information, which corresponds to remaining PDB/ latency constraint,
and selects and sends a subset of resources/ candidate resource set that is based on/
satisfies this latency constraint).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Yoshioka,
SHIN and Khoryaev, with the teachings of LIU, by incorporating cross-layer resource
selection, and the motivation to do so would have been to improve coordination across
protocol layers and ensure that selected resources satisfy latency constraints, thereby
enabling timely transmission.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SALMA A AYAD whose telephone number is (571)270-0285. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 to 5:30 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, Yemane Mesfin can be reached at 5712723927. 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.
/SALMA AYAD/Examiner, Art Unit 2462
/YEMANE MESFIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2462
Prosecution Insights