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 § 112
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.
Claims 21, 26, 31 and 36 are 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.
Claims 21, 26, 31 and 36 recite “wherein when the Priority of the sidelink HARQ is indicated in the priority fields of the SCI, when a field used by the SCI to indicate the priority of the sidelink HARQ is in a default state, the priority of the sidelink HARQ is a lowest priority.”
The term “lowest priority” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “lowest” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Applicant’s Specification does not disclose what other types of signals are included in the set of priorities in which the sidelink HARQ is the “lowest priority.”
Additionally, the term “default” is indefinite because a person of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the invention, would not have known how to determine whether the indicated priority for the sidelink HARQ is in a “default state.” The term “default” means a preselected option. However, a priority that is indicated in priority fields is not preselected. Accordingly, a person of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the invention, would not have known how to ascertain the metes and bounds of the term “priority.”
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.
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) 21-22, 25-27, 30-32, 35-37 and 40-48 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshioka et al. (US 2022/0321278) in view of Pelletier et al. (US 2017/0031565), and further in view of Panteleev et al. (US 2021/0243796).
Regarding claim 21, Yoshioka discloses a method, comprising:
obtaining, by a first terminal device, a first resource used to transmit a sidelink hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) and a second resource used to transmit a downlink HARQ, wherein the sidelink HARQ corresponds to sidelink data sent by the first terminal device, and the downlink HARQ corresponds to downlink data that is received by the first terminal device from a network device (Yoshioka, Fig. 3; paragraph [0007], in sidelink transmission mode 1, user apparatus 20A transmits HARQ-ACK to base station apparatus 10 on a PUCCH; paragraph [0009], HARQ-ACKs in direct communication between terminals scheduled by a base station; paragraph [0032], based on SL scheduling determined by the base station, HARQ-ACK is fed back from the user apparatus 20A to the base station apparatus 10; paragraph [0034]; paragraph [0036], SL HARQ-ACK on the sidelink between the user apparatus 20A and the user apparatus 20B and Uu HARQ-ACK between the user apparatus 20A and the base station apparatus; paragraph [0073], receiving DCI designating allocation of feedback Uu-HARQ-ACK and another DCI designating SL-HARQ-ACK in the same slot);
determining, by the first terminal device, a first threshold from a plurality of thresholds based on a service type of the downlink data, wherein at least one threshold of the plurality of thresholds correspond to different service types of the downlink data, different thresholds correspond to different service types of the downlink data, the plurality of thresholds includes at least one threshold set, and the at least one threshold set may be preconfigured or predefined, wherein the at least one threshold set includes at least two different thresholds, and the at least one threshold set is used to represent a priority of downlink data of one service type (Yoshioka, paragraphs [0041]-[0042] and [0047]-[0049], assign different priority levels for different service types including eMBB and URLLC; paragraph [0073], drop or postpone either one of the Uu-HARQ-ACK or the SL-HARQ-ACK based on priorities set for SL-unicast-HARQ-ACK, Uu-HARQ-ACK, SL-groupcast-HARQ-ACK, or based on priorities corresponding to scheduling earlier than the latest; paragraph [0078], Uu eMBB-HARQ-ACK, Uu URLLC-HARQ-ACK); and
sending, by the first terminal device when the first resource and the second resource overlap in time domain, feedback information to the network device on a third resource based on a comparison of a priority of the sidelink HARQ with the a first threshold, wherein the feedback information comprises the sidelink HARQ or the downlink HARQ, the third resource is determined based on the first resource and the second resource, and wherein the third resource is the first resource, the second resource, or a different resource (Yoshioka, paragraph [0036], same slot is indicated for feeding back an SL HARQ-ACK and a Uu HARQ-ACK; collision between PUCCH including SL HARQ-ACK and PUCCH including another type of UCI; paragraphs [0047]-[0049], different priority levels for different service types including eMBB and URLLC; paragraph [0073], receiving DCI designating allocation of feedback Uu-HARQ-ACK and another DCI designating SL-HARQ-ACK in the same slot; paragraph [0073], drop or postpone either one of the Uu-HARQ-ACK or the SL-HARQ-ACK based on priorities set for SL-unicast-HARQ-ACK, Uu-HARQ-ACK, SL-groupcast-HARQ-ACK),
wherein when the sidelink HARQ includes HARQs corresponding to a plurality of different pieces of data sent by the first terminal device to one or more terminal devices, such that there are a plurality of pieces of sidelink data corresponding to the sidelink HARQ, the priority of the sidelink HARQ is a largest value in values of priority fields in a plurality of pieces of sidelink control information (SCI) for scheduling the plurality of pieces of data (Yoshioka, paragraph [0041], eMBB is associated with a low priority; paragraph [0042], URLLC is associated with a high priority; paragraphs [0041]-[0042] and [0047]-[0049], assign different priority levels for different service types including eMBB and URLLC; paragraph [0073], drop or postpone either one of the Uu-HARQ-ACK or the SL-HARQ-ACK based on priorities set for SL-unicast-HARQ-ACK, Uu-HARQ-ACK, SL-groupcast-HARQ-ACK; paragraph [0077], eMBB or URLLC HARQ-ACK may be dropped or postponed based on the priority), and
wherein when the Priority of the sidelink HARQ is indicated in the priority fields of the SCI, when a field used by the SCI to indicate the priority of the sidelink HARQ, the priority of the sidelink HARQ is a lowest priority (Yoshioka, paragraphs [0041]-[0042] and [0047]-[0049], assign different priority levels for different service types including eMBB and URLLC; paragraph [0073], drop or postpone either one of the Uu-HARQ-ACK or the SL-HARQ-ACK based on priorities set for SL-unicast-HARQ-ACK, Uu-HARQ-ACK, SL-groupcast-HARQ-ACK, or based on priorities corresponding to scheduling earlier than the latest; priorities may set in an order of SL-unicast HARQ-ACK>Uu HARQ-ACK>SL-groupcast HARQ-ACK, so SL-groupcast HARQ-ACK is the lowest priority).
Yoshioka does disclose that [a set of] multiple types of different priority thresholds may be associated with same types of data, ([the set of] different priority levels for different downlink service types including eMBB vs. URLLC, unicast vs. groupcast), as well as for Uu vs. sidelink, and further discloses that combinations of those types of data may have different priority thresholds (different priorities set for SL-unicast-HARQ-ACK, Uu-HARQ-ACK, SL-groupcast-HARQ-ACK). A person of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the invention, would have understood that different priority threshold levels may be associated with downlink data, such as downlink-unicast data vs downlink-groupcast data or downlink-eMBB vs. downlink-URLLC data. The motivation would have been to prioritize different types of data in the downlink.
Yoshioka does not explicitly disclose a default priority state.
Pelletier discloses wherein when the priority of the HARQ is indicated in the priority fields of control information, when a field used by the control information to indicate the priority of the HARQ is in a default state (Pelletier, paragraph [0568], control information sets a specific priority for a given HARQ process, WTRU receives further control signaling that deactivates the non-default priority).
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 a default priority for a HARQ process, in the invention of Yoshioka. The motivation to combine the references would have been to reduce the amount of configuration signaling needed.
Additionally, in order to advance prosecution, the Examiner includes the Panteleev reference, which more explicitly discloses that one service type is represented by a set of at least two different priority thresholds (Panteleev, paragraph [0043], conditional priorities for the Uu link; paragraph [0045], different set of threshold may be configured for unicast and broadcast, unicast and groupcast, groupcast and broadcast). A person of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the invention, would have understood that different priority threshold levels may be associated with downlink data, such as downlink-unicast data vs downlink-groupcast data or downlink-eMBB vs. downlink-URLLC data. The motivation would have been to prioritize different types of data in the downlink.
Regarding claim 22, Yoshioka in view of Pelletier, and further in view of Panteleev discloses the method according to claim 21, wherein the priority of the sidelink HARQ is further based on: a priority of a transmission resource of the sidelink HARQ (Yoshioka, paragraphs [0047]-[0049], different priority levels for different service types including eMBB and URLLC; paragraph [0073], drop or postpone either one of the Uu-HARQ-ACK or the SL-HARQ-ACK based on priorities set for SL-unicast-HARQ-ACK, Uu-HARQ-ACK, SL-groupcast-HARQ-ACK).
Regarding claim 25, Yoshioka in view of Pelletier, and further in view of Panteleev discloses the method according to claim 24, wherein sending, by the first terminal device, feedback information to the network device on the third resource based on the priority of the sidelink HARQ and the first threshold comprises: when a value of the priority of the sidelink HARQ is greater than or equal to the first threshold, sending, by the first terminal device, the downlink HARQ to the network device on the third resource and not sending the sidelink HARQ; or when a value of the priority of the sidelink HARQ is smaller than the first threshold, sending, by the first terminal device, the sidelink HARQ to the network device on the third resource and not sending the downlink HARQ (Yoshioka, paragraphs [0047]-[0049], different priority levels for different service types including eMBB and URLLC; paragraph [0073], drop or postpone either one of the Uu-HARQ-ACK or the SL-HARQ-ACK based on priorities set for SL-unicast-HARQ-ACK, Uu-HARQ-ACK, SL-groupcast-HARQ-ACK).
Claims 26-27 and 30 are rejected under substantially the same rationale as claims 21-22 and 25, respectively.
Claims 31-32 and 35 are rejected under substantially the same rationale as claims 21-22 and 25, respectively. Yoshioka additionally discloses a communication apparatus, comprising at least one processor and a memory, wherein the memory stores program instructions, and when executing the program instructions, the at least one processor executes operations (Yoshioka, paragraph [0114], program on the processor and memory device cause the processor to execute operations).
Claims 36-37 and 40 are rejected under substantially the same rationale as claims 21-22 and 25, respectively. Yoshioka additionally discloses a communication apparatus, comprising at least one processor and a memory, wherein the memory stores program instructions, and when executing the program instructions, the at least one processor executes operations (Yoshioka, paragraph [0114], program on the processor and memory device cause the processor to execute operations).
Regarding claim 41, Yoshioka in view of Pelletier, and further in view of Panteleev discloses the method according to claim 24, wherein sending, by the first terminal device, feedback information to the network device on the third resource based on the priority of the sidelink HARQ and the first threshold comprises: when a value of the priority of the sidelink HARQ is greater than the first threshold, sending, by the first terminal device, the sidelink HARQ and the downlink HARQ to the network device on the third resource; and when a value of the priority of the sidelink HARQ is less than or equal to the first threshold, sending, by the first terminal device, the downlink HARQ to the network device on the third resource and not sending the sidelink HARQ (Yoshioka, paragraphs [0047]-[0049], different priority levels for different service types including eMBB and URLLC; paragraph [0073], drop or postpone either one of the Uu-HARQ-ACK or the SL-HARQ-ACK based on priorities set for SL-unicast-HARQ-ACK, Uu-HARQ-ACK, SL-groupcast-HARQ-ACK).
Claims 42-44 are rejected under substantially the same rationale as claim 41.
Regarding claim 45, Yoshioka in view of Pelletier, and further in view of Panteleev discloses the method according to claim 21, wherein the priority of the sidelink HARQ is further based on a priority of sidelink data corresponding to the sidelink HARQ (Yoshioka, paragraphs [0041]-[0042] and [0047]-[0049], assign different priority levels for different service types including eMBB and URLLC; paragraph [0073], drop or postpone either one of the Uu-HARQ-ACK or the SL-HARQ-ACK based on priorities set for SL-unicast-HARQ-ACK, Uu-HARQ-ACK, SL-groupcast-HARQ-ACK, or based on priorities corresponding to scheduling earlier than the latest; paragraph [0078], Uu eMBB-HARQ-ACK, Uu URLLC-HARQ-ACK) (Panteleev, paragraph [0039], packet priority; paragraph [0041], some services get higher priority).
Claims 46-48 are rejected under substantially the same rationale as claim 45.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed February 2, 2026 have been fully considered but they are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALAN LOUIS LINDENBAUM whose telephone number is (571)270-3858. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM EST.
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, Nishant Divecha can be reached on (571) 270-3125. 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.
/ALAN L LINDENBAUM/ Examiner, Art Unit 2466
/Nishant Divecha/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2419