DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Amendment filed 8/31/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 1, 10, 15, 21, and 29 have been amended. The previous objection to claim 10 is withdrawn in light of the amendments.
Claim 2 has been previously cancelled. Claims 1 and 3-31 remain pending.
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.
Claims 15-20 and 29-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 15 and 29 continue to recite a “receiving/receive” step as “from a second UE and according to an inter-UE coordination scheme”, without clearly providing for what is received from the second UE according to an inter-UE coordination scheme.
Applicant’s contention that the claim clearly states the “the indication of preferred resources or indication of non-preferred sidelink resources for transmission to the second UE” is what is received is inaccurate. This quoted portion is only present much later in the claim as part of a “wherein” statement, but is not clearly referring to the receiving/receive step in claims 15 and 29.
Further, claim 15 is presently amended to delete repeated language “the indication of preferred resources or indication of non-preferred sidelink resources for transmission to the second UE” in the above-referenced “wherein” statement, but claim 29 has not been so amended.
Claims 16-20, 30, and 31 are maintained as rejected based on their dependence from claims 15 and 29, respectively. See response to arguments for further clarification.
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.
Claims 1, 3-13, 15-19, 21-27, and 29-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Samsung: “On Feasibility and Benefits for Mode2 Enhancements”, 3GP Draft, R1-2101232, 3GPP TSP RAN WG1 #104-e (hereafter “Samsung”) in view of Kalhan et al. (US20240205920A1; hereafter “Kalhan”).
Regarding claims 1 and 21,
Samsung discloses a first user equipment (UE) (Figure 2, RX UE-A) for wireless communication comprising one or more memories; and one or more processors, coupled to the memories (inherent to UE operating in release 17 NR sidelink mode 2 as disclosed in Section 1-2 and Figure 2) configured to perform a method comprising selecting an inter-UE coordination scheme, from stored configuration information or a received indication (Section 2, Figure 2; RSAI; proposal 4 options 1-2 predefined time or request signaling on RSAI), wherein the scheme is based at least in part on a resource pool associated with the first UE and the inter-UE coordination scheme; and transmitting, to a second UE (Figure 2, Tx UE-B), an indication of one or more of preferred sidelink resources or non-preferred sidelink resources (Section 2, RSAI details, options 1-3) based at least in part on the selection of the inter-UE coordination scheme (Section 1-2; inter-UE coordination among UEs; release 16 only TX-UE performs the resource allocation whereas release 17 enabling other UEs to provide RSAI/indication to Tx UE for improving inter-UE coordination scheme selection).
Samsung discloses the inter-UE coordination scheme is one of: first scheme in which the first UE indicates preferred sidelink resources to the second UE, wherein the second UE does not sense sidelink resources; second scheme in which the first UE indicates preferred sidelink resources to the second UE, wherein the second UE senses sidelink resources; third scheme in which the first UE indicates non-preferred sidelink resources to the second UE, wherein the second UE does not sense sidelink resources; fourth scheme in which the first UE indicates non-preferred sidelink resources to the second UE, wherein the second UE senses sidelink resources; and fifth scheme in which the first UE indicates non-preferred sidelink resources to other UEs (Section 1-2 describes both preferred and non-preferred sidelink resources signaled between UEs; Section 2 RSAI details under Proposal 3 describes RSAI between UEs with and without sensing).
Samsung discloses inter-UE coordination signaling for both preferred and non-preferred resources of the first UE’s resource pool, as shown above. However, Samsung does not expressly disclose selecting, from stored configuration information or received indication, between preferred and non-preferred resources as the basis for transmitting the indication of preferred or non-preferred resources.
Kalhan discloses analogous art (Title: Inter-UE Coordination) including selecting, from stored configuration information or received indication, between preferred and non-preferred resources as the basis for transmitting the indication of preferred or non-preferred resources (Fig. 3; paragraph 38-40; receiving a list of preferred and non-preferred resources and an indication of expected, potential, and/or detected resource conflicts on those resources for selection).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing to modify Samsung by selecting, from stored configuration information or received indication, between preferred and non-preferred resources as the basis for transmitting the indication of preferred or non-preferred resources, as shown by Kalhan, thereby optimizing resource allocation among potentially conflicting resources.
Regarding claims 15 and 29 (as best understood),
Samsung discloses a first user equipment (UE) (Figure 2, TX UE-B) for wireless communication, comprising: one or more memories; and one or more processors, coupled to the memories (inherent to UE operating in release 17 NR sidelink mode 2 as disclosed in Section 1-2 and Figure 2) configured to perform a method comprising receiving, from a second UE (Figure 2, RX UE-A) according to an inter-UE coordination scheme based at least in part on a resource pool associated with the first UE and the inter-UE coordination scheme, an indication of preferred sidelink resources or non-preferred sidelink resources for transmission to the second UE (Section 2, Figure 2; RSAI), sensing sidelink resources if the inter-UE coordination scheme specifies that the first UE is to perform sensing (Section 2, RSAI details, options 1-2 based on sensing) and transmitting a communication on a sidelink channel to the second UE based at least in part on the indication of preferred sidelink resources or non-preferred sidelink resources and a result of the sensing if sensing is performed (Section 1-2; inter-UE coordination among UEs; release 16 only TX-UE performs the resource allocation whereas release 17 enabling other UEs to provide RSAI to Tx UE).
Samsung discloses the inter-UE coordination scheme is one of: first scheme in which the first UE indicates preferred sidelink resources to the second UE, wherein the second UE does not sense sidelink resources; second scheme in which the first UE indicates preferred sidelink resources to the second UE, wherein the second UE senses sidelink resources; third scheme in which the first UE indicates non-preferred sidelink resources to the second UE, wherein the second UE does not sense sidelink resources; fourth scheme in which the first UE indicates non-preferred sidelink resources to the second UE, wherein the second UE senses sidelink resources; and fifth scheme in which the first UE indicates non-preferred sidelink resources to other UEs (Section 1-2 describes both preferred and non-preferred sidelink resources signaled between UEs; Section 2 RSAI details under Proposal 3 describes RSAI between UEs with and without sensing).
Samsung discloses inter-UE coordination signaling for both preferred and non-preferred resources of the first UE’s resource pool, as shown above. However, Samsung does not expressly disclose selecting, from stored configuration information or received indication, between preferred and non-preferred resources as the basis for transmitting the indication of preferred or non-preferred resources.
Kalhan discloses analogous art (Title: Inter-UE Coordination) including selecting, from stored configuration information or received indication, between preferred and non-preferred resources as the basis for transmitting the indication of preferred or non-preferred resources (Fig. 3; paragraph 38-40; receiving a list of preferred and non-preferred resources and an indication of expected, potential, and/or detected resource conflicts on those resources for selection).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing to modify Samsung by selecting, from stored configuration information or received indication, between preferred and non-preferred resources as the basis for transmitting the indication of preferred or non-preferred resources, as shown by Kalhan, thereby optimizing resource allocation among potentially conflicting resources.
Regarding claims 3, 22, and 31 (as best understood),
Samsung discloses the inter-UE coordination scheme based at least in part on whether the resource pool supports unicast, groupcast, or broadcast (Section 2; RSAI details; Proposal 2-3; inter-UE coordination supported for unicast/groupcast; Release 16 already supports sidelink for unicast/groupcast).
Regarding claims 4, 23 and 16 and 30 (as best understood),
Samsung discloses the receive/transmit of indication includes an inter-UE coordination scheme preferred by the second UE (Section 1-2; Proposals 1-7 describe use of RSAI under different scenarios as preferred/selected by RX and/or TX UEs).
Regarding claim 5,
Samsung does not expressly disclose to select the inter-UE coordination scheme based at least in part on a level of congestion in the resource pool.
Kalhan discloses analogous art (Title: Inter-UE Coordination) including selection of inter-UE coordination scheme based at least in part on a level of congestion in the resource pool (Fig. 3; paragraph 38-40; receiving a list of preferred and non-preferred resources and an indication of expected, potential, and/or detected resource conflicts/congestion on those resources for selection).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing to modify Samsung by enabling selection of inter-UE coordination scheme based at least in part on a level of congestion in the resource pool, as shown by Kalhan, thereby optimizing resource allocation among congested resources.
Regarding claim 6,
Samsung discloses to select the inter-UE coordination scheme based at least in part on whether periodic reservation is enabled for the resource pool (Section 2 “benefits from inter-UE coordination observed for periodic & aperiodic traffics”).
Regarding claims 7 and 24,
Samsung discloses to select the inter-UE coordination scheme based at least in part on whether feedback is enabled for the resource pool (Section 2; RSAI Details; HARQ feedback already supported in Rel-16).
Regarding claim 8,
Samsung discloses HARQ feedback already supported in Rel-16 (Section 2; RSAI Details) but does not expressly show to select the inter-UE coordination scheme based at least in part on a type of feedback.
Kalhan discloses analogous art (Title: Inter-UE Coordination) including including to select the inter-UE coordination scheme based at least in part on a type of feedback (Fig. 3; paragraph 38-40; receiving a list of preferred and non-preferred resources and feedback indications of expected, potential, and/or detected resource conflicts/congestion on those resources for selection).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing to modify Samsung by enabling selection of inter-UE coordination scheme based based at least in part on a type of feedback, as shown by Kalhan, thereby optimizing resource allocation among potentially congested resources.
Regarding claim 9,
Samsung discloses the indication of the one or more of preferred sidelink resources or non-preferred sidelink resources indicates one or more of a type of inter-UE coordination message or a resource conflict (Section 2, Proposal 5-6 describes various message/container types carrying RSAI).
Regarding claims 10, 17 (as best understood), and 25,
Samsung discloses the inter-UE coordination scheme is one of a first inter-UE coordination scheme and a second inter-UE coordination scheme configured for the resource pool (Section 1-2 describes both preferred and non-preferred sidelink resources signaled between UEs; Section 2 RSAI details under Proposal 3 describes RSAI between UEs with and without sensing), but fails to expressly disclose an indication of preferred or non-preferred sidelink resources resources according to the first inter-UE coordination scheme on a first set of resources and to transmit an indication of preferred sidelink resources or non-preferred sidelink resources according to second inter-UE coordination scheme on second set of resources.
Kalhan discloses analogous art (Title: Inter-UE Coordination) including an indication of preferred sidelink resources or non-preferred sidelink resources according to the first inter-UE coordination scheme on a first set of resources and to transmit an indication of preferred sidelink resources or non-preferred sidelink resources according to the second inter-UE coordination scheme on a second set of resources (Fig. 3; paragraph 38-40; receiving a list of preferred and non-preferred resources and an indication of resource conflicts on those resources for selection).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing to modify Samsung by transmitting an indication of preferred sidelink resources or non-preferred sidelink resources according to the first inter-UE coordination scheme on a first set of resources and transmitting an indication of preferred sidelink resources or non-preferred sidelink resources according to the second inter-UE coordination scheme on a second set of resources, as shown by Kalhan, thereby optimizing resource allocation among potentially conflicting resources.
Regarding claims 11, 18 (as best understood), and 26,
Samsung discloses to indicate, to the second UE, the inter-UE coordination scheme selected for the resource pool in sidelink control information (Section 2, Proposal 5-6 uses SCI as container carrying RSAI).
Regarding claim 12,
Samsung discloses to indicate, to the second UE, the inter-UE coordination scheme selected for the resource pool in a medium access control control element (MAC-CE) (Section 2, Proposal 5, Option 1).
Regarding claims 13, 19 (as best understood), and 27,
Samsung discloses to indicate, to the second UE, the inter-UE coordination scheme selected for the resource pool by a sidelink control information format (Section 2, Proposal 5; SCI 1st/2nd stage).
5. Claims 14, 20, and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Samsung and Kalhan in view of Li et al. (US20210250954A1), hereafter Li.
Regarding claims 14, 20 (as best understood), and 28,
Samsung discloses consideration of which physical channel/container is used in determining inter-UE coordination (Proposal 5-6; consideration of container carrying RSAI including MAC message, RRC signaling, SCI formats and PSFCH) but does Samsung and Kalhan do not expressly disclose to indicate the inter-UE coordination scheme selected for the resource pool by one or more of how a cyclic redundancy check for a message is scrambled.
Li discloses analogous art (Title: Method and Apparatus for Scheduling Device to Device Sidelink Transmission in Wireless Communication System) indicating the inter-UE coordination scheme selected for the resource pool by one or more of how a cyclic redundancy check for a message is scrambled (Fig. 12-15; paragraph 312-328; CRC parity bits scrambled with specific sequence to indication inter-UE scheduling).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing to modify Samsung and Kalhan by indicating the inter-UE coordination scheme selected for the resource pool by one or more of how a cyclic redundancy check for a message is scrambled, as shown by Li, thereby group specific inter-UE coordination.
Response to Arguments
6. Applicant's arguments filed 8/31/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In the Remarks on pg. 13-14 of the Amendment, Applicant contends claims 15 (and, presumably, 29) clearly state that the “receive/receiving” steps describe receiving….the indication of preferred sidelink resources or indication of non-preferred sidelink resources for transmission to the second UE”. However, as shown above in the maintained rejection, neither claim 15 nor claim 29 expressly describes this language in the receive/receiving step. Rather, the language “the indication of preferred sidelink resources or indication of non-preferred sidelink resources for transmission to the second UE” is first included in a subsequent “wherein” statement recited after the receive/receiving step. Therefore, the rejections of claims 15-20 and 29-31 under 35 USC 112(b) are properly maintained.
In the Remarks on pg. 14-16 of the Amendment, Applicant contends Samsung fails to describe a scheme of inter-UE coordination as presented in independent claims 1, 15, 21, and 29. Applicant appears to contend that Samsung only provides an indication of preferred or non-preferred resources but does not select an inter-UE coordination scheme from stored configuration or received indication, where the scheme is based on a sensing process as well as on a resource pool associated with the first UE, as claimed. Applicant further contends Kalhan’s disclosure of providing a list of preferred or non-preferred resources does not disclose that a scheme itself is selected from stored information or received indication.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. In regards to claims 1 and 21 requiring “selection” of the scheme as well as claims 15 and 29 requiring the “receiving” of an indication of that selection, under a broadest reasonable interpretation, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that any “indication” of an inter-UE coordination scheme related to preferred and non-preferred resources necessarily requires the selection of the preferred or non-preferred scheme/resources prior to such indication being used for transmission. Turning now to the applied art under that broadest reasonable interpretation, Samsung discloses, within proposal 4, options 1-2 to define a condition for the UE-A to provide RSAI (i.e. the indication) to UE-B based on either a pre-defined time instance “(pre-) configurated in a pool” (i.e. stored configuration) or request signaling (i.e. received indication), as claimed. Sections 1-2 of Samsung further discloses both preferred and non-preferred sidelink resources signaled between UEs while Section 2 RSAI details under Proposal 3 describes RSAI between UEs with and without sensing. Samsung is admitted as failing to expressly disclose the selection between the schemes of preferred and non-preferred resources from stored configuration information or received indication. For this express teaching, Kalhan is further cited for showing the receiving of a list of preferred and non-preferred resources and an indication of resource conflicts on those resources for selection of an inter-UE coordination scheme to be used for subsequent transmission. Consideration of these combined disclosures of Samsung and Kalhan would optimize resource allocation among potentially conflicting resources, thereby meeting the contested claim limitations given a broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim language without improperly reading limitations in from the Specification. Therefore, the rejections based on the combination of Samsung and Kalhan are properly maintained.
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 GREGORY B SEFCHECK whose telephone number is (571)272-3098. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 6AM-4PM.
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, Chirag Shah can be reached on 571-272-3144. 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.
/GREGORY B SEFCHECK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2477
Prosecution Insights