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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ arguments filed on 9 December 2025 have been fully considered but they are not deemed to be persuasive.
Applicant argues that the combination of Wang and 3GPP fails to teach “wherein the first portion of the control information comprises a modulation and coding scheme (MCS) of the data and the first portion of the control information excludes the destination ID associated with the data,” and further asserts that 3GPP SCI format 0 includes both MCS and destination ID and therefore cannot teach the claimed feature.
The argument is not persuasive because it improperly attacks the references individually rather than the combination of Wang and 3GPP. The rejection does not rely on 3GPP alone to disclose the claimed subject matter, but instead on the combined teachings of Wang and 3GPP.
Wang teaches transmitting control information and associated data over multiple time-frequency resources, while 3GPP teaches control information fields including modulation and coding scheme (MCS) and destination identifier (ID). The combination of these references suggests distributing control information across multiple transmission portions or resource subsets.
Applicant’s argument that 3GPP SCI format 0 includes both MCS and destination ID does not rebut the rejection, as the rejection relies on an obvious modification of the prior art, namely, organizing known control information fields across different portions of control signaling. Rearranging or partitioning known information elements (e.g., MCS and destination ID) across multiple transmissions or resource subsets constitutes a predictable variation within the level of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding the limitation “and the first portion of the control information excludes the destination ID associated with the data,” Wang teaches partitioning control information into portions, and 3GPP teaches that destination ID is a distinct control information field separate from other parameters such as MCS (sec. 5.4.3.1.1). It would have been obvious to place the destination ID in a different portion from the first portion, thereby causing the first portion to exclude the destination ID, as a matter of routine design choice in arranging known control information fields.
Further, Applicant has not provided evidence of criticality or unexpected results associated with excluding the destination ID from a first portion of control information while including MCS. Nor has Applicant shown that the prior art teaches away from such an arrangement.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the combined teachings of Wang and 3GPP to distribute control information fields, including placing MCS information in a first portion while omitting destination ID from that portion, in order to optimize signaling efficiency and flexibility.
Therefore, the rejection under 35 U.S.C. §103 is maintained.
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 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 7-14, 16, 17, 19, 20, 22-29, 31, 32, 34, 35 and 37-44 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable by Wang et al (US Pub. 2022/0353846) in view of 3GPP TS 36.212/36.211, Rel-12 (Mar. 2015), hereinafter “3GPP”.
Regarding claim 1, Wang discloses an apparatus for wireless communication at a device comprising a memory and processors configured to:
• determine a cyclic shift;
Wang discloses transmission of sidelink control information (SCI1) on the PSCCH, which is transmitted with reference symbol (RS) sequences (para. 33, Fig. 3). The PSCCH RS sequences are designed to provide orthogonality between transmitting devices, which inherently require use of cyclic shifts of base sequences as specified in 3GPP standards.
• transmit a first portion of control information via a first subset of time-frequency resources with a reference symbol (RS) sequence based on the cyclic shift;
Wang discloses that SCI1 is transmitted on the PSCCH (para. 33), which occupies specific time-frequency resources and is associated with RS sequences. 3GPP TS 36.211 (Rel-12), §9.8, further discloses that sidelink PSCCH RS sequences are generated by applying cyclic shifts to a base Zadoff-Chu sequence. Thus, the PSCCH RS transmitted with SCI1 is based on a cyclic shift.
• transmit a second portion of the control information via a second subset of the time-frequency resources;
Wang discloses that SCI is transmitted in two stages, SCI1 and SCI2, where SCI2 is transmitted separately from SCI1 on other resources (para. 33).
• transmit data associated with the control information via a third subset of the time-frequency resources;
Wang discloses that the PSSCH carries user data and is transmitted using resources identified by SCI1/SCI2 (para. 33, para. 54).
• wherein the first portion of the control information comprises information to decode the data and a resource allocation of the data, …;
Wang discloses SCI1 providing control information for resource allocation and transmission parameters (para. 33, para. 54).
• wherein the second portion of the control information comprises a destination identifier (destination ID) associated with the data.
Wang discloses that SCI2 carries additional control information for identifying receiving UEs (para. 33), including destination-related identifiers.
Wang does not specifically disclose wherein the information to decode the data comprises a modulation and coding scheme (MCS) of the data and the first portion of the control information excludes the destination ID associated with the data. However, 3GPP discloses that SCI format 0 (first-stage SCI) explicitly includes an “MCS (5 bits)” field corresponding to the modulation and coding scheme of the data transmitted on the PSSCH. This MCS field is used by the receiving UE to decode the data. (sec. 5.4.3.1.1, Table 5.4.3.1.1-1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the explicit MCS field of SCI format 0 as taught by 3GPP into the first-stage SCI of Wang, in order to enable the receiving UE to decode the PSSCH data. Wang already teaches that SCI1 provides control information for locating resources and transmission parameters; 3GPP makes explicit that this control information includes MCS of the data. The combination represents the predictable use of a known control field (MCS) in a known SCI framework to achieve the expected result of decoding the transmitted data.
Furthermore, in light of Wang teaching partitioning control information into portions as recited above, 3GPP teaches that 3GPP teaches that destination ID is a distinct control information field separate from other parameters such as MCS, as shown in the sidelink control information (SCI) format definition, which explicitly lists fields including a modulation and coding scheme (MCS) field and a destination ID field (e.g., group destination ID / NSAID) as separate entries within the SCI structure (see 3GPP TS 36.212, Section 5.4.3.1, SCI format table). It would have been obvious to place the destination ID in a different portion from the first portion, thereby causing the first portion to exclude the destination ID, as a matter of routine design choice in arranging known control information fields.
Regarding claim 2, Wang further discloses wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the device to:
receive a negative acknowledgement (NACK) from a second device in response to a failure of the second device to successfully decode the data (para. 23, HARQ).
Regarding claim 4, Wang further discloses wherein the first portion of the control information comprises a link identifier (link ID) determined based at least on a link layer identifier associated with the device and a link layer identifier associated with a second device (para. 54, 55, sidelink control information (SCI)).
Regarding claim 5, Wang further discloses wherein the first portion of the control information comprises: a resource allocation of the second portion of the control information (para. 55, time-and-frequency resources).
Regarding claim 7, Wang further discloses wherein the second portion of the control information comprises the information to decode the data, the information to decode the data comprising:
a modulation and coding scheme (MCS), a transmission mode, a new data indicator (NDI), a redundancy version, or any combination thereof (para. 23).
Regarding claim 8, Wang further discloses wherein the transmission mode indicates at least one of:
a unicast type transmission;
a broadcast type transmission;
a multicast type transmission; or
a groupcast type transmission (fig. 2A, 2B, 2C unicast, groupcast, broadcast; fig. 5B, SCI2 580; para. 24, 43, for message types that are non-broadcast (e.g., unicast or groupcast), the PSCCH may include a first part (e.g., PSCCH1) carrying SCI1 and a second part (e.g., PSCCH2) carrying SCI2; para. 52, FIG. 5B illustrates a scrambling operation performed by a Tx UE on SCI2 according to one embodiment. The Tx UE first calculates a sequence of CRC bits 560 on an SCI2 payload 550. A scrambler 570 is applied on the CRC bits 560 to produce scrambled CRC 565. The scrambler 570 is a data sequence (also referred to an identifier) which is specific to an intended recipient or recipients; e.g., an Rx UE (for unicast) or a group of UEs (for groupcast). The identifier for unicast identifies the Rx UE and for groupcast identifies a group of UEs.).
Regarding claim 9, Wang in view of 3GPP further discloses wherein the cyclic shift distinguishes a transmission of the device from another transmission of another device on a same time-frequency resource (para. 33, 54).
Regarding claim 10, Wang in view of 3GPP further discloses wherein the one or more processors configured to cause the device to provide the first portion of the control information are further configured to:
determine the RS sequence based on the cyclic shift (para. 33, 54).
Regarding claim 11, Wang-3GPP further discloses wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the device to determine a sequence identifier to use to transmit the first portion of the control information (Wang, para. 33; 3GPP, sec. 5.4.3.1.1).
Regarding claim 12, Wang-3GPP further discloses wherein at least one of the sequence identifier or the cyclic shift is configured at the device via a radio resource control (RRC) configuration (Wang, para. 33; 3GPP, sec. 5.4.3.1.1).
Regarding claim 13, Wang in view of 3GPP further discloses wherein the first portion of the control information is demodulated based on the RS sequence (para. 55).
Regarding claim 14, Wang-3GPP further discloses wherein a number of symbols to use to transmit the first portion of the control information is configured at the device via a radio resource control (RRC) configuration (Wang, para. 33; 3GPP, sec. 5.4.3.1.1).
Claim 16 recites a method of wireless communication at a device, corresponding with the device of claim 1, and is thus similarly rejected.
Claims 17, 19, 20 and 22-29 recite substantially identical subject matter as recited in claims 2, 4, 5 and 7-14, respectively, and are thus similarly rejected.
Claim 31 recites a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing code at a device, corresponding with the device of claim 1, and is thus similarly rejected.
Claims 32, 34, 35 and 37-44 recite substantially identical subject matter as recited in claims 2, 4, 5 and 7-14, respectively, and are thus similarly rejected.
Claims 46-89 and 91-96 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable by Wang et al (US Pub. 2022/0353846) in view of 3GPP.
Regarding claim 46, Wang discloses an apparatus for wireless communication at a device, comprising:
a memory (fig. 8, memory 840); and
one or more processors coupled to the memory (fig. 8, processor(s) 830), the one or more processors configured to cause the device to:
• transmit a first portion of a control message associated with user data via a first subset of time-frequency resources (para. 33: SCI1 transmitted on PSCCH, associated with data carried on PSSCH).
• wherein the first portion of the control message is to be decoded by a second device and a third device, and the user data is to be decoded by the second device (para. 33: SCI1 is broadcast on PSCCH and can be decoded by multiple UEs; only the UE identified in SCI2 proceeds to decode the PSSCH user data, while other UEs do not).
• wherein the first portion of the control message comprises information to decode the user data and a resource allocation of the user data (para. 33: SCI1 provides information for locating time-and-frequency resources used for transmitting PSSCH data)…
• transmit a second portion of the control message associated with the user data via a second subset of the time-frequency resources, wherein the second portion of the control message comprises a destination identifier associated with the user data (Wang, para. 33: SCI2 transmitted separately, includes control information identifying the destination UE).
• and transmit the user data via a third subset of the time-frequency resources (Wang, para. 33, para. 54: PSSCH carries user data transmitted on resources determined by SCI1/SCI2).
Wang does not specifically disclose wherein the information to decode the user data comprises a modulation and coding scheme (MCS) of the user data.
However, 3GPP from an analogous art discloses that SCI includes an explicit MCS field corresponding to the modulation and coding scheme of the PSSCH user data, used by the receiving UE to decode the data. (sec. 5.4.3.1.1 (SCI format 0)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the explicit MCS field of SCI format 0 as taught by 3GPP into the SCI1 of Wang, in order to enable reliable decoding of the PSSCH user data, since Wang already teaches SCI1 conveys control information related to data transmission and 3GPP makes explicit that MCS is part of that control information.
Regarding claim 47, Wang further discloses wherein the resource allocation of the user data comprises a resource allocation of a current transmission of the user data, and wherein the first portion of the control message further comprises:
a resource allocation of the second portion of the control message (para. 55, time-and-frequency resources).
Regarding claim 48, Wang further discloses wherein the resource allocation of the second portion of the control message comprises one or more of:
time-frequency resources of the second portion of the control message; or
a format type of the second portion of the control message (para. 55, time-and-frequency resources).
Regarding claim 49, Wang further discloses wherein the resource allocation of the second portion of the control message comprises an orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (OFDM) symbol location of the second portion of the control message (para. 37).
Regarding claim 50, Wang in view of 3GPP further discloses wherein the resource allocation of the user data comprises a resource allocation for a future transmission or retransmission of the user data (para. 33, 34, SCI1 (first portion) providing information to locate time-and-frequency resources of PSSCH and SCI2 (second portion) providing additional resource-related information including identifiers of receiving devices and scheduling information – i.e., associated with distinct control resources corresponding to the same PSSCH data resources).
Regarding claim 51, Wang further discloses wherein the second portion of the control message comprises one or more of:
information to indicate whether the transmission of the user data is a new data transmission or a retransmission;
information to indicate whether acknowledgment information is to be transmitted by the second device;
information to determine one or more feedback transmissions by the second device;
a source identifier associated with the user data; or
a destination identifier associated with the user data (fig. 2A, 2B, 2C, unicast, groupcast, broadcast).
Regarding claim 52, Wang further discloses wherein the source identifier is associated with a service for which the user data is transmitted (para. 33, 34, two-stage SCI transmission). The ordering of SCI1 and SCI2 across time-frequency resources is an implementation detail. (3GPP further discloses flexible mapping of SCI to PSCCH resources (sec. 5.4.3.1.1, SCI format 0 fields.)
Regarding claim 53, Wang further discloses wherein the second portion of the control message comprises a transmission mode that indicates at least one of:
a unicast type transmission;
a broadcast type transmission;
a multicast type transmission; or
a groupcast type transmission (fig. 2A, 2B, 2C, unicast, groupcast, broadcast).
Claims 54-61 recite a method corresponding the apparatus of claims 46-53, respectively, and are thus similarly rejected.
Claims 62-69 recite a non-transitory computer-readable medium corresponding the apparatus of claims 46-53, respectively, and are thus similarly rejected.
Regarding claim 70, Wang further discloses wherein the transmission mode indicates the unicast type transmission (para. 24, 34).
Regarding claim 71, Wang further discloses wherein the transmission mode indicates the broadcast type transmission (para. 24, 34).
Regarding claim 72, Wang further discloses wherein the transmission mode indicates the groupcast type transmission (para. 24, 34).
Claims 73-75 recite substantially identical subject matter as recited in claims 70-72, respectively, and are thus similarly rejected.
Claims 76-78 recite substantially identical subject matter as recited in claims 70-72, respectively, and are thus similarly rejected.
Claims 79-81 recite substantially identical subject matter as recited in claims 70-72, respectively, and are thus similarly rejected.
Claims 82-84 recite substantially identical subject matter as recited in claims 70-72, respectively, and are thus similarly rejected.
Claims 85-87 recite substantially identical subject matter as recited in claims 70-72, respectively, and are thus similarly rejected.
Claims 88, 89, and 91-92 recite substantially identical subject matter as recited in claims 1, 2, 5, and 7, respectively, and are thus similarly rejected.
Claims 93-96 recite substantially identical subject matter as recited in claims 46-48 and 51, respectively, and are thus similarly rejected.
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 LUAT T PHUNG whose telephone number is (571)270-3126. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9 AM - 6 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, Marcus Smith can be reached on (571) 270-1096. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Luat Phung/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2468