DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to applicant’s amendment filed on 20 January 2026. Claims 1, 6-12, 14-16, 41, 43, 45, and 51 are now pending in the present application and claims 2-5, 13, 17-40, 42, 44, and 46-50 are canceled. This office action is made Final.
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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 20 January 2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 6-12, 14-16, 41, 43, 45, and 51 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Pelletier et al. (hereinafter Pelletier) WO 2019/0160973 A1.
Regarding claims 1, 43, 45, and 51, Pelletier discloses a user device, UE, for a wireless communication system, the wireless communication system comprising a plurality of user devices, UEs,
wherein the UE is to communicate with one or more further UE0 (e.g., 203, 203) s using a sidelink, SL (e.g., V2V, V2X) { (see pp. 15-16, [0063-0064]; pg. 21, [0086] Figs. 2-3) where the system provides sidelink communication }, and
wherein a location information element describes a geographical location or position of the UE, wherein the location information element comprises a first part and a second part, wherein, for locations or positions within a certain area (e.g., proximity area within a cell of a pre-defined geographic zone), the first part of the location information element is a common first part (e.g., group-specific identity) for UEs being located within the certain area, and the second part of the location information element varies dependent on the actual or exact geographical location or position of the UE { (see pp. 25-27, [0114-0115, 0104-0113]), where the system provides a WTRU(s) with a group-specific identity that is embedded in signaling (e.g., common sidelink reference signal or control signal (see pg. 27, [0117, 0118] ; Figs. 10A-B & 18), and the system provides geographical location (see pg. 33, [0146, lines 1-3]; pg. 37, [0160]) }, and
wherein, when being in the certain area, the UE is to - receive from the further UE position information of the further UE, the position information comprising only some or all of the second part of the location information element of the further UE, and - acquire the geographical location or position of the further UE by combining the common first parts (e.g., group-specific identity) with the position information which is received from the further UE { (see pg. 27, [0117, 0118] ; Figs. 10A-B & 18), where the system detects location (pp. 25-27, [0104-0115]), and the system provides a WTRU(s) with a group-specific identity that is embedded in signaling (e.g., common sidelink reference signal or control signal (see pg. 27, [0114-0115, 0117, 0118] ; Figs. 10A-B & 18), and the system provides geographical location (see pg. 33, [0146, lines 1-3]; pg. 37, [0160]) }.
Regarding claim 6, Pelletier discloses the user device, UE, of claim 1, wherein the common first part is to be updated dynamically { (see pp. 25-27, [0104-0115, 0117-0118]) }.
Regarding claim 7, Pelletier discloses the user device, UE, of claim 1, wherein the UE is to determine a distance to the further UE using the location of the UE and the location of the further UE { (see pg. 27, [0117, 0118]; pp. 25-27, [0104-0115]; Figs. 10A-B & 18) }.
Regarding claim 8, Pelletier disc0loses the user device, UE, of claim 1, wherein, dependent on a minimum required communication range, the UE is to decide whether a certain operation is to be performed { (see pp. 15-16, [0063-0064]; pg. 21, [0086] Figs. 2-3) }.
Regarding claim 9, Pelletier discloses the user device, UE, of claim 8, wherein the UE is to determine an area of minimum required communication range around the UE, estimate an area of uncertainty around the further UE, dependent on the amount of the second part of the location information element received, and determine whether the further UE is within the minimum required communication range or not using the area of uncertainty around the further UE and the area of minimum required communication range { (see pg. 27, [0117, 0118]; pp. 25-27, [0104-0115]; Figs. 10A-B & 18) }.
Regarding claim 10, Pelletier discloses the user device, UE, of claim 8, wherein the UE is to - determine an area of minimum required communication range around the UE, and - determine whether the further UE is within the minimum required communication range or not { (see pg. 27, [0117, 0118]; pp. 25-27, [0104-0115]; Figs. 10A-B & 18) }.
Regarding claim 11, Pelletier discloses the user device, UE, of claim 9, wherein the UE is to determine that the further UE is within the minimum required communication range in case one out of the following criteria is met: the whole area of uncertainty is within the area of minimum required communication range, at least a certain portion of the area of uncertainty is within the area of minimum required communication range, and the area of uncertainty and the area of minimum required communication range meet at least in one point { (see pp. 25-27, [0104-0115]) }.
Regarding claim 12, Pelletier discloses the user device, UE, of claim 11, wherein, to determine that the further UE is within the minimum required communication range, in case at least a portion of the area of uncertainty is within the area of minimum required communication range, the UE is to decide whether the portion of the area of uncertainty being within the area of minimum required communication range meets a certain condition { (see pg. 27, [0117, 0118]; pp. 25-27, [0104-0115]; Figs. 10A-B & 18) }.
Regarding claim 14, Pelletier discloses the user device, UE, of claim 1, wherein the UE is a receiving UE or a transmitting UE in the SL communication { (see pp. 15-16, [0063-0064]; pg. 21, [0086] Figs. 2-3).
Regarding claim 15, Pelletier discloses the user device, UE, of claim 1, wherein - the UE is configured with the certain area by a signaling during a group setup or a signaling from a network entity or by an application, or over-the-top, OTT, or - wherein the UE is pre-configured with the certain area { (see pp. 15-16, [0063-0064]; pg. 21, [0086] Figs. 2-3).
Regarding claim 16, Pelletier discloses the user device, UE, of claim 1, wherein the certain area is a defined geographical area or an area around a moving UE, within which the second part of the information element changes as the UE moves { (see pg. 27, [0117, 0118]; pp. 25-27, [0104-0115]; Figs. 10A-B & 18) }.
Regarding claim 41, Pelletier discloses ate user device, UE, of claim 1, wherein the one or more location information elements further comprise one or more of: - a current height or altitude of the UE, and - a motion vector or direction of motion of the UE { (see pp. 25-27, [0104-0115]) }.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to claims 1, 6-12, 14-16, 41, 43, 45, and 51 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection necessitated by the amended language, new limitations, and/or new claims.
In response to applicant’s arguments, the Examiner respectfully disagrees as the applied reference(s) provide more than adequate support and to further clarify (see the above claims for relevant citations and comments in this section).
Conclusion
All claims are identical to or patentably indistinct from, or have unity of invention with claims in the application prior to the entry of the submission under 37 CFR 1.114 (that is, restriction (including a lack of unity of invention) would not be proper) and all claims could have been finally rejected on the grounds and art of record in the next Office action if they had been entered in the application prior to entry under 37 CFR 1.114. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL even though it is a first action after the filing of a request for continued examination and the submission under 37 CFR 1.114. See MPEP § 706.07(b). 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 WILLIE J DANIEL JR whose telephone number is (571)272-7907. The examiner can normally be reached on 9 - 6.
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, Gary Mui can be reached on 571-270-1420. 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.
/WILLIE J DANIEL JR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2465
WJD,Jr
23 January 2026