DETAILED ACTION
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 31 December 2025 has been entered. No claims are currently amended; claim 1-20, 24, 28, 29, 32, 39, and 40 are cancelled; claims 21-23, 25-27, 30, 31, 33-38, and 41-44 are previously presented; no claims have been added. Claims 21-23, 25-27, 30, 31, 33-38, and 41-44 are pending and ready for examination.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 7-8, filed 31 December 2025, with respect to “Claim Rejections under 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103” have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the primary art of reference Zhou fails to qualify as prior art under 35 USC 102(a)(2) due to the latest priority claim of Zhou, CN 202010091299.1 filed on 13 February 2020 is the only one of the priority claims that support the features of DCI size alignment and zero padding. The applicant goes onto assert that the priority date of the present application is 21 November 2019.
While the examiner is still working on obtaining certified translations for the priority claim documents of Zhou and will assume, arguendo, that applicant is correct in their assertions that the size alignment and DCI format 3x are only supported by the latest priority claim of Zhou, the examiner has also reviewed the application’s priority claim itself and has been unable to find the support for its claim limitations in the provisional patent applications that the applicant relies. The examiner therefore respectfully requests the applicant provide the citation for where support exists in the provisional patent applications for the last limitation of independent claim 21, which reads “wherein, based on that (i) the first device is not configured to monitor the third control information format for scheduling NR SL communication and (ii) a total number of sizes of the first control information formats and a second control information format before size alignment is greater than a threshold, the size of the second control information format equals, by zero padding, a smallest size among sizes of the first control information formats that is larger than a size of the second control information format before size alignment.” For the time being, the examiner will hold the previous rejection in abeyance pending the examiner time to properly review the priority documents of Zhou and applicant’s response to the above request for citation of support and fully consider by the examiner. In the interest of compact prosecution, the examiner is also submitting a new grounds of rejection to address the subject matter that the applicant asserts Zhou does not have support for as prior art.
Claim Objections
Claims 21-23, 25-27, 30, 31, 33-38, and 41-44 are objected to because of the following informalities: the independent claims utilize the abbreviation NR without first stating what NR is short for. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 21-23, 27, 30, 31, 33-35, 38, 41, and 44 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou et al. (US 2021/0028891 A1), hereafter referred Zhou, in view of Yi et al. (US 2020/0337029 A1), hereafter referred Yi.
Regarding claim 21, Zhou teaches a method for performing wireless communication by a first device, the method comprising:
monitoring, by a first device, first control information formats for downlink (DL) communication or uplink (UL) communication (Zhou, [0521]-[0532]; the sidelink UE determines the sizes of the DCI formats 0_0 and 1_0 that are monitored in the UE-specific search space and when the UE is configured with supplementary uplink).
While Zhou teaches monitoring, by the first device, information for scheduling long-term evolution (LTE) sidelink (SL) communication and scheduling NR SL communication (Zhou, [0121]-[0134] and [0360]-[0370]; the UE monitors HARQ-ACK feedback at the PSFCH resource position according to the scheduling information indicated, where LTE SL does not support the HARQ-ACK feedback and the NR V2X introduces an HARQ-ACK feedback mechanism), Zhou does not expressly teach the information is a second control information format, wherein, based on that the first device is configured to monitor a third control information format for scheduling NR SL communication, a size of the second control information format always equals a size of the third control information format as a result of size alignment, and
wherein, based on that (i) the first device is not configured to monitor the third control information format for scheduling NR SL communication and (ii) a total number of sizes of the first control information formats and a second control information format before size alignment is greater than a threshold, the size of the second control information format equals, by zero padding, a smallest size among sizes of the first control information formats that is larger than a size of the second control information format before size alignment.
However, Yi teaches the information is a second control information format (Yi, [0347]; a wireless device may monitor the DCI formats, such as DCI format 0_2 and 1_2 on the one or more search space sets), wherein, based on that the first device is configured to monitor a third control information format for scheduling NR SL communication, a size of the second control information format always equals a size of the third control information format as a result of size alignment (Yi, Fig. 22, [0323] and [0347]-[0360]; the wireless device may determine the first DCI size based on the DCI format 1, the DCI format 2, and the DCI format 3, and perform a DCI size alignment among the DCI formats based on the DCI size which may involve add zeros and/or truncate bits to align a size of the DCI format to the determined DCI size to the smallest and/or largest values among the DCI sizes wherein each service may use a different DCI format), and
wherein, based on that (i) the first device is not configured to monitor the third control information format for scheduling NR SL communication and (ii) a total number of sizes of the first control information formats and a second control information format before size alignment is greater than a threshold, the size of the second control information format equals, by zero padding, a smallest size among sizes of the first control information formats that is larger than a size of the second control information format before size alignment (Yi, Fig. 22, [0323] and [0347]-[0360]; the wireless device may determine the first DCI size based on the DCI format 1, the DCI format 2, and the DCI format 3, and perform a DCI size alignment among the DCI formats based on the DCI size which may involve add zeros and/or truncate bits to align a size of the DCI format to the determined DCI size to the smallest and/or largest values among the DCI sizes wherein each service may use a different DCI format).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Zhou to include the above recited limitations as taught by Yi in order to reduce the total number of blind decodings to the UE capability (Yi, [0318]).
Regarding claim 30, Zhou teaches a first device comprising:
at least on transceiver; at least one processor; and at least one memory connected to the at least one processor and storing instructions that, based on being executed, cause the first device (Zhou, Fig. 8, [0100] and [0657]-[0663]; the UE may include a processor, a transceiver, and a memory, where the memory may be connected to the processor and store at least one instruction for the proposed function, where the function can be implemented by computer programs that can be stored in memory and executed on a processor) to perform operations comprising:
monitoring first control information formats for downlink (DL) communication or uplink (UL) communication (Zhou, [0521]-[0532]; the sidelink UE determines the sizes of the DCI formats 0_0 and 1_0 that are monitored in the UE-specific search space and when the UE is configured with supplementary uplink);
While Zhou teaches monitoring, by the first device, information for scheduling long-term evolution (LTE) sidelink (SL) communication and scheduling NR SL communication (Zhou, [0121]-[0134] and [0360]-[0370]; the UE monitors HARQ-ACK feedback at the PSFCH resource position according to the scheduling information indicated, where LTE SL does not support the HARQ-ACK feedback and the NR V2X introduces an HARQ-ACK feedback mechanism), Zhou does not expressly teach the information is a second control information format, wherein, based on that the first device is configured to monitor a third control information format for scheduling NR SL communication, a size of the second control information format always equals a size of the third control information format as a result of size alignment, and
wherein, based on that (i) the first device is not configured to monitor the third control information format for scheduling NR SL communication and (ii) a total number of sizes of the first control information formats and a second control information format before size alignment is greater than a threshold, the size of the second control information format equals, by zero padding, a smallest size among sizes of the first control information formats that is larger than a size of the second control information format before size alignment.
However, Yi teaches the information is a second control information format (Yi, [0347]; a wireless device may monitor the DCI formats, such as DCI format 0_2 and 1_2 on the one or more search space sets), wherein, based on that the first device is configured to monitor a third control information format for scheduling NR SL communication, a size of the second control information format always equals a size of the third control information format as a result of size alignment (Yi, Fig. 22, [0323] and [0347]-[0360]; the wireless device may determine the first DCI size based on the DCI format 1, the DCI format 2, and the DCI format 3, and perform a DCI size alignment among the DCI formats based on the DCI size which may involve add zeros and/or truncate bits to align a size of the DCI format to the determined DCI size to the smallest and/or largest values among the DCI sizes wherein each service may use a different DCI format), and
wherein, based on that (i) the first device is not configured to monitor the third control information format for scheduling NR SL communication and (ii) a total number of sizes of the first control information formats and a second control information format before size alignment is greater than a threshold, the size of the second control information format equals, by zero padding, a smallest size among sizes of the first control information formats that is larger than a size of the second control information format before size alignment (Yi, Fig. 22, [0323] and [0347]-[0360]; the wireless device may determine the first DCI size based on the DCI format 1, the DCI format 2, and the DCI format 3, and perform a DCI size alignment among the DCI formats based on the DCI size which may involve add zeros and/or truncate bits to align a size of the DCI format to the determined DCI size to the smallest and/or largest values among the DCI sizes wherein each service may use a different DCI format).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Zhou to include the above recited limitations as taught by Yi in order to reduce the total number of blind decodings to the UE capability (Yi, [0318]).
Regarding claim 33, Zhou teaches a method comprising:
transmitting, by a base station, first control information formats for downlink (DL) communication or uplink (UL) communication (Zhou, [0521]-[0532]; the sidelink UE determines the sizes of the DCI formats 0_0 and 1_0 that are monitored in the UE-specific search space and when the UE is configured with supplementary uplink);
While Zhou teaches transmitting, by the base station, information for scheduling long-term evolution (LTE) sidelink (SL) communication and scheduling NR SL communication (Zhou, [0121]-[0134] and [0360]-[0370]; the UE monitors HARQ-ACK feedback at the PSFCH resource position according to the scheduling information indicated, where LTE SL does not support the HARQ-ACK feedback and the NR V2X introduces an HARQ-ACK feedback mechanism), Zhou does not expressly teach the information is a second control information format, wherein, based on that the first device is configured to monitor a third control information format for scheduling NR SL communication, a size of the second control information format always equals a size of the third control information format as a result of size alignment, and
wherein, based on that (i) the first device is not configured to monitor the third control information format for scheduling NR SL communication and (ii) a total number of sizes of the first control information formats and a second control information format before size alignment is greater than a threshold, the size of the second control information format equals, by zero padding, a smallest size among sizes of the first control information formats that is larger than a size of the second control information format before size alignment.
However, Yi teaches the information is a second control information format (Yi, [0347]; a wireless device may monitor the DCI formats, such as DCI format 0_2 and 1_2 on the one or more search space sets), wherein, based on that the first device is configured to monitor a third control information format for scheduling NR SL communication, a size of the second control information format always equals a size of the third control information format as a result of size alignment (Yi, Fig. 22, [0323] and [0347]-[0360]; the wireless device may determine the first DCI size based on the DCI format 1, the DCI format 2, and the DCI format 3, and perform a DCI size alignment among the DCI formats based on the DCI size which may involve add zeros and/or truncate bits to align a size of the DCI format to the determined DCI size to the smallest and/or largest values among the DCI sizes wherein each service may use a different DCI format), and
wherein, based on that (i) the first device is not configured to monitor the third control information format for scheduling NR SL communication and (ii) a total number of sizes of the first control information formats and a second control information format before size alignment is greater than a threshold, the size of the second control information format equals, by zero padding, a smallest size among sizes of the first control information formats that is larger than a size of the second control information format before size alignment (Yi, Fig. 22, [0323] and [0347]-[0360]; the wireless device may determine the first DCI size based on the DCI format 1, the DCI format 2, and the DCI format 3, and perform a DCI size alignment among the DCI formats based on the DCI size which may involve add zeros and/or truncate bits to align a size of the DCI format to the determined DCI size to the smallest and/or largest values among the DCI sizes wherein each service may use a different DCI format).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Zhou to include the above recited limitations as taught by Yi in order to reduce the total number of blind decodings to the UE capability (Yi, [0318]).
Regarding claims 22, 31, and 34, Zhou in view of Yi teaches the method of claim 21, the first device of claim 30, and the method of claim 33 above. Zhou does not expressly teach wherein the size of the second control information format before size alignment is smaller than or equal to a largest size among all sizes of the first control information formats, and wherein it is not allowed that the size of the second control information format before size alignment is larger than the largest size among all sizes of the first control information formats.
However, Yi teaches wherein the size of the second control information format before size alignment is smaller than or equal to a largest size among all sizes of the first control information formats, and wherein it is not allowed that the size of the second control information format before size alignment is larger than the largest size among all sizes of the first control information formats (Yi, Fig. 22, [0323] and [0347]-[0360]; the wireless device may determine the first DCI size based on the DCI format 1, the DCI format 2, and the DCI format 3, and perform a DCI size alignment among the DCI formats based on the DCI size which may involve add zeros and/or truncate bits to align a size of the DCI format to the determined DCI size to the smallest and/or largest values among the DCI sizes wherein each service may use a different DCI format).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Zhou to include the above recited limitations as taught by Yi in order to reduce the total number of blind decodings to the UE capability (Yi, [0318]).
Regarding claims 23, 35, and 41, Zhou in view of Yi teaches the method of claim 21, the first device of claim 30, and the method of claim 33 above. Zhou does not expressly teach wherein a size of a third control information format before size alignment is smaller than or equal to a largest size among all sizes of the first control information formats, and wherein it is not allowed that the size of the third control information format before size alignment is larger than the largest size among all sizes of the first control information formats.
However, Yi teaches wherein a size of a third control information format before size alignment is smaller than or equal to a largest size among all sizes of the first control information formats, and wherein it is not allowed that the size of the third control information format before size alignment is larger than the largest size among all sizes of the first control information formats (Yi, Fig. 22, [0323] and [0347]-[0360]; the wireless device may determine the first DCI size based on the DCI format 1, the DCI format 2, and the DCI format 3, and perform a DCI size alignment among the DCI formats based on the DCI size which may involve add zeros and/or truncate bits to align a size of the DCI format to the determined DCI size to the smallest and/or largest values among the DCI sizes wherein each service may use a different DCI format).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Zhou to include the above recited limitations as taught by Yi in order to reduce the total number of blind decodings to the UE capability (Yi, [0318]).
Regarding claims 27, 38, and 44, Zhou in view of Yi teaches the method of claim 21, the first device of claim 30, and the method of claim 33 above. Zhou does not expressly teach wherein, based on that the first device is configured to monitor the third control information format, it is not allowed that the size of the second control information format is not equal to the size of the third control information format.
However, Yi teaches wherein, based on that the first device is configured to monitor the third control information format, it is not allowed that the size of the second control information format is not equal to the size of the third control information format (Yi, Fig. 22, [0323] and [0347]-[0360]; the wireless device may determine the first DCI size based on the DCI format 1, the DCI format 2, and the DCI format 3, and perform a DCI size alignment among the DCI formats based on the DCI size which may involve add zeros and/or truncate bits to align a size of the DCI format to the determined DCI size to the smallest and/or largest values among the DCI sizes wherein each service may use a different DCI format).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Zhou to include the above recited limitations as taught by Yi in order to reduce the total number of blind decodings to the UE capability (Yi, [0318]).
Claims 25, 26, 36, 37, 42, and 43 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou in view of Yi as applied to claims 21, 30, and 33 above, and further in view of Wu et al. (US 2021/0022142 A1), hereafter referred Wu.
Regarding claims 25, 36, and 42, Zhou in view of Yi teaches the method of claim 21, the first device of claim 30, and the method of claim 33 above. Zhou in view of Yi does not expressly teach wherein the second control information format includes information for activating or release an LTE SL Semi-Persistent Scheduling (SPS) configuration.
However, Wu teaches wherein the second control information format includes information for activating or release an LTE SL Semi-Persistent Scheduling (SPS) configuration (Wu, [0095]; the DCI transmitted by the base station and received by the UE may further activate/deactivate the SPS of the sidelink transmission, where the deactivation may also be a release).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Zhou in view of Yi to include the above recited limitations as taught by Wu in order to support the convergence of different technologies to create new value to human life and society (Wu, [0003]-[0006]).
Regarding claims 26, 37, and 43, Zhou in view of Yi teaches the method of claim 21, the first device of claim 30, and the method of claim 33 above. Zhou in view of Yi does not expressly teach teaches wherein the second control information format is transmitted by an NR base station.
However, Wu teaches wherein the second control information format is transmitted by an NR base station (Wu, [0010]; a base station associated with a first network transmitting first downlink control information (DCI) for scheduling of a sidelink associated with a second network, wherein the first network is associated with a new radio network and the second network is associated with a long term evolution (LTE) network).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Zhou in view of Yi to include the above recited limitations as taught by Wu in order to support the convergence of different technologies to create new value to human life and society (Wu, [0003]-[0006]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RODRICK MAK whose telephone number is (571)270-0284. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:30 am - 5:30 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, Noel Beharry can be reached at 571-270-5630. 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.
/R.M./Examiner, Art Unit 2416
/NOEL R BEHARRY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2416