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 Amendment
The amendment filed on 11-17-2025 has been received and entered.
Claims 1-30 are pending in the current application.
Claims 1-6 are allowed.
Claims 19-21 are objected to.
Claims 7-18, and 22-30 remain rejected as discussed below.
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.
Claims 7, 10, 13, 22, 24-27, 28 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Han et al (US 20250274952). Hereinafter referred to as Han.
Regarding claims 7, 22, and 28, Han discloses a User Equipment (UE) for wireless communication (see at least figure 1: elements 102), comprising at least one memory; and at least one processor communicatively coupled with the at least one memory (see at least figure 2 elements: 204 and 202), the at least one processor configured to cause the UE to perform a sidelink listen before talk (LBT) channel associated with a sidelink channel based at least in part on a sidelink channel access priority class (SL CAPC) being mapped to a PC5 New Radio (NR) standardized associated quality of service (QOS) identifier (PQI) associated with a sidelink communication (see at least paragraphs [0009]-[0010], [0058], [0070]-[0073], [0103]-[0105]), and transmit, to another UE, the sidelink communication via the sidelink channel based at least in part on the sidelink channel procedure (see at least figure 1 and paragraphs [0103]-[0105], [0133], claims 16-17).
Regarding claim 10, Han discloses a UE wherein the at least one processor is further configured to cause the UE to map the QoS parameter to the SL CAPC (see at least abstract).
Regarding claim 13. Han discloses a UE wherein the at least one processor is further configured to cause the UE to receive, from the other UE and via the sidelink channel, at least one of a feedback communication associated with the sidelink communication or a channel state information report (see at least paragraph [0126] and [0159]).
Regarding claim 24. Han discloses a UE wherein the sidelink communication is associated with at least one of a feedback communication or a channel state information report (see at least paragraph [0126] and [0159]).
Regarding claim 25. Han discloses a UE wherein the indication of the SL CAPC is received via an inter-UE coordination (IUC) request, and wherein the sidelink communication is associated with an IUC information communication associated with the IUC request (see at least figures 1 and 4).
Regarding claim 26. Han discloses a UE wherein the at least one processor is further configured to cause the UE to receive, from the other UE, an indication of one or more mapping lookup tables associated with mapping a quality of service parameter to the SL CAPC (see at least figures 1 and 4 ad abstract).
Regarding claim 27. Han discloses a UE wherein the at least one processor is further configured to cause the UE to receive, from the other UE, an indication of one or more updated mapping lookup tables (see at least figures 1 and 4, [0126] and [0159] and abstract).
Regarding claim 30. Han discloses a method comprising mapping the QoS parameter to the SL CAPC (see at least abstract).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
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 8-9 and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Han in view of Chen et al (US 2024/0276243).
Regarding claims 8, and 29. Han discloses all the limitations of the claimed invention with the exception of transmitting, to a network node, an indication of the PQI; and receiving, from the network node, an indication of the SL CAPC based at least in part on the indication of the PQI. However, Chen, from the same field of endeavor, teaches transmitting, to a network node, an indication of the PQI; and receiving, from the network node, an indication of the SL CAPC based at least in part on the indication of the PQI (see at least figure 7). Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the invention to employ the teaching of Chen, as indicated, into the communication method of Han for the purpose of providing sidelink services bases on QOS requirements.
Regarding claim 9. Han in view of Chen discloses a UE wherein the at least one processor is further configured to cause the UE to receive, from the network node, an indication of a sidelink listen-before-talk (LBT) mode, wherein performing the sidelink channel access procedure is further based at least in part on the sidelink LBT mode (see at least figures 1 and 4).
Claims 11-12, 14-15 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Han in view of Xu et al (US 2021/0195637, hereinafter referred to as Xu-637).
Regarding claims 11 and 23. Han discloses all the limitations of the claimed invention with the exception of determining a sidelink listen-before-talk (LBT) mode associated with the sidelink channel access procedure; and transmit, to the UE, an indication of the sidelink LBT mode. However, Xu-637, from the same field of endeavor, teaches determining a sidelink listen-before-talk (LBT) mode associated with the sidelink channel access procedure; and transmit, to the UE, an indication of the sidelink LBT mode (see at least paragraphs, [0038], [0041] and [0091]). Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the invention to employ the teaching of Xu-637, as, indicated into the communication method of of Han for the purpose of improving LBT sensitivity and avoid potential hidden nodes.
Regarding claims 12. of Han discloses all the limitations of the claimed invention with the exception of transmitting, to the other UE, an indication of at least one of the SL CAPC or a sidelink listen-before-talk (LBT) mode associated with the sidelink channel access procedure. However, Xu-637, from the same field of endeavor, teaches transmitting, to the other UE, an indication of at least one of the SL CAPC or a sidelink listen-before-talk (LBT) mode associated with the sidelink channel access procedure (see at least paragraphs [0041] and [0091]). Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the invention to employ the teaching of Xu-637, as, indicated into the communication method of Han for the purpose of improving LBT sensitivity and avoid potential hidden nodes.
Regarding claim 14, of Han discloses all the limitations of the claimed invention with the exception of sidelink communication is associated with an inter-UE coordination (IUC) request, and wherein the IUC request includes an indication of at least one of the SL CAPC or a sidelink listen-before-talk (LBT) mode associated with the sidelink channel access procedure. However, Xu-637, from the same field of endeavor, teaches sidelink communication is associated with an inter-UE coordination (IUC) request, and wherein the IUC request includes an indication of at least one of the SL CAPC or a sidelink listen-before-talk (LBT) mode associated with the sidelink channel access procedure (see at least paragraphs, [0038], [0041] and [0091]) ]). Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the invention to employ the teaching of Xu-637, as, indicated into the communication method of Han for the purpose of improving LBT sensitivity and avoid potential hidden nodes.
Regarding claim 15. Han in view of Xu-637 discloses a UE wherein the at least one processor is further configured to cause the UE to receive, from the other UE and via the sidelink channel, an IUC information communication associated with the IUC request (Xu-637: see at least paragraph [0002]).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Han in view of Xu et al (US 2020/0351669, hereinafter referred to as Xu-669).
Regarding claim 16. Han discloses all the limitations of the claimed invention with the exception of transmitting, to the UE, an indication of one or more sidelink unlicensed frequency bands, wherein the sidelink channel access procedure is associated with the one or more sidelink unlicensed frequency bands. However, Xu-669, from the same field of endeavor, teaches transmitting, to the UE, an indication of one or more sidelink unlicensed frequency bands, wherein the sidelink channel access procedure is associated with the one or more sidelink unlicensed frequency bands (see at least paragraphs [0056], [0152] and [0169]). Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the invention to employ the teaching of Xu-669, as indicated, into the communication method of Han for the purpose of guaranteeing sidelink communication.
Claims 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Han in view of Qaisrani et al (US 2022/0109969, hereinafter referred to as Qaisrani).
Regarding claims 17. Han discloses all the limitations of the claimed invention with the exception of receiving, from the UE, sidelink UE information indicating at least one of a capability to operate in one or more sidelink unlicensed frequency bands or a preferred sidelink unlicensed frequency band list. However, Qaisrani, from the same field of endeavor, teaches receiving, from the UE, sidelink UE information indicating at least one of a capability to operate in one or more sidelink unlicensed frequency bands (see at least claim 12). Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the invention to employ the teaching of Qaisrani for the purpose of enabling communication over unlicensed bands and expand the range of the network capabilities.
Regarding claim 18. Han in view of Qaisrani discloses a network node wherein the at least one processor is further configured to cause the network node to determine one or more mapping lookup tables associated with one or more sidelink unlicensed frequency bands based at least in part on the sidelink UE information, wherein the mapping of the QoS parameter to the SL CAPC is based at least in part on the one or more mapping lookup tables (see at least abstract and paragraphs [0085], [0096]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-6 are allowed.
Claims 19-21 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 7-18 and 22-30 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO_892.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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.
In the case of amending the claimed invention, Applicant is respectfully requested to indicate the portion(s) of the specification which dictate(s) the structure relied on for proper interpretation and also to verify and ascertain the metes and bounds of the claimed invention.
When responding to this office action, applicants are advised to clearly point out the patentable novelty which they think the claims present in view of the state of the art disclosed by the references cited or the objections made. Applicants must also show how the amendments avoid such references or objections. See 37C.F.R 1.111(c). In addition, applicants are advised to provide the examiner with the line numbers and pages numbers in the application and/or references cited to assist examiner in locating the appropriate paragraphs.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOUNIR MOUTAOUAKIL whose telephone number is (571)270-1416. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10AM-4PM 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, Ayaz Sheikh can be reached at 571-272-3795. 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.
/MOUNIR MOUTAOUAKIL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2476