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 .
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.
Claim(s) 1, 9, 17, and 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang US 20220149997 in view of Lee US 20190090250.
Regarding claims 1, 9, 17, 25, Wang teaches a method of wireless communication performed by a transmitter device, comprising:
determining that a criterion relating to semi-persistent scheduling (SPS) is satisfied, wherein the criterion relates to packet arrival times for SPS transmission (based on configured data arrival time and time window length, if at least one SPS candidate transmission resource, then earliest candidate transmission resources is selected to transmit SPS, [0274]); and
triggering an SPS resource reselection, for subsequent packets of the SPS transmission, based at least in part on determining that the criterion is satisfied (based on configured data arrival time and time window length, if at least one SPS candidate transmission resource, then earliest candidate transmission resources is selected to transmit SPS, [0274]).
Although Wang teaches triggering SPS resource reselection, the reference is silent on determining that the criterion is satisfied, wherein the criterion is at least one of:
a threshold quantity of packets arriving for transmission from an application process after a configured SPS arrival time and the SPS resource reselection comprises reselection to one or more SPS resources determined based at least in part on the packet arrival times of the threshold quantity of packets;
a threshold quantity of accumulated sidelink synchronization signal (SLSS) subframes satisfying a first threshold value and an SPS transmission latency satisfying a second threshold value, when the SLSS is configured; or
a threshold SPS transmission latency corresponding to a threshold accumulation of reserved subframes.
Given Wang teaches SPS resource reselection Lee make obvious the limitation SPS resource reselection based upon a threshold SPS transmission latency corresponding to a threshold accumulation of reserved subframes.
Lee teaches resource reselection based upon a threshold transmission latency corresponding to a threshold accumulation of reserved subframes (Here, if a currently selected ‘D’ value (or ‘SUBFRAME#D’) has a problem in satisfying the ‘LATENCY (or QoS) REQUIREMENT’ of a newly arrived (or generated (or received)) packet (or message), a (transmission) resource (re)selection operation may be triggered, [0452]). Note, the Examiner maintains Lee also makes obvious the limitation “a threshold quantity of packets arriving for transmission … “
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the system of Wang by SPS resource reselection based upon a threshold SPS transmission latency corresponding to a threshold accumulation of reserved subframes, as suggested by Lee. This modification would benefit the system by reselecting SPS resources in order to meet the latency requirement.
Claim(s) 6, 14, 22, 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Wang and LEE as applied to claims 1, 9, 17, and 25 above, and further in view of Awad US 20220232618.
The combination is silent on identifying a jitter spread for the packet arrival times; and
wherein triggering the SPS resource reselection comprises:
reselecting SPS resources to one or more resources determined based at least in part on a size of the jitter spread.
Awad teaches identifying a jitter spread for the packet arrival times; and
wherein triggering the resource reselection / (activation/deactivation) comprises:
reselecting / (activating/deactivating) SPS resources to one or more resources determined based at least in part on a size of the jitter spread / tolerance, ([0075] A threshold value may be indicated to the UE if UE is initiating activation/deactivation; [0076] The UE may be configured to activate/deactivate different CG resources based on jitter tolerance. If, for example, jitter is above a certain limit on the received packets then all configured CG resources could be used. When jitter tolerance is at an intermediate level, then less than the configured amount of CG resources can be used. For UL traffic, jitter tolerance is detected at the gNB or application layer and fed back to the base station which may trigger activation/deactivation of CG resources. For the UE based approach, the UE may be signalled the criteria; e.g. the jitter tolerance level for different CG configurations).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the system of the combination by identifying a jitter spread for the packet arrival times; and
wherein triggering the SPS resource reselection comprises:
reselecting SPS resources to one or more resources determined based at least in part on a size of the jitter spread, as suggested by Awad. This modification would benefit the system by optimally reselecting SPS resources.
Claim(s) 7, 15, 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Wang, LEE, and Awad as applied to claims 6, 14, and 22 above, and further in view of Hahn US 20190239039.
The combination is silent on the one or more resources are selected based at least in part on a channel busy ratio value.
Hahn teaches the one or more resources are selected based at least in part on a channel busy ratio value ([0023] The frequency bands for transmission of the SPS traffic may be determined based on a channel busy ratio (CBR) measured by the first communication node, [0090] In the communication system supporting V2X communications, the vehicle may perform communications based on the CA scheme. For example, the vehicle may perform communications using a primary carrier and one or more secondary carriers. The carrier used for the V2X communications (e.g., V2X service) may be determined based on channel state information (e.g., channel busy ratio (CBR)). The CBR may indicate congestion, occupancy state, load state, etc. of the corresponding carrier (e.g., channel). In this case, the vehicle may measure the CBR in the carrier according to a periodic or specific event).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the system of the combination by the one or more resources are selected based at least in part on a channel busy ratio value, as shown by Hahn. This modification would benefit the system by selecting resources in an optimal matter.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8, 16, and 24 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 the amended independent claim(s) 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
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RONALD B ABELSON whose telephone number is (571)272-3165. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-4:30.
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 on 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.
/RONALD B ABELSON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2476
Prosecution Insights