Response to Amendment
This office action is in response to a communication received on May 20, 2025.
The application has been reassigned to a new examiner; the examiner’s contact information is available at the end of the office action.
Claims 1, 13, 14, and 30 have been amended.
Claims 1-30 are pending in this application.
Response to Arguments
The 35 USC §103 rejection of claims 1-30 is hereby withdrawn in light of applicant’s amendments and arguments (see remarks pp. 9-10). However a new grounds of rejection is provided below and was necessitated based upon the amendments.
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4, 6-15, 17, 19-24, and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lund et al (US 2022/0028264, hereinafter “Lund”) (cited in Applicant’s IDS received 2/8/2024).
Regarding claims 1 and 13, Lund teaches an apparatus for wireless communication at a network entity, comprising:
memory; and
at least one processor coupled to the memory and, based at least in part on information stored in the memory, the at least one processor is configured to:
obtain a capability indication of a user equipment (UE), the capability indication indicating that the UE is paired with a vehicle (see ¶100, V2X inter-vehicle negotiation includes coordination between vehicles which includes vehicle capabilities, see ¶77, wherein a mobile phone can perform the inter-vehicle coordination with another vehicle, including vehicle abilities, see ¶73, wherein the mobile phone is acting as a proxy for a legacy vehicle, ¶47, wherein the mobile device learns the vehicles capabilities through paired communication with the vehicle, see ¶44, wherein the mobile device lets other vehicles know its acting as a proxy for a legacy vehicle);
generate vehicle specific signals based on the capability indication indicating that the UE is paired with the vehicle (¶31, wherein transmitting devices can modify communication based on the knowledge they are acting as a proxy for a legacy device), wherein data within the vehicle specific signals are tailored based at least in part on the vehicle being an autonomous vehicle or a non- autonomous vehicle (see ¶100, wherein the vehicle abilities are tailored to the vehicle’s capabilities, see ¶20, wherein the vehicles ADAS capabilities are included in the vehicle capabilities); and
output the vehicle specific signals to the UE (¶100, wherein the vehicles perform inter-vehicle coordination).
Regarding claims 14 and 30, Lund teaches an apparatus for wireless communication at a user equipment (UE), comprising:
memory; and
at least one processor coupled to the memory and, based at least in part on information stored in the memory, the at least one processor is configured to:
transmit, to a network entity, a capability indication of the UE, the capability indication indicating that the UE is paired with a vehicle (see ¶100, V2X inter-vehicle negotiation includes coordination between vehicles which includes vehicle capabilities, see ¶77, wherein a mobile phone can perform the inter-vehicle coordination with another vehicle, including vehicle abilities, see ¶73, wherein the mobile phone is acting as a proxy for a legacy vehicle, ¶47, wherein the mobile device learns the vehicles capabilities through paired communication with the vehicle, see ¶44, wherein the mobile device lets other vehicles know its acting as a proxy for a legacy vehicle); and
receive, from the network entity, vehicle specific signals based on the capability indication indicating that the UE is paired with the vehicle (¶31, wherein transmitting devices can modify communication based on the knowledge they are acting as a proxy for a legacy device), wherein data within the vehicle specific signals are tailored based at least in part on the vehicle being an autonomous vehicle or anon-autonomous vehicle (see ¶100, wherein the vehicle abilities are tailored to the vehicle’s capabilities, see ¶20, wherein the vehicles ADAS capabilities are included in the vehicle capabilities).
Regarding claim 2, Lund teaches the apparatus of claim 1, further comprising a transceiver coupled to the at least one processor, and wherein the at least one processor is configured to output the vehicle specific signals by initiating transmission of the vehicle specific signals via the transceiver (see ¶102 teaching an embodiment of non-legacy vehicles including wireless transceivers to transmit v2x messages).
Regarding claim 9, Lund teaches the apparatus of claim 2, wherein the capability indication is comprised within a wireless communication received via the transceiver (see ¶100, V2X inter-vehicle negotiation includes coordination between vehicles which includes vehicle capabilities, see ¶77, wherein a mobile phone can perform the inter-vehicle coordination with another vehicle, including vehicle abilities, see ¶73, wherein the mobile phone is acting as a proxy for a legacy vehicle, ¶47, wherein the mobile device learns the vehicles capabilities through paired communication with the vehicle, see ¶44, wherein the mobile device lets other vehicles know its acting as a proxy for a legacy vehicle).
Regarding claim 10, Lund teaches the apparatus of claim 9, wherein the transmission of the vehicle specific signals comprises one or more application-layer messages, one or more radio resource control (RRC) messages, or one or more physical-layer messages (¶23, wherein v2x communication is layer 1 (physical), communications).
Regarding claim 11, Lund teaches the apparatus of claim 2, wherein the capability indication is comprised within a short-range wireless communication, wherein the vehicle specific signals are comprised within at least one of application-layer messages, radio resource control (RRC) messages, or physical-layer messages (¶23, wherein v2x communication is layer 1 (physical), communications).
Regarding claim 4, Lund teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the data within the vehicle specific signals is tailored for a paired combination of the UE and the vehicle (¶31, wherein transmitting devices can modify communication based on the knowledge they are acting as a proxy for a legacy device).
Regarding claim 6, Lund teaches the apparatus of claim 4, wherein:
i) in response to the vehicle comprising a non-autonomous vehicle, the data comprises at least information associated with a vicinity of the non-autonomous vehicle for the UE paired with the non-autonomous vehicle (see ¶100, wherein the vehicle abilities are tailored to the vehicle’s capabilities, see ¶20, wherein the vehicles ADAS capabilities are included in the vehicle capabilities, wherein the ADAS capabilities can be non-autonomous), or
ii) in response to the vehicle comprising an autonomous vehicle, the data comprises at least information associated with a vicinity of the autonomous vehicle for the UE paired with the autonomous vehicle for use by the autonomous vehicle while an autonomous mode of the autonomous vehicle is disengaged (Alternative limitation is mapped above).
Regarding claim 7, Lund teaches the apparatus of claim 6, wherein the vicinity of the non-autonomous vehicle for the UE paired with the non-autonomous vehicle or the vicinity of the autonomous vehicle for the UE paired with the autonomous vehicle corresponds to a field of view of an operator of the vehicle (see ¶66, wherein field of view is used in sensing the vicinity presence of nearby vehicles).
Regarding claim 8, Lund teaches the apparatus of claim 4, wherein:
i) in response to the vehicle comprising a non-autonomous vehicle, the data within the vehicle specific signals is based, at least in part, on an expected reaction time of an operator of the non-autonomous vehicle (see ¶79 teaches capability information includes stopping distance which is the reaction time of the operator to make a complete stop based on current conditions), or
ii) in response to the vehicle comprising an autonomous vehicle, the data within the vehicle specific signals is based, at least in part, on an expected data processing capability of the autonomous vehicle, an expected reaction time of an operator of the autonomous vehicle, or both (alternative taught above).
Regarding claim 12, Lund teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the vehicle comprises an autonomous vehicle or a non-autonomous vehicle (see ¶20 and ¶¶2-3).
Regarding claim 15, Lund teaches the apparatus of claim 14, further comprising a transceiver coupled to the at least one processor, and wherein the at least one processor is configured to receive the vehicle specific signals by initiating reception of the vehicle specific signals via the transceiver (see ¶122, wherein the proxy device has wireless communication interface to perform signaling using v2X).
Regarding claim 21, Lund teaches the apparatus of claim 15, wherein the capability indication is comprised within a wireless communication transmitted via the transceiver (see ¶100, V2X inter-vehicle negotiation includes coordination between vehicles which includes vehicle capabilities, see ¶77, wherein a mobile phone can perform the inter-vehicle coordination with another vehicle, including vehicle abilities, see ¶73, wherein the mobile phone is acting as a proxy for a legacy vehicle, ¶47, wherein the mobile device learns the vehicles capabilities through paired communication with the vehicle, see ¶44, wherein the mobile device lets other vehicles know its acting as a proxy for a legacy vehicle).
Regarding claim 22, Lund teaches the apparatus of claim 21, wherein the reception of the vehicle specific signals comprises one or more application-layer messages, one or more radio resource control (RRC) messages, or one or more physical-layer messages (¶23, wherein v2x communication is layer 1 (physical), communications).
Regarding claim 23, Lund teaches the apparatus of claim 15, wherein the capability indication is comprised within a short-range wireless communication, wherein the vehicle specific signals are comprised within at least one of application-layer messages, radio resource control (RRC) messages, or physical-layer messages (¶23, wherein v2x communication is layer 1 (physical), communications).
Regarding claim 17, Lund teaches the apparatus of claim 14, wherein the data within the vehicle specific signals is tailored to a paired combination of the UE and the vehicle (¶31, wherein transmitting devices can modify communication based on the knowledge they are acting as a proxy for a legacy device).
Regarding claim 19, Lund teaches the apparatus of claim 17, wherein:
i) in response to the vehicle comprising a non-autonomous vehicle, the data comprises at least information associated with a vicinity of the non-autonomous vehicle for the UE paired with the non-autonomous vehicle (see ¶100, wherein the vehicle abilities are tailored to the vehicle’s capabilities, see ¶20, wherein the vehicles ADAS capabilities are included in the vehicle capabilities, wherein the ADAS capabilities can be non-autonomous), or
ii) in response to the vehicle comprising an autonomous vehicle, the data comprises at least information associated with a vicinity of the autonomous vehicle for the UE paired with the autonomous vehicle for use by the autonomous vehicle while an autonomous mode of the autonomous vehicle is disengaged (alternative taught above),
wherein the vicinity of the non-autonomous vehicle for the UE paired with the non- autonomous vehicle or the vicinity of the autonomous vehicle for the UE paired with the autonomous vehicle corresponds to a field of view of an operator of the vehicle (see ¶66, wherein field of view is used in sensing the vicinity presence of nearby vehicles).
Regarding claim 20, Lund teaches the apparatus of claim 17, wherein:
i) in response to the vehicle comprising a non-autonomous vehicle, the data within the vehicle specific signals is based, at least in part, on an expected reaction time of an operator of the non-autonomous vehicle (see ¶79 teaches capability information includes stopping distance which is the reaction time of the operator to make a complete stop based on current conditions), or
ii) in response to the vehicle comprising an autonomous vehicle, the data within the vehicle specific signals is based, at least in part, on an expected data processing capability of the autonomous vehicle, an expected reaction time of an operator of the autonomous vehicle, or both (alternative taught above).
Regarding claim 24, Lund teaches the apparatus of claim 14, wherein the vehicle comprises an autonomous vehicle or a non-autonomous vehicle (see ¶20 and ¶¶2-3).
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) 3, 5, 16, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lund in view of Tsuda (US 2022/0238019, hereinafter “Tsuda”).
Regarding claim 3, Lund teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the vehicle comprises an autonomous vehicle (see ¶20 and ¶70), however Lund does not explicitly indicate wherein the capability indication further indicates that an autonomous mode of the autonomous vehicle is engaged or disengaged.
Tsuda teaches a system for driving assistance, wherein when there is a safety issue on the roads, v2x communications can include signals to other vehicles that have reported to other vehicles and network entities to be have autonomous mode driving engage, and can control them to switch or disengage the autonomous mode (see ¶¶300-310).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use Tsuda’s teaching of transmitting autonomous driving level information as part of the inter-vehicle negotiation capabilities so that the other vehicles can specify how to tailor communications and commands to vehicles based upon current autonomous level.
Claim 16 is rejected under the same rationale as claim 3
Regarding claim 5, Lund teaches the apparatus of claim 4, wherein the vehicle comprises an autonomous vehicle (see ¶20 and ¶70), and wherein the data corresponds to one or more other vehicles, one or more road users, one or more road conditions, one or more traffic conditions, a field of view of one or more sensors, one or more depths, one or more ranges, or some combination thereof (¶100, wherein weather and road conditions can be shared), however, Lund does not explicitly teach that the capabilities include an autonomous mode of the autonomous vehicle is engaged
Tsuda teaches a system for driving assistance, wherein when there is a safety issue on the roads, v2x communications can include signals to other vehicles that have reported to other vehicles and network entities to be have autonomous mode driving engage, and can control them to switch or disengage the autonomous mode (see ¶¶300-310).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use Tsuda’s teaching of transmitting autonomous driving level information as part of the inter-vehicle negotiation capabilities so that the other vehicles can specify how to tailor communications and commands to vehicles based upon current autonomous level.
Claim 18 is rejected under the same rationale as claim 5.
Claim(s) 25-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lund in view of Wu et al (US 2021/0152991, hereinafter “Wu).
Regarding claim 25, Lund teaches the apparatus of claim 14. However Lund does not explicitly indicate wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: transmit a second vehicle specific signal to one or more UEs via sidelink communication.
Wu teaches a system for inter-vehicle v2x communication which can include sidelink communication between vehicles (see ¶66, see also ¶65 and ¶88).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art the time the invention was made to use Wu’s suggestion of include sidelink communication to communication between cooperating vehicles in a inter-vehicle communication, the result would be to allow sidelink v2x messages between the vehicles and the proxies as taught in Lund. The combination would allow the communication to occur between vehicles using the available sidelink communications to help utilize the available communication resources.
Regarding claim 26, Lund, as improved by Wu, teaches the apparatus of claim 25, wherein each of the one or more UEs are paired with a respective autonomous vehicle or a respective non-autonomous vehicle (¶103 and ¶100, wherein the vehicles are capability of communicating with any neighbor vehicles include those with paired UEs, the legacy vehicles with paired UEs may be autonomous or have no ADAS capabilities (see ¶70).
Regarding claim 27, Lund, as improved by Wu, teaches the apparatus of claim 25, wherein the vehicle specific signals transmitted to the one or more UEs are transmitted via broadcast, groupcast, or unicast (see ¶22, wherein the V2X messages are broadcast).
Regarding claim 28, Lund, as improved by Wu, teaches the apparatus of claim 25, wherein the second vehicle specific signal is processed to correspond with vehicle capabilities of the one or more UEs, based on the vehicle specific signals received from the network entity (¶100, wherein the inter-vehicle negotiation is based on all the nearby vehicles and based on all the capabilities).
Regarding claim 29, Lund, as improved by Wu, teaches the apparatus of claim 25, wherein the second vehicle specific signal comprise the vehicle specific signals received from the network entity (¶100, wherein the inter-vehicle negotiation is based on all the nearby vehicles and based on all the capabilities).
Pertinent Prior art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2019/0096243 issued to Doig et al because it discloses pairing mobile devices with vehicles to communicate using v2x communications. The communications include learning about the vehicle’s capabilities (include ADAS) and communicating and receiving vehicle specific signals on behalf of the vehicle.
Conclusion
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN T BATES whose telephone number is (571)272-3980. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9 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.
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.
/KEVIN T BATES/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2472