DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. 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 § 102
2. In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
3. 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.
(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.
4. Claims 1, 5-7, 14 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Cao et al. (US 2020/0322100 A1, hereinafter “Cao”).
Regarding claims 1 and 14, Cao teaches a method, comprising: transmitting, during a period of a sidelink configured grant, a transport block (TB) on a first configured-grant resource of the period of the sidelink configured grant (fig. 4, ¶ [0122], figs. 5A-8, ¶ [0081], The transmissions may include the initial transmission and retransmissions of the same TB. The initial transmission and retransmission of the TB may sometimes also be referred to as repetitions. ¶ [0011], receiving a configuration of a maximum number of transmissions and retransmissions of a TB that UE can perform using the resources configured by the SL CG transmission. In other words, configuration of a maximum number of times a TB is repeatedly transmitted using the resource configured by the SL CG transmission. ¶ [0175], ¶ [0183], ¶ [0148], ¶ [0072], ¶ [0075]); receiving, during the period of the sidelink configured grant and prior to expiration of a minimum processing time relative to a second configured grant resource of the period of the sidelink configured grant (fig. 6, ¶ [0160], the UE makes use of one or more preconfigured/configured time gaps to decide whether a transmitted ACK/NACK can be decoded by the transmit UE on time to terminate retransmission before the last retransmission, or more generally, before an Mth transmission. ¶ [0161], decoding is successful for the third retransmission 504. An ACK is shown transmitted at 510 in respect of successful decoding of the second retransmission 503. The time gap between the second retransmission 504 and the last retransmission 506 is T2. The feedback time gap T1 is the time from the transmit UE's perspective between transmitting the second retransmission 504 and receiving an ACK in respect of that transmission. T3 is the processing time at the transmit UE to process a received ACK/NACK. ¶ [0162], ¶ [0163]), feedback over a physical sidelink feedback channel (PSFCH) indicating whether the TB was successfully received (¶ [0140] In this embodiment, to enable the HARQ feedback and retransmission according to the HARQ feedback, the transmit UE (the UE making the SL transmission) and the receive UE (the UE receiving the SL transmission) are both configured with information regarding the time gap of the physical shared feedback channel (PSFCH) and the associated PSSCH transmission. ¶ [0144], ¶ [0146]); and in response to receiving, during the period of sidelink configured grant, feedback indicating that the TB was successfully received, terminating further transmissions of the TB by refraining from transmitting the TB on the second configured grant resources of the period of the sidelink configured grant (figs. 5A-7, ¶ [0081], ¶ [0149], ¶ [0152], ¶ [0153], the UE sends an ACK only if the successfully decoded SL transmission is the initial transmission, or up to the M-1 retransmission, where M may be configured by a base station (e.g. in RRC signaling or system information (e.g. in SIB) or DCI signaling), or indicated in SCI, or preconfigured/predefined. ¶ [0154], The method continues at block 602 with, before transmitting a last SL retransmission of the plurality of SL retransmissions, the first UE receiving an acknowledgement (ACK) from the second UE. The method continues at block 604 with the first UE terminating the transmission of the first SL transport block in response to receiving the ACK by refraining from transmitting at least the last SL retransmission of said plurality of SL retransmissions, ¶ [0166], ¶ [0173], ¶ [0175]).
Regarding claims 5 and 18, Cao teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising, in response to the feedback indicating that the TB, using remaining configured grant resources for the period of the sidelink configured grant for transmitting a different TB (¶ [0186], the UE can use the retransmission resource for initial transmission of a next TB when the UE receives an ACK before finishing all retransmissions for the current TB. ¶ [0189]).
Regarding claims 6 and 19, Cao teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising retransmitting the TB on next configured grant resources during the period of the sidelink configured grant in response to the feedback indicating the TB is not successfully received (¶ [0044], ¶ [0175], in the case of CG where a set of 4 transmissions for each TB (1 initial transmission and 3 retransmissions) are configured, at the end of the 1st and 2nd sets of TB retransmissions, the transmit UE will retransmit the TB if it receives a NACK from the receive UE; however, at the end of the 3rd set of the TB retransmission (of a configured maximum of 3), the transmit UE will not retransmit the TB if it receives a NACK).
Regarding claims 7 and 20, Cao teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising retransmitting the TB on next configured grant resources in response to not receiving feedback over the PSFCH (¶ [0173], if no ACK/NACK is detected for a TB at predefined/configured timing T4 for HARQ feedback, the UE concludes that the TB was not successfully received, and begins an autonomous retransmission of the TB).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. 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.
6. 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.
7. 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.
8. Claims 2-4, 8, 12 and 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cao in view of Wu et al. (US 2020/0351031 A1, hereinafter “Wu”).
Regarding claims 2 and 15, Cao teaches the method of claim 1, in response to the feedback indicating that the TB is successfully received, transmitting a new TB (¶ [0166]).
Cao does not explicitly teach further comprising, in response to the feedback indicating that the TB is successfully received, retransmitting a pending TB from a different hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) process during the period of the sidelink configured grant.
Wu teaches in response to the feedback indicating that the TB is successfully received, retransmitting a pending TB from HARQ process during the period of the sidelink configured grant (¶ [0041], ¶ [0056], ¶ [0057], the terminal device 110 may determine more than HARQ processes have TBs pending for retransmission. The terminal device 110 may further determine which prior TB should be retransmitted first on the configured grant resources. For example, two HARQ processes may be have TB pending for retransmission at the terminal device 110. For each TB on the corresponding HARQ of the two HARQ processes, the CG timer and the CG retransmission timer may be started when a TB is started to transmit. ¶ [0058]-¶ [0061], ¶ [0062], The process or the TB having the highest number of the retransmission attempt times may be retransmitted on this configured grant resources first. ¶ [0063], ¶ [0071]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to retransmit a pending TB from a different HARQ process during the period of the sidelink configured grant in response to the feedback indicating that the TB is successfully received in the system of Cao to further enhance system reliability.
Regarding claims 3 and 16, Cao in view of Wu teaches the method of claim 2.
Cao does not explicitly tach further comprising indicating within channel state information an identifier for the HARQ process of the pending TB that is retransmitted.
However, Wu teaches indicating within uplink control information for the transmitting UE device an identifier for the HARQ process of the pending TB that is retransmitted (¶ [0048] and ¶ [0064]).
Further, it is well known in the art that uplink control information includes channel state information.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to indicate within channel state information for the transmitting UE device an identifier for the HARQ process of the pending TB that is retransmitted in the system of Cao in view of Wu. The motivation for doing this is a matter of design choice.
Regarding claims 4 and 17, Cao in view of Wu teaches he method of claim 2, further comprising generating a new TB and performing an initial transmission of the new TB on next configured grant resources during the period of the sidelink configured grant in response to the feedback indicating that the TB is successfully received (Cao: ¶ [0186], the UE can use the retransmission resource for initial transmission of a next TB when the UE receives an ACK before finishing all retransmissions for the current TB. ¶ [0189]. Wu: ¶ [0063], if the terminal device 110 determines 215 no prior TB to be retransmitted, the terminal device 110 may initiate 220 a new TB transmission on an available HARQ process.).
Regarding claim 8, Cao teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising, in response to the feedback indicating that the TB is not successfully received, sending an indication to a network entity that provides the sidelink configured grant that the TB is not successfully received (¶ [0178], the transmit UE can request the network (for example a gNB) to schedule a retransmission from the transmit UE to the receive UE. This may, for example, be triggered following failure to successfully transmit using existing configured CG resources, for example following receipt of some number of NACKs or number of unsuccessful transmissions or number of K repetitions if K repetitions are configured), retransmitting the buffered TB on subsequent configured grant resources until one of the timer expires and the feedback indicates that the TB is successfully received TB (¶ [0175], ¶ [0186], the UE can use the retransmission resource for initial transmission of a next TB when the UE receives an ACK before finishing all retransmissions for the current TB. ¶ [0189]).
Cao does not explicitly teach the TB buffered for retransmission; starting a timer associated with retransmissions of the TB; while the timer is running: preventing new TBs from being generated and overwriting the TB in the buffer.
Wu teaches the TB buffered for retransmission; starting a timer associated with retransmissions of the TB; while the timer is running: preventing new TBs from being generated and overwriting the TB in the buffer; and retransmitting the buffered TB on subsequent configured grant resources until one of the timer expires and the feedback indicates that the TB is successfully received (¶ [0042], the CG timer defined for NR to prevent the UE to use the HARQ process for new transmission on a certain period when the UE may wait for performing a potential retransmission, ¶ [0043], The CG timer defined for FeLAA is introduced for auto retransmission (i.e. timer expiry=HARQ NACK) on configured grant for the case of the Transport Block (TB) previous being transmitted on configured grant resources, such CG time may be referred to as “CG retransmission timer.” ¶ [0044] The CG retransmission timer may be started when the TB is actually transmitted on the configured grant and stopped upon reception of HARQ feedback (DFI) or dynamic grant for the HARQ process. ¶ [0045], ¶ [0052], in order to avoid the PDU overwriting when a TB does not get retransmission opportunity for a long time, the terminal device 110 may determine 205 whether there is at least one prior TB to be retransmitted before selecting a HARQ process for new transmission. ¶ [0056], ¶ [0065], If the CG retransmission timer expires before receiving the response, the terminal device 110 may retransmit 225 the new TB while restart the CG retransmission timer. ¶ [0066]. ¶ [0070]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to buffer, start a timer associated with retransmissions of the TB and to prevent new TBs from being generated and overwriting the TB in the buffer while the timer is running in the system of Cao to further improve industrial applicability.
Regarding claim 12, Cao teaches the method of claim 1.
Cao does not explicitly teach further comprising: starting a timer in response to sending the TB on a configured grant resource during the period of the sidelink configured grant; and stopping the timer in response to the feedback indicating that the TB is successfully received.
Wu teaches starting a timer in response to sending the TB on a configured grant resource during the period of the sidelink configured grant (¶ [0071]-¶ [0073]); and stopping the timer in response to the feedback indicating the TB is successfully received (¶ [0070], the terminal device 110 may receive a response indicating a successful reception of the TB. The terminal device 110 may terminate 240 the transmission of TB ends. In this case, both the CG timer and the CH retransmission timer may be stopped).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to start a timer in response to sending the TB on a configured grant resource during the period of the sidelink configured grant and to stopping the timer in response to the TB is successfully received in the system of Cao to further improve industrial applicability.
9. Claims 8-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cao in in view of Fujitsu (“Remaining issues on mode 1 resource allocation for NR V2X,” 3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #100, R1-2000546).
Regarding claim 8, Cao teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising, in response to the feedback indicating that the TB is not successfully received, sending an indication to a network entity that provides the sidelink configured grant that the TB is not successfully received (¶ [0178], the transmit UE can request the network (for example a gNB) to schedule a retransmission from the transmit UE to the receive UE. This may, for example, be triggered following failure to successfully transmit using existing configured CG resources, for example following receipt of some number of NACKs or number of unsuccessful transmissions or number of K repetitions if K repetitions are configured), retransmitting the buffered TB on subsequent configured grant resources until one of the timer expires and the feedback indicates that the TB is successfully received TB (¶ [0175], ¶ [0186], the UE can use the retransmission resource for initial transmission of a next TB when the UE receives an ACK before finishing all retransmissions for the current TB. ¶ [0189]).
Cao does not explicitly teach the TB buffered for retransmission; starting a timer associated with retransmissions of the TB; while the timer is running: preventing new TBs from being generated and overwriting the TB in the buffer.
Fujitsu teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising, in response to the feedback indicating that the TB is not successfully received, sending an indication to a network entity that provides the sidelink configured grant that the TB is not successfully received (Page 2, the transmitter UE reports NACK to the gNB after ReTx#2. When receiving NACK, the gNB decides to schedule retransmissions and the scheduled dynamic grant resources for retransmission), the TB being buffered for retransmission; starting a timer associated with retransmissions of the TB; while the timer is running: preventing new TBs from being generated and overwriting the TB in the buffer (page 3, In configured grant, a series of periods is associated with this HARQ process and this buffer. If the buffer cannot be flushed, these associated periods of configured grant resources cannot be used for any new transmissions. The buffer can be used for configured grant again only if the scheduled new transmission is ACKed. Page 4, After reporting NACK to the gNB, the UE will start a timer. The UE can flush the buffer if the DCI scheduling retransmission is not received within a timer period); and retransmitting the buffered TB on subsequent configured grant resources until one of the timer expires and the feedback indicates that the TB is successfully received (page 2: UE reports ACK on the PUCCH resource to inform the gNB that there is no need to schedule retransmissions anymore. Page 3, The buffer can be used for configured grant again only if the scheduled new transmission is ACKed. Page 4).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to buffer, start a timer associated with retransmissions of the TB and to prevent new TBs from being generated and overwriting the TB in the buffer while the timer is running in the system of Cao to define UE behavior to avoid any ambiguity (Page 1, §2 of Fujitsu).
Regarding claim 9, Cao in view of Fujitsu teaches the method of claim 8.
Cao does not explicitly teach further comprising retransmitting the TB in response to receiving a retransmission grant for the TB within a predefined time before a subsequent configured grant resource.
Fujitsu teaches retransmitting the TB in response to receiving a retransmission grant for the TB within a predefined time before a subsequent configured grant resource (page 4, where the UE starts a timer and waits for the DCI scheduling dynamic grant resources for transmission. It is implicit that if the UE receives DCI scheduling dynamic grant resources for retransmission within a predefined time, the UE uses the scheduled dynamic grant resources for retransmission).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to retransmit the TB in response to receiving a retransmission grant for the TB within a predefined time before a subsequent configured grant resource to define UE behavior to avoid any ambiguity (Page 1, §2 of Fujitsu).
Regarding claim 10, Cao teaches the method of claim 8.
Cao does not explicitly teach further comprising generating a new TB for transmission in response to not receiving a retransmission grant for the TB within a predefined time before a subsequent configured grant resource.
Fujitsu teaches generating a new TB for transmission in response to not receiving a retransmission grant for the TB within a predefined time before a subsequent configured grant resource (Page 2, optionally, if a new transmission is ready, the UE can use the scheduled dynamic grant resources for the new transmission. Page 3, Page 4, the UE can flush the buffer if not receiving the DCI scheduling retransmission within a timer period.).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to generate a new TB for transmission in response to not receiving a retransmission grant for the TB within a predefined time before a subsequent configured grant resource to define UE behavior to avoid any ambiguity (Page 1, §2 of Fujitsu).
Regarding claim 11, Cao teaches the method of claim 8.
Cao does not explicitly teach further comprising, in response to the feedback indicating that the TB is successfully received, not starting the timer and generating a new TB for transmission on subsequent configured grant resources.
Fujitsu teaches in response to the feedback indicating that the TB is successfully received, not starting the timer and generating a new TB for transmission on subsequent configured grant resources (Page 1, when PUCCH is configured for configured grant, both dynamic grant resources and the configured grant resources can be used for retransmission. Page 2, the UE reports ACK. Optionally if a new transmission is ready, the UE can use the scheduled dynamic grant resources for the new transmission. Page 3, The buffer can be used for configured grant again only if the scheduled new transmission is ACKed, page 4, where the UE only starts the time after reporting NACK).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to not start the timer and generate a new TB for transmission on subsequent configured grant resources in response to the feedback indicating that the TB is successfully received to define UE behavior to avoid any ambiguity (Page 1, §2 of Fujitsu).
10. Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cao in view of Wu as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Wang et al. (US 2023/0088550 A1, hereinafter “Wang”).
Regarding claim 13, Cao in view of Wu teaches the method of claim 12.
Cao does not explicitly teach further comprising considering NDI as toggled in response to the timer expiring and generating a new TB for transmission.
Wang teaches considering NDI as toggled in response to the timer expiring and generating a new TB for transmission (¶ [0085], In additional or alternative embodiments, a UE takes one or more of the following actions to handle one non-idle HARQ process regardless of whether the new grant gives the same or different TBS as the pending TB for this HARQ process: 1) Stop the associated timers (CGT and/or CGRT); 2) Flush the associated HARQ buffer; and 3) Consider associated NDI bit to be toggled or set to a fixed value (0, or 1). With any of these options, the HARQ buffer can be flushed and the UE can use the associated HARQ process ID for new transmission).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to consider NDI as toggled in response to the timer expiring and generating a new TB for transmission in the system of Cao in view of Wu to utilize conventional techniques in the art.
Response to Arguments
11. Applicant's arguments filed on November 26, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
12. Applicant argues “…Specifically, Applicant has amended claim 1 clarify the timing relationship between the UE's receipt of PSFCH feedback and the UE's use of configured-grant resources within the same sidelink configured-grant period. As amended, claim 1 now expressly recites that the UE (i) transmits the TB on a first configured-grant resource of the sidelink configured-grant period, (ii) receives PSFCH feedback during the same period and prior to expiration of a minimum processing time relative to a second configured-grant resource of that period, and (iii) in response to receiving timely feedback indicating that the TB was successfully received, refrains from transmitting the TB on the second configured-grant resource and on any additional configured-grant resources within that same period. These amendments make explicit that the claimed method requires a real-time, intra-period cancellation of scheduled configured-grant transmissions based on the timing of PSFCH feedback relative to the next configured-grant opportunity. The cited references do not teach or suggest this real-time, intra-period cancellation behavior, and therefore the §102 rejections should be withdrawn…”
Examiner respectfully disagrees and submits that Cao teaches the amended claims 1 and 14, as set forth above.
Conclusion
13. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MANDISH RANDHAWA whose telephone number is (571)270-5650. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday (9 AM-7 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, Chirag Shah can be reached at 571-272-3144. 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.
/MANDISH K RANDHAWA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2477