DETAILED ACTION
In response to communication filed on 12/2/2025.
Claims 1-3,5-8,10-13,15-18,20-22,24-27, and 29-36 are pending.
Claims 1-3,5-8,10-13,15-18,20-22,24-27, and 29-36 are rejected.
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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12/2/2025 has been entered.
Response to Amendments
This communication is in response to Applicant’s reply filed under 3 CFR 1.111 on 12/2/2025. Claims 1,11,21 and 30 were amended, claims 4,14 and 23 were canceled, claims 34-36 were added and claims 1-3,5-8,10-13,15-18,20-22,24-27, and 29-36 remain pending.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1,11,21 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Su et al. (US Pub. 2019/0090293)(S1 hereafter) in view of Gulati et al. (US Pub. 2021/0144681)(G1 hereafter).
Regarding claims 1,11,21 and 30, S1 teaches an apparatus for wireless communication at a user equipment (UE) [refer Fig. 3], comprising:
a memory [refer Fig. 3; 306]; and
one or more processors [refer Fig. 3; 302], coupled to the memory [refer Fig. 3; 300][paragraph 0057], configured to:
determine, periodically, at least one metric (i.e. sync preamble length) associated with a current sidelink synchronization reference signal (SLSS)(i.e. sync subframes comprise of a sidelink synchronization signal (SLSS))[paragraph 0088] on a sidelink [paragraph 0155]; and
extend a time window (i.e. sync preamble window) allowed for a search for a new SLSS (i.e. extended sync preamble)[paragraph 0160] on the sidelink based at least in part on the at least one metric [paragraph 0155].
However, S1 fails to disclose refrain from performing the search based at least in part on extending the time window.
G1 discloses that a UE can determine a window length to determine resources for transmissions, the UE is able to increase the duration of the selection window which is based upon an RSRP stop threshold, the base station can configure the UE with an exclusion range for increasing the RSRP threshold (i.e. refraining from the search based upon the extended window)[paragraph 0049].
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 teachings of S1 for searching for sync signals during an LBT window [refer S1; paragraph 0137] to incorporate the increasing of a time window based upon an increase in an RSRP threshold for determining resources as taught by G1 . One would be motivated to do so to provide a means of identifying availability of resources when such resources can diminish based upon more UEs performing sidelink communications [refer G1; paragraph 0048].
Claims 1-3,11-13,21,22 and 30-32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over S1 in view of Zheng et al. (US Pub. 2015/0024760)(Z1 hereafter).
Regarding claims 1,11,21 and 30, S1 teaches an apparatus for wireless communication at a user equipment (UE) [refer Fig. 3], comprising:
a memory [refer Fig. 3; 306]; and
one or more processors [refer Fig. 3; 302], coupled to the memory [refer Fig. 3; 300][paragraph 0057], configured to:
determine, periodically, at least one metric (i.e. sync preamble length) associated with a current sidelink synchronization reference signal (SLSS)(i.e. sync subframes comprise of a sidelink synchronization signal (SLSS))[paragraph 0088] on a sidelink [paragraph 0155]; and
extend a time window (i.e. sync preamble window) allowed for a search for a new SLSS (i.e. extended sync preamble)[paragraph 0160] on the sidelink based at least in part on the at least one metric [paragraph 0155].
However, S1 fails to disclose refrain from performing the search based at least in part on extending the time window.
Z1 discloses that a type of search can be based upon a power remaining for a UE, in which the decreasing of a battery power can increase a search interval, in which searches can stop all together once the battery power falls below a given threshold (i.e. refraining from searching based at least in part on extending the time window)[paragraph 0063].
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 teachings of S1 for searching for sync signals during an LBT window [refer S1; paragraph 0137] to incorporate the increasing of a search interval based upon batter power as taught by Z1. One would be motivated to do so to provide a means of preserving battery life of a UE when the frequency of search can depend upon battery life [refer Z1; paragraph 0062].
Regarding claims 2,12,22 and 31, S1 teaches the time window is extended as a function of a discontinuous reception (DRx) cycle associated with the UE (D2D synchronization preamble sequence is received during an on duration portion of a DRX cycle)[paragraph 0222].
Regarding claims 3,13 and 32, S1 teaches the time window is extended for a preconfigured amount of time (i.e. multiple lengths of a discovery interval)[paragraph 0155].
Regarding claims 34 and 36, S1 teaches the UE is not synchronized to global navigation satellite system (a UE may be synchronized with a coordinated universal time that can be acquired in various other ways other than GNSS (i.e. is not synchronized to GNSS))[paragraph 0148].
Regarding claim 35, S1 teaches the new SLSS is synchronized to global navigation satellite system (each D2D period can be synchronized with a coordinated UTC time, such as via GNSS)[paragraph 0148].
Claims 5-7,15-17,24-27, and 33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over S1 in view of Z1, as applied to claims 1,11 and 21, in further view of G1.
Regarding claims 5,15,24 and 33, S1 fails to disclose that the at least one metric comprises a reference signal received power (RSRP) associated with the current SLSS, an RSRP variation associated with the current SLSS, an RSRP trend associated with the current SLSS, a reference signal received quality (RSRQ) associated with the current SLSS, or a combination thereof.
G1 discloses that a UE can determine a RSRP of a reference signal of another UE, and when the RSRP is above a threshold, the UE ma reduce retransmissions associated with sidelink transmissions and increase (i.e. extend) the size of a time window [paragraph 0116].
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 teachings of S1 for discovery of sync preambles with particular power levels [refer S1; paragraph 0164] to incorporate the changing of a time window for sidelink communications based upon RSRP measurements as taught by G1. One would be motivated to do so to provide a means of reducing the number of retransmissions for sidelink communications [refer G1; paragraph 0022].
Regarding claims 6,16 and 25, S1 fails to disclose the one or more processors, to extend the time window, are configured to extend the time window based on: the RSRP associated with the current SLSS satisfying an RSRP threshold; the RSRP variation associated with the current reference signal SLSS satisfying a variation threshold; the RSRQ associated with the current SLSS satisfying an RSRQ threshold; a direction of the RSRP trend associated with the current SLSS satisfying a trend threshold; or a combination thereof.
G1 discloses that a UE can determine a RSRP of a reference signal of another UE, and when the RSRP is above a threshold, the UE ma reduce retransmissions associated with sidelink transmissions and increase (i.e. extend) the size of a time window [paragraph 0116].
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 teachings of S1 for discovery of sync preambles with particular power levels [refer S1; paragraph 0164] to incorporate the changing of a time window for sidelink communications based upon RSRP measurements as taught by G1. One would be motivated to do so to provide a means of reducing the number of retransmissions for sidelink communications [refer G1; paragraph 0022].
Regarding claims 7,17 and 26, S1 teaches transmitting to a source UE [refer Fig. 1; 504] associated with the current SLSS [paragraph 0155].
However, S1 fails to disclose the one or more processors, to extend the time window, are configured to extend the time window based at least in part on a data connection with the source UE.
G1 discloses that a UE can determine a time window for resource selection for transmission of sidelink message from one UE to another [paragraph 0140], the size of the time window for selection of resources can be increased [paragraph 0141], the increase in the size of the time window can be based upon reducing a number of retransmissions [paragraph 0145].
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 teachings of S1 for discovery of sync preambles with particular power levels [refer S1; paragraph 0164] to incorporate the changing of a time window for sidelink communications based upon RSRP measurements as taught by G1. One would be motivated to do so to provide a means of reducing the number of retransmissions for sidelink communications [refer G1; paragraph 0022].
Regarding claims 8,18 and 27, S1 fails to disclose receive from a source UE associated with the current SLSS, the one or more processors, to extend the time window, are configured to extend the time window based at least in part on a data connection with the source UE.
G1 discloses that a UE can determine a time window for resource selection for transmission of sidelink message from one UE to another [paragraph 0140], the size of the time window for selection of resources can be increased [paragraph 0141], the increase in the size of the time window can be based upon reducing a number of retransmissions [paragraph 0145].
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 teachings of S1 for discovery of sync preambles with particular power levels [refer S1; paragraph 0164] to incorporate the changing of a time window for sidelink communications based upon RSRP measurements as taught by G1. One would be motivated to do so to provide a means of reducing the number of retransmissions for sidelink communications [refer G1; paragraph 0022].
Claims 10,20, and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over S1 in view of Z1, as applied to claims 1,11 and 21, in further view of Chen et al. (US Pub. 2022/0039035)(C2 hereafter).
Regarding claims 10,20 and 29, S1 fails to disclose the search comprises an asynchronous SyncRef UE search or a SyncRef UE search without SLSS timing awareness.
C2, in the same field of endeavor, discloses that a given SyncRef may be lost due to out of range or obstruction, in which a UE is able to perform a full search within a given duration for a configured periodicity, such as a 160ms periodicity, to search for all SSLS IDs (SSID) (i.e. SyncRef search without SLSS timing awareness)[paragraph 0019].
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 teachings of S1 to incorporate the implementation of SyncRef UE search for performing searches in a sidelink as taught by C2. One would be motivated to do so to provide the use of a known technique in the field of endeavor to yield predictable results.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/2/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding claims 1,11,21 and 30, applicant argues that the applied reference does not teach newly added claim limitation, namely, “refrain from performing the search based at least in part on extending the time window”.
In response to the above-mentioned argument, examiner respectively directs the applicant to the new grounds of rejection, as noted above, with regards to the teachings of Zheng et al. (US Pub. 2015/0024760)(Z1 hereafter) and in view of the teachings of Gulati et al. (US Pub. 2021/0144681)(G1 hereafter). Given the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim language, to refrain performing a search based at least in part on extending of a time window can be interpreted as any type of delay, exclusion or stopping of searching in accordance to an extended time window. This can be broadly seen as the exclusion range tied to the increasing of a RSRP threshold that leads to the modification of a time window as taught by G1, or when searches can stop (i.e. refrained) all together once battery power falls below a given threshold when a type of search can be based upon a power remaining for a UE, in which the decreasing of a battery power can increase a search interval as taught by Z1.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RYAN C KAVLESKI whose telephone number is (571)270-3619. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6:30am-3pm.
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, Charles C Jiang can be reached at 571-270-7191. 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.
Ryan Kavleski
/R.C.K/Examiner, Art Unit 2412
/CHARLES C JIANG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2412