DETAILED ACTION
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
1. 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 8 December 2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
2. Applicant's arguments filed 8 December 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant asserts, on pages 13-15 of Remarks, that “in the Advisory Action dated 12-2-2025, the Examiner alleges that Hosseini discloses the subject matter of claim 5 because neither claim 5 nor the claims that claim 5 depends from (claims 1 and 3) require that the gap is for "a measurement gap utilized for inter- RAT measurements or technology switching", while claim 2 actually specifies that the claimed gap can be for a variety of purposes other than measurement. In this regard, Applicant respectfully disagrees. Claim 5 ultimately depends from claim 1, which has already defined "performing, based on the configuration information, at least one of the following within the gap: measurement on information of a first radio technology if a transmission is performed based on a second radio technology; or measurement on information of a second radio technology if a transmission is performed based on a first radio technology; or, switching between the first radio technology and the second radio technology." That is, in the solution of claim 1 of the present application,
the gap recited in claim 1 is explicitly used as a measurement gap for inter-RAT measurements or radio technology switching, i.e., the measurement gap is required to be "utilized for inter-RAT measurements or technology switching." Therefore, claim 1 requires that the measurement gap must be "utilized for inter-RAT measurements or technology switching". Moreover, the present application does not require that the measurement gap is only "utilized for inter-RAT measurements or technology switching," assuming arguendo that "claim 2 actually specifies that
the claimed gap can be for a variety of purposes other than measurement". In addition, Applicant respectfully submits that claim 5 is not taught or suggest by Hosseini also for at least the following reasons. Specifically, claim 5 recites: "The method according to claim 3, wherein the start position of the gap is associated with a position of a physical sidelink feedback channel (PSFCH)." In Hosseini (see paragraph [0113]), the "gap" is defined as the temporal interval between the end of the PSFCH and the start of the PUCCH, and is used solely to ensure that a minimum processing time for PSFCH information is satisfied before uplink PUCCH transmission. If this PSFCH-PUCCH gap is shorter than a threshold associated with the relay UE's minimum processing time, the relay UE postpones the PUCCH transmission until the gap satisfies this threshold. Thus, the focus in Hosseini is on internal timing/processing constraints for feedback within a single radio access technology, namely allowing sufficient time to process PSFCH information before transmitting corresponding uplink control on PUCCH. By contrast, in the present application, the claimed "gap" is configured and utilized for a different technical purpose and in a different technical context. As recited in claim 1, the first radio technology and the second radio technology correspond to sidelinks of different radio access technologies, respectively, and the gap is used to perform at least one of: (i) measurement on information of a first radio technology when transmission is performed based on a second radio technology; (ii) measurement on information of a second radio technology when transmission is performed based on a first radio technology; or (iii) switching between the first radio technology and the second radio technology. Claim 5 further specifies that the start position of the gap is associated with a position of a PSFCH. Accordingly, while the PSFCH position may serve as a timing anchor, the configured gap itself in claimed invention is expressly intended for inter-RAT sidelink measurement and/or switching operations, not for merely satisfying a processing-time constraint between PSFCH and PUCCH within a single RAT. Hosseini does not disclose, teach, or suggest configuring a gap whose start position is associated with a PSFCH in order to enable measurements and switching between sidelinks of different RATs. Nor does Hosseini contemplate any multi-RAT sidelink scenario or the need to coordinate inter-RAT sidelink measurements and handover activities in a dedicated gap. Instead, Hosseini's use of the PSFCH-related gap is limited to managing minimum processing time for uplink control in the same RAT. Therefore, the distinction identified by the Applicant-namely that Hosseini's gap addresses PSFCH processing time for PUCCH transmission within a single RAT, whereas the claimed invention defines a PSFCH-anchored gap for measurement and switching between sidelinks of different radio access technologies-is technically accurate and highlights a substantive difference in both purpose and scope.”
Applicant’s original argument was “the term "gap" refers explicitly to a
measurement gap that is configured and used for the purpose of facilitating, for example, measurements or switching between sidelinks of different RATs, as described in claim 1. This measurement gap facilitates actions such as inter-technology measurements or switching, which are necessary for effective coexistence and coordination across different RATs in sidelink communications. In contrast, the "gap" described in Hosseini (paragraph [113]) is fundamentally different in both purpose
and technical context. As explicitly disclosed, the gap mentioned by Hosseini is one that exists between the end of the PSFCH and the start of the PUCCH.” However, Hosseini is merely relied on for disclosing dependent claims 5 and 6, whereby claim 5 states “the start position of the gap is associated with a position of a physical sidelink feedback channel (PSFCH)” and Applicant’s position therefore appears to be that Hosseini’s disclosure of a gap that is defined in relation to a position of a PSFCH, as required by claim 5, thereby renders Hosseini “fundamentally different in both purpose and technical context”. However, Hosseini clearly discloses the concept of defining the start position of a gap in relation to a position of a PSFCH, and there is no requirement in claim 5 that the gap be “utilized for inter-RAT measurements or technology switching”. As noted in the Advisory Action, claim 2 lists numerous other uses of the claimed gap, which is in apparent agreement with Applicant’s above-quoted statement “Moreover, the present application does not require that the measurement gap is only "utilized for inter-RAT measurements or technology switching,". The claimed gap is introduced in claim 1 with the words “obtaining configuration information of a gap”, without any restriction of this configured gap to being “utilized for inter-RAT measurements or technology switching.” Therefore, contrary to Applicant’s assertion, the gap of Hosseini is not “fundamentally different in both purpose and technical context” from the gap of the pending claims.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the new limitation of independent claims 1, 17, and 20 have been considered but are moot because they do not apply to the new reference, Baghel, that is relied on in the current rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
3. 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.
4. 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.
5. 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.
6. Claims 1-4, 7-13, 15, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gopal et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication 2015/0289153 (hereinafter Gopal), in view of Yeo et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication 2018/0054800 (hereinafter Yeo), further in view of Baghel et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication 2020/0029202 (hereinafter Baghel).
Regarding claim 1, Gopal discloses a transmission processing method, performed by a terminal (disclosed is a method according to which a UE performs measurements of transmissions, according to [0034]) and comprising:
obtaining configuration information of a gap (the UE obtains configuration information for a measurement gap, according to [0034]).
Gopal does not expressly disclose performing, based on the configuration information, at least one of the following within the gap: measurement on information of a first radio technology if a transmission is performed based on a second radio technology; or measurement on information of a second radio technology if a transmission is performed based on a first radio technology; or, switching between the first radio technology and the second radio technology; wherein the first radio technology and the second radio technology correspond to sidelinks of different radio access technologies, respectively.
Yeo discloses performing, based on the configuration information, at least one of the following within the gap: measurement on information of a first radio technology if a transmission is performed based on a second radio technology; or measurement on information of a second radio technology if a transmission is performed based on a first radio technology; or, switching between the first radio technology and the second radio technology (a terminal changes from one RAT to another RAT during a measurement gap time interval [“switching between the first radio technology and the second radio technology”], according to [0222]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Gopal with Yeo by performing, based on the configuration information, at least one of the following within the gap: measurement on information of a first radio technology if a transmission is performed based on a second radio technology; or measurement on information of a second radio technology if a transmission is performed based on a first radio technology; or, switching between the first radio technology and the second radio technology.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to facilitate a terminal’s measurement of a cell that uses a RAT different from the RAT currently being used by said terminal (Yeo: [0220]).
Neither Gopal nor Yeo expressly discloses that the first radio technology and the second radio technology correspond to sidelinks of different radio access technologies, respectively.
Baghel discloses that the first radio technology and the second radio technology correspond to sidelinks of different radio access technologies, respectively (a UE indicates, to a base station, its ability to simultaneously transmit using two different RAT sidelinks, according to Abstract, [0007]-[0008], [0059]-[0061]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Gopal as modified by Yeo with Baghel such that the first radio technology and the second radio technology correspond to sidelinks of different radio access technologies, respectively.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to facilitate vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) communications (Baghel: [0005]).
Claim 17 recites a terminal, comprising a processor, a memory, and a program or instructions stored in the memory and capable of running on the processor, wherein the program or instructions are executed by the processor (disclosed is a UE comprising a processor and a memory storing software that is executed by said processor, according to [0104]-[0105], [0108], Fig. 11 [elements 1250, 1290, and 1292]) such that the method recited in claim 1 is performed, and is therefore rejected on the same grounds as claim 1.
Claim 20 recites a non-transitory readable storage medium, wherein the non-transitory readable storage medium stores a program or instructions, and when the program or instructions are executed by a processor (disclosed is a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing software that is executed by a processor to cause a UE to perform its functions, according to [0008], [0111]), the method recited in claim 1 is performed, and is therefore rejected on the same grounds as claim 1.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Gopal, Yeo, and Baghel discloses all the limitations of claim 1. Additionally, Gopal discloses that the gap comprises at least one of the following: a duration for switching between downlink transmission and sidelink transmission; a power adjustment duration for downlink transmission and sidelink transmission; a duration for switching between uplink transmission and sidelink transmission; a power adjustment duration for uplink transmission and sidelink transmission; a gap duration for switching between frequencies; a gap duration for switching between radio frequencies; a gap duration for switching between bandwidth parts (BWPs); a gap duration for switching between air interfaces; a power adjustment duration for air interfaces; a gap duration for switching between radio access technologies (RATs); a power adjustment duration for RATs; a gap duration for switching between channels; or, a power adjustment duration for channels (a plurality of RAT frequencies are measured during the configured gap [“a gap duration for switching between frequencies”], according to [0054]).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Gopal, Yeo, and Baghel discloses all the limitations of claim 1. Additionally, Gopal discloses that the configuration information is used to configure at least one of the following: a length of the gap; a start position of the gap; an end position of the gap; an offset position of the gap; timing advance information of the gap; a period of the gap; or, a configuration quantity of the gap (the configuration information configures the starting time and ending time of the measurement gap [“a length of the gap; a start position of the gap; an end position of the gap”], according to [0034]).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Gopal, Yeo, and Baghel discloses all the limitations of claim 3. Additionally, Gopal discloses that the length of the gap is associated with a subcarrier spacing (SCS) and/or capability of the terminal (the measurement gap duration is set to a value that is sufficient for the UE to perform the target RAT frequency measurement [“capability of the terminal”], according to [0034]).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Gopal, Yeo, and Baghel discloses all the limitations of claim 1. Additionally, Gopal discloses that the configuration information is obtained by using at least one of the following manners: pre-definition; pre-configuration; radio resource control (RRC) configuration; medium access control control element (MAC CE) configuration; downlink control information (DCI) indication; or, sidelink control information (SCI) indication (the UE stores a pre-existing current measurement configuration [“pre-configuration”], according to [0034]).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Gopal, Yeo, and Baghel discloses all the limitations of claim 1. Additionally, Gopal discloses that the configuration information is periodically sent or is triggered based on a first preset event (a modified measurement gap configuration is generated based on the need for the UE to perform a target RAT frequency measurement [“is triggered based on a first preset event”], according to [0034]).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Gopal, Yeo, and Baghel discloses all the limitations of claim 1. Additionally, Gopal discloses that the configuration information corresponds to at least one of the following information: a transmission type; a resource pool; a terminal; a terminal group; or, a priority (the configuration information corresponds to the UE [“a terminal”], according to [0034]).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Gopal, Yeo, and Baghel discloses all the limitations of claim 1. Additionally, Gopal discloses that the gap is enabled by using at least one of the following manners: being enabled based on triggering of a second preset event; being enabled based on a period; being enabled based on indication of first preset signaling; in a case that a PSFCH is configured in a resource pool for the terminal, enabling a gap configured in the resource pool; or, in a case that a PSFCH period in a resource pool for the terminal is non-zero, enabling a gap configured in the resource pool (the measurement gap occurs at a specified periodicity [“being enabled based on a period”], according to [0032]).
Regarding claims 11-12 and 15, since the claim upon which these claims depend recites options for a step written in the alterative and the option to which these claims are directed is not the one for which prior art is cited, no art need be cited in the rejection of these claims.
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Gopal, Yeo, and Baghel discloses all the limitations of claim 1. Additionally, Gopal discloses that an enabling quantity of the gap is N, and positions of N gaps are continuous or discontinuous (disclosed are a plurality of discontinuous gaps, according to [0032], Fig. 1B).
Claim 18 does not differ substantively from claim 2, and is therefore rejected on the same grounds as claim 2.
Claim 19 does not differ substantively from claim 3, and is therefore rejected on the same grounds as claim 3.
7. Claims 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gopal in view of Yeo in view of Baghel as applied to claim 3 above, further in view of Hosseini et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication 2021/0297971 (hereinafter Hosseini).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Gopal, Yeo, and Baghel discloses all the limitations of claim 3.
Neither Gopal, Yeo, nor Baghel expressly discloses that the start position of the gap is associated with a position of a physical sidelink feedback channel (PSFCH).
Hosseini discloses that the start position of the gap is associated with a position of a physical sidelink feedback channel (PSFCH) (a gap is positioned between the end of a PSFCH and the start of a PUCCH (therefore, the start position of the gap is associated with the position of the PSFCH), according to [0113]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Gopal as modified by Yeo as modified by Baghel with Hosseini such that the start position of the gap is associated with a position of a physical sidelink feedback channel (PSFCH).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to accommodate a relay UE’s minimum processing time (Hosseini: [0113]).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Gopal, Yeo, and Baghel discloses all the limitations of claim 3.
Neither Gopal, Yeo, nor Baghel expressly discloses that the end position of the gap is associated with a position of a PSFCH.
Hosseini discloses that the end position of the gap is associated with a position of a PSFCH (a gap is positioned between the end of a PSFCH and the start of a PUCCH (therefore, the end position of the gap is associated with the position of the PSFCH), according to [0113]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Gopal as modified by Yeo as modified by Baghel with Hosseini such that the end position of the gap is associated with a position of a PSFCH.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to accommodate a relay UE’s minimum processing time (Hosseini: [0113]).
8. Claims 14 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gopal in view of Gopal in view of Baghel as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Yum et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication 2023/0188282 (hereinafter Yum).
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Gopal, Yeo, and Baghel discloses all the limitations of claim 1.
Neither Gopal, Yeo, nor Baghel expressly discloses that the gap is disabled through indication of second preset signaling.
Yum discloses that the gap is disabled through indication of second preset signaling (a measurement gap is disabled through signaling, according to [0384]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Gopal as modified by Yeo as modified by Baghel with Yum such that the gap is disabled through indication of second preset signaling.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to facilitate efficient channel state reporting (Yum: [0022]).
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Gopal, Yeo, Baghel, and Yum discloses all the limitations of claim 14.
Neither Gopal, Yeo, nor Baghel expressly discloses that the second preset signaling comprises at least one of the following: RRC; MAC CE; DCI; or, SCI.
Yum discloses that the second preset signaling comprises at least one of the following: RRC; MAC CE; DCI; or, SCI (a measurement gap is disabled through DCI signaling, according to [0384]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Gopal as modified by Yeo as modified by Baghel as modified by Yum with Yum such that the second preset signaling comprises at least one of the following: RRC; MAC CE; DCI; or, SCI.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to facilitate efficient channel state reporting (Yum: [0022]).
Conclusion
9. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW W GENACK whose telephone number is (571)272-7541. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM Eastern Time.
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, Anthony Addy can be reached on 571-272-7795. 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.
/MATTHEW W GENACK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2645