DETAILED ACTION
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 January 22, 2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Examiner acknowledges receipt of Applicant’s amendment filled 12/26/2025.
In the amendment, Applicant amended claims 1, 14, 15, 21, 29 and 30.
Claims 15, 16-17, 19-20 and 30 are objected to.
Claims 1-5, 7-17, 19-24, and 26-30 are currently pending.
Response to Arguments
Examiner has fully considered Applicant's remark, filed on 12/26/2025.
Examiner has fully considered Applicant's amendment, see pages 10-13, filed 12/26/2025, with respect to the amended claim 15 and claim 30 and they are persuasive. Examiner has withdrawn the rejections of the claim 15 and claim 30.
Applicant’s argument with regards to of the claims 1, and claim 21, which are amended have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Objections
Claim 15 and 30 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Part of Claim 15 and Claim 30 "transmit, to the network entity based at least in part on performing the sidelink communications, the first in-device co-existence interference information, and the second in-device co-existence interference information, an in-device co-existence interference report indicating in-device co-existence interference corresponding to at least a portion of the set of sidelink resources" is objected to because of the following informalities:
"transmit, to the network entity based at least in part on performing the sidelink communications, the first in-device co-existence interference information, and the second in-device co-existence interference information, and in-device co-existence interference report indicating in-device co-existence interference corresponding to at least a portion of the set of sidelink resources"
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
Claims 1, 4-5, 9-14, 21, 23-24 and 28-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang; Xiaowei (US 20230095046 A1, hereinafter, Jiang) in view of Park et al. (US 20240381390 A1, hereinafter, Park) further in view of Zhang et al. (WO 2021029811 A1, hereinafter, Zhang).
Regarding Claim 1, Jiang discloses, an apparatus for wireless communications at a first user equipment (UE), comprising: one or more processors (Fig. 8, Element 820);
memory coupled (Fig. 8, Element 804) with the one or more processors; and
instructions stored in the memory and executable by the one or more processors to cause the apparatus to:
receive, from a second UE, reporting information for indicating in-device co-existence interference ("In some embodiments, the third communication unit 50 may be further configured to receive IDC interference indication information from a second UE, where the IDC interference indication information is used to indicate the first UE determining or predicting that IDC interference is present in a sidelink..." [¶0104]);
receive, from the second UE, a resource reservation message indicating a set of sidelink resources ("In some embodiments, the third communication unit 50 may be further configured to receive IDC interference indication information from a second UE, where the IDC interference indication information is used to indicate the first UE determining or predicting that IDC interference is present in a sidelink; the second processing unit 60 may be further configured to, based on the IDC interference indication information, re-allocate a transmitting resource for the second UE performing sidelink communication with the first UE." [¶0104]); and
Jiang dies not explicitly discloses, transmit, to the second UE according to the reporting information and based at least in part on detecting the in-device co-existence interference at the first UE, an in- device co-existence interference report indicating the in-device co-existence interference corresponding to at least a portion of the set of sidelink resources;
wherein the in-device co-existence interference report is an indication of a link failure associated with the set of sidelink resources due to the in-device co-existence interference.
Park, in analogous art discloses, transmit, to the second UE according to the reporting information and based at least in part on detecting the in-device co-existence interference at the first UE, an in- device co-existence interference report indicating the in-device co-existence interference corresponding to at least a portion of the set of sidelink resources ("For example, the NR V2X RX UE may transmit resource information for avoidance of IDC interference to the NR V2X TX UE through a PC5 RRC message by including the resource information in an inter-UE coordination message. For example, the NR V2X RX UE may transmit resource (e.g., resource domain causing IDC interference) information to the TX UE such that SL slots that overlap with SL TX operation and other RAT (e.g., Wi-Fi) reception (or transmission) are excluded from the TX UE's resource selection, to avoid IDC interference..." [¶0191], see also, "For example, the NR V2X UE may transmit SL carrier information that causes IDC interference to the other UE (e.g., the other UE with a unicast connection/PC5 RRC connection) through a PC5 RRC message. Based on an embodiment of the present disclosure, the UE that detects IDC interference may perform SL communication based on a method and/or a procedure described below." [¶0192]- [¶0193]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the idea of Jiang with the idea which is based on this detection and configured reporting criteria, the first UE transmits an IDC interference report to a second UE as disclosed by Park. The rationale for doing so is to allows the second UE which is managing the resources to take action to avoid the affected resources and reduce the effect of IDC interference.
Zhang, in related art teaches, wherein the in-device co-existence interference report is an indication of a link failure associated with the set of sidelink resources due to the in-device co-existence interference ("Alternatively or additionally, the wireless device’s attempt to recover from the radio link failure may include transmitting signaling to one or more other peer wireless devices (not shown) requesting reduced transmission on radio resources used for the sidelink 22. To the extent radio link failure was attributable to interference on those radio resources, for instance, such signaling may help to alleviate the interference and resolve the underlying physical layer problems that triggered radio link failure." [Page 7, Line 21-26], see also, "In some embodiments, after failing to recover from the radio link failure within a certain time period, the wireless device 12 may release the sidelink 22, transmit a release message to the radio network node 14 and/or to the peer wireless device 20 indicating that the wireless device 12 has released the sidelink 22, and/or trigger a discovery procedure to discover a different peer wireless device. " [Page 7, lin30-34]). Here, the message is only transmitted after a radio link failure occurred and released the sidelink to reduce the transmission on radio resources.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the idea of Jiang and Park with the idea of reporting the link failure due to presence of in-device co-existence interference specifically related to the resources used for sidelink communication as disclosed by Zhang. The rationale for doing so would have been to manage and mitigate IDC problems, particularly in complex scenarios like V2X communication where reliable sidelink connectivity is essential for safety and efficient operation.
Regarding Claim 4, combination of Jiang, Park and Zhang discloses the apparatus of claim 1.
Combination Jiang and Zhang do not explicitly disclose, wherein the instructions to receive the reporting information are executable by the one or more processors to cause the apparatus to:
receive a measurement object configuration message, a sidelink assistance information message or an inter-UE coordination information message.
Park, in related art relates, wherein the instructions to receive the reporting information are executable by the one or more processors to cause the apparatus to:
receive a measurement object configuration message, a sidelink assistance information message or an inter-UE coordination information message ("For example, the NR V2X RX UE may transmit resource information for avoidance of IDC interference to the NR V2X TX UE through a PC5 RRC message by including the resource information in an inter-UE coordination message."[¶0191], see also, "For example, if there is a loss in SL RX operation due to IDC interference, the NR V2X receiving UE may include the SL slot where the loss occurs in a set of non-preferred resources for SL RX operation during inter-UE coordination (e.g., when transmitting an inter-UE coordination message) to ensure that the TX UE excludes the SL slot where the loss occurs from resource selection." [¶0204]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the idea of Jiang and Zhang with the idea that enables the UE to receive different types of messages crucial for its operation and communication with other devices and the network as disclosed by Park. The rationale for utilizing this information is to adjust the UE's behavior, such as performing measurements based on the configuration, selecting resources for sidelink transmissions, or reselecting resources based on inter-UE coordination information.
Regarding Claim 5, combination of Jiang, Park and Zhang discloses the apparatus of claim 1.
Jiang also teaches, wherein the instructions are further executable by the one or more processors to cause the apparatus to:
transmit, in the in-device co-existence interference report, an indication of one or more carrier frequencies, one or more sidelink bandwidth parts, one or more sidelink resource pools, one or more sidelink subchannels, one or more sidelink physical resource blocks, a range of frequency resources or any combination thereof, affected by the in-device co-existence interference ("...Thus, the base station or the second UE can determine a solution for solving the problem concerning IDC interference based on the TDM auxiliary information and/or FDM auxiliary information." [¶0052], see also,"...That is, a transmitting resource pool and/or transmitting resource frequency domain position of the second UE is selected from receiving resource pools and/or receiving resource frequency domain positions other than the IDC-interference-affected receiving resource pool and/or receiving resource frequency domain position." [¶0053]).
Regarding Claim 9, combination of Jiang, Park and Zhang discloses the apparatus of claim 1.
Combination of Jiang and Zhang don’t explicitly teach, wherein the instructions to transmit the in-device co-existence interference report are executable by the one or more processors to cause the apparatus to:
transmit an inter-UE coordination message comprising an indication that a plurality of sidelink resources comprising at least the portion of the set of sidelink resources are non-preferred resources.
Park in related art relates, wherein the instructions to transmit the in-device co-existence interference report are executable by the one or more processors to cause the apparatus to:
transmit an inter-UE coordination message comprising an indication that a plurality of sidelink resources comprising at least the portion of the set of sidelink resources are non-preferred resources ("For example, the IDC UE may transmit, to the base station, information regarding a resource that is likely to cause IDC interference. For example, the IDC UE may transmit, to a peer UE (through a PC5 RRC message), information regarding a resource that is likely to cause IDC interference..." [¶0201]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the idea of Jiang and Zhang with the idea of having UE capable of reporting information about potential interference among different radio communication modules within the same device to the network as disclosed by Park. The rationale for having this capability is to improve in-device coexistence interference avoidance and optimized resource utilization, leading to more efficient sidelink communication.
Regarding Claim 10, combination of Jiang, Park, and Zhang discloses the apparatus of claim 9.
Combination of Jiang, Zhang don’t clearly relate, wherein the instructions are further executable by the one or more processors to cause the apparatus to:
receive, from the second UE, a request for an indication of non-preferred resources, wherein transmitting the inter-UE coordination message is based at least in part on receiving the request.
Park, in related art relates, wherein the instructions are further executable by the one or more processors to cause the apparatus to:
receive, from the second UE, a request for an indication of non-preferred resources, wherein transmitting the inter-UE coordination message is based at least in part on receiving the request ("For example, if there is a loss in SL RX operation due to IDC interference, the NR V2X receiving UE may include the SL slot where the loss occurs in a set of non-preferred resources for SL RX operation during inter-UE coordination (e.g., when transmitting an inter-UE coordination message) to ensure that the TX UE excludes the SL slot where the loss occurs from resource selection." [¶0204]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the idea of Jiang and Zhang with the idea that the transmission of an "inter-UE coordination message" is triggered, at least partially, by the receipt of the request for non-preferred resources as disclosed by Park. The rationale for doing this inter-UE coordination (IUC) in wireless communication, where devices exchange information to improve performance and the "indication of non-preferred resources" suggests that the first UE might be providing assistance information to the second UE, which can be part of an IUC process.
Regarding Claim 11, combination of Jiang, Park, and Zhang disclose the apparatus of claim 9.
Combination of Jiang and Zhang don’t explicitly relate, wherein the instructions are further executable by the one or more processors to cause the apparatus to:
receive configuration information indication one or more conditions, wherein transmitting the inter-UE coordination message is based at least in part on the one or more conditions being satisfied.
Park, in relates art relates, wherein the instructions are further executable by the one or more processors to cause the apparatus to:
receive configuration information indication one or more conditions, wherein transmitting the inter-UE coordination message is based at least in part on the one or more conditions being satisfied ("For example, the NR V2X UE may receive DRX configuration information to avoid IDC interference and may perform NR SL transmission within an on-duration timer duration of SL DRX. In this case, if the NR V2X UE detects that the number of failed NR SL transmissions is greater than or equal to a threshold, the NR V2X UE may trigger a reconfiguration of the SL DRX configuration..." [¶0197] , see also, "For example, if there is a loss in SL RX operation due to IDC interference, the NR V2X receiving UE may include the SL slot where the loss occurs in a set of non-preferred resources for SL RX operation during inter-UE coordination (e.g., when transmitting an inter-UE coordination message) to ensure that the TX UE excludes the SL slot where the loss occurs from resource selection." [¶0204]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the idea of Jiang and Zhang with the idea that UE decision to an inter-UE (User Equipment) coordination message is dependent on the fulfillment of the specified conditions as disclosed by Park. The rationale for having this type of system used in wireless communication, specifically in sidelink (SL) communications, is to manage resources and avoid interference between devices and reserve resources for a later transmission.
Regarding Claim 12, combination of Jiang, Park, and Zhang disclose the apparatus of claim 9.
Combination of Jiang and Zhang don’t explicitly relate, wherein the instructions are further executable by the one or more processors to cause the apparatus to:
receive, from the second UE, an indication that the second UE is capable of receiving the inter-UE coordination message, wherein transmitting the inter-UE coordination message is based at least in part on receiving the indication that the second UE is capable of receiving the inter-UE coordination message.
Park, in related art relates, wherein the instructions are further executable by the one or more processors to cause the apparatus to:
receive, from the second UE, an indication that the second UE is capable of receiving the inter-UE coordination message, wherein transmitting the inter-UE coordination message is based at least in part on receiving the indication that the second UE is capable of receiving the inter-UE coordination message ("For example, a UE that receives information regarding a set of resources experiencing the IDC issue through an INTER-UE coordination message may reselect a transmission resource that overlaps with it (or entire SL grant)..." [¶0211], see also, "...For example, the NR V2X RX UE may transmit resource (e.g., resource domain causing IDC interference) information to the TX UE such that SL slots that overlap with SL TX operation and other RAT (e.g., Wi-Fi) reception (or transmission) are excluded from the TX UE's resource selection, to avoid IDC interference..." [¶0191]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the idea of Jiang and Zhang with the idea that a first User Equipment (UE) receives an indication from a second UE that the second UE is capable of receiving an inter-UE coordination message before it could transmit to the second UE as disclosed by Park. The rationale for using this mechanism is to ensures that the coordination message is only sent to UEs that can actually process it, avoiding unnecessary transmissions and potential interference.
Regarding Claim 13, combination of Jiang, Park, and Zhang disclose the apparatus of claim 9.
Combination of Jiang and Zhang don’t explicitly relate, wherein the instructions are further executable by the one or more processors to cause the apparatus to:
transmit, in the inter-UE coordination message, an indication of a first subset of the plurality of sidelink resources that are non-preferred due to in-device co-existence interference.
Park, in related art relates, wherein the instructions are further executable by the one or more processors to cause the apparatus to:
transmit, in the inter-UE coordination message, an indication of a first subset of the plurality of sidelink resources that are non-preferred due to in-device co-existence interference ("For example, if there is a loss in SL RX operation due to IDC interference, the NR V2X receiving UE may include the SL slot where the loss occurs in a set of non-preferred resources for SL RX operation during inter-UE coordination (e.g., when transmitting an inter-UE coordination message) to ensure that the TX UE excludes the SL slot where the loss occurs from resource selection." [¶0204]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the idea of Jiang and Zhang with the idea that Inter-UE coordination messages facilitate communication between UEs to exchange information about resource availability and potential conflicts indicating preferred or non-preferred resources for another UE's sidelink transmission as disclosed by Park. The rationale for transmitting this indication, the affected UE helps the coordinating UE to avoid selecting those specific resources for its sidelink transmissions, thereby mitigating potential IDC interference. This, in turn, can improve the reliability and performance of both the sidelink communication and the interfering co-located radio technology on the receiving UE.
Regarding Claim 14, combination of Jiang, Park and Zhang discloses the apparatus of claim 1.
Jiang also relates, wherein the instructions are further executable by the one or more processors to cause the apparatus to:
monitor for sidelink signaling from the second UE based at least in part on the resource reservation message ("...For the mode in which a UE autonomously selects a resource to perform sidelink transmission, the network configures a transmitting resource pool and a` receiving resource pool for the UE. If one UE is to communicate with another UE, the transmitting resource pool of the one UE must be included in the receiving resource pool of the other UE." [¶0003]); and
detect the in-device co-existence interference on at least the portion of the set of sidelink resources based at least in part on the monitoring ("At step S21, the second UE receives IDC interference indication information reported by a first UE, where the IDC interference indication information is used to indicate the first UE determining or predicting that IDC interference is present in a sidelink. At step S22, according to a transmitting resource allocation manner of the second UE, the second UE re-determines a transmitting resource for the second UE performing sidelink communication with the first UE." [¶0061-¶0062]).
Claim 21 is the method claim corresponding to the apparatus claim 1 that has been rejected above. Applicant’s attention is directed to the rejection of claim 1. Claim 21 is rejected under the same rational as claim 1.
Claim 23 is the method claim corresponding to the apparatus claim 4 that has been rejected above. Applicant’s attention is directed to the rejection of claim 4. Claim 23 is rejected under the same rational as claim 4.
Claim 24 is the method claim corresponding to the apparatus claim 5 that has been rejected above. Applicant’s attention is directed to the rejection of claim 5. Claim 24 is rejected under the same rational as claim 5.
Claim 28 is the method claim corresponding to the apparatus claim 9 that has been rejected above. Applicant’s attention is directed to the rejection of claim 9. Claim 28 is rejected under the same rational as claim 9.
Claim 29 is the method claim corresponding to the apparatus claim 14 that has been rejected above. Applicant’s attention is directed to the rejection of claim 14. Claim 29 is rejected under the same rational as claim 14.
Claims 2, 8, 22 and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang, Park, and Zhang and further in view of Lovlekar et al. (US 20200260463 A1, hereinafter, Lovlekar).
Regarding Claim 2, combination of Jiang, Park and Zhang discloses the apparatus of claim 1.
Combination of Jiang, Park and Zhang don’t explicitly disclose, wherein the instructions to receive the reporting information are executable by the one or more processors to cause the apparatus to:
receive sidelink radio resource control signaling comprising the reporting information, wherein the reporting information comprises an indication that in-device co- existence interference reporting by the first UE is enabled.
Lovlekar, in analogous art teaches, wherein the instructions to receive the reporting information are executable by the one or more processors to cause the apparatus to:
receive sidelink radio resource control signaling comprising the reporting information, wherein the reporting information comprises an indication that in-device co- existence interference reporting by the first UE is enabled (Fig. 9, "...UE 902 may also send an issue report indicating possible IDC problems, for example problems with the Uu link and/or the PC5 link that are impacting communications, to assist NB 906 with mitigating such issues that may arise (926)." [¶0167], see also, "In response to the report(s), the NB 906 may reconfigure the Uu and/or PC5 resources for the UE 902 in order to mitigate the issues that may have arisen, for example to reduce interference between the PC5 and Uu links and thus improve communications between UE 902 and UE 904..." [¶0168], see also, "...In addition, if the interference is higher than a given (e.g. specified) threshold, the PC5 may be temporarily suspended for the entire duration of the RRC signaling procedure so that a less aggressive PC5 link resource configuration may be obtained from the NB..." [¶0175]) .
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the idea of Jiang, Park and Zhang with the idea of enabling the UE to report information comprises in-device co-existence interference (IDC) as disclosed by Lovlekar. The rationale for doing so would be that the first UE is configured to detect and report instances of IDC interference to its serving network or other UEs, so that devices or network can take steps to mitigate the interference, potentially improving the overall performance and reliability of both sidelink and other concurrent wireless services.
Regarding Claim 8, combination of Jiang, Park and Zhang discloses the apparatus of claim 1.
Combination of Jiang, Park and Zhang don’t explicitly teach, wherein the instructions to transmit the in-device co-existence interference report are executable by the one or more processors to cause the apparatus to:
groupcast the in-device co-existence interference report to a plurality of sidelink UEs comprising the second UE.
Lovlekar, in related art discloses, wherein the instructions to transmit the in-device co-existence interference report are executable by the one or more processors to cause the apparatus to:
groupcast the in-device co-existence interference report to a plurality of sidelink UEs comprising the second UE (Fig. 8, "...The use of measurement reports, IDC indication, and other feedback methods to combat interference and coexistence problems, and the reporting of resource allocation deficiencies to the NB (base station) may all be deployed for unicast, groupcast and/or broadcast modes of C-V2X communications." [¶0165], see also, "...It should be noted that while the example in FIG. 9 is directed to a unicast scenario, a similar method may equally be deployed for groupcast and/or broadcast scenarios. UEs 902 and 904 may undergo a device discovery for a UE pairing procedure for unicast transmissions, whereby UE 902 and UE 904 may communicate with each other over an SL, e.g. over the PC5 link (910). NB 906 may configure SL resources for UE 902 ..." [¶0166], see also, "...In one sense, in addition to configuring the SL resources for UE 902 and UE 906, respectively, NB 906 and NB 908 are also providing information to the UEs to indicate which resources and/or characteristics (for example associated with PC5 communications) the UEs are to monitor and later report to the NBs..."[¶0166]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the idea of Jiang, Park and Zhang with the idea of groupcasting the in-device co-existence interference (IDC) report to a plurality of sidelink UEs as disclosed by Lovlekar. The rationale for doing so would have been to allow a UE to proactively share information about in-device-interference with other nearby UEs operating in sidelink mode, facilitating coordinated actions to mitigate or avoid the interference and improve overall communication within the group.
Claim 22 is the method claim corresponding to the apparatus claim 2 that has been rejected above. Applicant’s attention is directed to the rejection of claim 2. Claim 22 is rejected under the same rational as claim 2.
Claim 27 is the method claim corresponding to the apparatus claim 8 that has been rejected above. Applicant’s attention is directed to the rejection of claim 8. Claim 27 is rejected under the same rational as claim 8.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang, Park, Zhang and Lovlekar in view of Ahluwalia et al. (US 20250097922 A1, hereinafter, Ahluwalia).
Regarding Claim 3, Combination of Jiang, Park, Zhang and Lovlekar teach the apparatus of claim 2.
Combination of Jiang, Park, Zhang and Lovlekar don’t explicitly discloses, wherein the instructions are further executable by the one or more processors to cause the apparatus to:
receive, in the sidelink radio resource control signaling, an indication of a center frequency around which the first UE is requested to report the in-device co-existence interference, an indication of a sidelink resource pool for reporting the in-device co-existence interference, an indication of one or more subchannels associated with reporting the in-device co-existence interference, an indication of one or more active sidelink bandwidth parts or inactive sidelink bandwidth parts for corresponding to the in-device co-existence interference, or any combination thereof.
Ahluwalia, in related art relates, wherein the instructions are further executable by the one or more processors to cause the apparatus to:
receive, in the sidelink radio resource control signaling, an indication of a center frequency around which the first UE is requested to report the in-device co-existence interference, an indication of a sidelink resource pool for reporting the in-device co-existence interference, an indication of one or more subchannels associated with reporting the in-device co-existence interference, an indication of one or more active sidelink bandwidth parts or inactive sidelink bandwidth parts for corresponding to the in-device co-existence interference, or any combination thereof ("When IDC is detected by the UE, it can report the actually affected frequency range at a level such as the affected bandwidth part(s), part of an affected bandwidth part, part of the affected carrier frequency range, or a range of affected physical resource blocks of the candidate affected frequency range, and/or of a range outside of the candidate range. The UE may send the indication of the actually affected frequencies as part of a UE Assistance Information message sent from the UE to the gNB. This is an RRC message that provides information from the UE, for example of any preferred configuration or reporting of interference issues." [¶0098]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the idea of Jiang, Park, Zhang and Lovlekar with the idea of user equipment (UE) receiving sidelink Radio Resource Control (RRC) signaling from a base station (e.g., gNB in NR) to manage interference, specifically "in-device coexistence interference" (IDC) as disclosed by Ahluwalia. The rationale for using this mechanism is to help the network manage IDC interference more effectively, allowing UEs to better detect and mitigate the impact of interference from other devices operating within the same device.
Claims 7 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang, Park, and Zhang in view of Wang at al. (US 20230137334 A1, hereinafter, Wang), further in view of CHI; Liangang (US 20240275508 A1, hereinafter, Chi).
Regarding Claim 7, combination of Jiang, Park, and Zhang disclose the apparatus of claim 1.
Jiang and Zhang don’t explicitly teach, wherein the instructions are further executable by the one or more processors to cause the apparatus to:
receive, in the reporting information, event-triggered measurement object configuration; and detect the in-device co-existence interference based at least in part on monitoring the set of sidelink resources in accordance with the event-triggered measurement object configuration, wherein transmitting the in-device co-existence interference report comprises transmitting a media access control (MAC) control element (CE) based at least in part on detecting the in-device co-existence interference.
Park, in analogous art teaches, wherein the instructions are further executable by the one or more processors to cause the apparatus to:
receive, in the reporting information, event-triggered measurement object configuration ("… the NR V2X receiving UE may include the SL slot where the loss occurs in a set of non-preferred resources for SL RX operation during inter-UE coordination (e.g., when transmitting an inter-UE coordination message) to ensure that the TX UE excludes the SL slot where the loss occurs from resource selection." [¶0204]); and
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the idea of Jiang and Zhang with the idea how a User Equipment (UE) or similar device is configured to handle measurement reports based on specific events as disclosed by Park. The rationale for doing this event-triggered reporting is to allow the network to efficiently manage resources and react to changes in the wireless environment. By only receiving reports, when necessary, the network can optimize performance, manage handovers, and ensure the user's connection remains stable.
Park doesn’t explicitly disclose, detect the in-device co-existence interference based at least in part on monitoring the set of sidelink resources in accordance with the event-triggered measurement object configuration, wherein transmitting the in-device co-existence interference report comprises transmitting a media access control (MAC) control element (CE) based at least in part on detecting the in-device co-existence interference.
Wang in related art relates, detect the in-device co-existence interference based at least in part on monitoring the set of sidelink resources in accordance with the event-triggered measurement object configuration ("The first terminal may also receive trigger signaling from the second terminal, and the trigger signaling indicates that the first terminal feeds back the sidelink assistance information. If the second terminal triggers, through the trigger signaling, the first terminal to feed back the sidelink assistance information, the second terminal may notify the first terminal of the service packet information simultaneously or after or before the trigger signaling is sent..." [¶0062]),
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the idea of Jiang, Zhang and Park with the idea of allowing the device to report measurements based on specific events or thresholds and in the presence of IDC as disclosed by Wang. The rationale for having this the event-triggered measurement object configuration to act as a trigger mechanism and eventually allows for a more efficient and responsive detection of IDC interference, as the device only reports measurements when potentially problematic situations arise.
Wang does not explicitly disclose, wherein transmitting the in-device co-existence interference report comprises transmitting a media access control (MAC) control element (CE) based at least in part on detecting the in-device co-existence interference.
Chi, in related art discloses, wherein transmitting the in-device co-existence interference report comprises transmitting a media access control (MAC) control element (CE) based at least in part on detecting the in-device co-existence interference ("For example, a corresponding relationship between the resource allocation information for sending the cross link interference measurement signal and the specific bit in the MAC CE signaling may be agreed in the protocol or configured by the network device...Thus, the first terminal device may determine activating or deactivating one or more pieces of resource allocation information for sending the cross link interference measurement signal based on the value of the specific bit in the received MAC CE signaling." [¶0151]). Here a person with ordinary skill in the art could replace the cross link interference measurement signal (interference between different cells or base stations in a cellular network) with in-device co-existence interference.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the idea of Jiang, Zhang, Park and Wang with the idea that a wireless device can transmit an in-device coexistence interference report to the network using a Media Access Control (MAC) Control Element (CE) as disclosed by Chi. The rationale for having MAC CE to carry control information between the device and the network- when a device detects IDC interference, it doesn't necessarily need to report it constantly. The triggering of the report can be based on various factors, including the severity of the interference, the duration of the interference, or the type of interference.
Claim 26 is the method claim corresponding to the apparatus claim 7 that has been rejected above. Applicant’s attention is directed to the rejection of claim 7. Claim 26 is rejected under the same rational as claim 7.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 15 and 30 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the objection, set forth in this Office action.
Claims 16-17, and 19-20 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the objection of the base claims, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MUHAMMAD AINUL HUDA whose telephone number is (703)756-1594. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 - 6:30 ET.
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, HASSAN PHILLIPS can be reached at (571)272-3940. 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.
/MUHAMMAD AINUL HUDA/Examiner, Art Unit 4126
/HASSAN A PHILLIPS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2467