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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/25/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/12/2025 have been fully considered but they are moot in view of new ground(s).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
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.
Claims 1-2, 6-9, 11-12, 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (US 20220124776) in view of Golitschek et al. (US 20190098657).
Regarding claim 1, Li discloses a method performed by a terminal in a wireless communication system (Fig. 1), the method comprising:
identifying a first highest priority value of at least one logical channel of an uplink (UL) transmission and a second highest priority value of at least one logical channel of a sidelink transmission (the priority of the UL MAC PDU may be a highest priority of one or more logical channels included in the UL MAC PDU, and the priority of the SL MAC PDU may be a highest priority of one or more sidelink logical channels included in the SL MAC PDU; [0148]);
identifying that the terminal is not able to perform a simultaneous transmission of the UL transmission and the sidelink transmission (when the UL conflicts with the SL, that the terminal device preferentially sends an uplink medium access control packet data unit UL MAC PDU or a sidelink medium access control packet data unit SL MAC PDU based on the indication information; [0138]); and
performing the sidelink transmission in case that the terminal is not able to perform the simultaneous transmission of the UL transmission and the sidelink transmission, a medium access control (MAC) protocol data unit (PDU) of the UL transmission does not include a first MAC control element (CE) (terminal device may determine sending priorities of a UL and an SL, to ensure that data transmitted on a link having a higher sending priority is preferentially transmitted; [0007].
The UL MAC CE may include one or more of the following: a C-RNTI MAC CE, a MAC CE for BSR, with exception of BSR included for padding, a MAC CE for a BSR included for padding (MAC CE for BSR included for padding), a MAC CE for a sidelink buffer status report SL BSR with exception of an SL BSR included for padding (MAC CE for SL BSR, with exception of SL BSR included for padding), a MAC CE for an SL BSR included for padding (MAC CE for SL BSR included for padding), a single-entry or multiple-entry power headroom report (PHR) MAC CE, and a MAC CE for a recommended bit rate queue; [0129].
If the UL MAC PDU and the SL MAC PDU satisfy a first condition, the terminal device preferentially sends the SL MAC PDU. For example, the first condition may be that the UL MAC PDU does not include the UL MAC CE; [0148].
Note that in order to preferentially send the SL MAC PDU, The UL MAC PDU should not include any of the instances of the MAC CEs as mentioned above, such as, e.g., a C-RNTI MAC CE and a MAC CE for BSR),
the first highest priority value is not lower than a first threshold, and the second highest priority value is lower than a second threshold (priority 3 of the sidelink logical channel on the SL is higher than the priority 5 of the logical channel on the UL. In Table 2, a logical channel whose priority value is “0” is a logical channel having a highest priority among all the logical channels on the UL (i.e., the highest priority on the UL is not lower than any other priority (a first threshold) on the UL).
A value of the mapping priority that corresponds to the highest priority “0” of the sidelink logical channel on the SL is “1”, which is lower than the highest priority “0” of the logical channels on the UL (i.e., lower than a second threshold); [0157]),
wherein a priority of the first MAC CE is higher than a priority of the sidelink transmission (if the UL MAC PDU includes the UL MAC CE specified in the first configuration information, a sending priority of the UL is higher than a sending priority of the SL; [0138]).
Li does not expressly disclose wherein a priority of the first MAC CE is higher than a priority of data from any logical channel except data from UL-common control channel (CCCH).
In an analogous art, Golitschek discloses wherein a priority of the first MAC CE is higher than a priority of data from any logical channel except data from UL-common control channel (CCCH) (MAC entity shall consider a relative priority of the MAC CE for AUL confirmation higher than: data from any logical channel except for data from an UL-CCCH; [0052]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add the features taught by Golitschek into the system of Li in order to enable triggering a buffer status report (BSR) upon deactivation of autonomous uplink (AUL), so that the network unit obtains the BSR immediately, thus determining a number of grants and granted resources needed by the remote unit in a better manner (Golitschek; [0055]).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Li and Golitschek, particularly Li discloses wherein in case that the first MAC CE is included in the MAC PDU of the UL transmission, a priority of the UL transmission is higher than the priority of the sidelink transmission (if the UL MAC PDU includes the UL MAC CE specified in the first configuration information, a sending priority of the UL is higher than a sending priority of the SL; [0138]); and
in case that a second MAC CE which is different from the first MAC CE is included in the MAC PDU of the UL transmission, the priority of the sidelink transmission is higher than the priority of the UL transmission (when the UL MAC PDU includes only the UL MAC CE, it may be understood that the highest priority of the logical channel on the UL is always lower than the highest priority of the sidelink logical channel on the SL. In this way, it is determined that the SL MAC PDU is preferentially sent; [0164]).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Li and Golitschek, particularly Li discloses wherein the first threshold and the second threshold are configured to the terminal (mapping priority is compared with the priority of the logical channel on the other link, to obtain a result of comparing the priority of the logical channel on one link with the priority of the logical channel on the other link. For example, the terminal device may obtain the mapping relationship by using RRC signaling, a system information block (SIB), a MAC CE, downlink control information (DCI) from the network device or in a pre-configuration manner; [0153]).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Li and Golitschek, particularly Li discloses wherein a priority value of the at least one logical channel for UL transmission is one of 16 values, and wherein a priority value of the at least one logical channel for sidelink transmission is one of 8 values (priority levels of the logical channels on the UL and the SL are respectively 16 and 8; [0159]).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Li and Golitschek, particularly Li discloses wherein an increasing priority value indicates a lower priority (for logical channels on a same link, a smaller priority value indicates a higher priority; [0159]).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Li and Golitschek, particularly Li discloses wherein a priority of a scheduling request for at least one UL resource of the UL transmission or for at least one sidelink resource of the sidelink transmission is identified based on a priority of a logical channel associated with the scheduling request (the first mapping relationship is used to convert the priority of the logical channel that triggers the UL SR into the mapping priority that can be compared with the priority of the sidelink logical channel included in the SL MAC PDU. As shown in Table 5, the priority of the logical channel that triggers the UL SR and the priority of the sidelink logical channel included in the SL MAC PDU cannot be directly compared, and priority levels are both 16. In other words, both the priorities of the logical channels on the two links are 16 levels, and a smaller value indicates a higher priority. To be specific, a logical channel whose priority value is 0 is a logical channel having a highest priority among all the logical channels on the same link, and a logical channel whose priority value is 15 is a logical channel having a lowest priority among all the logical channels on the same link. For example, assuming that values of the priority of the logical channel that triggers the UL SR and the priority of the sidelink logical channel included in the SL MAC PDU are both 2, based on Table 5, a value of the mapping priority that corresponds to the priority of the logical channel that triggers the UL SR and that can be compared with the priority of the sidelink logical channel included in the SL MAC PDU is 1, and is less than the value 2 of the priority of the sidelink logical channel included in the SL MAC PDU. In this case, it may be determined that the priority 2 of the logical channel that triggers the UL SR is higher than the priority 2 of the sidelink logical channel included in the SL MAC PDU; [0184]), and
wherein the scheduling request is used to request to a base station for the at least one UL resource of the UL transmission or for the at least one sidelink resource of the sidelink transmission (the SR may include an uplink scheduling request UL SR, the second configuration information includes a first mapping relationship, and the first mapping relationship is used to convert a priority of a logical channel that triggers the UL SR into a mapping priority that can be compared with the priority of the sidelink logical channel included in the SL MAC PDU. Correspondingly, that the terminal device compares the priority of the logical channel that triggers the scheduling request SR with the priority of the sidelink logical channel included in the sidelink medium access control packet data unit SL MAC PDU, and preferentially sends the SR or the SL MAC PDU based on the priority comparison result; [0071]).
Regarding claim 11, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the reasons cited in claim 1.
Regarding claim 12, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the reasons cited in claim 2.
Regarding claim 16, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the reasons cited in claim 6.
Regarding claim 17, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the reasons cited in claim 7.
Regarding claim 18, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the reasons cited in claim 8.
Regarding claim 19, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the reasons cited in claim 9.
Claims 3 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (US 20220124776) in view of Golitschek et al. (US 20190098657) and in view of Lu et al. (US 20200045724).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Li and Golitschek does not expressly disclose in case that a total transmission power of the UL transmission and the sidelink transmission exceeds a maximum transmission power, reducing a transmission power of a lower priority transmission among the UL transmission and the sidelink transmission so that the total transmission power does not exceed the maximum transmission power.
In an analogous art, Lu discloses in case that a total transmission power of the UL transmission and the sidelink transmission exceeds a maximum transmission power, reducing a transmission power of a lower priority transmission among the UL transmission and the sidelink transmission so that the total transmission power does not exceed the maximum transmission power (terminal device may allocate resources and/or power for the first set of D2D packet data, the uplink cellular transmission, and the second set of D2D packet data, in a descending scheduling priority order until at least one of available resource and transmission power budget of the terminal device is exhausted; and perform transmission according to the allocated resources and/or power; [0096].
terminal device 102 may be capable of supporting simultaneous transmissions of cellular LL and SL, and the overall power budget is shared between the UL and SL. Therefore although the UE may support simultaneous UL/SL transmissions, the Uu performances, i.e., uplink cellular transmission performance, may be impacted if the power budget is shared; [0127]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add the features taught by Lu into the system of Li and Golitschek in order to enable coordination between cellular communication and D2D communication to reduce resource/power waste (Lu; [0078]).
Regarding claim 13, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the reasons cited in claim 3.
Claims 10 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (US 20220124776) in view of Golitschek et al. (US 20190098657) and in view of Lee et al. (US 20190313414).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Li and Golitschek, particularly Li discloses wherein the first MAC CE includes at least one of the MAC CE for BSR with exception of BSR included for padding or the MAC CE for sidelink BSR with exception of sidelink BSR included for padding, and wherein the second MAC CE includes at least one of the MAC CE for UL BSR included for padding or the MAC CE for sidelink BSR included for padding (UL MAC CE may include one or more of the following: a cell radio network temporary identifier (C-RNTI) MAC CE, a configured grant confirmation MAC CE, a MAC CE for a link buffer status report BSR with exception of a BSR included for padding (MAC CE for BSR, with exception of BSR included for padding), a MAC CE for a BSR included for padding (MAC CE for BSR included for padding), a MAC CE for a sidelink buffer status report SL BSR with exception of an SL BSR included for padding (MAC CE for SL BSR, with exception of SL BSR included for padding), a MAC CE for an SL BSR included for padding (MAC CE for SL BSR included for padding), a single-entry or multiple-entry power headroom report (PHR) MAC CE, and a MAC CE for a recommended bit rate queue (MAC CE for recommended bit rate queue); [0129]).
The combination of Li and Golitschek does not expressly disclose wherein the priority of the UL transmission or the priority of the sidelink transmission is determined according to an order of a MAC CE for buffer status report (BSR) with exception of BSR included for padding, a MAC CE for sidelink BSR with exception of sidelink BSR included for padding, a MAC CE for UL BSR included for padding, and a MAC CE for sidelink BSR included for padding.
In an analogous art, Lee discloses wherein the priority of the UL transmission or the priority of the sidelink transmission is determined according to an order of a MAC CE for buffer status report (BSR) with exception of BSR included for padding, a MAC CE for sidelink BSR with exception of sidelink BSR included for padding, a MAC CE for UL BSR included for padding, and a MAC CE for sidelink BSR included for padding ([0104-0114]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add the features taught by Lee into the system of Li and Golitschek in order to enable transmitting data based on a prioritized Bit Rate (PBR), thus improving the performance of applications that critically depend on delay/latency (Lee; [0003-0004]).
Regarding claim 20, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the reasons cited in claim 10.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Wang et al. (US 20250088977), “USER EQUIPMENT AND WIRELESS COMMUNICATION METHOD FOR POWER CONTROL OF SIDELINK CHANNEL TRANSMISSION.”
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OUSSAMA ROUDANI whose telephone number is (571)272-4727. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 AM - 5:00 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, UN C CHO can be reached on (571) 272 7919. 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.
/OUSSAMA ROUDANI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2413