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 .
This office action is responsive to the amendment filed 1/21/26.
Claims 1-6 and 8-14 are pending.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6, and 8-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yeo et al., US 2023/0057836, (“Yeo”) in view of Wu et al., US 2023/0262774, (“Wu”), and Zhang et al., US 2023/0247654, (“Zhang”).
Independent Claims
Regarding claim 1, Yeo teaches “A method for controlling sidelink communication by a UE (Fig. 17, UE1 or first terminal 1710), comprising:
receiving sidelink control information from a second UE (paragraph no. 0173 discloses that UE1 receives SCI/PSCCH from the second UE, UE2 or second terminal 1720);
receiving first sidelink data according to scheduling of the sidelink control information (paragraph no. 0173 discloses that UE1 receives PSSCH #2 from UE2 which has been scheduled by the received PSCCH); and
determining priority when a time resource for transmitting first HARQ feedback information for the first sidelink data and a time resource for receiving second HARQ feedback information for second sidelink data transmitted by the UE at least partially overlap” (paragraph no. 0173, “The present method is a method for determining which terminal will receive a PSFCH, which terminal will transmit the PSFCH, based on a bit field value included in SCI transmitted or received by the terminal … For example, if the priority value of the SCI included in the PSCCH which is transmitted when terminal #1 1710 transmits PSSCH #1 on slot #1 1741 is 1, and the priority value included in the PSCCH for scheduling PSSCH #2 received from terminal #2 1720 on slot #2 1742 is 4 (it is assumed that priority 1 is higher than priority 4), the first terminal 1710 may receive PSFCH #1 (for example, including feedback information regarding PSSCH #1) on slot #4 1744, and the second terminal 1720 may transmit PSFCH #1 on slot #4 1744”; note that slot #4 as best shown in Fig. 4 is the overlapping time resource for the HARQ feedback from both UE1 and UE2 and hence, slot #4 teaches the claimed “a time resource”; see also, paragraph no. 0169, “In this case, the first terminal 1720 and the second terminal 1720 should both transmit and receive the PSFCH on slot #4, and transmission and reception of the PSFCH may be performed on the same symbol. That is, there may be an overlap (or collision) between a resource for receiving PSFCH #1 (for example, feedback information including feedback regarding PSSCH #1) of the first terminal 1710, and a resource for transmitting PSFCH #2 (for example, feedback information including feedback regarding PSSCH #2)”).
Yeo does not teach but Wu teaches “wherein the sidelink control information further includes sidelink reserved resource information (Fig. 8A, step 806 and paragraph no. 0086),
wherein the method further comprises:
before receiving the first sidelink data, determining whether to transmit coordination information: (Fig. 8A, step 804; paragraph no. 0085) and
when transmission of the coordination information is determined, transmitting the coordination information including any one of collision indication information, preferred resource information, and non-preferred resource information to the second UE (Fig. 8A, step 810; paragraph no. 0087, 0094),
wherein the coordination information includes the preferred resource information or the non- preferred resource information when the coordination information is transmitted according to reception of request information from the second UE” (paragraph no. 0091 discloses that the receiving UE determines whether the coordination message is triggered by monitoring an SCI signal to trigger a coordination message … the SCI signal can include an indication to trigger the coordination message, the indication provided by the transmitting UE; paragraph no. 0094 discloses preferred resources in the coordination message) as recited in claim 1.
Yeo does not teach but Zhang teaches “wherein the coordination information includes the collision indication information when sidelink reserved resource information of the second UE conflicts or is predicted to conflict with another sidelink reserved resource information” (see paragraph no. 0026, “A receiving UE that receives resources reserved by a transmitting UE for sidelink communication may configure resources used to transmit a coordination message from the receiving UE back to the transmitting UE. The coordination message may inform the transmitting UE whether the reserved resources are unavailable for use by the receiving UE due to collisions with resources reserved by another UE”; the claimed “second UE” reads on the transmitting UE) as recited in claim 1.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of this claimed invention to modify Yeo by incorporating the teachings of Wu to realize the benefits disclosed in paragraph no. 0004 of Wu such as enhancing the reliability of the SL resource selection and SL transmission by reducing collision probability and by avoiding half duplex issues. In addition, such a modification would enable the transmission of the coordination message based on an explicit request from the other UE.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of this claimed invention to modify Yeo and Wu by incorporating the teachings of Zhang to improve the resource coordination between the two UEs by taking into account resource reservations made by other UEs within their vicinity, thereby improving the SL communications between the two UEs.
Regarding independent claim 12, this independent claim is a corresponding apparatus (i.e. UE) claim of the method claim 1 and recites similar subject matter. As such, the rationale behind the above rejection of claim 1 applies with equal force to this independent claim and as further amplified below to highlight the minor differences between the claims.
Regarding further independent claim 12, see Fig. 3 of Yeo for the claimed structural elements of the claim.
Dependent Claims
Regarding claims 2 and 13, Yeo teaches “wherein the priority is determined based on a transmission type of the first sidelink data and the second sidelink data” (paragraph nos. 0178, 0180, 0184: the limitation “a transmission type” reads on either the larger TBS disclosed in paragraph no. 0178 or the initial transmission/retransmission disclosed in paragraph no. 0180).
Regarding claims 3 and 14, Yeo teaches “wherein the priority is determined based on a result of comparison between respective priority information of the first sidelink data and the second sidelink data” (paragraph no. 1073 discloses comparison of priority values contained in the SCI of the respective PSSCHs).
Regarding claim 4, Yeo teaches “wherein the respective priority information is determined by a priority field value included in sidelink control information associated with each of the first sidelink data and the second sidelink data” (paragraph no. 0173).
Regarding claim 6, Yeo teaches “wherein when the respective priority information of the first sidelink data and the second sidelink data indicates the same priority, determining the priority determines the priority based on any one of HARQ option type information of each of the first HARQ feedback information and the second HARQ feedback information (see paragraph nos. 0189-0191 for this first claimed alternative), a type of information included in the first HARQ feedback information, and a format type of a sidelink control channel.”
Regarding claim 8, Yeo does not teach but Wu teaches “wherein determining whether to transmit the coordination information determines to transmit the coordination information when request information for requesting to transmit the coordination information is received from the second UE” (paragraph no. 0091 discloses that the receiving UE determines whether the coordination message is triggered by monitoring an SCI signal to trigger a coordination message … the SCI signal can include an indication to trigger the coordination message, the indication provided by the transmitting UE).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of this claimed invention to modify Yeo, Wu and Zhang by incorporating the additional teachings of Wu to realize the benefits disclosed in paragraph no. 0004 of Wu such as enhancing the reliability of the SL resource selection and SL transmission by reducing collision probability and by avoiding half duplex issues. In addition, such a modification would enable the transmission of the coordination message based on an explicit request from the other UE.
Regarding claim 9, Yeo does not teach but Wu teaches “wherein determining whether to transmit the coordination information determines to transmit the coordination information when a radio resource indicated by the sidelink reserved resource information transmitted from the second UE, received by the UE, and wherein the coordination information includes the collision indication information indicating whether a collision occurs in the sidelink reserved resource information transmitted from the second UE” (paragraph nos. 0009, 0091). Wu does not teach but Zhang teaches “at least partially overlaps the another sidelink reserved resource information reserved by at least one other UE” (Zhang teaches that a receiving UE may send a coordination message back to transmitting UE and the coordination message may inform the transmitting UE whether the reserved resources are unavailable for use by the receiving UE due to collisions with resources reserved by another UE, see paragraph no. 0026).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of this claimed invention to modify Yeo, Wu, and Zhang by incorporating the additional teachings of Wu and Zhang to improve the resource coordination between the two UEs by taking into account resource reservations made by other UEs within their vicinity, thereby improving the SL communications between the two UEs.
Regarding claim 10, Yeo does not teach but Wu teaches “wherein the preferred resource information included in the coordination information includes at least one radio resource selected based on sidelink reserved resource information, received by the UE” (paragraph no. 0094). Wu does not teach the limitation “reserved by at least one other UE” as required by claim 10.
Zhang teaches that a receiving UE may send a coordination message back to transmitting UE and the coordination message may inform the transmitting UE whether the reserved resources are unavailable for use by the receiving UE due to collisions with resources reserved by another UE, see paragraph no. 0026.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of this claimed invention to modify Yeo, Wu, and Zhang by incorporating the additional teachings of Wu and Zhang to improve the resource coordination between the two UEs by taking into account resource reservations made by other UEs within their vicinity, thereby improving the SL communications between the two UEs.
Regarding claim 11, Yeo does not teach but Wu teaches “wherein the non-preferred resource information included in the coordination information includes at least one radio resource determined based on measurement value measured by the UE and the sidelink reserved resource information, received by the UE” (Fig. 8A, steps 806, 810 and their respective written descriptions). Wu does not teach but Zhang teaches “RSRP measurement value” and “reserved by at least one other UE” (see paragraph no. 0026, supra, and paragraph no. 0031 discloses RSRP measurement value).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of this claimed invention to modify Yeo, Wu, and Zhang by incorporating the additional teachings of Wu and Zhang to improve the resource coordination between the two UEs by taking into account resource reservations made by other UEs within their vicinity, thereby improving the SL communications between the two UEs. In addition, the taking of RSRP measurement values in local sensing at the UE is well known and serves as a reliable metric for resource selection at the UE.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yeo, Wu, and Zhang as applied to claim 4 above and further in view of Yeo et al., US 2020/0106566 (“Samsung”).
Yeo does not teach but Samsung teaches “wherein the priority field value is determined based on a transmission type of the first sidelink data and the second sidelink data, and wherein the transmission type is any one of a unicast type, a groupcast type, and a broadcast type” (paragraph no. 0130, “If a priority included in SCI having scheduled a unicast PSSCH is 1, and a priority included in SCI having scheduled a groupcast PSSCH is 4, when the terminal is scheduled to simultaneously transmit a HARQ-ACK on a sidelink unicast PSSCH and a HARQ-ACK on a sidelink groupcast PSSCH, the terminal always transmits the HARQ-ACK on the unicast PSSCH”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of this claimed invention to modify Yeo, Wu, and Zhang by incorporating the teachings of Samsung to enable the higher priority type-cast data to be transmitted by a UE, thereby increasing the reliability of SL transmissions among the UEs.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 12 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.
Conclusion
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 WON TAE C. KIM whose telephone number is (571)270-1812. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 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, Edan Orgad can be reached at (571)272-7884. 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.
/WON TAE C KIM/Examiner, Art Unit 2414