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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 5-9, and 13-21 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. Regarding claims 1, 9 and 17, the new secondary reference Wang discloses trigger conditions for performing resource reselect including determining to resource re-select before the counter reaches 0 and doing re-selection when the first terminal has not received any HARQ responses after some time.
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, 5-9, and 13-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LEE et al. (US 20220104126 A1, hereinafter Lee) in view of Wang (WO 2020151407 A1, “WO2020151407 English Translation” used for English translation, hereinafter Wang).
Regarding claims 1, 9 and 17 Lee discloses:maintaining a counter to record how many periodic reservations remain to be used for sidelink signal transmission, wherein the periodic reservations are associated with a reservation period and each periodic reservation is associated with at least one sidelink resource; (Paragraph [0189], “When resources in which conflicts occur are reserved according to the same periodicity, the resource conflicts may occur continuously. In order to solve such the problem, when resource conflicts occur continuously, the terminal may release the reserved resources even before the counter value becomes 0, and may select a new resource(s) by performing a random selection operation.”)
and reselecting at least one new sidelink resource for next periodic reservations when the resource re-selection condition is met. (Paragraph [0189], “When resources in which conflicts occur are reserved according to the same periodicity, the resource conflicts may occur continuously. In order to solve such the problem, when resource conflicts occur continuously, the terminal may release the reserved resources even before the counter value becomes 0, and may select a new resource(s) by performing a random selection operation.”)
Lee does not disclose:
determining whether a resource re-selection condition is met before the counter counts to 0, wherein the resource re-selection condition is associated with status of receiving responses corresponding to a subset of the sidelink resources;
Wherein the resource re-selection condition comprises at least one of:
the first UE does not receive any response for each first sidelink resource in all periodic reservations from the second UE in a first number of the reservation periods, wherein the first number of the reservation periods are continuous.
a number M2 is greater than a first threshold, wherein the number M2 is the number of continuous sidelink resources that the first UE does not receive corresponding responses.
a number M3 is greater than a second threshold, wherein the number M3 is the number of sidelink resources that are first sidelink resources in the periodic reservations and the first UE does not receive corresponding responses from the second UE during a period of time, and the period of time comprises at least one reservation period. Wang discloses:
determining whether a resource re-selection condition is met before the counter counts to 0, wherein the resource re-selection condition is associated with status of receiving responses corresponding to a subset of the sidelink resources; (Paragraph [0076], “Trigger condition 1: Based on the counter (SL_RESOURCE_RESELECTION_COUNTER) = [5, 15], one data packet is transmitted, the counter is reduced, and when the counter is zeroed, the terminal reselects the resource with a certain probability (in fact, when the counter is 1, the terminal needs to decide whether to perform reselection when the counter is zero, so as to indicate whether there is a resource reservation), that is, after the terminal selects/reselects one resource” determining before counter counts to 0.)
Wherein the resource re-selection condition comprises at least one of:
the first UE does not receive any response for each first sidelink resource in all periodic reservations from the second UE in a first number of the reservation periods, wherein the first number of the reservation periods are continuous. (Paragraph [0099], “Manner 1: If the first terminal continuously sends M1 pieces of information to a second terminal, if none of the first terminals receives the HARQ feedback of the M1 pieces of information, the first terminal reselects a sidelink resource, where M1 is a positive integer greater than or equal to 1.” The terminal is waiting to hear a response if no then reselect resource.)
a number M2 is greater than a first threshold, wherein the number M2 is the number of continuous sidelink resources that the first UE does not receive corresponding responses. (Paragraph [0099], “Manner 1: If the first terminal continuously sends M1 pieces of information to a second terminal, if none of the first terminals receives the HARQ feedback of the M1 pieces of information, the first terminal reselects a sidelink resource, where M1 is a positive integer greater than or equal to 1.” The terminal is waiting to hear a response if no then reselect resource.)
a number M3 is greater than a second threshold, wherein the number M3 is the number of sidelink resources that are first sidelink resources in the periodic reservations and the first UE does not receive corresponding responses from the second UE during a period of time, and the period of time comprises at least one reservation period. (Paragraph [0099], “Manner 1: If the first terminal continuously sends M1 pieces of information to a second terminal, if none of the first terminals receives the HARQ feedback of the M1 pieces of information, the first terminal reselects a sidelink resource, where M1 is a positive integer greater than or equal to 1.” The terminal is waiting to hear a response if no then reselect resource.)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated Wang’s trigger condition with Lee’s counter. One would have been motivated to do this to increase robustness and have a fallback.
Specifically regarding claim 9 Lee discloses:
a radio frequency (RF) signal processing device (Paragraph [0091], “In the communication system using the analog beamforming scheme, a beamforming gain may be obtained using analog RF devices (e.g., phase shifter, power amplifier (PA), variable gain amplifier (VGA), and the like) and an antenna array.” And paragraph [0023], “the instructions cause the first terminal to: receive, from a base station, configuration information including information of n periodicities”)
and a processor, (Paragraph [0023], “a first terminal in a communication system may comprise: a processor;”)
Regarding claims 5, 13 and 18 Lee does not disclose:
a number M4 is greater than a second threshold, wherein the number M4 is the number of sidelink resources that the first UE does not receive corresponding responses from the second UE during a period of time, and the period of time comprises at least one reservation period.
Wang discloses:
a number M4 is greater than a second threshold, wherein the number M4 is the number of sidelink resources that the first UE does not receive corresponding responses from the second UE during a period of time, and the period of time comprises at least one reservation period. (Paragraph [0099], “Manner 1: If the first terminal continuously sends M1 pieces of information to a second terminal, if none of the first terminals receives the HARQ feedback of the M1 pieces of information, the first terminal reselects a sidelink resource, where M1 is a positive integer greater than or equal to 1.” The terminal is waiting to hear a response if no then reselect resource.)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated Wang’s trigger condition with Lee’s counter. One would have been motivated to do this to increase robustness and have a fallback.
Regarding claims 6,14 and 19 Lee discloses:
resetting the counter to a new value when the new sidelink resource is reselected. (Paragraph [0188], “the counter value becomes 0, the terminal may reset the counter to a value randomly selected between specific values according to the uniform probability.” And paragraph [0189], “the terminal may release the reserved resources even before the counter value becomes 0, and may select a new resource(s) by performing a random selection operation. In this case, the previous counter value or an initial value of the previous counter may be used as the counter value. Alternatively, a new counter value may be set by the above-described method of setting the counter value, and the terminal may use the new counter value”)
Regarding claims 7, 15 and 20 Lee discloses:
the subset of the sidelink resources precludes the sidelink resources for re-transmission. (Paragraph [0199], “Upon receiving the indicator from the first terminal, the second terminal may perform a resource selection operation in the remaining resources excluding the resource(s) indicated by the indicator among all resources (e.g., all candidate resources).” There is a subset of resources that are excluded from selection for retransmission.)
Regarding claims 8, 16 and 21 Lee discloses:wherein each response for the sidelink resources associated with the periodic reservations from the second UE comprises an ACK response or a NACK response. (Paragraph [0131], “A transmitting terminal may transmit SL data to a receiving terminal, and the receiving terminal may transmit a HARQ feedback (e.g., acknowledgement (ACK) or negative ACK (NACK)) for the SL data to the transmitting terminal on a PSFCH.” And paragraph [0224], “A terminal may transmit data (e.g., SL data) and may receive a HARQ feedback for the data on a PSFCH. In this case, a PSFCH periodicity may not coincide with the DRX cycle.”)
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 NAM P CAO whose telephone number is (571)270-0614. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5.
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, Jae Y Lee can be reached at 5712703936. 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.
/NAM P. CAO/Examiner, Art Unit 2479 /JAE Y LEE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2479
Prosecution Insights