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 February 13th, 2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. “CAP” is not defined in the claims nor in the specifications. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. Examiner suggests changing the title to read “METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR PERFORMING WIRELESS COMMUNICATION BASED ON SIDELINK POSITION REFERENCE SIGNAL.”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the first resource”. However, there is no prior reference of a first resource in the claim language. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or non-obviousness.
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 1-6, 10, 12-14, and 20-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Manolakos (U.S. Publication No. US 20220085945 A1) in view of Basu Mallick (U.S. Publication No. US 20210058833 A1).
Regarding claim 1,
Manolakos teaches a method for performing wireless communication by a first device, the method comprising: obtaining a sidelink (SL) PRS configuration, including information related to a SL positioning reference signal (PRS) resource
("At stage 1410, the TRP 300 sends a PRS configuration message 1412 to the UE 500. The PRS configuration message 1412 may indicate the resource configuration parameters for one or more PRS (e.g., DL-PRS or SL-PRS), to be sent to the UE 500." [Paragraph 119],
i.e. The UE may be considered as the first device.)
receiving, on the first resource, a first SL PRS
("At stage 1410, the TRP 300 sends a PRS configuration message 1412 to the UE 500. The PRS configuration message 1412 may indicate the resource configuration parameters for one or more PRS (e.g., DL-PRS or SL-PRS), to be sent to the UE 500." [Paragraph 119])
obtaining, based on the first SL PRS, information related to a location of the first device
("At stage 1440, the UE 500 determines position information based on received PRS." [Paragraph 123])
Manolakos does not teach transmitting, on a second resource, information representing whether a SL PRS retransmission is required, wherein the second resource is configured based on at least one of a configuration related to the first resource and an identifier (ID) related to the first SL PRS.
In an analogous art, Basu Mallick teaches and transmitting, on a second resource, information representing whether a SL PRS retransmission is required
("In some embodiments, the target UE 504, after receiving one or more “Are you there” messages, may determine if the message is from any known source (e.g., for which an AS context, an RS sequence, and/or PC5-RNTI is saved) and, if the message is from a known source, the target UE 504 may respond by sending in the second communication 508 one or more of: PC5 RRC signaling indicating that the target UE 504 is around, physical layer signaling including HARQ Feedback, a SL RS, a RLM RS, a DMRS sequence, and/or a PSCCH transmission indicating that the target UE 504 is present." [Paragraph 62])
wherein the second resource is configured based on at least one of a configuration related to the first resource and an identifier (ID) related to the first SL PRS
(“In such embodiments, aggregation of multiple logical channels belonging to the physical UE pair may provide an AS level identifier between the UE pair." [Paragraph 52],
"In some embodiments, the target UE 504, after receiving one or more “Are you there” messages, may determine if the message is from any known source (e.g., for which an AS context, an RS sequence, and/or PC5-RNTI is saved) and, if the message is from a known source, the target UE 504 may respond by sending in the second communication 508 one or more of: PC5 RRC signaling indicating that the target UE 504 is around, physical layer signaling including HARQ Feedback, a SL RS, a RLM RS, a DMRS sequence, and/or a PSCCH transmission indicating that the target UE 504 is present." [Paragraph 62],
i.e. In order to determine if the source of a transmitted first PRS is known to a UE, the UE evaluates various possible configurations/information regarding the source of first SL PRS which may include identifiers related to the first SL PRS.)
Therefore, as Manolakos teaches a device receiving PRS configuration message and resources from which the location of a device may be determined, and as Basu Mallick teaches the device sending PRS resources based on previous configurations and identifiers, to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would be obvious to Manolakos’s and Basu Mallick’s respective methods. The motivation to combine is to have a device which sends and receives PRS configuration messages, including using the information to determine the location, thereby deriving a method accounting for “higher data transfer speeds, greater numbers of connections, and better coverage, among other improvements” needed for future technologies (Manolakos, Paragraph 3).
Regarding claim 2, Manolakos-Basu Mallick teach all the limitations and motivations of claim 1.
Manolakos also teaches the configuration related to the first resource includes information regarding an SL PRS comb size.
("Also, a DL PRS Point A parameter defines a frequency of a reference resource block (and the lowest subcarrier of the resource block), with DL PRS resources belonging to the same DL PRS resource set having the same Point A and all DL PRS resource sets belonging to the same frequency layer having the same Point A. A frequency layer also has the same DL PRS bandwidth, the same start PRB (and center frequency), and the same value of comb size (i.e., a frequency of PRS resource elements per symbol such that for comb-N, every N.sup.th resource element is a PRS resource element)" [Paragraph 89],
i.e. Although the DL PRS is provided for the Manolakos’s exemplary embodiment, a DL PRS and SL PRS may have analogous parameters. Manolakos also teaches that a source may send a “PRS configuration message 1412 may indicate the resource configuration parameters for one or more PRS (e.g., DL-PRS or SL-PRS)” to the UE in other embodiments [Paragraph 119].)
Regarding claim 3, Manolakos-Basu Mallick teach all the limitations and motivations of claim 1.
Manolakos also teaches the configuration related to the first resource includes information regarding an SL PRS resource element offset.
("The relative RE offsets of the remaining symbols within a DL PRS resource are defined based on the initial offset." [Paragraph 90]
i.e. Although the DL PRS is provided for the Manolakos’s exemplary embodiment, a DL PRS and SL PRS may have analogous parameters. Manolakos also teaches that a source may send a “PRS configuration message 1412 may indicate the resource configuration parameters for one or more PRS (e.g., DL-PRS or SL-PRS)” to the UE in other embodiments [Paragraph 119].)
Regarding claim 4, Manolakos-Basu Mallick teach all the limitations and motivations of claim 1.
Manolakos also teaches the configuration related to the first resource includes information regarding an SL PRS resource element offset.
("The relative RE offsets of the remaining symbols within a DL PRS resource are defined based on the initial offset." [Paragraph 90]
i.e. Although the DL PRS is provided for the Manolakos’s exemplary embodiment, a DL PRS and SL PRS may have analogous parameters. Manolakos also teaches that a source may send a “PRS configuration message 1412 may indicate the resource configuration parameters for one or more PRS (e.g., DL-PRS or SL-PRS)” to the UE in other embodiments [Paragraph 119].)
Regarding claim 5, Manolakos-Basu Mallick teach all the limitations and motivations of claim 1.
Manolakos also teaches the configuration related to the first resource includes information regarding a starting RE (resource element) within the starting symbol of the SL PRS resource
("The RE offset defines the starting RE offset of the first symbol within a DL PRS resource in frequency.” [Paragraph 90],
i.e. “RE offset” may be considered information regarding the starting RE.
Additionally, although the DL PRS is provided for the Manolakos’s exemplary embodiment, a DL PRS and SL PRS may have analogous parameters. Manolakos also teaches that a source may send a “PRS configuration message 1412 may indicate the resource configuration parameters for one or more PRS (e.g., DL-PRS or SL-PRS)” to the UE in other embodiments [Paragraph 119].)
Regarding claim 6, Manolakos-Basu Mallick teach all the limitations and motivations of claim 1.
Manolakos also teaches the configuration related to the first resource includes information regarding a number of symbols within one slot of a SL PRS.
("Each PRS resource is configured with an RE offset, slot offset, a symbol offset within a slot, and a number of consecutive symbols that the PRS resource may occupy within a slot." [Paragraph 90]
i.e. Although the DL PRS is provided for the Manolakos’s exemplary embodiment, a DL PRS and SL PRS may have analogous parameters. Manolakos also teaches that a source may send a “PRS configuration message 1412 may indicate the resource configuration parameters for one or more PRS (e.g., DL-PRS or SL-PRS)” to the UE in other embodiments [Paragraph 119].)
Regarding claim 10, Manolakos-Basu Mallick teach all the limitations and motivations of claim 1.
Manolakos also teaches the second resource is a resource after a time offset from the first resource, and wherein the time offset is in unit of a logical slot
("Every time all repetitions of all PRS resources of the PRS resource set are configured to be transmitted is referred as an “instance”. Therefore, an “instance” of a PRS resource set is a specified number of repetitions for each PRS resource and a specified number of PRS resources within the PRS resource set such that once the specified number of repetitions are transmitted for each of the specified number of PRS resources, the instance is complete." [Paragraph 92],
i.e. Here, the amount of time it takes for an "instance" to be complete between the transmission of the first and second resources can be considered analogous to a "time offset." The analogous time offset is represented by a number, analogous to a "logical slot," in the resource set.)
Regarding claim 12, Manolakos-Basu Mallick teach all the limitations and motivations of claim 1.
Basu Mallick also teaches receiving, from a second device, control information, through an SL PRS control channel (CCH) related to the first SL PRS, and wherein the control information includes information representing the second resource.
("The UEs 105, 106 may communicate with each other through UE-to-UE sidelink (SL) communications by transmitting over one or more sidelink channels such as a physical sidelink synchronization channel (PSSCH), a physical sidelink broadcast channel (PSBCH), or a physical sidelink control channel (PSCCH)." [Paragraph 36])
Regarding claim 13, Manolakos-Basu Mallick teach all the limitations and motivations of claim 13 in claim 1, in method mode rather than device mode.
Manolakos also teaches one or more processors
("The processor 310" [68])
one or more transceivers
("memory 311" [68])
one or more memories connected to the one or more processors and storing instructions that, based on being executed, cause the one or more processors to perform operations
("a transceiver 315" [68])
Therefore, claim 13 is rejected for the same reasons as claim 1.
Regarding claim 14, Manolakos-Basu Mallick teach all the limitations and motivations of claim 13 in claim 1, in method mode rather than device mode.
Manolakos also teaches one or more processors
("The processor 310" [68])
and one or more memories operably connectable to the one or more processors and storing instructions that, based on being executed, cause the one or more processors to perform operations
("memory 311" [68])
Therefore, claim 13 is rejected for the same reasons as claim 1.
Regarding claim 20, Manolakos-Basu Mallick teach all the limitations and motivations of claim 14. Manolakos-Basu Mallick also teach all the limitations and motivations of claim 20 in claim 2, in method mode rather than device mode.
Regarding claim 21, Manolakos-Basu Mallick teach all the limitations and motivations of claim 14. Manolakos-Basu Mallick also teach all the limitations and motivations of claim 21 in claim 3, in method mode rather than device mode.
Regarding claim 22, Manolakos-Basu Mallick teach all the limitations and motivations of claim 14. Manolakos-Basu Mallick also teach all the limitations and motivations of claim 22 in claim 4, in method mode rather than device mode.
Regarding claim 23, Manolakos-Basu Mallick teach all the limitations and motivations of claim 14. Manolakos-Basu Mallick also teach all the limitations and motivations of claim 23 in claim 5, in method mode rather than device mode.
Regarding claim 24, Manolakos-Basu Mallick teach all the limitations and motivations of claim 14. Manolakos-Basu Mallick also teach all the limitations and motivations of claim 24 in claim 6, in method mode rather than device mode.
Claims 7, 8, and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Manolakos-Basu Mallick further in view of Liu (U.S. Publication No. US 20220053289 A1).
Regarding claim 7, Manolakos-Basu Mallick teach all the limitations and motivations of claim 1.
Manolakos also teaches the ID includes at least one of a source ID and
("A PRS resource set is identified by a PRS resource set ID and may be associated with a particular TRP (identified by a cell ID) transmitted by an antenna panel of a base station." [Paragraph 89],
i.e. A source ID)
Manolakos does not teach a destination ID.
In an analogous art, Liu teaches a destination ID
("In one embodiment, the parameters of the target positioning reference signal comprise a Destination Identity (Destination ID)." [Paragraph 539])
Therefore, as Manolakos-Basu Mallick teaches attributes of a PRS resource, and as Liu teaches additional attributes of a PRS resource, to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would be obvious to Manolakos-Basu Mallick’s and Liu’s respective PRS resource attributes. The motivation to combine is to have a PRS resource having all pertinent attributes, thereby allowing the “the Sidelink (SL) [to] be utilized for provision of positioning with wider coverage, less latency and higher precision” (Liu, Paragraph 5).
Regarding claim 8, Manolakos-Basu Mallick teach all the limitations and motivations of claim 1.
Manolakos also teaches the configuration related to the first resource includes information regarding an SL PRS slot offset and
("The slot offset is the starting slot of the DL PRS resource with respect to a corresponding resource set slot offset.." [Paragraph 90]
i.e. Although the DL PRS is provided for the Manolakos’s exemplary embodiment, a DL PRS and SL PRS may have analogous parameters. Manolakos also teaches that a source may send a “PRS configuration message 1412 may indicate the resource configuration parameters for one or more PRS (e.g., DL-PRS or SL-PRS)” to the UE in other embodiments [Paragraph 119].)
Manolakos does not teach information regarding an SL PRS period.
In an analogous art, Liu teaches information regarding an SL PRS period
("In one embodiment, the parameters of the target positioning reference signal comprise at least one of a period of the target positioning reference signal" [Paragraph 539])
Therefore, as Manolakos-Basu Mallick teaches attributes of a PRS resource, and as Liu teaches additional attributes of a PRS resource, to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would be obvious to Manolakos-Basu Mallick’s and Liu’s respective PRS resource attributes. The motivation to combine is to have a PRS resource having all pertinent attributes, thereby allowing the “the Sidelink (SL) [to] be utilized for provision of positioning with wider coverage, less latency and higher precision” (Liu, Paragraph 5).
Regarding claim 25, Manolakos-Basu Mallick teach all the limitations and motivations of claim 14. Manolakos-Basu Mallick also teach all the limitations and motivations of claim 25 in claim 7, in method mode rather than device mode.
Claims 9 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Manolakos-Basu Mallick further in view of Kwak (International Publication No. WO 2022027012 A1).
Regarding claim 9, Manolakos-Basu Mallick teach all the limitations and motivations of claim 1.
Manolakos-Basu Mallick does not teach performing BWP switching after a time gap from the first resource, based on a BWP of the first resource and a BWP of the second resource being different.
In an analogous art, Kwak teaches ("A BWP activation may refer to where an inactive BWP (or dormant BWP) is to be switched to an active BWP, such as by an indication and/or configuration." [Paragraph 297],
i.e. The “configuration" may be the first resource.)
Therefore, as Manolakos-Basu Mallick teach a device which sends and receives PRS configuration messages, including using the information to determine the location, and as Kwak teaches BWP switching, it would be obvious to Manolakos-Basu Mallick’s and Kwak’s respective methods. The motivation to combine is to have a device which sends and receives PRS configuration messages, including using the information to determine the location and employs BWP switching, thereby allow the network to handle "different use cases such as services relying on ultra-reliable low latency (URLLC) access, services relying on enhanced massive mobile broadband (eMBB) access, services for MTC access, and/or the like" (Kwak, Paragraph 101).
Regarding claim 11, Manolakos-Basu Mallick teach all the limitations and motivations of claim 10.
Manolakos-Basu Mallick do not teach performing BWP switching after a time gap from the first resource, based on a BWP of the first resource and a BWP of the second resource being different, wherein the time offset is greater than or equal to the time gap.
In an analogous art, Kwak teaches performing BWP switching after a time gap from the first resource
(“In the case of TRPs, a WTRU 102 may be configured with plural TRPs in a BWP (e.g., a newly activated BWP, a deactivated BWP, or a switched BWP). Based on the configured TRPs, the WTRU 102 may receive one or more activation/deactivation messages for the BWP.” [Paragraph 308],
i.e. Determine BWP switching based configuration sent from the source, represented in claim language as the first resource.)
based on a BWP of the first resource and a BWP of the second resource being different, wherein the time offset is greater than or equal to the time gap
(“Further, the WTRU 102 may be configured to determine a first processing time value from among plural processing time values based at least in part on a number of configured/activated TRPs in the BWP being less than (or equal to) a threshold. Further, the WTRU 102 may be configured to determine a second processing time value from among plural processing time values based at least in part on the number of configured/activated TRPs in the BWP being greater than the threshold” [Paragraph 308]
i.e. Time offset for BWP switch based on BWP of a number of resources with processing times, and the threshold may be greater than one processing time that may considered to be the “time gap.”)
Therefore, as Manolakos-Basu Mallick teach a device which sends and receives PRS configuration messages, including using the information to determine the location, and as Kwak teaches BWP switching, it would be obvious to Manolakos-Basu Mallick’s and Kwak’s respective methods. The motivation to combine is to have a device which sends and receives PRS configuration messages, including using the information to determine the location and employs BWP switching, thereby allow the network to handle "different use cases such as services relying on ultra-reliable low latency (URLLC) access, services relying on enhanced massive mobile broadband (eMBB) access, services for MTC access, and/or the like" (Kwak, Paragraph 101).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FATIHA KAMAL whose telephone number is (571)270-0726. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 6:30am - 3:30pm, Alternating Fridays 6:30am-2:30pm.
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, Alison Slater can be reached at (571)270-0375. 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.
/FATIHA KAMAL/Examiner, Art Unit 2647
/Alison Slater/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2647
Prosecution Insights