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 filed 12/10/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the prior art fails to teach, suggest or disclose all elements of claim 41 (See Applicant’s Arguments and Remarks, pages 8-9). Specifically, Applicant argues that Wang’ second stage SCI is not for conflict information about a half duplex conflict about the half duplex conflict, as the coordination information only relates to available/unavailable resources and time domain information (Id).
The Examiner disagrees.
That is, Wang discloses that the claimed UE may receive a request for coordination information from the second UE (paragraphs 0143 – “That is to say, in this optional embodiment, the coordination request information may be carried in the 2nd-stage SCI”) to which the claimed UE responds with coordination information (paragraphs 0159-0165) and the coordination information includes sets of resources (paragraphs 0054-0057) and the coordination information may further comprise conflict information that indicates which slots in the sets of resources have half duplex conflicts (paragraph 0073 – “For example, in order to solve the half-duplex problem, the bit corresponding to the type indication of the coordination information should be “00”, which indicates “time-domain resource not recommended to use”). Therefore, since Wang explicitly discloses the coordination information comprises conflict information of a slot in the set of resources that has a half-duplex conflict, Applicant’s arguments have been considered and are not persuasive.
Applicant further argues that Wangs second stage SCI does not suggest requesting conflict information as it relates only to coordination (Id at 9). As noted, supra, the coordination information comprises half duplex conflict information and therefore this argument is not found persuasive.
Applicant further argues that Wang fails to teach a “half duplex conflict” as a half duplex conflict is an event where a target receiver cannot receive a transmission in a slot because it is transmitting (Id at 10-11). Applicant further argues that Wang relates only to prevention of half duplex conflicts and not the reporting of actual half-duplex conflicts as it reports resources in which the UE must transmit and therefore it cannot receive. The Examiner disagrees. That is Wang discloses that the claimed/coordinating UE receives in the resource coordination request a set of resources selected by the coordinated UE and proposed for transmission (paragraph 0066 – “the sidelink resource coordination request information of the embodiment of the present disclosure may further include the selected resource of the coordinated UE, after the coordinating UE decodes the coordination request information, the coordinating UE determines whether the resource selected by the coordinated UE is appropriate or not from the perspective of the coordinating UE”). The claimed/coordinating UE then examines the proposed resources for transmission and determines if a half duplex conflict exists on the proposed resources, and, if so, returns a half duplex conflict indication (paragraphs 0066, 0073). Therefore, although Wang relates to coordination between the UEs, the coordination information is indicative of a half-duplex conflict that is present in the proposed resources put forth by the coordinated UE to the coordinating UE and therefore represents a half-duplex conflict at those resources. Therefore, Applicant’s Argument have been considered and are not persuasive.
Applicant further argues that Ganesan discloses minimal bit conflict information in PSFCH (pages 10-11) and therefore the PSFCH could not carry the large number of bits required by the communications of Wang. Applicant characterizes wang as requiring a large amount of information for transmission, such as coordination type window start/end, maximum delay, etc.) in the coordination information. However, Wang also discloses a number of compact signaling applications (see for example 0073 – resources singled on a bitwise basis) that are not significantly more resource intensive than those suggested by Ganesan. Therefore, Applicant’s Arguments have been considered and are not persuasive.
Applicant further argues that Ganeson does not teach PSFCH transmission in response to a requested coordination package. Examiner agrees, but notes this does not consider the combination made in which Wang discloses a response made to a coordination package and Ganeson discloses transmitting coordination/conflict information in response to the request.
Applicant further re-iterates that Ganesan discloses minimal bit conflict information in PSFCH (pages 10-11) and therefore the PSFCH could not carry the large number of bits required by the communications of Wang as Wang discloses large containerized requests which would render Ganeson nor fit for it’s intended purpose. However, as discussed, supra, Wang contemplates compact transmissions as well, for example, sending only a bitmap indication of channel suitability, as discussed in paragraph 0073. Therefore, Applicant’s Arguments have been considered and are not persuasive.
Applicant further re-iterates that Ganeson does not teach PSFCH transmission in response to a requested coordination package. Examiner agrees, but notes this does not consider the combination made in which Wang discloses a response made to a coordination package and Ganeson discloses transmitting coordination/conflict information in response to the request.
Applicant argues that the motive is an outcome-oriented generality. Examiner agrees and notes pretty much all motivations are so, as they generally amount to making a system better, cheaper or faster (Id at 13). See MPEP 2143, citing DyStar Textilfarben GmbH & Co. Deutschland KG v. C.H. Patrick Co., 464 F.3d 1356, 1360, 80 USPQ2d 1641, 1645 (Fed. Cir. 2006) –“ [A]n implicit motivation to combine exists not only when a suggestion may be gleaned from the prior art as a whole, but when the ‘improvement’ is technology-independent and the combination of references results in a product or process that is more desirable, for example because it is stronger, cheaper, cleaner, faster, lighter, smaller, more durable, or more efficient…” Applicant then re-iterates that the combination made cannot be made as Ganesan’s PSFCH teaches a minimum number of bits on the PSFCH and Wang requires a great deal of information in the response and therefore the combination is taught away from. The examiner once again disagrees and nodes that Wang also contemplates smaller responses suitable for PSFCH transmission.
Therefore, Applicant’s Arguments have been considered and are not persuasive.
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.
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 nonobviousness.
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) 41-44 and 54-57 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang, et al. (US Pre Grant Publication No. 2023/0262737; Note also CN 202011149078.1 – With identical disclosure) in view of Ganesan, et al. (US Pre Grant Publication No. 2024/0057121; note also 63/121814 [“814”], with parallel citations)
Regarding claims 41 and 54, Wang discloses an apparatus for a first user equipment (UE) configured for operation in a Fifth Generation New Radio (5G NR) network, the apparatus comprising processing circuitry, wherein to configure the first UE for sidelink communication in the 5G NR network, the processing circuitry is to and a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium that stores instructions for execution by one or more processors of a user equipment (UE), the instructions to configure the UE for sidelink operation in a Fifth Generation New Radio (5G NR) network, and to cause the UE to perform operations comprising:
decode/decoding a second stage sidelink control information (SCI) format received from a second UE, the second stage SCI including a request from the second UE for inter-UE coordination information; (The system of Wang discloses that a first stage SCI indicates that a second stage SCI format for requesting coordination information is to follow (thereby also indicating support for inter-UE coordination) [paragraph 0145] is then followed by a second stage SCI format used to request coordination information [paragraphs 0143-0144] with both received by the first user equipment/coordinating UE [paragraphs 0159-0165]. The coordination request may indicate that the coordinating UE is to indicate slots unavailable because of a half-duplex issue in the transmission pool/window/period/etc. [i.e. a set of resources] [paragraphs 0054-0057] and the coordinating UE may feed back which slots in the set of resources have a half duplex conflict [paragraph 0073, 0066, 0165]. Note that the coordination requests may be unicast to a single coordinating UE or multicast requests to a group of coordinating UEs [paragraphs 0147-0148].)
detect a conflict associated with a slot in a set of resources; and (see (a), supra - paragraphs 0073, 0066, 0165)
encode conflict information about the conflict for transmission to the second UE as the inter-UE coordination information requested by the second UE (see (a), supra - paragraphs 0073, 0066, 0165).
Wang fails to disclose the transmission being via a physical sidelink feedback channel (PSFCH). In the same field of endeavor, Ganesan discloses the transmission being via a physical sidelink feedback channel (PSFCH). (The system of Ganesan discloses that conflict feedback may occur on a dedicated portion of the PSFCH [paragraph 0045, 0090; see also 814, paragraphs 0068, 0071].)
Therefore, since Ganesan discloses conflict feedback on PSFCH, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to combine the conflict feedback of Ganesan with the system of Wang by performing the conflict feedback/coordination response using the PSFCH. The motive to combine is to provide rapid feedback via an already established feedback channel used for rapid ACK/NACK feedback.
Regarding claims 42 and 55, Wang discloses the request is indicated by a one-bit field in the second stage SCI format. (Wang discloses requests may be a single bit indicates the UE requests feedback of a type indicating resources not to use, i.e. half-duplex issue resources [paragraph 0073].)
Regarding claims 43 and 56, Wang discloses decode a first stage SCI format received from the second UE, the first stage SCI format including information indicating the second UE can receive the inter-UE coordination information. (Wang discloses that the first stage SCI indicates the UE can receive the coordination information by indication that a coordination request SCI will be transmitted in the second stage SCI [paragraph 0145 – see also the independent claim (a), supra].)
Regarding claims 44 and 57, Wang as modified by Ganesan discloses determine to transmit via the PSFCH the conflict information to the second UE as the inter-UE coordination information further based on the information in the first stage SCI format indicating the second UE can receive the inter-UE coordination information. (Wang discloses that the first stage SCI indicates the UE can receive the coordination information by indication that a coordination request SCI will be transmitted in the second stage SCI [paragraph 0145 – see also the independent claim (a), supra]. The combination with Ganesan in the independent claim disclose the transmission using the PSFCH)
Claim(s) 45, 46, 51 and 52 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang, et al. (US Pre Grant Publication No. 2023/0262737; Note also CN 202011149078.1 – With identical disclosure) in view of Ganesan, et al. (US Pre Grant Publication No. 2024/0057121; note also 63/121814 [“814”], with parallel citations) as applied to claim 41 and further in view of R1-2101551 (“551”) (Author Unknown, Discussion on feasibility and benefits for mode 2 enhancements, Doc. No. R1-2101551, pages 1-4, 5 February 2021).
Regarding claim 45, Wang as modified by Ganeson fails to disclose decode a first sidelink transmission received from the second UE, the first sidelink transmission including a first resource reservation for a subsequent sidelink transmission by the second UE, decode a second sidelink transmission received from a third UE, the second sidelink transmission including a second resource reservation for a subsequent sidelink transmission by the third UE, detect a co-channel collision based on the first resource reservation and the second resource reservation being in a same sidelink slot and
encode a feedback message for transmission to the second UE and the third UE, the feedback message indicating the co-channel collision. In the same field of endeavor 791 discloses decode a first sidelink transmission received from the second UE, the first sidelink transmission including a first resource reservation for a subsequent sidelink transmission by the second UE, decode a second sidelink transmission received from a third UE, the second sidelink transmission including a second resource reservation for a subsequent sidelink transmission by the third UE, detect a co-channel collision based on the first resource reservation and the second resource reservation being in a same sidelink slot and
encode a feedback message for transmission to the second UE and the third UE, the feedback message indicating the co-channel collision. (The system of 551 discloses that a the first/RX UE may trigger an inter-UE coordination message in two circumstances [pages 1-2, section 2.1 – “An inter-UE coordination message from UE-A to UE-B can be triggered either by a request from UE-B, or by (pre-) defined or (pre-) configured condition(s) in UE-A”]. First, upon request from another UE, as was the case in Wang [pages 1-2, section 2.1 – “ Option 1 can be used when there is a connection (e.g. PC5-RRC connection) between UE-A and UE-B, in which case UE-B can request coordination from UE-A”] and second upon detection of a conflict in resource reservations between UE-B/the second UE and UE-B2/a third UE, in which case UE-A may broadcast the coordination message indicating the resource IDs of the co-channel collision to both the second and third UEs [i.e. UE B1 and B1] [pages 1-2, section 2.1 – “Option 2 is the only choice when the inter-UE coordination message is of broadcast nature. For example, UE-A can broadcast an inter-UE coordination message when it detects conflicts in resource reservation from UE-B1 and UE-B2 etc., in which case it would be much less efficient if a different cast type is used for the inter-UE coordination message”].)
Therefore, since 551 discloses both a proactive/TX/first UE Triggered/assistance information driven and event-driven conflict detection used together, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the proactive/TX/first UE Triggered/assistance information driven conflict detection of Wang along with an event-driven conflict detection at the first/TX UE by further detecting an event causing a conflict by receiving reservation/SCI from the second and third UE at the first UE and comparing the reservations to determine if a conflict/co-channel collision is present based on the first and second reservation being in the same slot, and, if so, sending a further indication of the resources of the conflict/co-channel collision to the second/RX UE and the third UE. The motive to combine is to allow additional conflict checking based on actual reservations to allow for further conflict resolution based on reservation information.
Regarding claim 46, Wang as previously modified by Ganeson and 551 fails to disclose encoding the feedback message for transmission to the second UE and the third UE using a physical sidelink feedback channel (PSFCH). In the same field of endeavor, another portion of 551 discloses encoding the feedback message for transmission to the second UE and the third UE using a physical sidelink feedback channel (PSFCH) (551 discloses that inter-UE coordination may be transmitted using the PSFCH [page 2, section 2.2].)
Therefore, since another portion of 551 discloses the inter-UE coordination messages of Wang as previously modified by Ganeson and 551 may be contained in PSFCH, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to transmit the inter-UE coordination message to UE2 and 3 indicating the conflict using a PSFCH indication. The motive to combine is to use already established PSFCH feedback channel to feedback collision information to reduce overhead.
Regarding claim 51, Wang as modified by Ganeson and 551 discloses the feedback message comprises a resource ID associated with the first sidelink transmission and the second sidelink transmission. (See the combination in claim 45, supra, the feedback message identifies the conflicting resource set).
Regarding claim 52, Wang discloses PSSCH for transmission of control information (paragaprh 0004).
Wang as previously modified by Ganeson and 551 fails to disclose encoding the feedback message for transmission to the second UE and the third UE using physical sidelink control channel (PSCCH) sidelink control information (SCI). In another portion, 551 discloses encoding the feedback message for transmission to the second UE and the third UE using physical sidelink control channel (PSCCH) sidelink control information (SCI) (page 2, section 2.2, the inter-UE coordination messages may be sent in a new second SCI format).
Therefore, since another portion of 551 discloses the inter-UE coordination messages of Wang as previously modified by Ganeson and 551 may be contained in SCI and Wang discloses the PSSCH for control information transmission it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to transmit the inter-UE coordination message to UE2 and 3 indicating the conflict using a PSSCH SCI indication. The motive to combine is to use already established sidelink control information to transmit the control information related to inter-UE coordination to reduce overhead.
Claim(s) 47 and 49 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang, et al. (US Pre Grant Publication No. 2023/0262737; Note also CN 202011149078.1 – With identical disclosure) in view of Ganesan, et al. (US Pre Grant Publication No. 2024/0057121; note also 63/121814 [“814”], with parallel citations) R1-2101551 (“551”) (Author Unknown, Discussion on feasibility and benefits for mode 2 enhancements, Doc. No. R1-2101551, pages 1-4, 5 February 2021) as applied to claim 45 and further in view of R1-2009273 (“273”) (Author Unknown, Reliability and Latency Enhancements for Mode 2, Doc. No. R1-2009273, pages 1-19, 13 November 2020)
Regarding claim 47, Wang as modified by Ganeson and 551 fails to disclose fails to disclose encoding the feedback message for transmission to the second UE and the third UE using a pool of resources of the PSFCH, the pool of resources dedicated to inter-UE coordination feedbacks. In the same field of endeavor, 273 discloses encoding the feedback message for transmission to the second UE and the third UE using a pool of resources of the PSFCH, the pool of resources dedicated to inter-UE coordination feedbacks. (273 discloses that a collision can be signaled on PSFCH [page 4, Observation 3] and further discloses the coordination reports/feedback can be assigned a dedicated resource [i.e. a pool of resources in orange in fig. 13] [page 12, section 7].)
Therefore, since 273 discloses dedicated resources for coordination reports/feedback, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to combine the feedback of 273 with Wang as modified by Ganeson and 551by sending the feedback message using a dedicated pool of resources on the PSFCH. The motive to combine is provided by 273 and is to prevent collisions of critical feedback information [page 12, section 7, observation 23].
Regarding claim 49, Wang as modified by Ganeson and 551 fails to disclose fails to disclose encoding the feedback message for transmission to the second UE and the third UE using a shared pool of resources of the PSFCH. In the same field of endeavor, 273 discloses encoding the feedback message for transmission to the second UE and the third UE using a shared pool of resources of the PSFCH. (273 discloses that a collision can be signaled on PSFCH [page 4, Observation 3] and further discloses a pool of resources for the coordination reports/feedback [fig. 13, pool of resources in orange] it is further disclosed that it is considered to use dedicated resourcs, indicating that it is also proposed that non dedicated [i.e. shared] resources are used [page 12, section 7].)
Therefore, since 273 discloses shared resources for coordination reports/feedback, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to combine the feedback of 273 with Wang as modified by Ganeson and 551by sending the feedback message using a shared pool of resources on the PSFCH. The motive to combine is to reduce overhead and increase flexibility by using a non-dedicated resources for the transmission.
Claim(s) 53 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang, et al. (US Pre Grant Publication No. 2023/0262737; Note also CN 202011149078.1 – With identical disclosure) in view of Ganesan, et al. (US Pre Grant Publication No. 2024/0057121; note also 63/121814 [“814”], with parallel citations) R1-2101551 (“551”) (Author Unknown, Discussion on feasibility and benefits for mode 2 enhancements, Doc. No. R1-2101551, pages 1-4, 5 February 2021) as applied to claim 45 and further in view of R1-2100767 (“767”) (Author Unknown, R Sitelink resource allocation for Reliability enhancement, Doc. No. R1-2100767, pages 1-6, 5 February 2021).
Regarding claim 53, Wang as modified by Ganeson and 551 fails to disclose the UE is a group member of a UE group comprising the second UE and the third UE. In the same field of endeavor, 767 discloses the UE is a group member of a UE group comprising the second UE and the third UE. (767 dislcoses detecting conflicts based on resource indications from a second and third UE in a group and reporting the conflict [pages 2-3, section “conflict indication using a feedback channel”].)
Therefore, since 767 discloses monitoring reservations for a second and third UE in a group for conflicts, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to combine the groups of 767 with the system of Wang as modified by Ganeson and 551 by placing the first, second and third UE in a group together and having the first report the conflict to the second and third UEs. The motive to combine is to allow use in a groupcast setting to allow for increased flexailibty.
Claim(s) 58 and 59 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over R1-2101551 (“551”) (Author Unknown, Discussion on feasibility and benefits for mode 2 enhancements, Doc. No. R1-2101551, pages 1-4, 5 February 2021).
Regarding claim 58, 551 discloses UE for sidelink operation in a Fifth Generation New Radio (5G NR) network (page 1, introduction) and to causing the UE to perform operations comprising
decode a first sidelink transmission received from the second UE, the first sidelink transmission including a first resource reservation for a subsequent sidelink transmission by the second UE, decode a second sidelink transmission received from a third UE, the second sidelink transmission including a second resource reservation for a subsequent sidelink transmission by the third UE, detect a co-channel collision based on the first resource reservation and the second resource reservation being in a same sidelink slot and (The system of 791 discloses that a NR UE may detect a conflict/co-channel collision between a second UE/UE-B1 and a third UE/UE-B2 by decoding resource reservations for the second and third UEs on the sidelink and may encode and transmit a feedback message in response [page 1, introduction – transmission on sidelink for inter-UE coordination; pages 1-2, section 2.1- “…when it detects conflicts in resource reservation from UE-B1 and UE-B2” – indicating receiving and decoding a resource reservation from the second and third UE; pages 1-2, section 2.1- “For example, UE-A can broadcast an inter-UE coordination message when it detects conflicts in resource reservation from UE-B1 and UE-B2 etc., in which case it would be much less efficient if a different cast type is used for the inter-UE coordination message, not to mention that UE-A may not even have any connection to each UE-Bx.” – message broadcast to each UE-Bx with a conflict when one is detected].)
encode a feedback message for transmission to the second UE and the third UE, the feedback message indicating the co-channel collision. (pages 1-2, section 2.1 -see (a), supra).
551 fails to disclose non-transitory computer-readable storage medium that stores instructions for execution by one or more processors. However, it is officially noted that the use of non transitory computer readable mediums, such as memory, and processors was well known to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the invention. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to implement the UE of 551 using a processor and memory. The motive to combine is to reduce costs by using the mass produced and low cost microprocessor.
Regarding claim 59, 551 discloses encoding the feedback message for transmission to the second UE and the third UE using a physical sidelink feedback channel (PSFCH) (551 discloses that the feedback message, which is an inter-UE coordination message can be sent using PSFCH [page 2, section 2.2].)
Claim(s) 60 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over R1-2101551 (“551”) (Author Unknown, Discussion on feasibility and benefits for mode 2 enhancements, Doc. No. R1-2101551, pages 1-4, 5 February 2021) as applied to claim 59 and further in view of R1-2009273 (“273”) (Author Unknown, Reliability and Latency Enhancements for Mode 2, Doc. No. R1-2009273, pages 1-19, 13 November 2020)
Regarding claim 60, 551 fails to disclose encoding the feedback message for transmission to the second UE and the third UE using a pool of resources of the PSFCH, the pool of resources dedicated to inter-UE coordination feedbacks. In the same field of endeavor, 273 discloses encoding the feedback message for transmission to the second UE and the third UE using a pool of resources of the PSFCH, the pool of resources dedicated to inter-UE coordination feedbacks. (273 discloses that a collision can be signaled on PSFCH [page 4, Observation 3] and further discloses the coordination reports/feedback can be assigned a dedicated resource [i.e. a pool of resources in orange in fig. 13] [page 12, section 7].)
Therefore, since 273 discloses dedicated resources for coordination reports/feedback, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to combine the feedback of 273 with 551 by sending the feedback message using a dedicated pool of resources on the PSFCH. The motive to combine is provided by 273 and is to prevent collisions of critical feedback information [page 12, section 7, observation 23].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 48 and 50 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding claim 48, the prior art fails to teach, suggest or disclose the pool of resources includes a physical resource block (PRB) bitmap over PSFCH symbols, the PRB bitmap being pre-configured for the PSFCH. That is, no art in which a bitmap on the PSFCH is used could be located. Furthermore, given the number and type of combinations already made, the further modification of the system of Wang as modified by Ganeson, 551 and 273 to address this limitation would amount to hindsight reconstruction. Therefore, the prior art fails to teach, suggest or disclose all elements of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 50, the prior art fails to teach, suggest or disclose he processing circuitry is configured to: encode hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) information for transmission using the shared pool of resources of the PSFCH, wherein transmission of the HARQ information and transmission of the feedback message are associated with resources from the shared pool with different resource IDs. That is, no art in which a shared pool with different resource IDs is used could be located. Furthermore, given the number and type of combinations already made, the further modification of the system of Wang as modified by Ganeson, 551 and 273 to address this limitation would amount to hindsight reconstruction. Therefore, the prior art fails to teach, suggest or disclose all elements of the claimed invention.
A note about Double Patenting
It was considered if a double patenting rejection was appropriate between the present application, claim 58 and claim 41 of application 18/280,078 (“078”). Side by side the two sets of claims are as follows:
Claim 58 of present application
Claim 41 of 078
A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium that stores instructions for execution by one or more processors of a user equipment (UE), the instructions to configure the UE for sidelink operation in a Fifth Generation New Radio (5G NR) network, and to cause the UE to perform operations comprising:
An apparatus for user equipment configured for operation in a Fifth Generation New Radio (5G NR) network, the apparatus comprising: processing circuitry, wherein to configure the UE for sidelink communication in the 5G NR network, the processing circuitry is to:
decoding a first sidelink transmission received from a second UE, the first sidelink transmission including a first resource reservation for a subsequent sidelink transmission by the second UE;
decode sidelink control information (SCI) format 1-A to obtain a set of resources, the set of resources comprising one or more slots and resource blocks reserved for a physical sidelink shared channel (PSSCH) transmission
decoding a second sidelink transmission received from a third UE, the second sidelink transmission including a second resource reservation for a subsequent sidelink transmission by the third UE;
detecting a co-channel collision based on the first resource reservation and the second resource reservation being in a same sidelink slot; and
detect a half-duplex conflict associated with a slot in the set of resources
encoding a feedback message for transmission to the second UE and the third UE, the feedback message indicating the co-channel collision.
encode conflict information about the half-duplex conflict for transmission to a second UE via a physical sidelink feedback channel (PSFCH);
Comparing the claims a number of key differences emerge. The present application claim 58 relates to co-channel collision which is distinct from the half duplex of 078, as a co-channel collision is an overlap in two transmissions and a half-duplex issue relates to the first/receiver UE having to simultaneously receive and transmit from different devices when it cannot as it is half duplex and can only transmit or receive at one time. This different is important, as it is not necessary to receive a second reservation to detect a half duplex collision, as the receiving/first node is already aware of its scheduled transmissions. Overall, the claims differ substantially other than a generalized idea of detecting a reservation issue and reporting the detected issue. Given these differences, modifying 078 to read on the present claims would amount to hindsight reconstruction.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 CHRISTOPHER M CRUTCHFIELD whose telephone number is (571)270-3989. The examiner can normally be reached 9am-5pm M-F.
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, Faruk Hamza can be reached at (571) 272-7969. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER M CRUTCHFIELD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2466