DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. 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
2. Applicant's arguments, filed on January 1, 2026, regarding rejection of claims 21-40 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
A. § 103 rejection of claim 21
Regarding claim 21, as amended, applicant argues claim 21 is in condition for allowance, because applied references Wu ‘530 (US 2023/0345530, “Wu ‘530”), Park ‘660 (US 2023/0262660, “Park ‘660”), Dutta ‘109 (US 2023/0403109, “Dutta ‘109”), and Fu ‘228 (US 2023/0337228, “Fu ‘228”) do not disclose “based on hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) feedback for the MAC PDU and the at least one first resource reservation period related to the HARQ feedback, determining, by the first device, at least one second resource reservation period among the plurality of resource reservation periods for selecting a second SL resource” (See Remarks, page 12, para 2).
First, applicant argues that a resource selection window of Wu ‘530 is not a resource reservation period, because Wu ‘530 discloses multiple resource selection windows which are time-frequency search regions and spatial search domains, rather than disclosing a plurality of resource reservation periods that are temporal scheduling intervals and pre-configured scheduling periods within a resource pool (See Remarks, page 10, lines 19-28).
Examiner respectfully disagrees. In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., a plurality of resource reservation periods that are temporal scheduling intervals and pre-configured scheduling periods within a resource pool) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Further, examiner notes that Wu ‘530 discloses that multiple resource selection windows are within a partial sensing-resource selection window in time domain, during which time-frequency resources are selected (FIG. 4, para 45 and 51-58). Furthermore, examiner notes that Wu ‘530 discloses that the partial sensing window and the resource selection windows are determined to be used for resource selection (FIG. 4, para 45 and 51-58). Thus, the resource selection windows of Wu ‘530 are configured as reserved to be used for resource selection of resources within the windows. Therefore, the resource selection windows of Wu ‘530 are configured as resource reservation periods.
Second, applicant argues that Wu ‘530 does not disclose determining a reservation period based on HARQ feedback, because Wu ‘530 discloses a HARQ feedback that indicates whether a retransmission is required, rather than disclosing a mechanism for determining a second resource reservation period based on both HARQ feedback and a first resource reservation period and rather than disclosing “based on hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) feedback for the MAC PDU and the at least one first resource reservation period related to the HARQ feedback, determining, by the first device, at least one second resource reservation period among the plurality of resource reservation periods for selecting a second SL resource” (See Remarks, page 10, lines 29-30, page 11, lines 1-10).
Examiner respectfully disagrees. In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., a mechanism for determining a second resource reservation period based on both HARQ feedback and a first resource reservation period) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Further, examiner notes that Wu ‘530 discloses that UE selects slots within the resource selection window to perform transmission, and receives HARQ NACK feedback based on which it determines to select resources in a new resource selection window, for a retransmission (FIG. 4-5, para 51-58). Thus, Wu ‘530 discloses that the UE determines a new resource selection window, based on the received HARQ NACK feedback and the original resource selection window. Therefore, Wu ‘530 discloses “based on hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) feedback and the at least one first resource reservation period related to the HARQ feedback, determining, by the first device, at least one second resource reservation period among the plurality of resource reservation periods for selecting a second SL resource”. Furthermore, examiner notes that Fu ‘228 discloses “based on hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) feedback for the MAC PDU and the at least one first period, determining at least one second period” (para 198 and 204; a determination regarding a current resource is made based on HARQ for MAC PDU on another resource, where the resources are in time domain).
Third, applicant argues that Wu ‘530‘s new selection window after NACK is not a reservation period and is not determined based on HARQ, because Wu ‘530‘s new selection window is a new search area, rather than a new reservation period which is determined based on HARQ feedback (See Remarks, page 11, lines 11-21).
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Examiner notes that Wu ‘530 discloses that UE selects slots within the resource selection window to perform transmission, and receives HARQ NACK feedback based on which it determines to select resources in a new resource selection window, for a retransmission (FIG. 4-5, para 51-58). Thus, Wu ‘530 discloses that the UE determines a new resource selection window, based on the received HARQ NACK feedback, as reserved to be used for resource selection.
Fourth, applicant argues that Wu ‘530 discloses re-selecting resources within a new selection window, rather than disclosing adapting or optimizing resource utilization through reservation-period adaptation (See Remarks, page 11, lines 22-29, page 21, para 1).
Examiner respectfully disagrees. In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., adapting or optimizing resource utilization through reservation-period adaptation) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Further, examiner notes that Wu ‘530 discloses that UE selects slots within the resource selection window to perform transmission, and receives HARQ NACK feedback based on which it determines to select resources in a new resource selection window, for a retransmission (FIG. 4-5, para 51-58). Thus, Wu ‘530 discloses that the UE determines a new resource selection window, based on the received HARQ NACK feedback and the original resource selection window. Therefore, Wu ‘530 discloses “based on hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) feedback and the at least one first resource reservation period related to the HARQ feedback, determining, by the first device, at least one second resource reservation period among the plurality of resource reservation periods for selecting a second SL resource”. Furthermore, examiner notes that Fu ‘228 discloses “based on hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) feedback for the MAC PDU and the at least one first period, determining at least one second period” (para 198 and 204; a determination regarding a current resource is made based on HARQ for MAC PDU on another resource, where the resources are in time domain).
B. § 103 rejection of claims 34 and 38
Regarding claims 34 and 38, as amended, applicant argues the claims are allowable by virtue of reciting similar features as those discussed with respect to claim 21. Relevant limitations claimed in claim 21 are discussed above. Applicant does not present arguments regarding additional limitations claimed in claims 34 and 38.
C. § 103 rejection of claims 22-33, 35-37, and 39-40
Regarding claims 22-33, 35-37, and 39-40, applicant argues the claims are allowable by virtue of their dependencies from amended claims 21, 34, and 38. Relevant limitations claimed in amended claims 21, 34, and 38 are discussed above. Applicant does not present arguments regarding additional limitations claimed in dependent claims 22-33, 35-37, and 39-40.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
3. 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.
4. Claims 21, 24-26, 34, and 37-38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu ‘530 (US 2023/0345530, “Wu ‘530”), in view of Park ‘660 (US 2023/0262660, “Park ‘660”), further in view of Dutta ‘109 (US 2023/0403109, “Dutta ‘109”), and further in view of Fu ‘228 (US 2023/0337228, “Fu ‘228”).
Regarding claims 21, 34, and 38, Wu ‘530 discloses a first device adapted to perform wireless communication (FIGS. 3-4 and 22, para 47, 126, and 144-145; UE apparatus that is a smartphone), the first device comprising:
at least one transceiver; at least one processor; and at least one memory connected to the at least one processor and storing instructions that, based on being executed (FIG. 22, para 144-145; the smartphone includes a processor and a memory, where the memory stores a program executed by the processor), cause the first device to perform operations comprising:
obtaining a plurality of resource reservation periods configured in a resource pool (FIGS. 3-5, para 45 and 51-58; based on a sensing result in a previous partial sensing window, UE determines multiple resource selection windows located within a partial sensing-resource selection window, to select resources in a resource pool; multiple resource selection windows read on a plurality of resource reservation periods);
determining at least one first candidate slot for selecting a first sidelink (SL) resource (FIG. 4, para 51-58; UE selects time-frequency resources within the resource selection window, where the time resources are slots; before transmitting on a sidelink using the slot-based resources selected within the resource selection window, UE performs sensing for resource reevaluation to make sure that slots selected within the resource selection window, to be used for sidelink transmission, are not occupied; thus, UE determines at least one first candidate slot for selecting a sidelink resource);
performing first sensing for at least one first slot related to the at least one first candidate slot based on at least one first resource reservation period among the plurality of resource reservation periods (FIGS. 4-5, para 51-58; UE performs sensing in the slots selected within the resource selection window among the multiple resource selection windows);
selecting the first SL resource based on the first sensing (FIG. 4, para 51-58; when the UE senses that the slots are unoccupied, the UE selects the slots as SL resources for SL communication);
transmitting first sidelink control information (SCI) (para 73-74; UE transmits SCI to other UEs); and
based on hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) feedback and the at least one first resource reservation period related to the HARQ feedback, determining at least one second resource reservation period among the plurality of resource reservation periods for selecting a second SL resource (FIGS. 4-5, para 51-58; UE performs transmission using slots selected within the resource selection window, and subsequently receives HARQ feedback; when the UE receives a HARQ NACK message, the UE determines that it is required to perform retransmission, and determines a new resource selection window to select resources for the purpose of the retransmission).
Although Wu ‘530 discloses transmitting first sidelink control information (SCI), Wu ‘530 does not specifically disclose transmitting first sidelink control information (SCI) including information for scheduling of a physical sidelink shared channel (PSSCH) through a physical sidelink control channel (PSCCH) based on the first SL resource. Further, Wu ‘530 does not specifically disclose transmitting a media access control (MAC) protocol data unit (PDU) through the PSSCH based on the first SL resource.
Park ‘660 teaches transmitting first sidelink control information (SCI) including information for scheduling of a physical sidelink shared channel (PSSCH) through a physical sidelink control channel (PSCCH) based on the first SL resource (para 126; UE transmits SCI via PSCCH, to schedule retransmission of PSSCH via sidelink resources);
transmitting a media access control (MAC) protocol data unit (PDU) through the PSSCH based on the first SL resource (para 212-213; UE transmits a MAC PDU through PSSCH with PSSCH resources).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Wu ‘530’s device adapted to perform wireless communication, to include Park ‘660’s UE that transmits SCI via PSCCH, to schedule retransmission of PSSCH via sidelink resources. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide a device for communication by a UE in a wireless communication system supporting sidelink carrier aggregation (Park ‘660, para 7-8).
Although Wu ‘530 in combination with Park ‘660 discloses transmitting a media access control (MAC) protocol data unit (PDU) through the PSSCH based on the first SL resource, Wu ‘530 in combination with Park ‘660 does not specifically disclose transmitting second SCI through the PSSCH.
Dutta ‘109 teaches transmitting second SCI through the PSSCH (para 79; SCI is transmitted via PSSCH).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add features to the combined device of Wu ‘530 and Park ‘660, to include Dutta ‘109’s SCI that is transmitted via PSSCH. The motivation for doing so would have been to further improve radio access technologies to meet the increasing demand for mobile broadband access (Dutta ‘109, para 4).
Although Wu ‘530 in combination with Park ‘660 and Dutta ‘109 discloses based on hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) feedback and the at least one first resource reservation period related to the HARQ feedback, determining at least one second resource reservation period among the plurality of resource reservation periods for selecting a second SL resource, Wu ‘530 in combination with Park ‘660 and Dutta ‘109 does not specifically disclose based on hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) feedback for the MAC PDU and the at least one first period, determining at least one second period.
Fu ‘228 teaches based on hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) feedback for the MAC PDU and the at least one first period, determining at least one second period (para 198 and 204; a determination regarding a current resource is made based on HARQ for MAC PDU on another resource, where the resources are in time domain).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add features to the combined device of Wu ‘530, Park ‘660, and Dutta ‘109, to include Fu ‘228’s determination regarding a current resource that is made based on HARQ for MAC PDU on another resource. The motivation for doing so would have been to address a need of supporting URLLC service in an interference-controlled NR-U scenario (Fu ‘228, para 30).
Regarding claims 24 and 37, Wu ‘530 in combination with Park ‘660, Dutta ‘109, and Fu ‘228 discloses all the limitations with respect to claims 21 and 34, respectively, as outlined above.
Further, Wu ‘530 teaches wherein, based on that the HARQ feedback is a negative acknowledgment (NACK), the at least one second resource reservation period for selecting the second SL resource is determined by including M resource reservation periods in the at least one first resource reservation period, and wherein M is a positive integer (FIGS. 4-5, para 51-58; UE performs transmission using slots selected within the resource selection window, and subsequently receives HARQ feedback; when the UE receives a HARQ NACK message, the UE determines that it is required to perform retransmission, and determines a new resource selection window to select slot resources for the purpose of the retransmission).
Regarding claims 25, Wu ‘530 in combination with Park ‘660, Dutta ‘109, and Fu ‘228 discloses all the limitations with respect to claim 24, as outlined above.
Further, Wu ‘530 teaches wherein the M resource reservation periods include at least one resource reservation period that is not used to select the first SL resource among the plurality of resource reservation periods (FIGS. 4-5, para 51-58; UE performs transmission using slots selected within the resource selection window, and subsequently receives HARQ feedback; when the UE receives a HARQ NACK message, the UE determines that it is required to perform retransmission, and determines a new resource selection window to select resources for the purpose of the retransmission).
Regarding claims 26, Wu ‘530 in combination with Park ‘660, Dutta ‘109, and Fu ‘228 discloses all the limitations with respect to claim 21, as outlined above.
Further, Wu ‘530 teaches further comprising: determining at least one second candidate slot for selecting the second SL resource; performing second sensing for at least one second slot related to the at least one second candidate slot based on the at least one second resource reservation period; and selecting the second SL resource based on the second sensing (FIGS. 3-5, para 45 and 51-58; based on a sensing result in a previous partial sensing window, UE determines multiple resource selection windows located within a partial sensing-resource selection window, to select resources in a resource pool; thus, UE performs sensing in the slots of the previous partial sensing window to determine the sensing result for the slots; therefore, UE selects the slots in the partial sensing-resource selection window for the determination of the sensing result).
5. Claims 22-23, 35-36, and 39-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu ‘530, in view of Park ‘660, further in view of Dutta ‘109, further in view of Fu ‘228, and further in view of Wang ‘919 (US 2021/0250919, “Wang ‘919”).
Regarding claims 22, 35, and 39, Wu ‘530 in combination with Park ‘660, Dutta ‘109, and Fu ‘228 discloses all the limitations with respect to claims 21, 34, and 38, respectively, as outlined above.
However, Wu ‘530 in combination with Park ‘660, Dutta ‘109, and Fu ‘228 does not specifically disclose wherein, based on that the HARQ feedback is a positive acknowledgement (ACK), the at least one second resource reservation period for selecting the second SL resource is determined by excluding N resource reservation periods from the at least one first resource reservation period, and wherein N is a positive integer.
Wang ‘919 teaches wherein, based on that the HARQ feedback is a positive acknowledgement (ACK), the at least one second resource reservation period for selecting the second SL resource is determined by excluding N resource reservation periods from the at least one first resource reservation period, and wherein N is a positive integer (para 48-49 and 56; time-frequency resources are reserved for sidelink HARQ ACK, in the resource pool; thus, time resources for HARQ ACK are excluded from the time resources in the resource pool).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add features to the combined device of Wu ‘530, Park ‘660, Dutta ‘109, and Fu ‘228, to include Wang ‘919’s time-frequency resources that are reserved for sidelink HARQ ACK, in the resource pool. The motivation for doing so would have been to address the negative impact of the sensing-based UE behavior on the power consumption of a Tx UE (Wang ‘919, para 5).
Regarding claims 23, 36, and 40, Wu ‘530 in combination with Park ‘660, Dutta ‘109, Fu ‘228, and Wang ‘919 discloses all the limitations with respect to claims 22, 35, and 39, respectively, as outlined above.
Further, Wang ‘919 teaches wherein the N resource reservation periods are some of resource reservation periods among the at least one first resource reservation period used to select the first SL resource (para 48-49 and 56; time-frequency resources are reserved for sidelink HARQ ACK, in the resource pool; thus, time resources for HARQ ACK are excluded from the time resources in the resource pool for selecting resources).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add features to the combined device of Wu ‘530, Park ‘660, Dutta ‘109, Fu ‘228, and Wang ‘919, to further include Wang ‘919’s time-frequency resources that are reserved for sidelink HARQ ACK, in the resource pool. The motivation for doing so would have been to address the negative impact of the sensing-based UE behavior on the power consumption of a Tx UE (Wang ‘919, para 5).
6. Claim 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu ‘530, in view of Park ‘660, further in view of Dutta ‘109, further in view of Fu ‘228, and further in view of Ye ‘187 (US 2023/0337187, “Ye ‘187”).
Regarding claims 27, Wu ‘530 in combination with Park ‘660, Dutta ‘109, and Fu ‘228 discloses all the limitations with respect to claim 26, as outlined above.
However, Wu ‘530 in combination with Park ‘660, Dutta ‘109, and Fu ‘228 does not specifically disclose wherein the first sensing for the at least one first slot related to the at least one first candidate slot is performed based on the at least one first resource reservation period and a first bitmap, and wherein the second sensing for the at least one second slot related to the at least one second candidate slot is performed based on the at least one second resource reservation period and a second bitmap.
Ye ‘187 teaches wherein the first sensing for the at least one first slot related to the at least one first candidate slot is performed based on the at least one first resource reservation period and a first bitmap (para 55; sensing window includes a number of reservation periods; UE is configured with partial sensing by being provided a bitmap to indicate which resource reservation periods the UE is to perform sensing), and
wherein the second sensing for the at least one second slot related to the at least one second candidate slot is performed based on the at least one second resource reservation period and a second bitmap (para 55; sensing window includes a number of reservation periods; UE is configured with partial sensing by being provided a bitmap to indicate which resource reservation periods the UE is to perform sensing).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add features to the combined device of Wu ‘530, Park ‘660, Dutta ‘109, and Fu ‘228, to include Ye ‘187’s UE is that configured with partial sensing by being provided a bitmap. The motivation for doing so would have been to enhance resource allocation to facilitate sidelink communications (Ye ‘187, para 1).
7. Claim 30 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu ‘530, in view of Park ‘660, further in view of Dutta ‘109, further in view of Fu ‘228, and further in view of Xue ‘862 (US 2023/0131862, “Xue ‘862”).
Regarding claims 30, Wu ‘530 in combination with Park ‘660, Dutta ‘109, and Fu ‘228 discloses all the limitations with respect to claim 21, as outlined above.
However, Wu ‘530 in combination with Park ‘660, Dutta ‘109, and Fu ‘228 does not specifically disclose wherein, based on that a unicast connection is established between the first device and a second device, unicast communication between the first device and the second device is performed based on a dedicated resource pool for the first device and the second device.
Xue ‘862 teaches wherein, based on that a unicast connection is established between the first device and a second device, unicast communication between the first device and the second device is performed based on a dedicated resource pool for the first device and the second device (para 129; a resource pool is dedicated to unicast communication between two UEs, over sidelink).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add features to the combined device of Wu ‘530, Park ‘660, Dutta ‘109, and Fu ‘228, to include Xue ‘862’s resource pool that is dedicated to unicast communication between two UEs. The motivation for doing so would have been to improve communication reliability (Xue ‘862, para 56).
8. Claim 32 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu ‘530, in view of Park ‘660, further in view of Dutta ‘109, further in view of Fu ‘228, and further in view of Soleymani ‘845 (US 2024/0015845, “Soleymani ‘845”).
Regarding claims 32, Wu ‘530 in combination with Park ‘660, Dutta ‘109, and Fu ‘228 discloses all the limitations with respect to claim 21, as outlined above.
However, Wu ‘530 in combination with Park ‘660, Dutta ‘109, and Fu ‘228 does not specifically disclose wherein a time domain or a frequency domain of resources selectable by the first device requiring power saving is configured for the first device.
Soleymani ‘845 teaches wherein a time domain or a frequency domain of resources selectable by the first device requiring power saving is configured for the first device (para 5 and 99; resource selection is performed by a UE with reduced power consumption, where the resources are in time domain or frequency domain).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add features to the combined device of Wu ‘530, Park ‘660, Dutta ‘109, and Fu ‘228, to include Soleymani ‘845’s resource selection that is performed by a UE with reduced power consumption. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide for power savings needed by battery driven UEs transmitting/receiving over the sidelink (Soleymani ‘845, para 97).
9. Claim 33 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu ‘530, in view of Park ‘660, further in view of Dutta ‘109, further in view of Fu ‘228, further in view of Kim ‘264 (US 2023/0284264, “Kim ‘264”), and further in view of Kim ‘721 (US 2015/0334721, “Kim ‘721”).
Regarding claims 33, Wu ‘530 in combination with Park ‘660, Dutta ‘109, and Fu ‘228 discloses all the limitations with respect to claim 32, as outlined above.
However, Wu ‘530 in combination with Park ‘660, Dutta ‘109, and Fu ‘228 does not specifically disclose wherein the time domain is determined based on at least one of a specific time offset, a specific time period, or a specific number of slots, with respect to a specific reference time, wherein the frequency domain is determined based on at least one of a specific frequency offset, a specific frequency period, or a specific number of subchannels, with respect to a specific reference frequency.
Kim ‘264 teaches wherein the time domain is determined based on at least one of a specific time offset (para 8, 254-255, and 261; time domain resources for random access (RA) are determined based on a time offset between resources for RA preamble and resources for RA payload; examiner notes the use of alternative language; for rejection purposes, only one of the alternative limitations must be disclosed by prior art), a specific time period, or a specific number of slots, with respect to a specific reference time,
wherein the frequency domain is determined based on at least one of a specific frequency offset (para 8, 254-255, and 261; frequency domain resources for random access (RA) are different between resources for RA preamble and resources for RA payload, and are expressed as a frequency offset; examiner notes the use of alternative language; for rejection purposes, only one of the alternative limitations must be disclosed by prior art), a specific frequency period, or a specific number of subchannels, with respect to a specific reference frequency.
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add features to the combined device of Wu ‘530, Park ‘660, Dutta ‘109, and Fu ‘228, to include Kim ‘264’s resources that are expressed as a frequency offset. The motivation for doing so would have been to efficiently perform an access procedure of a terminal (Kim ‘264, para 6-7).
However, Wu ‘530 in combination with Park ‘660, Dutta ‘109, Fu ‘228, and Kim ‘264 does not specifically disclose wherein the first device requiring power saving is not allowed to select resources other than the time domain or the frequency domain.
Kim ‘721 teaches wherein the first device requiring power saving is not allowed to select resources other than the time domain or the frequency domain (para 68; UE may select different resources for sidelink communication, where it is possible to select different resources only in time and frequency domain).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add features to the combined device of Wu ‘530, Park ‘660, Dutta ‘109, Fu ‘228, and Kim ‘264, to include Kim ‘721’s UE that may select different resources for sidelink communication, where it is possible to select different resources only in time and frequency domain. The motivation for doing so would have been to avoid resource collision in a mobile communication system (Kim ‘721, para 2-6).
Allowable Subject Matter
10. Claims 28, 29, and 31 are objected to as being dependent upon rejected base claims, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claims and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Internet Communication
Applicant is encouraged to submit a written authorization for Internet communications (PTO/SB/439, https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/sb0439.pdf) in the instant patent application to authorize the examiner to communicate with the applicant via email. The authorization will allow the examiner to better practice compact prosecution. The written authorization can be submitted via one of the following methods only. (1) Central Fax which can be found in the Conclusion section of this Office action; (2) regular postal mail; (3) EFS WEB; or (4) the service window on the Alexandria campus. EFS web is the recommended way to submit the form since this allows the form to be entered into the file wrapper within the same day (system dependent). Written authorization submitted via other methods, such as direct fax to the examiner or email, will not be accepted. See MPEP § 502.0.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NEVENA SANDHU whose telephone number is (571) 272-0679. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday 9AM-5PM EST, Friday variable.
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, Michael Thier can be reached on (571)272-2832. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/NEVENA ZECEVIC SANDHU/Examiner, Art Unit 2474
/Michael Thier/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2474
Prosecution Insights