DETAILED ACTION
This communication is responsive to applicant’s response filed under 37 C.F.R §1.111 in response to a non-final office action. Claim(s) 1-8 have been amended; No claims have been canceled; No claim(s) have been added. Claim(s) 1-8 are subject to examination.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-8 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: Sidelink Communication Control Method in a Mobile Communication System.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 5 fails to further limit the subject matter of claim 1 due to being identical to claim 3. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-3 and 5-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by FARAG et al. (US 11690048 B2).
Claim 1:
FARAG teaches a communication control method in a mobile communication system comprising a first user equipment and a second user equipment, the first user equipment and the second user equipment being configured to communicate wirelessly with each other by sidelink communication (FARAG: FIG. 6 sidelink communication), the communication control method comprising: identifying, by the first user equipment, a timing where reception of the sidelink communication from the second user equipment by the first user equipment is not available due to the timing used for other communication by the first user equipment (FARAG: FIG. 6 step 2 (“UE-A(a) determines if future transmission collide, and grant/trigger UE-B(s) SL transmission on future SL resource by indicating preferred and/or not preferred resource.”) wherein UE-A/first user equipment identifies timing of sidelink reception collision); transmitting, by the first user equipment, to the second user equipment, resource information related to the timing where reception of the sidelink communication from the second user equipment by the first user equipment is not available (FARAG: FIG. 6 step 2 (“UE-A(a) determines if future transmission collide, and grant/trigger UE-B(s) SL transmission on future SL resource by indicating preferred and/or not preferred resource.”) wherein first UE/UE-A indicates preferred and/or not preferred resources related to a timing when communication is not available/colliding); and receiving, by the second user equipment, the resource information (FARAG: col 19 line 5-15 (“In step three, after a UE-B receives a grant or trigger signal, indicating a preferred or non-preferred resource for a UE-B, the UE-B can determine whether or not to proceed with a SL transmission on a pre-indicated or reserved SL resource. Non-preferred resources are resources that have a collision or conflict with another SL or UL transmission. If the reserved resource is indicated to have a conflict…”) wherein second user equipment receives resource information related to resource collision).
Claim 2:
FARAG teaches the communication control method according to claim 1, further comprising performing, by the second user equipment, no transmission to the first user equipment at the timing (FARAG: col 19 line 5-15 (“In step three, after a UE-B receives a grant or trigger signal, indicating a preferred or non-preferred resource for a UE-B, the UE-B can determine whether or not to proceed with a SL transmission on a pre-indicated or reserved SL resource.”) wherein UE-B/second user equipment can perform no transmission to the first UE).
Claim 3:
FARAG teaches the communication control method according to claim 1, wherein the resource information is information indicating a timing where reception of the sidelink communication from the second user equipment by the first user equipment is not available (FARAG: FIG. 6 step 2 (“UE-A(a) determines if future transmission collide, and grant/trigger UE-B(s) SL transmission on future SL resource by indicating preferred and/or not preferred resource.”) wherein first UE/UE-A indicates communication at a timing when communication is not available due to collision).
Claim 5:
FARAG teaches the communication control method according to claim 1. For further limitations, see 112(d) rejection and rejection for claim 3 above.
Claim 6:
FARAG teaches the communication control method according to claim 5, further comprising performing, by the second user equipment, no transmission to the first user equipment at the timing where reception of the sidelink communication from the second user equipment to the first user equipment is not available (FARAG: col 19 line 5-15 (“In step three, after a UE-B receives a grant or trigger signal, indicating a preferred or non-preferred resource for a UE-B, the UE-B can determine whether or not to proceed with a SL transmission on a pre-indicated or reserved SL resource.”) wherein UE-B/second user equipment can perform no transmission to the first UE).
Claim 7:
FARAG teaches A first user equipment configured to communicate wirelessly with a second user equipment by sidelink communication, the first user equipment comprising: a controller and a transmitter (FARAG: FIG. 3 item 340 (“Controller/Processor”) and item 310 (“RF Transceiver”) the transmitter).
For further limitations, see rejection for claim 1 above.
Claim 8:
FARAG teaches a chipset for controlling a first user equipment configured to communicate wirelessly with a second user equipment by sidelink communication (FARAG: FIG. 3), the chipset comprising: a processor and a memory coupled to the processor (FARAG: FIG. 3 item 340 (“Controller/Processor”) and item 360 (“Memory”)).
For further limitations, see rejection for claim 1 above.
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.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over FARAG in view of LEI et al. (US 20230328784 A1) (see 892 06/18/2025), hereby referred to as LEI.
Claim 4:
FARAG teaches the communication control method according to claim 3, but does not explicitly disclose further comprising not waking up the second user equipment at the timing where reception of the sidelink communication from the second user equipment by the first user equipment is not available.
LEI, in the same field of endeavor, teaches not waking up the second user equipment at the timing where reception of the sidelink communication from the second user equipment by the first user equipment is not available (LEI: FIG. 4 and para 57-58 (“Therefore, UE 103 may be aware that the occupancy of the channel will not be released until the remaining duration of channel occupancy…it is not necessary for UE 103 to perform any useless channel access during the remaining duration of channel occupancy…UE103 may enter a sleep mode after determining the remaining duration of channel occupancy, and wake up after the remaining duration of channel occupancy.”) wherein the second UE/the UE103 receiving the resource information/channel occupancy info, is asleep/not woken up during the time when communication is not available/occupied).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified FARAG with LEI for the benefit of preventing data loss (LEI: para 28) and useless transmissions (LEI: para 57).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
FARAG et al. (63/083541) pg 21-22 gives priority date 09/25/2020 to the subject matter of the primary reference.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANGELIE T NGO whose telephone number is (571)272-0180. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Thur: 8am - 5pm; 2nd Fri: 8am - 3pm.
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, Noel Beharry can be reached at (571) 270-5630. 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.
/A.T.N./ Examiner, Art Unit 2416
/NOEL R BEHARRY/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2416