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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR
1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued
examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the
finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's
submission filed on 06/04/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s submission filed on 06/04/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-30 are pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant' s arguments with respect to claims 1-30 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.
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.
Claims 1-25 and 27-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu et al. (US 2025/0193818 A1), hereinafter “LIU” in view of Kim et al. (US 2022/0408388 A1), hereinafter “KIM”.
Regarding claim 1, LIU teaches, ‘A first user equipment (UE) for wireless communications,
comprising: one or more memories storing processor-executable code; and one or more processors coupled with the one or more memories and operable to execute the code to cause the first UE to:’ (Paragraph [0094]: FIG. 9B illustrates a block diagram of an example UE 901… The UE 901 includes a UE transceiver module 930, a UE antenna 932, a UE memory module 934, and a UE processor module 936. The modules 930, 932, 934, and 936 are operatively coupled to and interconnected with one another via a data communication bus 940; Paragraphs [0101]-[0102]: the UE 901 may be embodied in various types of user devices such as a mobile phone… The processor modules 914 and 936 may be
implemented, or realized, with a general purpose processor… The memory modules 916 and 934… can read information from, and write information to, memory modules):
‘receive, from a network entity, a downlink message at the first UE;’ (Paragraph [0023]: The
links 131 and 132 support uplink communications which include wireless transfer of data from the UEs 121 and 123 to the BS 101 and downlink communications which include wireless transfer of data from the BS 101 to the UEs 121 and 123; Paragraph [0027]: interfere with the downlink reception of the UE 121 in the macro cell 111 (and communicating with the BS 101));
‘receive a first level of interference at the first UE, wherein the first level of interference is based
at least in part on an uplink message transmitted from a second UE’ (Paragraph [0027]: Specifically,
the uplink transmission of the UE 122 in the micro cell 112 (and communicating with the BS 102) can interfere with the downlink reception of the UE 121 in the macro cell 111 (and communicating with the BS 101)… The uplink-to-downlink interference can also be referred to as inter-UE interference)
‘and wherein the first level of interference at least partially overlaps in time with the downlink message;’ (Paragraph [0031]: During the time at which the time-frequency-domain resources for the different cells are different, crosslink interference 233 may be generated. Specifically for example, the uplink transmission of the UE 221 communicating with the BS 201 via link 231 interferes with the downlink reception of the UE 222 communicating with BS 202 via link 232; Paragraph [0042]: The time-domain resources (shown in dotted box) may be configured with different frame structure attributes (i.e., uplink in cell 512 while downlink in cell 511)… Then, within these resources, the uplink transmission of UE 522 interferes the downlink reception at UE 521);
LIU does not explicitly teach but KIM teaches, ‘and transmit, to the network entity, assistance information associated with a timing adjustment for the second UE’ (KIM – Paragraph [0018]: The method may further include transmitting, to the second UE, a signal requesting a change in a timing
advance (TA) value [assistance information associated with a timing adjustment] for the first sidelink based on a change in the reception timing of the sidelink signal; Paragraph (0215): The first reception UE (V0) [first UE] may instruct the first transmission UE (V1) [second UE] to adjust the TA value corresponding to a change in reception timing for the first sidelink signal, and may inform the BS [network entity] of the change in reception timing for the first sidelink, so that the BS can instruct the first transmission UE (V1) to change the TA value for the first sidelink; Paragraph [0208]: In this case, the first reception UE (V0) may transmit, to the first transmission UE (V1), a signal including either information about the changed first reception timing point or a signal requesting the TA change)
‘that is determined by the first UE based at least in part on the first level of interference,’ (KIM – Paragraph [0017]: determining whether to change a reception timing point of a sidelink signal for the
first sidelink, based on a difference value between a first reception timing point related to the first sidelink and the second reception timing point; Paragraph [0191]: if a difference value between the reception (Rx) timing point for a first independent sidelink formed between the specific UE and the first transmission UE and the other reception (Rx) timing point for a second independent sidelink formed between the specific UE and other UEs is equal to or greater than a preset threshold, the sidelink signal generated through the second sidelink may cause ISI/ICI [Inter-Symbol Interference / Inter-Carrier Interference: level of interference] occurrence when the specific UE receives the sidelink signal generated through the first sidelink.),
‘wherein the timing adjustment is associated with one or more uplink messages to be transmitted from the second UE.’ (KIM – Paragraph [0015]: An object of the present disclosure is to provide a method for adjusting transmission/reception (Tx/Rx) timing points of sidelink to minimize or prevent the influence of inter-symbol interference; Paragraph [0181]: indicating management or adjustment of the transmission (Tx) timing point… referred to as a timing advance (TA); Paragraph [0215]: the first reception UE (V0) may determine whether to change the reception timing point of
the sidelink signal based on TA information obtained from the second transmission UE (V2)… The first reception UE (V0) may instruct the first transmission UE (V1) to adjust the TA value corresponding to a change in reception timing for the first sidelink signal, and may inform the BS of the change in reception timing for the first sidelink, so that the BS can instruct the first transmission UE (V1) to change the TA value for the first sidelink).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of KIM with LIU because both are in the same/similar field of endeavor. The advantage of incorporating the above limitation(s) of KIM into LIU is that KIM provides computing a preferred timing adjustment at the victim UE and transmitting a request to change the underlying transmission properties (Timing Advance value) of the interfering link to restore boundary alignment by explaining the exact physical consequence of mismatched link boundaries across independent links and defining the precise physical threshold condition (the Cyclic Prefix length) that dictates when an active timing adjustment becomes mandatory to preserve wireless performance (See paragraph [0186], [0189], KIM).
Regarding claim 2, LIU and KIM teach, The first UE of claim 1, LIU further teaches, ‘wherein the one or more processors are further operable to execute the code to cause the first UE to:’ (Paragraph [0096]: The UE 901 includes… a UE processor module 936; Paragraph [0041]: The victim UE 521 (first UE or first network node) receives and measures the RS):
LIU does not explicitly teach but KIM teaches, ‘compare timing associated with reception of the downlink message to timing associated with reception of the first level of interference,’ (KIM - Paragraph [0017]: determining whether to change a reception timing point of a sidelink signal for the first sidelink, based on a difference value between a first reception timing point related to the first sidelink and the second reception timing point; Paragraph [0191]: That is, if a difference value between the reception (Rx) timing point for a first independent sidelink… and the other reception (Rx) timing point for a second independent sidelink… is equal to or greater than a preset threshold),
‘wherein the assistance information is based at least in part on the comparison.’ (KIM – Paragraph [0018]: The method may further include transmitting, to the second UE, a signal requesting a change in a timing advance (TA) value for the first sidelink based on a change in the reception timing of the sidelink signal [Note: derived from the calculated difference value]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of KIM with LIU because both are in the same/similar field of endeavor. The advantage of incorporating the above limitation(s) of KIM into LIU is that KIM provides computing a preferred timing adjustment at the victim UE and transmitting a request to change the underlying transmission properties (Timing Advance value) of the interfering link to restore boundary alignment by explaining the exact physical consequence of mismatched link boundaries across independent links and defining the precise physical threshold condition (the Cyclic Prefix length) that dictates when an active timing adjustment becomes mandatory to preserve wireless performance (See paragraph [0186], [0189], KIM).
Regarding claims 3 and 22, LIU and KIM teach, The first UE of claim 2, LIU further teaches, ‘wherein, to transmit the assistance information, the one or more processors are operable to execute the code to cause the first UE to:’ (Paragraph [0096]: The UE 901 includes… a UE processor module 936; Paragraph [0041]: The victim UE 521 (first UE or first network node) receives and measures the RS):
LIU does not explicitly teach but KIM teaches, ‘transmit an indication of a value associated with the timing adjustment for the second UE,’ (KIM – Paragraph [0018]: The method may further include transmitting, to the second UE, a signal requesting a change in a timing advance (TA) value for the first sidelink; Paragraph [0213]: the first reception UE (V0) or the second reception UE (V3) may transmit, to the corresponding transmission UE, information on the change of the first reception timing point and the signal requesting the change of the TA value for the corresponding sidelink),
‘wherein the value associated with the timing adjustment is based at least in part on the comparison.’ (KIM – Paragraph [0017]: estimating a second reception timing point… based on a synchronization signal and timing advance (TA) information… and determining whether to change a reception timing point… based on a difference value between a first reception timing point… and the second reception timing point; Paragraph [0208]: That is, when a difference value between a first reception timing point for the first sidelink and a second reception timing point… is equal to or greater than a preset threshold, the first reception UE (V0) may change the first reception timing point… transmit… a signal requesting the TA change).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of KIM with LIU because both are in the same/similar field of endeavor. The advantage of incorporating the above limitation(s) of KIM into LIU is that KIM provides computing a preferred timing adjustment at the victim UE and transmitting a request to change the underlying transmission properties (Timing Advance value) of the interfering link to restore boundary alignment by explaining the exact physical consequence of mismatched link boundaries across independent links and defining the precise physical threshold condition (the Cyclic Prefix length) that dictates when an active timing adjustment becomes mandatory to preserve wireless performance (See paragraph [0186], [0189], KIM).
Regarding claims 4 and 23, LIU and KIM teach, The first UE of claim 2, LIU further teaches, ‘wherein, to transmit the assistance information, the one or more processors are operable to execute the code to cause the first UE to:’ (Paragraph [0096]: The UE 901 includes… a UE processor module 936; Paragraph [0041]: The victim UE 521 (first UE or first network node) receives and measures the RS):
LIU does not explicitly teach but KIM teaches, ‘transmit an indication of a timing report,’ (KIM – Paragraph [0213]: the first reception UE (V0) or the second reception UE (V3) may transmit, to the corresponding transmission UE, information on the change of the first reception timing point and the
signal requesting the change of the TA value for the corresponding sidelink),
‘wherein the timing report comprises an indication of a difference between the timing associated with the reception of the downlink message and the timing associated with the reception of the first level of interference’ (KIM – Paragraph [0017]: determining whether to change a reception timing point of a sidelink signal for the first sidelink, based on a difference value between a first
reception timing point related to the first sidelink and the second reception timing point; Paragraph [0191]: That is, if a difference value between the reception (Rx) timing point for a first independent sidelink… and the other reception (Rx) timing point for a second independent sidelink… is equal to or greater than a preset threshold)
‘based at least in part on the comparison.’ (KIM – Paragraph [0208]: That is, when a difference value between a first reception timing point… and a second reception timing point… is equal to or greater than a preset threshold, the first reception UE (V0) may change the first reception timing
point… transmit… a signal requesting the TA change).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of KIM with LIU because both are in the same/similar field of endeavor. The advantage of incorporating the above limitation(s) of KIM into LIU is that KIM provides computing a preferred timing adjustment at the victim UE and transmitting a request to change the underlying transmission properties (Timing Advance value) of the interfering link to restore boundary alignment by explaining the exact physical consequence of mismatched link boundaries across independent links and defining the precise physical threshold condition (the Cyclic Prefix length) that dictates when an active timing adjustment becomes mandatory to preserve wireless performance (See paragraph [0186], [0189], KIM).
Regarding claim 5, LIU and KIM teach, The first UE of claim 2, LIU further teaches, ‘wherein, to transmit the assistance information, the one or more processors are operable to execute the code to cause the first UE to:’ (Paragraph [0096]: The UE 901 includes… a UE processor module 936; Paragraph [0041]: The victim UE 521 (first UE or first network node) receives and measures the RS):
LIU does not explicitly teach but KIM teaches, ‘transmit, to the network entity, the assistance information associated with the timing adjustment for the second UE’ (KIM – Paragraph [0213]: the first
reception UE (V0) or the second reception UE (V3) may transmit… information on the change of the first reception timing point and the signal requesting the change of the TA value for the corresponding
sidelink)
‘based at least in part on a difference between the timing associated with the reception of the downlink message and the timing associated with the reception of the first level of interference’ (KIM – Paragraph [0017]: determining whether to change a reception timing point… based on a difference value between a first reception timing point related to the first sidelink and the second reception timing point; Paragraph [0191]: That is, if a difference value between the reception (Rx) timing point for a first independent sidelink… and the other reception (Rx) timing point for a second independent
Sidelink… is equal to or greater than a preset threshold)
‘exceeding a second threshold,’ (KIM – Paragraph [0019]: The reception timing point of the sidelink signal may be changed when the calculated difference value is greater than or equal to a predetermined threshold),
‘wherein the difference is based at least in part on the comparison.’ (KIM – Paragraph [0208]: That is, when a difference value between a first reception timing point for the first sidelink and a second reception timing point estimated for a signal related to the second sidelink is equal to or greater than a preset threshold, the first reception UE (V0) may change the first reception timing
point… transmit… a signal requesting the TA change).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of KIM with LIU because both are in the same/similar field of endeavor. The advantage of incorporating the above limitation(s) of KIM into LIU is that KIM provides computing a preferred timing adjustment at the victim UE and transmitting a request to change the underlying transmission properties (Timing Advance value) of the interfering link to restore boundary alignment by explaining the exact physical consequence of mismatched link boundaries across independent links and defining the precise physical threshold condition (the Cyclic Prefix length) that dictates when an active timing adjustment becomes mandatory to preserve wireless performance (See paragraph [0186], [0189], KIM).
Regarding claim 6, LIU and KIM teach, The first UE of claim 1, LIU further teaches, ‘wherein the one or more processors are further operable to execute the code to cause the first UE to:’ (Paragraph [0096]: The UE 901 includes… a UE processor module 936; Paragraph [0041]: The victim UE 521 (first UE or first network node) receives and measures the RS):
‘measure the first level of interference,’ (Paragraphs [0041]-[0042]: The victim UE 521 (first UE or first network node) receives and measures the RS [Note: from the aggressor UE]… UE 521 measures
the RS from UE 522),
LIU does not explicitly teach but KIM teaches, ‘wherein transmitting the assistance information is based at least in part on the first level of interference’ (KIM – Paragraph [0213]: the first reception UE (V0) or the second reception UE (V3) may transmit… information on the change of the first reception timing point and the signal requesting the change of the TA value for the corresponding sidelink)
‘exceeding a threshold.’ (KIM – Paragraph [0212]: if a difference between the first reception
timing point for the second sidelink and the estimated second reception timing point is greater than or equal to a preset threshold, and if the reception strength of the received interference signal is equal to or greater than a preset signal strength, the change of the first reception timing point may
be requested or triggered… Here, the reception strength may refer to a value of a Received Signal Strength Indicator (RSSI) or a Reference Signal Received Power (RSRP) of the interference signal).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of KIM with LIU because both are in the same/similar field of endeavor. The advantage of incorporating the above limitation(s) of KIM into LIU is that KIM provides computing a preferred timing adjustment at the victim UE and transmitting a request to change the underlying transmission properties (Timing Advance value) of the interfering link to restore boundary alignment by explaining the exact physical consequence of mismatched link boundaries across independent links and defining the precise physical threshold condition (the Cyclic Prefix length) that dictates when an active timing adjustment becomes mandatory to preserve wireless performance (See paragraph [0186], [0189], KIM).
Regarding claim 7, LIU and KIM teach, The first UE of claim 6, LIU further teaches, ‘wherein the one or more processors are further operable to execute the code to cause the first UE to:’ (Paragraph [0096]: The UE 901 includes… a UE processor module 936; Paragraph [0041]: The victim UE 521 (first UE or first network node) receives and measures the RS):
‘receive, from the network entity, control signaling’ (Paragraph [0044]: The victim UE 521 can receive such parameters configured by BS 501 via RRC signaling from BS 501; Paragraph [0034]: T0 is parameter that is configured by the BS 201 through Radio Resource Control (RRC) signaling e.g., n-TimingAdvanceOffset)
LIU does not explicitly teach but KIM teaches, ‘comprising an indication of the threshold.’ (KIM – Paragraph [0211]: Alternatively, the preset threshold may be preset to a value determined by the BS; Paragraph [0176]: Alternatively, the synchronization source and the preference may be configured for the UE by a control message provided by the BS).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of KIM with LIU because both are in the same/similar field of endeavor. The advantage of incorporating the above limitation(s) of KIM into LIU is that KIM provides computing a preferred timing adjustment at the victim UE and transmitting a request to change the underlying transmission properties (Timing Advance value) of the interfering link to restore boundary alignment by explaining the exact physical consequence of mismatched link boundaries across independent links and defining the precise physical threshold condition (the Cyclic Prefix length) that dictates when an active timing adjustment becomes mandatory to preserve wireless performance (See paragraph [0186], [0189], KIM).
Regarding claim 8, LIU and KIM teach, The first UE of claim 6, LIU does not explicitly teach but KIM teaches, ‘wherein the threshold is based at least in part on one or more parameters at the first UE.’ (KIM – Paragraph [0020]: The predetermined threshold may be determined based on a cyclic prefix (CP) length of the first sidelink signal; Paragraph [0211]: Alternatively, the preset threshold may be preset to a value determined by the BS. Alternatively, the preset threshold may be preset in consideration of OFDM orthogonality characteristics between a signal transmitted from the desired sidelink and a signal transmitted from the undesired sidelink).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of KIM with LIU because both are in the same/similar field of endeavor. The advantage of incorporating the above limitation(s) of KIM into LIU is that KIM provides computing a preferred timing adjustment at the victim UE and transmitting a request to change the underlying transmission properties (Timing Advance value) of the interfering link to restore boundary alignment by explaining the exact physical consequence of mismatched link boundaries across independent links and defining the precise physical threshold condition (the Cyclic Prefix length) that dictates when an active timing adjustment becomes mandatory to preserve wireless performance (See paragraph [0186], [0189], KIM).
Regarding claims 9 and 24, LIU and KIM teach, The first UE of claim 1, LIU further teaches, ‘wherein, to transmit the assistance information, the one or more processors are operable to execute the code to cause the first UE to:’ (Paragraph [0096]: The UE 901 includes… a UE processor module 936; Paragraph [0041]: The victim UE 521 (first UE or first network node) receives and measures the RS):
LIU does not explicitly teach but KIM teaches, ‘transmit an indication of one or more parameters associated with the downlink message, the uplink message, or both,’ (KIM – Paragraph [0213]: the first
reception UE (V0) or the second reception UE (V3) may transmit, to the corresponding transmission UE, information on the change of the first reception timing point and the signal requesting the change of the TA value for the corresponding sidelink),
‘wherein the assistance information comprises the one or more parameters.’ (KIM – Paragraph [0208]: the first reception UE (V0) may change the first reception timing point based on the second reception timing point. In this case, the first reception UE (V0) may transmit… a signal including either information about the changed first reception timing point or a signal requesting the TA change).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of KIM with LIU because both are in the same/similar field of endeavor. The advantage of incorporating the above limitation(s) of KIM into LIU is that KIM provides computing a preferred timing adjustment at the victim UE and transmitting a request to change the underlying transmission properties (Timing Advance value) of the interfering link to restore boundary alignment by explaining the exact physical consequence of mismatched link boundaries across independent links and defining the precise physical threshold condition (the Cyclic Prefix length) that dictates when an active timing adjustment becomes mandatory to preserve wireless performance (See paragraph [0186], [0189], KIM).
Regarding claims 10 and 25, LIU and KIM teach, The first UE of claim 9, LIU further teaches, ‘wherein the one or more parameters are associated with one or more guard bands,’ (Paragraph [0034]: T0 is parameter that is configured by the BS 201 through Radio Resource Control (RRC) signaling e.g., n-TimingAdvanceOffset… Such RRC signaling can be used for state transition of the BS 201 between reception and transmission; Paragraph [0043]: In some arrangements, the N TA offset is used for state transition of the BS between reception and transmission [Note: In OFDM/cellular, timing advance offsets for state transitions establish time-domain guard periods/guard bands to absorb propagation shifts]),
‘one or more guard symbols, one or more power control parameters, or any combination thereof.’
Regarding claim 11, LIU and KIM teach, The first UE of claim 1, LIU further teaches, ‘wherein the one or more processors are further operable to execute the code to cause the first UE to:’ (Paragraph [0096]: The UE 901 includes… a UE processor module 936; Paragraph [0041]: The victim UE 521 (first UE or first network node) receives and measures the RS):
‘receive, from the network entity, a second downlink message at the first UE;’ (Paragraph [0045]: Then, victim UE 521 can determine the reception timing for the measurement RS as a time period T0+ T1 -T3+T2 before its normal reception or detection timing for normal downlink data (e.g., PDSCH, PDCCH, etc.).
‘and receive a second level of interference at the first UE based at least in part on the one or more uplink messages transmitted from the second UE,’ (Paragraphs [0041]-[0042]: The interference or aggressor UE 522 (second UE or second network node) transmits RS for inter-UE interference measurement according to its uplink transmission timing of normal uplink data, e.g., carried on Physical Uplink Shared Channel (PUSCH), Physical Uplink Control Channel (PUCCH), etc. The victim UE 521 (first UE or first network node) receives and measures the RS. The time-domain resources (shown in dotted box) may be configured with different frame structure attributes (i.e., uplink in cell 512 while downlink in cell 511). The UE 522 and BS 502 are located in cell 512, while UE 521 and BS 501 are located in cell 511. Then, within these resources, the uplink transmission of UE 522 interferes the downlink reception at UE 521),
LIU does not explicitly teach but KIM teaches, ‘wherein the second level of interference is based at least in part on the assistance information.’ (KIM – Paragraph [0018]: The method may further include transmitting, to the second UE, a signal requesting a change in a timing advance (TA) value for the first sidelink based on a change in the reception timing of the sidelink signal; Paragraph [0221]: Referring to FIG. 18, the reception timing point for the first sidelink at the first reception UE (V0) has been changed. Specifically, the reception timing point… of the interference signal through the second sidelink… That is, by changing the reception timing point for the first sidelink based on the reception timing point estimated for the interference signal of the first reception UE, ISI and ICI that may occur in the first reception UE can be prevented. Furthermore, ISI and ICI that may occur in the second reception UE can also be prevented or minimized).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of KIM with LIU because both are in the same/similar field of endeavor. The advantage of incorporating the above limitation(s) of KIM into LIU is that KIM provides computing a preferred timing adjustment at the victim UE and transmitting a request to change the underlying transmission properties (Timing Advance value) of the interfering link to restore boundary alignment by explaining the exact physical consequence of mismatched link boundaries across independent links and defining the precise physical threshold condition (the Cyclic Prefix length) that dictates when an active timing adjustment becomes mandatory to preserve wireless performance (See paragraph [0186], [0189], KIM).
Regarding claim 12, LIU and KIM teach, The first UE of claim 11, LIU does not explicitly teach but KIM teaches, ‘wherein the second level of interference is less than a threshold.’ (KIM – Paragraph [0221]: That is, by changing the reception timing point for the first sidelink based on the reception timing point estimated for the interference signal of the first reception UE, ISI and ICI that may occur in the first reception UE can be prevented. Furthermore, ISI and ICI that may occur in the second reception UE can also be prevented or minimized; Paragraph [0208]: when a difference value between a first reception timing point… and a second reception timing point estimated for a signal related to the second sidelink is equal to or greater than a preset threshold, the first reception UE (V0) may change the first reception timing point… transmit… a signal requesting the TA change [Note: Realignment based on the requested value explicitly forces the secondary collision level below the operational safety threshold boundary, i.e., minimizing/preventing inter-symbol distortion]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of KIM with LIU because both are in the same/similar field of endeavor. The advantage of incorporating the above limitation(s) of KIM into LIU is that KIM provides computing a preferred timing adjustment at the victim UE and transmitting a request to change the underlying transmission properties (Timing Advance value) of the interfering link to restore boundary alignment by explaining the exact physical consequence of mismatched link boundaries across independent links and defining the precise physical threshold condition (the Cyclic Prefix length) that dictates when an active timing adjustment becomes mandatory to preserve wireless performance (See paragraph [0186], [0189], KIM).
Regarding claims 13 and 21, LIU and KIM teach, The first UE of claim 11, wherein the downlink message is associated with a first transmission timing, and wherein, to receive the second downlink message, the one or more processors are operable to execute the code to cause the first UE to:’ (Paragraphs [0041]-[0042]: The victim UE 521 (first UE or first network node) receives and measures the RS… where the downlink reception timing for the normal downlink data corresponds to the uplink transmission timing; Paragraph [0034]: denotes the time-domain position 301 (e.g., a frame border) of the BS 201 for transmitting data, which is the downlink transmission timing of data in frame i):
LIU does not explicitly teach but KIM teaches, ‘receive the second downlink message associated with a second transmission timing,’ (KIM – Paragraph [0015]: An object of the present disclosure is to provide a method for adjusting transmission/reception (Tx/Rx) timing points of sidelink to minimize or prevent the influence of inter-symbol interference; Paragraph [0225]: the second sidelink may change the reception timing point and the transmission timing point… ICI can be avoided by changing the transmission and reception (Tx/Rx) timing points),
‘wherein the second transmission timing is based at least in part on the assistance information.’ (KIM – Paragraph [0018]: The method may further include transmitting, to the second UE, a signal requesting a change in a timing advance (TA) value for the first sidelink based on a change
in the reception timing of the sidelink signal; Paragraph [0213]: the first reception UE (V0) or the second reception UE (V3) may transmit… the signal requesting the change of the TA value for the corresponding sidelink).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of KIM with LIU because both are in the same/similar field of endeavor. The advantage of incorporating the above limitation(s) of KIM into LIU is that KIM provides computing a preferred timing adjustment at the victim UE and transmitting a request to change the underlying transmission properties (Timing Advance value) of the interfering link to restore boundary alignment by explaining the exact physical consequence of mismatched link boundaries across independent links and defining the precise physical threshold condition (the Cyclic Prefix length) that dictates when an active timing adjustment becomes mandatory to preserve wireless performance (See paragraph [0186], [0189], KIM).
Regarding claim 14, LIU and KIM teach, The first UE of claim 13, LIU further teaches, ‘wherein the one or more processors are further operable to execute the code to cause the first UE to:’ (Paragraph [0096]: The UE 901 includes… a UE processor module 936; Paragraph [0041]: The victim UE 521 (first UE or first network node) receives and measures the RS):
‘receive, from the network entity, a control message’ (Paragraph [0064]: For instance, at least one of the BS 501 or the BS 502 can transmit to one or more of the UEs 521 and 522 an indication of the mode via RRC signaling, Media Access Control (MAC) layer signaling ( e.g., MAC CE), Downlink Control Information (DCI), or some predefined sequence)
‘indicating the second transmission timing,’ (Paragraph [0064]: an indication indicating whether the first network node is to determine the reception timing of the RS, wherein the reception timing is different from downlink reception or detection timing of normal downlink data; or the second network node is to determine the transmission timing of the RS, wherein the transmission timing is different from uplink transmission timing of normal uplink data),
‘wherein receiving the second downlink message is based at least in part on the control message.’ (Paragraph [0044]: The victim UE 521 can receive such parameters configured by BS 501 via RRC signaling from BS 501… In some arrangements, determining the reception timing of the RS includes receiving, by the first network node, at least one parameter from a base station communicating with the first network node… and determining, by the first network node, the reception timing of the RS according to the at least one of parameter).
Regarding claim 15, LIU and KIM teach, The first UE of claim 11, LIU further teaches, ‘wherein a difference between timing associated with the reception of the second downlink message’ (Paragraph [0045]: Then, victim UE 521 can determine the reception timing for the measurement RS as a time period T0+ T1 -T3+T2 before its normal reception or detection timing for normal downlink data (e.g., PDSCH, PDCCH, etc.))
‘and timing associated with the reception of the second level of interference’ (Paragraph [0041]: The interference or aggressor UE 522 (second UE or second network node) transmits RS for inter-UE interference measurement according to its uplink transmission timing of normal uplink data, e.g., carried on Physical Uplink Shared Channel (PUSCH), Physical Uplink Control Channel (PUCCH), etc. The victim UE 521 (first UE or first network node) receives and measures the RS)
LIU does not explicitly teach but KIM teaches, ‘is below a second threshold. (KIM - Paragraph [0221]: Specifically, the reception timing point… of the first reception UE (V0) for the first sidelink is aligned with the reception timing point… In this case, the reception timing point of the signal (Path 10) received by the first reception UE (V0) in the first sidelink and the interference signal (Path 20) received by the first reception UE V0 in the second sidelink may have a difference value less than the CP length… That is, by changing the reception timing point for the first sidelink based on the reception timing point estimated for the interference signal of the first reception UE, ISI and ICI that may occur in the first reception UE can be prevented. Furthermore, ISI and ICI that may occur in the second reception UE can also be prevented or minimized).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of KIM with LIU because both are in the same/similar field of endeavor. The advantage of incorporating the above limitation(s) of KIM into LIU is that KIM provides computing a preferred timing adjustment at the victim UE and transmitting a request to change the underlying transmission properties (Timing Advance value) of the interfering link to restore boundary alignment by explaining the exact physical consequence of mismatched link boundaries across independent links and defining the precise physical threshold condition (the Cyclic Prefix length) that dictates when an active timing adjustment becomes mandatory to preserve wireless performance (See paragraph [0186], [0189], KIM).
Regarding claim 16, LIU and KIM teach, The first UE of claim 1, LIU further teaches, ‘wherein the one or more processors are further operable to execute the code to cause the first UE to:’ (Paragraph [0096]: The UE 901 includes… a UE processor module 936; Paragraph [0041]: The victim UE 521 (first UE or first network node) receives and measures the RS):
‘receive, from the network entity, a feedback message’ (Paragraph [0064]: For instance, at least one of the BS 501 or the BS 502 can transmit to one or more of the UEs 521 and 522 an indication of the mode via RRC signaling, Media Access Control (MAC) layer signaling ( e.g., MAC CE), Downlink Control Information (DCI), or some predefined sequence)
‘indicating whether the network entity applied the timing adjustment to the second UE’ (Paragraph [0064]: an indication indicating whether the first network node is to determine the reception timing of the RS… or the second network node is to determine the transmission timing of the RS, wherein the transmission timing is different from uplink transmission timing of normal uplink data)
LIU does not explicitly teach but KIM teaches, ‘based at least in part on receiving the assistance information.’ (KIM – Paragraph [0018]: The method may further include transmitting, to the second UE, a signal requesting a change in a timing advance (TA) value for the first sidelink based on a change
in the reception timing of the sidelink signal; Paragraph [0213]: the first reception UE (V0) or the second reception UE (V3) may transmit… information on the change of the first reception timing point and the signal requesting the change of the TA value for the corresponding sidelink).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of KIM with LIU because both are in the same/similar field of endeavor. The advantage of incorporating the above limitation(s) of KIM into LIU is that KIM provides computing a preferred timing adjustment at the victim UE and transmitting a request to change the underlying transmission properties (Timing Advance value) of the interfering link to restore boundary alignment by explaining the exact physical consequence of mismatched link boundaries across independent links and defining the precise physical threshold condition (the Cyclic Prefix length) that dictates when an active timing adjustment becomes mandatory to preserve wireless performance (See paragraph [0186], [0189], KIM).
Regarding claim 17, the claim includes features identical to the subject matter mentioned in the rejection to claim 1. The claim is mere reformulation of claim 1 in order to define the corresponding from network perspective, and the rejection to claim 1 is applied hereto.
LIU teaches, ‘A network entity for wireless communications, comprising: one or more memories storing processor-executable code; and one or more processors coupled with the one or more memories and operable to execute the code to cause the network entity to:’ (Paragraph [0094]: FIG. 9A illustrates a block diagram of an example base station 902; Paragraph [0096]: The base station 902 includes a transceiver module 910, an antenna 912, a processor module 914, a memory module 916… operatively coupled… via a data communication bus 920):
‘transmit, to a first user equipment (UE), a downlink message’ (Paragraph [0042]: reception timing for the normal downlink data; Paragraph [0045]: normal reception or detection timing for
normal downlink data (e.g., PDSCH, PDCCH, etc.) [Note: Scheduled downlink messages are transmitted by the base station node to the first UE])
Regarding claim 18, LIU and KIM teach, The network entity of claim 17, LIU further teaches, wherein the one or more processors are further operable to execute the code to cause the network entity to:’ (Paragraph [0094]: FIG. 9A illustrates a block diagram of an example base station 902; Paragraph [0096]: The base station 902 includes a transceiver module 910, an antenna 912, a processor module 914, a memory module 916… operatively coupled… via a data communication bus 920):
‘receive the uplink message from the second UE according to a first timing advance;’ (Paragraph [0041]: The interference or aggressor UE 522 (second UE or second network node) transmits RS for inter-UE interference measurement according to its uplink transmission timing of normal uplink data, e.g., carried on Physical Uplink Shared Channel (PUSCH), Physical Uplink Control Channel (PUCCH), etc.; Paragraph [0034]: The transmission timing of frame i by UE 221 (which is also referred to as uplink transmission timing) is 2*T1 + T0 before the detection timing of the UE 221… T0 is parameter that is configured by the BS 201 through Radio Resource Control (RRC) signaling e.g., n-TimingAdvanceOffset);
‘and determine whether to apply the timing adjustment to the second UE,’ (Paragraph [0123]: receiving, by the first network node from a base station, an indication indicating whether the first network node is to determine the reception timing of the RS… or the second network node is to determine the transmission timing of the RS, wherein the transmission timing is different from uplink
transmission timing of normal uplink data),
LIU does not explicitly teach but KIM teaches, ‘wherein the timing adjustment is based at least in part on the assistance information.’ (KIM – Paragraph [0018]: The method may further include transmitting, to the second UE, a signal requesting a change in a timing advance (TA) value for the first sidelink based on a change in the reception timing of the sidelink signal; Paragraph [0213]: the first
reception UE (V0) or the second reception UE (V3) may transmit… the signal requesting the change of the TA value for the corresponding sidelink).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of KIM with LIU because both are in the same/similar field of endeavor. The advantage of incorporating the above limitation(s) of KIM into LIU is that KIM provides computing a preferred timing adjustment at the victim UE and transmitting a request to change the underlying transmission properties (Timing Advance value) of the interfering link to restore boundary alignment by explaining the exact physical consequence of mismatched link boundaries across independent links and defining the precise physical threshold condition (the Cyclic Prefix length) that dictates when an active timing adjustment becomes mandatory to preserve wireless performance (See paragraph [0186], [0189], KIM).
Regarding claim 19, LIU and KIM teach, The network entity of claim 18, LIU further teaches, ‘wherein the one or more processors are further operable to execute the code to cause the network entity to:’ (Paragraph [0094]: FIG. 9A illustrates a block diagram of an example base station 902; Paragraph [0096]: The base station 902 includes a transceiver module 910, an antenna 912, a processor module 914, a memory module 916… operatively coupled… via a data communication bus 920):
LIU does not explicitly teach but KIM teaches, ‘apply the timing adjustment to the second UE
based at least in part on a value associated with the timing adjustment,’ (KIM – Paragraph [0018]: The method may further include transmitting, to the second UE, a signal requesting a change in a timing
advance (TA) value for the first sidelink based on a change in the reception timing of the sidelink signal; Paragraph [0213]: the first reception UE (V0) or the second reception UE (V3) may transmit… the signal requesting the change of the TA value for the corresponding sidelink),
‘wherein determining to apply the timing adjustment is based at least in part on the value being less than or equal to a second threshold.’ (KIM – Paragraph [0019]: The reception timing point of the sidelink signal may be changed when the calculated difference value is greater than or equal to a predetermined threshold; Paragraph [0208]: That is, when a difference value between a first reception timing point for the first sidelink and a second reception timing point estimated for a signal related to the second sidelink is equal to or greater than a preset threshold, the first reception UE (V0) may… transmit… a signal requesting the TA change [Note: evaluating the time offset magnitude against a threshold bound to determine whether to perform a configuration realignment change]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of KIM with LIU because both are in the same/similar field of endeavor. The advantage of incorporating the above limitation(s) of KIM into LIU is that KIM provides computing a preferred timing adjustment at the victim UE and transmitting a request to change the underlying transmission properties (Timing Advance value) of the interfering link to restore boundary alignment by explaining the exact physical consequence of mismatched link boundaries across independent links and defining the precise physical threshold condition (the Cyclic Prefix length) that dictates when an active timing adjustment becomes mandatory to preserve wireless performance (See paragraph [0186], [0189], KIM).
Regarding claim 20, LIU and KIM teach, The network entity of claim 19, LIU further teaches, ‘wherein, to apply the timing adjustment, the one or more processors are further operable to execute the code to cause the network entity to:’ (Paragraph [0094]: FIG. 9A illustrates a block diagram of an example base station 902… Referring to FIGS. l-9B… the base station 902 is an example implementation of the base station described herein):
‘transmit, to the second UE, a control message indicating a second timing advance,’ (Paragraph [0034]: T0 is parameter that is configured by the BS 201 through Radio Resource Control (RRC) signaling e.g., n-TimingAdvanceOffset… Such RRC signaling can be used for state transition of the BS 201 between reception and transmission; Paragraph [0123]: or the second network node is to determine the transmission timing of the RS, wherein the transmission timing is different from uplink
transmission timing of normal uplink data [Note: A network control message – whether dynamic DCI, a MC CE, or an RRC reconfiguration block – sent to adjust a distinct terminal’s transmission parameters represents a control message indicating a timing advance modification]),
‘and receive a second uplink message from the second UE according to the second timing advance.’ (FIG. 10 and Paragraph [0105]: At 1030, the second network node transmits the RS according to the determined transmission timing. At 1040, the first network node receives the RS according to the determined reception timing [Note: receiving subsequent uplink messages from the adjusted second UE execution loop]).
LIU does not explicitly teach but KIM teaches, ‘wherein the second timing advance is based at least in part on the value associated with the timing adjustment;’ (KIM – Paragraph [0018]: The method may further include transmitting, to the second UE, a signal requesting a change in a timing advance (TA) value for the first sidelink based on a change in the reception timing of the sidelink signal; Paragraph [0213]: the first reception UE (V0) or the second reception UE (V3) may transmit, to the corresponding transmission UE, information on the change of the first reception timing point and the
signal requesting the change of the TA value for the corresponding sidelink);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of KIM with LIU because both are in the same/similar field of endeavor. The advantage of incorporating the above limitation(s) of KIM into LIU is that KIM provides computing a preferred timing adjustment at the victim UE and transmitting a request to change the underlying transmission properties (Timing Advance value) of the interfering link to restore boundary alignment by explaining the exact physical consequence of mismatched link boundaries across independent links and defining the precise physical threshold condition (the Cyclic Prefix length) that dictates when an active timing adjustment becomes mandatory to preserve wireless performance (See paragraph [0186], [0189], KIM).
Regarding claim 27, LIU and KIM teach, The network entity of claim 17, LIU further teaches, ‘wherein the first level of interference’ (Paragraph [0041]: The interference or aggressor UE 522 (second UE or second network node) transmits RS for inter-UE interference measurement… The victim UE 521 (first UE or first network node) receives and measures the RS)
LIU does not explicitly teach but KIM teaches, ‘exceeds a threshold.’ (KIM – Paragraph [0208]: That is, when a difference value between a first reception timing point… and a second reception timing point estimated for a signal related to the second sidelink is equal to or greater than a preset threshold, the first reception UE (V0) may… transmit… a signal requesting the TA change [Note: triggering criteria for the terminal to generate and compile its timing advance alignment update request is conditioned upon the relative mismatch boundary metrics equaling or exceeding a preset network threshold]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of KIM with LIU because both are in the same/similar field of endeavor. The advantage of incorporating the above limitation(s) of KIM into LIU is that KIM provides computing a preferred timing adjustment at the victim UE and transmitting a request to change the underlying transmission properties (Timing Advance value) of the interfering link to restore boundary alignment by explaining the exact physical consequence of mismatched link boundaries across independent links and defining the precise physical threshold condition (the Cyclic Prefix length) that dictates when an active timing adjustment becomes mandatory to preserve wireless performance (See paragraph [0186], [0189], KIM).
Regarding claim 28, LIU and Kim teach, The network entity of claim 17, LIU further teaches, ‘wherein the one or more processors are further operable to execute the code to cause the network entity to:’ (Paragraph [0094]: FIG. 9A illustrates a block diagram of an example base station 902; Paragraph [0096]: The base station 902 includes a transceiver module 910, an antenna 912, a processor module 914, a memory module 916):
‘transmit, to the first UE, a control message’ (Paragraph [0064]: For instance, at least one of the BS 501 or the BS 502 can transmit to one or more of the UEs 521 and 522 an indication of the mode via RRC signaling, Media Access Control (MAC) layer signaling ( e.g., MAC CE), Downlink Control Information (DCI), or some predefined sequence)
LIU does not explicitly teach but KIM teaches, ‘comprising an indication of a threshold associated with interference at the first UE.’ (KIM – Paragraph [0211]: Alternatively, the preset threshold may be preset to a value determined by the BS; Paragraph [0208]: That is, when a difference value between a first reception timing point… and a second reception timing point estimated for a signal related to the second sidelink is equal to or greater than a preset threshold, the first reception UE (V0) may change the first reception timing point… transmit… a signal requesting the TA change [Note: underlying operational safety threshold used by the terminal to evaluate cross-link signal alignment or timing mismatch bounds is directly determined, preset, and signaled down by the Base Station]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of KIM with LIU because both are in the same/similar field of endeavor. The advantage of incorporating the above limitation(s) of KIM into LIU is that KIM provides computing a preferred timing adjustment at the victim UE and transmitting a request to change the underlying transmission properties (Timing Advance value) of the interfering link to restore boundary alignment by explaining the exact physical consequence of mismatched link boundaries across independent links and defining the precise physical threshold condition (the Cyclic Prefix length) that dictates when an active timing adjustment becomes mandatory to preserve wireless performance (See paragraph [0186], [0189], KIM).
Regarding claim 29, the claim includes features identical to the subject matter mentioned in the rejection to claim 1. The claim is mere reformulation of claim 1 in order to define the corresponding method, and the rejection to claim 1 is applied hereto.
LIU teaches, ‘A method for wireless communications at a first user equipment (UE), comprising:’ (Paragraph [0041]: The victim UE 521 (first UE or first network node) receives and measures the RS):
Regarding claim 30, the claim includes features identical to the subject matter mentioned in the rejection to claim 17. The claim is mere reformulation of claim 17 in order to define the corresponding method, and the rejection to claim 17 is applied hereto.
LIU teaches, ‘A method for wireless communications at a network entity, comprising:’ (Paragraph [0094]: FIG. 9A illustrates a block diagram of an example base station 902; Paragraph [0096]: The base station 902 includes a transceiver module 910, an antenna 912, a processor module 914, a memory module 916)
Claim 26 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LIU in view of KIM in view of Park et al. (US 2022/0248383 A1), hereinafter “PARK”.
Regarding claim 26, LIU and KIM teach, The network entity of claim 17, LIU further teaches, ‘wherein the one or more processors are further operable to execute the code to cause the network entity to:’ (Paragraph [0094]: FIG. 9A illustrates a block diagram of an example base station 902; Paragraph [0096]: The base station 902 includes a transceiver module 910, an antenna 912, a processor module 914, a memory module 916… operatively coupled… via a data communication bus 920):
‘wherein the second network entity is associated with the uplink message.’ (Paragraph [0042]: The UE 522 and BS 502 are located in cell 512, while UE 521 and BS 501 are located in cell 511. Then, within these resources, the uplink transmission of UE 522 interferes the downlink reception at UE 521 [Note: The neighbor network entity “BS 502” directly serves and schedules the second terminal “UE 522” which generates the conflicting uplink message]).
LIU and KIM do not explicitly teach but PARK teaches, ‘transmit, to a second network entity, the assistance information associated with the timing adjustment for the second UE,’ (PARK - Paragraph [0234]: One or more first base stations (e.g., gNBs 120A and 120B) and/or one or more second base stations (e.g., ng-eNBs 120C and 120D) may be interconnected with each other via Xn interface; Paragraph [0319]: A master base station and a secondary base station may exchange information about a wireless device configuration such as by using RRC containers (e.g., internode messages) carried via Xn messages [Note: utilizing inter-entity control-plane messaging via an Xn interface to forward configuration parameters provides the necessary backhaul transport loop]),
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of PARK with LIU and KIM because both are in the same/similar field of endeavor. The advantage of incorporating the above limitation(s) of PARK into LIU and KIM is that PARK provides that separate network entities (e.g., base stations, gNBs, and ng-eNBs) do not operate as isolated islands; they are explicitly interconnected with each other via an Xn interface, where this dedicated inter-node backhaul path is used to exchange information about a wireless device configuration by using RRC containers (inter-node messages) carried via Xn messages. By doing so, the first base station is provided with a predictable backhaul transport loop to forward terminal-derived configuration parameters directly across cell boundaries. Because this neighbor network entity is explicitly associated with the uplink message, it decodes the inter-node RRC container and issues a targeted Timing Advance command to pull its own scheduled client into clean phase alignment (See paragraph [0234], [0319], PARK).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HAESHIL J CHOI whose telephone number is (703)756-5409. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday ET.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jae Y Lee can be reached on 571-270-3936. 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.
/HAESHIL JESSICA CHOI/Examiner, Art Unit 2479
/WEI ZHAO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2479
Prosecution Insights