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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on August 7, 2023, and July 16, 2024 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites a variable “n” without specifying the range, limits or the manner in which “n” is determined, meaning “n” could be positive, zero or a negative number, thus the metes and bounds of the claimed invention cannot be ascertained. This lack of clarity renders the claim indefinite.
Claim 1 recites a variable “TSLproc,0” without specifying any range or limits of values, meaning “TSLproc,0” could be positive, zero or a negative number, thus the metes and bounds of the claimed invention cannot be ascertained. This lack of clarity renders the claim indefinite.
Claim 1 recites a variable “T3” without specifying any range or limits of values, meaning “T3” could be positive, zero or a negative number, thus the metes and bounds of the claimed invention cannot be ascertained. This lack of clarity renders the claim indefinite.
Claim 1 recites a variable “m” without specifying the range, limits or the manner in which “m” is determined, meaning “m” could be positive, zero or a negative number, thus the metes and bounds of the claimed invention cannot be ascertained. This lack of clarity renders the claim indefinite.
Claim 9 recites a variable “n” without specifying the range, limits or the manner in which “n” is determined, meaning “n” could be positive, zero or a negative number, thus the metes and bounds of the claimed invention cannot be ascertained. This lack of clarity renders the claim indefinite.
Claim 10 recites a variable “m” without specifying the range, limits or the manner in which “m” is determined, meaning “m” could be positive, zero or a negative number, thus the metes and bounds of the claimed invention cannot be ascertained. This lack of clarity renders the claim indefinite.
Claim 11 recites a variable “n” without specifying the range, limits or the manner in which “n” is determined, meaning “n” could be positive, zero or a negative number, thus the metes and bounds of the claimed invention cannot be ascertained. This lack of clarity renders the claim indefinite.
Claim 11 recites a variable “TSLproc,0” without specifying any range or limits of values, meaning “TSLproc,0” could be positive, zero or a negative number, thus the metes and bounds of the claimed invention cannot be ascertained. This lack of clarity renders the claim indefinite.
Claim 12 recites a variable “T0” without specifying any range or limits of values, meaning “T0” could be positive, zero or a negative number, thus the metes and bounds of the claimed invention cannot be ascertained. This lack of clarity renders the claim indefinite.
Claim 18 recites a variable “n” without specifying the range, limits or the manner in which “n” is determined, meaning “n” could be positive, zero or a negative number, thus the metes and bounds of the claimed invention cannot be ascertained. This lack of clarity renders the claim indefinite.
Claim 18 recites a variable “TSLproc,0” without specifying any range or limits of values, meaning “TSLproc,0” could be positive, zero or a negative number, thus the metes and bounds of the claimed invention cannot be ascertained. This lack of clarity renders the claim indefinite.
Claim 18 recites a variable “T3” without specifying any range or limits of values, meaning “T3” could be positive, zero or a negative number, thus the metes and bounds of the claimed invention cannot be ascertained. This lack of clarity renders the claim indefinite.
Claim 18 recites a variable “m” without specifying the range, limits or the manner in which “m” is determined, meaning “m” could be positive, zero or a negative number, thus the metes and bounds of the claimed invention cannot be ascertained. This lack of clarity renders the claim indefinite.
Claim 19 recites a variable “n” without specifying the range, limits or the manner in which “n” is determined, meaning “n” could be positive, zero or a negative number, thus the metes and bounds of the claimed invention cannot be ascertained. This lack of clarity renders the claim indefinite.
Claim 19 recites a variable “TSLproc,0” without specifying any range or limits of values, meaning “TSLproc,0” could be positive, zero or a negative number, thus the metes and bounds of the claimed invention cannot be ascertained. This lack of clarity renders the claim indefinite.
Claim 19 recites a variable “T3” without specifying any range or limits of values, meaning “T3” could be positive, zero or a negative number, thus the metes and bounds of the claimed invention cannot be ascertained. This lack of clarity renders the claim indefinite.
Claim 19 recites a variable “m” without specifying the range, limits or the manner in which “m” is determined, meaning “m” could be positive, zero or a negative number, thus the metes and bounds of the claimed invention cannot be ascertained. This lack of clarity renders the claim indefinite.
Claim 20 recites a variable “n” without specifying the range, limits or the manner in which “n” is determined, meaning “n” could be positive, zero or a negative number, thus the metes and bounds of the claimed invention cannot be ascertained. This lack of clarity renders the claim indefinite.
Claim 20 recites a variable “TSLproc,0” without specifying any range or limits of values, meaning “TSLproc,0” could be positive, zero or a negative number, thus the metes and bounds of the claimed invention cannot be ascertained. This lack of clarity renders the claim indefinite.
Claim 20 recites a variable “T3” without specifying any range or limits of values, meaning “T3” could be positive, zero or a negative number, thus the metes and bounds of the claimed invention cannot be ascertained. This lack of clarity renders the claim indefinite.
Claim 20 recites a variable “m” without specifying the range, limits or the manner in which “m” is determined, meaning “m” could be positive, zero or a negative number, thus the metes and bounds of the claimed invention cannot be ascertained. This lack of clarity renders the claim indefinite.
The dependent claims 2-8 and 13-17 inherit the same deficiencies and therefore are rejected for the same reasons as indicated above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claims 1, 3-5, 8-13, 15-16 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Farag (US 20220312479 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Farag teaches a resource monitoring method in sidelink communication by a user equipment (UE), comprising:
sensing slots of a sidelink resource pool within a monitoring window ([0153] FIG. 9 illustrates yet another example of contiguous partial sensing operation 900. [0099] partial sensing can be contiguous partial sensing (CPS), wherein slots are sensed contiguously within a short time window before resource selection/reselection for an initial SL transmission or for a re-evaluation check or a preemption check.), wherein the monitoring window comprises at least a time interval (Fig. 9 2nd sensing window), and the time interval starts from a slot (n - 31), a slot (m - 31), or a slot (n - TSLproc,0 - 31) (Fig. 9; slot A2 [0157] slot A2 is determined based on slot m. In one example, the farthest aperiodic reservation that can be indicated in an SCI is after W logical slots from a slot of the SCI, T.sub.Am corresponds to the physical duration of W logical slots before slot m. Alternatively, T.sub.Am is in logical slots, and is equal to W. In one example, W is 31 logical slots. Therefore, the time interval starts at slot m-31.) and ends in slot (n - TSLproc,0 ) (In Fig. 9, this would be C - TSLproc,0 or slot B2 [0171] slot B2 is determined based on slot C, e.g., slot B2 is before slot C by time T.sub.BC, i.e., B2=C−T.sub.BC, wherein, T.sub.BC=T.sub.proc,0.sup.SL. Therefore, the time interval ends at slot C - TSLproc,0), where the UE is triggered to determine a subset of resources in a slot (n) as a part of a re-evaluation and pre-emption checking procedure (Fig. 6; [0116] As illustrated in FIG. 6, in step 601, a UE is (pre-)configured with a resource pool, and with one or more sensing modes (e.g., full sensing, partial sensing and/or random resource selection), as well as configuration parameters related to each sensing mode. [0122] In step 604, a UE determines the candidate resources as a result of partial sensing (or no sensing) in step 603 and performs SL resource selection within the candidate resources. [0154] a resource re-evaluation check can occur in slot C (slot (n))…and one or more second contiguous partial sensing windows occur for re-evaluation and/or pre-emption. ), and m is a smallest candidate resource slot index after slot (n + T3) ([0154] FIG. 9, for a first SL transmission occurring in slot m, as a result of a resource selection/re-selection in slot n, a resource re-evaluation check can occur in slot C. [0177] slot C is before slot m by time T.sub.Cm, i.e., C=m−T.sub.Cm, wherein, T.sub.Cm=T.sub.proc,1.sup.SL Wherein, T.sub.proc,1.sup.SL is latency between the slot where re-evaluation check occurs (i.e. C) and slot m. (which is the same as saying m is after slot C + T.sub.Cm or C + T.sub.proc,1.sup.SL (n+ T3), where T.sub.proc,1.sup.SL = T3.)
Regarding claim 3, Farag teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the UE senses the slots of the sidelink resource pool by decoding a physical sidelink control channel (PSCCH) and measuring a reference signal received power (RSRP) within the monitoring window except for slots in which its own transmissions occur ([0086] Therefore, sensing within a sensing window involves decoding the first stage SCI (PSCCH), and measuring the corresponding SL RSRP, wherein the SL RSRP can be based on PSCCH DMRS or PSSCH DMRS. Sensing is performed over slots where the UE doesn't transmit SL.).
Regarding claim 4, Farag teaches the method of claim 1, wherein a number of slots for TSLproc,0 is selected from a set of values [1, 1, 2, 4] depending on a configured subcarrier spacing (SCS) for a sidelink bandwidth part in which the sidelink resource pool is configured ([0145] in another example 0.1.1.2.3, T.sub.proc,0.sup.SL depends on the sub-carrier spacing of the SL bandwidth part (e.g., of the SL channels). For example, as shown in TABLE 2. For example, T.sub.proc, 0.sup.SL is as described in Table 8.1.4-1 of TS 38.214. Sidelink Sub-carrier spacing (μ.sub.SL) T.sub.proc, 0.sup.SL in slots 15 kHz (μ.sub.SL = 0).sup. 1, 30 kHz (μ.sub.SL = 1) 1, 60 kHz (μ.sub.SL = 2) 2, 120z (μ.sub.SL = 3) 4).
Regarding claim 5, Farag teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the sidelink resource pool is indicated by a higher layer to a physical layer when the higher layer requests and/or triggers the physical layer in the slot (n) to determine the subset of resources from which the higher layer selects resources for a physical sidelink shared channel (PSSCH)/PSCCH transmission as the part of the re-evaluation and pre- emption checking procedure ([0329] A resource pool can be configured with one or more periodic reservation periods given by higher layer parameter sl-ResourceReservationPeriodList. [0129] FIG. 7 illustrates an example of periodic-based partial sensing: (i) resource selection/re-selection is triggered by higher layers in slot n [0086] The resource (re-)selection is a two-step procedure: (1) the first step (e.g., performed in the physical layer) is to identify and determine the candidate resources within a resource selection window. (2) the second step (e.g., performed in the higher layers) is to select or re-select a resource from the identified (determined) candidate resources for PSSCH/PSCCH transmission. [0203] In another example 0.2.2, a first contiguous partial sensing window ends before slot C of re-evaluation check of the first SL transmission or would SL transmission as illustrated in FIG. 14 for SL transmission (resource selection/re-selection) triggered by higher layers in slot n. When re-evaluation and/or pre-emption check is enabled, one or more second contiguous partial sensing windows are used for re-evaluation check and/or pre-emption check for the next SL transmissions.).
Regarding claim 8, Farag teaches the method of claim 1, wherein for the time interval of the monitoring window, a maximum resource assignment/reservation in future time slots by a sidelink control information (SCI) is limited to 31 slots (Fig. 8 [0136] In one example 0.1.1.1, T.sub.0 is determined by the extent of aperiodic resource reservation by sidelink control information (SCI), based on at least one of the following example. [0137] In one example 0.1.1.1.1, as in release 16, an SCI can indicate up to 2 future aperiodic reserved resources within 31 logical slots).
Regarding claim 9, Farag teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the time interval starts from the slot (n - 31) when the UE selects an early resource selection window ([0161] In another example 0.1.2.1.6, slot A2 is determined based on slot C (n), e.g., slot A2 is before slot C by time T.sub.AC, i.e., A2=C−T.sub.AC). In one example, the farthest aperiodic reservation that can be indicated in an SCI is after W logical slots from a slot of the SCI, T.sub.AC corresponds to the physical duration of W logical slots before slot C. Alternatively, T.sub.AC is in logical slots, and is equal to W. In one example, W is 31 logical slots. Therefore, the time interval starts from the slot (n-31), where n is equal to C in Fig. 9).
Regarding claim 10, Farag teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the time interval starts from the slot (m - 31) when the UE needs to monitor up to 31 slots prior to a first sidelink candidate resource indicated for the re-evaluation and pre-emption checking procedure (Fig. 9; slot A2 [0157] slot A2 is determined based on slot m. In one example, the farthest aperiodic reservation that can be indicated in an SCI is after W logical slots from a slot of the SCI, T.sub.Am corresponds to the physical duration of W logical slots before slot m. Alternatively, T.sub.Am is in logical slots, and is equal to W. In one example, W is 31 logical slots. Therefore, the time interval starts at slot m-31.).
Regarding claim 11, Farag teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the time interval starts from the slot (n - TSLproc,0 - 31) for a UE processing time for decoding a PSCCH and preparing the subset of resources to be reported to a higher layer in the slot (n) ([0087] During the first step of the resource (re-)selection procedure, a UE can monitor slots in a sensing window [n−T.sub.0, n−T.sub.proc,0.sup.SL), where the UE monitors slots belonging to a corresponding sidelink TX resource pool that are not used for the UE's own transmission. For example, T.sub.proc,0.sup.SL is the sensing processing latency time. Paragraph [0160] discloses A2 can be determined by C-31. If we take into account T.sub.proc,0.sup.SL, the sensing processing latency time, then the start of the time interval is C - 31 - T.sub.proc,0.sup.SL).
Regarding claim 12, Farag teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising:
including all available sensing results of the sidelink resource pool within a time interval for the re-evaluation and pre-emption checking procedure ([0090] and [0091] The re-evaluation and pre-emption checks both include: (1) performing the first step of the SL resource selection procedure as determined in 3GPP standard specification (i.e., clause 8.1.4 of TS 38.214), which involves identifying (determining) a candidate (available) sidelink resource set in a resource selection window as previously described), wherein the time interval is after n – T0 and/or before n - TSLproc,0 ([0135] In one example 0.1.1, as illustrated in FIG. 8, contiguous partial sensing starts in slot A, wherein A=n−T.sub.0, and ends before slot n−T.sub.B, [0145] in one example 0.1.1.2.1, T.sub.B=T.sub.proc,0.sup.SL. (before n - T.sub.proc,0.sup.SL)), where a number of slots for T0 is determined according to a configuration parameter ([0138] In another example 0.1.1.1.2, the farthest aperiodic reservation that can be indicated in an SCI is after W logical slots from the slot of the SCI, wherein W (configuration parameter) can be specified in the system specifications and/or pre-configured and/or configured and/or updated by RRC signaling and/or MAC CE signaling and/or L1 control signaling. In one example, T.sub.0 corresponds to the physical duration of W logical slots before slot n, and slot n is the physical slot number. Alternatively, slot n corresponds to a logical slot index within a resource pool and T.sub.0 is W logical slots within a resource pool.)
Regarding claim 13, Farag teaches the method of claim 12, wherein the configuration parameter indicates a start of the monitoring window ([0138] Alternatively, the sensing window starts W logical slots before the start of the resource selection window).
Regarding claim 15, Farag teaches the method of claim 13, wherein a value of the configuration parameter is dependent on whether the sidelink resource pool allows to reserve a sidelink resource for another transport block (TB) in an SCI ([0136] In one example 0.1.1.1, T.sub.0 (value of the configuration parameter) is determined by the extent of aperiodic resource reservation by sidelink control information (SCI), based on at least one of the following example. [0137] In one example 0.1.1.1.1, as in release 16, an SCI can indicate up to 2 future aperiodic reserved resources (resource for another TB) within 31 logical slots. In one example, T.sub.0 corresponds to the physical duration of 31 logical slots before slot n, and slot n is the physical slot number. [0138] In another example 0.1.1.1.2, the farthest aperiodic reservation that can be indicated in an SCI is after W logical slots from the slot of the SCI, wherein W can be specified in the system specifications and/or pre-configured and/or configured and/or updated by RRC signaling and/or MAC CE signaling and/or L1 control signaling. In one example, T.sub.0 corresponds to the physical duration of W logical slots before slot n, and slot n is the physical slot number.).
Regarding claim 16, Farag teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the UE initializes a set of candidate resources within a selection window and excludes resources that have been reserved by others in a received SCI format and its measured RSRP is higher than a corresponding threshold ([0092] The pre-emption check includes: (1) performing the first step of the SL resource selection procedure as determined in 3GPP standard specification (i.e., clause 8.1.4 of TS 38.214), which involves identifying (determining) candidate (available) sidelink resource set in a resource selection window as previously described; (2) if the pre-selected and reserved resource is available in the candidate sidelink resource set, the resource is used/signaled for sidelink transmission; (3) else, the pre-selected and reserved resource is NOT available in the candidate sidelink resource set. The resource is excluded from the candidate resource set due to an SCI, associated with a priority value P.sub.RX, having an RSRP exceeding a threshold.).
Regarding claim 18, Farag teaches a user equipment (UE) (Fig. 3; UE 116), comprising:
a memory (Fig. 3; memory 360);
a transceiver (Fig. 3; RF transceiver 310); and
a processor (Fig. 3; processor 340) coupled to the memory and the transceiver;
wherein the UE is configured to:
sense slots of a sidelink resource pool within a monitoring window ([0153] FIG. 9 illustrates yet another example of contiguous partial sensing operation 900. [0099] partial sensing can be contiguous partial sensing (CPS), wherein slots are sensed contiguously within a short time window before resource selection/reselection for an initial SL transmission or for a re-evaluation check or a preemption check.), wherein the monitoring window comprises at least a time interval (Fig. 9 2nd sensing window), and the time interval starts from a slot (n - 31), a slot (m - 31), or a slot (n - TSLproc,0 - 31) (Fig. 9; slot A2 [0157] slot A2 is determined based on slot m. In one example, the farthest aperiodic reservation that can be indicated in an SCI is after W logical slots from a slot of the SCI, T.sub.Am corresponds to the physical duration of W logical slots before slot m. Alternatively, T.sub.Am is in logical slots, and is equal to W. In one example, W is 31 logical slots. Therefore, the time interval starts at slot m-31.) and ends in slot (n - TSLproc,0) (In Fig. 9, this would be C - TSLproc,0 or slot B2 [0171] slot B2 is determined based on slot C, e.g., slot B2 is before slot C by time T.sub.BC, i.e., B2=C−T.sub.BC, wherein, T.sub.BC=T.sub.proc,0.sup.SL. Therefore, the time interval ends at slot C - TSLproc,0), where the UE is triggered to determine a subset of resources in a slot (n) as a part of a re-evaluation and pre-emption checking procedure (Fig. 6; [0116] As illustrated in FIG. 6, in step 601, a UE is (pre-)configured with a resource pool, and with one or more sensing modes (e.g., full sensing, partial sensing and/or random resource selection), as well as configuration parameters related to each sensing mode. [0122] In step 604, a UE determines the candidate resources as a result of partial sensing (or no sensing) in step 603 and performs SL resource selection within the candidate resources. [0154] a resource re-evaluation check can occur in slot C (slot (n))…and one or more second contiguous partial sensing windows occur for re-evaluation and/or pre-emption. ), and m is a smallest candidate resource slot index after slot (n + T3) ([0154] FIG. 9, for a first SL transmission occurring in slot m, as a result of a resource selection/re-selection in slot n, a resource re-evaluation check can occur in slot C. [0177] slot C is before slot m by time T.sub.Cm, i.e., C=m−T.sub.Cm, wherein, T.sub.Cm=T.sub.proc,1.sup.SL Wherein, T.sub.proc,1.sup.SL is latency between the slot where re-evaluation check occurs (i.e. C) and slot m. (which is the same as saying m is after slot C + T.sub.Cm or C + T.sub.proc,1.sup.SL (n+ T3), where T.sub.proc,1.sup.SL = T3.).
Regarding claim 19, Farag teaches t user equipment (UE), comprising:
a memory (Fig. 3; memory 360);
a transceiver (Fig. 3; RF transceiver 310); and
a processor (Fig. 3; processor 340) coupled to the memory and the transceiver;
wherein the UE is configured to:
include all available sensing results of a sidelink resource pool within a time interval for a re-evaluation and pre-emption checking procedure ([0090] and [0091] The re-evaluation and pre-emption checks both include: (1) performing the first step of the SL resource selection procedure as determined in 3GPP standard specification (i.e., clause 8.1.4 of TS 38.214), which involves identifying (determining) a candidate (available) sidelink resource set in a resource selection window as previously described), wherein the time interval is after n – T0 and/or before n - TSLproc,0 ([0135] In one example 0.1.1, as illustrated in FIG. 8, contiguous partial sensing starts in slot A, wherein A=n−T.sub.0, and ends before slot n−T.sub.B, [0145] in one example 0.1.1.2.1, T.sub.B=T.sub.proc,0.sup.SL. (before n - T.sub.proc,0.sup.SL)), where a number of slots for T0 is determined according to a configuration parameter ([0138] In another example 0.1.1.1.2, the farthest aperiodic reservation that can be indicated in an SCI is after W logical slots from the slot of the SCI, wherein W (configuration parameter) can be specified in the system specifications and/or pre-configured and/or configured and/or updated by RRC signaling and/or MAC CE signaling and/or L1 control signaling. In one example, T.sub.0 corresponds to the physical duration of W logical slots before slot n, and slot n is the physical slot number. Alternatively, slot n corresponds to a logical slot index within a resource pool and T.sub.0 is W logical slots within a resource pool.)
Regarding claim 20, Farag teaches the UE according to claim 19, wherein the processor is further caused to: sense slots of the sidelink resource pool within a monitoring window ([0153] FIG. 9 illustrates yet another example of contiguous partial sensing operation 900. [0099] partial sensing can be contiguous partial sensing (CPS), wherein slots are sensed contiguously within a short time window before resource selection/reselection for an initial SL transmission or for a re-evaluation check or a preemption check.), wherein the monitoring window comprises at least a time interval (Fig. 9 2nd sensing window), and the time interval starts from a slot (n - 31), a slot (m - 31), or a slot (n - TSLproc,0 - 31) (Fig. 9; slot A2 [0157] slot A2 is determined based on slot m. In one example, the farthest aperiodic reservation that can be indicated in an SCI is after W logical slots from a slot of the SCI, T.sub.Am corresponds to the physical duration of W logical slots before slot m. Alternatively, T.sub.Am is in logical slots, and is equal to W. In one example, W is 31 logical slots. Therefore, the time interval starts at slot m-31.) and ends in slot (n - TSLproc,0) (In Fig. 9, this would be C - TSLproc,0 or slot B2 [0171] slot B2 is determined based on slot C, e.g., slot B2 is before slot C by time T.sub.BC, i.e., B2=C−T.sub.BC, wherein, T.sub.BC=T.sub.proc,0.sup.SL. Therefore, the time interval ends at slot C - TSLproc,0), where the UE is triggered to determine a subset of resources in a slot (n) as a part of the re-evaluation and pre- emption checking procedure (Fig. 6; [0116] As illustrated in FIG. 6, in step 601, a UE is (pre-)configured with a resource pool, and with one or more sensing modes (e.g., full sensing, partial sensing and/or random resource selection), as well as configuration parameters related to each sensing mode. [0122] In step 604, a UE determines the candidate resources as a result of partial sensing (or no sensing) in step 603 and performs SL resource selection within the candidate resources. [0154] a resource re-evaluation check can occur in slot C (slot (n))…and one or more second contiguous partial sensing windows occur for re-evaluation and/or pre-emption. ), and m is a smallest candidate resource slot index after slot (n + T3) ([0154] FIG. 9, for a first SL transmission occurring in slot m, as a result of a resource selection/re-selection in slot n, a resource re-evaluation check can occur in slot C. [0177] slot C is before slot m by time T.sub.Cm, i.e., C=m−T.sub.Cm, wherein, T.sub.Cm=T.sub.proc,1.sup.SL Wherein, T.sub.proc,1.sup.SL is latency between the slot where re-evaluation check occurs (i.e. C) and slot m. (which is the same as saying m is after slot C + T.sub.Cm or C + T.sub.proc,1.sup.SL (n+ T3), where T.sub.proc,1.sup.SL = T3.).
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 2, 6, 7, 14 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Farag (US 20220312479 A1) in view of Li (US 20220086803 A1).
Regarding claim 2, Farag teaches the method of claim 1, but does not teach wherein a number of slots for T3 is selected from a set of values [3, 5, 9, 17] depending on a configured subcarrier spacing (SCS) for a sidelink bandwidth part in which the sidelink resource pool is configured.
However, Li in the same field of endeavor of sidelink communication teaches wherein a number of slots for T3 is selected from a set of values [3, 5, 9, 17] depending on a configured subcarrier spacing (SCS) for a sidelink bandwidth part in which the sidelink resource pool is configured ([0096] selection of T.sub.1 is up to UE implementation under 0≤T.sub.1≤T.sub.proc,1.sup.SL, where T.sub.proc,1.sup.SL (T3) is defined in slots in Table 8.1.4-2 where μ.sub.SL is the SCS configuration of the SL BWP. [Table 8.1.4-2 of 3GPP TS 38.214 V16.2.0, Entitled “T.sub.proc,1.sup.SL Depending on Sub-Carrier Spacing”, is Reproduced as FIG. 6]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the sensing operations for sidelink communications of Farag to include the teachings of Li. The motivation to do so would have been to enhance reliability and reduce latency for NR SL mode 2 (Li; [0416]).
Regarding claim 6, Farag teaches the method of claim 1, but does not explicitly teach wherein the re-evaluation and pre-emption checking procedure comprises one or more of following parameters: a layer 1 (L1) priority of a PSSCH/PSCCH to be transmitted; a remaining packet delay budget (PDB) for the PSSCH/PSCCH transmission; and a number of sub-channels for the PSSCH/PSCCH transmission.
However, Li in the same field of endeavor of sidelink communication teaches wherein the re-evaluation and pre-emption checking procedure comprises one or more of following parameters: a layer 1 (L1) priority of a PSSCH/PSCCH to be transmitted; a remaining packet delay budget (PDB) for the PSSCH/PSCCH transmission; and a number of sub-channels for the PSSCH/PSCCH transmission ([0079] In resource allocation mode 2, the higher layer can request the UE to determine a subset of resources from which the higher layer will select resources for PSSCH/PSCCH transmission. To trigger this procedure, in slot n, the higher layer provides the following parameters for this PSSCH/PSCCH transmission: [0080] the resource pool from which the resources are to be reported; [0081] L1 priority, prio.sub.TX; [0082] the remaining packet delay budget; [0083] the number of sub-channels to be used for the PSSCH/PSCCH transmission in a slot, L.sub.subCH).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the sensing operations for sidelink communications of Farag to include the teachings of Li. The motivation to do so would have been to enhance reliability and reduce latency for NR SL mode 2 (Li; [0416]).
Regarding claim 7, Farag teaches the method of claim 5, but does not teach wherein the higher layer further provides a first set of one or more resources for re-evaluation and a second set of one or more resources for pre-emption checking.
However Li in the same field of endeavor of sidelink communication teaches wherein the higher layer further provides a first set of one or more resources for re-evaluation and a second set of one or more resources for pre-emption checking ([0085] if the higher layer requests the UE to determine a subset of resources from which the higher layer will select resources for PSSCH/PSCCH transmission as part of re-evaluation or pre-emption procedure, the higher layer provides a set of resources (r.sub.0, r.sub.1, r.sub.2, . . . ) which may be subject to re-evaluation and a set of resources (r′.sub.0, r′.sub.1, r′.sub.2, . . . ) which may be subject to pre-emption).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the sensing operations for sidelink communications of Farag to include the teachings of Li. The motivation to do so would have been to enhance reliability and reduce latency for NR SL mode 2 (Li; [0416]).
Regarding claim 14, Farag teaches the method of claim 13, but does not teach wherein the configuration parameter is defined as 1100 ms or 100 ms.
However, Li in the same field of endeavor of sidelink communication teaches wherein the configuration parameter is defined as 1100 ms or 100 ms ([0278] Confirm that sensing window size parameter T0 is (pre)-configured between two values: 1100 ms and 100 ms).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the sensing operations for sidelink communications of Farag to include the teachings of Li. The motivation to do so would have been to enhance reliability and reduce latency for NR SL mode 2 (Li; [0416]).
Regarding claim 17, Farag teaches the method of claim 1, but does not teach wherein the UE reports remaining candidate resource set to the higher layer along with the following:
any resource from a first set of one or more resources provided by the higher layer that is no longer part of the remaining candidate resource set as re-evaluation, and/or
any resource from a second set of one or more resources provided by the higher layer that is no longer part of the remaining candidate resource set as pre-emption.
However, Li in the same field of endeavor of sidelink communication teaches wherein the UE reports remaining candidate resource set to the higher layer along with the following ([0101] 4) The set S.sub.A is initialized to the set of all the candidate single-slot resources. [0102] 5) The UE shall exclude any candidate single-slot resource R.sub.x,y from the set S.sub.A if it meets all the following conditions outlined in paragraphs [0103] though [0108]. [0109] The UE shall report set S.sub.A to higher layers.):
any resource from a first set of one or more resources provided by the higher layer that is no longer part of the remaining candidate resource set as re-evaluation ([0109] If a resource r.sub.i from the set (r.sub.0, r.sub.1, r.sub.2, . . . ) is not a member of S.sub.A, then the UE shall report re-evaluation of the resource r.sub.i to higher layers.), and/or
any resource from a second set of one or more resources provided by the higher layer that is no longer part of the remaining candidate resource set as pre-emption ([0109] If a resource r′.sub.i from the set (r′.sub.0, r′.sub.1, r′.sub.2, . . . ) is not a member of S.sub.A due to exclusion in step 6 above by comparison with the RSRP measurement for the received SCI format 1-A with an associated priority prio.sub.RX, and prio.sub.RX<prio.sub.pre and prio.sub.TX>prio.sub.RX, then the UE shall report pre-emption of the resource r′.sub.i to higher layers.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the sensing operations for sidelink communications of Farag to include the teachings of Li. The motivation to do so would have been to enhance reliability and reduce latency for NR SL mode 2 (Li; [0416]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NANCY SIXTO whose telephone number is (571)272-3295. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Friday 9AM-5PM EST.
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, Gary Mui can be reached at 571-270-1420. 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.
/NANCY SIXTO/Examiner, Art Unit 2465
/GARY MUI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2465