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 .
Drawings
The drawings were received on 10 May 2026. These drawings are accepted.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding claim 112 rejections, Applicant has overcome some of the rejections but also has introduced more 112 issues. Please see the rejections that follow.
Regarding the 103 rejections, Applicant argues that ‘…Lee is silent about exceeding the transmission capability including expected transmission or reception associated with a transmission or reception object exceeding the transmission capability…’ and therefore, Lee does not disclose all of the underlined portions added to claim 1. Examiner disagrees. The claims have numerous 112 issues that make interpretation of the claims difficult. For example, claim 1 recites numerous ‘one of the following paired with an ‘or’ clauses which have ‘and’ clauses possibly nested within (unclear) which have ‘or clauses which have ‘one of the following clause’ which possibly has an ‘and’ clause nested within. That is, the claim is very difficult to follow, the indenting makes it seem like some of the wherein clauses are within the one of the following but also may or may not be part of the ‘one of the following’. Please see all the detailed rejections below. Lee discloses a UE capability of transmitting simultaneously on two carriers at the same time and the UE is unable to select more than two by for example not being able to select in subframe #4 because it is already transmitting on Carrier A and C in that subframe. (See Lee para. 170, 168; fig. 8) So this is exceeding the transmission capability of the UE and the UE drops or does not perform the transmission. Therefore, Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive.
Regarding claims 2, 9, and 10, Applicant argues based upon dependency. Please see the arguments above and rejections below.
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.
Regarding claims 1-18, claim 1 states ‘the target limit’ may be either a transmission/reception limit or a time limit, but later limitations compare ‘transmission or reception’, ‘expected transmission or reception’, ‘quantity’, or ‘duration’ to the ‘corresponding target limit’. Therefore it is unclear whether the comparison is to a quantity limit, time limit, antenna/chain limit, or bearer-object limit. Applicant is attempting to mix and match and ends up with a claim that compares apples to oranges; they are not the same thing and are not comparable. Claims 2-18 do not cure the deficiencies of claim 1 and are rejected for similar reasons.
Regarding claims 1-18, claim 1 recites ‘corresponding target limit’. The phrase appears in the alternatives for exceeding the target limit, but it is not clear what the ‘corresponding’ target limit corresponds to; the first transmission/reception object, the expected transmission/reception, the UE, the bearer object, or the type of limit or something else. Claims 2-18 do not cure the deficiencies of claim 1 and are rejected for similar reasons.
Regarding claims 1-18, claim 1 recites ‘dropping, by the first device’, but the object to be dropped is something that ‘needs to be performed by the first UE’. If the first device is a second UE or control node, it is unclear how it ‘drops’ the first UE’s transmission/reception. Claims 2-18 do not cure the deficiencies of claim 1 and are rejected for similar reasons.
Regarding claims 1-18, claim 1 recites ‘transmission or reception’ both as an activity and as an object-like noun. This creates ambiguity throughout the claim. Claims 2-18 do not cure the deficiencies of claim 1 and are rejected for similar reasons.
Regarding claims 1-18, claim 1 recites ‘expected transmission or reception’. It is not clear whether this refers to a scheduled transmission, predicted transmission, a candidate transmission, a grant-based expected transmission, or a resource-reservation expectation. Claims 2-18 do not cure the deficiencies of claim 1 and are rejected for similar reasons.
Regarding claims 1-18, claim 1 recites that ‘the first transmission or reception comprises: first transmission, or first expected transmission or reception’. Then the claim defines ‘the first transmission’ but also allows the ‘first transmission or reception’ to instead be an expected transmission or reception. This ambiguity also occurs with regard to the second transmission/reception object. Claims 2-18 do not cure the deficiencies of claim 1 and are rejected for similar reasons.
Regarding claim 1-18, claim 1 recites numerous ‘one of the following paired with an ‘or’ clauses which have ‘and’ clauses possibly nested within (unclear) which have ‘or clauses which have ‘one of the following clause’ which possibly has an ‘and’ clause nested within. That is, the claim is very difficult to follow, the indenting makes it seem like some of the wherein clauses are within the one of the following but also may or may not be part of the ‘one of the following’. Therefore, the claim is unclear. Claims 2-18 do not cure the deficiencies of claim 1 and are rejected for similar reasons.
Regarding claim 1-18, claim 1 recites ‘target transmission or reception object’ This is unclear. Is it a target transmission object or target reception object or is it a target transmission object or a reception object? Claims 2-18 do not cure the deficiencies of claim 1 and are rejected for similar reasons.
Regarding claim 2, claim 2 recites ‘exceeds the target limit’. That is claim 2 recites that exceeding the target limit comprises a second transmission/reception not exceeding the target limit plus an additional or adjusted transmission/reception. This makes the actual exceeding condition unclear.
Regarding claim 2, claim 2 recites ‘based on’. The claim fails to identify what is added, adjusted or compared. Based on what? Therefore, the claim is unclear.
Regarding claim 2, claim 2 recites a list with multiple ‘or’ but it is not clear if each the these items are ‘or’ed themselves or if they are ‘and’. It appears there is something missing like an ‘and’ or ‘or’.
Regarding claim 3, claim 3 recites ‘based on’. The claim fails to identify what is added, adjusted or compared. Based on what? Therefore, the claim is unclear.
Regarding claim 4, claim 4 recites ‘transmission manner…is transmission’/ ‘reception manner… is reception’. That is, the claim appears to define a manner as ‘transmission’ and another as ‘reception’ which is unclear. Further, how can a reception manner be defined as transmission and how can a transmission manner be reception? Therefore, the claims are unclear.
Regarding claim 4, claim 4 recites ‘exceeding the target limit comprises…’ followed by several alternatives. Some alternatives refer to a transmission exceeding a limit; others refer to a reception not exceeding a limit plus an expected transmission exceeding a limit. This mixing and matching is unclear because reception is not transmission and transmission is not reception.
Regarding claim 5, claim 5 recites ‘performing dropping until the number of remaining…’ and uses fifth/sixth/seventh transmissions. It is unclear what Applicant is attempting to claim. The claims repeatedly just redefine what has already be been defined by just calling it something else. For example, the first target transmission or reception is a fourth expected transmission, the second target transmission reception is the third expected transmission or reception, etc. This leads to confusing and unclear claims.
Regarding claim 5, claim 5 recites ‘remaining first expected transmission or reception’ / ‘remaining second expected transmission or reception’. It is unclear what it means for an ‘expected transmission’ to be ‘remaining’ after dropping.
Regarding claim 5, claim 5 recites ‘first predetermined quantity’ through ‘seventh predetermined quantity’ have no defined relationship to target limit. That is, the claim recites many predetermined quantities but does not clearly tie them to the target limit or explain whether they are thresholds for different object types or something else.
Regarding claim 8, claim 8 recites ‘whether at least a part of same target objects are associated…’ This is unclear. Associated with what?
Regarding claim 10, claim 10 recites ‘target bearer object’ lacks antecedent basis. Claim 10 recites ‘target bearer object’, but claim 1 recites a target transmission/reception object, not a target bearer object.
Regarding claims 11-14, claims 11-14 recite ‘first time’, ‘second time’, ‘third time’, ‘fourth time’, ‘fifth time’. It is not clear if these are time periods or time intervals or some quantity (like a number of times). Please review all of your claims.
Regarding claims 12-14, claims 12-14 recites fourth transmission/reception object associated with third object and compares this to the target transmission or reception limit. Claim 11 recites a target limit. It is unclear if these are different or the same limit.
Regarding claim 19, claim 19 recites ‘causes to implement operations’ This is unclear.
Regarding claims 19, claim 19 states ‘the target limit’ may be either a transmission/reception limit or a time limit, but later limitations compare ‘transmission or reception’, ‘expected transmission or reception’, ‘quantity’, or ‘duration’ to the ‘corresponding target limit’. Therefore it is unclear whether the comparison is to a quantity limit, time limit, antenna/chain limit, or bearer-object limit. Applicant is attempting to mix and match and ends up with a claim that compares apples to oranges; they are not the same thing and are not comparable.
Regarding claims 19, claim 19 recites ‘corresponding target limit’. The phrase appears in the alternatives for exceeding the target limit, but it is not clear what the ‘corresponding’ target limit corresponds to; the first transmission/reception object, the expected transmission/reception, the UE, the bearer object, or the type of limit or something else.
Regarding claims 19, claim 19 recites ‘dropping, by the first device’, but the object to be dropped is something that ‘needs to be performed by the first UE’. If the first device is a second UE or control node, it is unclear how it ‘drops’ the first UE’s transmission/reception.
Regarding claims 19, claim 19 recites ‘transmission or reception’ both as an activity and as an object-like noun. This creates ambiguity throughout the claim.
Regarding claims 19, claim 19 recites ‘expected transmission or reception’. It is not clear whether this refers to a scheduled transmission, predicted transmission, a candidate transmission, a grant-based expected transmission, or a resource-reservation expectation.
Regarding claims 19, claim 19 recites that ‘the first transmission or reception comprises: first transmission, or first expected transmission or reception’. Then the claim defines ‘the first transmission’ but also allows the ‘first transmission or reception’ to instead be an expected transmission or reception. This ambiguity also occurs with regard to the second transmission/reception object.
Regarding claim 19, claim 19 recites numerous ‘one of the following paired with an ‘or’ clauses which have ‘and’ clauses possibly nested within (unclear) which have ‘or clauses which have ‘one of the following clause’ which possibly has an ‘and’ clause nested within. That is, the claim is very difficult to follow, the indenting makes it seem like some of the wherein clauses are within the one of the following but also may or may not be part of the ‘one of the following’. Therefore, the claim is unclear.
Regarding claim 19, claim 19 recites ‘target transmission or reception object’ This is unclear. Is it a target transmission object or target reception object or is it a target transmission object or a reception object?
Regarding claims 20, claim 20 states ‘the target limit’ may be either a transmission/reception limit or a time limit, but later limitations compare ‘transmission or reception’, ‘expected transmission or reception’, ‘quantity’, or ‘duration’ to the ‘corresponding target limit’. Therefore it is unclear whether the comparison is to a quantity limit, time limit, antenna/chain limit, or bearer-object limit. Applicant is attempting to mix and match and ends up with a claim that compares apples to oranges; they are not the same thing and are not comparable.
Regarding claims 20, claim 20 recites ‘corresponding target limit’. The phrase appears in the alternatives for exceeding the target limit, but it is not clear what the ‘corresponding’ target limit corresponds to; the first transmission/reception object, the expected transmission/reception, the UE, the bearer object, or the type of limit or something else.
Regarding claims 20, claim 20 recites ‘dropping, by the first device’, but the object to be dropped is something that ‘needs to be performed by the first UE’. If the first device is a second UE or control node, it is unclear how it ‘drops’ the first UE’s transmission/reception.
Regarding claims 20, claim 20 recites ‘transmission or reception’ both as an activity and as an object-like noun. This creates ambiguity throughout the claim.
Regarding claims 20, claim 20 recites ‘expected transmission or reception’. It is not clear whether this refers to a scheduled transmission, predicted transmission, a candidate transmission, a grant-based expected transmission, or a resource-reservation expectation.
Regarding claims 20, claim 20 recites that ‘the first transmission or reception comprises: first transmission, or first expected transmission or reception’. Then the claim defines ‘the first transmission’ but also allows the ‘first transmission or reception’ to instead be an expected transmission or reception. This ambiguity also occurs with regard to the second transmission/reception object.
Regarding claim 20, claim 20 recites numerous ‘one of the following paired with an ‘or’ clauses which have ‘and’ clauses possibly nested within (unclear) which have ‘or clauses which have ‘one of the following clause’ which possibly has an ‘and’ clause nested within. That is, the claim is very difficult to follow, the indenting makes it seem like some of the wherein clauses are within the one of the following but also may or may not be part of the ‘one of the following’. Therefore, the claim is unclear.
Regarding claim 20, claim 20 recites ‘target transmission or reception object’ This is unclear. Is it a target transmission object or target reception object or is it a target transmission object or a reception object?
Regarding claim 1-20, Examiner has done the best as possible to interpret the claims, but the claims lack consistency and clarity and appear to just be a narrative. In order to speed up prosecution, it is recommended that you amend your claims to clearly delineate what you believe to be your invention.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1, 3-8, and 11-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (2019/0045465), and further in view of Yi (2021/0212099).
Regarding claim 1, Lee discloses a transmission or reception method, comprising:
determining, by a first device, a target limit of a first User Equipment (UE); and (See Lee para. 168; UE determines a count (e.g. a target limit) of simultaneous transmission reaches capability of UE)
wherein:
the first transmission or reception is at least a part of the transmission or reception of the target transmission or reception object; (See Lee para. 172; fig. 8; 1-6 are transmission objects)
the transmission or reception of the target transmission or reception object is Sidelink (SL) transmission or reception; (See Lee para. 5; sidelink; para. 25, fig. 8; CA in sidelink)
the target limit comprises at least one of the following: a target transmission or reception limit, or a target time limit; (See Lee para. 170; simultaneously on two carriers at same time (e.g. a target transmission limit); see also para. 168)
the first device comprises at least one of the following: the first UE, a second UE, or a control node;
the second UE is a UE related to sidelink transmission or reception of the first UE, (See Lee fig. 4; part c shows UE, E-UTRAN (e.g. control node) or vehicle (e.g. second UE); vehicle is related to sidelink transmission of UE in that it transmits to or receives from)
wherein:
the target transmission or reception object comprises at least a first transmission or reception object, and exceeding the target limit comprises one of the following: (See Lee para. 170; simultaneously on two carriers at same time (e.g. a target transmission limit); see also para. 168; no more than two so exceeding is trying for more than 2)
expected transmission or reception associated with the first transmission or reception object exceeds the corresponding target limit; or (See Lee para. 170; simultaneously on two carriers at same time (e.g. a target transmission limit); see also para. 168; no more than two so exceeding is trying for more than 2; see 112 rejections)
the transmission corresponding to the first transmission or reception object does not exceed the corresponding target limit, and the expected transmission or reception associated with the first transmission or reception object exceeds the corresponding target limit,
wherein:
the first transmission or reception comprises: first transmission, or first expected transmission or reception;
the first transmission is a transmission corresponding to at least a part of the first transmission or reception object: and
the first expected transmission or reception is expected transmission or reception associated with the transmission corresponding to at least a part of the first transmission or reception object; or
the target transmission or reception object comprises at least a second transmission or reception object and exceeding the target limit comprises one of the following:
expected transmission or reception associated with the second transmission or
reception object exceeds the corresponding target limit; or
the reception corresponding to the second transmission or reception object docs
not exceed the corresponding target limit, and the expected transmission or
reception associated with the second transmission or reception object exceeds the
corresponding target limit,
wherein:
the first transmission or reception comprises: first reception. or second expected
transmission or reception;
the first reception is a reception corresponding to at least a part of the second
transmission or reception object; and
the second expected transmission or reception is expected transmission or
reception associated with the reception corresponding to at least a part of the
second transmission or reception object. (See Lee para. 170; simultaneously on two carriers at same time (e.g. a target transmission limit); see also para. 168; no more than two so exceeding is trying for more than 2) (See Lee para. 172; fig. 8; 1-6 are transmission objects (they are transmitted by one device and received by another); see also 112 unclear what is optional and what is required due to unclear nesting of ‘or’ and ‘and’ clauses)
Lee discloses that a device has a limit to the amount of simultaneous transmissions that may occur at the same time. Lee does not explicitly disclose dropping, by the first device, communication when the communication object that needs to be performed exceed the UE’s capabilities. However, Yi does disclose dropping, by the first device, communication when the communication object that needs to be performed exceed the UE’s capabilities. (See Yi fig. 23; drop PSSCH; para. 293, fig. 28; drop sidelink communication) Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the method of Lee to include the teaching of dropping, by the first device, communication when the communication object that needs to be performed exceed the UE’s capabilities of Yi with the motivation being it is common sense (a UE is not capable of performing actions beyond its capabilities) and further to allow devices that may not have all of the capabilities of another device to still communication and participate on the network which increase connectivity and further to reduce costs by not creating rigid networks which can only support certain capabilities which may require hundreds of different networks and further to allow for flexibility in network operation and ensuring an inclusive networking environment which allows for different UEs of differing capabilities.
Regarding claim 3, Lee in view of Yi discloses the transmission or reception method according to claim 1, wherein dropping, by the first device, the first transmission comprises:
when the target transmission or reception object meets the corresponding target time limit, or a preset parameter associated with the target transmission or reception object meets a preset condition: dropping the first transmission or reception and performing fourth transmission or reception; or
when the target transmission or reception object does not meet the corresponding target time limit, or the preset parameter associated with the target transmission or reception object does not meet the preset condition: dropping the first transmission or reception. (See Yi fig. 23; drop PSSCH if BWP switching latency (e.g. preset condition and/or target time limit) is not met/or it is met; other transmissions are performed (e.g. fourth transmission); para. 293, fig. 28; drop sidelink communication) The motivation being it is common sense (a UE is not capable of performing actions beyond its capabilities) and further to allow devices that may not have all of the capabilities of another device to still communication and participate on the network which increase connectivity and further to reduce costs by not creating rigid networks which can only support certain capabilities which may require hundreds of different networks and further to allow for flexibility in network operation and ensuring an inclusive networking environment which allows for different UEs of differing capabilities.
Regarding claim 4, Lee in view of Yi discloses the transmission or reception method according to claim 1, wherein a transmission or reception manner corresponding to the first transmission or reception object is transmission, and a transmission or reception manner corresponding to the second object is reception,
wherein: (See Lee para. 172; fig. 8; 1-6 are transmission objects (they are transmitted by one device and received by another); see also 112)
when the target transmission or reception object comprises at least the first transmission or reception object, exceeding the target limit further comprises:
the transmission corresponding to the first transmission or reception object exceeds the corresponding target limit; (See Lee para. 170; simultaneously on two carriers at same time (e.g. a target transmission limit); see also para. 168; no more than two so exceeding is trying for more than 2)
when the target transmission or reception object comprises at least the second transmission or reception object, exceeding the target limit further comprises:
the reception corresponding to the second transmission or reception object exceeds
the corresponding target limit; (See Lee para. 170; simultaneously on two carriers at same time (e.g. a target transmission limit); see also para. 168; no more than two so exceeding is trying for more than 2)
when the target transmission or reception object comprises the first transmission or reception object and the second transmission or reception object, exceeding the target limit comprises at least one of the following:
the transmission corresponding to the first transmission or reception object and the reception corresponding to the second transmission or reception object exceed the corresponding target limit;
the transmission corresponding to the first transmission or reception object and expected transmission or reception associated with the second transmission or
reception object exceed the corresponding target limit; (See Lee para. 170; simultaneously on two carriers at same time (e.g. a target transmission limit); see also para. 168; no more than two so exceeding is trying for more than 2) (See Lee para. 172; fig. 8; 1-6 are transmission objects (they are transmitted by one device and received by another); see also 112)
expected transmission or reception associated with the first transmission or reception object and the expected transmission or reception associated with the second
transmission or reception object exceed the corresponding target limit; or
the reception corresponding to the second transmission or reception object and the expected transmission or reception associated with the first transmission or reception object exceed the corresponding target limit,
wherein the first transmission or reception comprises at least one of the following:
second transmission, third expected transmission or reception, second reception, or fourth expected transmission or reception,
wherein:
the second transmission is a transmission corresponding to at least a part of the first transmission or reception object;
the third expected transmission or reception is expected transmission or reception associated with the transmission corresponding to at least a part of the first
transmission or reception object;
the second reception is reception corresponding to at least a part of the second
transmission or reception object; and
the fourth expected transmission or reception is expected transmission or reception associated with reception corresponding to at least a part of the second transmission or reception object. (This is nested ‘one of the following’ and does not necessarily occur because of previous ‘one of the following’; see 112 rejection above)
Regarding claim 5, Lee in view of Yi discloses the transmission or reception method according to claim 4, wherein
performing dropping until the number of remaining first transmission is not greater than a first predetermined quantity; (See Lee para. 170; simultaneously on two carriers at same time (e.g. a target transmission limit); see also para. 168)
Yi does disclose dropping, by the first device, communication when the communication object that needs to be performed exceed the UE’s capabilities. (See Yi fig. 23; drop PSSCH; para. 293, fig. 28; drop sidelink communication) The motivation being it is common sense (a UE is not capable of performing actions beyond its capabilities) and further to allow devices that may not have all of the capabilities of another device to still communication and participate on the network which increase connectivity and further to reduce costs by not creating rigid networks which can only support certain capabilities which may require hundreds of different networks and further to allow for flexibility in network operation and ensuring an inclusive networking environment which allows for different UEs of differing capabilities.
performing dropping until the number of remaining first expected transmission or reception is not greater than a second predetermined quantity;
performing dropping until the number of the remaining first reception is not greater than a third predetermined quantity;
performing dropping until the number of the remaining second expected transmission or reception is not greater than a fourth predetermined quantity;
performing dropping until the number of remaining fifth transmission or reception is not greater than a fifth predetermined quantity;
performing dropping until the number of remaining sixth transmission or reception is not greater than a sixth predetermined quantity; or
performing dropping until the number of remaining seventh transmission or reception is not greater than a seventh predetermined quantity,
wherein:
first target transmission or reception is the fourth expected transmission or reception, second target transmission or reception is the third expected transmission or reception, third target transmission or reception is the second transmission, and fourth target transmission is the second reception; or
the first target transmission or reception is the third expected transmission or reception, the second target transmission or reception is the fourth expected transmission or reception, the third target transmission or reception is the second reception, and the fourth target transmission or reception is the second transmission; or
the first target transmission or reception is the second reception, the second target transmission or reception is tin third expected transmission or reception, the third target transmission or reception is the second transmission, and the fourth target transmission or reception is the fourth expected transmission or reception; or
the first target transmission or reception is the fourth expected transmission or reception, the second target transmission or reception is the second transmission, the third target transmission or reception is the third expected transmission or reception, and the fourth target transmission or reception is the second reception,
wherein:
the fifth transmission or reception comprises at least one of the following: the first target transmission or reception, the second target transmission or reception, or the first target transmission or reception and the second target transmission or reception;
the sixth transmission or reception comprises at least one of the following: the third target transmission or reception, the fourth target transmission or reception, or the third target transmission or reception and the fourth target transmission or reception; and
the seventh transmission or reception comprises at least one of the following: the third target transmission or reception. the first target transmission or reception, or the third target transmission or reception and the first target transmission or reception. (None of these options are required to occur because of the ‘one of the following clauses above; see also 112)
Regarding claim 6, Lee in view of Yi discloses the transmission or reception method according to claim 1, wherein dropping the first transmission comprises:
dropping the first transmission or reception according to a first predetermined rule, wherein the first predetermined rule comprises at least one of the following: (See Yi fig. 23, para. 260; drop PSSCH based upon switching latency (e.g. a predetermined rule); para. 293, fig. 28; drop sidelink communication) the motivation being it is common sense (a UE is not capable of performing actions beyond its capabilities) and further to allow devices that may not have all of the capabilities of another device to still communication and participate on the network which increase connectivity and further to reduce costs by not creating rigid networks which can only support certain capabilities which may require hundreds of different networks and further to allow for flexibility in network operation and ensuring an inclusive networking environment which allows for different UEs of differing capabilities.
according to a priority order of the target transmission or reception object;
according to a priority order of a transmission or reception type of the transmission or reception of the target transmission or reception object;
according to a priority order of the transmission or reception of the target transmission or reception object;
according to information about the target transmission or reception object; (See Yi fig. 23, para. 260; drop PSSCH based upon switching latency which is an amount of time needed to switch (e.g. information about the transmission object)); para. 293, fig. 28; drop sidelink communication) the motivation being it is common sense (a UE is not capable of performing actions beyond its capabilities) and further to allow devices that may not have all of the capabilities of another device to still communication and participate on the network which increase connectivity and further to reduce costs by not creating rigid networks which can only support certain capabilities which may require hundreds of different networks and further to allow for flexibility in network operation and ensuring an inclusive networking environment which allows for different UEs of differing capabilities.
according to a frequency domain location of the transmission or reception of the target transmission or reception object; (See Yi fig. 23, para. 260; drop PSSCH based upon switching latency which is an amount of time needed to switch (e.g. in time domain)); para. 293, fig. 28; drop sidelink communication) the motivation being it is common sense (a UE is not capable of performing actions beyond its capabilities) and further to allow devices that may not have all of the capabilities of another device to still communication and participate on the network which increase connectivity and further to reduce costs by not creating rigid networks which can only support certain capabilities which may require hundreds of different networks and further to allow for flexibility in network operation and ensuring an inclusive networking environment which allows for different UEs of differing capabilities.
according to a time domain location of the transmission or reception of the target
transmission or reception object;
according to duration of the transmission or reception of the target transmission or reception object;
according to a Subcarrier Spacing (SCS) of the transmission or reception of the target transmission or reception object; or
according to content or a transmission or reception object type of the transmission or reception of the target transmission or reception object.
Regarding claim 7, Lee in view of Yi discloses the transmission or reception method according to claim 6, wherein the information about the target transmission or reception object comprises at least one of the following:
coding of the target transmission or reception object an identifier of the target transmission or reception object, or information about a target object associated with the target transmission or reception object, wherein(See Lee para. 172; fig. 8; 1-6 are transmission objects and are coded according to the 3GPP suite of standards Sidelink; para. 64; 3GPP standards)
the target object comprises at least one of the following:
a Logical Channel (LCH), a Logical Channel Group (LCG), Quality of Service (QOS), a HARQ process, a Transport Block (TB), a data packet. or a Protocol Data Unit (PDL). (See Lee para. 172; fig. 8; 1-6 are transmission objects (e.g. packets of data) and are coded according to the 3GPP suite of standards Sidelink; para. 64; 3GPP standards)
Regarding claim 8, Lee in view of Yi discloses the transmission or reception method according to claim 7, wherein the information about the target transmission or reception object comprises the information about the target object associated with the target transmission or reception object, which further comprises: a quantity of target objects or whether at least a part of same target objects are associated. (See Lee para. 168; UE determines a count (e.g. a target limit) of simultaneous transmission reaches capability of UE) (See Lee para. 170; simultaneously on two carriers at same time (e.g. a target transmission limit); see also para. 168)
Regarding claim 11, Lee in view of Yi discloses the transmission or reception method according to claim 1, wherein
the target transmission or reception object comprises a third transmission or reception object; and (See Lee para. 172; fig. 8; 1-6 are transmission objects)
before dropping, by the first device, the first transmission or reception when the transmission or reception of the target transmission or reception object that needs to be performed by the first UE exceeds the target limit, the method further comprises:
determining, in a first time, whether transmission or reception of the third transmission or reception object within a second time exceeds the target transmission or reception limit; or
determining, in a third time, whether to drop the first transmission or reception,
wherein: (See Yi fig. 23; drop PSSCH because BWP switching latency exceeds limit; determination to drop is done before it is dropped; para. 293, fig. 28; drop sidelink communication) the motivation being it is common sense (a UE is not capable of performing actions beyond its capabilities) and further to allow devices that may not have all of the capabilities of another device to still communication and participate on the network which increase connectivity and further to reduce costs by not creating rigid networks which can only support certain capabilities which may require hundreds of different networks and further to allow for flexibility in network operation and ensuring an inclusive networking environment which allows for different UEs of differing capabilities.
the first time or the third time is before the second time, or or (See Yi fig. 23; drop PSSCH because BWP switching latency exceeds limit; determination to drop is done before it is dropped; para. 293, fig. 28; drop sidelink communication) the motivation being it is common sense (a UE is not capable of performing actions beyond its capabilities) and further to allow devices that may not have all of the capabilities of another device to still communication and participate on the network which increase connectivity and further to reduce costs by not creating rigid networks which can only support certain capabilities which may require hundreds of different networks and further to allow for flexibility in network operation and ensuring an inclusive networking environment which allows for different UEs of differing capabilities.
duration of a time interval between the second time and the first time comprises at least duration corresponding to at least one time limit in the target time limit, or
duration of a time interval between the second time and the third time comprises at least duration corresponding to at least one time limit in the target time limit.
Regarding claim 12, Lee in view of Yi discloses the transmission or reception method according to claim 11,
wherein before dropping, by the first device, the first transmission or reception, the method further comprises:
determining, in a fourth time, whether transmission or reception of a fourth transmission or reception object associated with the third transmission or reception object exceeds the target transmission or reception limit wherein the transmission or reception of the fourth transmission or reception object is within a fifth time. (See Yi fig. 23; drop PSSCH because BWP switching latency exceeds limit; determination to drop is done before it is dropped; para. 293, fig. 28; drop sidelink communication; that is, performing the dropping sequence again for multiple switching ) the motivation being it is common sense (a UE is not capable of performing actions beyond its capabilities and performing the steps again depending upon how many times the UE needs to switch) and further to allow devices that may not have all of the capabilities of another device to still communication and participate on the network which increase connectivity and further to reduce costs by not creating rigid networks which can only support certain capabilities which may require hundreds of different networks and further to allow for flexibility in network operation and ensuring an inclusive networking environment which allows for different UEs of differing capabilities and further it is a duplication of parts under MPEP 2144.04 (e.g. performing the steps of Yi again depending upon how many switches are required).
Regarding claim 13, Lee in view of Yi discloses the transmission or reception method according to claim 12, wherein
the fourth time or the third time is before the fifth time, or
duration of a time interval between the fifth time and the fourth time comprises at least duration corresponding to at least one time limit in the target time limit or
duration of a time interval between the fifth time and the third time comprises at least duration corresponding to at least one time limit in the target time limit. (See Yi fig. 23; drop PSSCH because BWP switching latency exceeds limit; determination to drop is done before it is dropped; para. 293, fig. 28; drop sidelink communication; that is, performing the dropping sequence again for multiple switching ) the motivation being it is common sense (a UE is not capable of performing actions beyond its capabilities and performing the steps again depending upon how many times the UE needs to switch) and further to allow devices that may not have all of the capabilities of another device to still communication and participate on the network which increase connectivity and further to reduce costs by not creating rigid networks which can only support certain capabilities which may require hundreds of different networks and further to allow for flexibility in network operation and ensuring an inclusive networking environment which allows for different UEs of differing capabilities and further it is a duplication of parts under MPEP 2144.04 (e.g. performing the steps of Yi again depending upon how many switches are required).
Regarding claim 14, Lee in view of Yi discloses the transmission or reception method according to claim 12,
wherein determining, in the third time, whether to drop the first transmission or reception comprises at least one of the following:
when a first predetermined condition is met, determining. in the third time, whether to drop at least a part of transmission or reception of the third transmission or reception object; and
when a second predetermined condition is met determining. in the third time, whether to drop at least a part of transmission or reception of the fourth transmission or reception object,
wherein:
the first predetermined condition comprises at least one of the following:
the first time or the third time is before the second time,
duration of a time interval between the second time and the first time comprises at least duration corresponding to at least one time limit in the target time limit or
duration of a time interval between the second time and the third time comprises at
least duration corresponding to at least one time limit in the target time limit; and
the second predetermined condition comprises at least one of the following:
the fourth time or the third time is before the fifth time;
duration of a time interval between the fifth time and the fourth time comprises at
least duration corresponding to at least one time limit in the target time limit or
duration of a time interval between the fifth time and the third time comprises at least
duration corresponding to at least one time limit in the target time limit. (See Yi fig. 23; drop PSSCH because BWP switching latency exceeds limit; determination to drop is done before it is dropped; para. 293, fig. 28; drop sidelink communication; that is, performing the dropping sequence again for multiple switching ) the motivation being it is common sense (a UE is not capable of performing actions beyond its capabilities and performing the steps again depending upon how many times the UE needs to switch) and further to allow devices that may not have all of the capabilities of another device to still communication and participate on the network which increase connectivity and further to reduce costs by not creating rigid networks which can only support certain capabilities which may require hundreds of different networks and further to allow for flexibility in network operation and ensuring an inclusive networking environment which allows for different UEs of differing capabilities and further it is a duplication of parts under MPEP 2144.04 (e.g. performing the steps of Yi again depending upon how many switches are required).
Regarding claim 15, Lee in view of Yi discloses the transmission or reception method according to claim 1,
wherein the target transmission or reception limit comprises at least one of the following:
a quantity NI of transmit antennas;
a quantity N2 of receive antennas;
a quantity N3 of transmit antennas and receive antennas;
a quantity N4 of transmit chains;
a quantity NS of receive chains;
a quantity N6 of transmit chains and receive chains;
a maximum quantity of bearer objects for receiving or transmitting target transmission or reception objects at the same time, wherein the bearer objects include at least one of the following: a carrier, a Component Carrier (CC), a cell, a BWP, or a resource pool; (See Lee para. 170; simultaneously on two carriers at same time (e.g. a target transmission limit); see also para. 168)
a maximum quantity of target transmission or reception objects that the first device receives or transmits at the same time; or
a maximum quantity of target transmission or reception objects that the first device receives or transmits at the same time on X bearer objects, wherein X is a positive integer.
Regarding claim 16, Lee in view of Yi discloses the transmission or reception method according to claim 1,
Lee does not explicitly disclose wherein the target time limit comprises at least one of the following: a minimum time limit for switching a bearer object; a maximum time limit for switching a bearer object; a minimum time limit for power adjustment; a maximum time limit for power adjustment; a minimum time limit for adjusting a transmission chain; a maximum time limit for adjusting a transmission chain; a time limit for preparing the target transmission object; a time limit for preparing candidate resource reporting; or a time limit required for determining a candidate resource, wherein the transmission chain comprises a transmit chain or a receive chain. However, Yi does disclose wherein the target time limit comprises at least one of the following: a minimum time limit for switching a bearer object; a maximum time limit for switching a bearer object; a minimum time limit for power adjustment; a maximum time limit for power adjustment; a minimum time limit for adjusting a transmission chain; a maximum time limit for adjusting a transmission chain; a time limit for preparing the target transmission object; a time limit for preparing candidate resource reporting; or a time limit required for determining a candidate resource, wherein the transmission chain comprises a transmit chain or a receive chain. (See Yi para. 66; fig. 23; drop pssch based upon BWP switching latency (e.g. max/min)) Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the method of Lee to include the teaching of wherein the target time limit comprises at least one of the following: a minimum time limit for switching a bearer object; a maximum time limit for switching a bearer object; a minimum time limit for power adjustment; a maximum time limit for power adjustment; a minimum time limit for adjusting a transmission chain; a maximum time limit for adjusting a transmission chain; a time limit for preparing the target transmission object; a time limit for preparing candidate resource reporting; or a time limit required for determining a candidate resource, wherein the transmission chain comprises a transmit chain or a receive chain of Yi with the motivation being the motivation being it is common sense (a UE is not capable of performing actions beyond its capabilities) and further to allow devices that may not have all of the capabilities of another device to still communication and participate on the network which increase connectivity and further to reduce costs by not creating rigid networks which can only support certain capabilities which may require hundreds of different networks and further to allow for flexibility in network operation and ensuring an inclusive networking environment which allows for different UEs of differing capabilities and further the motivation being to meet QoS requirements for flows (See Yi para. 66) and further to allow for service differential with differing performance to meet end user requirements and further for flexibility in allocation and creation of specialized paths and resource optimization.
Regarding claim 17, Lee in view of Yi discloses the transmission or reception method according to claim 1, wherein
transmission or reception on a plurality of bearer objects at the same time or transmission or reception on a plurality of bearer objects within a fourth preset time is supported only in a target frequency domain, and (See Lee para. 170; simultaneously on two carriers (Frequency) at same time (e.g. a target transmission limit); see also para. 168; no more than two so exceeding is trying for more than 2)
different frequency domains respectively have corresponding target limits.
Lee does not explicitly disclose bearers. However, Yi does disclose bearers (See Yi para. 66) Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the method of Lee to include the teaching of bearers of Yi with the motivation being to meet QoS requirements for flows (See Yi para. 66) and further to allow for service differential with differing performance to meet end user requirements and further for flexibility in allocation and creation of specialized paths and resource optimization.
Regarding claim 18, Lee in view of Yi discloses the transmission or reception method according to claim 1, wherein the target limit comprises an actual limit or a first limit of the first UE, wherein the actual limit is determined based on the first limit, wherein (See Lee para. 168; UE determines a count (e.g. a target limit) of simultaneous transmission reaches capability of UE)
the first limit comprises a first transmission or reception limit;
the actual limit comprises an actual transmission or reception limit; and (See Yi fig. 23; drop pssch; para. 293; fig. 28; drop sidelink communication; BWP switching latency (e.g. a limit)) The motivation being it is common sense (a UE is not capable of performing actions beyond its capabilities) and further to allow devices that may not have all of the capabilities of another device to still communication and participate on the network which increase connectivity and further to reduce costs by not creating rigid networks which can only support certain capabilities which may require hundreds of different networks and further to allow for flexibility in network operation and ensuring an inclusive networking environment which allows for different UEs of differing capabilities.
the target transmission or reception limit comprises: the first transmission or reception limit, or the actual transmission or reception limit wherein:
the first transmission or reception limit comprises at least one of the following: a first receive limit a first transmit limit. or a first transmit and receive limit; and (See Lee para. 168; UE determines a count (e.g. a target limit) of simultaneous transmission reaches capability of UE)
the actual transmission or reception limit comprises at least one of the following: an actual receive limit. an actual transmit limit. or an actual transmit and receive limit. (See Yi fig. 23; drop pssch; para. 293; fig. 28; drop sidelink communication; BWP switching latency (e.g. a limit)) The motivation being it is common sense (a UE is not capable of performing actions beyond its capabilities) and further to allow devices that may not have all of the capabilities of another device to still communication and participate on the network which increase connectivity and further to reduce costs by not creating rigid networks which can only support certain capabilities which may require hundreds of different networks and further to allow for flexibility in network operation and ensuring an inclusive networking environment which allows for different UEs of differing capabilities.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (2019/0045465), and further in view of Yi (2021/0212099) and further in view of Xiong (2019/0261361).
Regarding claim 2, Lee in view of Yi discloses the transmission or reception method according to claim 1, wherein the transmission or reception of the target transmission or reception object that needs to be performed by the first UE comprises:
second transmission or reception, additional transmission or reception based on the second transmission or reception, or transmission or reception obtained by adjusting the second transmission or reception
wherein:
the second transmission or reception is at least a part of the transmission or reception of the target transmission or reception object;
the second transmission or reception is currently performed by the first UE;
the second transmission or reception does not exceed the target limit;
the additional transmission or reception based on the second transmission or reception is at least a part of the transmission or reception of the target transmission or reception object; (See Lee para. 170; simultaneously on two carriers at same time (e.g. a target transmission limit); see also para. 168; that is no matter how much data the UE wants to transmit across many different carriers or resources Lee states it can only simultaneously transmit on two; 2nd transmission is part that does not exceed limit; additional transmission exceeds these limits)
the transmission or reception obtained by adjusting the second transmission or reception is at least a part of the transmission or reception of the target transmission or reception object;
wherein:
a total of the second transmission or reception and the additional transmission or
reception based on the second transmission or reception exceeds the target limit, or
the transmission or reception obtained by adjusting the second transmission or reception exceeds the target limit. (See Lee para. 170; simultaneously on two carriers at same time (e.g. a target transmission limit); see also para. 168; that is no matter how much data the UE wants to transmit across many different carriers or resources Lee states it can only simultaneously transmit on two; 2nd transmission is part that does not exceed limit; additional transmission exceeds these limits)
Li in view of Yi does not explicitly disclose the third transmission comprises any one of the following: the second transmission and additional transmission based on the second transmission, or transmission obtained by adjusting the second transmission. However, Xiong does disclose the third transmission comprises any one of the following: the second transmission and additional transmission based on the second transmission, or transmission obtained by adjusting the second transmission. (See Xiong fig. 4, para. 45-46; overlapping transmissions can be combined (e.g. transmission obtained by adjusting the 2nd transmission)) Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the method of Li in view of Yi to include the teaching of the third transmission comprises any one of the following: the second transmission and additional transmission based on the second transmission, or transmission obtained by adjusting the second transmission of Xiong with the motivation being to reduce delay of important transmissions and further to meet UE capabilities which does not waste resources by sending/receiving information that cannot be received/sent and further to maximize scheduling of limited wireless resources which reduce delay and increases throughput.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (2019/0045465), and further in view of Yi (2021/0212099) and further in view of Freda (2021/0385694).
Regarding claim 9, Lee in view of Yi discloses the transmission or reception method according to claim 7, wherein when the information about the target transmission or reception object comprises the information about the target object associated with the target transmission or reception object, dropping the first transmission according to the information about the target object associated with the target transmission or reception object comprises: (See Yi fig. 23; drop PSSCH of multiple PSSCHs (e.g. same target object) but also at different times (e.g. different target objects); para. 293, fig. 28; drop sidelink communication) the motivation being it is common sense (a UE is not capable of performing actions beyond its capabilities) and further to allow devices that may not have all of the capabilities of another device to still communication and participate on the network which increase connectivity and further to reduce costs by not creating rigid networks which can only support certain capabilities which may require hundreds of different networks and further to allow for flexibility in network operation and ensuring an inclusive networking environment which allows for different UEs of differing capabilities.
Lee in view of Yi do not explicitly disclose reserving bearers. However, Freda does disclose reserving bearers. (See Freda para. 82 and 88; reserving bearers for sidelink; para. 93; BWP) Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the method of Lee in view of Yi to include the teaching of reserving bearers of Freda with the motivation being to prevent collisions and further to prevent interference and further to maximize limited wireless resources by reduce the possibility of collisions and interference.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (2019/0045465), and further in view of Yi (2021/0212099) and further in view of Xiong (2019/0261361) and further in view of Freda (2021/0385694).
Regarding claim 10, Lee in view of Yi discloses the transmission or reception method according to claim 1.
Lee in view of Yi do not explicitly disclose wherein when transmission on a target object exceeds the target limit, the method further comprises: multiplexing transmission on at least a part of objects in the target object to another bearer object in the target object, wherein the at least a part of objects in the target object and the another bearer object are associated with a same target object. However, Xiong does disclose wherein when transmission on a target object exceeds the target limit, the method further comprises: multiplexing transmission on at least a part of objects in the target object to another bearer object in the target object, wherein the at least a part of objects in the target object and the another bearer object are associated with a same target object. (See Xiong fig. 4, para. 45-46; overlapping transmissions can be combined (e.g. transmission obtained by adjusting the 2nd transmission)) Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the method of Li in view of Yi to include the teaching of wherein when transmission on a target object exceeds the target limit, the method further comprises: multiplexing transmission on at least a part of objects in the target object to another bearer object in the target object, wherein the at least a part of objects in the target object and the another bearer object are associated with a same target object of Xiong with the motivation being to reduce delay of important transmissions and further to meet UE capabilities which does not waste resources by sending/receiving information that cannot be received/sent and further to maximize scheduling of limited wireless resources which reduce delay and increases throughput.
Lee in view of Yi do not explicitly disclose bearers. However, Freda does disclose bearers. (See Freda para. 82 and 88; reserving bearers for sidelink) Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the method of Lee in view of Yi to include the teaching of bearers of Freda with the motivation being to prevent collisions and further to prevent interference and further to maximize limited wireless resources by reduce the possibility of collisions and interference and further to allow for differing QoS requirements and further to differentiate between different data types (with different requirements, possibly control data vs user data, etc.).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (2019/0045465), and further in view of Yi (2021/0212099).
Regarding claim 19, Lee discloses a transmission device, comprising a processor; and a memory having a computer program or an instruction stored thereon, wherein the computer program or the instruction, when executed by the processor. causes to implement operations comprising: (See Lee fig. 9 UE with a processor executing an algorithm stored in memory)
determining, by a first device, a target limit of a first User Equipment (UE); and (See Lee para. 168; UE determines a count (e.g. a target limit) of simultaneous transmission reaches capability of UE)
wherein:
the first transmission or reception is at least a part of the transmission or reception of the target transmission or reception object; (See Lee para. 172; fig. 8; 1-6 are transmission objects)
the transmission or reception of the target transmission or reception object is Sidelink (SL) transmission or reception; (See Lee para. 5; sidelink; para. 25, fig. 8; CA in sidelink)
the target limit comprises at least one of the following: a target transmission or reception limit, or a target time limit; (See Lee para. 170; simultaneously on two carriers at same time (e.g. a target transmission limit); see also para. 168)
the first device comprises at least one of the following: the first UE, a second UE, or a control node;
the second UE is a UE related to sidelink transmission or reception of the first UE, (See Lee fig. 4; part c shows UE, E-UTRAN (e.g. control node) or vehicle (e.g. second UE); vehicle is related to sidelink transmission of UE in that it transmits to or receives from)
wherein:
the target transmission or reception object comprises at least a first transmission or reception object, and exceeding the target limit comprises one of the following: (See Lee para. 170; simultaneously on two carriers at same time (e.g. a target transmission limit); see also para. 168; no more than two so exceeding is trying for more than 2)
expected transmission or reception associated with the first transmission or reception object exceeds the corresponding target limit; or (See Lee para. 170; simultaneously on two carriers at same time (e.g. a target transmission limit); see also para. 168; no more than two so exceeding is trying for more than 2; see 112 rejections)
the transmission corresponding to the first transmission or reception object does not exceed the corresponding target limit, and the expected transmission or reception associated with the first transmission or reception object exceeds the corresponding target limit,
wherein:
the first transmission or reception comprises: first transmission, or first expected transmission or reception;
the first transmission is a transmission corresponding to at least a part of the first transmission or reception object: and
the first expected transmission or reception is expected transmission or reception associated with the transmission corresponding to at least a part of the first transmission or reception object; or
the target transmission or reception object comprises at least a second transmission or reception object and exceeding the target limit comprises one of the following:
expected transmission or reception associated with the second transmission or
reception object exceeds the corresponding target limit; or
the reception corresponding to the second transmission or reception object docs
not exceed the corresponding target limit, and the expected transmission or
reception associated with the second transmission or reception object exceeds the
corresponding target limit,
wherein:
the first transmission or reception comprises: first reception. or second expected
transmission or reception;
the first reception is a reception corresponding to at least a part of the second
transmission or reception object; and
the second expected transmission or reception is expected transmission or
reception associated with the reception corresponding to at least a part of the
second transmission or reception object. (See Lee para. 170; simultaneously on two carriers at same time (e.g. a target transmission limit); see also para. 168; no more than two so exceeding is trying for more than 2) (See Lee para. 172; fig. 8; 1-6 are transmission objects (they are transmitted by one device and received by another); see also 112 unclear what is optional and what is required due to unclear nesting of ‘or’ and ‘and’ clauses)
Lee discloses that a device has a limit to the amount of simultaneous transmissions that may occur at the same time. Lee does not explicitly disclose dropping, by the first device, communication when the communication object that needs to be performed exceed the UE’s capabilities. However, Yi does disclose dropping, by the first device, communication when the communication object that needs to be performed exceed the UE’s capabilities. (See Yi fig. 23; drop PSSCH; para. 293, fig. 28; drop sidelink communication) Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the method of Lee to include the teaching of dropping, by the first device, communication when the communication object that needs to be performed exceed the UE’s capabilities of Yi with the motivation being it is common sense (a UE is not capable of performing actions beyond its capabilities) and further to allow devices that may not have all of the capabilities of another device to still communication and participate on the network which increase connectivity and further to reduce costs by not creating rigid networks which can only support certain capabilities which may require hundreds of different networks and further to allow for flexibility in network operation and ensuring an inclusive networking environment which allows for different UEs of differing capabilities.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (2019/0045465), and further in view of Yi (2021/0212099).
Regarding claim 20, Lee discloses a non-transitory computer readable storage medium storing a computer program or an instruction that. when executed by a processor, causes the processor to implement operations comprising: (See Lee fig. 9 UE with a processor executing an algorithm stored in memory)
determining, by a first device, a target limit of a first User Equipment (UE); and (See Lee para. 168; UE determines a count (e.g. a target limit) of simultaneous transmission reaches capability of UE)
wherein:
the first transmission or reception is at least a part of the transmission or reception of the target transmission or reception object; (See Lee para. 172; fig. 8; 1-6 are transmission objects)
the transmission or reception of the target transmission or reception object is Sidelink (SL) transmission or reception; (See Lee para. 5; sidelink; para. 25, fig. 8; CA in sidelink)
the target limit comprises at least one of the following: a target transmission or reception limit, or a target time limit; (See Lee para. 170; simultaneously on two carriers at same time (e.g. a target transmission limit); see also para. 168)
the first device comprises at least one of the following: the first UE, a second UE, or a control node;
the second UE is a UE related to sidelink transmission or reception of the first UE, (See Lee fig. 4; part c shows UE, E-UTRAN (e.g. control node) or vehicle (e.g. second UE); vehicle is related to sidelink transmission of UE in that it transmits to or receives from)
wherein:
the target transmission or reception object comprises at least a first transmission or reception object, and exceeding the target limit comprises one of the following: (See Lee para. 170; simultaneously on two carriers at same time (e.g. a target transmission limit); see also para. 168; no more than two so exceeding is trying for more than 2)
expected transmission or reception associated with the first transmission or reception object exceeds the corresponding target limit; or (See Lee para. 170; simultaneously on two carriers at same time (e.g. a target transmission limit); see also para. 168; no more than two so exceeding is trying for more than 2; see 112 rejections)
the transmission corresponding to the first transmission or reception object does not exceed the corresponding target limit, and the expected transmission or reception associated with the first transmission or reception object exceeds the corresponding target limit,
wherein:
the first transmission or reception comprises: first transmission, or first expected transmission or reception;
the first transmission is a transmission corresponding to at least a part of the first transmission or reception object: and
the first expected transmission or reception is expected transmission or reception associated with the transmission corresponding to at least a part of the first transmission or reception object; or
the target transmission or reception object comprises at least a second transmission or reception object and exceeding the target limit comprises one of the following:
expected transmission or reception associated with the second transmission or
reception object exceeds the corresponding target limit; or
the reception corresponding to the second transmission or reception object docs
not exceed the corresponding target limit, and the expected transmission or
reception associated with the second transmission or reception object exceeds the
corresponding target limit,
wherein:
the first transmission or reception comprises: first reception. or second expected
transmission or reception;
the first reception is a reception corresponding to at least a part of the second
transmission or reception object; and
the second expected transmission or reception is expected transmission or
reception associated with the reception corresponding to at least a part of the
second transmission or reception object. (See Lee para. 170; simultaneously on two carriers at same time (e.g. a target transmission limit); see also para. 168; no more than two so exceeding is trying for more than 2) (See Lee para. 172; fig. 8; 1-6 are transmission objects (they are transmitted by one device and received by another); see also 112 unclear what is optional and what is required due to unclear nesting of ‘or’ and ‘and’ clauses)
Lee discloses that a device has a limit to the amount of simultaneous transmissions that may occur at the same time. Lee does not explicitly disclose dropping, by the first device, communication when the communication object that needs to be performed exceed the UE’s capabilities. However, Yi does disclose dropping, by the first device, communication when the communication object that needs to be performed exceed the UE’s capabilities. (See Yi fig. 23; drop PSSCH; para. 293, fig. 28; drop sidelink communication) Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the method of Lee to include the teaching of dropping, by the first device, communication when the communication object that needs to be performed exceed the UE’s capabilities of Yi with the motivation being it is common sense (a UE is not capable of performing actions beyond its capabilities) and further to allow devices that may not have all of the capabilities of another device to still communication and participate on the network which increase connectivity and further to reduce costs by not creating rigid networks which can only support certain capabilities which may require hundreds of different networks and further to allow for flexibility in network operation and ensuring an inclusive networking environment which allows for different UEs of differing capabilities.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHEN J CLAWSON whose telephone number is (571)270-7498. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-5:00 pm 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, Huy D Vu can be reached at (571) 272-3155. 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.
/Stephen J Clawson/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2461
Prosecution Insights