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. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 2 . 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. 3 . 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. 4 . Claim s 1 , 10 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Zhao (US 12520201) . Regarding claim 1, Zhao teaches a resource selection method in sidelink communication by a user equipment (UE),comprising (see column 1 lines 21-24; sidelink (SL) communication, a resource reservation and a resource selection method based on channel sensing are supported by terminal devices): triggering a resource selection procedure for sidelink (SL) transmission of a SL data, wherein the SL data for transmission has a resource reservation interval set to zero or not provided at all (see figure 6 and see column 11 lines 1-9; when the aperiodic resource reservation or the resource reservation with the period Ts as 0 for the first sidelink transmission is performed, the terminal device selects whether the first sensing condition needs to be met. That is, whether the time unit needs to be sensed where the sidelink transmission that may perform the periodic resource reservation on the first time unit is located, the flexibility of the methods for partial sensing is ensured); and utilizing a periodic-based sensing result from a periodic-based sensing, a contiguous partial sensing result from a contiguous partial sensing, and/or a sidelink channel decoding result from a sidelink channel decoding during the resource selection procedure for sidelink transmission of the SL data (see figure 6 and see column 11 lines 1-9; when the aperiodic resource reservation or the resource reservation with the period Ts as 0 for the first sidelink transmission is performed, the terminal device selects whether the first sensing condition needs to be met. That is, whether the time unit needs to be sensed where the sidelink transmission that may perform the periodic resource reservation on the first time unit is located, the flexibility of the methods for partial sensing is ensured). Regarding claim 10 , th is claim ha s similar limitations as those of claim 1 . Therefore, it is rejected under Zhao for the same reasons as set forth in the rejection of claim 1. The terminal device includes a memory 104-fig.10, transmitter/receiver and a processor 101-fig.10. Regarding claim 20 , th is claim ha s similar limitations as those of claim 1 . Therefore, it is rejected under Zhao for the same reasons as set forth in the rejection of claim 1. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 5 . 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 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. 6 . The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: (a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made. 7 . 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 . 8 . This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. 9 . Claim s 3 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhao, in view of Agiwal et al. (US 2021/0307060), hereinafter referred to as Agiwal . Regarding claim 3, Zhao discloses all claimed limitations, except the sidelink transmission comprises a physical sidelink shared channel (PSSCH) transmission or a PSCCH transmission, and/or the SL data comprises a single medium access control (MAC) packet data unit (PDU) or transport block (TB). Agiwal discloses transmitter UE transmits TB carrying SL MAC protocol data unit (PDU) over PSSCH, see 0172. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to employ the teaching of Agiwal into the system of Zhao . The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to provide V2X services, whereby UEs can communicate with each other directly over the PC5 interface using NR technology without traversing any network node. R egarding claim 11 , th is claim ha s similar limitations as those of claim 3 . Therefore, it is rejected under Zhao- Agiwal for the same reasons as set forth in the rejection of claim 3 . Allowable subject matter 1 0 . Claim s 2, 4-9, 12-19 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Conclusion 1 1 . The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Shin et al. (US 2022/0295514); Li et al. (US 2022/0224497); Lin et al. (US 2024/0031997) are cited , and considered pertinent to the instant specification . 1 2 . Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT DUC C HO whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-3147 . The examiner can normally be reached on FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT M-F 8am-4pm . 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 on FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 571-270-1420 (Gary.mui@uspto.gov). The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /DUC C HO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2465