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 replacement drawings were received on 02/06/2026. These drawings are Acceptable.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-32 have been considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues 3GPP (R1166200) does not teach “wherein the UE includes an indication of a relative position of the UE within the plurality of UEs that includes a first hop identifier of the UE, and wherein the indication of the relative position of the neighboring UE includes a second hop identifier of the neighboring UE,” as recited in amended claim 1. However, OHARA (US-20220070805-A1) suggests a first hop and second hop identifier that identifier their position for synchronize source (par.61;66;72, Fig.8) as well as the portion of claim 6 (pars.66;72).
Applicant further argues “The Office Action acknowledges that the combination of 3GPP (R1166200) and OHARA does not disclose "trigger an SLSS search responsive to a first value of the first hop identifier being less than or equal to a second value of a second hop identifier of one UE of the plurality of UEs for a configured time duration," as previously recited in dependent claim 6, upon which at least a portion of the amendment to claim 1 is based…” However, applicant amended claim 1 to only have a portion of claim 4 and claim 6 into claim 1 and thus now the OHARA (US-20220070805-A1) suggests the amended portion of claim 1 (see par.61;66;72, Fig.8).
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-11, 13-14, 18, 23-25, 27-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over 3GPP'#86 (3GPP TSG RAN WGI Meeting #86, R1-166200) (IDS 3 pages, 03/04/2025) in view of OHARA (US-20220070805-A1).
Regarding Claim 1, 3GPP'#86 discloses an apparatus for wireless communication at a user equipment (UE), comprising: one or more memories storing processor-executable code; and one or more processors coupled with the one or more memories, at least one processor of the one or more processors configured to cause the UE (page 2, Fig.1:UE2) to:
receive a first indication (Fig.1:y1) including at least a sidelink synchronization signal (SLSS) identifier associated with a neighboring UE of the UE (page 1, 2.2 SLSS ID definition for UEs having GNSS, lines 6-10, Fig.1:y1, (i.e., Bottom of Fig.1 UE2 receives y1 which is SLSS1 which is a first indication and the UE2 is the neighbor of UE1 and UE3. An indication here is being read as a message since UE1 is sending a message to UE2 comprising of SLSS and InCL status.))
and an indication (Fig.1:y1) of a relative position (Fig.1:UE2:y1=SLSS1) of the neighboring UE within a plurality of UEs (page 2, Fig.1:UE2:y1=SLSS1, (i.e., "relative position" is position of UE from within coverage of a gNB/GNSS and indication is to show the distance from the gNB/GNSS as shown in bottom of Fig.1. In this case SLSS1 shows the UE1 is the first hop. “An indication” in this limitation is being read as in the message has a position indication.));
However, 3GPP'#86 does not disclose wherein the UE includes an indication of a relative position of the UE within the plurality of UEs that includes a first hop identifier of the UE, and wherein the indication of the relative position of the neighboring UE includes a second hop identifier of the neighboring UE; and trigger an SLSS search responsive to a first value of the first hop identifier of the UE being less than or equal to a second value of the second hop identifier of the neighboring UE.
Ohara discloses wherein the UE includes an indication of a relative position of the UE within the plurality of UEs that includes a first hop identifier of the UE (paragraph [0061], Fig.8 "when the communication apparatus 20A receives a synchronization signal transmitted from the base station 10 and relays to the communication apparatus 20B the sidelink synchronization signal using the base station 10 as a synchronization source, the communication apparatus 20A may transmit a notification to the communication apparatus 20B that the number of hops is one." (i.e., Using 3GPP'#86 Fig.1, UE1=Apparatus 20A and UE2=Apparatus 20B. Apparatus 20A discloses it has a first hop identifier when its sending to apparatus 20B that the hops is one.)),
and wherein the indication of the relative position of the neighboring UE includes a second hop identifier of the neighboring UE (paragraph [0061], Fig.8, "When the communication apparatus 20A receives a sidelink synchronization signal transmitted from another communication apparatus 20 and relays to the communication apparatus 20B the sidelink synchronization signal using the another communication apparatus 20 as a synchronization source, the communication apparatus 20A may transmit, to the communication apparatus 20B, a notification of a value obtained by adding one to the hop number transmitted from the another communication apparatus 20." and paragraph [0072], "in a case where the receiving communication apparatus 20 receives multiple types of sidelink synchronization signals, the receiving communication apparatus 20 may detect a minimum number of hops from the multiple numbers of hops by comparing the multiple numbers of hops of the multiple types of sidelink synchronization signals," (i.e., there are multiple UE with their own hop numbers.)),
trigger an SLSS search responsive to a first value of the first hop identifier of the UE being less than (paragraph [0066], “The receiving communication apparatus 20 may search for a synchronization signal from resources in the descending order of priority (for example, a resource corresponding to a fewer number of hops). In this case, for example, the number of searches up to detection of a synchronization signal and the number of hops of the synchronization signal may be associated with each other.” and paragraph [0072], "in a case where the receiving communication apparatus 20 receives multiple types of sidelink synchronization signals, the receiving communication apparatus 20 may detect a minimum number of hops from the multiple numbers of hops by comparing the multiple numbers of hops of the multiple types of sidelink synchronization signals, and may use the type of the sidelink synchronization signal associated with the detected minimum number of hops, for synchronization for sidelink communication by the receiving communication apparatus 20. Namely, the receiving communication apparatus 20 may preferentially select a sidelink synchronization signal with a low number of hops." (i.e., examiner reading “trigger an SLSS search” as the communication apparatus 20 performs reselection for a new synchronization signal, when the UE receives multiple synchronization signals it will pick one candidate, as the best one source for synchronization comprising a first hop identifier, then comparing the first hop identifier with other synchronization signal and during the comparison there will be synchronization signals such as a second hop identifier that will be worse for synchronization as it has a higher hop number than the first identifier, thus the apparatus 20 will keep searching until either the first hop identifier remains as the best source or another candidate with a lower hop identifier will be used as a synchronization source.)).
3GPP'#86 and Ohara are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of sidelink synchronization. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified 3GPP'#86 in order to implement a hop identifier into the master information block because Ohara provides a method for the UE to choose the best SLSS source for reliable synchronization (Ohara, paragraph [0060], “As a solution to solve the problem of a decrease in synchronization accuracy due to an increase in the number of hops described above, for example, when the communication apparatus 20A relays a synchronization signal to the communication apparatus 20B, the communication apparatus 20A may transmit the number of hops to the communication apparatus 20B.”).
Regarding Claim 2, 3GPP’#86 in view of Ohara discloses all the limitations as claim 1.
3GPP'#86 further discloses wherein the indication of the relative position of the UE includes an identifier of the UE (page 2, Fig.1:UE2:y1=SLSS2, (i.e., Bottom of Fig.1 shows the plurality of UEs and wherein they update the y1 value as "SLSS1", "SLSS2" and so on. The identifier being the SLSS #.)).
Regarding Claim 4, 3GPP’#86 in view of Ohara discloses all the limitations as claim 1.
Ohara further discloses wherein the at least one processor of the one of the one or more processors, to receive the second hop identifier, is configured to cause the UE to receive the second hop identifier in a master information block (MIB) (and paragraph [0062], "the transmitting communication apparatus 20 may include the number of hops in a payload of PSBCH transmitted by the transmitting communication apparatus 20." (i.e., payload of PSBCH is reading on MIB.)).
The proposed combination as well as the motivations for combining the references presented in the rejection of the parent claim apply to this claim and are incorporated herein by reference.
Regarding Claim 5, 3GPP’#86 in view of Ohara discloses all the limitations as claim [[4]]1.
Ohara further discloses and wherein [[a]]the first value of the first hop identifier is incremented from a second value of a second hop identifier associated with the neighboring UE (paragraph [0061], "When the communication apparatus 20A receives a sidelink synchronization signal transmitted from another communication apparatus 20 and relays to the communication apparatus 20B the sidelink synchronization signal using the another communication apparatus 20 as a synchronization source, the communication apparatus 20A may transmit, to the communication apparatus 20B, a notification of a value obtained by adding one to the hop number transmitted from the another communication apparatus 20." (i.e., Now the 20B receives SLSS with a notification of hop+1 because the original source was from another apparatus.)).
The proposed combination as well as the motivations for combining the references presented in the rejection of the parent claim apply to this claim and are incorporated herein by reference.
Regarding Claim 6, 3GPP’#86 in view of Ohara discloses all the limitations as claim [[4]]1.
3GPP'#86 further discloses wherein the at least one processor of the one of the one or more processors is configured to cause the UE to: transmit a second indication including at least an SLSS identifier associated with the UE (page 1-2, 2.2 SLSS ID definition for UEs having GNSS, lines 6-10, Fig.1:y2 (i.e., Bottom of Figure 1 UE2 is transmitting to UE3 with "SLSS3")).
Ohara further discloses and an indication of the relative position of the UE within the plurality of UEs (paragraph [0077], Fig.12, "Here, FIG. 12 illustrates an example in which synchronization is established between a plurality of communication apparatuses 20 included in a group #0, and synchronization is established between a plurality of communication apparatuses 20 included in a group #1. In this case, for example, the number of hops may be defined as the number of groups that relay the sidelink synchronization signal. For example, when the synchronization signal using the base station 10 as a synchronization source is relayed from the group #0 to the group #1, the number of hops of the synchronization signal may be set to 2. In the example illustrated in FIG. 12, alternately, the number of hops of the synchronization signal may be set to 4, because the sidelink synchronization signal is relayed by four communication apparatus 20." (i.e., Ohara discloses the UE are able to show their relative position when sending the synchronization signal as a group or individual.)).
The proposed combination as well as the motivations for combining the references presented in the rejection of the parent claim apply to this claim and are incorporated herein by reference.
Regarding Claim 7, 3GPP'#86 discloses all the limitations as claim 1.
However, 3GPP'#86 does not disclose wherein the indication of the relative position of the neighboring UE includes a hop identifier associated with the neighboring UE.
Ohara discloses wherein the indication of the relative position of the neighboring UE includes an indication of a geographic location of the neighboring UE (paragraph [0064], Fig.8 " the transmitting communication apparatus 20 may use the location of the transmission resource corresponding to the number of hops to transmit a sidelink synchronization signal, and the receiving communication apparatus 20 may determine the number of hops of the synchronization signal on the basis of the location of the reception resource on which the sidelink synchronization signal has been received."(i.e., Ohara discloses of transmitting and receiving a geographic location of the neighboring UE.)).
3GPP'#86 and Ohara are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of sidelink synchronization. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified 3GPP'#86 in order to implement a hop identifier into the master information block because Ohara provides a method for the UE to choose the best SLSS source for reliable synchronization (Ohara, paragraph [0060], “As a solution to solve the problem of a decrease in synchronization accuracy due to an increase in the number of hops described above, for example, when the communication apparatus 20A relays a synchronization signal to the communication apparatus 20B, the communication apparatus 20A may transmit the number of hops to the communication apparatus 20B.”).
Regarding Claim 8, 3GPP’#86 in view of Ohara discloses all the limitations as claim [[1]]6.
3GPP'#86 further discloses wherein the indication of the relative position of the UE includes one (page 2, Fig.1:UE2:y1=SLSS2, (i.e., As shown in bottom of Fig.1 the UE2 transmits to UE3 indicating the UE2 is SLSS2.)).
Regarding Claim 9, 3GPP’#86 in view of Ohara discloses all the limitations as claim 1.
3GPP'#86 further discloses wherein the indication of the relative position of the UE includes one or more of: an identifier of the UE (page 2, Fig.1:UE2:y1=SLSS2, (i.e., As shown in bottom of Fig.1 the UE2 transmits to UE3 indicating the UE2 is SLSS2.)).
Regarding Claim 10, 3GPP’#86 in view of Ohara discloses all the limitations as claim [[1]]6.
3GPP'#86 discloses wherein the first indication comprises a first list (page 2, Fig.1:UE2:y1=SLSS1, (i.e., As shown in bottom of Fig.1 the UE2 receives InCL1=true and SLSS1=y1 showing a first list of information.)),
and wherein the second indication comprises a second list (page 2, Fig.1:UE2:y1=SLSS2, (i.e., As shown in bottom of Fig.1 the UE2 receives InCL12=False and SLSS2=y2 showing a second list of information.)).
Ohara further discloses wherein the first indication comprises a first list that associates a first index (par.61, notification) with the SLSS identifier associated with the neighboring UE (paragraph [0061], Fig.8 "when the communication apparatus 20A receives a synchronization signal transmitted from the base station 10 and relays to the communication apparatus 20B the sidelink synchronization signal using the base station 10 as a synchronization source, the communication apparatus 20A may transmit a notification to the communication apparatus 20B that the number of hops is one." and paragraph [0062], "the transmitting communication apparatus 20 may include the number of hops in a payload of PSBCH transmitted by the transmitting communication apparatus 20." (i.e., Using 3GPP'#86 Fig.1, UE1=Apparatus 20A and UE2=Apparatus 20B. UE2 receives SLSS as disclosed in limitation 1, the UE2 receives a list of information and now with Ohata is showing a first index that the current number of hop that the SLSS is at is at one.)), and
wherein the second indication comprises a second list that associates the first index with the SLSS identifier associated with the UE and with the indication of the relative position of the UE (paragraph [0061], "When the communication apparatus 20A receives a sidelink synchronization signal transmitted from another communication apparatus 20 and relays to the communication apparatus 20B the sidelink synchronization signal using the another communication apparatus 20 as a synchronization source, the communication apparatus 20A may transmit, to the communication apparatus 20B, a notification of a value obtained by adding one to the hop number transmitted from the another communication apparatus 20." (i.e., A slightly different scenario, apparatus 20A is receiving from another apparatus 20 not the base station, therefor UE2=apparatus 20A, and when sending the SLSS to UE3=apparatus 20B, it uses the notification of the hop number value received from apparatus 20 to then sent to 20B with the second list.)).
The proposed combination as well as the motivations for combining the references presented in the rejection of the parent claim apply to this claim and are incorporated herein by reference.
Regarding Claim 11, 3GPP’#86 in view of Ohara discloses all the limitations as claim 10.
Ohara further discloses wherein the second list further associates a second index with the SLSS identifier associated with the neighboring UE and associated with the indication of the relative position of the neighboring UE (paragraph [0061], "When the communication apparatus 20A receives a sidelink synchronization signal transmitted from another communication apparatus 20 and relays to the communication apparatus 20B the sidelink synchronization signal using the another communication apparatus 20 as a synchronization source, the communication apparatus 20A may transmit, to the communication apparatus 20B, a notification of a value obtained by adding one to the hop number transmitted from the another communication apparatus 20." (i.e., Now the 20B receives SLSS with a notification of hop+1 because the original source was from another apparatus.)).
The proposed combination as well as the motivations for combining the references presented in the rejection of the parent claim apply to this claim and are incorporated herein by reference.
Regarding Claim 13, 3GPP’#86 in view of Ohara discloses all the limitations as claim 11.
Ohara further discloses wherein at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to: generate the second list by appending information to the first list (paragraph [0062], "the transmitting communication apparatus 20 may include the number of hops in a payload of PSBCH transmitted by the transmitting communication apparatus 20." (i.e., adding the hop number to the payload of PSBCH and therefor generating a second list.)).
The proposed combination as well as the motivations for combining the references presented in the rejection of the parent claim apply to this claim and are incorporated herein by reference.
Regarding Claim 14, 3GPP’#86 in view of Ohara discloses all the limitations as claim 13.
Ohara further discloses wherein the at least one processor configured to cause the UE to generate the second list by appending information to the first list is configured to cause the UE to: append information to the first list using the first index (paragraph [0062], "the transmitting communication apparatus 20 may include the number of hops in a payload of PSBCH transmitted by the transmitting communication apparatus 20." (i.e., same explanation as parent claim of 13.)).
The proposed combination as well as the motivations for combining the references presented in the rejection of the parent claim apply to this claim and are incorporated herein by reference.
Regarding Claim 18, which is similar in scope to claim 1, thus rejected under the same rationale.
Regarding Claim 23, 3GPP’#86 in view of Ohara discloses all the limitations as claim 18.
3GPP'#86 further discloses identifying one or more parameters of one or more SLSS transmissions based at least in part on the first indication (page 1, 2.2 SLSS ID definition for USs having GNSS, lines 6-10, Fig.1:y1, (i.e., Bottom of Fig.1 UE2 receives multiple parameters from UE1 such as the y1=SLSS1 and inCL=True.)).
Regarding Claim 25, 3GPP’#86 in view of Ohara discloses all the limitations as claim 18.
3GPP'#86 further discloses wherein the neighboring UE is a first neighboring UE (page 2, Fig.1:(True,y1) (i.e., Bottom of Fig.1, UE1 sending a y1 wherein y1=SLSS1 and therefore showing as the first neighboring UE.)),
and wherein receiving the first indication includes receiving the first indication from the first neighboring UE (page 2, Fig.1, UE2 receiving (TRUE, y1) (i.e., Bottom of Fig.1 UE2 receives y1 which is SLSS1 which is a first indication and U1 is the neighboring of UE2.)).
Regarding Claim 28, which is similar in scope to combination of claims 6, 10, 11, and 13, thus rejected under the same rationale.
Regarding Claim 29, which is similar in scope to combination of claims 6, 10, 11, 13, and 14, thus rejected under the same rationale.
Claim(s) 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over 3GPP'#86 (3GPP TSG RAN WGI Meeting #86, R1-166200) (IDS 3 pages, 03/04/2025) in view of OHARA (US-20220070805-A1) in further view of 3GPP'#96 (3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #96, R1-1902800) (IDS 5 pages, 03/04/2025).
Regarding Claim 3, 3GPP’#86 in view of Ohara discloses all the limitations as claim 2.
However, 3GPP’#86 in view of Ohara does not disclose wherein the identifier of the UE is a roadside unit (RSU) identifier.
3GPP'#96 discloses wherein the identifier of the UE is a roadside unit (RSU) identifier (page 2, 2.2, lines 6-11, "…in order to distinguish UE type RSUs, NR SLSS can be used…" (i.e., UE can be RSUs.)).
3GPP’#86 in view of Ohara and 3GPP'#96 are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of sidelink synchronization. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified 3GPP'#86 to have roadside unit (RSU) as disclosed in 3GPP’#96 as they are more stable for synchronization source for a reliable source for synchronization compared to mobile sources that can have different signal strength and might now cover areas like tunnels that are outside of coverage consistently and has a way to distinguish UE type RSUs (page 2, 2.2 SL-SSID, lines 6-10, “…stationary synchronization source is more stable than mobile ones, therefore, UE TYPE RSU may be treated specially in NR V2X…”).
Claim(s) 12, 24, and 27 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over 3GPP'#86 (3GPP TSG RAN WGI Meeting #86, R1-166200) (IDS 3 pages, 03/04/2025) in view of OHARA (US-20220070805-A1) in further view of KO (US-20220417872-A1) (IDS 5 pages, 03/04/2025).
Regarding Claim 12, 3GPP'#86 in view of Ohara discloses all the limitations as claim 11.
3GPP'#86 discloses the first list (page 2, Fig.1:UE1:y1=SLSS1 (i.e., UE1 sending a list of information such comprises of y1, and inCL.)) and the second list (page 2, Fig.1:UE2:y1=SLSS2 (same as UE1, the UE2 is sending second list to UE3.)).
However, 3GPP'#86 in view of Ohara do not explicitly disclose wherein the plurality of UEs are in SLSS synchronization and transmit, via a physical sidelink shared channel (PSSCH) once every one or more SLSS cycles, a plurality of lists, including the first list and the second list, that include indications of a plurality of synchronization sources.
KO discloses wherein the plurality of UEs (par.188, plurality of synchronization sources) are in SLSS synchronization and transmit (paragraph [0188], and Figs.14;15, "For example, a processor 102 of a first apparatus 100 may control a transceiver 106 to receive a plurality of sidelink-synchronization signal blocks (S-SSBs) from a plurality of synchronization sources. And, a processor 102 of a first apparatus 100 may select one synchronization source from among the plurality of synchronization sources," (i.e., Plurality of S-SSBs which contain SLSS is being transmitted.)),
via a physical sidelink shared channel (PSSCH) once every one or more SLSS cycles (paragraph [0188], "And, a processor 102 of a first apparatus 100 may control a transceiver 106 to transmit a physical sidelink control channel (PSCCH)…to a second apparatus 200 based on the synchronization." and pargraph [0171], Fig.14, "In step S1430, a first UE may perform sidelink communication with a second UE based on a selected synchronization source." (i.e., Par.188 to show that SLSS sending in PSCCH. Par.171 is to show that the first cycle being when first UE receive S-SSB as shown in Fig.14 and second cycle is at S1430.)),
a plurality of lists, including the first list and the second list (paragraph [0156], Fig.14, "Referring to FIG. 14, in step S1410, a first UE may receive a first S-SSB from a first synchronization source and receive a second S-SSB from a second synchronization source…For example, a first synchronization source and a second synchronization source may be at least one of GNSS, a base station, or a UE." (i.e., 3GPP#86 shows the first list and the second list and KO Fig.14 is to show that there is first list and second list since one of the synchronization sources could be a base station therefor being first list and a second source could be UE and therefor being a second list.)),
that include indications of a plurality of synchronization sources (paragraph [0188], Fig.14;15, "And, a processor 102 of a first apparatus 100 may select one synchronization source from among the plurality of synchronization sources, based on reference signal received power (RSRP) related to each of the plurality of S-SSBs and a sidelink synchronization signal (SLSS) ID related to each of the plurality of S-SSBs." (i.e., the first apparatus is able to identify a plurality of sources as shown in Fig.14 and as stated in Fig.15.)).
3GPP'#86 in view of Ohara and KO are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of sidelink synchronization. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified 3GPP'#86 to use the method of KO (Fig.14) in order for UE to choose the best SLSS signal in order to provide to the next UE with consistency such as power in order for all UEs to stay synchronized (KO, paragraph [0157], “In step S1420, a first UE may select either a first synchronization source or a second synchronization source as a synchronization source.” And paragraph [0159], “For example, when the difference between an RSRP value related to a first S-SSB and an RSRP value related to a second S-SSB is greater than or equal to a first threshold, a first UE may determine RSRP related to an S-SSB as a criterion for selecting a synchronization source.”). Further KO provides a plurality of synchronization sources and broadcast-type SL communications (KO, Fig.11(a)) in order to reduce the time to find a synchronization source.
Regarding Claim 24, 3GPP’#86 in view of Ohara discloses all the limitations as claim 18.
However, 3GPP’#86 in view of Ohara do not explicitly disclose wherein a mobile UE identifies a synchronization source from among the plurality of UEs in accordance with the first indication.
KO further discloses wherein a mobile UE identifies a synchronization source from among the plurality of UEs in accordance with the first indication (paragraph [0155], Fig.14, "FIG. 14 is a diagram showing a procedure in which a first UE selects a synchronization source and performs sidelink communication with a second UE based on the selected synchronization source, according to an embodiment of the present disclosure." (i.e., UE identifying multiple synchronization sources as shown in Fig.14.)).
3GPP'#86 in view of Ohara and KO are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of sidelink synchronization. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified 3GPP'#86 to use the method of KO (Fig.14) in order for UE to choose the best SLSS signal in order to provide to the next UE with consistency such as power in order for all UEs to stay synchronized (KO, paragraph [0157], “In step S1420, a first UE may select either a first synchronization source or a second synchronization source as a synchronization source.” And paragraph [0159], “For example, when the difference between an RSRP value related to a first S-SSB and an RSRP value related to a second S-SSB is greater than or equal to a first threshold, a first UE may determine RSRP related to an S-SSB as a criterion for selecting a synchronization source.”). Further KO provides a plurality of synchronization sources and broadcast-type SL communications (KO, Fig.11(a)) in order to reduce the time to find a synchronization source.
Regarding Claim 27, which is similar in scope to combination of claims 6, 10, 11, and 12, thus rejected under the same rationale.
Claim(s) 17, and 32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over 3GPP'#86 (3GPP TSG RAN WGI Meeting #86, R1-166200) (IDS 3 pages, 03/04/2025) in view of OHARA (US-20220070805-A1) in further view of Cheng (US 20200196255 A1).
Regarding Claim 17, 3GPP’#86 in view of Ohara discloses all the limitations as claim 1.
However, 3GPP’#86 in view of Ohara do not disclose wherein at least one processor of the one or more processors is configured to cause the UE to: identify overlapping SLSS transmissions using the first indication
Cheng discloses wherein at least one processor of the one or more processors is configured to cause the UE to: identify overlapping SLSS transmissions using the first indication (paragraph [0046], "In some of the present implementations, once the RX UE receives multiple SLSS transmission configurations from different groups or clusters, the RX UE may transmit the SLSSs based on the received SLSS transmission configurations if the resource allocations for the SLSSs are not overlapped. Conversely, if some of the resource allocations for the SLSSs are partially, or entirely, overlapped, the RX UE may choose one of the SLSS transmission configurations to perform the SLSS transmission, and may drop the other received SLSS transmission configuration(s)." (i.e., once the UE receives the SLSS signal it uses all the signals to determine which signal to transmit based on identifying the overlapping.)).
3GPP’#86 in view of Ohara and Cheng are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of sidelink synchronization. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified 3GPP'#86 to have the UE to have a plurality of UE transmit SLSS signals but to also have a UE identify collision because there is a need for detecting collision of sidelink and providing control (Cheng, paragraph [0004], “However, collisions may happen when a wireless communication device is configured to perform transmissions or receptions on two or more physical sidelink channels at the same time. Therefore, there is a need in the art for providing methods and apparatuses for collision control of sidelink communications in wireless communication systems.”).
Regarding Claim 32, which is similar in scope to claim 17, thus rejected under the same rationale.
Claim(s) 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over 3GPP'#86 (3GPP TSG RAN WGI Meeting #86, R1-166200) (IDS 3 pages, 03/04/2025) in view of OHARA (US-20220070805-A1) in further view of Hu (US 20240172118 A1).
Regarding Claim 19, 3GPP’#86 in view of Ohara discloses all the limitations as claim 18.
However, 3GPP’#86 in view of Ohara do not disclose further comprising: triggering [[an]]another SLSS search responsive to a packet error rate exceeding a threshold.
Hu discloses further comprising: triggering [[an]]another SLSS search responsive to a packet error rate exceeding a threshold (paragraph [0062], "In an embodiment of the present application, the UE may perform the candidate SLSS detection to select or reselect a synchronization reference source for a sidelink communication with another UE when a quality of service (QOS) requirement of an upcoming service for a sidelink communication with another UE is within a first threshold range. The QoS requirement of the upcoming service for the sidelink communication with another UE may indicate, such as, service latency (e.g., packet delay budget), reliability (e.g., packet error rate)," (i.e., triggering SLSS detect selection or reselect based on QoS such as packet error rate.)).
3GPP’#86 in view of Ohara and Hu are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of sidelink synchronization. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified 3GPP'#86 to implement a SLSS search when the packet error rate exceeds a threshold in order to for UE participation device to device (D2D) communication to not provide failed data transmission or any unreliable source for synchronization to another UE and this will create a more reliable SLSS to other devices.
Regarding Claim 20, 3GPP’#86 in view of Ohara discloses all the limitations as claim 18.
However, 3GPP’#86 in view of Ohara do not disclose triggering [[an]]another SLSS search responsive to the first indication not including any SLSS identifier associated with a navigation-system-synchronized UE of the plurality of UEs.
Hu discloses triggering [[an]]another SLSS search responsive to the first indication not including any SLSS identifier associated with a navigation-system-synchronized UE of the plurality of UEs (paragraph [0068], "In another embodiment of the present application, in the case that a current synchronization reference source of the UE is another UE which is not synchronized to a GNSS or a BS directly or indirectly (that is, the UE has a synchronization reference source from P6 group UEs in Table 1 (i.e. any other UEs, starting with the UE with the highest PSBCH-RSRP results)), the UE performs the candidate SLSS detection to select or reselect a synchronization reference source for a sidelink communication with another UE…" (i.e., do a SLSS reselection of the SLSS is received is not from a UE connected to a GNSS.)).
3GPP’#86 in view of Ohara and Hu are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of sidelink synchronization. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified 3GPP'#86 to implement a SLSS search when the SLSS is not from the GNSS because using the SLSS that are from a GNSS are more reliable source for synchronization compared to a UE that is not directly connected is a GNSS or a BS and can reduce time offset compared to D2D signals.
Claim(s) 26 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over 3GPP'#86 (3GPP TSG RAN WGI Meeting #86, R1-166200) (IDS 3 pages, 03/04/2025) in view of OHARA (US-20220070805-A1) in further view of LI (WO 2018143854 A1).
Regarding Claim 26, 3GPP’#86 in view of Ohara discloses all the limitations as claim 18.
However, 3GPP’#86 in view of Ohara do not explicitly disclose wherein receiving the first indication includes receiving the first indication from
LI discloses wherein receiving the first indication includes receiving the first indication from (page 3, lines 25-35, Fig.1, "…Access Network 100. A Radio Network Node (RNN) 102 such as an eNB operates in the communications network 100. The RNN 102 provides coverage within a coverage area 102a, sometimes referred to as a cell." and page 5, lines 1-6, "In particular, unlike the Rel.12 sidelink synchronization, the wireless device may select as a synchronization source not only the eNB timing (i.e., acquired via the PSS/SSS) or the timing of UEs in the surroundings (i.e., acquired via the Sidelink Synchronization Signals SLSS), but also from the GNSS.").
3GPP’#86 in view of Ohara and LI are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of sidelink synchronization. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified 3GPP'#86 to implement LI network and method is because the UEs in 3GPP’#86 can take advantage of network infrastructure when available and enable a tighter integration between communications (LI, page 3, lines 17-24, “V2x communication may take advantage of a network (NW) infrastructure, when available, but at least basic V2x connectivity should be possible even in case of lack of coverage. Providing an LTE-based V2x interface may be economically advantageous because of the LTE economies of scale and it may enable tighter integration between communications with the NW infrastructure (V2I) and a pedestrian (V2P) and a vehicle (V2V), as compared to using a dedicated V2x technology.”).
Claim(s) 15, and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over 3GPP'#86 (3GPP TSG RAN WGI Meeting #86, R1-166200) (IDS 3 pages, 03/04/2025) in view of OHARA (US-20220070805-A1) in view of Chae (US 20190116565 A1) in further view Kaur (US 20170142741 A1).
Regarding Claim 15, 3GPP’#86 in view of Ohara discloses all the limitations as claim 1.
However, 3GPP’#86 in view of Ohara do not disclose wherein at least one processor of the one or more processors is configured to cause the UE to: derive a coordinated universal time (UTC) time associated with the UE using a UTC time, associated with the neighboring UE, carried in the first indication; and generate the second indication by appending the UTC time associated with the UE to the first indication.
Chae discloses wherein at least one processor of the one or more processors is configured to cause the UE to: derive a coordinated universal time (UTC) time associated with the UE using a UTC time, associated with the neighboring UE, carried in the first indication (paragraph [0108], "In this case, the UE needs to transmit the timing difference to a sidelink signal receiving UE. The timing difference may be transmitted to the sidelink signal receiving UE by at least one of an SLSS, a PSBCH, a PSSCH, or a PSCCH. Since the receiving UE may not know a transmission timing of a signal indicating the timing difference, the signal indicating the timing difference may be transmitted on the basis of the UTC timing of the UE." (i.e., The UE transmitting its own timing information based on UTC standard in the SLSS. “Deriving” is reading as obtaining from a specific source in this case a UE.)).
3GPP’#86 in view of Ohara and Chae are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of sidelink synchronization. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified 3GPP'#86 to include UTC time in the first indication in order for the second UE that is receiving the time to reduce ambiguity of a UE operation due to not knowing the time of reception and transmission (Chae, paragraph [0024], “According to the present disclosure, the ambiguity of a UE operation, which may arise from GNSS timing-based sidelink transmission and reception of a UE, can be reduced.”).
However, 3GPP'#86 in view of Ohara in further view of Chae do not disclose and generate the second indication by appending the UTC time associated with the UE to the first indication.
Kaur discloses and generate another indication by appending the UTC time associated with the UE to the first indication (paragraph [0340], "The location information may be associated to an in-coverage WTRU. A WTRU (e.g., transmitting and/or receiving)…The synchronization message may include a hop-count indicating the number of hops from the source node or an indication whether the transmitting entity is the source entity or not. The synchronization message may include a frame number (e.g., a SFN number) and/or a time reference number used as a reference to synchronize reception and/or transmission patterns." (i.e., Appending a time reference number to a synchronize transmission. Chae discloses the UTC time, and 3GPP'86 discloses UE2 sending the SLSS2 to UE3, and with Kaur sending with the time attached.)).
3GPP'#86 in view of Ohara in further view of Chae and Kaur are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of sidelink synchronization. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified 3GPP'#86 to provide a time reference number in synchronize reception and/or transmission to provide a more accurate time for timing of user equipment’s and can be forwarded to other devices.
Regarding Claim 30, which is similar in scope to claim 15, thus rejected under the same rationale.
Claim(s) 16 and 31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over 3GPP'#86 (3GPP TSG RAN WGI Meeting #86, R1-166200) (IDS 3 pages, 03/04/2025) in view of OHARA (US-20220070805-A1) in view of KO (US-20220417872-A1) in further view of LUO (US 20220360389 A1).
Regarding Claim 16, 3GPP’#86 in view of Ohara discloses all the limitations as claim 1.
However, 3GPP'#86 in view of Ohara do not disclose wherein at least one processor of the one or more processors is configured to cause the UE to: decode a plurality of indications including the first indication; and identify a coordinated universal time (UTC) time from an indication, of the plurality of indications, that the UE decoded more recently than any other indications of the plurality of indications.
KO discloses wherein at least one processor of the one or more processors is configured to cause the UE to: decode a plurality of indications including the first indication (paragraph [0169], and Fig.14, "For example, in case that a plurality of first synchronization sources including a first synchronization source transmits a synchronization signal to a first UE based on GNSS, and a plurality of second synchronization sources including a second synchronization source transmits a synchronization signal that is not based on GNSS (hereinafter, non-GNSS) to a first UE, a first UE may select any one GNSS-based representative synchronization source from among a plurality of first synchronization sources based on" (i.e., UE receiving plurality of synchronization sources, the UE is decoding them by choosing the source to use.)).
3GPP'#86 in view of Ohara and KO are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of sidelink synchronization. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified 3GPP'#86 to use the method of KO (Fig.14) in order to have the 3GPP'#86 obtain SLSS from multiple sources in order to increase the coverage of synchronization and KO also discloses choosing the best source in order to provide to other UE thus making the source for SLSS flexible (KO, paragraph [0157], "In step S1420, a first UE may select either a first synchronization source or a second synchronization source as a synchronization source." And paragraph [0159], "For example, when the difference between an RSRP value related to a first S-SSB and an RSRP value related to a second S-SSB is greater than or equal to a first threshold, a first UE may determine RSRP related to an S-SSB as a criterion for selecting a synchronization source.").
However, 3GPP’#86 in view of Ohara in further view of KO do not disclose decode a plurality of indications including the first indication; and identify a coordinated universal time (UTC) time from an indication, of the plurality of indications, that the UE decoded more recently than any other indications of the plurality of indications.
LUO discloses identify a coordinated universal time (UTC) time from an indication, of the plurality of indications, that the UE decoded more recently than any other indications of the plurality of indications (paragraph [0335], "derives a timing-related parameter of a sidelink such as a hyper direct frame number, a direct frame number, a direct half frame number, a direct subframe number, and a direct slot number by using a current UTC time, so that all user equipment (UE) and base stations and/or other entities operating on the sidelink can be synchronized in the timing parameter, ensuring correct transmission and reception of the user equipment (UE) and base stations and/or other entities on the sidelink." (i.e., Ohara discloses plurality of synchronization sources in par.66 and LUO discloses using the current UTC time in order to ensure the correct reception of a sidelink and provide the correct synchronization when transmitting to a different UE such as Ohara Fig.8 or 3GPP'#86.)).
3GPP’#86 in view of Ohara in further view of KO and LUO are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of sidelink synchronization. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified 3GPP'#86 in order to use current UTC time in order to ensuring the correct and reception UE and base stations on the sidelink (LUO, paragraph [0335], “ensuring correct transmission and reception of the user equipment (UE) and base stations and/or other entities on the sidelink.”).
Regarding Claim 31, which is similar in scope to claim 16, thus rejected under the same rationale.
Claim(s) 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over 3GPP'#86 (3GPP TSG RAN WGI Meeting #86, R1-166200) (IDS 3 pages, 03/04/2025) in view of OHARA (US-20220070805-A1) in view of in view of Chae (US 20190116565 A1) in further view of Bryson (US 20200018861 A1).
Regarding Claim 21, 3GPP’#86 in view of Ohara discloses all the limitations as claim 18.
3GPP’#86 discloses a second indication transmitted by the UE (page 1-2, 2.2 SLSS ID definition for UEs having GNSS, lines 6-10, Fig.1:y2 (i.e., Bottom of Figure 1 UE2 is transmitting to UE3 with "SLSS3")).
However, 3GPP’#86 in view of Ohara do not disclose wherein the first indication further includes a first indication of a first time, and wherein the second indication further includes a second indication of a second time derived from the first time.
Chae discloses wherein the first indication further includes a first indication of a first time (paragraph [0108], "In this case, the UE needs to transmit the timing difference to a sidelink signal receiving UE. The timing difference may be transmitted to the sidelink signal receiving UE by at least one of an SLSS, a PSBCH, a PSSCH, or a PSCCH. Since the receiving UE may not know a transmission timing of a signal indicating the timing difference, the signal indicating the timing difference may be transmitted on the basis of the UTC timing of the UE." (i.e., The UE transmitting its own timing information based on UTC standard in the SLSS.)).
3GPP’#86 in view of Ohara and Chae are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of sidelink synchronization. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified 3GPP'#86 to include UTC time in the first indication in order for the second UE that is receiving the time to reduce ambiguity of a UE operation due to not knowing the time of reception and transmission (Chae, paragraph [0024], “According to the present disclosure, the ambiguity of a UE operation, which may arise from GNSS timing-based sidelink transmission and reception of a UE, can be reduced.”).
However, 3GPP'#86 in view of Ohara in further view of Chae do not disclose and wherein [[the]]a second indication transmitted by the UE further includes a second indication of a second time derived from the first time.
Bryson discloses and wherein [[the]]a second indication transmitted by the UE further includes a second indication of a second time derived from the first time (paragraph [0030], "Utilizing a common or universal time source as the source for the common time signal may enable the IEDs 26 to generate time-synchronized data. In some examples, the IEDs 26 may receive the common time signal from a common time source…the common time source, such as a Global Position Satellite (GPS) 36, Global Navigation Satellite System (GLONASS, GNSS), or the like…the common time signal may be directly received from the common time source, derived from information (e.g., a time, an indication of a time) received from the common time source, and/or based on a signal (e.g., a time, an indication of a time) received from the common time source." (i.e., think of IEDs being UE and receiving a common time source such as a sidelink as disclosed in 3GP'#86 since UE1 communicates with GNSS and universal time source is reading as UTC, and based on the received time its own time data, thus, a second time derived from the first time.)).
3GPP'#86 in view of Ohara in further view of Chae and Bryson are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of timing of mobile device and positioning. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified 3GPP'#86 to use time from sources like GNSS in order to verify the accuracy of the information is relevant and accurate derive its own timing and enable the UEs to determine if the information received is accurate (Bryson, paragraph [0072], “The systems and methods may use a time from a remote IED and a time from a local IED to determine that the common time signals are synchronous. In this way, the systems and methods may enable the local IED to determine when information gathered via the remote IED is accurate, and thus may be used to determine control operations.”).
Regarding Claim 22, 3GPP'#86 in view of Ohara in view of Chae in further view of Bryson discloses all the limitations as claim 21.
Chae further discloses wherein the first time is a first coordinated universal time (UTC) time (paragraph [0108], UE by at least one of an SLSS, a PSBCH, a PSSCH, or a PSCCH… the signal indicating the timing difference may be transmitted on the basis of the UTC timing of the UE),
Bryson further discloses and wherein the second time is a second UTC time (paragraph [0030], "Utilizing a common or universal time source as the source for the common time signal may enable the IEDs 26 to generate time-synchronized data…the common time source, such as a Global Position Satellite (GPS) 36, Global Navigation Satellite System (GLONASS, GNSS),… derived from information (e.g., a time, an indication of a time) received from the common time source, (i.e., examiner reading the universal time source is UTC and Chae discloses UTC time.)).
The proposed combination as well as the motivations for combining the references presented in the rejection of the parent claim apply to this claim and are incorporated herein by reference.
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 Erkin S. Abdullaev whose telephone number is (571)272-4135. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday - 8:00 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Wesley Kim can be reached at (571)272-7867. 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.
ERKIN S. ABDULLAEV
Examiner
Art Unit 2648
/ERKIN ABDULLAEV/Examiner, Art Unit 2648
/WESLEY L KIM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2648