DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . In virtue of the Application filed on 11/08/2023, in which claims 1-16 are presented for examination, wherein claims 1, 13, 14, 15, 16 are recited in independent form. The present application claims foreign priority to EP21173057.7 with filing date of 05/10/2021 (certified copy received on 12/25/2023) and is a continuation of PCT/EP2022/062454 with a filing date of 05/09/2022.
Claim Interpretation
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art, without importing limitations from the specification. The Examiner notes that the construction of the independent claims 1, 13, 14, 15, 16 and dependent claims 2-12 set forth many, sets of alternative limitations set forth with the term ‘and/or’. The Examiner notes, under a BRI
, the term and/or is interpreted as an ‘or’ as it embodies the broadest reasonable interpretation of the limitation. For Example, a BRI of claim 1 includes:
1. A communication system comprising one or more first user equipment(s) and one or more second user equipment(s), wherein one or multiple user equipment(s) out of the one or more first and second user equipment(s) are selected to be the one or more first user equipment(s) at least based on explicit request which is defined as follows:
wherein another parameter from an entity of first or second user equipment is considered/used to determine the one or more first user equipment(s);
or
wherein a second user equipment is considered to determine the one or more first user equipment;
or
wherein the one or more first user equipment(s) is determined to be the one or more first user equipment(s) sending an assisted information message when it is triggered based on an explicit request from the one or more second user equipment(s) or (pre-)configured conditions;
wherein the assisted information message or coordination information is limited to be sent by the one or more first user equipment(s).
Under a BRI the claims only require one of the alternatives: wherein another parameter from an entity of first or second user equipment is considered/used to determine the one or more first user equipment(s); or wherein a second user equipment is considered to determine the one or more first user equipment; or wherein the one or more first user equipment(s) is determined to be the one or more first user equipment(s) sending an assisted information message when it is triggered based on an explicit request from the one or more second user equipment(s) or (pre-)configured conditions, listed in the claims. Similar claim interpretation is used for independent claims 13, 14, 15 ,16 and any place the term ‘and/or’ is employed in the claims setting forth a series of alternatives in a BRI.
The Examiner also notes that the claim sets forth several list of limitations which only require “at least one of” the various alternatives. Accordingly, the BRI of any claim which sets forth ‘at least one of’ requires only one of the alternatives. Any limitations which further modify a limitation only included in the alternative is also not a part of a claim in which one of the other alternatives is used for claim interpretation. The Examiner also notes the rejections below under 35 USC § 112, which set forth claims which fail to particularly point out and distinctly claim that which the Applicant regards as the invention. The lack of particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming that which the Applicant regards as the invention as set forth below in the Claim Rejections under 35 USC § 112 yields specific difficulty in claim interpretation as the meaning and construction are not particularly pointed out nor distinctly claimed. The Examiner makes, what he considers the most reasonable interpretation, and other reasonable assumptions of the claim language in light of the rejections under 35 USC § 112 noted below in order to provide the Applicant with a rejection under 35 USC § 103, despite the severe lack of clarity and definiteness demonstrated by the rejections under 35 USC § 112 noted 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 1-16 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 1-16 the claims set forth various sets of limitations which fail to particularly point out and distinctly claim that which the Applicant regards as the invention including:
Regarding claims 1-16, use of terms separated by ‘/’ (e.g. and/or, considered/used, available/free etc.) use of terms separated by ‘/’ fails to particularly set forth which of the terms are required by the claims as the terms separated by ‘/’ imbue the claims with different meaning and obfuscate the limitation imposed; claims 1-16, either the claims themselves or when considering limitations inherited by dependency, employ ‘/’ and a similarly rejected wherever the use appears in the claims including claims: 1, 13-16, 2, 3, 6, 8, 10, 11, 12
Regarding claims 1-16, use of limitations which are presented in parentheticals (i.e. ‘(‘ and ‘)’) (e.g. “(pre-) configured”, etc.), the particular employment of parentheticals fails to particularly point out or distinctly claim that which the Applicant regards as the invention as one of ordinary skill in the art is not apprised as to if the terms contained within the parentheticals is required by the claims; the meaning and requirement of the claim limitations are drastically altered based on the inclusion or exclusion of the terms contained within the parentheticals; all claims, including at least claims 1, 13, 14, 15, 16 and all claims which depend thereon which employ parentheticals are rejected by the same reasoning;
Regarding claims 1, 3, 4, 6, 9, 13, 14, 15, 16, the claims utilize bulleted notation for individual limitations (e.g. claims 1, 3, 4, 6, 9, 13, 14, 15, 16) in various forms, the impact and meaning of the formatting renders the claims as failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim that which the Applicant regards as the invention as one of ordinary skill in the art would be unable to determine the impact or the various bulleted aspects on the limitations;
Various claims, including the independent claims and the claims which inherit the limitations based on dependance thereon, recite limitations which are prefaced by e.g.; use of the term render the claims as failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim that which the Applicant regards as the invention because one of ordinary skill in the art would not be able to determine if the limitations following ‘e.g.’ are required by the claims; examples of claims employing ‘e.g.’ including, but are not limited to 3, 4, 6, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 and all claims that depend thereon, which are rejected for the reasoning set forth above;
Claims 1, 13, and 15 and the claims that depend thereon (i.e. claims 1-13, 15-16) recite the limitation “is considered/used to” or “is considered to”, the limitations fail to particularly point out and distinctly claim that which the Applicant regards as the invention because the limitation fails to clearly and particularly point out the action taking place and whether the limitation s required by the claims; also the claims fail to particularly point out and distinctly claim how a device can be considered to determine, and if determination is required or only needed to regarded as considered determined;
Claim 8 is rejected as it ends with punctuation “; and/or” and is not a complete sentence and does not end with a period; the aforementioned characteristics fail to particularly point out and distinctly claim that which the Applicant regards as the invention; One of ordinary skill in the art would not be able to determine if the claim is incomplete or missing verbiage and the idea conveyed is incomplete.
Regarding claims 1-16, the claims are set forth in a narrative manner which fails to particularly point out and distinctly claim that which the Applicant regards as the invention; for example claim 9 sets forth limitations including some set forth as ‘e.g.’ as well as stating within parenthesis “any of the following solutions may apply:…” as well as “any user equipment could propose UE-A resources to be shared…” which are narrative in nature and fail to particularly point out and distinctly claim that which the Applicant regards as the invention; Examiner points to claim 9 as an example but the claims are replete with narrative language that may to be drawn directly from a specification document without appropriate manipulation to render the language appropriate for a claim. The claims require amendment to conform with requirements for limitations of a claim to particularly point out and distinctly claim that which the Applicant regards as the invention;
Independent claims 1, 13, 14, 15, 16 recite “wherein one or multiple user equipment(s) out of the one or more first and second user equipment(s) are selected to be the one or more first user equipment(s)” wherein the use of the term first and/or second user equipment(s) in multiple context fails to particularly point out and distinctly claim that which the Applicant regards as the invention; one of ordinary skill in the art would not be able to determine what selection of a UE to be a UE would require in the context of the claims; claims 2-12 which depend on claim 1 also inherit the limitation in virtue of dependence thereon, and do not provide additional limitations which address the issue and are similarly rejected; the Specification sets forth selection of a UE of a set of UEs to serve as a UE-A or CO-UE or coordinating UE however the limitations of the claims in question fail to adequately convey such a process;
The preamble of claims 1, 13, 14, 15, 16 set forth a selection of a UE based on explicit request, wherein the various alternative options set forth ‘determine’ the connection between the ‘selection’ of the preamble and the ‘determine’ of the alternative options later in the claim and in independent claims is not particularly pointed out or distinctly claimed; claims 2-12 which depend on claim 1 also inherit the limitation in virtue of dependence thereon, and do not provide additional limitations which address the issue and are similarly rejected;
Claims 1, 13, 14, 15, 16 set forth an “entity of first or second user equipment” without adequately defining what the entity is; the claims fail to incorporate references to the entity or connect it to the functionality of claims and fail to particularly point out how it accomplishes the selection of the UE in the context of the claims; as such the claims fail to particularly point out and distinctly claim that which the Applicant regards as the invention; claims 2-12 which depend on claim 1 also inherit the limitation in virtue of dependence thereon, and do not provide additional limitations which address the issue and are similarly rejected;
Regarding claims 1-16, a plurality of the claims set forth acronyms including, for example AIM(s), GNSS, RSSI, RSRP, SL, without defining the acronyms in the claims; ambiguous use of acronyms renders the claims as failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim that which the Applicant regards as the invention;
Claim 6 sets forth the limitation “QoS of itself towards intended second user equipment” which conveys no clear meaning which particularly points out or distinctly claims that which the Applicant regards as the invention; the Examiner is unable to extract any intelligible meaning from the limitations;
Claims 13 and 14 set forth “user equipment of a communication system comprising one or more first user equipment(s)” wherein the meaning and requirement of a UE that comprises a UE is not clear; the language noted above renders the claims as failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim that which that Applicant regards as the invention;
Claim 7 recites “the measurement” the term lacks antecedent basis;
With respect to 35 USC 112 (b), regarding claims 1-16, the claims are replete with issues related to, or are similar to those identified above. As the claims are replete with such issues, it is impractical for the Examiner to be able to identify every single issue. The Applicant is required to perform a complete review of all the claims with particular emphasis on compliance with 35 USC 112 to correct all such rejections, or potential rejections in connection with any response.
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over NPL document “Considerations on Inter-UE Coordination for Mode 2 Enhancements” to 3GPP(R1-2007788) (hereinafter d1) (copy provided by Applicant in connection to the IDS of 01/12/2024) in view of US-20230362934 to Grieco (hereinafter d2).
Regarding claim 1, as to the limitations “A communication system comprising one or more first user equipment(s) and one or more second user equipment(s), wherein one or multiple user equipment(s) out of the one or more first and second user equipment(s) are selected to be the one or more first user equipment(s) at least based on explicit request which is defined as follows:
wherein another parameter from an entity of first or second user equipment is considered/used to determine the one or more first user equipment(s); and/or
wherein a second user equipment is considered to determine the one or more first user equipment; and/or
wherein the one or more first user equipment(s) is determined to be the one or more first user equipment(s) sending an assisted information message when it is triggered based on an explicit request from the one or more second user equipment(s) or (pre-)configured conditions;
wherein the assisted information message or coordination information is limited to be sent by the one or more first user equipment(s)” d1 discloses selection of a UE from a plurality of UEs to coordinate inter UE coordination of communication (see d1 section 3.1); including using at least one of a parameter (see d1 section 3.1); and/or another UE (see d1 section 3.1); and/or assisted information messages (see d1 section 3.1); and/or based on triggered or preconfigured conditions (see d1 section and 3.1);
D1 may not explicitly disclose device elements “A communication system comprising one or more first user equipment(s) and one or more second user equipment(s)” and in connection with the limitations noted above as met by d1 d2 also disclose a system (see d2 Fig. 1, 18) comprising a plurality of UEs (i.e. one or more first user equipment(s) and one or more second user equipment(s)) (see d2 Figs. 1, 15); wherein the system executes a method in connection with system elements (see d2 para. 0005-0006); wherein the method may be embodied in various forms including system, device, method and computer readable medium (see d2 para. 0090, 0099, 0101, 0112, 0152-0153); which involve selection of a UE to service as a coordinating UE for inter UE coordination of communication (see d2 Fig. 18, para. 0137-0139); the selection involving one or more of another parameter and/or determination by another device (see d2 para. 0146-0150) and/or assisted information messages (see d2 para. 0146); and/or based on triggered or by BS pre configuration (i.e. preconfigured conditions) (see d2 para. 0139), wherein the disclosure of d2 is also equally applicable to all the limitations noted above as being met by d1 and is also applied thereto.
The combination of d1 and d2 contains ample teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings of d2 regarding inter ue coordination techniques known in the art at the time of filing to the teaching of d1 regarding inter ue coordination to arrive at the claimed invention according to the motivation known from d1 in view of d2 including to improve inter UE coordination stability and efficiency (see d2 para. 0005-0007). Such teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation, is found in references d1 and/or d2, as well as being found squarely within the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would look to modify d1 with the teaching of d2 in order to achieve the stated advantages of improved performance. Furthermore, the techniques are employed in the same field of endeavor (wireless communication) in a similar manner (for inter UE coordination) for similar purposes (improved communication performance) which would yield a reasonable expectation of success when considered by one of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claim 2, as to the limitation “The communication system according to claim 1, wherein the one or more first user equipment(s) are configured to be determined as the one or more first user equipment(s) and/or one or more second user equipment(s) to transmit the assisted information message or coordination information; and/or wherein the one or more first user equipment(s) and/or a further first user equipment(s) are configured to transmit inter- user equipment(s) coordination” d1 in view of d2 disclose selection of a UE according to the reasoning set forth above and/or by using assisted information message or coordination information (see d1 section 3, 3.1; d2 Fig. 19 para. 0137-0139, para. 0146, 0150) which leads to a UE transmitting inter- user equipment(s) coordination see d1 section 3, 3.1; d2 Fig. 19 para. 0137-0139, para. 0146, 0150).
The combination of d1 and d2 contains ample teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings of d2 regarding inter ue coordination techniques known in the art at the time of filing to the teaching of d1 regarding inter ue coordination to arrive at the claimed invention according to the motivation known from d1 in view of d2 including to improve inter UE coordination stability and efficiency (see d2 para. 0005-0007). Such teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation, is found in references d1 and/or d2, as well as being found squarely within the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would look to modify d1 with the teaching of d2 in order to achieve the stated advantages of improved performance. Furthermore, the techniques are employed in the same field of endeavor (wireless communication) in a similar manner (for inter UE coordination) for similar purposes (improved communication performance) which would yield a reasonable expectation of success when considered by one of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claim 3, as to the limitation “The communication system according to claim 1, wherein the one or more first user equipment(s) are determined based on a certain position of the one or more first user equipment(s) and/or second user equipment(s) and/or a geographical area of the one or more first user equipment(s) and/or second user equipment(s) and/or proximity of the one or more first user equipment(s) to the second or another user equipment(s) and/or distance between the of the one or more first user equipment(s) and the second or another user equipment(s); and/or wherein the one or more first user equipment(s) are determined based on fulfillment of at least one of the conditions below: zone or zone length where the one or more first user equipment(s) are; and/or wherein the zone is indicated in control information; a threshold is provided to determine the maximum allowed distance between the one or more first user equipment(s) and the one or more second user equipment(s); a distance or a proximity derived from an absolute position of first and second user equipment(s) or a relative distance of first and second user equipment(s); a distance or a proximity derived from geographical information of the one or more first and second user equipment(s) (e.g. from the GNSS or from measurements (e.g. relative distance), from the received signal strength (e.g. RSSI, RSRP), or from a signal runtime or from a SL positioning reference signal” d1 in view of d2 disclose selection of a UE to be a coordinating UE based at least on location (see d1 section 4.4; d2 para. 0135, 0195, 0208) from which a geographical area of the one or more first user equipment(s) and/or second user equipment(s) and/or proximity of the one or more first user equipment(s) to the second or another user equipment(s) and/or distance between the of the one or more first user equipment(s) and the second or another user equipment(s); and/or wherein the one or more first user equipment(s) are determined based on fulfillment of at least one of the conditions below: zone or zone length where the one or more first user equipment(s) are; and/or wherein the zone is indicated in control information; a threshold is provided to determine the maximum allowed distance between the one or more first user equipment(s) and the one or more second user equipment(s); a distance or a proximity derived from an absolute position of first and second user equipment(s) or a relative distance of first and second user equipment(s); a distance or a proximity derived from geographical information of the one or more first and second user equipment(s) (e.g. from the GNSS or from measurements (e.g. relative distance), from the received signal strength (e.g. RSSI, RSRP), or from a signal runtime or from a SL positioning reference signal would all be obvious aspects drawn therefrom or directly disclosed by d1 and/or d2.
The combination of d1 and d2 contains ample teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings of d2 regarding inter ue coordination techniques known in the art at the time of filing to the teaching of d1 regarding inter ue coordination to arrive at the claimed invention according to the motivation known from d1 in view of d2 including to improve inter UE coordination stability and efficiency (see d2 para. 0005-0007). Such teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation, is found in references d1 and/or d2, as well as being found squarely within the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would look to modify d1 with the teaching of d2 in order to achieve the stated advantages of improved performance. Furthermore, the techniques are employed in the same field of endeavor (wireless communication) in a similar manner (for inter UE coordination) for similar purposes (improved communication performance) which would yield a reasonable expectation of success when considered by one of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claim 4, as to the limitation “The communication system according to claim 1, wherein the one or more first user equipment(s) are determined based on a type parameter; wherein the type parameter is determined based on fulfillment of at least one of the conditions below: the one or more first user equipment(s) are a relay UE; the one or more first user equipment(s) are configured with a certain capability (e.g. at least sensing capability or feedback transmission); the one or more first user equipment(s) are a non-power-saving user equipment(s) (e.g. no battery-based UE, but vehicular UE); first user equipment(s) users a defined or predefined DRX configuration (e.g. same or similar UEs, UEs comprising the same on-duration)” d1 in view of d2 disclose selection based on device type (see d2 para. 0140) encompassing at least one of: the one or more first user equipment(s) are a relay UE; the one or more first user equipment(s) are configured with a certain capability (e.g. at least sensing capability or feedback transmission); the one or more first user equipment(s) are a non-power-saving user equipment(s) (e.g. no battery-based UE, but vehicular UE); first user equipment(s) users a defined or predefined DRX configuration (e.g. same or similar UEs, UEs comprising the same on-duration).
The combination of d1 and d2 contains ample teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings of d2 regarding inter ue coordination techniques known in the art at the time of filing to the teaching of d1 regarding inter ue coordination to arrive at the claimed invention according to the motivation known from d1 in view of d2 including to improve inter UE coordination stability and efficiency (see d2 para. 0005-0007). Such teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation, is found in references d1 and/or d2, as well as being found squarely within the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would look to modify d1 with the teaching of d2 in order to achieve the stated advantages of improved performance. Furthermore, the techniques are employed in the same field of endeavor (wireless communication) in a similar manner (for inter UE coordination) for similar purposes (improved communication performance) which would yield a reasonable expectation of success when considered by one of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claim 5, as to the limitation “The communication system according to claim 1, wherein the type parameter is configured or (pre-)configured through the higher layer signaling” d1 in view of d2 disclose the known technique of configuration through higher layer signaling (see d1 section 4, 4.4, d2 para. 0088, 0138, 0145).
The combination of d1 and d2 contains ample teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings of d2 regarding inter ue coordination techniques known in the art at the time of filing to the teaching of d1 regarding inter ue coordination to arrive at the claimed invention according to the motivation known from d1 in view of d2 including to improve inter UE coordination stability and efficiency (see d2 para. 0005-0007). Such teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation, is found in references d1 and/or d2, as well as being found squarely within the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would look to modify d1 with the teaching of d2 in order to achieve the stated advantages of improved performance. Furthermore, the techniques are employed in the same field of endeavor (wireless communication) in a similar manner (for inter UE coordination) for similar purposes (improved communication performance) which would yield a reasonable expectation of success when considered by one of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claim 6, as to the limitation “The communication system according to claim 1, wherein the one or more first user equipment(s) are determined based on measurement or parameters; wherein the measurement or parameter is determined based on at least one of the conditions below: other nearby first user equipment(s) transmitting the same number of first user equipment(s) transmitting the AIMs are beyond a pre- configured threshold; load of the network ( based on e.g. CBR measurement); available / free resource of a user equipment(s) (e.g. may depend on how much resources are needed by the user equipment(s) itself); relative velocity of the one or more first and second user equipment received signal level; QoS of itself towards intended second user equipment” d1 in view of d2 disclose selection of a UE to be a coordinating UE is based on measurements or sensing (see d1 section 3.1, 4.2, 4.4; d2 para. 0120, 0124, 0128, 0131, 0133, 0136-0137, 0140) encompassing one or more of other nearby first user equipment(s) transmitting the same number of first user equipment(s) transmitting the AIMs are beyond a pre- configured threshold; load of the network ( based on e.g. CBR measurement); available / free resource of a user equipment(s) (e.g. may depend on how much resources are needed by the user equipment(s) itself); relative velocity of the one or more first and second user equipment received signal level; QoS of itself towards intended second user equipment.
The combination of d1 and d2 contains ample teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings of d2 regarding inter ue coordination techniques known in the art at the time of filing to the teaching of d1 regarding inter ue coordination to arrive at the claimed invention according to the motivation known from d1 in view of d2 including to improve inter UE coordination stability and efficiency (see d2 para. 0005-0007). Such teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation, is found in references d1 and/or d2, as well as being found squarely within the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would look to modify d1 with the teaching of d2 in order to achieve the stated advantages of improved performance. Furthermore, the techniques are employed in the same field of endeavor (wireless communication) in a similar manner (for inter UE coordination) for similar purposes (improved communication performance) which would yield a reasonable expectation of success when considered by one of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claim 7, as to the limitation “The communication system according to claim 1, wherein the measurement or parameter that is used to determine the one or more first user equipment(s) is (pre- )configured by the higher signaling and transmitted on the (pre-)configured radio resources for the AIM or other resources identified through its sensing” d1 in view of d2 disclose configuration through higher layer signaling (see d1 section 4, 4.4, d2 para. 0088, 0138, 0145) and use of AIM or other resources (see d1 section 3, 3.1; d2 para. para. 0120, 0124, 0128, 0131, 0133, 0136-0137, 0140; see also sections cited in reference to claims 4, 5, 6).
The combination of d1 and d2 contains ample teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings of d2 regarding inter ue coordination techniques known in the art at the time of filing to the teaching of d1 regarding inter ue coordination to arrive at the claimed invention according to the motivation known from d1 in view of d2 including to improve inter UE coordination stability and efficiency (see d2 para. 0005-0007). Such teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation, is found in references d1 and/or d2, as well as being found squarely within the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would look to modify d1 with the teaching of d2 in order to achieve the stated advantages of improved performance. Furthermore, the techniques are employed in the same field of endeavor (wireless communication) in a similar manner (for inter UE coordination) for similar purposes (improved communication performance) which would yield a reasonable expectation of success when considered by one of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claim 8, as to the limitation “The communication system according to claim 1, wherein the other parameter is depending on the coverage state of the one or more first user equipment(s) and the cast type of different entities; and/or wherein the other parameter indicates an in-coverage-scenario, or wherein the other parameter indicates an in-coverage-scenario of the one or more first user equipment(s), wherein the gNB determines the one or more first user equipment(s); and/or wherein the other parameter indicates an out-of-coverage-scenario; and/or” d1 in view of d2 disclose use of coverage and cast type (see d1 section 3.1, 4, 4.5, 4.6; d2 para. 0125, 0127-0133) wherein the other parameter indicates an in-coverage-scenario of the one or more first user equipment(s), wherein the gNB determines the one or more first user equipment(s) (see d2 Fig. 18).
The combination of d1 and d2 contains ample teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings of d2 regarding inter ue coordination techniques known in the art at the time of filing to the teaching of d1 regarding inter ue coordination to arrive at the claimed invention according to the motivation known from d1 in view of d2 including to improve inter UE coordination stability and efficiency (see d2 para. 0005-0007). Such teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation, is found in references d1 and/or d2, as well as being found squarely within the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would look to modify d1 with the teaching of d2 in order to achieve the stated advantages of improved performance. Furthermore, the techniques are employed in the same field of endeavor (wireless communication) in a similar manner (for inter UE coordination) for similar purposes (improved communication performance) which would yield a reasonable expectation of success when considered by one of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claim 9, as to the limitation “The communication system according to claim 1, wherein the other parameter indicates different cast types out of a group comprising: Groupcast (e.g. the group head may determine UE-A); Unicast (any of the following solution may apply, UE-A can be intended receiver of UE-B or Non-intended receiver of UE-B, which meets conditions to be determined as UE-A, the transmitting user equipment(s) could be UE-A to the receiving user equipment(s) and vice versa); Broadcast (any of the following solution may apply: Any user equipment(s) could propose UE-A resources to be shared and UE-B decides which ones to use)” d1 in view of d2 disclose cast type parameter including groupcast, unicast, broadcast (see d1 section 3.1, 4.4, 4.6; d2 para 0137, 0139, 0141-0142; see also sections cited in reference to claim 8).
The combination of d1 and d2 contains ample teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings of d2 regarding inter ue coordination techniques known in the art at the time of filing to the teaching of d1 regarding inter ue coordination to arrive at the claimed invention according to the motivation known from d1 in view of d2 including to improve inter UE coordination stability and efficiency (see d2 para. 0005-0007). Such teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation, is found in references d1 and/or d2, as well as being found squarely within the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would look to modify d1 with the teaching of d2 in order to achieve the stated advantages of improved performance. Furthermore, the techniques are employed in the same field of endeavor (wireless communication) in a similar manner (for inter UE coordination) for similar purposes (improved communication performance) which would yield a reasonable expectation of success when considered by one of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claim 10, as to the limitation “The communication system according to claim 1, wherein a request is sent from the one or more second user equipment(s); and/or wherein a request is sent from the one or more second user equipment(s) requesting an information about the resources available to the one or more second user equipment(s)” d1 in view of d2 disclose a request send from a UE requesting information (see d1 section 3, 3.1, 4.2, 4.6; d2 para. 0123, 0125, 0140, 0147).
The combination of d1 and d2 contains ample teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings of d2 regarding inter ue coordination techniques known in the art at the time of filing to the teaching of d1 regarding inter ue coordination to arrive at the claimed invention according to the motivation known from d1 in view of d2 including to improve inter UE coordination stability and efficiency (see d2 para. 0005-0007). Such teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation, is found in references d1 and/or d2, as well as being found squarely within the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would look to modify d1 with the teaching of d2 in order to achieve the stated advantages of improved performance. Furthermore, the techniques are employed in the same field of endeavor (wireless communication) in a similar manner (for inter UE coordination) for similar purposes (improved communication performance) which would yield a reasonable expectation of success when considered by one of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claim 11, as to the limitation “A user equipment(s) configured to communicate within the communication system of claim 1 and forming the one or more first or second user equipment” d1 in view of d2 disclose the communication system of claim 1 as set forth above. D1 in view of d2 also disclose A user equipment(s) configured to communicate within the communication system of claim 1 and forming the one or more first or second user equipment (see d2 Fig. 15).
The combination of d1 and d2 contains ample teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings of d2 regarding inter ue coordination techniques known in the art at the time of filing to the teaching of d1 regarding inter ue coordination to arrive at the claimed invention according to the motivation known from d1 in view of d2 including to improve inter UE coordination stability and efficiency (see d2 para. 0005-0007). Such teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation, is found in references d1 and/or d2, as well as being found squarely within the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would look to modify d1 with the teaching of d2 in order to achieve the stated advantages of improved performance. Furthermore, the techniques are employed in the same field of endeavor (wireless communication) in a similar manner (for inter UE coordination) for similar purposes (improved communication performance) which would yield a reasonable expectation of success when considered by one of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claim 12, as to the limitation “The user equipment(s) according to claim 11, wherein the user equipment(s) comprise one or more of the following: a power-limited UE, or a hand-held UE, like a user equipment(s) used by a pedestrian, and referred to as a Vulnerable Road User, VRU, or a Pedestrian UE, P-UE, or an on-body or hand-held user equipment(s) used by public safety personnel and first responders, and referred to as Public safety UE, PS-UE, or an loT UE, e.g., a sensor, an actuator or a user equipment(s) provided in a campus network to carry out repetitive tasks and needing input from a gateway node at periodic intervals, a mobile terminal, or a stationary terminal, or a cellular loT-UE, or a vehicular UE, or a vehicular group leader UE, or a sidelink relay, or an loT or narrowband loT, NB-loT, device, or wearable device, like a smartwatch, or a fitness tracker, or smart glasses, or a ground based vehicle, or an aerial vehicle, or a drone, or a base station e.g. gNB, or a moving base station, or road side unit, or a building, or any other item or device provided with network connectivity enabling the item/device to communicate using the wireless communication network, e.g., a sensor or actuator, or any other item or device provided with network connectivity enabling the item/device to communicate using a sidelink the wireless communication network, e.g. a sensor or actuator, or a transceiver, or any sidelink capable network entity” d1 in view of d2 disclose various embodiments of the UE corresponding to at least one of the required UEs of the claim (see d2 para. 0039).
The combination of d1 and d2 contains ample teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings of d2 regarding inter ue coordination techniques known in the art at the time of filing to the teaching of d1 regarding inter ue coordination to arrive at the claimed invention according to the motivation known from d1 in view of d2 including to improve inter UE coordination stability and efficiency (see d2 para. 0005-0007). Such teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation, is found in references d1 and/or d2, as well as being found squarely within the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would look to modify d1 with the teaching of d2 in order to achieve the stated advantages of improved performance. Furthermore, the techniques are employed in the same field of endeavor (wireless communication) in a similar manner (for inter UE coordination) for similar purposes (improved communication performance) which would yield a reasonable expectation of success when considered by one of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claim 13, as to the limitations “A first one or more second user equipment(s), wherein one or multiple user equipment(s) out of the one or more first and second user equipment(s) are selected to be the one or more first user equipment(s) based on explicit request which is defined as follows: wherein another parameter, e.g. from an entity of first or second user equipment is considered/used to determine the one or more first user equipment(s); and/or wherein a second user equipment is considered to determine the one or more first user equipment; and/or wherein the one or more first user equipment(s) is determined to be the one or more first user equipment(s) sending an assisted information message when it is triggered based on an explicit request from the one or more second user equipment(s) or (pre-)configured conditions; wherein the assisted information message or coordination information is limited to be sent by the one or more first user equipment(s)” d1 discloses selection of a UE from a plurality of UEs to coordinate inter UE coordination of communication (see d1 section 3.1); including using at least one of a parameter (see d1 section 3.1); and/or another UE (see d1 section 3.1); and/or assisted information messages (see d1 section 3.1); and/or based on triggered or preconfigured conditions (see d1 section and 3.1);
D1 may not explicitly disclose device elements “A first one or more second user equipment(s), wherein one or multiple user equipment(s)” and in connection with the limitations noted above as met by d1 d2 also disclose a system (see d2 Fig. 1, 18) comprising a plurality of UEs (i.e. one or more first user equipment(s) and one or more second user equipment(s)) (see d2 Figs. 1, 15); wherein the system executes a method in connection with system elements (see d2 para. 0005-0006); wherein the method may be embodied in various forms including system, device, method and computer readable medium (see d2 para. 0090, 0099, 0101, 0112, 0152-0153); which involve selection of a UE to service as a coordinating UE for inter UE coordination of communication (see d2 Fig. 18, para. 0137-0139); the selection involving one or more of another parameter and/or determination by another device (see d2 para. 0146-0150) and/or assisted information messages (see d2 para. 0146); and/or based on triggered or by BS pre configuration (i.e. preconfigured conditions) (see d2 para. 0139), wherein the disclosure of d2 is also equally applicable to all the limitations noted above as being met by d1 and is also applied thereto.
The combination of d1 and d2 contains ample teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings of d2 regarding inter ue coordination techniques known in the art at the time of filing to the teaching of d1 regarding inter ue coordination to arrive at the claimed invention according to the motivation known from d1 in view of d2 including to improve inter UE coordination stability and efficiency (see d2 para. 0005-0007). Such teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation, is found in references d1 and/or d2, as well as being found squarely within the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would look to modify d1 with the teaching of d2 in order to achieve the stated advantages of improved performance. Furthermore, the techniques are employed in the same field of endeavor (wireless communication) in a similar manner (for inter UE coordination) for similar purposes (improved communication performance) which would yield a reasonable expectation of success when considered by one of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claim 14, as to the limitations “A second user equipment of a communication system comprising one or more first user equipment(s) and one or more second user equipment(s), wherein one or multiple user equipment(s) out of the one or more first and second user equipment(s) are selected to be the one or more first user equipment(s) based on explicit request which is defined as follows: wherein another parameter, e.g. from an entity of first or second user equipment is considered/used to determine the one or more first user equipment(s); and/or wherein the one or more first user equipment(s) is determined to be the one or more first user equipment(s) sending an assisted information message when it is triggered based on an explicit request from the one or more second user equipment(s)or (pre-)configured conditions; wherein the explicit request is sent by the one or more second user equipment(s)” d1 discloses selection of a UE from a plurality of UEs to coordinate inter UE coordination of communication (see d1 section 3.1); including using at least one of a parameter (see d1 section 3.1); and/or another UE (see d1 section 3.1); and/or assisted information messages (see d1 section 3.1); and/or based on triggered or preconfigured conditions (see d1 section and 3.1);
D1 may not explicitly disclose device elements “A second user equipment of a communication system comprising one or more first user equipment(s) and one or more second user equipment(s)” and in connection with the limitations noted above as met by d1 d2 also disclose a system (see d2 Fig. 1, 18) comprising a plurality of UEs (i.e. one or more first user equipment(s) and one or more second user equipment(s)) (see d2 Figs. 1, 15); wherein the system executes a method in connection with system elements (see d2 para. 0005-0006); wherein the method may be embodied in various forms including system, device, method and computer readable medium (see d2 para. 0090,