Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1, 3-4 and 20-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ELAZZOUNI (US 20240049283) in view of Wang (US 20240015743).
With respect to independent claims:
Regarding claim(s) 1/20, ELAZZOUNI teaches A method of wireless communication for a first user equipment (UE) ([0091], “a first sidelink UE”), comprising
performing a listen-before-talk (LBT) process to access first resources of an unlicensed channel ([0092], “The first sidelink UE may acquire the COT 320 based on the LBT procedure 322 being successful.”);
obtaining the first resources based on the LBT ([0092], “The first sidelink UE may acquire the COT 320 based on the LBT procedure 322 being successful.”); and
transmitting, to a second UE, first information for sharing a portion of the first resources with the second UE ([0093], “The first sidelink UE may transmit COT sharing information to a second sidelink UE (e.g., the UE 115, the UE 120, or the UE 900) for sharing the COT 320 with the second sidelink UE.”), the first information ([0094], “The first sidelink UE may indicate the time resource allocation(s) to the sidelink UEs sharing the COT in a time domain resource allocation (TDRA) via SCI-1.”) including one or more channel access priority class (CAPC) values associated with the second UE ([0017], “wherein the SCI indicates at least one of a channel access priority class (CAPC) associated a communication to be transmitted by the second sidelink UE.”).
However, ELAZZOUNI does not specifically disclose wherein a plurality of portions of the first information indicates one or more destination identifications (IDs).
In an analogous art, Wang discloses wherein ([0102], “the additional bits may indicate to interpret the fields ... as a destination identifier ... A value of ‘01’ may indicate to interpret the identifier fields in the SCI (e.g., the 16 bit destination identifier and the 8 bit source identifier) as a 24 bit destination identifier.”) a plurality of portions ([Fig.2], destination identifier field 225 and source identifier field 230) of the first information ([0102], SCI) indicates one or more destination identifications (IDs) ([0102], “24 bit destination identifier.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claim invention to have modified the method of ELAZZOUNI to specify additional bits as taught by Wang. The motivation/suggestion would have been because there is need to indicate both destination identifier field and source identifier field are interpreted as destination identifier.
With respect to dependent claims:
Regarding claim(s) 3/21, ELAZZOUNI teaches wherein the first information is transmitted in a first sidelink control information (SCI) message ([0094], “The first sidelink UE may indicate the time resource allocation(s) to the sidelink UEs sharing the COT in a time domain resource allocation (TDRA) via SCI-1.”).
Regarding claim(s) 4/22, ELAZZOUNI teaches wherein the first resources include frequency bandwidth ([0083], “the COT sharing information may include a frequency resource allocation (e.g., frequency range(s))”) and time duration ([0082], “the COT sharing information may indicate a COT duration.”).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-22 filed on 07/07/2026 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection in instant Office action does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the Applicant’s arguments.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZHIREN QIN whose telephone number is (571) 272-5444. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9-6 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Derrick Ferris can be reached on 571-272-3123. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ZHIREN QIN/Examiner, Art Unit 2411
Prosecution Insights