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 .
This Office Action is in response to the Applicant Arguments/REMARKS correspondence filed on 01/15/2026.
Claims 1-10 are pending and rejected.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/03/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Applicant Arguments/REMARKS, filed 01/15/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claims 1-10 under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of further search and review necessitated by the amendment.
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.
Claims 1 and 2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nuttall et al (US20230354337A1) in view of Kalhan et al (US 2021/0400723 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Nuttall discloses In a vehicle-to-everything (V2X) environment, a method comprising: identifying, by an ego- vehicle, a safety-critical vehicle in a vicinity of the ego-vehicle; (see [0021], [0029]-[0030], [0044]-[0045], [0059]-[0062], teaches identification of proximate wireless communication sources in overlapping coverage areas and evaluating received signal power, interference levels, and carrier-to-interference ratios to determine interference suppression requirements; further teaches maintaining interference, selecting suppression based on channel-to-interference ratios, and ensuring received wireless signals satisfy required threshold-conditions; accordingly, teaches identifying proximate interfering wireless sources based”)
identifying, by an ego- vehicle, a plurality of interferers in proximity to the safety-critical vehicle in accordance with a signal strength of each identified interferer of the plurality of interferers satisfying a threshold signal strength (see [0021], [0029]-[0030], [0044]-[0045], [0059]-[0062], teaches identification of proximate wireless communication sources in overlapping coverage areas and evaluating received signal power, interference levels, and carrier-to-interference ratios to determine interference suppression requirements; further teaches maintaining interference, selecting suppression based on channel-to-interference ratios, and ensuring received wireless signals satisfy required threshold-conditions; accordingly, teaches identifying proximate interfering wireless sources based)
But Nuttall fails to disclose estimating, by the ego-vehicle, transmission time slots on a first channel of each identified interferer based on past transmissions of the respective identified interferer; and transmitting, to the safety-critical vehicle, a message in a time slot that is different than the estimated transmission time slots of each identified interferer via the first channel in accordance with having identified the safety-critical vehicle.
However, Kalhan discloses estimating, by an ego- vehicle, transmission time slots on a first channel of each identified interferer based on past transmissions of the respective identified interferer (see [0014] periodicity of the transmissions refers to past observed transmissions of a neighboring device- device observes neighbor’s earlier use of specific slot, from this past transmission history, the device determines the neighbor’s transmission periodicity and using past information predicts future occupied slots; “Based on the periodicity of the transmissions, the neighboring wireless communication devices are able to predict that the transmitting wireless communication device's subsequent data transmissions would occur”);
and transmitting, by an ego- vehicle, to the safety-critical vehicle, a message in a time slot that is different than the estimated transmission time slots of each identified interferer via the first channel.(Abstract, [0013]-[0015], [0036]-[0038], describes creating/receiving reserved time-slot lists and refraining from transmitting during time-slots identifies in those lists; devices select unused slots that avoid the predicted (reserved/periodic) slots of others—choosing a time-slot different from the estimated interferer slots).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kalhan with the vehicle location methods of Nuttall. The motivation for doing so would have been to improve safety with knowledge of surrounding vehicles.
Regarding Claim 2, Kalhan discloses the method, wherein transmitting the message in the time slot comprises scheduling a transmission time slot which does not overlap with the estimated interferer transmission time slots (see [0013] “Once an unused time-slot is found and selected, the wireless communication device uses the selected time-slot for data transmissions”).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nuttall in view of Kalhan as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Haran (US 2019/0320341 A1).
Regarding Claim 3, Kalhan discloses the method, wherein the first channel is a C-V2X channel, and wherein the estimating the transmission time slots of each identified interferer comprises: identifying first time slots during which each identified interferer is expected to transmit on the first channel;(see, [0014] “Based on the periodicity of the transmissions, the neighboring wireless communication devices are able to predict that the transmitting wireless communication device's subsequent data transmissions would occur”).
and (iv) selecting an identified transmission resource while excluding the first time slots and the second time slows (see [0034] “In order to avoid possible data collisions, wireless communication device 106 refrains from transmitting data during the reserved time-slots that were identified”).
Kalhan and Nuttall fail to disclose, but Haran discloses identifying second time slots during which each respective identified interferer is expected to transmit on a channel adjacent to the first channel based on past transmission times of the respective identified interferer (see Abstract “A method comprises, in a V2X communication unit, detecting energy of an adjacent channel, or current and future scheduled transmission in the adjacent channel, if available, the adjacent channel being adjacent to a main channel, and if adjacent channel transmission is detected, deferring transmission in the main channel to maintain a sufficient communication range for both the main channel and the adjacent channel”),
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kalhan and Nuttall with the adjacent channel monitoring of Haran.
The motivation for doing so would have been to reduce opportunities for messages to be lost due to interference.
Claim(s) 4 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nuttall in view of Kalhan as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of ETSI (EN 302 663 V1.3.1 published 12/7/2020).
Regarding Claim 4, Kalhan discloses the method, wherein the first channel is an ITS-G5 channel, and wherein the estimating the transmission time slots of each identified interferer comprises: identifying time slots during which each identified interferer is expected to transmit on the first channel as the ego-vehicle (see [0014] “Based on the periodicity of the transmissions, the neighboring wireless communication devices are able to predict that the transmitting wireless communication device's subsequent data transmissions would occur”),
treating all identified time-slots as channel busy (see [0033] “Since time-slot t.sub.m is listed as one of the reserved time-slots being used by neighboring wireless communication devices, wireless communication device 106 refrains from transmitting data in time-slot t.sub.m”).
Kalhan and Nuttall fail to disclose, but ETSI discloses attempting a transmission using an ITS-G5 MAC channel access procedure (see Fig. C.2(b)),
and checking whether the transmission was successful in a configurable pre-defined interval (see Fig. C.2(b), Decision box “Successful reception of ACK?”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kalhan and Nuttall with the ITS-G5 access procedure of ETSI.
The motivation for doing so would have been to validate successful access to the ITS-G5 channels.
Regarding Claim 5, Kalhan and Nuttall fail to disclose, but ETSI discloses The method of claim 4, wherein, if the transmission was not successful in the configurable pre-defined interval, the transmitting the message in the time slot comprises transmitting according to an JTS-G5 standard defined transmission procedure (see Fig. C.2(b)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kalhan and Nuttall with the ITS-G5 access procedure of ETSI.
The motivation for doing so would have been to properly achieve access to ITS-G5 channels.
Claims 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nuttall in view of Kalhan and in view of Lee et al (US 2019/0150135 A1).
Regarding Claim 6, Kalhan discloses and wherein the modified MAC layer is configured to estimate transmission time slots on a first channel of each identified interferer based on past transmissions of the respective identified interferer (see [0014] “Based on the periodicity of the transmissions, the neighboring wireless communication devices are able to predict that the transmitting wireless communication device's subsequent data transmissions would occur”);
and to transmit, via the radio transceiver, to the safety-critical vehicle, a message in a time slot that is different than the estimated transmission time slots of each identified interferer via the first channel in accordance with having identified the safety-critical vehicle .(Abstract, [0013]-[0015], [0036]-[0038], describes creating/receiving reserved time-slot lists and refraining from transmitting during time-slots identifies in those lists; devices select unused slots that avoid the predicted (reserved/periodic) slots of others—choosing a time-slot different from the estimated interferer slots).
Kalhan fails to disclose but Nuttall discloses a radio receiver for transmitting and receiving messages; and at least one processor (see [0021], [0029]-[0030], [0044]-[0045], [0059]-[0062], teaches identification of proximate wireless communication sources in overlapping coverage areas and evaluating received signal power, interference levels, and carrier-to-interference ratios to determine interference suppression requirements; further teaches maintaining interference, selecting suppression based on channel-to-interference ratios, and ensuring received wireless signals satisfy required threshold-conditions; accordingly, teaches identifying proximate interfering wireless sources based):
configured to identify a safety-critical vehicle in a vicinity of the ego-vehicle in accordance with a driving scenario (see [0021], [0029]-[0030], [0044]-[0045], [0059]-[0062], teaches identification of proximate wireless communication sources in overlapping coverage areas and evaluating received signal power, interference levels, and carrier-to-interference ratios to determine interference suppression requirements; further teaches maintaining interference, selecting suppression based on channel-to-interference ratios, and ensuring received wireless signals satisfy required threshold-conditions; accordingly, teaches identifying proximate interfering wireless sources based)
and identify a plurality of interferers in proximity to the safety-critical vehicle in accordance with a signal strength of each identified interferer of the plurality of interferers satisfying a threshold signal strength (see [0021], [0029]-[0030], [0044]-[0045], [0059]-[0062], teaches identification of proximate wireless communication sources in overlapping coverage areas and evaluating received signal power, interference levels, and carrier-to-interference ratios to determine interference suppression requirements; further teaches maintaining interference, selecting suppression based on channel-to-interference ratios, and ensuring received wireless signals satisfy required threshold-conditions; accordingly, teaches identifying proximate interfering wireless sources based),
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kalhan with the vehicle location methods of Nuttall.
The motivation for doing so would have been to improve safety with knowledge of surrounding vehicles.
Kalhan and Nuttall fail to disclose but Lee discloses
and a V2X processor operatively coupled with the radio transceiver (see Fig.13, [0167] “The RF unit 1130 is connected to the processor 1110 to transmit and receive radio signals.”);
wherein the V2X processor comprises a PHY layer (see Fig. 2, Fig 3, [0041] “Data is transferred between the MAC layer and the PHY layer through the transport channel”),
a modified MAC layer (see Fig. 2, Fig 3, [0041] “Data is transferred between the MAC layer and the PHY layer through the transport channel”),
and a V2X stack (see Fig. 2, Fig 3, [0040] “The user plane is a protocol stack for user data transmission. The control plane is a protocol stack for control signal transmission.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kalhan and Nuttall with the device structure of Lee.
The motivation for doing so would have been to develop an apparatus capable of the desired functionality.
Regarding Claim 7, Kalhan discloses the V2X communication unit of claim 6, wherein a the at least one processor is further configured to:
schedule a transmission time slot which does not overlap with the estimated interferer transmission time slots and to transmit in the scheduled transmission time slots (see Abstract, [0013]-[0015], [0036]-[0038], describes creating/receiving reserved time-slot lists and refraining from transmitting during time-slots identifies in those lists; devices select unused slots that avoid the predicted (reserved/periodic) slots of others—choosing a time-slot different from the estimated interferer slots). “Once an unused time-slot is found and selected, the wireless communication device uses the selected time-slot for data transmissions”).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nuttall in view of Kalhan and in view of Lee as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Haran (US 2019/0320341 A1).
Regarding Claim 8, Kalhan discloses the V2X communication unit, wherein the first channel is a C-V2X channel (see [0012] “and cellular-based V2X (C-V2X)”),
and wherein, to estimate the transmission time slots of each identified interferer, the at least one processor is further configured to: identify first time slots during which each identified interferer is expected to transmit on the first channel (see [0014] “Based on the periodicity of the transmissions, the neighboring wireless communication devices are able to predict that the transmitting wireless communication device's subsequent data transmissions would occur”);
identify possible transmission resources per a sensing based resource selection procedure (see [0013] “Once an unused time-slot is found and selected, the wireless communication device uses the selected time-slot for data transmissions”);
and select an identified transmission resource while excluding the first time slots and the second time slots (see [0034] “In order to avoid possible data collisions, wireless communication device 106 refrains from transmitting data during the reserved time-slots that were identified”).
Kalhan, Nuttall and Lee do not disclose but Haran discloses identify second time slots during which each respective identified interferer is expected to transmit on a channel adjacent to the first channel, based on past transmission times of the respective identified interferer (see Abstract “A method comprises, in a V2X communication unit, detecting energy of an adjacent channel, or current and future scheduled transmission in the adjacent channel, if available, the adjacent channel being adjacent to a main channel, and if adjacent channel transmission is detected, deferring transmission in the main channel to maintain a sufficient communication range for both the main channel and the adjacent channel.”);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kalhan, Nuttall and Lee with the adjacent channel monitoring of Haran.
The motivation for doing so would have been to reduce opportunities for messages to be lost due to interference.
Claims 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nuttall in view of Kalhan and in view of Lee as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of ETSI.
Regarding Claim 9, Kalhan discloses the V2X communication unit, wherein the first channel is an JTS-G5 channel, and wherein to estimate the transmission slots of each identified interferer, the at least one processor is further configured to: identify time slots during which each identified interferer is expected to transmit on the first channel (see [0014] “Based on the periodicity of the transmissions, the neighboring wireless communication devices are able to predict that the transmitting wireless communication device's subsequent data transmissions would occur”);
treating all identified time-slots as channel busy (see [0033] “Since time-slot t.sub.m is listed as one of the reserved time-slots being used by neighboring wireless communication devices, wireless communication device 106 refrains from transmitting data in time-slot t.sub.m”),
Kalhan, Nuttall and Lee do not disclose but ETSI discloses to attempt a transmission using an ITS-G5 MAC channel access procedure (see Fig. C.2(b)),
and to check whether the transmission was successful in a configurable pre-defined interval (see Fig. C.2(b), Decision box “Successful reception of ACK?”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kalhan, Nuttall and Lee with the ITS-G5 access procedure of ETSI.
The motivation for doing so would have been to validate successful access to the ITS-G5 channel.
Regarding Claim 10, Kalhan, Nuttall and Lee do not disclose but ETSI discloses The V2X communication unit of claim 9, wherein, if the transmission was not successful in the configurable pre-defined interval to transmit the message in the time slot, the at least one processor is further configured to: transmit according to an ITS-G5 standard defined transmission procedure (see Fig. C.2(b)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kalhan, Nuttall and Lee with the ITS-G5 access procedure of ETSI.
The motivation for doing so would have been to properly achieve access to the ITS-G5 channels.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 MICHAEL WILLIAM ABBATINE whose telephone number is (571)272-0192. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 0830-1700 EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Nishant Divecha can be reached at (571) 270-3125. 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.
/MICHAEL WILLIAM ABBATINE JR./Examiner, Art Unit 2419
/Nishant Divecha/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2419
Prosecution Insights