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 .
Response to Amendment
The Examiner acknowledges the receipt of the Applicant’s amendment filed on 05/15/2026. Claim 16 has been amended. Claims 1-30 are currently pending in the present application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Applicant Arguments/Remarks, filed 05/15/2026, with respect to the rejections of claims 1-30 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 Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn.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 Cheng et al. (US 2018/0365909 A1 herein Cheng), and further in view of Sorrentino (US 2020/0204952 A1).
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.
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.
Claims 1-3, 6-7, 9-10, 12-17, 20-23, 24-28, and 29-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheng et al. (US 2018/0365909 A1 herein Cheng), and further in view of Sorrentino (US 2020/0204952 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Cheng teaches a method of wireless communication, comprising:
transmitting, by a first device, a sensor sharing message (SSM) associated with a vehicle communication network (read as each of the first vehicle 114, the second vehicle 116, the UE 102, the sensor 118, and the TRP 106 may include a module for on- demand sensor sharing 120) (Cheng - [0039]), wherein the SSM includes first data associated with the first device and further includes second data indicating one or more objects detected by the first device (Cheng - [0054]).
However, Cheng fails to teach in response to transmitting the SSM, receiving, by the first device from a second device, an extension request for extension data associated with at least a first object of the one or more objects.
In the related art, Sorrentino teaches in response to transmitting the SSM, receiving, by the first device from a second device, an extension request for extension data associated with at least a first object of the one or more objects (read as wireless device 110 detects a first status of an object such as another object in proximity of the wireless device based on dynamic properties of the object. Wireless device 110 may communicate the first status of the object to a network element. Wireless device 110 may predict a status of the object based on the first status of the object. The prediction may comprise an extrapolation based on the first status (e.g., extrapolate a location based on previous speed and heading). Wireless device 110 may also detect a second status of the object based on dynamic properties of the object. Upon determining that the predicted status is different than the second status, wireless device 110 may communicate the second status to the network element) (Sorrentino – [0084]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teachings of Sorrentino into the teachings of Cheng for the purpose of triggering message transmissions based on predicted versus actual dynamics of a wireless device sensor, wherein the message provides information that is useful to predict/extrapolate the evolution of a status associated with the object.
Regarding claim 2 as applied to claim 1, Cheng as modified by Sorrentino further teaches comprising, prior to transmitting the SSM, generating, by the first device, an uncompressed SSM that includes the first data, the second data, and the extension data (read as Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) include a number of message families having such characteristics, such as CAM, DENM, SPAT, BSM, etc.) (Sorrentino – [0075]).
Regarding claim 3 as applied to claim 2, Cheng as modified by Sorrentino further teaches comprising determining, by the first device, whether one or more compression criteria are satisfied, wherein the first device transmits the SSM instead of the uncompressed SSM based on identifying that the one or more compression criteria are satisfied (read as a requestor may broadcast a vehicle-to-everything (V2X) message that requests any responder that meets a response criterion or response criteria to share specified sensor information) (Cheng - [0033], [0047], [0187]).
Regarding claim 6 as applied to claim 1, Cheng as modified by Sorrentino further teaches comprising, based on receiving the extension request, determining, by the first device, whether one or more extension response criteria for transmission of an extension response are satisfied (read as determine whether device is able to meet a response criterion specified by the request for sensor sharing 208) (Cheng - [0047]; Sorrentino – [0084]).
Regarding claim 7 as applied to claim 6, Cheng as modified by Sorrentino further teaches comprising transmitting the extension response indicating the extension data based on determining that the one or more extension response criteria are satisfied (read as determine whether device is able to meet a response criterion specified by the request for sensor sharing 208; if a response is warranted, a module for sending a response 222 may send the response with sensor information 210) (Cheng - [0047]-[0048]; Sorrentino – [0084]).
Regarding claim 9 as applied to claim 6, Cheng as modified by Sorrentino further teaches wherein determining whether the one or more extension response criteria are satisfied is based on a priority element indicated by the extension request (read as response transmission schedule based on the index and schedule or prioritize or based on time domain) (Cheng - [0129]; Sorrentino – [0084]).
Regarding claim 10 as applied to claim 6, Cheng as modified by Sorrentino further teaches wherein determining whether the one or more extension response criteria are satisfied is based on a number of extension requests received by the first device and indicating the first object (read as number or requesters) (Cheng - [0125]; Sorrentino – [0084]).
Regarding claim 12 as applied to claim 1, Cheng as modified by Sorrentino further teaches comprising: selecting, by the first device, a transmission mode for an extension response indicating the extension data; and transmitting, by the first device, the extension response based on the transmission mode (read as unicast link; unicast signaling, unicast model 600) (Cheng - Figure 6, [0038], [0045], [0099]; Sorrentino – [0084]).
Regarding claim 13 as applied to claim 12, Cheng as modified by Sorrentino further teaches wherein the transmission mode corresponds to a unicast transmission mode (read as unicast link; unicast signaling, unicast model 600) (Cheng - Figure 6, [0038], [0045], [0099]).
Regarding claim 14 as applied to claim 12, Cheng as modified by Sorrentino further teaches wherein the transmission mode corresponds to broadcast or groupcast transmission mode, and wherein the first device transmits the extension response to the second device and to one or more other devices (read as devices of the system 100 may communicate with each other directly via a direct link 112 such as unicast link, broadcast link, or multicast link) (Cheng - [0038]).
Regarding claim 15 as applied to claim 14, Cheng as modified by Sorrentino further teaches comprising receiving one or more other extension requests from the one or more other devices, wherein the first device selects the broadcast or groupcast transmission mode based on a number of extension requests indicating the first object (read as devices of the system 100 may communicate with each other directly via a direct link 112 such as unicast link, broadcast link, or multicast link; large number of requesters) (Cheng - [0038], [0125]; Sorrentino – [0084]).
Regarding claim 16 as applied to claim 14, Cheng as modified by Sorrentino further teaches wherein the first device selects the broadcast or groupcast transmission mode based on determining that the second device and the one or more other devices are within a particular range of one another (read as devices of the system 100 may communicate with each other directly via a direct link 112 such as unicast link, broadcast link, or multicast link; the vehicle selects the communication parameters to use to communicate the response efficiently; different types of sensor information may be requested depending on whether the devices are close to one another or far from one another such as based on a comparison of the distance between the devices to one or more thresholds) (Cheng - [0038], [0125], [0202]).
Regarding claim 17 as applied to claim 14, Cheng as modified by Sorrentino further teaches wherein the first device transmits the SSM using a first modulation and coding scheme (MCS) and based on a unicast transmission mode, and further comprising selecting a second MCS for transmission of the extension response based on the broadcast or groupcast transmission mode (read as customizing the transmission response may involve customizing the channel, the modulation/coding, the modulation and coding scheme/resource blocks (MCS/RBs)) (Cheng - [0111]; Sorrentino – [0084]).
Regarding claim 20, Cheng teaches an apparatus comprising: a transmitter configured to transmit (read as transmitter 1414) (Cheng - [0169], [0182]-[0183]), from a first device, a sensor sharing message (SSM) associated with a vehicle communication network (read as each of the first vehicle 114, the second vehicle 116, the UE 102, the sensor 118, and the TRP 106 may include a module for on- demand sensor sharing 120) (Cheng - [0039]), wherein the SSM includes first data associated with the first device and further includes second data indicating one or more objects detected by the first device (Cheng - [0054]); and a receiver configured to receive (read as receiver 1416) (Cheng - [0169], [0213]).
However, Cheng fails to teach in response to transmitting the SSM, an extension request from a second device for extension data associated with at least a first object of the one or more objects.
In the related art, Sorrentino teaches in response to transmitting the SSM, an extension request from a second device for extension data associated with at least a first object of the one or more objects (read as wireless device 110 detects a first status of an object such as another object in proximity of the wireless device based on dynamic properties of the object. Wireless device 110 may communicate the first status of the object to a network element. Wireless device 110 may predict a status of the object based on the first status of the object. The prediction may comprise an extrapolation based on the first status (e.g., extrapolate a location based on previous speed and heading). Wireless device 110 may also detect a second status of the object based on dynamic properties of the object. Upon determining that the predicted status is different than the second status, wireless device 110 may communicate the second status to the network element) (Sorrentino – [0084]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teachings of Sorrentino into the teachings of Cheng for the purpose of triggering message transmissions based on predicted versus actual dynamics of a wireless device sensor, wherein the message provides information that is useful to predict/extrapolate the evolution of a status associated with the object.
Regarding claim 21 as applied to claim 20, Cheng as modified by Sorrentino further teaches wherein the first device corresponds to an on-board unit (OBU) of a vehicle, a roadside unit (RSU) (read as sensor 118 (e.g., road-side device)) (Cheng - [0038]), or another device that communicates using the vehicle communication network (read as apparatus 1400 could embody or be implemented within a vehicle) (Cheng - Figure 14, [0167]).
Regarding claim 22 as applied to claim 20, Cheng as modified by Sorrentino further teaches wherein the second device corresponds to an on-board unit (OBU) of a vehicle, a roadside unit (RSU) (read as sensor 118 (e.g., road-side device)) (Cheng - [0038]), or another device that communicates using the vehicle communication network (read as apparatus 1400 could embody or be implemented within a vehicle) (Cheng - Figure 14, [0167]).
Regarding claim 23 as applied to claim 21, Cheng as modified by Sorrentino further teaches wherein the first object corresponds to a vehicle, a vulnerable road user (VRU), or an obstacle (read as first vehicle 114) (Cheng - Figure 1, [0038]).
Regarding claim 24, Cheng teaches a method of wireless communication, comprising:
receiving, from a first device and by a second device, a sensor sharing message (SSM) associated with a vehicle communication network (read as each of the first vehicle 114, the second vehicle 116, the UE 102, the sensor 118, and the TRP 106 may include a module for on-demand sensor sharing 120) (Cheng - [0039]), wherein the SSM includes first data associated with the first device and further includes second data indicating one or more objects detected by the first device (Cheng - [0054]).
However, Cheng fails to teach in response to receiving the SSM, transmitting, to the first device by the second device, an extension request for extension data associated with at least a first object of the one or more objects.
In the related art, Sorrentino teaches in response to receiving the SSM, transmitting, to the first device by the second device, an extension request for extension data associated with at least a first object of the one or more objects (read as wireless device 110 detects a first status of an object such as another object in proximity of the wireless device based on dynamic properties of the object. Wireless device 110 may communicate the first status of the object to a network element. Wireless device 110 may predict a status of the object based on the first status of the object. The prediction may comprise an extrapolation based on the first status (e.g., extrapolate a location based on previous speed and heading). Wireless device 110 may also detect a second status of the object based on dynamic properties of the object. Upon determining that the predicted status is different than the second status, wireless device 110 may communicate the second status to the network element) (Sorrentino – [0084]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teachings of Sorrentino into the teachings of Cheng for the purpose of triggering message transmissions based on predicted versus actual dynamics of a wireless device sensor, wherein the message provides information that is useful to predict/extrapolate the evolution of a status associated with the object.
Regarding claim 25 as applied to claim 24, Cheng as modified by Sorrentino further teaches comprising receiving, from the first device based on the extension request, an extension response indicating the extension data (read as extended service set (ESS); extended sensors (e.g., sensor sharing); Vehicle A discovers Vehicle B's position, capability, and sensors to share; which may involve use of objects (e.g., extended objects) in the BSM/CAM and/or other messages which may be used for requests) (Cheng - [0041], [0092], [0132]; Sorrentino – [0084]).
Regarding claim 26 as applied to claim 24, Cheng as modified by Sorrentino further teaches wherein the second device transmits the extension request to the first device based on determining that the extension data is to be used in connection with one or more of a maneuver of the second device or trajectory planning of the second device (read as location, speed, direction, path, etc.; Zone/Direction of interest) (Cheng - [0145], [0163]; Sorrentino – [0084]).
Regarding claim 27 as applied to claim 24, Cheng as modified by Sorrentino further teaches wherein the second device transmits the extension request to at least one other device (read as device B 604 may transmit a BSM/CAM 606, or any other periodic broadcast messages known to nearby vehicles and/or devices) (Cheng - [0100]; Sorrentino – [0084]).
Regarding claim 28 as applied to claim 24, Cheng as modified by Sorrentino further teaches wherein the extension request includes a priority element indicating a priority associated with the extension request (read as response transmission schedule based on the index and schedule or prioritize or based on time domain) (Cheng - [0129]; Sorrentino – [0084]).
Regarding claim 29, Cheng teaches an apparatus comprising:
a receiver configured to receive (read as receiver 1416) (Cheng - [0169], [0213]), from a first device and by a second device, a sensor sharing message (SSM) associated with a vehicle communication network (read as each of the first vehicle 114, the second vehicle 116, the UE 102, the sensor 118, and the TRP 106 may include a module for on-demand sensor sharing 120) (Cheng - [0039]), wherein the SSM includes first data associated with the first device and further includes second data indicating one or more objects detected by the first device (Cheng - [0054]); and a transmitter configured to transmit (read as transmitter 1414) (Cheng - [0169], [0182]-[0183]),
However, Cheng fails to teach from the second device to the first device in response to receiving the SSM, an extension request for extension data associated with at least a first object of the one or more objects.
In the related art, Sorrentino teaches from the second device to the first device in response to receiving the SSM, an extension request for extension data associated with at least a first object of the one or more objects (read as wireless device 110 detects a first status of an object such as another object in proximity of the wireless device based on dynamic properties of the object. Wireless device 110 may communicate the first status of the object to a network element. Wireless device 110 may predict a status of the object based on the first status of the object. The prediction may comprise an extrapolation based on the first status (e.g., extrapolate a location based on previous speed and heading). Wireless device 110 may also detect a second status of the object based on dynamic properties of the object. Upon determining that the predicted status is different than the second status, wireless device 110 may communicate the second status to the network element) (Sorrentino – [0084]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teachings of Sorrentino into the teachings of Cheng for the purpose of triggering message transmissions based on predicted versus actual dynamics of a wireless device sensor, wherein the message provides information that is useful to predict/extrapolate the evolution of a status associated with the object.
Regarding claim 30 as applied to claim 29, Cheng as modified by Sorrentino further teaches wherein the first object corresponds to a vehicle (read as first vehicle 114) (Cheng - Figure 1, [0038]), a vulnerable road user (VRU), or an obstacle, wherein the first device corresponds to an on-board unit (OBU) of a vehicle, a roadside unit (RSU) (read as sensor 118 (e.g., road-side device)) (Cheng - [0038]), or another device that communicates using the vehicle communication network, and wherein the second device corresponds to an OBU of a vehicle, an RSU, or another device that communicates using the vehicle communication network (read as sensor 118 (e.g., road-side device)) (Cheng - [0038]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-5, 8, 11, 18-19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to APRIL GUZMAN GONZALES whose telephone number is (571)270-1101. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 am to 4:00 pm EST. The examiner’s email is april.guzman@uspto.gov.
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 L. 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.
/APRIL G GONZALES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2648
Prosecution Insights