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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 09/25/2023 and 11/18/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings filed on 09/25/2023 are accepted by the Examiner.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because uses phrases which can be implied, such as, “The present disclosure relate” (see line 1). A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
The disclosure filed on 09/25/2023 is accepted by the Examiner.
Claim Objections
Applicant is advised that should claim 14 be found allowable, claim 19 will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate thereof. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 16-18 are rejected because no reference to any controller is present in the originally filed application documents. See European search opinion dated 11/14/2024 section 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-5, 14, 16-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)1) as being anticipated by Vivo (R1-2007689 “Discussion on mode 2 enhancements” October 26, 2020). See also European search opinion dated 11/14/2024 sections 2-5.
Regarding claims 1, 16 and 20, Vivo discloses user equipment (UE), comprising a processor and a memory coupled with the processor (inherent to the UE) the processor is configured to cause the UE to determine a first set of candidate transmissions to be transmitted on a transmission occasion in a time domain, wherein each transmission within the first set of candidate transmissions is used for a resource conflict indication (section 2.2 page 3:"RX UE indicates collided resources to TX UE to triggers resource re-selection", section 2.1 pages 1-2:"persistent collision between neighbor UEs that select heavily overlapping resources…RX UE shares some resource interference situation to TX UE, such information sharing mechanism can be named as inter-UE coordination…The above analysis of reliability enhancement is mainly from PSSCH/PSCCH transmission perspective); determine a second set of candidate transmissions to be transmitted on the transmission occasion, each transmission within the second set of candidate transmissions is used for hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) feedback information (section 2.2 page 3:"receiver UE…it can feedback HARQ-ACK to UE-B and UE-C"); select a subset of transmissions from at least one of the first set of candidate transmissions and the second set of candidate transmissions and transmit the subset of transmissions on the transmission occasion (section 2.2 page 3:"UE-A as a receiver UE, coordinates PSSCH transmissions of UE-B and UE-C, so that it can feedback HARQ-ACK to UE-B and UE-C in different PSFCH occasions in power limited case").
PNG
media_image1.png
150
360
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 2 and 17, Vivo discloses claims 1 and 16, Vivo also discloses that each transmission within the first set of candidate transmissions is associated with one or more control signals, and wherein each of the one or more control signals includes a priority field value (section 2.2-2.3 page 3 “If ‘a set of type-A resource’ includes resources selected by RX UE/leading-UE for TX UE’s transmission, UE can directly use the suggested resources for its transmission, or UE can include (part of) the suggested resources in the candidate resource set and prioritize the suggested resources during the final resource selection”).
Regarding claims 3 and 18, Vivo discloses claims 2 and 17, Vivo also discloses to cause the UE to determine a smallest priority field value included in the one or more control signals associated with the each transmission within the first set of candidate transmissions and use the smallest priority field value as a priority of the each transmission within the first set of candidate transmissions (section 2.2-2.3 page 3 “Regarding hierarchical inter-UE coordination, a leading-UE in a UE group is in charge of the resource coordination. The leading-UE can suggest a set of resource to a dedicated TX UE in the UE group, when the UE performs transmission, the suggested resource can be used. If different resources are assigned to different UEs in the UE group, resource collision among the UEs could be avoided”).
Regarding claim 4, Vivo discloses claim 1, Vivo also discloses determine whether a power control parameter is configured to the UE (section 2.2-2.3 page 3 “Regarding hierarchical inter-UE coordination, a leading-UE in a UE group is in charge of the resource coordination. The leading-UE can suggest a set of resource to a dedicated TX UE in the UE group, when the UE performs transmission, the suggested resource can be used. If different resources are assigned to different UEs in the UE group, resource collision among the UEs could be avoided”).
Regarding claim 5, Vivo discloses claim 4, Vivo also discloses in response to the power control parameter configured to the UE, compute a total number of all transmissions within the first set of candidate transmissions and the second set of candidate transmissions and determine whether the total number is less than or equal to a maximum total number associated with a capability of the UE (section 2.2-2.3 page 3 “Regarding hierarchical inter-UE coordination, a leading-UE in a UE group is in charge of the resource coordination. The leading-UE can suggest a set of resource to a dedicated TX UE in the UE group, when the UE performs transmission, the suggested resource can be used. If different resources are assigned to different UEs in the UE group, resource collision among the UEs could be avoided”).
Regarding claims 14, 19 and 21, Vivo discloses claims 1 and 20, Vivo also discloses transmission within the subset of transmissions has a same transmitting power (section 2.2-2.3 page 3 “Regarding hierarchical inter-UE coordination, a leading-UE in a UE group is in charge of the resource coordination. The leading-UE can suggest a set of resource to a dedicated TX UE in the UE group, when the UE performs transmission, the suggested resource can be used. If different resources are assigned to different UEs in the UE group, resource collision among the UEs could be avoided”).
Claims 1-5, 14, 16-21 are is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Huang (US 20230361933 A1).
Regarding claims 1, 16 and 20, Huang discloses user equipment (UE), comprising a processor and a memory coupled with the processor (figure 16 the processor is configured to cause the UE to determine a first set of candidate transmissions to be transmitted on a transmission occasion in a time domain, each transmission within the first set of candidate transmissions is used for a resource conflict indication (abstract, summary section figure 11 paragraph [0003] and [0007]-[0173], [0281]-[0312] “Embodiments of this application disclose a resource conflict processing method and an apparatus. The method includes: determining that a first resource of at least one piece of to-be-sent first information and a second resource of at least one piece of to-be-received second information overlap in time domain; and sending the first information on the first resource or receiving the second information on the second resource according to a first rule”); determine a second set of candidate transmissions to be transmitted on the transmission occasion, each transmission within the second set of candidate transmissions is used for hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) feedback information (abstract, summary section figure 11 paragraph [0003] and [0007]-[0173], [0281]-[0312] “ where the first rule includes one of the following: determining, based on priorities of HARQs, whether to send the first information on the first resource or receive the second information on the second resource; or determining, based on priorities of HARQs and priorities of resource conflict indication information, whether to send the first information on the first resource or receive the second information on the second resource”); select a subset of transmissions from at least one of the first set of candidate transmissions and the second set of candidate transmissions and transmit the subset of transmissions on the transmission occasion information (abstract, summary section figure 11 paragraph [0003] and [0007]-[0173], [0281]-[0312] “ where the first rule includes one of the following: determining, based on priorities of HARQs, whether to send the first information on the first resource or receive the second information on the second resource; or determining, based on priorities of HARQs and priorities of resource conflict indication information, whether to send the first information on the first resource or receive the second information on the second resource”).
PNG
media_image2.png
408
594
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 2 and 17, Huang discloses claims 1 and 16, Huang also discloses that each transmission within the first set of candidate transmissions is associated with one or more control signals, and wherein each of the one or more control signals includes a priority field value (abstract, summary section figure 11 paragraph [0003] and [0007]-[0173], [0281]-[0312] “ where the first rule includes one of the following: determining, based on priorities of HARQs, whether to send the first information on the first resource or receive the second information on the second resource; or determining, based on priorities of HARQs and priorities of resource conflict indication information, whether to send the first information on the first resource or receive the second information on the second resource”).
Regarding claims 3 and 18, Huang discloses claims 2 and 17, Huang also discloses to cause the UE to determine a smallest priority field value included in the one or more control signals associated with the each transmission within the first set of candidate transmissions and use the smallest priority field value as a priority of the each transmission within the first set of candidate transmissions (abstract, summary section figure 11 paragraph [0003] and [0007]-[0173], [0281]-[0312] “For example, the terminal may use a priority value included in SCI associated with a HARQ as a priority of the HARQ (where the priority may be represented by using the priority value, for example, a smaller priority value indicates a higher priority” … “The highest-priority HARQ in the HARQs is a HARQ with a smallest priority value in the HARQs. For example, a smaller priority value on a sidelink indicates a higher priority”).
Regarding claim 4, Vivo discloses claim 1, Vivo also discloses determine whether a power control parameter is configured to the UE (abstract, summary section figure 11 paragraph [0003] and [0007]-[0173], [0258]-[0262] [0281]-[0312] “transmit powers of the resource conflict indication information and the HARQs do not exceed a total power upper limit determined based on a quantity of pieces of resource conflict indication information and a quantity of HARQs”).
Regarding claim 5, Huang discloses claim 4, Huang also discloses in response to the power control parameter configured to the UE, compute a total number of all transmissions within the first set of candidate transmissions and the second set of candidate transmissions and determine whether the total number is less than or equal to a maximum total number associated with a capability of the UE (abstract, summary section figure 11 paragraph [0003] and [0007]-[0173], [0258]-[0262] [0281]-[0312] “transmit powers of the resource conflict indication information and the HARQs do not exceed a total power upper limit determined based on a quantity of pieces of resource conflict indication information and a quantity of HARQs”).
Regarding claims 14, 19 and 21, Huang discloses claims 1 and 20, Huang also discloses transmission within the subset of transmissions has a same transmitting power (abstract, summary section figure 11 paragraph [0003] and [0007]-[0173], [0258]-[0262] [0281]-[0312] “a transmit power of resource conflict indication information is an equally divided power of a maximum transmit power of resource conflict indication information”).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-13 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
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Zhang (US 20230362917 A1) discloses resource conflict indication transmission method, apparatus, and system.
Liu (US 10536966 B2) discloses physical downlink control channel and hybrid automatic repeat request feedback for MuLTEfire coverage enhancement.
Babaei (US 11343844 B2) discloses resource conflict.
Nazar (US 12225548 B2) discloses method and apparatus for allocating resources for an enhanced physical hybrid automatic repeat request indicator channel.
Lee (US 11917649 B2) discloses method and device for reporting HARQ feedback to base station in NR V2X.
Nguyen (US 20210105728 A1) discloses concurrent physical sidelink feedback channel transmission.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUAN A TORRES whose telephone number is (571) 272-3119. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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, Kenneth N Vanderpuye can be reached at (571) 272-3078. 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.
/JUAN A TORRES/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2634