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 Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 09/04/26, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-29 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 Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn.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 Panteleev (Pub No 20240155654) in view of newly cited Dimou (BR 102012024526 A2)
Regarding claim 1,
The applicant argues that the prior art does not teach the amended limitations.
The examiner relies on newly cited prior art Dimou (BR 102012024526 A2) to teach the amended limitations.
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) 1-4, 16-20, 27-29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Panteleev (Pub No 20240155654) in view of Dimou (BR 102012024526 A2)
Regarding claims 1 and 27 and 28 and 29,
Panteleev teaches a method for wireless communications by a first user equipment (UE), comprising:
A memory comprising instructions; and one or more processors configured, individually or in any combination, to execute instructions to cause the apparatus to: (see para [0051])
A non-transitory computer-readable medium comprising computer-executable instructions that when executed by one or more processors of a first user equipment, cause the first UE to perform a method of wireless communications, comprising: (see para [0051])
receiving resource reservation information indicating reservations of resources by at least a second UE and a third UE; and (interpreted as Co-channel collision in resource reservation (CC-RSV): In this case, the TX UEs (UE.sub.P and UE.sub.Q) have reserved resources for transmission in the same slot on overlapping frequency resources (full or partial overlap), see para [0075])
transmitting a collision indication to at least one of the second UE or the third UE based on the resource reservation information indicating colliding transmissions (interpreted as UE3 provides feedback to UE1 and UE2 indicating co-channel collision in reservation and potential need for resource (re)-selection or retransmissions, see para [0087]. Also see for instance, the UE.sub.R may prioritize feedback towards the UE that is closer in distance or radio-distance, see para [0113])
However, Panteleev does not teach the at least one distance-based condition comprising that a maximum of a distance between the first UE and the second UE and a distance between the first UE and the third UE is less than a threshold distance.
Dimou the at least one distance-based condition comprising that a maximum of a distance between the first UE and the second UE and a distance between the first UE and the third UE is less than a threshold distance. (Interpreted as in that embodiment, if the network node determines that both the radio distance between base station 26 and wireless device 30 and the radio distance between base station 26 and wireless device 32 are less than the radio limit distance. 36, the network node determines whether at least a predefined threshold amount of other wireless devices that are sufficiently close to wireless devices 30 and 32, if any, is equipped with one or more interference cancellation receivers (step 2116), pg. 21, paragraph 4)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the collision indication as taught by Panteleev to include an interference cancellation based on the distance condition as taught by Dimou with the motivation being to provide collision indication when devices are within range to cause interference/collision.
Regarding claim 2,
Panteleev teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the resource reservation information indicating reservations of resources within a slot. (see sidelink slot reservations fig. 8)
Regarding claim 3,
Panteleev teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the collision indication indicates at least one of: that the second UE and third UE are scheduled to transmit on at least partially overlapping resources; or that the second UE and third UE are scheduled to transmit in a same slot (interpreted as Co-channel collision in resource reservation (CC-RSV): In this case, the TX UEs (UE.sub.P and UE.sub.Q) have reserved resources for transmission in the same slot on overlapping frequency resources (full or partial overlap), see para [0075])
Regarding claim 4,
Panteleev teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising: determining a first distance between the first UE and the second UE; and determining a second distance between the first UE and the third UE, wherein the at least one distance-based condition is based on at least the first distance and the second distance. (Interpreted as for instance, the UE.sub.R may prioritize feedback towards the UE that is closer in distance or radio-distance. In this case, the distance may be derived from zone IDs and zone length L or from coordinate signaling by TX UEs, see para [0113])
Regarding claim 16,
Panteleev teaches the method of claim 4, however does not teach wherein the at least one distance-based condition is considered met if a maximum of the first distance and second distance is less than a collision indication distance threshold.
Dimou teaches wherein at least one distance-based condition is considered met if a maximum of the first distance and second distance is less than a collision indication distance threshold. (Interpreted as in that embodiment, if the network node determines that both the radio distance between base station 26 and wireless device 30 and the radio distance between base station 26 and wireless device 32 are less than the radio limit distance. 36, the network node determines whether at least a predefined threshold amount of other wireless devices that are sufficiently close to wireless devices 30 and 32, if any, is equipped with one or more interference cancellation receivers (step 2116), see pg. 21, paragraph 4. The default borderline amount can be, for example, a predefined percentage in range. which includes 0% to 100%, a predefined percentage greater than 50%, a predefined percentage greater than 67%, or a predefined percentage greater than 75%. At present, other wireless devices that are "close enough" to wireless devices 30 and 32 are other wireless devices that are at a preset radio distance or wireless devices 30 and 32. See pg. 21, paragraph 4.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the collision indication as taught by Panteleev to include an interference cancellation based on the distance condition as taught by Dimou with the motivation being to provide collision indication when devices are within range to cause interference/collision.
Regarding claim 17,
Panteleev teaches the method of claim 16, however does not teach wherein the collision indication is transmitted to: the second UE if the first distance is less than the collision indication distance threshold; the third UE if the second distance is less than the collision indication distance threshold; or to both the second and third UEs if the first and second distances are both less than the collision indication distance threshold.
Dimou teaches wherein the collision indication is transmitted to: the second UE if the first distance is less than the collision indication distance threshold; the third UE if the second distance is less than the collision indication distance threshold; or to both the second and third UEs if the first and second distances are both less than the collision indication distance threshold. (Interpreted as in that embodiment, if the network node determines that both the radio distance between base station 26 and wireless device 30 and the radio distance between base station 26 and wireless device 32 are less than the radio limit distance. 36, the network node determines whether at least a predefined threshold amount of other wireless devices that are sufficiently close to wireless devices 30 and 32, if any, is equipped with one or more interference cancellation receivers (step 2116), see pg. 21, paragraph 4. The default borderline amount can be, for example, a predefined percentage in range. which includes 0% to 100%, a predefined percentage greater than 50%, a predefined percentage greater than 67%, or a predefined percentage greater than 75%. At present, other wireless devices that are "close enough" to wireless devices 30 and 32 are other wireless devices that are at a preset radio distance or wireless devices 30 and 32. See pg. 21, paragraph 4.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the collision indication as taught by Panteleev to include an interference cancellation based on the distance condition as taught by Dimou with the motivation being to provide collision indication when devices are within range to cause interference/collision.
Regarding claim 18,
Panteleev teaches the method of claim 16, wherein: if transmissions from the second UE have higher priority than transmissions from the third UE, the collision indication is transmitted to the second UE only if the first distance is less than the collision indication distance threshold; and if transmissions from the third UE have higher priority than transmissions from the second UE, the collision indication is transmitted to the third UE only if the second distance is less than the collision indication distance threshold. (interpreted as The prioritization of inter-UE coordination signaling can be subject to the conditions that may include: priority of sidelink HARQ ACK/NACK signaling over half-duplex or co-channel collision indications, priority of UL transmission over SL transmission priority, distance or SL-RSRP (radio-distance) to TXs UEs, distance between TX UEs, group membership/provided service (destination ID), and random or implementation-based selection, see para [0104])
Regarding claim 19,
Panteleev teaches the method of claim 16, wherein, if transmissions for the second UE and third UE have the same priority, the collision indication is transmitted to: one or both of the second UE and third UE that have distance smaller than the collision indication distance threshold; one of the second UE and third UE with the smaller distance if the smaller distance is smaller than the collision indication distance threshold; or a randomly selected one of the second UE or third UE based on a random selection. (interpreted as The prioritization of inter-UE coordination signaling can be subject to the conditions that may include: priority of sidelink HARQ ACK/NACK signaling over half-duplex or co-channel collision indications, priority of UL transmission over SL transmission priority, distance or SL-RSRP (radio-distance) to TXs UEs, distance between TX UEs, group membership/provided service (destination ID), and random or implementation-based selection, see para [0104])
Regarding claim 20,
Panteleev teaches the method of claim 1, however does not teach further comprising determining a distance between the second UE and the third UE, wherein the at least one distance-based condition is based on at least the determined distance between the second UE and the third UE.
Dimou teaches further comprising determining a distance between the second UE and the third UE, wherein the at least one distance-based condition is based on at least the determined distance between the second UE and the third UE. (interpreted as the network node determines whether at least a predefined threshold amount of other wireless devices that are sufficiently close to wireless devices 30 and 32, if any, is equipped with one or more interference cancellation receivers (step 2116). In one embodiment, the default limit amount of any other wireless devices is a majority of other nearby wireless devices that are close enough to wireless devices 30 and 32. The default limit amount can be, for example, a predefined percentage in the range. including and including 0% to 100%, a
predefined percentage greater than 50%, a predefined percentage greater than 67%, or a predefined
percentage greater than 75%. Here, other wireless devices that are "close enough" to wireless
devices 30 and 32 are other wireless devices that are within a predefined radio distance of either
wireless device 30 and 32, see pg. 21 paragraph 4)
Claim(s) 5-15, 21-26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Panteleev (Pub No 20240155654) in view of Dimou (BR 102012024526 A2) and Yeo (Pub 20200106566)
Regarding claim 5,
Panteleev teaches the method of claim 4, however does not teach wherein the at least one distance-based condition is further based on distance thresholds associated with one or more communication range requirements indicated by the second UE and third UE for providing feedback.
Yeo teaches wherein the at least one distance-based condition is further based on distance thresholds associated with one or more communication range requirements indicated by the second UE and third UE for providing feedback. (interpreted as When groupcast sidelink data is transmitted or received, a transmitter may transmit data after including, in SCI, location information (e.g., the ID value of a zone in which the transmitter is located) of the transmitter itself and also including, in the SCI, a reference distance value (e.g., reference zone ID, a reference distance, or a distance threshold) allowing the transmission of a HARQ-ACK feedback, see para [0266])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the distance as taught by Panteleev with the distance threshold as taught by Yeo with the motivation being to prevent wasting resources transmitting when certain conditions are not met.
Regarding claim 6,
Panteleev teaches the method of claim 5, however does not teach wherein at least one distance-based condition is considered met if a maximum of the first distance and second distance is less than a maximum of the distance thresholds.
Dimou teaches wherein at least one distance-based condition is considered met if a maximum of the first distance and second distance is less than a maximum of the distance thresholds. (Interpreted as in that embodiment, if the network node determines that both the radio distance between base station 26 and wireless device 30 and the radio distance between base station 26 and wireless device 32 are less than the radio limit distance. 36, the network node determines whether at least a predefined threshold amount of other wireless devices that are sufficiently close to wireless devices 30 and 32, if any, is equipped with one or more interference cancellation receivers (step 2116), pg. 21, paragraph 4)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the collision indication as taught by Panteleev to include an interference cancellation based on the distance condition as taught by Dimou with the motivation being to provide collision indication when devices are within range to cause interference/collision.
Regarding claim 7,
Panteleev teaches the method of claim 5, however does not teach wherein the at least one distance-based condition is considered met if a maximum of the first distance and second distance is less than a minimum of the distance thresholds.
Dimou teaches wherein at least one distance-based condition is considered met if a maximum of the first distance and second distance is less than a minimum of the distance thresholds. (Interpreted as in that embodiment, if the network node determines that both the radio distance between base station 26 and wireless device 30 and the radio distance between base station 26 and wireless device 32 are less than the radio limit distance. 36, the network node determines whether at least a predefined threshold amount of other wireless devices that are sufficiently close to wireless devices 30 and 32, if any, is equipped with one or more interference cancellation receivers (step 2116), see pg. 21, paragraph 4. The default borderline amount can be, for example, a predefined percentage in range. which includes 0% to 100%, a predefined percentage greater than 50%, a predefined percentage greater than 67%, or a predefined percentage greater than 75%. At present, other wireless devices that are "close enough" to wireless devices 30 and 32 are other wireless devices that are at a preset radio distance or wireless devices 30 and 32. see pg. 21, paragraph 4.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the collision indication as taught by Panteleev to include an interference cancellation based on the distance condition as taught by Dimou with the motivation being to provide collision indication when devices are within range to cause interference/collision.
Regarding claim 8,
Panteleev teaches the method of claim 5, wherein the collision indication is transmitted to both the second and third UEs. (interpreted as UE3 provides feedback to UE1 and UE2 indicating co-channel collision in reservation and potential need for resource (re)-selection or retransmissions, see para [0087])
Regarding claim 9,
Panteleev teaches the method of claim 5, wherein the collision indication is transmitted to one of the second UE or the third UE, based on at least one of: a relative distance of the second and third UEs from the first UE; or which of the second or third UEs has the highest priority transmissions. (Interpreted as for instance, the UE.sub.R may prioritize feedback towards the UE that is closer in distance or radio-distance. In this case, the distance may be derived from zone IDs and zone length L or from coordinate signaling by TX UEs, see para [0113])
Regarding claim 10,
Panteleev teaches the method of claim 5, however does not teach wherein the at least one distance-based condition is further based on a collision indication distance threshold.
Yeo teaches wherein at least one distance-based condition is further based on a collision indication distance threshold. (Interpreted as the configuration of the maximum distance information may mean that according to a configured maximum distance value, a terminal does not transmit or receive data having, as a QoS parameter, a distance value greater than the corresponding maximum distance value. A range value is not limited to the above description, and may be applied according to various methods, see para [0267]. Also see a reference distance value included in SCI may be determined based on the maximum value or the minimum value, see para [0270])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the distance as taught by Panteleev with the distance threshold as taught by Yeo with the motivation being to prevent wasting resources transmitting when certain conditions are not met.
Regarding claim 11,
Panteleev teaches the method of claim 10, however does not teach further comprising receiving signaling indicating the collision indication distance threshold.
Yeo teaches further comprising receiving signaling indicating the collision indication distance threshold. (interpreted as When groupcast sidelink data is transmitted or received, a transmitter may transmit data after including, in SCI, location information (e.g., the ID value of a zone in which the transmitter is located) of the transmitter itself and also including, in the SCI, a reference distance value (e.g., reference zone ID, a reference distance, or a distance threshold) allowing the transmission of a HARQ-ACK feedback, see para [0266])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the distance as taught by Panteleev with the distance threshold as taught by Yeo with the motivation being to prevent wasting resources transmitting when certain conditions are not met.
Regarding claim 12,
Panteleev teaches the method of claim 11, however does not teach wherein the signaling comprises at least one of radio resource control (RRC) signaling, signaling of a minimum communication range, or a parameter signaled via sidelink control information (SCI).
Yeo teaches wherein the signaling comprises at least one of radio resource control (RRC) signaling, signaling of a minimum communication range, or a parameter signaled via sidelink control information (SCI). (interpreted as When groupcast sidelink data is transmitted or received, a transmitter may transmit data after including, in SCI, location information (e.g., the ID value of a zone in which the transmitter is located) of the transmitter itself and also including, in the SCI, a reference distance value (e.g., reference zone ID, a reference distance, or a distance threshold) allowing the transmission of a HARQ-ACK feedback, see para [0266])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the distance as taught by Panteleev with the distance threshold as taught by Yeo with the motivation being to prevent wasting resources transmitting when certain conditions are not met.
Regarding claim 13,
Panteleev teaches the method of claim 10, however does not teach wherein the collision indication distance threshold value is location dependent.
Yeo teaches wherein the collision indication distance threshold value is location dependent. (interpreted as When groupcast sidelink data is transmitted or received, a transmitter may transmit data after including, in SCI, location information (e.g., the ID value of a zone in which the transmitter is located) of the transmitter itself and also including, in the SCI, a reference distance value (e.g., reference zone ID, a reference distance, or a distance threshold) allowing the transmission of a HARQ-ACK feedback, see para [0266])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the distance as taught by Panteleev with the distance threshold as taught by Yeo with the motivation being to prevent wasting resources transmitting when certain conditions are not met.
Regarding claim 14,
Panteleev teaches the method of claim 10, however does not teach wherein the at least one distance-based condition is considered met if a maximum of the first distance and second distance is less than a maximum of the collision indication distance threshold and the distance thresholds for the second UE and third UE for providing feedback.
Dimou teaches wherein at least one distance-based condition is considered met if a maximum of the first distance and second distance is less than a maximum of the collision indication distance threshold and the distance thresholds for the second UE and third UE for providing feedback. (Interpreted as in that embodiment, if the network node determines that both the radio distance between base station 26 and wireless device 30 and the radio distance between base station 26 and wireless device 32 are less than the radio limit distance. 36, the network node determines whether at least a predefined threshold amount of other wireless devices that are sufficiently close to wireless devices 30 and 32, if any, is equipped with one or more interference cancellation receivers (step 2116), see pg. 21, paragraph 4. The default borderline amount can be, for example, a predefined percentage in range. which includes 0% to 100%, a predefined percentage greater than 50%, a predefined percentage greater than 67%, or a predefined percentage greater than 75%. At present, other wireless devices that are "close enough" to wireless devices 30 and 32 are other wireless devices that are at a preset radio distance or wireless devices 30 and 32. See pg. 21, paragraph 4.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the collision indication as taught by Panteleev to include an interference cancellation based on the distance condition as taught by Dimou with the motivation being to provide collision indication when devices are within range to cause interference/collision.
Regarding claim 15,
Panteleev teaches the method of claim 10, however does not teach wherein the at least one distance-based condition is considered met if a maximum of the first distance and second distance is less than a minimum of the collision indication distance threshold and the distance thresholds for the second UE and third UE for providing feedback.
Dimou teaches wherein the at least one distance-based condition is considered met if a maximum of the first distance and second distance is less than a minimum of the collision indication distance threshold and the distance thresholds for the second UE and third UE for providing feedback. (Interpreted as in that embodiment, if the network node determines that both the radio distance between base station 26 and wireless device 30 and the radio distance between base station 26 and wireless device 32 are less than the radio limit distance. 36, the network node determines whether at least a predefined threshold amount of other wireless devices that are sufficiently close to wireless devices 30 and 32, if any, is equipped with one or more interference cancellation receivers (step 2116), see pg. 21, paragraph 4. The default borderline amount can be, for example, a predefined percentage in range. which includes 0% to 100%, a predefined percentage greater than 50%, a predefined percentage greater than 67%, or a predefined percentage greater than 75%. At present, other wireless devices that are "close enough" to wireless devices 30 and 32 are other wireless devices that are at a preset radio distance or wireless devices 30 and 32. See pg. 21, paragraph 4.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the collision indication as taught by Panteleev to include an interference cancellation based on the distance condition as taught by Dimou with the motivation being to provide collision indication when devices are within range to cause interference/collision.
Regarding claim 21,
Panteleev teaches the method of claim 20, however does not teach wherein the at least one distance-based condition is considered met if distance between the second UE and the third UE is less than a maximum of distance thresholds indicated by the second UE and third UE for providing feedback.
Yeo teaches wherein at least one distance-based condition is considered met if distance between the second UE and the third UE is less than a maximum of distance thresholds indicated by the second UE and third UE for providing feedback. (Interpreted as the configuration of the maximum distance information may mean that according to a configured maximum distance value, a terminal does not transmit or receive data having, as a QoS parameter, a distance value greater than the corresponding maximum distance value. A range value is not limited to the above description, and may be applied according to various methods, see para [0267]. Also see a reference distance value included in SCI may be determined based on the maximum value or the minimum value, see para [0270])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the distance as taught by Panteleev with the distance threshold as taught by Yeo with the motivation being to prevent wasting resources transmitting when certain conditions are not met.
Regarding claim 22,
Panteleev teaches the method of claim 21, however does not teach wherein the collision indication is transmitted to: both the second UE and the third UE; the second UE if the distance between the second UE and the third UE is greater than the threshold for the third UE but less than the threshold for the second UE; the third UE if the distance between the second UE and the third UE is greater than the threshold for the second UE but less than the threshold for the third UE; or to the second UE or third UE that has higher priority transmission.
Yeo teaches wherein the collision indication is transmitted to: both the second UE and the third UE; the second UE if the distance between the second UE and the third UE is greater than the threshold for the third UE but less than the threshold for the second UE; the third UE if the distance between the second UE and the third UE is greater than the threshold for the second UE but less than the threshold for the third UE; or to the second UE or third UE that has higher priority transmission. (Interpreted as the configuration of the maximum distance information may mean that according to a configured maximum distance value, a terminal does not transmit or receive data having, as a QoS parameter, a distance value greater than the corresponding maximum distance value. A range value is not limited to the above description, and may be applied according to various methods, see para [0267]. Also see a reference distance value included in SCI may be determined based on the maximum value or the minimum value, see para [0270])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the distance as taught by Panteleev with the distance threshold as taught by Yeo with the motivation being to prevent wasting resources transmitting when certain conditions are not met.
Regarding claim 23,
Panteleev teaches the method of claim 4, however does not teach wherein the at least one distance-based condition is considered met only if a maximum of the first and second distances is greater than a distance threshold value.
Yeo teaches wherein at least one distance-based condition is considered met only if a maximum of the first and second distances is greater than a distance threshold value. (Interpreted as the configuration of the maximum distance information may mean that according to a configured maximum distance value, a terminal does not transmit or receive data having, as a QoS parameter, a distance value greater than the corresponding maximum distance value. A range value is not limited to the above description, and may be applied according to various methods, see para [0267]. Also see a reference distance value included in SCI may be determined based on the maximum value or the minimum value, see para [0270])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the distance as taught by Panteleev with the distance threshold as taught by Yeo with the motivation being to prevent wasting resources transmitting when certain conditions are not met.
Regarding claim 24,
Panteleev teaches the method of claim 23, however does not teach further comprising receiving signaling indicating the distance threshold value.
Yeo teaches further comprising receiving signaling indicating the distance threshold value. (interpreted as a reference distance value included in SCI may be determined based on the maximum value or the minimum value, see para [0270])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the distance as taught by Panteleev with the distance threshold as taught by Yeo with the motivation being to prevent wasting resources transmitting when certain conditions are not met.
Regarding claim 25,
Panteleev teaches the method of claim 24, however does not teach wherein the signaling comprises at least one of radio resource control (RRC) signaling, signaling of a minimum communication range, or a parameter signaled via sidelink control information (SCI).
Yeo teaches wherein the signaling comprises at least one of radio resource control (RRC) signaling, signaling of a minimum communication range, or a parameter signaled via sidelink control information (SCI). (interpreted as a reference distance value included in SCI may be determined based on the maximum value or the minimum value, see para [0270])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the distance as taught by Panteleev with the distance threshold as taught by Yeo with the motivation being to prevent wasting resources transmitting when certain conditions are not met.
Regarding claim 26,
Panteleev teaches the method of claim 23, however it does not teach wherein the distance threshold value is location dependent.
Yeo teaches wherein the distance threshold value is location dependent. (interpreted as When groupcast sidelink data is transmitted or received, a transmitter may transmit data after including, in SCI, location information (e.g., the ID value of a zone in which the transmitter is located) of the transmitter itself and also including, in the SCI, a reference distance value (e.g., reference zone ID, a reference distance, or a distance threshold) allowing the transmission of a HARQ-ACK feedback, see para [0266])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the distance as taught by Panteleev with the distance threshold as taught by Yeo with the motivation being to prevent wasting resources transmitting when certain conditions are not met.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BAO G NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-7732. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10pm - 6:30pm.
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, Huy Vu can be reached at 571-272-3155. 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.
/BAO G NGUYEN/Examiner, Art Unit 2461
/JASON E MATTIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2461
Prosecution Insights