DETAILED ACTION
Claims status
In response to the application filed on 01/15/2026, claims 7 and 9 are currently pending for the examination. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
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 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.
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 7 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DING et al. (US 2024/0276521 A1) in view of Liu et al. (US 2022/0217771 A1).
Regarding claim 7; Ding teaches a terminal that is a first terminal (See Fig. 18: Third terminal (i.e., being analyzed as a first terminal recited in the claim). ¶ [0213]), comprising:
a reception unit configured to:
receive first reservation information for reserving a first resource from a second terminal (See Fig. 18: At operation 202-1, the third terminal receives and determines a first resource set (i.e., first resource reservation info) based on time-frequency resources for a first terminal (i.e., the second terminal recited in the claim) to send data; ¶ [0214]) and
receive second reservation information for reserving a second resource from a third terminal (See Fig. 18: at operation 202-2, the third terminal receives and determines a second resource set (i.e., second resource reservation info) based on time-frequency resources for a second terminal (i.e., the third terminal recited in the claim) to send data. ¶ [0214]); and
a control unit configured to determine whether or not transmission of information related to a collision is to be allowed in a case (See Fig. 18: At operation 204-1, in a case where the first resource set φ and the second resource set θ satisfy a resource conflict condition… The resource conflict condition is a condition to determine whether the first resource set φ conflicts or overlaps with the second resource set β in at least one of time domain or frequency domain. ¶ [0221-0222]);
Even though, Ding teaches the method of determining resource collision or conflict condition between the first and second resource sets, Ding doesn’t explicitly provide the method wherein determining a destination of the first reservation information is not the first terminal and wherein the control unit detects the collision based on a value of RSRP (Reference signal received power) of a signal transmitted from the second terminal or the third terminal.
However, Liu further discloses the method wherein determining a destination of the first reservation information is not the first terminal (Liu: See Fig. 7, a sidelink UE (i.e., first terminal) may be configured with a list of sidelink UE IDs. The sidelink UE IDs on the list may correspond to sidelink UE that are part of a same group as the sidelink UE. When the sidelink UE receives SCI, the sidelink UE may compare a source/destination ID associated with the SCI to the list of sidelink UE IDs, and determine whether the SCI is for sidelink UEs in the group. When the SCI is not for sidelink UEs in the group (i.e., destination of the resource info is not the first terminal), the sidelink UE may not share a COT with a sender of the SCI. ¶ [0079]), and wherein the control unit detects the collision based on a value of RSRP (Reference signal received power) of a signal transmitted from the second terminal or the third terminal (See Fig. 3: the UE 305 may measure an RSSI parameter (e.g., a sidelink-RSSI (S-RSSI) parameter) associated with various sidelink channels, may measure an RSRP parameter (e.g., a PSSCH-RSRP parameter) associated with various sidelink channels…and may select a channel for transmission of a sidelink communication based at least in part on the measurement(s). ¶ [0068]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide the method wherein determining a destination of the first reservation information is not the first terminal as taught by Liu to have incorporated in the system of Ding, so that it would provide that one sidelink UE to share a COT with other sidelink UEs in a group, effectively making the COT a group COT that is shared with the other sidelink UEs. Large groups of sidelink UEs may have an advantage over smaller groups of sidelink UEs in clearing the LBT procedure and sharing a COT with other sidelink UEs in the group. ¶ [0094].
[Office’s Note: Because of the alternative claim language such as “in a case where…or…”, only one of the alternative limitations has been analyzed by the examiner].
Regarding claim 9; Ding teaches a communication method performed by a terminal that is a first terminal, the communication method comprising:
receiving first reservation information for reserving a first resource from a second terminal (See Fig. 18: At operation 202-1, the third terminal receives and determines a first resource set (i.e., first resource reservation info) based on time-frequency resources for a first terminal (i.e., the second terminal recited in the claim) to send data; ¶ [0214]) and
receive second reservation information for reserving a second resource from a third terminal (See Fig. 18: at operation 202-2, the third terminal receives and determines a second resource set (i.e., second resource reservation info) based on time-frequency resources for a second terminal (i.e., third terminal recited in the claim) to send data. ¶ [0214]); and
determining whether or not transmission of information related to a collision is to be allowed in a case (See Fig. 18: At operation 204-1, in a case where the first resource set φ and the second resource set θ satisfy a resource conflict condition… The resource conflict condition is a condition to determine whether the first resource set φ conflicts or overlaps with the second resource set β in at least one of time domain or frequency domain. ¶ [0221-0222]).
Even though, Ding teaches the method of determining resource collision or conflict condition between the first and second resource sets, Ding doesn’t explicitly provide the method wherein determining a destination of the first reservation information is not the first terminal and wherein the control unit detects the collision based on a value of RSRP (Reference signal received power) of a signal transmitted from the second terminal or the third terminal.
However, Liu further discloses the method wherein determining a destination of the first reservation information is not the first terminal (Liu: See Fig. 7, a sidelink UE (i.e., first terminal) may be configured with a list of sidelink UE IDs. The sidelink UE IDs on the list may correspond to sidelink UE that are part of a same group as the sidelink UE. When the sidelink UE receives SCI, the sidelink UE may compare a source/destination ID associated with the SCI to the list of sidelink UE IDs, and determine whether the SCI is for sidelink UEs in the group. When the SCI is not for sidelink UEs in the group (i.e., destination of the resource info is not the first terminal), the sidelink UE may not share a COT with a sender of the SCI. ¶ [0079]), and wherein the control unit detects the collision based on a value of RSRP (Reference signal received power) of a signal transmitted from the second terminal or the third terminal (See Fig. 3: the UE 305 may measure an RSSI parameter (e.g., a sidelink-RSSI (S-RSSI) parameter) associated with various sidelink channels, may measure an RSRP parameter (e.g., a PSSCH-RSRP parameter) associated with various sidelink channels…and may select a channel for transmission of a sidelink communication based at least in part on the measurement(s). ¶ [0068]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide the method wherein determining a destination of the first reservation information is not the first terminal as taught by Liu to have incorporated in the system of Ding, so that it would provide that one sidelink UE to share a COT with other sidelink UEs in a group, effectively making the COT a group COT that is shared with the other sidelink UEs. Large groups of sidelink UEs may have an advantage over smaller groups of sidelink UEs in clearing the LBT procedure and sharing a COT with other sidelink UEs in the group. ¶ [0094].
[Office’s Note: Because of the alternative claim language such as “in a case where one of a…”, only one of the alternative limitations has been analyzed by the examiner].
Response to Arguments
In response to the amendment, Applicant argues that the cited prior art references, Ding et al. (US 2024/0276521 A1) in view of Liu et al. (US 2022/0217771 A1), fail to teach: “wherein the control unit detects the collision based on a value of RSRP (Reference Signal Received Power) of a signal transmitted from the second terminal or the third terminal.”
Examiner’s responses:
Applicant’s argument has been fully considered but is not persuasive. Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Ding et al. teaches a first terminal receiving reservation information from multiple terminals and determining whether a resource collision exists.
Specifically, Ding teaches:
A third terminal (analyzed as the claimed first terminal) receiving first reservation information associated with a first resource from a second terminal; and
Receiving second reservation information associated with a second resource from a third terminal.
See: Fig. 18 and ¶ [0213]–[0214]:
At operation 202-1, the third terminal receives and determines a first resource set based on time-frequency resources for a first terminal to send data;
At operation 202-2, the third terminal receives and determines a second resource set based on time-frequency resources for a second terminal to send data.
Ding further teaches: Determining whether the first resource set and the second resource set satisfy a resource conflict condition. See: Fig. 18 and ¶ [0221]–[0222]. The control unit determines whether the first resource set conflicts or overlaps with the second resource set in at least one of the time domain or frequency domain. Thus, Ding teaches a control unit configured to detect resource collision/conflict conditions based on reservation information received from different terminals.
Although Ding teaches collision detection between resource reservations, Ding does not explicitly disclose that the destination of the reservation information is not the first terminal.
However, Liu et al. teaches this feature. Specifically, Liu discloses:
A sidelink UE configured with a list of sidelink UE IDs corresponding to members of a group;
Comparing source/destination IDs associated with SCI against the list; and
Determining whether received SCI is intended for the sidelink UE or for another UE/group. See: Fig. 7 and ¶ [0079].
Liu further teaches that:
When the SCI is not intended for sidelink UEs in the group, the sidelink UE determines that the SCI is not for itself.
Thus, Liu teaches determining that the destination of the reservation information is not the first terminal. Liu further teaches measuring radio signal parameters, including RSRP, associated with sidelink transmissions. See: Fig. 3 and ¶ [0068]:
The UE may measure RSSI parameters and RSRP parameters associated with sidelink channels; and
The UE may select channels for sidelink communication based at least in part on those measurements.
Because channel/resource selection is based on measured RSRP associated with sidelink signals transmitted by other terminals, Liu teaches using RSRP measurements to determine channel/resource conditions, including potential conflicts or collisions among sidelink transmissions. Accordingly, Liu teaches that the control unit detects or determines collision/resource conflict conditions based on a measured RSRP value of signals transmitted from other terminals. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate Liu’s RSRP-based sidelink measurement and SCI destination determination techniques into Ding’s collision detection framework.
Ding teaches collision/conflict determination between reserved resources;
Liu teaches:
determining whether reservation information is intended for the first terminal; and
measuring RSRP values of sidelink signals for resource/channel selection.
Combining these teachings would have predictably improved sidelink collision management by allowing the control unit to evaluate resource conflicts using measured sidelink signal strength information. Liu expressly teaches advantages associated with group-based sidelink coordination and channel occupancy sharing. See ¶ [0094]: One sidelink UE may share a channel occupancy time (COT) with other sidelink UEs in a group;
Group-based sharing may improve the ability to satisfy LBT requirements and improve communication efficiency.
One of ordinary skill in the art would therefore have been motivated to apply Liu’s RSRP-based sidelink resource evaluation techniques to Ding’s reservation conflict detection system in order to improve collision detection, resource coordination, and sidelink transmission efficiency.
Ding teaches receiving reservation information from different terminals and determining resource collision/conflict conditions;
Liu teaches:
determining that reservation information is not intended for the first terminal; and
measuring RSRP associated with sidelink signals for channel/resource determination.
Together, Ding and Liu teach or at least render obvious: detecting the collision based on a value of RSRP of a signal transmitted from the second terminal or the third terminal. Accordingly, Applicant’s argument is not persuasive, and the rejection is maintained.
Conclusion
Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAI AUNG whose telephone number is (571)272-3507. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday, Alt Fridays, 7:30 AM- 5:00 PM (EST).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Noel Beharry can be reached on 571-270-5630. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217 and 9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/SAI AUNG/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2416
Prosecution Insights