DETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to claims filed on 11 October 2023 and Information Disclosure Statements filed on 11 October 2023, 20 September 2024, and 24 October 2025.
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 .
Priority
Applicant cannot rely upon the certified copy of the foreign priority application to overcome this rejection because a translation of said application has not been made of record in accordance with 37 CFR 1.55. When an English language translation of a non-English language foreign application is required, the translation must be that of the certified copy (of the foreign application as filed) submitted together with a statement that the translation of the certified copy is accurate. See MPEP §§ 215 and 216.
Here, although the Specification filed on 11 October 2023 includes a certification as a true English translation of International Patent Application No. PCT/KR2022/006148, the certification does not appear to certify the Specification as a true English translation of either Korean Patent Application Nos. 10-2021-0055966 or 10-2021-0060950. Thus, a reference published or effectively filed before the actual filing date of the Internation Patent Application but after at least one of the Korean Patent Applications may still qualify as prior art under 35 U.S.C. §§ 102(a)(1) or 102(a)(2).
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDSes) submitted on 11 October 2023, 20 September 2024, and 24 October 2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered and attached by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hong (US 2022/0303956) in view of Sarkis et al. (US 2022/0240265, hereinafter Sarkis, as supported by U.S. Provisional Application No. 63/140,771, especially at Figs. 3, 5, 7-8, 10-12 and paragraphs 46-56, 60-67, and 76-96 of 63/140,771’s Drawings and Specification as filed).
Regarding Claim 1, Hong discloses a first user equipment (UE) in a wireless communication system, comprising:
a transceiver (Fig. 3, ¶¶ 59-60 and 62 disclose a communication node, such as a UE, as including a transceiver); and
a controller (Id. and ¶ 64 disclose the UE as including a processor executing instructions stored in memory) that is configured to determine to transmit inter-UE coordination information to a second UE according to inter-UE coordination scheme 1 (Figs. 7, 8, ¶¶ 104 and 137 disclose a UE (UE-A) transmitting inter-UE coordination (IUC) information to another UE (UE-B); Fig. 13 and ¶¶ 147-148 including Table 12 disclose UE-A indicating a type of resource set in the IUC information based on scheme 1), trigger transmission of the inter-UE coordination information (Id.), transmit the inter-UE coordination information to the second UE (Id.),
wherein the inter-UE coordination information includes information about a resource set and type information of the resource set (¶¶ 96-97 and Table 3, and ¶¶ 147-148 including Table 12 disclose IUC information as associated with a type of resource set and indicating preferred and non-preferred resources),
wherein the type information of the resource set indicates whether the resource set is a preferred resource or a non-preferred resource (Id.).
Hong may not explicitly disclose:
wherein the controller is further configured to receive a signal transmitted by the second UE based on the inter-UE coordination information.
However, in analogous art, Sarkis discloses:
wherein the controller is further configured to receive a signal transmitted by the second UE based on the inter-UE coordination information (Fig. 5 and ¶¶ 66-67 disclose UE-B selecting resources according to the IUC information to perform sidelink transmission).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Sarkis to modify Hong in order to conduct sidelink communication after communication of IUC information according to the IUC information. One would have been motivated to do this, because the use of IUC information is intended to improve sidelink communication by helping to reduce and avoid resource collisions (Sarkis ¶ 65).
Regarding Claim 2, Hong-Sarkis disclose the first user equipment of claim 1.
Hong discloses wherein the inter-UE coordination information is transmitted through 2nd-stage sidelink control information (SCI) (Fig. 7 and ¶¶ 105-108 disclose UE-A transmitting IUC information in 2nd stage SCI) transmitted on a physical sidelink shared channel (PSSCH) or is transmitted through a medium access control (MAC) control element (CE) (¶¶ 89-90 discloses 2nd stage SCI being transmitted on a PSSCH, such as in the case of using SCI format 2-C; ¶ 98, including Table 4, disclosing IUC information as transmitted in a 2nd stage SCI (e.g., SCI formats 2-A or 2B), new 2nd stage SCI (e.g., SCI format 2-C) and a MAC CE).
Regarding Claim 3, Hong-Sarkis disclose the first user equipment of claim 1.
Hong discloses wherein the inter-UE coordination information is determined to be transmitted to the second UE based on a pre-configuration according to inter-UE coordination scheme 1 (Fig. 13 and ¶¶ 147-148, including Table 12, disclose a UE generating IUC information based on an explicit trigger scheme, wherein for Types A and/or B, Scheme 1 is used with SCI in SCI format 2-C and/or a MAC CE are used as the container for the IUC information; ¶¶ 99 and 104 disclose that when the event triggered scheme is used, UE-A transmits the IUC information to UE-B upon satisfaction of preconfigured condition(s)).
Regarding Claim 4, Hong-Sarkis disclose the first user equipment of claim 1.
Hong discloses wherein transmission of the inter-UE coordination information is triggered based on an explicit request from the second UE or a preset condition (¶¶ 99 and 104 disclose using an explicit trigger scheme for UE-A to transmit IUC information to UE-B, wherein an explicit trigger is disclosed as a request messaged received from UE-B).
Regarding Claim 5, Hong-Sarkis disclose the first user equipment of claim 4.
Hong discloses wherein triggering of transmission of the inter-UE coordination information in response to an explicit request from the second UE is based on establishment of unicast between the first UE and the second UE (¶¶ 100, 111-112 (including table 8), 114, and 116 (including Table 11), disclose the trigger scheme and cast type between the UEs as associated with the resource set included in the IUC, wherein Types B and/or C are associated with unicast and an explicit trigger scheme, such as receiving a request message from UE-B as disclosed in ¶ 99).
Regarding Claims 6-15, though of varying scope, the limitations of claims 6-15 are substantially similar or identical to those of claims 1-5, and are rejected under the same reasoning.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Hwang et al. (US 2023/0137259), at Figs. 12, 13, and associated description, discloses UE-A transmitting assistance information or resource information (i.e., IUC information) to UE-B, potentially after receiving a request from UE-B, wherein resource information may indicate preferred or non-preferred resource information;
Li et al. (US 2023/0232428), at ¶¶ 663-674, discloses R1-2112127 as disclosing IUC scheme 1, wherein an IUC message may be included in SCI, MAC CE, or RRC signaling, and that IUC information includes indication of preferred or non-preferred resources, at ¶¶ 697-699, discloses request-based IUC information, and at ¶¶ 741-742, discloses that IUC information provided in response to a request may be included in 2nd stage SCI on a PSSCH transmission; and
Hwang et al. (WO 2023/022576), at the Abstract, describes a first UE transmitting IUC information to a second UE in response to a request received from the second UE.
A shortened statutory period for reply to this action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. An extension of time may be obtained under 37 CFR 1.136(a). However, in no event, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of the action.
A shortened statutory period for reply to this action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. An extension of time may be obtained under 37 CFR 1.136(a). However, in no event, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of the action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS R CAIRNS whose telephone number is (571)270-0487. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-5PM ET M-F.
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, MARCUS SMITH can be reached at (571) 270-1096. 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.
/Thomas R Cairns/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2468