DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
1. Applicant’s arguments with respect to the new limitations of claims 7-9 have been considered but are moot because they do not apply to the new reference, Sarkis, that is relied on in the current rejection.
Applicant asserts, on page 8 of Remarks, that “Further, cited paragraph [0052] of Wu describes that terminal-to-terminal communication based on Type C is established regardless of whether Type A/Type B is configured. However, Wu fails to disclose that terminal-to-terminal communication is established regardless of the configuration of Type C. Wu also fails to disclose that terminal-to-terminal communication is established without considering a configuration for receiving information related to resource collisions. Thus, Wu fails to disclose "the processor performs the device-to-device communication in a predetermined resource allocation mode without taking into account the configuration information related to the first inter-terminal coordination method and the configuration information related to the second inter-terminal coordination method [in which the receiver receives information related to a resource collision]," as arranged by the above-referenced limitations of amended independent claim 7.”
On the contrary, in the limitation in question, “the processor performs the device-to-device communication in a predetermined resource allocation mode without taking into account the configuration information related to the first inter-terminal coordination method and the configuration information related to the second inter-terminal coordination method”, Type A corresponds to “the first inter-terminal coordination method”, Type B corresponds to “the second inter-terminal coordination method”, and Type C corresponds to “a predetermined resource allocation mode”. Therefore, Applicant’s statement that “Further, cited paragraph [0052] of Wu describes that terminal-to-terminal communication based on Type C is established regardless of whether Type A/Type B is configured.” aligns with the interpretation of paragraph [0052] of Wu as disclosing device-to-device communication is performed in a predetermined resource allocation mode without taking into account configuration information that is associated with two other inter-terminal coordination methods. Regarding Applicant’s statement “However, Wu fails to disclose that terminal-to-terminal communication is established regardless of the configuration of Type C.”, as outlined above, Type C corresponds to the mode that is being performed, rather than either of the two methods for which configuration information is not taken into account. Applicant’s statement “Wu also fails to disclose that terminal-to-terminal communication is established without considering a configuration for receiving information related to resource collisions.” is moot, because the limitation in question does not mention resource collisions.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
2. 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.
3. 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.
4. 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.
5. Claims 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication 2023/0239955 (hereinafter Wu), in view of Sarkis et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication 2021/0321368 (hereinafter Sarkis).
Regarding claim 7, Wu discloses a terminal that performs device-to-device communication (disclosed is a second UE [“a terminal”] that performs device-to-device (D2D) communication, according to Abstract, [0018]), the terminal comprising:
a receiver configured to receive, from a base station, control information indicating a reserved resource in a resource pool (the second UE, which necessarily comprises a transceiver [“a reception unit configured to receive”], receives, from a gNB [“base station”], a grant allocation for sidelink radio resources, according to [0051], [0060]-[0061], Fig. 6); and
a processor configured to perform the device-to-device communication, based on the control information (the second UE necessarily comprises a processor [“a control unit configured to perform”], whereby sidelink communication with other UEs is performed using the allocated radio resources, according to [0051], [0059]-[0061], Fig. 6), wherein
the receiver further receives configuration information related to a first inter-terminal coordination method or configuration information related to a second inter-terminal coordination method (the second UE receives an RRC message that includes information that identifies supported inter-UE coordination (IUC) types of a first UE, according to Abstract, [0054], whereby IUC types comprise resource allocation Types A [“first inter-terminal coordination method”], B [“second inter-terminal coordination method”], and C, according to [0043]-[0046]), and
the processor performs the device-to-device communication in a predetermined resource allocation mode without taking into account the configuration information related to the first inter-terminal coordination method and the configuration information related to the second inter-terminal coordination method (the second UE may be without network coverage, and consequently said second UE autonomously selects sidelink resources and uses IUC Type C instead of either Type A or Type B [“without taking into account the configuration information related to the first inter-terminal coordination and the configuration information related to the second inter-terminal coordination”] for sidelink communication between said first and second UEs, according to [0051]-[0053], Fig. 4 [second row]).
Wu does not expressly disclose that wherein, in the first inter-terminal coordination method, the receiver receives information indicating a preferred resource set and a non-preferred resource set, and wherein, in the second inter-terminal coordination method, the receiver receives information related to a resource collision.
Sarkis discloses that wherein, in the first inter-terminal coordination method, the receiver receives information indicating a preferred resource set and a non-preferred resource set (in a given method, inter-UE coordination information is received, whereby said inter-UE coordination information indicates preferred resources and non-preferred resources, according to [0093]-[0094]), and
wherein, in the second inter-terminal coordination method, the receiver receives information related to a resource collision (in another method, inter-UE coordination information indicates one or more resource collisions, according to [0127]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wu with Sarkis such that wherein, in the first inter-terminal coordination method, the receiver receives information indicating a preferred resource set and a non-preferred resource set, and wherein, in the second inter-terminal coordination method, the receiver receives information related to a resource collision.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to improve spectral efficiency, reduce costs, and increase reliability (Sarkis: [0062]).
Regarding claim 8, Wu discloses a communication method performed by a terminal that performs device-to-device communication according to a predetermined resource allocation mode (disclosed is a method performed by a second UE, that performs D2D communication, for resource allocation, according to Abstract, [0018]), the communication method comprising:
receiving configuration information related to a first inter-terminal coordination method or configuration information related to a second inter-terminal coordination method (the second UE receives an RRC message that includes information that identifies supported inter-UE coordination (IUC) types of a first UE, according to Abstract, [0054], whereby IUC types comprise resource allocation Types A, B, and C, according to [0043]-[0046]);
receiving control information indicating a reserved resource in a resource pool from a base station (the second UE receives, from a gNB, a grant allocation for sidelink radio resources, according to [0051], [0060]-[0061], Fig. 6); and
performing the device-to-device communication, based on the control information without taking into account the configuration information related to the first inter-terminal coordination method and the configuration information related to the second inter-terminal coordination method (the second UE may be without network coverage, and consequently said second UE autonomously selects sidelink resources and uses IUC Type C instead of either Type A or Type B for sidelink communication between said first and second UEs, according to [0051]-[0053], Fig. 4 [second row]).
Wu does not expressly disclose that wherein, in the first inter-terminal coordination method, information indicating a preferred resource set and a non-preferred resource set is received, and wherein, in the second inter-terminal coordination method, information related to a resource collision is received.
Sarkis discloses that wherein, in the first inter-terminal coordination method, information indicating a preferred resource set and a non-preferred resource set is received (in a given method, inter-UE coordination information is received, whereby said inter-UE coordination information indicates preferred resources and non-preferred resources, according to [0093]-[0094]), and
wherein, in the second inter-terminal coordination method, information related to a resource collision is received (in another method, inter-UE coordination information indicates one or more resource collisions, according to [0127]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wu with Sarkis such that wherein, in the first inter-terminal coordination method, information indicating a preferred resource set and a non-preferred resource set is received, and wherein, in the second inter-terminal coordination method, information related to a resource collision is received.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to improve spectral efficiency, reduce costs, and increase reliability (Sarkis: [0062]).
Regarding claim 9, Wu discloses a communication system (disclosed is a wireless communication system, according to [0016], Fig. 1) comprising:
a first terminal and a second terminal that perform device-to-device communication (the system comprises a first UE [“second terminal”] and a second UE [“first terminal”] that engage in D2D communication, according to [0018], Fig. 1 [elements 120 and 122]); and
a base station (the system comprises a base station, according to [0021]-[0022], Fig. 1 [element 114]), wherein
the first terminal includes:
a receiver configured to receive, from the base station, control information indicating a reserved resource in a resource pool (the second UE, which necessarily comprises a transceiver, receives, from a gNB, a grant allocation for sidelink radio resources, according to [0051], [0060]-[0061], Fig. 6); and
a processor configured to perform the device-to-device communication, based on the control information (the second UE necessarily comprises a processor, whereby sidelink communication with other UEs is performed using the allocated radio resources, according to [0051], [0059]-[0061], Fig. 6), wherein
the receiver further receives, from the base station, configuration information related to a first inter-terminal coordination method or configuration information related to a second inter-terminal coordination method (the second UE receives an RRC message that includes information that identifies supported inter-UE coordination (IUC) types of a first UE, according to Abstract, [0054], whereby IUC types comprise resource allocation Types A, B, and C, according to [0043]-[0046]), and
the processor performs the device-to-device communication in a predetermined resource allocation mode without taking into account the configuration information related to the first inter-terminal coordination method and the configuration information related to the second inter-terminal coordination method (the second UE may be without network coverage, and consequently said second UE autonomously selects sidelink resources and uses IUC Type C instead of either Type A or Type B for sidelink communication between said first and second UEs, according to [0051]-[0053], Fig. 4 [second row]), and
wherein the base station includes:
a transmitter configured to transmit, to the first terminal, the control information (the gNB transmits a grant allocation for sidelink radio resources to the second UE, according to [0051], [0060]-[0061], Fig. 6) and
the configuration information related to the first inter-terminal coordination method or the configuration information related to the second inter-terminal coordination method (the gNB transmits, to the second UE, a grant allocation that takes into account IUC information regarding resources that are not preferred by the first UE (this is IUC Type B, according to [0045]), according to [0065], Fig. 7 [step 6]).
Wu does not expressly disclose that wherein, in the first inter-terminal coordination method, the receiver receives information indicating a preferred resource set and a non-preferred resource set, and wherein, in the second inter-terminal coordination method, the receiver receives information related to a resource collision.
Sarkis discloses that wherein, in the first inter-terminal coordination method, the receiver receives information indicating a preferred resource set and a non-preferred resource set (in a given method, inter-UE coordination information is received, whereby said inter-UE coordination information indicates preferred resources and non-preferred resources, according to [0093]-[0094]), and
wherein, in the second inter-terminal coordination method, the receiver receives information related to a resource collision (in another method, inter-UE coordination information indicates one or more resource collisions, according to [0127]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wu with Sarkis such that wherein, in the first inter-terminal coordination method, the receiver receives information indicating a preferred resource set and a non-preferred resource set, and wherein, in the second inter-terminal coordination method, the receiver receives information related to a resource collision.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to improve spectral efficiency, reduce costs, and increase reliability (Sarkis: [0062]).
Conclusion
7. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW W GENACK whose telephone number is (571)272-7541. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM Eastern Time.
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, Anthony Addy can be reached at 571-272-7795. 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.
/MATTHEW W GENACK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2645