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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(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 1-3, 7-8, 16-19, 23-24, and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Hwang et al (2023/0403728).
Regarding claims 1 and 17, Hwang discloses an apparatus and a method for wireless communications by a first user equipment (UE) (see UE-B in figure 12), comprising: selecting one or more inter-UE coordination information messages based on at least one prioritization rule (see select SL resource from at least one first resource in step S1340 and first SCI includes information related to priority in step S1310 in figure 13; the transmitting UE may transmit the second SCI to the receiving UE on the PSCCH and/or the PSSCH in paragraph 0118 and the second SCI for providing inter-UE coordination information in claim 1 on page 23); and transmitting the selected one or more inter-UE coordination information messages to at least a second UE via a sitelink (see transmit MAC PDU based on SL resource in step S1350 in figure 13 and S1240 and S1250 in figure 12; the first device may select a sidelink (SL) resource from among the at least one first resource, based on that the MAC PDU is related to the service type. In step S1350, the first device may transmit the MAC PDU based on the SL resource in paragraph 0184).
Regarding claims 2 and 18, Hwang discloses wherein the prioritization rule is based on at least one of: a cast type of the one or more inter-UE coordination information messages (see the condition may include a specific priority. For example, the condition may include a type of a service. For example, the condition may include a QoS parameter. For example, the condition may include a cast type in paragraph 0146); or a priority value of the one or more inter-UE coordination information messages (see the priority rule may be based on at least priority indication of the related PSCCH/PSSCH in paragraph 0113).
Regarding claims 3 and 19, Hwang discloses wherein the cast type comprises one of a unicast type, a first groupcast type, a second groupcast type, or a broadcast type (see FIG. 9 shows three cast types, based on an embodiment of the present disclosure. The embodiment of FIG. 9 may be combined with various embodiments of the present disclosure. Specifically, (a) of FIG. 9 shows broadcast-type SL communication, (b) of FIG. 9 shows unicast type-SL communication, and (c) of FIG. 9 shows groupcast-type SL communication in paragraph 0091).
Regarding claims 7 and 23, Hwang discloses wherein the prioritization rule is based on whether the first UE is an intended receiver of the second UE (see if the UE-A intends to receive PSCCH/PSSCH from the UE-B, the UE-A may transmit information related to preferred resource(s) and/or information related to non-preferred resource(s) to the UE-B in paragraph 0144; a priority value indicated by a SCI received by the UE and i) a priority value of data to be transmitted by the UE in paragraph 0161).
Regarding claims 8 and 24, Hwang discloses determining the first UE to be the intended receiver of the second UE when at least one of: the first UE and the second UE are communicating in a unicast communication mode; the first UE and the second UE are in a same group; or the first UE is within a communication range indicated by the second UE (see if the UE-A intends to receive PSCCH/PSSCH from the UE-B, the UE-A may transmit information related to preferred resource(s) and/or information related to non-preferred resource(s) to the UE-B in paragraph 0144; a priority value indicated by a SCI received by the UE and i) a priority value of data to be transmitted by the UE in paragraph 0161).
Regarding claims 16 and 30, Hwang discloses wherein the one or more inter-UE coordination information messages are selected based on multiple prioritization rules that are applied jointly (see the priority rule may be based on at least priority indication of the related PSCCH/PSSCH in paragraphs 0113 and 0179).
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.
Claims 4-5, 11-15, 20-21, and 27-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hwang et al (2023/0403728) in view of Hwang et al (2023/0199804).
Regarding claims 4 and 20, Hwang discloses prioritizing based on a cast type and based on assigned priority value (see the rejection of claim 2) but doesn't specifically disclose indicating conflicting transmissions on overlapping resources or the assigned priority value is subsequence to a cast type priority. However, Hwang discloses a priority of SL transmission may be configured to be high in UL-SL prioritization in paragraph 0176 and the priority of the signal or the channel including the additional information may be configured or pre-configured for the UE for each service type in paragraph 0179 and Hwang (...804) discloses indicating conflicting transmissions on overlapping resources (see conflict-related information representing a conflict of a reserved resource based on SCI is transmitted through a Physical Sidelink Feedback Channel (PSFCH) in paragraph 0045; The PSFCH related to the conflict information may be transmitted based on overlapping of the reserved resource based on the SCI with a reserved resource based on SCI of a third UE in paragraph 0021; transmitting a resource conflict indicator corresponding to a specific selection/reservation resource in paragraph 0280). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use the conflict indicator as taught by Hwang (...804) in addition to configure/preconfigure the priority as taught by Hwang so that the assigned priority values can be subsequence to the cast type priority in order to meet specific needs.
Regarding claims 5 and 21, the same obvious rejection can be applied to claims 5 and 21 as described in the rejection of claims 4 and 20 where claims 5 and 21 claimed the cast type priority is subsequence to the assigned priority values.
Regarding claims 11 and 27, Hwang discloses wherein the prioritization rule is based on the one or more inter-UE coordination information messages indicate preferred resources or non-preferred resources for transmissions by the second UE (see if the UE-A intends to receive PSCCH/PSSCH from the UE-B, the UE-A may transmit information related to preferred resource(s) and/or information related to non-preferred resource(s) to the UE-B. In this case, the UE-B may transmit in paragraph 0144). Hwang doesn't specifically disclose indicating conflicting transmissions on overlapping resources or conflicting reservations of overlapping resources. However, Hwang (...804) discloses this feature (see the resource conflict indicator in paragraphs 0264, 0283, 0315, 0021, 0031). The claim would have been obvious because a person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp. If this leads to the anticipated success, it is likely the product not of innovation but of ordinary skill and common sense.
Regarding claims 12 and 28, Hwang (...804) discloses wherein the prioritization rule prioritizes transmission of the one or more inter-UE coordination information messages indicating the conflicting transmissions on the overlapping resources over the one or more inter-UE coordination information messages indicating the conflicting reservations of the overlapping resources (see the resource conflict indicator in paragraphs 0264, 0283, 0315, 0021, 0031).
Regarding claims 13 and 28, Hwang discloses if the UE-A intends to receive PSCCH/PSSCH from the UE-B, the UE-A may transmit information related to preferred resource(s) and/or information related to non-preferred resource(s) to the UE-B. In this case, the UE-B may transmit PSCCH/PSSCH to a UE group including at least UE-A by using resource(s) other than the non-preferred resource(s). For example, the UE-B may transmit PSCCH/PSSCH to a UE group including at least UE-A by preferentially using the preferred resource(s) in paragraph 0144 but doesn't specifically disclose the prioritization rule prioritizes transmission of the one or more inter-UE coordination information messages indicating the non-preferred resources over the one or more inter-UE coordination information messages indicating the preferred resources. However, to prioritize transmission of messages indicating the non-preferred resource over the preferred resource is a matter of design choice in order to meet specific needs.
Regarding claims 14 and 28, the feature prioritizing transmission of the one or more inter-UE coordination information messages indicating the preferred resources over the one or more inter-UE coordination information messages indicating the non-preferred resources, when the second UE does not have a sidelink sensing capability is obvious for the same reason as described in the rejection of claims 13 and 27. In addition, Hwang discloses the transmission priority can be configured or pre-configured, a person of ordinary skill in the art can configure the transmission priority in order to meet specific needs.
Regarding claims 15 and 29, because Hwang teaches that the transmission priority can be configured or pre-configured as described in previous paragraphs, it is obvious that a person of ordinary skill in the art can configure the prioritization rule to prioritizes transmission of the one or more inter-UE coordination information messages that indicate the conflicting transmissions on the overlapping resources or the conflicting reservations of the overlapping resources over the one or more inter-UE coordination information messages that indicate the preferred resources or the non-preferred resources for the transmissions by the second UE.
Claims 6, 9-10, 22, and 25-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hwang et al (2023/0403728).
Regarding claims 6 and 22, Hwang discloses the UE-A may transmit information related to preferred resource(s) and/or information related to non-preferred resource(s) to the UE-B in paragraph 0144. Hwang further discloses the cast type priority and the priority can be configured or pre-configured as described in previous paragraphs except that one type of casting is subsequence to the others. However, to configure one cast type with a higher priority than the other is a matter of design choice. The claim would have been obvious because a person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp. If this leads to the anticipated success, it is likely the product not of innovation but of ordinary skill and common sense.
Regarding claims 9-10 and 25-26, Hwang discloses the priority is based on an intended receiver of the UE as described in the rejection of claims 7 and 23 above and discloses the assigned priority values as described in the rejection of claims 4 and 20 but doesn't specifically disclose one priority is subsequence to the other. However, because Hwang discloses priority can be configured or pre-configured. It is obvious that the assigned priority values and the priority of the intended UE can be configured so that one priority can be subsequence to the other.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN D NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-3084. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 - 4:30.
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, Khaled Kassim can be reached at 571-270-3770. 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.
/BRIAN D NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2475