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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 02/20/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 16-20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In each of claims 16-20, the preamble “The medium of” should read “The non-transitory computer-readable medium of”.
In each of claims 17-20, in line 1, the claim dependency should be changed from claim 8 to claim 15.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1, it is unclear as to what device or component is performing the recited method. To be more specific, it is unclear as to what device or component is performing the recited steps of “receiving inputs…”, “monitoring time synchronization…”, “determining whether a synchronization issue is detected…”, and “utilizing an alternate wireless communication medium…”
Additionally, it is unclear as to what the limitation of “performing regression estimation…” recited in lines 6-7 means. To be more specific, the claim language is unclear as to what data or information the regression estimation is performed on (i.e., in conventional art, regression analysis requires at least one dependent and one independent variable, none of which were specified by the claim), which would allow one of ordinary skill in the art to practice the invention. Is the regression estimation performed on the message timing of messages over CV2X-PC5?
Regarding claim 2-3 and 6-7, the claims are rejected for depending on claim 1.
Regarding claim 4, the term “and/or” recited in line 12 renders the scope of the claim indefinite, as it is unclear as to whether one or a combination thereof of the recited inputs are included. For examination purposes, the term will be interpreted as “or.”
Regarding claim 5, the term “and/or” recited in line 3 renders the scope of the claim indefinite, as it is unclear as to whether the dynamic rate is based on the SemiMajorAxisAccuracy accuracy, SemiMinorAxisAccuracy accuracy, GNSSTimeConfidence, or a combination thereof. For examination purposes, the term will be interpreted as “or.”
Regarding claim 8, it is unclear as to what the limitation of “performing regression estimation…” recited in lines 7-8 means. To be more specific, the claim language is unclear as to what data or information the regression estimation is performed on (i.e., in conventional art, regression analysis requires at least one dependent and one independent variable, none of which were specified by the claim), which would allow one of ordinary skill in the art to practice the invention. Is the regression estimation performed on the message timing of messages over CV2X-PC5?
Regarding claims 9-14, the claims are rejected for depending on claim 8.
Regarding claim 15, it is unclear as to what the limitation of “performing regression estimation…” recited in lines 8-9 means. To be more specific, the claim language is unclear as to what data or information the regression estimation is performed on (i.e., in conventional art, regression analysis requires at least one dependent and one independent variable, none of which were specified by the claim), which would allow one of ordinary skill in the art to practice the invention. Is the regression estimation performed on the message timing of messages over CV2X-PC5?
Regarding claim 16-20, the claims are rejected for depending on claim 15.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-20 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Applicant’s independent claims recite determining whether a synchronization issue is detected, including performing regression estimation for early prediction of potential time synchronization issues (as disclosed in Paragraphs [0053]-[0058] of applicant’s specification, filed 02/20/2024), which is neither taught nor suggested by the prior art.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Chae et al. (US 2019/0098589 A1) discloses V2X and UE falling back to eNB frequency synchronization as a fallback when GPS frequency synchronization fails.
Lee et al. (US 2020/0359354 A1) discloses V2X communication supporting PC5 based information exchange, and performing distance measurement using regression signaling.
Srivastava et al. (US 2021/0021376 A1) discloses cellular V2X and PC5 communications for one or more V2X-UEs
Cella (US 2021/0272394 A1) discloses V2X and training a classification model to predict failure within a given time window.
Mori et al. (US 2021/0306243 A1) discloses V2X and sensor delay time estimation.
Palermo et al. (US 2023/0421253 A1) discloses V2X and predicting, using machine learning, a next location of a UE.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BAILOR C HSU whose telephone number is (571)272-1729. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri. 9:00 am - 5:00 pm.
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.
/BAILOR C HSU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2461