DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
The applicant has amended the following:
Claims: 1, 3, 5-8, 11-13 and 18 have been amended.
Claims: 4, 9-10 and 19 have not been amended.
Claims: 21-26 have been added.
Claims: 2, 14-17 and 20 have been cancelled.
EXAMINER’S NOTES:
The examiner notes that the applicant’s amendment has changed the scope of the claims and necessitated the new grounds of rejection presented herein.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 3-13, 18-19 and 21-26 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9-10 are also objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The dependent claims 9-10 are objected as allowable because the closest prior art found fails to disclose, teach or suggest either alone or render obvious in a combined teachings of the prior art, the uniquely distinct features in the specific order, structure and combination of limitations together as a whole of the limitations recited in the dependent claims in combination with all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims in between.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 4-7, 11-13, 18-19 and 22-25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Han et al. (US Patent Publication 2024/0008077 herein after referenced as Han) in view of JIA et al. (US Patent Publication 2023/0025873 herein after referenced as Jia).
Regarding claim 1 and claim 18, Han discloses:
A consistent listen before talk (LBT) failure processing method, comprising: and A first terminal, comprising a processor, a memory, and a program or instructions stored in the memory and executable on the processor, wherein the program or the instructions, when executed by the processor, cause the first terminal to perform: when consistent LBT failures occur on an unlicensed band, performing, by a first terminal, a first failure processing operation, wherein the first failure processing operation comprises: performing a sidelink (SL) radio link failure (RLF) operation on an SL corresponding to the unlicensed band; (Han, [0059] discloses In this case, the terminal device 120-1 (i.e. reads on performing, by a first terminal) can perform various actions (i.e. reads on a first failure processing operation comprises performing a SL RLF operation on an SL corresponding to the unlicensed band) responsive to the detected sidelink consistent LBT failure (i.e. reads on when consistent LBT failures occur on an unlicensed band). For example, if consistent LBT failures are detected for all of the at least one resource pool, the terminal device 120-1 can cause a lower layer of the terminal device to provide a sidelink LBT failure to a higher layer of the terminal device, and cause the higher layer of the terminal device to suspend sidelink signaling radio bearers SRBs and data radio bearers DRBs; Han, [0045] discloses a method of consistent LBT failure for sidelink unlicensed transmission (i.e. reads on when consistent LBT failures occur on an unlicensed band) is proposed. The method can be used by the terminal device 120-1 to detect consistent SL LBT failures; Han, [0038] discloses Accordingly, if the sidelink transmission 125-1 for example is to be performed in an unlicensed band, the terminal device 120-1 can similarly perform an LBT procedure for the sidelink transmission 125-1; Han, [0005] discloses In a first aspect, there is provided a method performed by a terminal device. The method comprises starting a listen-before-talk LBT procedure. The method also comprises generating an LBT failure indication if a channel for a sidelink transmission is occupied during the LBT procedure. The method further comprises in response to the number of LBT failure indications being equal to or greater than a predetermined number threshold, determining a consistent LBT failure associated with the sidelink transmission; Han, [0006] discloses The first terminal device comprises a processor and a memory storing instructions. The memory and the instructions are configured, with the processor, to cause the terminal device to perform the method of the first aspect).
wherein the SL RLF operation comprises at least one of following: (Han, [0042] discloses For instance, if a sidelink LBT failure indication has been received from a lower layer of the terminal device 120-1, a higher layer for example, the MAC entity (i.e. reads on a MAC entity) of the terminal device 120-1 can start or restart the timer and increment the counter by one (1). By starting or restarting the timer and incrementing the counter, the terminal device 120-1 can count the number of LBT failure indications within the predetermined time duration. In some embodiments, the timer can be referred to as Sidelink-LBT-FailureDetectionTimer (i.e. reads on corresponding to the SL) and can be configured by the RRC. Similarly, the counter can be referred to as Sidelink-LBT-Counter. EXAMINER’S NOTE: The examiner notes that the claims are written in an alternative limitation format requiring and contingent on the selection of only one of various alternative options presented and as such the non-selected alternative options are crossed out (i.e. the limitations reciting “or resetting or releasing a layer 2 entity corresponding to the SL”) and are not given patentable weight as being directed towards limitations that are not required to be performed as is indicated in MPEP 2143.03 that recites “Language that suggests or makes a feature or step optional but does not require that feature or step does not limit the scope of a claim under the broadest reasonable claim interpretation. In addition, when a claim requires selection of an element from a list of alternatives, the prior art teaches the element if one of the alternatives is taught by the prior art” and in MPEP 2111.04, Section ll that recites “The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition precedent are not met”).
Han discloses performing various actions in response to detecting consistent LBT failure as well as disclosing restarting the MAC entity but fails to explicitly recite that said MAC entity is reset in response to the SL RLF operation and therefore fails to disclose “wherein the SL RLF operation comprises at least one of following: resetting a media access control (MAC) entity.”
In a related field of endeavor, Jia discloses:
wherein the SL RLF operation comprises at least one of following: resetting a media access control (MAC) entity (Jia, [0006] discloses A radio resource control RRC layer may configure a consistent LBT failure recovery procedure (i.e. reads on wherein the SL RLF operation comprises) for a higher layer, such as MAC entity of an MAC layer (i.e. reads on a MAC entity). Consistent LBT failure is detected per uplink BWP bandwidth part. For this purpose, a counter and a timer are introduced. When an uplink LBT failure occurs, the timer is started or restarted. Whenever the MAC layer receives an uplink LBT failure indication from lower layers such as a physical layer, the counter is incremented by 1. When the received count value exceeds a predetermined value, consistent LBT failure has been triggered. Furthermore, when the timer expires, the counter is reset (i.e. reads on resetting); Jia, [0144] discloses It can be seen from the above embodiment that the counter for consistent LBT failure detection is reset when a condition is satisfied. Hence, the terminal equipment may be prevented from keeping triggering unnecessary consistent LBT failures and executing a series of actions, thereby lowering power consumption and air interface overhead of the terminal equipment).
Therefore, at the time before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Han to incorporate the teachings of Jia for the purpose of providing the system with a means to ensure that the terminal equipment may be prevented from keeping triggering unnecessary consistent LBT failures and executing a series of actions, thereby lowering power consumption and air interface overhead of the terminal equipment (Jia, [0144]) and for the purpose of making the system more dynamic and adaptable by providing the system with added functionalities and various different alternatives in design, thereby allowing the system to handle a number of various different combination of specific design structure and scenarios and thereby, preventing the system from being limited to a single specific design structure and scenario (Han, [0144]-[0145]) and furthermore, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize based on the guidelines to rationales supporting a conclusion of obviousness seen on MPEP 2143, that the modification would involve use of a simple substitution of one known element and base device (i.e. performing various actions in response to detecting consistent LBT failure as well as taught by Han) with another known element and comparable device utilizing a known technique (i.e. performing various actions in response to detecting consistent LBT failure as well, wherein the actions includes resetting the MAC entity as taught by Jia) to improve the similar devices in the same way and to obtain the predictable result of the system performing various actions in response to detecting consistent LBT failure as well (i.e. as taught by both Han & Jia) and is dependent upon the specific intended use, design incentives, needs and requirements (i.e. such as due to teachings of a known standard, current technology, conservation of resources, personal preferences, economic considerations, etc.) of the user and the system as has been established in MPEP 2144.04.
Regarding claim 4 and claim 22, Han in view of Jia discloses:
The method according to claim 1, (see claim 1) and The first terminal according to claim 18, (see claim 18).
wherein that the consistent LBT failures occur on the unlicensed band comprises any one of following that: when a plurality of available resources exist on the unlicensed band, the consistent LBT failures occur on one of the plurality of available resources; when a plurality of available resources exist on the unlicensed band, the consistent LBT failures occur on each of the plurality of available resources; and when only one available resource exists on the unlicensed band, the consistent LBT failures occur on the one available resource (Han, [0047] discloses The first specific aspect of the LBT mechanism for sidelink transmissions is the detection granularity of the consistent LBT failure. As a reference, the detection granularity of the conventional consistent LBT failure in uplink is per Sidelink Bandwidth Part SL-BWP. For the sidelink transmissions, in addition to the BWP, there are other possible granularities, for example, the resource pool RP, the cast type, the destination, the unicast link, and the like. Among these granularities, the resource pool can be more suitable for consistent LBT failure detection since it is resource specific granularity. In general, a resource pool for sidelink transmissions can be considered as a set of transmission resources that can be used by a terminal device to perform a sidelink transmission).
Regarding claim 5 and claim 23, Han in view of Jia discloses:
The method according to claim 1, wherein the first failure processing operation further comprises (see claim 1) and The first terminal according to claim 18, (see claim 18).
reporting the consistent LBT failures to a network side device, wherein the reporting the consistent LBT failures to the network side device comprises at least one of following: (Han, [0058] discloses the terminal device 120-1 is triggered to report SL LBT failure of the resource pool to gNB. EXAMINER’S NOTE: The examiner notes that the claims are written in an alternative limitation format requiring and contingent on the selection of only one of various alternative options presented and as such the non-selected alternative options are crossed out (i.e. the limitations reciting “reporting occurrence time of the consistent LBT failures to the network side device; or” and “or, the reporting the consistent LBT failures to the network side device comprises: reporting the consistent LBT failures to the network side device, and requesting a transmission resource from the network side device”) and are not given patentable weight as being directed towards limitations that are not required to be performed as is indicated in MPEP 2143.03 and in MPEP 2111.04, Section ll).
Regarding claim 6 and claim 24, Han in view of Jia discloses:
The method according to claim 1, (see claim 1) and The first terminal according to claim 18, (see claim 18).
wherein the first failure processing operation further comprises suspending the SL corresponding to the unlicensed band, wherein the suspending the SL corresponding to the unlicensed band comprises at least one of following: when no other available resource used to perform the SL transmission exists, suspending the SL;
(Jia, [0060] discloses In some embodiment, the terminal device 120-1 can indicate SL LBT failure to upper layer for example RRC layer, if all transmission resource pool has triggered consistent SL LBT failure. RRC layer may suspend all SL SRBs and DRBs. EXAMINER’S NOTE: The examiner notes that the claims are written in an alternative limitation format requiring and contingent on the selection of only one of various alternative options presented and as such the non-selected alternative options are crossed out (i.e. the limitations reciting “or when a service transmitted through the SL is a first service, suspending the SL”) and are not given patentable weight as being directed towards limitations that are not required to be performed as is indicated in MPEP 2143.03 and in MPEP 2111.04, Section ll).
Regarding claim 7 and claim 25, Han in view of Jia discloses:
The method according to claim 1, (see claim 1) and The first terminal according to claim 18, (see claim 18).
wherein the first failure processing operation further comprises suspending the SL corresponding to the unlicensed band, wherein the suspending the SL corresponding to the unlicensed band comprises: suspending at least a part of services on the SL; (Han, [0069] discloses he terminal device 120-1 can suspend the data transmission/reception in the SL based on unlicensed band for example in RRC layer; Han, [0021] discloses a terminal device can access the communication network and receive services therefrom. EXAMINER’S NOTE: The examiner notes that the claims are written in an alternative limitation format requiring and contingent on the selection of only one of various alternative options presented and as such the non-selected alternative options are crossed out (i.e. the limitations reciting “or suspending at least a part of data radio bearers (DRBs) that carries at least a part of services on the SL; wherein after the at least a part of DRBs are suspended, the first terminal performs at least one of following operations: maintaining or resetting a sending status variable and a receiving status variable of a packet data convergence protocol (PDCP) layer of the at least a part of DRBs; maintaining or resetting a sending status variable and a receiving status variable of a radio link control (RLC) layer of the at least a part of DRBs; or stopping or resetting a status that is of a MAC layer of the at least a part of DRBs and that is related to sending.”) and are not given patentable weight as being directed towards limitations that are not required to be performed as is indicated in MPEP 2143.03 and in MPEP 2111.04, Section ll).
Regarding claim 11, Han in view of Jia discloses:
The method according to claim 1, (see claim 1).
wherein the first failure processing operation further comprises suspending the SL corresponding to the unlicensed band, after the performing, by a first terminal, a first failure processing operation, the method further comprises: (Han, [0069] discloses he terminal device 120-1 can suspend the data transmission/reception in the SL based on unlicensed band for example in RRC layer. EXAMINER’S NOTE: The examiner notes that the claims are written in an alternative limitation format requiring and contingent on the selection of only one of various alternative options presented and as such the non-selected alternative options are crossed out (i.e. the limitations reciting “continuously or periodically listening to, by the first terminal, the unlicensed band; and when at least one available resource exists on the unlicensed band, resuming, by the first terminal, the at least one available resource; or when no available resource is detected through listening on the unlicensed band in a target duration, releasing, by the first terminal, the SL or”) and are not given patentable weight as being directed towards limitations that are not required to be performed as is indicated in MPEP 2143.03 and in MPEP 2111.04, Section ll).
Regarding claim 12, Han in view of Jia discloses:
The method according to claim 1, (see claim 1).
wherein before the performing, by a first terminal, a first failure processing operation, the method further comprises: determining, by the first terminal, the first failure processing operation based on first information, wherein the first information is configured by a network side device or predefined (Han, [0030] discloses The LBT parameters such as type/duration, clear channel assessment parameters, and the like can be configured in the terminal device 120-1, for example, by the network device 110; Han, [0049] discloses SL UE is also configured with a counter, and a timer, and a threshold for each transmission resource pool, and for consistent LBT failure usage. If UE's MAC layer received LBT failure indication for SL transmission on specific transmission resource pool, start corresponding configured timer for that transmission resource pool. Corresponding configured counter is increased by 1. If a configured counter is larger than a corresponding configured threshold, trigger consistent LBT failure for that transmission resource pool).
Regarding claim 13, Han discloses:
A consistent listen before talk (LBT) failure processing method, comprising: configuring, by a network side device, first information for a first terminal, wherein the first information indicates (Han, [0030] discloses The LBT parameters (i.e. reads on first information) such as type/duration, clear channel assessment parameters, and the like can be configured in the terminal device 120-1 (i.e. reads on for a first terminal), for example, by the network device 110 (i.e. reads on configuring by a network side device); Han, [0049] discloses SL UE is also configured with a counter, and a timer, and a threshold for each transmission resource pool, and for consistent LBT failure usage. If UE's MAC layer received LBT failure indication for SL transmission on specific transmission resource pool, start corresponding configured timer for that transmission resource pool. Corresponding configured counter is increased by 1. If a configured counter is larger than a corresponding configured threshold, trigger consistent LBT failure for that transmission resource pool).
a first failure processing operation performed when consistent LBT failures occur on an unlicensed band, wherein the first failure processing operation comprises: performing a sidelink (SL) radio link failure (RLF) operation on an SL corresponding to the unlicensed band; (Han, [0059] discloses In this case, the terminal device 120-1 can perform various actions (i.e. reads on a first failure processing operation comprises performing a SL RLF operation on an SL corresponding to the unlicensed band) responsive to the detected sidelink consistent LBT failure (i.e. reads on when consistent LBT failures occur on an unlicensed band). For example, if consistent LBT failures are detected for all of the at least one resource pool, the terminal device 120-1 can cause a lower layer of the terminal device to provide a sidelink LBT failure to a higher layer of the terminal device, and cause the higher layer of the terminal device to suspend sidelink signaling radio bearers SRBs and data radio bearers DRBs; Han, [0045] discloses a method of consistent LBT failure for sidelink unlicensed transmission (i.e. reads on when consistent LBT failures occur on an unlicensed band) is proposed. The method can be used by the terminal device 120-1 to detect consistent SL LBT failures; Han, [0038] discloses Accordingly, if the sidelink transmission 125-1 for example is to be performed in an unlicensed band, the terminal device 120-1 can similarly perform an LBT procedure for the sidelink transmission 125-1; Han, [0005] discloses In a first aspect, there is provided a method performed by a terminal device. The method comprises starting a listen-before-talk LBT procedure. The method also comprises generating an LBT failure indication if a channel for a sidelink transmission is occupied during the LBT procedure. The method further comprises in response to the number of LBT failure indications being equal to or greater than a predetermined number threshold, determining a consistent LBT failure associated with the sidelink transmission).
wherein the SL RLF operation comprises at least one of following: (Han, [0042] discloses For instance, if a sidelink LBT failure indication has been received from a lower layer of the terminal device 120-1, a higher layer for example, the MAC entity (i.e. reads on a MAC entity) of the terminal device 120-1 can start or restart the timer and increment the counter by one (1). By starting or restarting the timer and incrementing the counter, the terminal device 120-1 can count the number of LBT failure indications within the predetermined time duration. In some embodiments, the timer can be referred to as Sidelink-LBT-FailureDetectionTimer (i.e. reads on corresponding to the SL) and can be configured by the RRC. Similarly, the counter can be referred to as Sidelink-LBT-Counter. EXAMINER’S NOTE: The examiner notes that the claims are written in an alternative limitation format requiring and contingent on the selection of only one of various alternative options presented and as such the non-selected alternative options are crossed out (i.e. the limitations reciting “or resetting or releasing a layer 2 entity corresponding to the SL”) and are not given patentable weight as being directed towards limitations that are not required to be performed as is indicated in MPEP 2143.03 that recites “Language that suggests or makes a feature or step optional but does not require that feature or step does not limit the scope of a claim under the broadest reasonable claim interpretation. In addition, when a claim requires selection of an element from a list of alternatives, the prior art teaches the element if one of the alternatives is taught by the prior art” and in MPEP 2111.04, Section ll that recites “The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition precedent are not met”).
Han discloses performing various actions in response to detecting consistent LBT failure as well as disclosing restarting the MAC entity but fails to explicitly recite that said MAC entity is reset in response to the SL RLF operation and therefore fails to disclose “wherein the SL RLF operation comprises at least one of following: resetting a media access control (MAC) entity.”
In a related field of endeavor, Jia discloses:
wherein the SL RLF operation comprises at least one of following: resetting a media access control (MAC) entity (Jia, [0006] discloses A radio resource control RRC layer may configure a consistent LBT failure recovery procedure (i.e. reads on wherein the SL RLF operation comprises) for a higher layer, such as MAC entity of an MAC layer (i.e. reads on a MAC entity). Consistent LBT failure is detected per uplink BWP bandwidth part. For this purpose, a counter and a timer are introduced. When an uplink LBT failure occurs, the timer is started or restarted. Whenever the MAC layer receives an uplink LBT failure indication from lower layers such as a physical layer, the counter is incremented by 1. When the received count value exceeds a predetermined value, consistent LBT failure has been triggered. Furthermore, when the timer expires, the counter is reset (i.e. reads on resetting); Jia, [0144] discloses It can be seen from the above embodiment that the counter for consistent LBT failure detection is reset when a condition is satisfied. Hence, the terminal equipment may be prevented from keeping triggering unnecessary consistent LBT failures and executing a series of actions, thereby lowering power consumption and air interface overhead of the terminal equipment).
Therefore, at the time before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Han to incorporate the teachings of Jia for the purpose of providing the system with a means to ensure that the terminal equipment may be prevented from keeping triggering unnecessary consistent LBT failures and executing a series of actions, thereby lowering power consumption and air interface overhead of the terminal equipment (Jia, [0144]) and for the purpose of making the system more dynamic and adaptable by providing the system with added functionalities and various different alternatives in design, thereby allowing the system to handle a number of various different combination of specific design structure and scenarios and thereby, preventing the system from being limited to a single specific design structure and scenario (Han, [0144]-[0145]) and furthermore, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize based on the guidelines to rationales supporting a conclusion of obviousness seen on MPEP 2143, that the modification would involve use of a simple substitution of one known element and base device (i.e. performing various actions in response to detecting consistent LBT failure as well as taught by Han) with another known element and comparable device utilizing a known technique (i.e. performing various actions in response to detecting consistent LBT failure as well, wherein the actions includes resetting the MAC entity as taught by Jia) to improve the similar devices in the same way and to obtain the predictable result of the system performing various actions in response to detecting consistent LBT failure as well (i.e. as taught by both Han & Jia) and is dependent upon the specific intended use, design incentives, needs and requirements (i.e. such as due to teachings of a known standard, current technology, conservation of resources, personal preferences, economic considerations, etc.) of the user and the system as has been established in MPEP 2144.04.
Regarding claim 19, Han in view of Jia discloses:
A network side device, comprising a processor, a memory, and a program or instructions stored in the memory and executable on the processor, (Han, [0030] discloses The LBT parameters such as type/duration, clear channel assessment parameters, and the like can be configured in the terminal device 120-1, for example, by the network device 110; Han, [0119] discloses an apparatus capable of performing the method 200 may comprise means for performing the respective steps of the method 200. The means may be implemented in any suitable form. For example, the means may be implemented in a circuitry or software module. In some embodiments, the means comprises at least one processor and at least one memory including computer program code, the at least one memory and computer program code configured to, with the at least one processor, cause the performance of the method 200).
wherein when the program or the instructions are executed by the processor, steps of the consistent LBT failure processing method according to claim 13 are implemented (see claim 13).
Claim(s) 3 and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Han et al. (US Patent Publication 2024/0008077 herein after referenced as Han) in view of JIA et al. (US Patent Publication 2023/0025873 herein after referenced as Jia) and further in view of BABAEI (US Patent Publication 2023/0353987 herein after referenced as Baba).
Regarding claim 3 and claim 21, Han in view of Jia discloses:
The method according to claim 1, (see claim 1) and The first terminal according to claim 18, (see claim 18).
Han in view of Jia discloses performing various actions in response to detecting an LBT radio link failure but fails to explicitly recite that a unicast transmission resulting in the various action and therefore fails to disclose “wherein when a transmission manner of the SL is unicast transmission, the SL RLF operation further comprises at least one of following: releasing a data radio bearer (DRB) corresponding to the SL; releasing a signaling radio bearer (SRB) corresponding to the SL; deleting configuration information of the SL; releasing a PC5-radio resource control (RRC) connection corresponding to the SL; releasing a PC5-S connection corresponding to the SL; reporting an SL RLF to a network side device; or reporting, to the network side device, that a reason for the SL RLF is the consistent LBT failures.”
In a related field of endeavor, Baba discloses:
wherein when a transmission manner of the SL is unicast transmission, the SL RLF operation further comprises at least one of following: (Baba, [0039] discloses he PC5 Link Identifier may uniquely identify the PC5 unicast link in a UE for the lifetime of the PC5 unicast link. The PC5 Link Identifier may be used to indicate the PC5 unicast link whose sidelink Radio Link failure RLF declaration was made and PC5-RRC connection was released; Baba, [0083] discloses consistent uplink Listen-Before-Talk LBT failure on PCell. EXAMINER’S NOTE: The examiner notes that the claims are written in an alternative limitation format requiring and contingent on the selection of only one of various alternative options presented and as such the non-selected alternative options are crossed out (i.e. the limitations reciting “releasing a data radio bearer (DRB) corresponding to the SL; releasing a signaling radio bearer (SRB) corresponding to the SL; deleting configuration information of the SL;” and “releasing a PC5-S connection corresponding to the SL; reporting an SL RLF to a network side device; or reporting, to the network side device, that a reason for the SL RLF is the consistent LBT failures.”) and are not given patentable weight as being directed towards limitations that are not required to be performed as is indicated in MPEP 2143.03 and in MPEP 2111.04, Section ll).
Therefore, at the time before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Han in view of Jia discloses to incorporate the teachings of Baba for the purpose of providing the system with a means to identify and release specific link when a radio link failure occurs (Baba, [0039]) and for the purpose of making the system more dynamic and adaptable by providing the system with added functionalities and various different alternatives in design, thereby allowing the system to handle a number of various different combination of specific design structure and scenarios and thereby, preventing the system from being limited to a single specific design structure and scenario (Han, [0144]-[0145]) and furthermore, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize based on the guidelines to rationales supporting a conclusion of obviousness seen on MPEP 2143, that the modification would involve use of a simple substitution of one known element and base device (i.e. performing various actions in response to detecting an LBT radio link failure as well as taught by Han) with another known element and comparable device utilizing a known technique (i.e. performing various actions in response to detecting an LBT radio link failure, wherein the actions include releasing a unicast PC5-RRC connection where the failure occurred as taught by Baba) to improve the similar devices in the same way and to obtain the predictable result of the system performing various actions in response to detecting an LBT radio link failure (i.e. as taught by both Han & Baba) and is dependent upon the specific intended use, design incentives, needs and requirements (i.e. such as due to teachings of a known standard, current technology, conservation of resources, personal preferences, economic considerations, etc.) of the user and the system as has been established in MPEP 2144.04.
Claim(s) 8 and 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Han et al. (US Patent Publication 2024/0008077 herein after referenced as Han) in view of JIA et al. (US Patent Publication 2023/0025873 herein after referenced as Jia) and further in view of Zou et al. (US Patent Publication 2024/0223326 herein after referenced as Zou).
Regarding claim 8 and claim 26, Han in view of Jia discloses:
The method according to claim 1, (see claim 1) and The first terminal according to claim 18, (see claim 18).
Han in view of Jia discloses suspending transmission in response to consistent LBT failure but fails to explicitly recite a suspension parameter and therefore fails to disclose “wherein the first failure processing operation further comprises suspending the SL corresponding to the unlicensed band, a suspension parameter of the suspending the SL comprises at least one of following:
a length of a first suspension timer; a threshold value of a suspension attempt counter;
or a resumption condition of a suspension operation.”
In a related field of endeavor, Zou discloses:
wherein the first failure processing operation further comprises suspending the SL corresponding to the unlicensed band, a suspension parameter of the suspending the SL comprises at least one of following: a length of a first suspension timer; (Zou, [0227] discloses Accordingly, embodiments of the present disclosure provide novel, flexible, and efficient techniques whereby ongoing MAC procedures i.e., when the MAC entity is in a normal operating state are divided into first, second, and third parts. When the MAC entity is suspended, the procedures in the first part are reset. When the MAC entity is resumed, the procedures in the third part are reset. Additionally, the procedures in the second part remain active e.g., are kept ongoing during the period between suspension and resume; Zou, [0226] discloses In another example, if the MAC entity is reset only upon MAC entity resume, some ongoing procedures upon MAC entity suspend e.g., SR due to BFR, consistent LBT failure, etc.. EXAMINER’S NOTE: The examiner notes that the claims are written in an alternative limitation format requiring and contingent on the selection of only one of various alternative options presented and as such the non-selected alternative options are crossed out (i.e. the limitations reciting “a threshold value of a suspension attempt counter; or a resumption condition of a suspension operation”) and are not given patentable weight as being directed towards limitations that are not required to be performed as is indicated in MPEP 2143.03 and in MPEP 2111.04, Section ll).
Therefore, at the time before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Han in view of Jia to incorporate the teachings of Zou for the purpose of providing the system with a means to provide novel, flexible, and efficient techniques (Zou, [0227]) and for the purpose of making the system more dynamic and adaptable by providing the system with added functionalities and various different alternatives in design, thereby allowing the system to handle a number of various different combination of specific design structure and scenarios and thereby, preventing the system from being limited to a single specific design structure and scenario (Han, [0144]-[0145]) and furthermore, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize based on the guidelines to rationales supporting a conclusion of obviousness seen on MPEP 2143, that the modification would involve use of a simple substitution of one known element and base device (i.e. performing suspending transmission in response to consistent LBT failure as taught by Han) with another known element and comparable device utilizing a known technique (i.e. performing suspending transmission in response to consistent LBT failure, wherein the suspension includes a period of when the suspension is resumed as taught by Zou) to improve the similar devices in the same way and to obtain the predictable result of the system performing suspending transmission in response to consistent LBT failure (i.e. as taught by both Han & Zou) and is dependent upon the specific intended use, design incentives, needs and requirements (i.e. such as due to teachings of a known standard, current technology, conservation of resources, personal preferences, economic considerations, etc.) of the user and the system as has been established in MPEP 2144.04.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
ZHANG et al. (US Patent Publication 2024/0147533) discloses a first terminal in sidelink transmission, and includes: executing listen-before-talk (LBT) on a grant-free scheduled resource; and when the LBT consistently fails to be triggered on the grant-free scheduled resource, executing a target operation.
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 MICHAEL Y MAPA whose telephone number is (571)270-5540. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Thursday: 10 AM - 8 PM EST.
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.
/MICHAEL Y MAPA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2645
Prosecution Insights