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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of 1-13 and 20 in the reply filed on 05/11/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the Office Action of ‘Requirement for Restriction’ does not provide adequate reasons or examples supporting the conclusion that examining all of the claims is burdensome to the Office. This is not found persuasive because claims 14-19, drawn to Reference Signal configuration, classified in CPC class H045L5/0048, belong to a different CPC class and requires additional and different search. This would put additional burden on the Examiner for examining different class of prior art.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 14-19 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 05/11/2026.
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 1-13 and 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.
Claims 1 and 20 recite limitation “selecting a transmission beam and a reception beam based on the beam qualities”. However, UE transmits reference signals (RSs) using transmission beams. Therefore, claim lack clarity on selecting “a reception beam” based on the beam qualities of the transmission beams in the received beam report. Other claims are subjected to the same rejection due to their dependency on the reject claim 1.
Claim 10 recites the limitation "the second beam report" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim and claim 1 upon which it is dependent. Claims 11-13 are subjected to the same rejection due to their dependency on the rejected claim 10.
Claims 9 and 10 recite receiving a second beam report for a beam other than the selected transmission beam. However, it is not clear about the purpose or significance of the second beam report in the context of the invention. Claims 11-13 are subjected to the same rejection due to their dependency on the rejected claim above and recitation of “the second beam report”.
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 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 1-6, 9-10, 12-13 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ye; Chunxuan et al US 20250185032 A1, hereinafter Ye, in view of XUE; Yisheng et al US 20220360302 A1, hereinafter XUE.
Regarding claims 1 and 20, Ye teaches, a method of wireless communication by a first user equipment (UE), comprising:
transmitting a plurality of reference signals (RSs) using a plurality of transmission beams on a sidelink (Ye [48] “the Tx UE 102 may generate and send one or more CSI-RSs as part of the first SL transmission 110 […] Each of these one or more CSI-RSs may be transmitted within the combined PSCCH/PSSCH on a corresponding one of one or more Tx beams of a beamforming used by the Tx UE 102 used to communicate with the Rx UE 104”);
receiving, from a second UE, a beam report carried on a Physical Sidelink Feedback Channel (PSFCH), the beam report indicating beam qualities generated by the second UE based on measurements of the plurality of RSs (Ye [48] “Once received at the Rx UE 104, the one or more CSI-RSs may be measured by the Rx UE 104.”, [50] “The second SL transmission 112 includes CSI reporting corresponding to the multiple CSI-RSs based on the measurements of the multiple CSI-RSs at the Rx UE 104. For example, measured L1-RSRP and/or L1-SINR values for one, some, or all of the multiple CSI-RSs may be included in this CSI reporting. Alternatively or additionally, an indication of one, some or all of a number X of the strongest CSI-RSs (e.g., CSI-RSs with the highest measured L1-RSRP and/or L1-SINR values) may be given.”, [52] “an instance of such CSI reporting may accordingly be referred to herein as a “beam report.”, [53] “the second SL transmission 112 having this CSI reporting may comprise a physical sidelink feedback channel (PSFCH)”);
selecting a transmission beam (Ye [51] “For example, if the second SL transmission 112 includes CSI reporting that indicates a given CSI-RS of the one or more CSI-RSs corresponds to a strongest/highest RSRP/SINR measured value, the Tx UE 102 can conclude accordingly that the beam used to send that given CSI-RS to the Rx UE 104 is a best beam to use for future transmissions to the Rx UE 104.”); and
establishing a sidelink communication with the second UE using the selected transmission beam (Implied in Ye. See Ye [51] “the Tx UE 102 can conclude accordingly that the beam used to send that given CSI-RS to the Rx UE 104 is a best beam to use for future transmissions to the Rx UE 104.”).
Ye does not expressly teach, however, in the same field of endeavor, XUE teaches, selecting a transmission beam and a reception beam based on the beam qualities (XUE [58] “Aspects described herein may be related […] for beamforming alignment between a pair of sidelink UEs operating in mode 1.”, [76] “The beam-feedback SCI message may include the index of the best (most suitable) Tx beam on which a beam-sweep SCI message was transmitted, the index of the best (most suitable) Rx beam corresponding to the best (most suitable) Tx beam, and/or a link metric associated with the Tx beam-Rx beam pair (e.g., the RSRP of the DMRS, or any other signal to interference plus noise ratio “SINR”-based metric such as a received signal strength indicator “RSSI,” a reference signal received quality “RSRQ,” a signal to noise ratio “SNR,” or an SINR, etc.). Accordingly, at 718, the first UE 702 may receive, from the at least one second UE 704, the beam-feedback SCI within the time period.”, [0101] “In one configuration, the beam-ACK SCI may include at least one of: an indication of an Rx beam, a link quality metric, or an indication of a completion of the beamforming alignment procedure.”, teaches aligning Tx and Rx beam-pair (=selecting a transmission beam and a reception beam), based on feed-back SCI message (=beam report)).
establishing a sidelink communication with the second UE using the selected transmission beam and the selected reception beam on the sidelink (implied in XUE, see XUE [0001] “beamforming alignment procedure for sidelink communication in a wireless communications system”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Ye to include the features as taught by Gao above in order to provide a method of beamforming alignment procedure for sidelink communication in a wireless communications system (XUE [0001]).
With respect to claim 20, claim recites the identical features of claim 1 for a corresponding apparatus. Therefore, it is subjected to the same rejection. Ye further teaches, comprising: a memory; and at least one processor coupled to the memory (see Ye Fig.25).
Regarding claim 2, Ye, in view of XUE, teaches the method, as outlined in the rejection of claim 1.
Ye further teaches, wherein the beam report is received on the PSFCH at a corresponding time occasion or a corresponding resource location associated with the selected transmission beam (Ye [73] “In a fourth case, a number of PSFCH resources that is available for PSFCH format 0 beam reporting are reserved (with each resource associated with one beam). Then, the Rx UE 104 may report the measured quality value for each of the reported-on beams in a reserved resource that is associated with that particular reported-on beam.”, teaches PSFCH resource for beam report is associated with a beam).
Regarding claim 3, Ye, in view of XUE, teaches the method, as outlined in the rejection of claim 1.
Ye further teaches, wherein the PSFCH carrying the beam report is received based on a timing of receiving a PSFCH for Acknowledgement/Negative Acknowledgement (ACK/NACK) feedback (Ye [80] “The UE may be configured to prioritize format 0 PSFCH communications for SL HARQ-ACK reporting over format 0 PSFCH communications for beam reporting.”, teaches, PSFCH carrying beam report is based on PSFCH for ACK/NACK at the time).
Regarding claim 4, Ye, in view of XUE, teaches the method, as outlined in the rejection of claim 3.
Ye further teaches, wherein different candidate PSFCH resources indicate whether a signal quality of a corresponding RS, transmitted from the first UE and received at the second UE, meets a criterion, or indicate different measured result values or measured result qualities of a corresponding RS transmitted from the first UE and received at the second UE (Ye [93] “In a first alternative, it may be that a frequency domain location of a format 0 PSFCH indicates a measured quality of a beam being reported on. For example, if a format 0 PSFCH for a beam report for a beam is sent by the Rx UE 104 in a first location in the frequency domain, the Tx UE 102 may understand that the beam was measured with a first measured quality. Further, if the format 0 PSFCH for the beam report for that beam is instead sent by the Rx UE 104 in a second location in the frequency domain, the Tx UE 102 may understand that the beam was measured with a second (different) measured quality.”. Satisfies “or” criteria of the claim)., or indicate whether a measured result or quality of a corresponding RS, transmitted from the first UE and received at the second UE, is better than that of a previously reported RS.
Regarding claim 5, Ye, in view of XUE, teaches the method, as outlined in the rejection of claim 1.
Ye further teaches, wherein a timing for the PSFCH carrying the beam report is separate from a timing for receiving a PSFCH for Acknowledgement/Negative Acknowledgement (ACK/NACK) feedback (Ye [109] “In other such cases, a time gap between PSSCH to the large-payload format PSFCH may be different (e.g., greater than) the PSSCH to PSFCH mapping rule used for SL HARQ-ACK reporting on PSFCH that uses a format 0 PSFCH.” Suggests different timings for beam-report PSFCH and HARQ-ACK (=ACK/NACK) PSFCH).
Regarding claim 6, Ye, in view of XUE, teaches the method, as outlined in the rejection of claim 5.
Ye further teaches, wherein one PSFCH time resource is reserved for the beam report, the one PSFCH time resource corresponding to one or more RSs and indicating a suitable RS among the one or more RSs (Ye [95] “For example, it may be that the first CSI-RS 302 has a measured quality that is the strongest out of all measured beams. It may be in such a case that the Rx UE 104 is configured indicated this to the Tx UE 102 by sending a format 0 PSFCH in the first format 0 PSFCH location 306. This may indicate to the Tx UE 102 that the beam associated with the first CSI-RS 302 (e.g., Beam 1) is the strongest out of all measured beams.”, suggests a first resource is reserved for strongest CSI-RS measured (=most suitable RS)).
Regarding claim 9, Ye, in view of XUE, teaches the method, as outlined in the rejection of claim 1.
Ye further teaches, further comprising: receiving, from the second UE, a second beam report for a beam other than the selected transmission beam (“beam report for a beam other than the selected transmission beam” is interpreted as a beam report for additional transmission beams. Ye [157] “using the PSFCH resources to receive a second PSFCH transmission comprising a second beam report”).
Regarding claim 10, Ye, in view of XUE, teaches the method, as outlined in the rejection of claim 1.
Ye further teaches, wherein the second beam report is received on the selected transmission beam via the PSFCH without requiring an extra resource selection procedure (“Other than selected transmission beam” is interpreted as more transmission beams. Ye [157] “using the PSFCH resources to receive a second PSFCH transmission comprising a second beam report”).
Regarding claim 12, Ye, in view of XUE, teaches the method, as outlined in the rejection of claim 10.
Ye further teaches, wherein the second beam report is received on an activated beam via a Physical Sidelink Shared Channel (PSSCH) using a resource selection procedure (Ye [52] “CSI reporting may accordingly be referred to herein as a “beam report.””, [0053] “In some cases, the second SL transmission 112 having this CSI reporting may comprise a combined PSCCH/PSSCH”, [0057] “In some instances where the beam report is carried in a MAC CE of the combined PSCCH/PSSCH, dedicated resources are used by the Rx UE 104 to transmit the combined PSCCH/PSSCH. In some cases, these dedicated resources may be resources that were reserved by SCI transmitted from the Tx UE 102 to the Rx UE 104”, teaches resource selection. Active beam (=current/operating beam for communication between UEs) for beam report” is inherent in Ye and XUE. See also claim 8 rejection).
Regarding claim 13, Ye, in view of XUE, teaches the method, as outlined in the rejection of claim 10.
Ye further teaches, wherein the second beam report is carried in a 2nd stage Sidelink Control Information (SCI) of the PSSCH, or in a data payload of the PSSCH (Ye [0059] “In some embodiments, it may be that the beam report is carried in stage 2 of SCI of the combined PSCCH/PSSCH”. It is obvious that same can be applied to the second beam report).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ye, in view of XUE, as applied to the rejection of claim 1 above, and further in view of WU; Min et al US 20240340142 A1, hereinafter WU.
Regarding claim 7, Ye, in view of XUE, teaches the method, as outlined in the rejection of claim 1.
Ye and XUE does not expressly teach, however, in the same field of endeavor, WU teaches, wherein a PSFCH resource for the beam report is determined according to at least one of a source ID and a destination ID of the first UE and the second UE (WU [0084] “reporting the measurement result based on the SL-CSI-RS to the first UE by […] a physical sidelink feedback channel (PSFCH)”, [0106] “determining a PSFCH resource for reporting in the group of PSFCH resources based on at least one of the first UE ID, the second UE ID and the index of the SL-CSI-RS resource corresponding to the measurement result to be reported”, [213] “The identity or identifier (ID) of the TX UE is called a first UE ID or source ID, and the ID of the RX UE is called a second UE ID or destination ID”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Ye and XUE to include the features as taught by WU above in order to provide a method to solve how to perform measurement and reporting related to sidelink communication (WU [0009]).
Claims 8 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ye, in view of XUE, as applied to the rejection of claim 1 above, and further in view of Wang; Kaidong et al US 20220385349 A1, hereinafter Wang.
Regarding claim 8, Ye, in view of XUE, teaches the method, as outlined in the rejection of claim 1.
While “using active beam (=current/operating beam for communication between UEs) for beam report” is inherent in Ye and XUE, Ye and XUE does not expressly teach, however, in the same field of endeavor, Wang teaches, wherein the PSFCH carrying the beam report is transmitted on an activated beam, or on a beam determined based on a resource selection procedure (Wang [11] “transmitting the beam measurement report to the second device using one or more of a current beam”. Current beam implies Active beam. Satisfies “or” criteria of the claim).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Ye and XUE to include the features as taught by Wang above in order to provide a method of managing beam measurement reporting associated with the wireless communications (Wang [0001]).
Regarding claim 11, Ye, in view of XUE, teaches the method, as outlined in the rejection of claim 10.
While “using active beam for beam report” is inherent in Ye and XUE, Ye and XUE does not expressly teach, however, in the same field of endeavor, Wang teaches, wherein the second beam report is received on an activated beam via a PSFCH (“second beam report” is similar to the beam report in claim 1. Wang [11] “transmitting the beam measurement report to the second device using one or more of a current beam”. Current beam implies Active beam. Satisfies “or” criteria of the claim).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Ye and XUE to include the features as taught by Wang above in order to provide a method of managing beam measurement reporting associated with the wireless communications (Wang [0001]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Farag; Emad Nader, US 20240022376 A1, METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR SL MULTI-BEAM OPERATION.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAHBUBUL BAR CHOWDHURY whose telephone number is (571)272-0232. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday 9AM-5PM EST; Friday variable.
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, Hassan Kizou can be reached on 571-272-3088. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MAHBUBUL BAR CHOWDHURY/Examiner, Art Unit 2475
Prosecution Insights