DETAILED ACTION
Examiner acknowledges receipt of Applicant’s amendment filed 6/22/2026.
In the amendment, Applicant has amended claims 1-13, 15, 16, and 18-20.
Claims 1-20 are currently pending.
Response to Arguments
Examiner has fully considered Applicant’s arguments, see page 10, filed 6/22/2026, with respect to the objection to the specification and they are persuasive. Examiner has withdrawn the objection to the specification.
Examiner has fully considered Applicant's arguments, see pages 10-11, filed 6/22/2026, with respect to the rejection of claims under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) but they are moot in view of Applicant’s claim amendments. Examiner has withdrawn the rejection of claims under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
Examiner has fully considered Applicant's arguments, see pages 11-14, filed 6/22/2026, with respect to the rejection of claims under 35 U.S.C. 102 but they are not persuasive.
On pages 11-12, Applicant indicates that the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102 is traversed and recites amended claim 1. On page 12, Applicant argues that Li does not disclose the amended limitations of “transmit, to the second UE, the first number of PSFCHs simultaneously on multiple carriers, wherein the first number of PSFCHs is less than or equal to a maximum number of PSFCHs, wherein the total power for the transmission of the first number of PSFCHs is less than or equal to a maximum power, and wherein PSFCH transmissions on the multiple carriers are with a time resource alignment”.
Applicant first argues that step 720 of Figure 7 and [0079] do not disclose simultaneously transmitting the first number of PSFCHs on multiple carriers. Examiner respectfully disagrees. Step 710 of Figure 7 discloses a number of sidelink feedback transmissions on a plurality of carriers/cells in a TTI/occasion (i.e. simultaneously). A subset of these transmissions is selected in step 715 and then transmitted in step 720. This subset is still transmitted on a plurality of carriers and simultaneously (in one TTI/occasion).
Next, on page 13, Applicant points to [0268], suggesting that it discloses that the number of PSFCHs may exceed a maximum number. Examiner respectfully disagrees. As noted in the rejection below, Li indicates that when the number of PSFCHs exceeds a maximum number, a subset of these PSFCHs (less than or equal to the maximum) is selected/prioritized/determined for transmission.
Applicant similarly points to [0272] regarding the maximum power. Li similarly discloses that when the scheduled PSFCHs exceeds a maximum power, a subset of the PSFCHs is selected/prioritized/determined to be below or equal to this maximum power (see step 715 of Figure 7).
On pages 13-14, Applicant addresses the “time resource alignment” limitation by suggesting the Li does not disclose multiple carriers. As noted above, Li discloses transmitting PSFCHs on multiple carriers (see Figure 7, as one example).
Examiner has fully considered Applicant's arguments, see page 14, filed 6/22/2026, with respect to the rejection of claims under 35 U.S.C. 103 but they are not persuasive.
Applicant presents arguments similar to those discussed above regarding the rejections of parent claims under 35 U.S.C. 102. For reasons similar to those stated above, Examiner respectfully disagrees.
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, 4, 11, 13, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Li et al (US 2023/0300815).
Regarding claim 1: Li discloses a first user equipment (UE) in a wireless communication system, the first UE comprising:
a transceiver (see transceiver 314, for example) configured to receive, from a second UE, a first number of physical sidelink shared channels (PSSCHs) (disclosed throughout; see [0257], for example, which discloses that a first UE may receive “multiple PSSCH transmissions” from another UE); and
a processor operably coupled to the transceiver, the processor configured to (see CPU 308, for example):
identify a first number of physical sidelink feedback channels (PSFCHs) (disclosed throughout; see 715 of Figure 7, for example; the selected/prioritized/determined set of sidelink feedback transmissions (from the plurality of sidelink feedback transmissions) is the first number of PSFCHs; see also [0268]-[0269], for example); and
identify a total power for transmission of the first number of PSFCHs (disclosed throughout; see [0262], for example, which indicates that “for one (scheduled and/or requested) sidelink feedback transmission in one sidelink resource pool on one carrier/cell, the first UE may determine and/or derive one power value”; see also [0278], which describes, in one example, that “the specific power value may be derived and/or determined according to one or more of the power value based on pathloss, the configured (e.g., guarantee) power value, and/or the power value based on maximum UE transmit power (noted as PCMAX)”),
wherein the transceiver is further configured to transmit, to the second UE, the first number of PSFCHs simultaneously on multiple carriers (disclosed throughout; see step 720 of Figure 7, for example; see also [0258], for example, which indicates that the determined PSFCH transmissions are “the number of allowed PSFCH transmissions in separate sidelink carriers/cells”; that is, the “scheduled and/or requested…sidelink feedback transmissions on the plurality of carriers/cells in a TTI/occasion” (i.e. simultaneously) of step 710 are prioritized to a subset of these in step 715 (see [0360]); see also [0079] and [0260], for example),
wherein the first number of PSFCHs is less than or equal to a maximum number of PSFCHs (disclosed throughout; see 715 of Figure 7, for example; the selected sidelink feedback (PSFCH) transmissions are subject to restrictions including a “device-specific maximum number” of PSFCH transmissions; see also [0268], which indicates the UE “may select, prioritize and/or determine the set of sidelink feedback transmissions determined to satisfy a condition that the number and/or cardinality of the set of sidelink feedback transmissions is smaller than or equal to the UE-specific maximum number” ; the UE-specific maximum number is the number of PSFCHs for simultaneous transmissions),
wherein the total power for the transmission of the first number of PSFCHs is less than or equal to a maximum power (disclosed throughout; see [0272], for example, which discloses an example of selecting a set of PSFCHs (1, 2, and 4) such that the “total sidelink transmit power…may not exceed the maximum UE transmit power”; see also [0274], which discloses that the PSFCH transmissions are selected “such that summation of specific power values of the subset of sidelink feedback transmissions (with priority value smaller than or equal to the value K) may be smaller than or equal to the maximum UE transmit power, noted as PCMAX”), and
wherein PSFCH transmissions on the multiple carriers are with a time resource alignment (disclosed throughout; see [0360], for example, which discloses that the PSFCH transmissions on multiple carriers are with a time resource alignment (in a same “TTI/occasion”); see also [0005], for example, which indicates that the “set of sidelink feedback transmissions on the set of carriers” is transmitted in “a transmission time interval (TTI) and/or an occasion”; thus, the PSFCH transmissions (feedback transmissions) occur in a time interval/occasion and are aligned in time; see also [0261], for example, which discloses that the “sidelink feedback transmissions may be partially or fully overlapped in time domain”).
Regarding claim 11: Li discloses a method performed by a first user equipment (UE) in a wireless communication system, the method of comprising:
receiving, from a second UE, a first number of physical sidelink shared channels (PSSCHs) (disclosed throughout; see [0257], for example, which discloses that a first UE may receive “multiple PSSCH transmissions” from another UE);
identifying a first number of, physical sidelink feedback channels (PSFCHs) (disclosed throughout; see 715 of Figure 7, for example; the selected/prioritized/determined set of sidelink feedback transmissions (from the plurality of sidelink feedback transmissions) is the first number of PSFCHs; see also [0268]-[0269], for example);
identifying a total power for transmission of the first number of PSFCHs (disclosed throughout; see [0262], for example, which indicates that “for one (scheduled and/or requested) sidelink feedback transmission in one sidelink resource pool on one carrier/cell, the first UE may determine and/or derive one power value”; see also [0278], which describes, in one example, that “the specific power value may be derived and/or determined according to one or more of the power value based on pathloss, the configured (e.g., guarantee) power value, and/or the power value based on maximum UE transmit power (noted as PCMAX)”); and
transmitting, to the second UE, the first number of PSFCHs simultaneously on multiple carriers (disclosed throughout; see step 720 of Figure 7, for example; see also [0258], for example, which indicates that the determined PSFCH transmissions are “the number of allowed PSFCH transmissions in separate sidelink carriers/cells”; that is, the “scheduled and/or requested…sidelink feedback transmissions on the plurality of carriers/cells in a TTI/occasion” (i.e. simultaneously) of step 710 are prioritized to a subset of these in step 715 (see [0360]); see also [0079] and [0260], for example),
wherein the first number of PSFCHs is less than or equal to a maximum number of PSFCHs (disclosed throughout; see 715 of Figure 7, for example; the selected sidelink feedback (PSFCH) transmissions are subject to restrictions including a “device-specific maximum number” of PSFCH transmissions; see also [0268], which indicates the UE “may select, prioritize and/or determine the set of sidelink feedback transmissions determined to satisfy a condition that the number and/or cardinality of the set of sidelink feedback transmissions is smaller than or equal to the UE-specific maximum number” ; the UE-specific maximum number is the number of PSFCHs for simultaneous transmissions),
wherein the total power for the transmission of the first number of PSFCHs is less than or equal to a maximum power (disclosed throughout; see [0272], for example, which discloses an example of selecting a set of PSFCHs (1, 2, and 4) such that the “total sidelink transmit power…may not exceed the maximum UE transmit power”; see also [0274], which discloses that the PSFCH transmissions are selected “such that summation of specific power values of the subset of sidelink feedback transmissions (with priority value smaller than or equal to the value K) may be smaller than or equal to the maximum UE transmit power, noted as PCMAX”), and
wherein PSFCH transmissions on the multiple carriers are with a time resource alignment (disclosed throughout; see [0360], for example, which discloses that the PSFCH transmissions on multiple carriers are with a time resource alignment (in a same “TTI/occasion”); see also [0005], for example, which indicates that the “set of sidelink feedback transmissions on the set of carriers” is transmitted in “a transmission time interval (TTI) and/or an occasion”; thus, the PSFCH transmissions (feedback transmissions) occur in a time interval/occasion and are aligned in time; see also [0261], for example, which discloses that the “sidelink feedback transmissions may be partially or fully overlapped in time domain”).
Regarding claims 3 and 13: Li discloses the limitations that the first number of PSFCHs is identified based on an ascending order of corresponding priority information (disclosed throughout; see [0270], for example, which indicates that the “the first UE may select, prioritize and/or determine the set of sidelink feedback transmissions according to and/or based on ascending priority value order of each of the plurality of (scheduled and/or requested) sidelink feedback transmissions”).
Regarding claims 4 and 14: Li discloses the limitations that a first carrier of the multiple carriers is a downlink (DL) carrier and a second carrier of the multiple carriers is a sidelink carrier (disclosed throughout; see [0334], for example, which discloses that “the first carrier/cell may be enabled and/or configured to use DL pathloss for determining a PSFCH transmit power while the second carrier/cell may not be enabled and/or configured to use DL pathloss for determining a PSFCH transmit power”; the first carrier is interpreted as a downlink/DL carrier as it utilizes a DL pathloss, while the second carrier is interpreted as a sidelink carrier as it does not utilize DL pathloss and transmits the PSFCH on the sidelink).
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.
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 2, 8, 12, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al (US 2023/0300815) in view of He et al (US 2025/0343632).
Regarding claims 2 and 12: Li discloses the limitations of parent claims 1 and 11 as indicated above. Li further discloses the limitations that the transmission of the PSFCH that includes hybrid automatic repeat request acknowledgement (HARQ-ACK) information in response to a reception of the PSSCHs is in a first carrier (disclosed throughout; see [0104], for example, which discloses that the PSFCH includes HARQ-ACK information for a PSSCH). Li does not explicitly disclose the limitation that the reception of the PSSCH is in a second carrier. However, He discloses throughout a system that uses aggregated sidelink feedback. In particular, as indicated in Figure 3, the feedback is transmitted via a PSFCH on one sidelink carrier in step 340. This carrier is different than at least one of the carriers that transmitted in the PSSCH information in step 310. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Li such that the feedback is transmitted on a first carrier and carries feedback in response to PSSCH information carried on a second carrier by using aggregated sidelink feedback as disclosed by He. The rationale for doing so would have been to perform HARQ in an “organized and efficient manner” as suggested by He in [0023], for example.
Regarding claims 8 and 18: Li discloses the limitations of parent claims 1 and 11 as indicated above. Li further discloses the limitations of receive a number of PSSCHs in a number of carriers from the multiple carriers (disclosed throughout; see [0257], for example, which discloses multiple PSSCHs (1-5) transmitted in multiple carriers (C1-C5)), and transmit, the PSFCH with hybrid automatic repeat request acknowledgement (HARQ-ACK) information in response to the second number of PSSCHs (disclosed throughout; see [0258], for example, which discloses transmitting a PSFCH for transmitting HARQ-ACK feedback corresponding to the PSSCHs). Li does not explicitly disclose the limitation that the PSFCH is transmitted in a second carrier. However, He discloses throughout a system that uses aggregated sidelink feedback. In particular, as indicated in Figure 3, the feedback is transmitted via a PSFCH on one sidelink carrier in step 340. This carrier is different than at least one of the carriers that transmitted in the PSSCH information in step 310. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Li such that the feedback is transmitted on a first carrier and carries feedback in response to PSSCH information carried on a second carrier by using aggregated sidelink feedback as disclosed by He. The rationale for doing so would have been to perform HARQ in an “organized and efficient manner” as suggested by He in [0023], for example.
Claims 5, 6, 15, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al (US 2023/0300815) in view of Wang et al (US 2023/0113942).
Regarding claims 5 and 15: Li discloses the limitations of parent claims 1 and 11 as indicated above. Li further discloses the limitations of determine: a path loss (see [0292], for example, which discloses that “for a first sidelink feedback transmission of the first set of sidelink feedback transmissions, the first UE may derive and/or determine a first power value based on pathloss (e.g., based on a first DL pathloss value derived/determined on the first carrier/cell, and/or based on a first SL pathloss value)”), and the total power based on the path loss (see [0292], for example, which discloses that “for a first sidelink feedback transmission of the first set of sidelink feedback transmissions, the first UE may derive and/or determine a first power value based on pathloss (e.g., based on a first DL pathloss value derived/determined on the first carrier/cell, and/or based on a first SL pathloss value)”).
Li does not explicitly disclose the limitations receive first reference signal (RS) resources and second RS resources in a first carrier of a downlink and determine the path loss based on the first RS resources and the second RS resources. However, Wang discloses receiving a first reference signal resources (see the downlink pathloss reference signal in [0089], for example) and receiving second reference signal resources (see the sidelink pathloss reference signals in [0108], for example). Wang further discloses that the path loss may be used to determine the transmit power and that the pathloss may be determined based on the downlink and sidelink pathloss values (such as a minimum of the two pathloss measurements); see [0107], for example. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Li to utilize two reference signal resources (those for the downlink pathloss reference signal and for the sidelink reference signal) to determine the pathloss to use to determine the transmit power. The rationale for doing so would have been to avoid wasting battery and system resources of the UEs as suggested in [0101] of Wang.
Regarding claims 6 and 16: Li discloses the limitations of parent claims 1 and 11 as indicated above. Li further discloses the limitations of determine: the total power based on the first and second path loss (see [0292], for example, which discloses that “for a first sidelink feedback transmission of the first set of sidelink feedback transmissions, the first UE may derive and/or determine a first power value based on pathloss (e.g., based on a first DL pathloss value derived/determined on the first carrier/cell, and/or based on a first SL pathloss value)”). Li does not explicitly disclose the limitations that the transceiver is further configured to receive, in a first carrier of the multiple carriers: first reference signal (RS) resources in a downlink, and second RS resources in a sidelink; and the processor is further configured to determine: a first path loss based on the first RS resources, a second path loss based on the second RS resources. However, Wang discloses receiving a first reference signal resources (RS) in a downlink (see the downlink pathloss reference signal in [0089], for example) and receiving second RS resources in a sidelink (see the sidelink pathloss reference signals in [0108], for example). Wang further discloses determining a first path loss value based on the first RS (see the downlink pathloss in [0089], for example) and a second path loss value based on the second RS (see the pathloss values in [0108], for example). Wang further discloses that the path loss may be used to determine the transmit power and that the pathloss may be determined based on the downlink and sidelink pathloss values (such as a minimum of the two pathloss measurements); see [0107], for example. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Li to utilize two reference signal resources (those for the downlink pathloss reference signal and for the sidelink reference signal) to determine the pathloss to use to determine the transmit power. The rationale for doing so would have been to avoid wasting battery and system resources of the UEs as suggested in [0101] of Wang.
Claims 7 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al (US 2023/0300815) in view of Wang et al (US 2023/0113942) in view of Ökvist et al (US 2023/0124839).
Regarding claims 7 and 17: Li, modified, discloses the limitations of parent claims 6 and 16 as indicated above. Li does not explicitly disclose the limitations of claims 7 and 17 of transmit a power control command (TPC) in the sidelink based on the first and second RS resources. However, Ökvist discloses the use of sidelink TPC commands to exchange power control information in relation to pathloss estimates (see [0004], for example). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to transmit a power control command (TPC) based on the pathloss measurements as suggested by Ökvist. The rationale for doing so would have been to ensure the neighboring sidelink nodes manage their power based on the most accurate and recently measured pathloss information.
Claims 9 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al (US 2023/0300815) in view of He et al (US 2025/0343632) in view of Li ’066 et al (US 2024/0260066).
Regarding claims 9 and 19: Li, modified, discloses the limitations of parent claims 8 and 18 as indicated above. Li further discloses the limitation that the first UE is capable of transmitting the maximum number of PSFCHs (disclosed throughout; see [0260], which discloses that “the first UE may be capable of simultaneously transmitting a corresponding maximum number of sidelink feedback transmissions”).
Claims 10 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al (US 2023/0300815) in view of He et al (US 2025/0343632) in view of Wang et al (US 2023/0113942).
Regarding claims 10 and 20: Li, modified, discloses the limitations of parent claims 8 and 18 as indicated above. Li further discloses the limitation that the total power is determined based on a path loss (see [0292], for example, which discloses that “for a first sidelink feedback transmission of the first set of sidelink feedback transmissions, the first UE may derive and/or determine a first power value based on pathloss (e.g., based on a first DL pathloss value derived/determined on the first carrier/cell, and/or based on a first SL pathloss value)”). Li does not explicitly disclose the limitations of receive a reference signal associated with the PSSCH in the second carrier, and the path loss is associated with the reference signal. However, Wang discloses receiving a reference signal (PLrefRS – pathloss-reference signal) associated with the PSSCH (see [0122], for example, which indicates “For PSSCH/PSCCH, the UE 115-d may support being configured one or both of sidelink and downlink PLrefRS”). Wang further discloses that the path loss may be used to determine the transmit power and that the pathloss may be determined based on the downlink and sidelink pathloss values (such as a minimum of the two pathloss measurements); see [0107], for example. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Li to utilize two reference signal resources (those for the downlink pathloss reference signal and for the sidelink reference signal) to determine the pathloss to use to determine the transmit power. The rationale for doing so would have been to avoid wasting battery and system resources of the UEs as suggested in [0101] of Wang.
Conclusion
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 Robert C Scheibel whose telephone number is (571)272-3169. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 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, Hassan A Phillips can be reached at 571-272-3940. 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.
Robert C. Scheibel
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2467
/Robert C Scheibel/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2467 August 15, 2026
Prosecution Insights