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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 6-8, filed April 04, 2026, with respect to claim(s) 13-15, 18-21, 24-27 and 30 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The claim rejection under 35 U.S.C 103 of claim(s) 13-15, 18 – 21, 24 – 27 and 30 has been withdrawn.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim(s) 13 – 15, 18 – 21, 24 – 27 and 30 is/are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim(s) 1 – 3, 5, 10 – 12, 14 and 19 of U.S. Patent No. 12,156,254 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both the application and the US Patent are direct to the subject matter of sidelink collision detection and indication where the claims are not patentable distinct from each other.
For claim 13, US Patent claims a processor configured to: receive first sidelink control information (SCI) from a second WTRU, wherein the first SCI indicates a first conflict indication setting and at least a first resource, wherein the first conflict indication setting indicates whether the second WTRU is enabled to receive a transmission associated with a conflict indication; receive second SCI from a third WTRU wherein the second SCI indicates second conflict indication setting and at least a second resource; determine that the first SCI and the second SCI are received at a time before a physical sidelink feedback channel (PSFCH) transmission; determine that at least the first resource and the second resource overlap; and send the PSFCH transmission to the second WTRU based on at least a determination that the first conflict indication setting is enabled, wherein the PSFCH transmission comprises a conflict indication (see claim 1).
For claim 14, US Patent claims wherein the processor is further configured to: determine a measurement associated with the second SCI; and determine that there is a conflict associated with the first resource and the second resource based on the determination that at least the first resource and at least the second resource overlap and based on a determination that a measurement associated with the second SCI is greater than a threshold (see claim 2).
For claim 15, US Patent claims wherein the measurement associated with the second SCI is a reference signal received power (RSRP) (see claim 3).
For claim 18, US Patent claims wherein the determination that at least the first resource and at least the second resource overlaps is based on a determination that the first resource at least partially overlaps with the second resource (see claim 5).
For claim 19, US Patent claims receiving first sidelink control information (SCI) from a second WTRU, wherein the first SCI indicates and a first conflict indication setting and at least a first resource, wherein the first conflict indication setting indicates whether the second WTRU is enabled to receive a transmission associated with a conflict indication; receiving second SCI from a third WTRU wherein the second SCI indicates a second conflict indication setting and at least a second resource; determining that the first SCI and the second SCI are received at a time before a physical sidelink feedback channel (PSFCH) transmission; determining that at least the first resource and the second resource overlap; and sending the PSFCH transmission to the second WTRU based on at least a determination that the first conflict indication setting is enabled, wherein the PSFCH transmission comprises a conflict indication (see claim 10).
For claim 20, US Patent claims wherein the method further comprises: determining a measurement associated with the second SCI; and determining that there is a conflict associated with the first resource and the second resource based on the determination that at least the first resource and at least the second resource overlap and based on a determination that a measurement associated with the second SCI is greater than a threshold (see claim 11).
For claim 21, US Patent claims wherein the measurement associated with the second SCI is a reference signal received power (RSRP) (see claim 12).
For claim 24, US Patent claims wherein the determination that at least the first resource and at least the second resource overlaps is based on a determination that the first resource at least partially overlaps with the second resource (see claim 14).
For claim 25, US Patent claims a processor configured to: receive first sidelink control information (SCI) from a second WTRU, wherein the first SCI indicates a first conflict indication setting, a first priority value, and at least a first resource, wherein the first conflict indication setting indicates whether the second WTRU is enabled to receive a transmission associated with a conflict indication; receive second SCI from a third WTRU, wherein the second SCI indicates a second conflict indication setting, a second priority value, and at least a second resource; determine that the first SCI and the second SCI are received at a time before a physical sidelink feedback channel (PSFCH) transmission; determine that at least the first resource and the second resource overlap; and send the PSFCH transmission to the second WTRU based on at least a determination that the first conflict indication setting is enabled, the second conflict indication setting is enabled, and the first priority value is greater than the second priority value (see claim 19).
For claim 26, US Patent claims wherein the processor is further configured to: determine a measurement associated with the second SCI; and determine that there is a conflict associated with the first resource and the second resource based on the determination that at least the first resource and at least the second resource overlap and based on a determination that a measurement associated with the second SCI is greater than a threshold (see claim 19).
For claim 27, US Patent claims wherein the measurement associated with the second SCI is a reference signal received power (RSRP) (see claim 19).
For claim 30, US Patent claims wherein the determination that with at least the first resource and at least the second resource overlaps is based on a determination that the first resource at least partially overlaps with the second resource (see claim 19).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 GARY MUI whose telephone number is (571)270-1420. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Thurs. 9 - 3 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, Deborah Reynolds can be reached at (571)272-0734. 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.
/GARY MUI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2465
Prosecution Insights