DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
This Office Action is responsive to the Amendment filed on: 05/05/2026.
Claims 7-11 are pending for Examination.
Claims 7-11 have been amended.
Claims 1-6 have been cancelled to date.
Claim Interpretation — 35 USC 112(f)
Claims 7-8 and 11 have each been appropriately amended to no longer require claim interpretation under §112(f).
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 filed 05/05/2026 have been fully considered but they are determined not to be persuasive.
With respect to claims 7 and 10, Applicant argues that the rejection of these independent claims in the last Office Action under §102, based on Xue alone, fails to read on the amended claim feature of: “wherein, when a transmission in a sidelink resource by a configured grant (CG) is unable to be performed due to LBT failure, the processor generates a NACK, wherein a priority of the NACK is the same as the priority of the transmission in the sidelink resources that is unable to be performed.” The Examiner agrees.
However, in the instant Office Action, a new grounds of rejection (i.e., the addition/combination of Park) is substantially relied upon to cure this admitted deficiency of Xue. Therefore, Applicant’s arguments against Xue have been effectively rendered moot, as Xue is not relied upon to teach the contested claim features. Instead, Applicant is referred to the new rejection of its independent claims 7 and 10 under §103, provided herewith.
With respect to claim 11, Applicant argues that the rejection of this independent claim in the last Office Action under §103, based on Xue in view of Sun, fails to reasonably teach/suggest the amended claim feature of: “wherein, when a transmission in a sidelink resource by a configured grant (CG) is unable to be performed due to LBT failure, the processor generates a NACK, wherein a priority of the NACK is the same as the priority of the transmission in the sidelink resources that is unable to be performed.” The Examiner again agrees.
However, in the instant Office Action a new grounds of rejection (i.e., the addition/combination of Park) is substantially relied upon to cure this admitted deficiency of Xue and Sun. Therefore, Applicant’s arguments against Xue and Sun have also been effectively rendered moot. Instead, Applicant is referred to the new rejection of its independent claim 11 under §103, based on Xue in view of Park and Sun.
With respect to the dependent claims, Applicant only argues these claims as being allowable based on their respective dependence from one of the above-indicated independent claims. Applicant’s Remarks at p. 11. As such, Applicant’s arguments with respect to the dependent claims are likewise determined not to be persuasive or have otherwise rendered moot, for the same reasons described above for the respective independent claims.
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.
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 7 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US PG Pub. 2021/0368542 A1, Xue et al. (hereinafter “Xue”) in view of US PG Pub. 2025/0142669 A1, Park et al. (hereinafter “Park”).
With Respect to Claim 7, Xue teaches:
A terminal (UE 500 of Fig. 5) comprising:
a processor (Processor 502 of Fig. 5) configured to determine a resource for transmitting a shared channel in a resource pool in a frequency band in which an LBT (Listen before talk) is performed for channel access (paras. [0007]-[0008], [0013], [0036], and [0076] —a UE can be preconfigured (i.e., Mode 2) with a sidelink (SL) resource pool for selection of SL channel resources PSCCH/PSSCH in an unlicensed frequency band where LBT (i.e., sensing) is performed before channel access); and
a transmitter (Transceiver 510 of Fig. 5) configured to transmit the shared channel to another terminal by using the determined resource (paras. [0078] and [0098]-[0099]; and Figs. 2, 4, and 7 —SL UEs 215x of Fig. 2 can transmit SL channel data therebetween, such as the PSSCHs 414/717 of Figs. 4 and 7, using preconfigured, i.e., Mode-2, SL resources),
wherein in a case where another transmission is performed before transmission using the determined resource (paras. [0078] and [0098]-[0099]; and Figs. 4 and 7 —Other SL Tx, 410/710 of Figs. 4 and 7, can be performed before the multiple PSSCH transmissions scheduled over the preconfigured SL resources, 414/717 of Figs. 4 and 7), the processor performs transmission of the shared channel by using at least a part of a period between a resource used for the another transmission and the determined resource (paras. [0078], [0098]-[0099], and [0101]; and Figs. 4 and 7 —a SL UE can transmit over the shared UL-CC channel 402/702, during at least part of the gap 412/712, which exists between the Other Tx 410/710 and the scheduled PSSCH Tx, 414/717 —a CP extension can be used to configure transmission within the gap of 16-25µs, at para. [0078] —a CP extension associated with higher priority traffic can allow a UE to occupy UL-CC early or prior in time compared to the start time of the transmission opportunity (e.g., within the gap 712), at para. [0101]).
Xue also teaches when a transmission in a sidelink resources by a CG/TXOP is unable to be performed due to LBT failure (paras. [0063], [0100]-[0101], [0111]-[0112], and [0115]; and LBT-failures of Figs. 9B and 10 —a SL TXOP/grant can fail for various reasons resulting in unused PSCCH/PSSCH resources —Xue describes the concept of transmitting filler transmissions before or after with SCI via the PSSCH).
However, Xue does not explicitly teach:
wherein, when a transmission in a sidelink resource by a configured grant (CG) is unable to be performed, the processor generates a NACK, wherein a priority of the NACK is the same as the priority of the transmission in the sidelink resources that is unable to be performed.
Park does teach:
wherein, when a transmission in a sidelink resource by a configured grant (CG) is unable to be performed, the processor generates a NACK, wherein a priority of the NACK is the same as the priority of the transmission in the sidelink resources that is unable to be performed (paras. [0123]-[0124] and Table 9 —when a UE does not transmit a SL-PSSCH Tx in any resources configured via DCI SL format 3_0 for configured grant (CG), in any resources for which the UE receives a PUCCH resource to report HARQ, when the priority value of the NACK is the same as the priority of the PSSCH that was not transmitted, i.e., due to priority failure, the NACK may be transmitted within the configured (CG) PSSCH resource).
It would have been prima-facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Xue’s NACK transmission for CG LBT failure to occur within allocated SL CG resources, when the NACK is determined to have the same priority as an intended PSSCH Tx that failed for one reason or another, as taught by Table 9 of Park.
The motivation for doing so would have been to better utilize previously unused SL CG resources for small HARQ feedback transmissions, as recognized by Park (paras. [0123]-[0124] and Table 9).
With respect to claim 10, Xue teaches:
A communication method performed by a terminal (UE 500 of Fig. 5), the communication method comprising:
determining a resource for transmitting a shared channel in a resource pool in a frequency band in which an LBT (Listen before talk) is performed for channel access (paras. [0007]-[0008], [0013], [0036], and [0076] —a UE can be preconfigured (i.e., Mode 2) with a sidelink (SL) resource pool for selection of SL channel resources PSCCH/PSSCH in an unlicensed frequency band where LBT (i.e., sensing) is performed before channel access); and
transmitting the shared channel to another terminal by using the determined resource (paras. [0078] and [0098]-[0099]; and Figs. 2, 4, and 7 —SL UEs 215x of Fig. 2 can transmit SL channel data therebetween, such as the PSSCHs 414/717 of Figs. 4 and 7, using preconfigured, i.e., Mode-2, SL resources),
wherein in a case where another transmission is performed before transmission using the determined resource, the transmitting includes transmitting the shared channel by using at least a part of a period between a resource used for the another transmission and the determined resource (paras. [0078], [0098]-[0099], and [0101]; and Figs. 4 and 7 —a SL UE can transmit over the shared UL-CC channel 402/702, during at least part of the gap 412/712, which exists between the Other Tx 410/710 and the scheduled PSSCH Tx, 414/717 —a CP extension can be used to configure transmission within the gap of 16-25µs, at para. [0078] —a CP extension associated with higher priority traffic can allow a UE to occupy UL-CC early or prior in time compared to the start time of the transmission opportunity (e.g., within the gap 712), at para. [0101]).
Xue also teaches when a transmission in a sidelink resources by a CG/TXOP is unable to be performed due to LBT failure (paras. [0063], [0100]-[0101], [0111]-[0112], and [0115]; and LBT-failures of Figs. 9B and 10 —a SL TXOP/grant can fail for various reasons resulting in unused PSCCH/PSSCH resources —Xue describes the concept of transmitting filler transmissions before or after with SCI via the PSSCH).
However, Xue does not explicitly teach:
wherein, when a transmission in a sidelink resource by a configured grant (CG) is unable to be performed, the processor generates a NACK, wherein a priority of the NACK is the same as the priority of the transmission in the sidelink resources that is unable to be performed.
Park does teach:
wherein, when a transmission in a sidelink resource by a configured grant (CG) is unable to be performed, the processor generates a NACK, wherein a priority of the NACK is the same as the priority of the transmission in the sidelink resources that is unable to be performed (paras. [0123]-[0124] and Table 9 —when a UE does not transmit a SL-PSSCH Tx in any resources configured via DCI SL format 3_0 for configured grant (CG), in any resources for which the UE receives a PUCCH resource to report HARQ, when the priority value of the NACK is the same as the priority of the PSSCH that was not transmitted, i.e., due to priority failure, the NACK may be transmitted within the configured (CG) PSSCH resource).
It would have been prima-facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Xue’s NACK transmission for CG LBT failure to occur within allocated SL CG resources, when the NACK is determined to have the same priority as an intended PSSCH Tx that failed for one reason or another, as taught by Table 9 of Park.
The motivation for doing so would have been to better utilize previously unused SL CG resources for small HARQ feedback transmissions, as recognized by Park (paras. [0123]-[0124] and Table 9).
Claims 8-9 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xue in view of Park, in further view of US PG Pub 2023/0146161 A1, Sun et al. (hereinafter “Sun”).
With Respect to Claim 8, Xue in view of Park teaches the terminal of claim 7.
However, Xue in view of Park does not explicitly teach:
wherein the processor configures the at least a part of the period based on a subcarrier spacing used for the transmission of the shared channel.
Sun does teach:
configuring at least a part of a period (between resources of a first transmission and resources of another transmission), based on a subcarrier spacing used for the transmission of the shared channel (paras. [0063], [0121], and [0124]-[0126]; and Fig. 10 —a gap/period used for a corresponding SL channel shared COT can be configured in accordance with a CP-extension, and is based on a SCS of the SL channel —SCS affects symbol length, i.e., the larger the SCS in kHz the smaller the symbol length, and a gap/period symbol is in proportion to the SCS).
It would have been prima-facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Xue in view of Park’s shared COT gap configuration with a gap-length that is based on the SL channel SCS, as taught by Sun.
The motivation for doing so would have been to recognize the inverse relationship between SCS and symbol length, as recognized by Sun (paras. [0063], [0121], and [0124]-[0126]; and Fig. 10).
With respect to claim 9, Xue in view of Park teaches the terminal of claim 7.
However, Xue in view of Park does not explicitly teach:
wherein in a case where a signal is received from another terminal before performing the transmission of the shared channel, the controller performs the transmission of the shared channel without an LBT if a gap between an ending point of the reception and a beginning point of the transmission is less than a predetermined value.
Sun does teach:
wherein in a case where a signal is received from another terminal before performing the transmission of the shared channel, the controller performs the transmission of the shared channel without an LBT if a gap between an ending point of the reception and a beginning point of the transmission is less than a predetermined value (paras. [0067], [0076], and [0110]; and Figs. 2 and 3 —after an initial PSSCH transmission 215 if a LBT gap threshold is satisfied, i.e., CAT-1 LBT, then the UE can apply a CP extension for a next SL PSSCH transmission 217 without LBT, i.e., where no CCA is required for high-priority/low-interference, buffered data).
It would have been prima-facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Xue in view of Park’s shared COT gap configuration with a gap-length threshold, for CAT-1 LBT, where no LBT (CCA) is required, as taught by Sun.
The motivation for doing so would have been to improve SL data throughput between communicating SL UEs, by not requiring LBT when a gap threshold is satisfied for CAT-1 LBT, as recognized by Sun (paras. [0067], [0076], and [0110]; and Figs. 2 and 3).
With respect to claim 11, Xue in view of Park teaches:
A communication system for performing device-to-device direct communication (Communications Systems 100/200 of Figs. 1 and 2), the communication system comprising:
a first terminal (SL UE 215a1 of Fig. 2); and
a second terminal (SL UE 215a2 of Fig. 2),
wherein the first terminal includes:
a processor (Processor 502 of Fig. 5) configured to determine a resource for transmitting a shared channel in a resource pool in a frequency band in which an LBT (Listen before talk) is performed for channel access (paras. [0007]-[0008], [0013], [0036], and [0076] —a UE can be preconfigured (i.e., Mode 2) with a sidelink (SL) resource pool for selection of SL channel resources PSCCH/PSSCH in an unlicensed frequency band where LBT (i.e., sensing) is performed before channel access); and
a transmitter (Transceiver 510 of Fig. 5) configured to transmit the shared channel to another terminal by using the determined resource(paras. [0078] and [0098]-[0099]; and Figs. 2, 4, and 7 —SL UEs 215x of Fig. 2 can transmit SL channel data therebetween, such as the PSSCHs 414/717 of Figs. 4 and 7, using preconfigured, i.e., Mode-2, SL resources),
wherein in a case where another transmission is performed before transmission using the determined resource, the processor performs transmission of the shared channel by using at least a part of a period between a resource used for the another transmission and the determined resource (paras. [0078], [0098]-[0099], and [0101]; and Figs. 4 and 7 —a SL UE can transmit over the shared UL-CC channel 402/702, during at least part of the gap 412/712, which exists between the Other Tx 410/710 and the scheduled PSSCH Tx, 414/717 —a CP extension can be used to configure transmission within the gap of 16-25µs, at para. [0078] —a CP extension associated with higher priority traffic can allow a UE to occupy UL-CC early or prior in time compared to the start time of the transmission opportunity (e.g., within the gap 712), at para. [0101]).
Xue also teaches when a transmission in a sidelink resources by a CG/TXOP is unable to be performed due to LBT failure (paras. [0063], [0100]-[0101], [0111]-[0112], and [0115]; and LBT-failures of Figs. 9B and 10 —a SL TXOP/grant can fail for various reasons resulting in unused PSCCH/PSSCH resources —Xue describes the concept of transmitting filler transmissions before or after with SCI via the PSSCH).
However, Xue does not explicitly teach:
wherein, when a transmission in a sidelink resource by a configured grant (CG) is unable to be performed, the processor generates a NACK, wherein a priority of the NACK is the same as the priority of the transmission in the sidelink resources that is unable to be performed.
Park does teach:
wherein, when a transmission in a sidelink resource by a configured grant (CG) is unable to be performed, the processor generates a NACK, wherein a priority of the NACK is the same as the priority of the transmission in the sidelink resources that is unable to be performed (paras. [0123]-[0124] and Table 9 —when a UE does not transmit a SL-PSSCH Tx in any resources configured via DCI SL format 3_0 for configured grant (CG), in any resources for which the UE receives a PUCCH resource to report HARQ, when the priority value of the NACK is the same as the priority of the PSSCH that was not transmitted, i.e., due to priority failure, the NACK may be transmitted within the configured (CG) PSSCH resource).
It would have been prima-facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Xue’s NACK transmission for CG LBT failure to occur within allocated SL CG resources, when the NACK is determined to have the same priority as an intended PSSCH Tx that failed for one reason or another, as taught by Table 9 of Park.
The motivation for doing so would have been to better utilize previously unused SL CG resources for small HARQ feedback transmissions, as recognized by Park (paras. [0123]-[0124] and Table 9).
Xue in view of Park does not explicitly teach:
the second terminal transmits, to the first terminal, feedback information corresponding to the shared channel transmitted by the first terminal.
Sun does teach:
a second SL terminal that transmits, to a first SL first terminal, feedback information corresponding to a shared channel transmitted by the first terminal (paras. [0033], [0055], [0097], and [0099]; and PSFCHs of Figs. 6-12 —a responding SL UE can transmit a PSFCH 616 feedback communication to an initiating UE corresponding an initial PSSCH transmission 614).
It would have been prima-facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Xue in view of Park’s shared channel transmissions between SL UEs to include feedback information via a PSFCH, as taught by Sun.
The motivation for doing so would have been to provide PSFCH feedback for a shared channel transmission of a first SL UE by a second SL UE during a shared COT, as recognized by Sun (paras. [0033], [0055], [0097], and [0099]; and PSFCHs of Figs. 6-12).
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to Scott Schlack whose telephone number is (571)272-2332. The Examiner can normally be reached Mon. through Fri., from 11am-6pm 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, Moo Jeong can be reached at (571)272-9617. 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.
/Scott A. Schlack/Examiner, Art Unit 2418
/Moo Jeong/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2418
Prosecution Insights