DETAILED ACTION
This office action is a response to an amendment filed on 07/16/2026.
Response to Amendment
Claims 5-6 have been amended.
Claims 1-4 have been cancelled.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 5-6 on pages 1-4 in the remarks have been considered but are moot because these arguments don’t apply for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the arguments for the new ground of rejections those have been made using new prior arts ZHOU et al. (20220116915) and HE et al. (20200029340).
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.
Claims 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 (a) as being unpatentable over ZHOU et al. (hereinafter, “ZHOU”; 20220116915) in view of HE et al. (hereinafter, “He”; 20200029340).
In response to claims 5 and 6,
ZHOU teaches a user equipment (UE), comprising: a processor; and a memory storing instructions, wherein the instructions, when run by the processor (paragraph 72 teaches a TE used s processor and a terminal), perform:
receiving a request for an Inter-UE coordination message from another UE via sidelink control information (SCI) (paragraph 30, sidelink communication (e.g.V2X or D2D communication) is equated to inter-UE communication between two UEs, paragraph 31, SCI is equated to a request for inter-UE coordination message, using PSCCH for SCI data is interpreted as one UE receiving a request for an Inter-UE coordination message from another UE via sidelink control information (SCI)); and
ZHOU does not teach explicitly about determining time and frequency resources for sidelink transmission of the Inter-UE coordination message upon receiving the request for the Inter-UE coordination message based on at least a latency requirement of the Inter-UE coordination message, the Inter-UE coordination message indicates a resource set preferred or non-preferred for transmission by the another UE.
He in view of ZHOU teaches determining time and frequency resources for sidelink transmission of the Inter-UE coordination message upon receiving the request for the Inter-UE coordination message based on at least a latency requirement of the Inter-UE coordination message (paragraph 136 is interpreted as performing inter-UE communication or inter-UE sidelink transmission, paragraph 147, using TTI and/or frequency resource location as resource pool is interpreted as using time and frequency resources, paragraph 144, configuring is equated to determining, configuring the resource pools using a latency requirement is interpreted as determining time and frequency resources for sidelink transmission based on at least a latency requirement of the Inter-UE coordination message, fig. 39, steps 3902, paragraphs 489-499, receiving a sidelink signal for selecting traffic for a periodic or an aperiodic traffic is interpreted as receiving a request for the Inter-UE coordination message, fig. 39, steps 3904 and 3908, paragraphs 499 and 501, decoding a SCI and identifying resource selectin windows based on the latency requirement is interpreted as determining time and frequency resources for sidelink transmission of the Inter-UE coordination message upon receiving the request for the Inter-UE coordination message based on at least a latency requirement of the Inter-UE coordination message), wherein
the Inter-UE coordination message indicates a resource set preferred or non-preferred for transmission by the another UE (paragraph 147, using TTI and/or frequency resource location as resource pool is interpreted as using time and frequency resources, paragraphs 489-499 and 501, second UE in paragraph 489 is equated to another UE, receiving a sidelink signal for selecting traffic for a periodic or an aperiodic traffic in step 3902 and identifying resource selectin windows based on the latency requirement in step 3908 is interpreted as the Inter-UE coordination message indicates a resource set preferred for transmission by the another UE).
It would have been obvious within the scope of a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify ZHOU for determining time and frequency resources for sidelink transmission of the Inter-UE coordination message upon receiving the request for the Inter-UE coordination message based on at least a latency requirement of the Inter-UE coordination message, the Inter-UE coordination message indicates a resource set preferred or non-preferred for transmission by the another UE as taught by He because it would allow selecting a periodic or aperiodic resources for V2V communication based on a latency requirement.
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 ABUSAYEED HAQUE whose telephone number is (571)270-7252. The examiner can normally be reached 9 am -7:30 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, Faruk Hamza can be reached at 571-272-7969. 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.
/ABUSAYEED M HAQUE/ Examiner, Art Unit 2466
/CHRISTOPHER M CRUTCHFIELD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2466
Prosecution Insights