DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA (or AIA ) first to invent provisions.
Response to Amendment
- The amendment filed on July 31, 2026 has been entered.
- Claims 1-20 are pending.
- Claims 1-20 are rejected.
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-21 of U.S. Patent No. 12058621. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both instant application and patent claims discuss monitoring v2x communication in different intervals.
Instant application: 18741699
Patent No: 12058621
1. A method of wireless communication performed at a user equipment (UE), comprising: determining a motion type of the UE; monitoring, based on a first monitoring interval, for one or more vehicle-to-everything (V2X) messages; and monitoring, based on a second monitoring interval different from the first monitoring interval, for the one or more V2X messages, wherein: the second monitoring interval is based on at least one of a UE characteristic associated with the UE, the first monitoring interval, or an environment characteristic, and at least one of the first monitoring interval or the second monitoring interval is based on the motion type.
1. A method of wireless communication performed at a user equipment (UE), comprising:
monitoring, based on a first monitoring interval, for one or more vehicle-to-everything (V2X) messages; monitoring, based on a second monitoring interval, for the one or more V2X messages, the second monitoring interval determined based on a UE characteristic associated with the UE, the first monitoring interval, an environment characteristic, or a combination thereof; determining a motion type of the UE; and determining the first monitoring interval or the second monitoring interval based on the motion type.
21. The UE of claim 20, wherein the first monitoring interval is different from the second monitoring interval.
2. The method of claim 1, wherein the motion type includes walking, jogging, running, cycling, skating, rolling, driving, riding, or a micro-mobility riding, and wherein determining the motion type of the UE further includes determining a speed of the UE.
2. The method of claim 1, wherein the motion type includes walking, jogging, running, cycling, skating, rolling, driving, riding, or a micro-mobility riding, and wherein determining the motion type of the UE further includes determining a speed of the UE.
3. The method of claim 1, further comprising adjusting the second monitoring interval via machine learning, the machine learning performed based on the first monitoring interval, the second monitoring interval, and an environment characteristic.
3. The method of claim 1, further comprising adjusting the second monitoring interval via machine learning, the machine learning performed based on the first monitoring interval, the second monitoring interval, and an environment characteristic.
4. The method of claim 1, wherein the UE characteristic includes a static UE characteristic, a dynamic UE characteristic, or a combination thereof.
4. The method of claim 1, wherein the UE characteristic includes a static UE characteristic, a dynamic UE characteristic, or a combination thereof.
5. The method of claim 4, wherein the static UE characteristic includes a device type, a motion type, a user input, a device capability, or a combination thereof.
5. The method of claim 4, wherein the static UE characteristic includes a device type, a motion type, a user input, a device capability, or a combination thereof.
6. The method of claim 5, wherein the dynamic UE characteristic includes a location of the UE, a motion state of the UE, a speed of the UE, or a combination thereof.
6. The method of claim 4, wherein the dynamic UE characteristic includes a location of the UE, a motion state of the UE, a speed of the UE, or a combination thereof.
7. The method of claim 1, wherein the environment characteristic includes a static environment characteristic, a dynamic environment characteristic, or a combination thereof.
7. The method of claim 1, wherein the environment characteristic includes a static environment characteristic, a dynamic environment characteristic, or a combination thereof.
8. The method of claim 7, wherein the static environment characteristic includes map information, walkway information, roadway information, topography information, injury/accident information, or a combination thereof.
8. The method of claim 7, wherein the static environment characteristic includes map information, walkway information, roadway information, topography information, injury/accident information, or a combination thereof.
9. The method of claim 8, wherein the dynamic environment characteristic includes traffic information, weather information, emergency information, one or more received V2X messages, or a combination thereof.
9. The method of claim 7, wherein the dynamic environment characteristic includes traffic information, weather information, emergency information, one or more received V2X messages, or a combination thereof.
10. The method of claim 1, wherein: each of the first monitoring interval and the second monitoring interval are associated with a non-monitoring time period; and the second monitoring interval is longer than or shorter than the first monitoring interval.
10. The method of claim 1, wherein: each of the first monitoring interval and the second monitoring interval are associated with a non-monitoring time period; and the second monitoring interval is longer than or shorter than the first monitoring interval.
11. The method of claim 1, further comprising: determining the second monitoring interval, wherein determining the second monitoring interval includes adjusting the first monitoring interval.
11. The method of claim 1, further comprising: determining the second monitoring interval, wherein determining the second monitoring interval includes adjusting the first monitoring interval.
12. The method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving a first V2X message during monitoring based on the first monitoring interval; and receiving a second V2X message during monitoring based on the second monitoring interval.
12. The method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving a first V2X message during monitoring based on the first monitoring interval; and receiving a second V2X message during monitoring based on the second monitoring interval.
13. The method of claim 1, further comprising performing machine learning based on the first monitoring interval, the second monitoring interval, and an environment characteristic.
13. The method of claim 1, further comprising performing machine learning based on the first monitoring interval, the second monitoring interval, and an environment characteristic.
14. The method of claim 1, further comprising generating a notification of a hazard based on a received V2X message.
14. The method of claim 1, further comprising generating a notification of a hazard based on a received V2X message.
15. A user equipment (UE) comprising: at least one processor; and a memory coupled with the at least one processor and storing processor-readable code that, when executed by the at least one processor, is configured to: determine a motion type of the UE; monitor, based on a first monitoring interval, for one or more vehicle-to-everything (V2X) messages; and monitor, based on a second monitoring interval different from the first monitoring interval, for the one or more V2X messages, wherein: the second monitoring interval is based on at least one of a UE characteristic associated with the UE, the first monitoring interval, or an environment characteristic, and at least one of the first monitoring interval or the second monitoring interval is based on the motion type.
15. A user equipment (UE) comprising: at least one processor; and a memory coupled with the at least one processor and storing processor-readable code that, when executed by the at least one processor, is configured to: monitor, based on a first monitoring interval, for one or more vehicle-to-everything (V2X) messages; monitor, based on a second monitoring interval, for the one or more V2X messages, the second monitoring interval determined based on a UE characteristic associated with the UE, the first monitoring interval, an environment characteristic, or a combination thereof; determine a motion type of the UE; and determine the first monitoring interval or the second monitoring interval based on the motion type.
21. The UE of claim 20, wherein the first monitoring interval is different from the second monitoring interval.
16. The UE of claim 15, wherein the motion type includes walking, jogging, running, cycling, skating, a micro-mobility riding.
16. The UE of claim 15, wherein the motion type includes walking, jogging, running, cycling, skating, a micro-mobility riding.
17. The UE of claim 15, wherein the UE characteristic includes a static UE characteristic, a dynamic UE characteristic, or a combination thereof.
17. The UE of claim 15, wherein the UE characteristic includes a static UE characteristic, a dynamic UE characteristic, or a combination thereof.
18. The UE of claim 17, wherein: the static UE characteristic includes a device type, a motion type, a user input, a device capability, or a combination thereof; or the environment characteristic includes a static environment characteristic, a dynamic environment characteristic, or a combination thereof.
18. The UE of claim 17, wherein: the static UE characteristic includes a device type, a motion type, a user input, a device capability, or a combination thereof; or the environment characteristic includes a static environment characteristic, a dynamic environment characteristic, or a combination thereof.
19. The UE of claim 18, wherein: the static UE characteristic includes a device type, a motion type, a user input, a device capability, or a combination thereof; the dynamic UE characteristic includes a location, a motion state, a speed, sensor data, a user input, or a combination thereof; the static environment characteristic includes map information, walkway information, roadway information, topography information, injury/accident information, or a combination thereof; or the dynamic environment characteristic includes traffic information, weather information, emergency information, one or more received V2X messages, or a combination thereof.
19. The UE of claim 18, wherein: the static UE characteristic includes a device type, a motion type, a user input, a device capability, or a combination thereof; the dynamic UE characteristic includes a location, a motion state, a speed, sensor data, a user input, or a combination thereof; the static environment characteristic includes map information, walkway information, roadway information, topography information, injury/accident information, or a combination thereof; or the dynamic environment characteristic includes traffic information, weather information, emergency information, one or more received V2X messages, or a combination thereof.
20. The UE of claim 15, wherein each of the first monitoring interval and the second monitoring interval are associated with a non-monitoring time period.
20. The UE of claim 15, wherein each of the first monitoring interval and the second monitoring interval are associated with a non-monitoring time period.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 4-7 and 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by IDS provide NPL 3GPP TSG-RAN WG1 #85 (PC5 for V2P; R1-164455; hereinafter 3GPP).
Regarding claim 1, 3GPP discloses a method of wireless communication performed at a user equipment (UE), comprising: determining a motion type of the UE; (Page 2, If a pedestrian can receive V2V messages it can use those to decide its periodicity of pedestrian messages. If messages received from vehicles are from vehicles with high velocity then the periodicity of pedestrian messages can be shorter and vice versa. This behaviour can be left to UE implementation and does not need to be standardized.) monitoring, based on a first monitoring interval, (Page 2, Periodicity) for one or more vehicle-to-everything (V2X) messages; ( Page 2, For example a vehicle travelling at 140km/hr will move around 40m within a second. If a pedestrian can receive V2V messages it can use those to decide its periodicity of pedestrian messages. If messages received from vehicles are from vehicles with high velocity then the periodicity of pedestrian messages can be shorter and vice versa. This behaviour can be left to UE implementation and does not need to be standardized.) and monitoring, based on a second monitoring interval different from the first monitoring interval, for the one or more V2X messages, (Page 2, If a pedestrian can receive V2V messages it can use those to decide its periodicity of pedestrian messages. If messages received from vehicles are from vehicles with high velocity then the periodicity of pedestrian messages can be shorter and vice versa. This behaviour can be left to UE implementation and does not need to be standardized; Further, Page 2 states “V2V and P2V transmission can overlap”. Interpreted that v2v monitoring interval is based on the periodicity of the pedestrian’s transmission.) wherein: the second monitoring interval (Page 2, periodicity of pedestrian messages can be shorter and vice versa; Further, Page 2 states “V2V and P2V transmission can overlap”. Interpreted that v2v monitoring interval is based on the periodicity of the pedestrian’s transmission) is based on at least one of a UE characteristic associated with the UE, the first monitoring interval, or an environment characteristic, (Page 2, If a pedestrian can receive V2V messages it can use those to decide its periodicity of pedestrian messages. If messages received from vehicles are from vehicles with high velocity then the periodicity of pedestrian messages can be shorter and vice versa. This behaviour can be left to UE implementation and does not need to be standardized.) and at least one of the first monitoring interval or the second monitoring interval is based on the motion type. (Page 2, If a pedestrian can receive V2V messages it can use those to decide its periodicity of pedestrian messages. If messages received from vehicles are from vehicles with high velocity then the periodicity of pedestrian messages can be shorter and vice versa; interpreted the using the v2v messages the UE can determine its pedestrians motion type)
Regarding claim 4, 3GPP discloses the UE characteristic includes a static UE characteristic, a dynamic UE characteristic, or a combination thereof. (Page 2, If a pedestrian can receive V2V messages it can use those to decide its periodicity of pedestrian messages. If messages received from vehicles are from vehicles with high velocity then the periodicity of pedestrian messages can be shorter and vice versa. This behaviour can be left to UE implementation and does not need to be standardized.)
Regarding claim 5, 3GPP discloses the static UE characteristic includes a device type, a motion type, a user input, a device capability, or a combination thereof. (Page 2, If a pedestrian can receive V2V messages it can use those to decide its periodicity of pedestrian messages. If messages received from vehicles are from vehicles with high velocity then the periodicity of pedestrian messages can be shorter and vice versa. This behaviour can be left to UE implementation and does not need to be standardized.)
Regarding claim 6, 3GPP discloses the dynamic UE characteristic includes a location of the UE, a motion state of the UE, a speed of the UE, or a combination thereof. (Page 2, If a pedestrian can receive V2V messages it can use those to decide its periodicity of pedestrian messages. If messages received from vehicles are from vehicles with high velocity then the periodicity of pedestrian messages can be shorter and vice versa. This behaviour can be left to UE implementation and does not need to be standardized.)
Regarding claim 7, 3GPP discloses the environment characteristic includes a static environment characteristic, a dynamic environment characteristic, or a combination thereof. (Page 2, If a pedestrian can receive V2V messages it can use those to decide its periodicity of pedestrian messages. If messages received from vehicles are from vehicles with high velocity then the periodicity of pedestrian messages can be shorter and vice versa. This behaviour can be left to UE implementation and does not need to be standardized.)
Regarding claim 10, 3GPP discloses each of the first monitoring interval and the second monitoring interval are associated with a non-monitoring time period; (page 2, periodicity of pedestrian messages can be shorter and vice versa; interpreted the non-monitoring occurs in the periodicity when there is a break between message intervals) and the second monitoring interval is longer than or shorter than the first monitoring interval. (Page 2, If a pedestrian can receive V2V messages it can use those to decide its periodicity of pedestrian messages. If messages received from vehicles are from vehicles with high velocity then the periodicity of pedestrian messages can be shorter and vice versa.)
Regarding claim 11, 3GPP discloses determining the second monitoring interval, wherein determining the second monitoring interval includes adjusting the first monitoring interval. (Page 2, If messages received from vehicles are from vehicles with high velocity then the periodicity of pedestrian messages can be shorter and vice versa.)
Regarding claim 12, 3GPP discloses receiving a first V2X message during monitoring based on the first monitoring interval; (Page 2, If a pedestrian can receive V2V messages it can use those to decide its periodicity of pedestrian messages. If messages received from vehicles are from vehicles with high velocity then the periodicity of pedestrian messages can be shorter and vice versa.) and receiving a second V2X message during monitoring based on the second monitoring interval. (Page 2, If a pedestrian can receive V2V messages it can use those to decide its periodicity of pedestrian messages. If messages received from vehicles are from vehicles with high velocity then the periodicity of pedestrian messages can be shorter and vice versa.)
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 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.
Claim(s) 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over 3GPP in view of IDS provide NPL 3GPP TSG WG1 Meeting #85 (Power consumption analysis of PC5 V2P; R1-164819; hereinafter 3GPP2).
Regarding claim 2, 3GPP fails to disclose the motion type includes walking, jogging, running, cycling, skating, rolling, driving, riding, or a micro-mobility riding.
3GPP2 discloses the motion type includes walking, jogging, running, cycling, skating, rolling, driving, riding, or a micro-mobility riding, and wherein determining the motion type of the UE further includes determining a speed of the UE. (Page 2, 3.1 In the V2X study item, pedestrians (including e.g., children, elderly, joggers) are generally considered to be highly stationary with walking speed of 3km/h. This mobility pattern leads to reasonably lower message transmission frequency compared with fast-moving vehicles (i.e., 1Hz for pedestrian vs. typical 10Hz for vehicles). While these assumptions are valid for vulnerable road users (VRUs) with walking speeds, they are not readily applicable to people riding on high-speed bicycles, the speeds of which can go up to 45km/h according to ETSI ITS TC [4] and SAE DSRC TC 56km/h [1]; Observation 3: The message transmission frequency of 1Hz holds only for walking pedestrians, which could increase up to 5Hz for high-speed bicycle riders as fast as 50km/h.)
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 method and system disclosed by 3GPP to include different type of VRUs with various speed ranges. The motivation to combine is efficiently enlarge communication range by utilizing different frequencies for each type of motion such as jogging and riding a bicycle (page 2).
Claim(s) 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over 3gpp in view of Rubin et al. (Pub. No. US 2017/0243485 A1; hereinafter Rubin).
Regarding claim 8, 3gpp fails to disclose the static environment characteristic includes map information, walkway information, roadway information, topography information, injury/accident information, or a combination thereof.
Rubin discloses the static environment characteristic includes map information, walkway information, roadway information, topography information, injury/accident information, or a combination thereof. (See ¶0809, Use of map information (cross street approaching) to determine likely change in arrival rate of new transmitters in range.)
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 method and system disclosed by Rubin to include the different information is used to determine interval. The motivation to combine is improved accuracy or provide all of the location information. Roadside markers, such as still images or video images taken to the side from a vehicle, forward or backward road images, road signage, beacons, targets, and other physical, detectable from the roadway, identifiable objects may be compared with a map or database to determine or improve position.
Regarding claim 9, 3ggp fails to disclose the dynamic environment characteristic includes traffic information, weather information, emergency information, one or more received V2X messages, or a combination thereof.
Rubin discloses the dynamic environment characteristic includes traffic information, weather information, emergency information, one or more received V2X messages, or a combination thereof. (See ¶0362, The four flags are: Vehicle, Local Conditions, Traffic, and Location History, on bits B0 through B3, respectively. When a flag is set to a value of one, it means that the final risk value comprises a significant portion from that source. A Vehicle flag means that the source of the final risk comprises the real-time behavior of one or more vehicles. This is the most common and obvious source of vehicle collisions. Local Conditions comprises road conditions and weather conditions. A slippery road surface, a detour, or thick fog, are examples of local conditions. The Traffic flag refers to overall traffic, rather than to one or two specific vehicle behaviors. Stop and go traffic is an example. Location History flag refers to a particular location, such as an intersection or mountain road as having a history of accidents or close calls.)
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 method and system disclosed by Rubin to include the different information is used to determine interval. The motivation to combine is improved accuracy or provide all of the location information. Roadside markers, such as still images or video images taken to the side from a vehicle, forward or backward road images, road signage, beacons, targets, and other physical, detectable from the roadway, identifiable objects may be compared with a map or database to determine or improve position.
Claim(s) 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over 3GPP in view of Aoude et al. (Patent No. US 10,235,882 B1; hereinafter Aoude)
Regarding claim 13, 3gpp fails to disclose performing machine learning based on the first monitoring interval, the second monitoring interval, and an environment characteristic.
Aoude discloses performing machine learning based on the first monitoring interval, the second monitoring interval, the UE characteristic, the environment characteristic, or a combination thereof. (Col. 7 Lines 4-13, a machine learning model that can predict behavior of ground transportation entities at or near the level crossing at a current time. The machine learning model is based on training data about previous motion and related behavior of road vehicles and pedestrians at or near the intersection. Current motion data received from the sensors about road vehicles and pedestrians at or near the level crossing is applied to the machine learning model to predict imminent behaviors of the road vehicles and pedestrians.)
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 method and system disclosed by 3GPP to include the monitoring of the all traffic and pedestrians at or near intersections. The motivation to combine is basic safety messages and personal safety messages are filtered to reduce the number of alerts provided to the driver of the road vehicle (Col. 3 Lines 23-25).
Claim(s) 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over 3gpp in view of Novlan et al. (Pub. No. US 2016/0295624 A1; hereinafter Novlan).
Regarding claim 14, 3gpp fails to disclose generating a notification of a hazard based on a received V2X message.
Novlan discloses generating a notification of a hazard based on a received V2X message. (20160295624-See ¶0075, his means that transport entities, such as vehicles, roadside infrastructure, and pedestrians, can collect knowledge of their local environments (such as information received from other vehicles or sensor equipment in proximity) to process and share that knowledge in order to provide more intelligent services, such as cooperative collision warning or autonomous driving; See ¶0077, The DENMs are event-triggered warning messages which are generated to alert neighboring vehicles about potential hazards.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify receiving information through a v2x to include using information from the v2x to generate a hazard notification. The motivation to combine is DENM messages can be transmitted at maximum transmit power and at the lowest coding rate to improve reliability (See ¶0194).
Claim(s) 15 and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over IDS provide NPL 3GPP TSG-RAN WG1 #85 (PC5 for V2P; R1-164455; hereinafter 3GPP) in view of Lepp et al. (Pub. No. US 2018/0262865 A1; hereinafter Lepp).
Regarding claim 15, 3GPP discloses a user equipment (UE) is configured to: determining a motion type of the UE; (Page 2, If a pedestrian can receive V2V messages it can use those to decide its periodicity of pedestrian messages. If messages received from vehicles are from vehicles with high velocity then the periodicity of pedestrian messages can be shorter and vice versa. This behaviour can be left to UE implementation and does not need to be standardized.) monitoring, based on a first monitoring interval, (Page 2, Periodicity) for one or more vehicle-to-everything (V2X) messages; ( Page 2, For example a vehicle travelling at 140km/hr will move around 40m within a second. If a pedestrian can receive V2V messages it can use those to decide its periodicity of pedestrian messages. If messages received from vehicles are from vehicles with high velocity then the periodicity of pedestrian messages can be shorter and vice versa. This behaviour can be left to UE implementation and does not need to be standardized.) and monitoring, based on a second monitoring interval different from the first monitoring interval, for the one or more V2X messages, (Page 2, If a pedestrian can receive V2V messages it can use those to decide its periodicity of pedestrian messages. If messages received from vehicles are from vehicles with high velocity then the periodicity of pedestrian messages can be shorter and vice versa. This behaviour can be left to UE implementation and does not need to be standardized.) wherein: the second monitoring interval (Page 2, periodicity of pedestrian messages can be shorter and vice versa) is based on at least one of a UE characteristic associated with the UE, the first monitoring interval, or an environment characteristic, (Page 2, If a pedestrian can receive V2V messages it can use those to decide its periodicity of pedestrian messages. If messages received from vehicles are from vehicles with high velocity then the periodicity of pedestrian messages can be shorter and vice versa. This behaviour can be left to UE implementation and does not need to be standardized.) and at least one of the first monitoring interval or the second monitoring interval is based on the motion type. (Page 2, If a pedestrian can receive V2V messages it can use those to decide its periodicity of pedestrian messages. If messages received from vehicles are from vehicles with high velocity then the periodicity of pedestrian messages can be shorter and vice versa; interpreted the using the v2v messages the UE can determine its pedestrians motion type)
However, 3GPP fails to discloses a user equipment (UE) comprising: at least one processor; and a memory coupled with the at least one processor and storing processor-readable code that, when executed by the at least one processor
Lepp discloses at least one processor; and a memory coupled with the at least one processor and storing processor-readable code that, when executed by the at least one processor (See ¶0225, a processor 1038 which controls the overall operation of the device; See ¶0228, each program can allocate a portion of flash memory 1024 for their own data storage requirements. Processor 1038, in addition to its operating system functions, may enable execution of software applications on the mobile device)
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 intervals is decided on the speed of the vehicle and pedestrian to include the device monitoring the speed has processor and memory to do the steps. The motivation to combine is safety-critical mode the radio may either be continuously on or the sleep cycles may be very short, thereby improving latency but reducing power efficiency (See ¶0075).
Regarding claim 17, 3GPP discloses the UE characteristic includes a static UE characteristic, a dynamic UE characteristic, or a combination thereof. (Page 2, If a pedestrian can receive V2V messages it can use those to decide its periodicity of pedestrian messages. If messages received from vehicles are from vehicles with high velocity then the periodicity of pedestrian messages can be shorter and vice versa. This behaviour can be left to UE implementation and does not need to be standardized.)
Regarding claim 18, 3GPP discloses the static UE characteristic includes a device type, a motion type, a user input, a device capability, or a combination thereof; or the environment characteristic includes a static environment characteristic, a dynamic environment characteristic, or a combination thereof. (Page 2, If a pedestrian can receive V2V messages it can use those to decide its periodicity of pedestrian messages. If messages received from vehicles are from vehicles with high velocity then the periodicity of pedestrian messages can be shorter and vice versa. This behaviour can be left to UE implementation and does not need to be standardized.)
Regarding claim 19, 3GPP discloses the static UE characteristic includes a device type, a motion type, a user input, a device capability, or a combination thereof; the dynamic UE characteristic includes a location, a motion state, a speed, sensor data, a user input, or a combination thereof; (Page 2, If a pedestrian can receive V2V messages it can use those to decide its periodicity of pedestrian messages. If messages received from vehicles are from vehicles with high velocity then the periodicity of pedestrian messages can be shorter and vice versa. This behaviour can be left to UE implementation and does not need to be standardized.) the static environment characteristic includes map information, walkway information, roadway information, topography information, injury/accident information, or a combination thereof; or the dynamic environment characteristic includes traffic information, weather information, emergency information, one or more received V2X messages, or a combination thereof.
Regarding claim 20, 3GPP discloses each of the first monitoring interval and the second monitoring interval are associated with a non-monitoring time period. (page 2, periodicity of pedestrian messages can be shorter and vice versa; interpreted the non-monitoring occurs in the periodicity when there is a break between message intervals)
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over 3GPP in view of Lepp and, further in view of IDS provide NPL 3GPP TSG WG1 Meeting #85 (Power consumption analysis of PC5 V2P; R1-164819; hereinafter 3GPP2).
Regarding claim 16, 3GPP discloses the motion type includes walking, jogging, running, cycling, skating, a micro-mobility riding.
3GPP2 discloses the motion type includes walking, jogging, running, cycling, skating, a micro-mobility riding. (Page 2, 3.1 In the V2X study item, pedestrians (including e.g., children, elderly, joggers) are generally considered to be highly stationary with walking speed of 3km/h. This mobility pattern leads to reasonably lower message transmission frequency compared with fast-moving vehicles (i.e., 1Hz for pedestrian vs. typical 10Hz for vehicles). While these assumptions are valid for vulnerable road users (VRUs) with walking speeds, they are not readily applicable to people riding on high-speed bicycles, the speeds of which can go up to 45km/h according to ETSI ITS TC [4] and SAE DSRC TC 56km/h [1]; Observation 3: The message transmission frequency of 1Hz holds only for walking pedestrians, which could increase up to 5Hz for high-speed bicycle riders as fast as 50km/h.)
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 method and system disclosed by 3GPP to include different type of VRUs with various speed ranges. The motivation to combine is efficiently enlarge communication range by utilizing different frequencies for each type of motion such as jogging and riding a bicycle (page 2).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed toward claims 1 and 15 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues 3gpp fails to disclose “adjusting a monitoring interval or the specific intervals” Examiner respectfully disagrees with applicant. The pedestrians is calculating its transmission interval overlapping with v2v transmission which means the monitoring interval is based on periodicity of pedestrians’ message. Further, Page 2 states “V2V and P2V transmission can overlap”. Interpreted that v2v monitoring interval is based on the periodicity of the pedestrian’s transmission since they overlap.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Petit et al. (Pub. No. US 2023/0100792 A1)-See 0058, such application-layer misbehavior may be associated with one or more V2X messages, such as basic safety messages (BSMs). Fuzzing attacks, on the other hand, may be a de facto offensive technique according to which an attacker may find weakness in implementation of the UE 115 and obtain escalated privileges. In some cases, one or more detectors of the UE 115 may look at one V2X message (e.g., one BSM message) or a relatively short series of V2X messages (e.g., a relatively short series of BSMs), such as three V2X messages, if monitoring for misbehaviors or attacks. Such a monitoring window for analysis of one or a relatively short series of V2X messages, however, may be too small to detect fuzzing attacks.
Lu et al. (Pub. No. US 2020/0192355 A1)-See 0145, the monitoring module 206 described above continues to generate the first set of V2X wireless messages and the event data by monitoring one or more of the remote vehicle 140 and the endpoint 160 and sends the first set of V2X wireless messages and the event data to the collision determination module 208 until the collision is detected to occur to the remote vehicle 140. In this case, the first set of V2X wireless messages received from the monitoring module 206 includes V2X wireless messages received from the remote vehicle 140 within a pre-crash time window, as well as V2X wireless messages from the endpoint 160 within the pre-crash time window if the endpoint 160 has V2X communication capability and is also involved in the collision. The event data received from the monitoring module 206 includes remote-vehicle behavior data of the remote vehicle 140 (as well as endpoint behavior da
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 TEJIS DAYA whose telephone number is (571)270-7817. The examiner can normally be reached 6:30-4:30.
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, Nicholas Jensen can be reached at 571-270-5443. 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.
/Tejis Daya/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2472
