DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 10-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim limitation “determining unit” invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. Fig. 8 and paragraphs 0161-0171 of the specification designate “black boxes” to perform the limitations, and as such the specification fails to disclose an adequate structure for the claim limitations (i.e. how/what such “unit” is implemented with). The reason that the claim is indefinite is that without a limiting specification, which is required by statute, the claim limitation becomes an unbounded purely functional limitation. There are no boundaries or limits imposed by structure, material or acts. The claim will cover all ways of performing a function, known and unknown. Therefore, such an unbounded limitation renders the claim indefinite, and thus is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
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 (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 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, 5-10, and 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Yang et al (US Publication 2025/0317944 A1).
Regarding to claims 1 and 10, Yang discloses an apparatus 1205 (fig. 12) for side communication, wherein the apparatus is a first terminal device (pages 18-19 paragraph 0187) and comprises: a determining unit 1240, configured to determine a first configuration 410 corresponding to a first fixed frame period FFP (fig. 4 page 11 paragraph 0108), wherein the first FFP 305 comprises a plurality of sidelink time domain units 310 (fig. 3), the first configuration is used to indicate a valid sidelink (available slots) time domain unit in the plurality of sidelink time domain units (page 11 paragraph 0103), the first configuration belongs to one of a plurality of configurations corresponding to the first FFP (page 12 paragraph 0110), and a quantity of configurations corresponding to the first FFP is determined based on a subcarrier spacing of sidelink (page 10 paragraph 0101; noted Table 1 include plurality SCS for FFP configurations).
Regarding to claims 5 and 14, Yang discloses the first configuration is determined based on first information, and the first information is associated with one or more of the following: a measurement result of some or all sidelink time domain units in the plurality of sidelink time domain units (page 10 paragraph 0102); a priority of the first terminal device (page 12 paragraph 0114); and a transmission type of the first terminal device.
Regarding to claims 6 and 15, Yang discloses the measurement result comprises a channel busy ratio (COT) of the some or all sidelink time domain units (page 10 paragraph 0102).
Regarding to claims 7 and 16, Yang discloses first configuration is selected by the first terminal device or configured by a network device 105 (page 11 paragraph 0109).
Regarding to claims 8 and 17, Yang discloses the first configuration is determined based on a resource pool configuration of the first terminal device (page 11 paragraph 0104).
Regarding to claims 9 and 18, Yang discloses a duration of the first FFP is 1 millisecond (page 10 paragraph 0101).
Regarding to claim 19, Yang discloses a communications apparatus 1205 (fig. 12), comprising a memory 1230 and a processor 1240, wherein the memory is configured to store a program (page 19 paragraph 0190), and the processor is configured to invoke the program in the memory to perform the method according to claim 1 (page 19 paragraph 0191).
Regarding to claim 20, Yang discloses a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium 1230, wherein the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium stores a program, and the program causes a computer to perform the method according to claim 1 (page 19 paragraph 0190).
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 2 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang in view of Hoang et al (US Publication 2025/0287402 A1).
Regarding to claims 2 and 11, Yang discloses all the limitations with respect to claims 1 and 10, except for
the first configuration comprises a first parameter, the first parameter is used to indicate a time domain unit offset, and the valid sidelink time domain unit is determined based on the first parameter. However, Hoang discloses a system (fig. 1A) and method (fig. 5) for sidelink communication comprising a first configuration comprises a first parameter, the first parameter is used to indicate a time domain unit offset, and the valid sidelink time domain unit is determined based on the first parameter (page 8 paragraph 0092). Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to arrange for the first configuration parameter as taught by Hoang into Yang’s system to increase channel access successfully.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 4, 12, and 13 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Duc T Duong whose telephone number is (571)272-3122. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri; 9am-6pm.
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 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.
/DUC T DUONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2467
Prosecution Insights