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 Objections
Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 14 recites “the one or more reserved channel occupancy times (COTs)” introducing the term “reserved” inconsistently; more pertinently, claim 14 refers to COTs as “reserved” whereas claim 1 introduces “one or more COTs” without the modifier “reserved” -- a grammatical/terminology inconsistency. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 17 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 17 recites “the frequency and resource assignment” whereas claim 15 introduces “frequency and time resource assignment”; the omission of “time” is a typographical/terminology inconsistency. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 10 recites “the one or more channel occupancy times (COTs) consists of a single COT”; the plural subject “times” with singular verb “consists” is a grammatical (subject-verb agreement) informality. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 18 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 18 recites “an update to a previously indicated channel occupancy time (COT) information”; the article “a” preceding the non-count noun phrase “information” is a grammatical informality (should be “previously indicated channel occupancy time (COT) information” without “a”). Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li (US 2025/0062939 A1) in view of Liu (US 2022/0095117 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Li discloses: and in response to a listen before talk (LBT) process indicating a clear channel, because Li teaches performing the LBT procedure before initiating any transmission on the unlicensed spectrum, so that transmission proceeds only once the LBT indicates the channel is clear (Li, para [0034] “When operating the NR system on an unlicensed spectrum, before initiating any transmission the LBT procedure should be performed.”).
Moreover, Li discloses: transmitting on a first COT of the one or more COTs, based on a maximum COT duration, since Li teaches transmitting within a channel occupancy time whose length is managed so as not to exceed the maximum COT (MCOT) defined by regulation (i.e., “based on a maximum COT duration” as claimed) (Li, para [0034] “In Rel-13 and Rel-14, the LBT priority classes, LBT parameters, and maximum COT (MCOT) values provided in Table I for DL and Table II for UL were agreed.” … para [0039] “gNB can manage the length of the COT, which does not exceed the MCOT defined in the regulations (either MCOT values provided in Table I and II, or a max of 20 ms including gaps).”).
Although Li teaches an unlicensed-spectrum node that performs an LBT before any transmission, transmits only on a clear channel, and bounds its channel occupancy so it does not exceed the regulatory maximum COT duration: (Li, para. [0034], [0039]), Li does not explicitly disclose transmitting control information that carries COT reservation information for one or more COTs by a first UE in sidelink, for which Liu is relied upon:
Yet, Li in view of Liu discloses A method of sidelink communications, comprising the steps of: transmitting, by a first user equipment (UE), control information comprising channel occupancy time (COT) reservation information associated with one or more COTs because a first UE transmits sidelink control information that indicates one or more channel occupancy times, including reserved resources tied to a first and a second COT, so the SCI carries COT reservation information associated with one or more COTs (Liu, para [0011], “transmitting, to one or more other UEs , sidelink control information that indicates one or more of the first channel occupancy time or the second channel occupancy time” … para [0086], “The first UE may transmit SCI 330 that indicates that a first communication 340 is transmitted in the sidelink data resources 335 , and may also indicate reserved 2 resources 355 for one or more retransmissions of the first communication 340.”).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine Li with Liu because Li teaches the unlicensed-band channel access regime (LBT before transmission, transmitting on a clear channel, and bounding the channel occupancy to the regulatory maximum COT), while Liu teaches that a first UE conveys COT reservation information for one or more COTs to other UEs through sidelink control information; applying Liu's SCI-based COT reservation signaling to Li's regulated COT access provides a predictable way for sidelink UEs to learn and reserve channel occupancy times, reducing scheduling uncertainty caused by LBT in a shared band.
Regarding claim 2, in spite of the fact that Li teaches a regulated LBT-based COT access scheme combined with a first UE transmitting COT reservation information in sidelink control information: (Li, para. [0034], [0039]), Li does not explicitly disclose the control information comprising sidelink control information (SCI), for which Liu is relied upon:
Yet, Li in view of Liu discloses The method of claim 1, wherein the control information comprises sidelink control information (SCI) because the control information that conveys the COT reservation is sidelink control information (SCI), which Liu transmits to other UEs to indicate the channel occupancy times (Liu, para [0011], “transmitting, to one or more other UEs , sidelink control information that indicates one or more of the first channel occupancy time or the second channel occupancy time”).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use Liu's sidelink control information as the control information in Li's regulated COT scheme because Liu expressly carries COT-related information in SCI, the standard sidelink control carrier, providing a predictable and standards-consistent mechanism for signaling COT reservations.
Regarding claim 3, although Li teaches a regulated LBT-based COT access scheme with a first UE transmitting COT reservation information in sidelink control information: (Li, para. [0034], [0039]), Li does not explicitly disclose the SCI comprising a first stage SCI, for which Liu is relied upon:
Yet, Li in view of Liu discloses The method of claim 2, wherein the sidelink control information (SCI) comprises a first stage SCI because the SCI is indicated in two stages, where a first-stage SCI carries resource allocation and decoding information, so the SCI comprises a first stage SCI (Liu, para [0088], “the UE may provide an explicit reserved resource trigger in SCI 330 ( e.g. , SCI - 1 or SCI - 2 ) that carries COT information for one or multiple reserved resources 355.”).
Consequently, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to implement Liu's COT-bearing SCI as a first-stage SCI (SCI-1) because Liu itself partitions sidelink control into SCI-1 and SCI-2 and places COT information in SCI-1, a conventional sidelink control structure offering predictable decoding.
Regarding claim 4, in spite of the fact that Li teaches a regulated LBT-based COT scheme with a first UE transmitting first-stage SCI carrying COT reservation information: (Li, para. [0034], [0039]), Li does not explicitly disclose transmitting the first stage SCI via a physical sidelink control channel (PSCCH), for which Liu is relied upon:
Yet, Li in view of Liu discloses The method of claim 3, wherein the first stage sidelink control information (SCI) is transmitted, by the first user equipment (UE), via a physical sidelink control channel (PSCCH) because Liu conveys the first-stage SCI carrying the COT reservation in the sidelink control resources of the COT, and Li expressly identifies the PSCCH as a logical channel of the sidelink (ProSe) interface (Liu, para [0086], “The first COT 305 may include sidelink control resources 325 and sidelink data resources 335 , in accordance with a sidelink configuration that is provided by a serving base station”; Li, para [0075] “The ProSe interface 605 may alternatively be referred to as a SL interface 605 and may comprise one or more logical channels, including but not limited to a PSCCH, a PSSCH, a PSDCH, and a PSBCH.”).
For these reasons, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to transmit Liu's first-stage SCI on a PSCCH because the PSCCH is the recognized physical channel for sidelink control information (named in Li's abbreviation list), and Liu places control in dedicated sidelink control resources, so mapping SCI-1 onto the PSCCH is a predictable and conventional implementation.
Regarding claim 5, even though Li teaches a regulated LBT-based COT scheme with a first UE transmitting first-stage SCI carrying COT reservation information: (Li, para. [0034], [0039]), Li does not explicitly disclose the SCI further comprising a second stage SCI, for which Liu is relied upon:
Yet, Li in view of Liu discloses The method of claim 3, wherein the sidelink control information (SCI) further comprises a second stage SCI because Liu indicates SCI in two stages, SCI-1 and SCI-2, where the explicit reserved-resource trigger carrying COT information can be placed in SCI-2, so the SCI further comprises a second stage SCI (Liu, para [0088], “the UE may provide an explicit reserved resource trigger in SCI 330 ( e.g. , SCI - 1 or SCI - 2 ) that carries COT information for one or multiple reserved resources 355.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include a second-stage SCI in Liu's scheme because Liu expressly references SCI-2 alongside SCI-1 for carrying COT information, a conventional two-stage sidelink control structure that predictably separates resource and decoding information.
Regarding claim 6, in spite of the fact that Li teaches a regulated LBT-based COT scheme with two-stage sidelink control carrying COT reservation information: (Li, para. [0034], [0039]), Li does not explicitly disclose transmitting the second stage SCI via a physical sidelink shared channel (PSSCH), for which Liu is relied upon:
Yet, Li in view of Liu discloses The method of claim 5, wherein the second stage sidelink control information (SCI) is transmitted, by the first user equipment (UE), via a physical sidelink shared channel (PSSCH) because the COT includes sidelink data resources transmitted on the sidelink shared channel, and Li expressly identifies the PSSCH as a logical channel of the sidelink (ProSe) interface; mapping the second-stage SCI onto the PSSCH follows the conventional arrangement where SCI-2 rides on the shared channel (Liu, para [0086], “The first COT 305 may include sidelink control resources 325 and sidelink data resources 335 , in accordance with a sidelink configuration that is provided by a serving base station”; Li, para [0075] “The ProSe interface 605 may alternatively be referred to as a SL interface 605 and may comprise one or more logical channels, including but not limited to a PSCCH, a PSSCH, a PSDCH, and a PSBCH.”).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to carry Liu's second-stage SCI on a PSSCH because the PSSCH is the recognized physical sidelink shared channel (named in Li), and placing SCI-2 on the shared data channel is the conventional sidelink arrangement offering predictable decoding of the data.
Regarding claim 7, even though Li teaches a regulated LBT-based COT scheme with two-stage sidelink control carrying COT reservation information: (Li, para. [0034], [0039]), Li does not explicitly disclose distributing portions of the COT reservation information across first and second stage SCI, for which Liu is relied upon:
Yet, Li in view of Liu discloses The method of claim 3, wherein: the sidelink control information (SCI) comprises a first stage SCI and a second stage SCI because Liu indicates SCI in two stages, namely SCI-1 and SCI-2, so the SCI comprises a first stage SCI and a second stage SCI (Liu, para [0088], “the UE may provide an explicit reserved resource trigger in SCI 330 ( e.g. , SCI - 1 or SCI - 2 ) that carries COT information for one or multiple reserved resources 355.”).
Moreover, Liu discloses and at least a first portion of the channel occupancy time (COT) reservation information associated with the one or more COTs is transmitted based on the first stage SCI and at least a second portion of said COT reservation information is transmitted based on the second stage SCI (Liu, para [0088], “the UE may provide an explicit reserved resource trigger in SCI 330 ( e.g. , SCI - 1 or SCI - 2 ) that carries COT information for one or multiple reserved resources 355.”).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to split Liu's COT reservation information across SCI-1 and SCI-2 because Liu expressly states the COT-information trigger may be in SCI-1 or SCI-2, and distributing control fields across the two stages is a conventional way to balance the control payload and decoding latency.
Regarding claim 8, although Li teaches a regulated LBT-based COT scheme with a first UE transmitting COT reservation information for one or more COTs in sidelink control information: (Li, para. [0034], [0039]), Li does not explicitly disclose the one or more COTs starting from different times, for which Liu is relied upon:
Yet, Li in view of Liu discloses The method of claim 1, wherein each of the one or more channel occupancy times (COTs) start from different times because Liu describes a first COT and a separately acquired second COT obtained after the first via a subsequent LBT, each with its own start time, so each of the one or more COTs starts from a different time (Liu, para [0086], “the reserved resources 355 may be located in a subsequent second COT 345 that is obtained based on a subsequent LBT procedure of the first UE .”).
Consequently, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide multiple COTs starting at different times in Li's scheme as taught by Liu, because Liu describes a first and a second COT each acquired by separate LBT procedures with distinct start times, a predictable consequence of repeated channel contention in a shared band.
Regarding claim 9, even though Li teaches a regulated LBT-based COT scheme where the one or more COTs start at different times, each acquired by a separate LBT: (Li, para. [0034], [0039]), Li does not explicitly disclose the first COT being the earliest COT for which an LBT indicates a clear channel, for which Liu is relied upon:
Yet, Li in view of Liu discloses The method of claim 8, wherein a first channel occupancy time (COT) is an earliest COT, of the one or more COTs, for which a listen before talk (LBT) process indicates a clear channel because Liu's first COT is obtained when an LBT (clear channel assessment) determines the channel is available, before a later second COT is acquired by a subsequent LBT, making the first COT the earliest COT for which the LBT indicates a clear channel (Liu, para [0037], “a UE may perform a listen before talk ( LBT ) procedure ( e.g. , a clear channel assessment ( CCA ) ) and determine whether signals from another device are detected on a channel or sub - channel. In the event that other signals are not detected that are indica tive of another device using the channel, the UE may determine that the channel is available and transmit a reservation signal to indicate to other UEs that the channel is reserved for a channel occupancy time ( COT )”).
For these reasons, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to treat the first COT as the earliest COT obtained from a passing LBT as taught by Liu, because Liu acquires the first COT upon a clear-channel determination and only later contends for subsequent COTs, so the first is necessarily the earliest clear-channel COT.
Regarding claim 10, Li discloses: The method of claim 1, wherein the one or more channel occupancy times (COTs) consists of a single COT with an extended duration, and, particularly since Li teaches the maximum COT of 6 ms may be increased to 8 ms by inserting gaps, yielding a single COT of extended duration (Li, para [0034] “The MCOT of6 ms may be increased to 8 ms by inserting one or more gaps. The minimum duration ofa pause shall be 100 us. The maximum duration (Channel Occupancy) before including any such gap shall be 6 ms.”).
Moreover, Li discloses: wherein the transmitting, by the first user equipment (UE), starts in a timing within the single COT for which the listen before talk (LBT) process indicates a clear channel, because Li teaches that the LBT procedure is performed before initiating any transmission, so the transmission starts at a timing within the occupied COT for which the LBT has indicated a clear channel (Li, para [0034] “When operating the NR system on an unlicensed spectrum, before initiating any transmission the LBT procedure should be performed.”).
Regarding claim 11, Li discloses: The method of claim 10, wherein the extended duration is longer than the maximum channel occupancy time (COT) duration, notably because Li teaches increasing the MCOT of 6 ms to 8 ms by inserting gaps, so the extended single-COT duration (8 ms) is longer than the maximum channel occupancy duration before including any gap (6 ms) (Li, para [0034] “The MCOT of6 ms may be increased to 8 ms by inserting one or more gaps. The minimum duration ofa pause shall be 100 us. The maximum duration (Channel Occupancy) before including any such gap shall be 6 ms.”).
Regarding claim 12, Li discloses: The method of claim 11, wherein the maximum channel occupancy time (COT) duration is based on a network configuration or based on a regulation, at least because Li teaches deriving the maximum COT (MCOT) values from the regulations agreed for the LBT priority classes, so the maximum COT duration is based on a regulation (Li, para [0034] “the LBT priority classes, LBT parameters, and maximum COT (MCOT) values provided in Table I for DL and Table II for UL were agreed.”).
Regarding claim 13, Li discloses: The method of claim 1, wherein the maximum channel occupancy time (COT) duration is based on a network configuration or based on a regulation, because Li teaches defining the maximum COT (MCOT) by regulation, with the MCOT for certain LBT priority classes set to 10 ms where the absence of other technology is guaranteed by level of regulation (Li, para [0034] “Ifthe absence ofa ny other technology sharing the carrier can be guaranteed on a long term basis (e.g. by level of regulation), the maximum channel occupancy time (MCOT) for LBT priority classes 3 and 4 is for 10 ms”).
Regarding claim 14, even though Li teaches a regulated LBT-based COT scheme with a first UE transmitting COT reservation information for one or more COTs in sidelink control information: (Li, para. [0034], [0039]), Li does not explicitly disclose signaling indicating that at least a portion of the reserved COTs are not used, for which Liu is relied upon:
Yet, Li in view of Liu discloses The method of claim 1, further comprising transmitting signaling indicating that at least a portion of the one or more reserved channel occupancy times (COTs) are not used because Liu teaches that a UE may indicate a COT sharing duration of zero, signaling that other UEs have no reserved resources in the current COT and must wait for the next COT, which conveys that at least a portion of the reserved COTs are not used (Liu, para [0095], “If the shared COT duration is zero , then other UEs have no reserved resources in the current COT and will wait for next COT”).
For these reasons, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to add Liu's signaling that the shared COT duration is zero to Li's regulated COT scheme, because Liu uses such an indication to inform other UEs that portions of the reserved COT are unavailable, predictably improving resource coordination and avoiding wasted contention.
Regarding claim 15, in spite of the fact that Li teaches a regulated LBT-based COT scheme with a first UE transmitting first-stage SCI carrying COT reservation information: (Li, para. [0034], [0039]), Li does not explicitly disclose control information indicating one or more of the enumerated SCI fields, for which Liu is relied upon:
Yet, Li in view of Liu discloses The method of claim 1, wherein the control information indicates one or more of: a priority; frequency and time resource assignment; resource reservation period; demodulation reference signal (DMRS) pattern and a number of DMRS ports; a second stage sidelink control information (SCI) format; and modulation and coding scheme because the reserved sidelink resources may be periodic and remain valid for a number of COTs or a preset time window, which is a resource reservation period, one of the recited fields, so the control information indicates one or more of the enumerated options (Liu, para [0088], “reserved resources 355 may be valid for a number of upcoming COTs or a preset time window”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have Liu's control information indicate one or more of a priority, frequency and time resource assignment, and a resource reservation period, because Liu's SCI already carries priority and reserved-resource (frequency/time) information and supports periodic reservations, providing predictable scheduling fields for sidelink COT coordination.
Regarding claim 16, Li discloses: The method of claim 15, wherein the priority indicates a channel access priority class (CAPC), particularly since Li ties the LBT/COT access to channel access priority classes, with the MCOT values agreed per LBT priority class; the priority indicated in the control information therefore indicates a channel access priority class (Li, para [0034] “Channel Access Priority Class (p)”).
Regarding claim 17, although Li teaches a regulated LBT-based COT scheme with SCI carrying COT reservation information including frequency and time resource assignment: (Li, para. [0034], [0039]), Li does not explicitly disclose the frequency and resource assignment being indicated for each of one or more COTs, for which Liu is relied upon:
Yet, Li in view of Liu discloses The method of claim 15, wherein the frequency and resource assignment is indicated for each of one or more channel occupancy times (COTs) because Liu indicates reserved resources for both a first COT and a separately obtained second COT, with offsets given relative to each COT's timing, so the frequency and resource assignment is indicated for each of one or more COTs (Liu, para [0086], “the first offset xo may indicate a first instance of reserved resource 355 - a in a second slot 350 - b of the second COT 345 , and the second offset yo may indicate a second instance of reserved resource 355 - b in the a last slot 350 - c of the second COT 345.”).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to indicate the resource assignment for each COT as taught by Liu, because Liu signals reserved resources tied to the timing of each COT, predictably enabling receivers to locate resources across multiple channel occupancy times.
Regarding claim 18, even though Li teaches a regulated LBT-based COT scheme with a first UE transmitting COT reservation information in sidelink control information: (Li, para. [0034], [0039]), Li does not explicitly disclose the control information indicating an update to previously indicated COT information, for which Liu is relied upon:
Yet, Li in view of Liu discloses The method of claim 1, wherein the control information indicates an update to a previously indicated channel occupancy time (COT) information because Liu transmits, within the first COT, two or more instances of SCI each indicating the COT, and a UE may forward/soft-relay updated COT sharing parameters to other nodes, so the control information indicates an update to previously indicated COT information (Liu, para [0101], “a COT detecting receiving node can soft relay the COT sharing information to other nodes in SCI , and provide a transcoded SI - COT bearing SCI that includes the identification of the UE that is sharing its COT .”).
Consequently, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to indicate updated COT information in the control information as taught by Liu, because Liu repeatedly signals and relays COT sharing information through SCI, predictably keeping receiving nodes current as the COT status changes.
Regarding claim 19, although Li teaches a regulated LBT-based COT scheme with a first UE transmitting COT reservation information in sidelink control information: (Li, para. [0034], [0039]), Li does not explicitly disclose receiving configuration parameters enabling COT reservation and/or COT sharing, for which Liu is relied upon:
Yet, Li in view of Liu discloses The method of claim 1, further comprising receiving one or more configuration parameters indicating enabling at least one of channel occupancy time (COT) reservation and COT sharing because Liu teaches that the time window for reserved resources and COT sharing behavior is configured by a sidelink configuration provided by a serving base station, so the UE receives configuration parameters enabling COT reservation and/or COT sharing (Liu, para [0088], “the time window may be configured in a sidelink configuration ( e.g. , provided by a serving base station via RRC signaling )”).
For these reasons, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to receive configuration parameters enabling COT reservation/sharing as taught by Liu, because Liu configures reserved-resource and shared-COT behavior via sidelink configuration from a serving base station, a predictable network-controlled enablement of those features.
Regarding claim 20, in spite of the fact that Li teaches a regulated LBT-based COT scheme where COT reservation/sharing behavior is configured by a serving base station: (Li, para. [0034], [0039]), Li does not explicitly disclose receiving the configuration parameters based on a radio resource control (RRC) message, for which Liu is relied upon:
Yet, Li in view of Liu discloses The method of claim 19, wherein the receiving the one or more configuration parameters is based on a radio resource control (RRC) message because Liu provides the sidelink configuration via RRC signaling from a serving base station, so the configuration parameters are received based on an RRC message (Liu, para [0088], “the time window may be configured in a sidelink configuration ( e.g. , provided by a serving base station via RRC signaling )”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to deliver the configuration parameters via an RRC message as taught by Liu, because Liu expressly provides the sidelink configuration through RRC signaling, the conventional higher-layer mechanism for configuring sidelink behavior.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHONGSUH (John) PARK whose telephone number is 408-918-7574. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00-5:30 PST
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, Avellino, Joseph can be reached at 571-272-3905 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.
/CHONGSUH PARK/Examiner, Art Unit 2478
/JOSEPH E AVELLINO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2478
Prosecution Insights