CTNF 18/823,199 CTNF 94016 4142 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. The preliminary amendment filed on 09/06/2024 has been entered. Claims 1, 6, 8, 12, 14 and 15 are amended. Claims 1-15 are pending and addressed below. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co. , 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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. 07-20-02-aia AIA This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1, 3, 8 and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over IDS reference from parent application, Ganesan; Karthikeyan et al US 20230189292 A1 priority 20200518 , hereinafter Ganesan , in view of SUN; Wanlu et al US 20240357641 A1 , hereinafter SUN . Regarding claims 1, 8, 14 and 15 , Ganesan teaches, a method performed by a first terminal in a wireless communication system, the method comprising: identifying that a procedure associated with determination of a set of resources for reception from a second terminal is triggered (Ganesan [51] teaches receiving trigger from TX UE (i.e., a second terminal) for reporting of a candidate resource set) ; identifying at least one parameter associated with the procedure, the at least one parameter being configured by a higher layer (Ganesan [51]-[53] teaches receiving parameters via PC5-RRC (i.e., a higher layer) which are used in candidate resource set determination procedure) ; determining a set of preferred resources or a set of non-preferred resources for the reception from the second terminal, based on the at least one parameter (Ganesan [52]-[53] teaches determining and reporting to TX UE a preferred or non-preferred resource set for the transmission of the second terminal, based on at least one parameter such as Reference signal received power (“RSRP”) and/or received signal strength indicator (“RSSI”) thresholds) . Ganesan does not expressly teach, however, in the same field of endeavor, SUN teaches, in case that the procedure is triggered by a condition at the first terminal, (SUN [183] “ For example, the receiving UE 100 performs the radio resource suggestion only if it is capable of full-sensing and has actually performed full-sensing . ”, suggesting a triggered condition at the first terminal, transmitting, to the second terminal, information including the set of non- preferred resources, based on a groupcast or broadcast manner ( SUN [0159] “ The one or more indicated radio resources 606 may be defined in terms of time, frequency, spatial stream or any combination or sub-combination thereof .” [0045] “The status message may be indicative of one or more radio resources excluded for the data reception .”, Fig. 3; [0184] “Alternatively or in addition, the step 304 may implement the transmitting of the radio resource suggestions 604 in a broadcast mode .”, suggests transmitting excluded resource information (=non-preferred resources) in a broadcast manner ), and transmitting, to the second terminal, information including the set of preferred resources, based on a unicast manner (SUN [0040] “The status message may be indicative of one or more radio resources preferred for the data reception .”, Fig. 3; [0184] “In any embodiment of the receiving UE 100 , the step 304 may implement the transmitting of the radio resource suggestions 604 in a unicast or multicast mode.”, suggests transmitting preferred resource information in a unicast manner ). Therefore, 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 invention of Ganesan to include the features as taught by SUN above in order to provide a D2D communication technique that avoids or mitigates a hidden node problem for directional radio communications (SUN [0008]) . With respect to claims 8 and 15 , claims recite the identical features of claim 1 for a method and terminal of the corresponding opposite side of the communication. Therefore, it is subjected to the same rejection. Ganesan further teaches determining resource information for the transmission of the second terminal, based on the set of non-preferred resources and the set of preferred resources (Ganesan [70], [43] “ The first user equipment uses the set of resources to determine resource reselection .”, the first user equipment being the second terminal of the claim and the set of resources is received from the first terminal). With respect to claim 14 , claim recites the identical features of claim 1 for a corresponding first terminal. Therefore, it is subjected to the same rejection. Regarding claim 3, Ganesan, in view of SUN, teaches the method, as outlined in the rejection of claim 1. Ganesan further teaches, wherein the set of preferred or non-preferred resources is used to determine resource information for the reception from the second terminal (Ganesan [43] “ The first user equipment uses the set of resources to determine resource reselection .”, the first user equipment being the second terminal of the claim, as such, teaches reception from the second terminal on determined resources) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 2 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ganesan , in view of SUN , as applied to the rejection of claims 1 and 8 above, and further in view of IDS reference from parent application, MIAO; Zhaobang et al US 20230164814 A1 , hereinafter Miao . Regarding claims 2 and 9, Ganesan, in view of SUN, teaches the methods, as outlined in the rejection of claims 1 and 8. Ganesan and SUN do not expressly teach, however, in the same field of endeavor, Miao teaches, wherein the set of preferred resources or the set of non-preferred resources is determined within a timing range (Miao Figs. 8B and 8C, [84]-[85], Claim-28 teaches identifying a time period to determine resource status after receiving a request from the second terminal). Therefore, 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 invention of Ganesan and SUN to include the features as taught by Miao above in order to provide a solution for sidelink resource coordination, and thereby avoiding resource collisions, while improving the reliability and delay of V2X communications (Miao “Abstract”) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 4-7 and 10-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ganesan , in view of SUN, as applied to the rejection of claims 1 and 8 above, and further in view of IDS reference from parent application, PARK; Dong Hyun US 20230239900 A1 priority 20200929, para [1] “ the benefit of Korean Patent Application No. 10-2020-0127058, filed on Sep. 29, 2020, each of which is hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety. ” , hereinafter Park . Regarding claims 4 and 10, Ganesan, in view of SUN, teaches the methods, as outlined in the rejection of claims 1 and 8. Ganesan and SUN do not expressly teach, however, in the same field of endeavor, PARK teaches, further comprising: receiving, from the second terminal, sidelink control information (SCI) indicating resources reserved for a physical sidelink shared channel (PSSCH) transmission (Park [127], [207] teaches determining non available resources based on reserve resources identified by SCI, SCI including resources for PSSCH ). Therefore, 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 invention of Ganesan and SUN to include the features as taught by Park above in order to provide a method for selecting resource in wireless communication system to avoid collision between resources for V2X (Park [2], [7]) . Regarding claims 5 and 11, Ganesan, in view of SUN and Park, teaches the methods, as outlined in the rejection of claims 4 and 10. Park further teaches, further comprising: determining resources not preferred by the first terminal, based on the SCI ( see Park [127], [207] and explanation above ). Regarding claim 6 and 12, Ganesan, in view of SUN and Park, teaches the methods, as outlined in the rejection of claims 5 and 11. Park further teaches , further comprising: receiving, from the second terminal via a PSSCH, sidelink data; and in response to the reception of the sidelink data, transmitting, to the second terminal via a physical sidelink feedback channel (PSFCH), information associated with the resources not preferred by the first terminal (Park [127], [145], [226], [227] teaches coordination message (i.e., control information) with non-preferred resources is transmitted in response to receiving coordination request included in data received over PSSCH. Park [146, [159] teaches resource coordination information (i.e., control information) is transmitted in HARQ feedback, HARQ feedback is sent over PSFCH). Regarding claims 7 and 13, Ganesan, in view of SUN and Park, teaches the methods, as outlined in the rejection of claim 6 and 12. Ganesan further teaches, wherein the information associated with the resources not preferred by the first terminal is transmitted based on an identity of the first terminal and an identity of the second terminal (Ganesan [48]-[49] teaches information on the sidelink between UEs are transmitted based on identifier of the UEs. “based on an identity” is interpreted as transmission between UEs among plurality of UEs according to UE’s identity ) . Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. IDS Reference NPL R1-2007412, Summary for AI 8.11.2.2 Feasibility and benefits for mode 2 enhancements, Moderator (LG Electronics), #3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #102-e, e-Meeting, August 17th – 28th, 2020 . Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAHBUBUL BAR CHOWDHURY whose telephone number is (571)272-0232. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday 9AM-5PM EST; Friday variable. 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, Khaled Kassim can be reached on 571-270-3770. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /MAHBUBUL BAR CHOWDHURY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2475 Application/Control Number: 18/823,199 Page 2 Art Unit: 2475 Application/Control Number: 18/823,199 Page 3 Art Unit: 2475 Application/Control Number: 18/823,199 Page 4 Art Unit: 2475 Application/Control Number: 18/823,199 Page 5 Art Unit: 2475 Application/Control Number: 18/823,199 Page 6 Art Unit: 2475 Application/Control Number: 18/823,199 Page 7 Art Unit: 2475 Application/Control Number: 18/823,199 Page 8 Art Unit: 2475 Application/Control Number: 18/823,199 Page 9 Art Unit: 2475
