DETAILED ACTION
This communication is in responsive to Application 18/830846 filed on 9/11/2024. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims:
Claims 1-20 are presented for examination.
Information Disclosure Statement
3. The Information Disclosure Statements (IDS)s comply with 37 CFR 1.97 provisions. Accordingly, the Examiner has considered the IDS.
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 1-16 of U.S. Patent No. 12120710Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the issued claims are obvious variation of current claims. For example, issued claim 1 is substantially similar or obvious variation of current claim 1. Similarly, the dependent claims of issued patent are obvious variations of current dependent claims.
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)(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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by
Applicant’s IDS “Sidelink synchronization mechanism” by vivo filed 9/11/2024, entry 3 under NPL (hereinafter Vivo).
Regarding Claim 1, Vivo is directed to the same concept as instant application, namely reducing the payload size (description paragraphs 5 & 6). Here, D1 teaches a first user equipment for transmitting a physical sidelink broadcast channel (PSBCH), comprising: a memory; a transceiver (section 4; PSBCH); and a processor coupled to the memory and the transceiver, wherein the processor is configured to control the transceiver to transmit, to one or more second user equipments, a PSBCH carrying information, wherein the information carried in the PSBCH is used to determine a periodicity (section 4-proposal 13; 5 bits in PSBCH are used to indicate the periodicity of TDD-configSL) and a number of slots wherein the slots comprise sidelink (SL) slots (section 4.2-top of page 10; in NR, in addition to periodicity, over 50 bits are used to indicate UL-DL partitioning in S1B1. It is impossible for NR sidelink UE to convey so many bits in PSBCH. Some simplifications or restrictions are required.
One straightforward solution is that PSBCH contains indicator(s) of either the number of resources available for sidelink or the number of resources prohibited for sidelink. For the most extreme case, when SCS=120kHz, Pi=]Onis, and P2=10mis, each TDD pattern contains 80 slots, thereby 7*2=14 bits ate sufficient to indicate the number of slots available for sidelink. Observation 5: if PSBCH indicates the number of resources. available for sidelink with slot-level granularity, 14 bits are required);
and obtain a first reference subcarrier spacing (SCS), wherein the first reference SCS is configured by a network (see proposal 9 e.g. SCS=60khz e.g. syne resource size is determined as the maximum number of 8-SSB slots for each SCS), wherein the number of slots which is determined by the information carried in the PSBCH is further determined by the first reference SCS and a second reference SCS, wherein the second reference SCS is pre-configured, or determined by the information carried in the PSBCH (see proposal 9 e.g. SCS=60khz e.g. syne resource size is determined as the maximum number of 8-SSB slots for each SCS 15/30/60kz SCS cases “predefined.”).
Regarding claims 2 and 18, Vivo further teaches the second user equipment of claim 17, wherein only a pattern 1 is configured by a network (see 3.3. pattern e.g. Table 4 in section 4.5 that shows the PSBCH content for pattern 1. Also see table 1/page 9 for single pattern), the information carried in PSBCH is determined by parameters configured in pattern 1, the periodicity which is determined by the information carried in the PSBCH is determined by a periodicity configured in the pattern 1, the number of slots which is determined by the information carried in the PSBCH is determined by a number of slots configured in the pattern 1 (see 3.3. pattern e.g. Table 4 in section 4.5 that shows the PSBCH content for pattern 1. Also see table 1/page 9 for single pattern), the slots configured in the pattern 1 comprise UL slots (see table 1-2/page 9 for up to two patterns also see 3.3. pattern e.g. Table 4 in section 4.5 that shows the PSBCH content including SL configuration).
Regarding claims 3 and 19, Vivo further teaches the second user equipment of claim 17, wherein both a pattern 1 and a pattern 2 are configured by the network (see table 2/page 9 for up to two patterns also see 3.3. pattern e.g. Table 4 in section 4.5 that shows the PSBCH content), the information carried in PSBCH is determined by parameters configured in pattern 1 and/or pattern 2, the periodicity which is determined by the information carried in the PSBCH is determined by a first periodicity configured in the pattern 1 and a second periodicity configured in the pattern 2, the number of slots which is determined by the information carried in the PSBCH is determined by a number of slots configured in at least one of the pattern 1 and the pattern 2 (see 3.3. pattern e.g. Table 4 in section 4.5 that shows the PSBCH content for pattern 1. Also see table 1/page 9 for single pattern), the slots configured in at least one of the pattern 1 and the pattern 2 comprise UL slots (see table 1-2/page 9 for up to two patterns also see 3.3. pattern e.g. Table 4 in section 4.5 that shows the PSBCH content including SL configuration).
Regarding claim 4, Vivo further teaches the first user equipment of claim 1, wherein the information carried in the PSBCH further determines a number of symbols wherein the symbols comprise SL symbols (see 4.5 e.g. config SL).
Regarding claim 5, Vivo further teaches the first user equipment of claim 1, wherein the first user equipment is in coverage of a cell (see Figs. 3-4).
Claim 6 is substantially similar to claim 1, thus the same rationale applies.
Regarding claim 7, Vivo further teaches the method of claim 6, wherein only a pattern 1 is configured by a network, the information carried in PSBCH is determined by parameters configured in pattern 1 (see 3.3. pattern e.g. Table 4 in section 4.5 that shows the PSBCH content for pattern 1. Also see table 1/page 9 for single pattern).
Regarding claim 8, Vivo further teaches the method of claim 7, wherein the periodicity which is determined by the information carried in the PSBCH is determined by a periodicity configured in the pattern 1 (see 3.3. pattern e.g. Table 4 in section 4.5 that shows the PSBCH content for pattern 1 including periodicity. Also see table 1/page 9 for single pattern).
Regarding claim 9, Vivo further teaches the method of claim 7, wherein the number of slots which is determined by the information carried in the PSBCH is determined by a number of slots configured in the pattern 1 (see 3.3. pattern e.g. Table 4 in section 4.5 that shows the PSBCH content for pattern 1 including SL. Also see table 1/page 9 for single pattern).
Regarding claim 10, Vivo further teaches the method of claim 9, wherein the slots configured in the pattern 1 comprise UL slots (see table 1-2/page 9 for up to two patterns also see 3.3. pattern e.g. Table 4 in section 4.5 that shows the PSBCH content including SL configuration).
Regarding claim 11, Vivo further teaches the method of claim 6, wherein both a pattern 1 and a pattern 2 are configured by the network, the information carried in PSBCH is determined by parameters configured in pattern 1 and/or pattern 2 (see table 2/page 9 for up to two patterns also see 3.3. pattern e.g. Table 4 in section 4.5 that shows the PSBCH content).
Regarding claim 12, Vivo further teaches the method of claim 11, wherein the periodicity which is determined by the information carried in the PSBCH is determined by a first periodicity configured in the pattern 1 and a second periodicity configured in the pattern 2 (see table 1-2/page 9 for up to two patterns also see 3.3. pattern e.g. Table 4 in section 4.5 that shows the PSBCH content).
Regarding claim 13, Vivo further teaches the method of claim 11, wherein the number of slots which is determined by the information carried in the PSBCH is determined by a number of slots configured in at least one of the pattern 1 and the pattern 2 (see table 2/page 9 for up to two patterns also see 3.3. pattern e.g. Table 4 in section 4.5 that shows the PSBCH content).
Regarding claim 14, Vivo further teaches the method of claim 13, wherein the slots configured in at least one of the pattern 1 and the pattern 2 comprise UL slots (see table 1-2/page 9 for up to two patterns also see 3.3. pattern e.g. Table 4 in section 4.5 that shows the PSBCH content including SL configuration).
Regarding claim 15, Vivo further teaches the method of claim 6, wherein the information carried in the PSBCH further determines a number of symbols, wherein the symbols comprise SL symbols (see 4.5 e.g. config SL).
Regarding claim 16, Vivo further teaches the method of claim 6, wherein the second user equipment is out coverage of a cell (see Figs. 3-4).
Claims 17 and 20 are substantially similar to above claims, thus the same rationale applies.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAHRAN ABU ROUMI whose telephone number is (469)295-9170. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 6AM-5PM.
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, Emmanuel Moise can be reached at 571-272-3865. 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.
MAHRAN ABU ROUMI
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2455
/MAHRAN Y ABU ROUMI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2455
Prosecution Insights