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 .
DETAILED ACTION
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, 2, 4, 6-11, 13-16 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-6 of copending Application No. US 20250142604 A1 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because:
Claim(s) 1 of the instant application merely broaden the scope of and/or is substantively derivable from claims(s) 1 and 6 of the patent. It is well settled that broadening the scope of claims would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in view of the narrower issued claims. In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982) and In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Similar rationale applies to claims 21 and 24.
Claim 2 of the instant application is substantively the same and/or readily derivable from patent claim(s) 1.
Claim 4 of the instant application is substantively the same and/or readily derivable from patent claim(s) 1.
Claim 6 of the instant application is substantively the same and/or readily derivable from patent claim(s) 6.
Claim 7 of the instant application is substantively the same and/or readily derivable from patent claim(s) 6.
Claim 8 of the instant application is substantively the same and/or readily derivable from patent claim(s) 1.
Claim 9 of the instant application is substantively the same and/or readily derivable from patent claim(s) 3 and 5.
Claim 10 of the instant application is substantively the same and/or readily derivable from patent claim(s) 3.
Claim 11 of the instant application is substantively the same and/or readily derivable from patent claim(s) 1.
Claim 13 of the instant application is substantively the same and/or readily derivable from patent claim(s) 1.
Claim 14 of the instant application is substantively the same and/or readily derivable from patent claim(s) 3.
Claim 15 of the instant application is substantively the same and/or readily derivable from patent claim(s) 2.
Claim 16 of the instant application is substantively the same and/or readily derivable from patent claim(s) 4 and 5.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 5, 18 is/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. The Examiner notes, that upon overcoming the aforementioned double patenting rejections, claims 7, 8, 13-16 would also be objected to as containing allowable subject matter.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
With respect to the claim(s), the prior art of record fails to disclose singly or in combination or render obvious all the limitations of the claim(s).
The closest prior art relating to Applicant' s claimed invention is:
US 20240397529 A1 Nguyen; Tien Viet et al.
US 20200288432 A1 Min; Byoung Yoon et al.
US 20230180342 A1 Shin; Cheolkyu et al.
Nguyen discloses that a UE determines an occurrence of a condition to trigger transmission of inter-UE coordination information based on a CR being below a threshold CR associated with a priority level for the inter-UE coordination information and transmits a sidelink message that includes the inter-UE coordination information in response to the occurrence of the condition for the inter-UE coordination information.
Min discloses a pre-5th-Generation (5G) or 5G communication system to be provided for supporting higher data rates Beyond 4th-Generation (4G) communication system such as Long Term Evolution (LTE). An operation method of a terminal in a wireless communication system comprises the steps of: receiving, from a base station, a message including information on a resource pool for vehicle communication and information for selecting a resource from the resource pool; determining candidate resources in the resource pool on the basis of the information for selecting the resource; and transmitting data by using at least one resource among the candidate resources.
Shin discloses a communication technique that merges IoT technology with a 5G communication system for supporting higher data transmission rates than 4G systems; and a system therefor. The present disclosure may be applied to intelligent services (for example, smart homes, smart buildings, smart cities, smart cars or connected cars, healthcare, digital education, retail business, security and safety-related services, etc.) on the basis of 5G communication technology and IoT-related technology. In addition, the present invention relates to a method and device for a V2X-supporting vehicle terminal to perform discontinuous reception during a process of transmitting and receiving information using another vehicle terminal, a pedestrian mobile terminal, and sidelink.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6, 10, 11, 20, 21, 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US 20240397529 A1 to Nguyen; Tien Viet et al.
Re: Claim(s) 1, 21, 24
Nguyen discloses a baseband processor, comprising: one or more processors configured to: (Fig. 3 – 375)
communicate a media access control (MAC) control element (CE) from a user equipment (UE) to another UE via a sidelink (SL) transmission (Fig. 7 – 706. 0090 - The UE-A 702 may transmit inter-UE coordination information 706 in a MAC-CE, e.g., on the PSSCH),
the MAC CE including an inter-UE coordination (IUC) information message indicating at least one wireless resource, associated with a time- domain validity, that the other UE is permitted to use to communicate with the UE (0083-0085 - The inter-UE coordination information 706 may include information based on the UE's sensing information (e.g., resource reservations of other UEs that are sensed by UE-A 702), inter-UE coordination information from another UE, resources that are bad, undesirable, or non-preferred for the UE-A 702 (e.g., resources subject to high interference), resources which are preferred or better than other resources for the UE-A 702, etc. The UE-A 702 may determine a set of sidelink resources available for a resource allocation … The inter-UE coordination information 706 may indicate candidate resources for sidelink transmission or preferred resources for transmissions by UE-B 704. The UE-A 702 may use the inter-UE coordination information 706 to inform the UE-B 704 about which sub-channels and slots may be used for communicating with the UE-A 702 and/or which sub-channels and slots may not be used because they are occupied or reserved by the UE-A 702 and/or other UEs. The UE-A may indicate a set of resources that may be more suitable for UE-B's transmission based on UE-A's evaluation. The candidate resources may indicate a group of resources from which the UE-B 704 (e.g., UE-B) may select for the sidelink transmission 708 … The UE-A 702 may transmit an indication of the set of available resources to the UE-B 704 via inter-UE coordination signaling (shown as a coordination message, and referred to in some aspects as an inter-UE coordination message or inter-UE coordination information). 0070 - The resource allocation for each UE may be in units of one or more sub-channels in the frequency domain (e.g., sub-channels SCI to SC 4), and may be based on one slot in the time domain. The UE may also use resources in the current slot to perform an initial transmission, and may reserve resources in future slots for retransmissions. In this example, two different future slots are being reserved by UE1 and UE2 for retransmissions. The resource reservation may be limited to a window of time or slots).
Nguyen further discloses
A UE comprising a memory device and processor (Fig. 3 – 310 comprises 376 and 375), as required by claim 21; and
A method corresponding to the baseband processor of claim 1 (see as analyzed above), as required by claim 24.
Re: Claim(s) 2
Nguyen discloses wherein the IUC information message is sent in response to reception of a MAC CE IUC request message from the other UE (0083 - The UE-A 702 may determine the set of sidelink resources based at least in part on determining that the set of sidelink resources are to be selected or based at least in part on a request, referred to herein as an inter-UE coordination request, received from the UE-B 704 or a base station).
Re: Claim(s) 3
Nguyen discloses wherein the time- domain validity comprises an indication of a one-time resource by not including a periodicity of at least one wireless resource (implicit from 0066 - Sidelink communication may be based on different types or modes of resource allocation mechanisms … In order to coordinate the selection of sidelink resources by individual UEs, each UE may use a sensing technique to monitor for resource reservations by other sidelink UEs and may select resources for sidelink transmissions from unreserved resources. Devices communicating based on sidelink, may determine one or more radio resources in the time and frequency domain that are used by other devices in order to select transmission resources that avoid collisions with other devices. The sidelink transmission and/or the resource reservation may be periodic or aperiodic, where a UE may reserve resources for transmission in a current slot and up to two future slots (discussed below). The Examiner notes that in the context of Nguyen, different resources may be allocated to different UEs in order to avoid collisions and may be periodic or aperiodic. In the case that resources allocated to a particular UE are aperiodic, it would be understood that a periodicity would not be relevant and thus not included in the resource allocation of said particular UE).
Re: Claim(s) 4
Nguyen discloses wherein the time-domain validity comprises a duration of time for which the at least one wireless resource is valid for communicating with the UE (0070 - The resources may be comprised in a sidelink resource pool, for example. The resource allocation for each UE may be in units of one or more sub-channels in the frequency domain (e.g., sub-channels SCI to SC 4), and may be based on one slot in the time domain. The UE may also use resources in the current slot to perform an initial transmission, and may reserve resources in future slots for retransmissions. In this example, two different future slots are being reserved by UE1 and UE2 for retransmissions. The resource reservation may be limited to a window of time or slots.).
Re: Claim(s) 6
Nguyen discloses wherein: the at least one wireless resource comprises a plurality of wireless resources, each wireless resource of the a plurality of wireless resources having a different periodicity and a same time-domain validity (implicit from 0070 - The resources may be comprised in a sidelink resource pool, for example. The resource allocation for each UE may be in units of one or more sub-channels in the frequency domain (e.g., sub-channels SCI to SC 4), and may be based on one slot in the time domain. The UE may also use resources in the current slot to perform an initial transmission, and may reserve resources in future slots for retransmissions. In this example, two different future slots are being reserved by UE1 and UE2 for retransmissions. The resource reservation may be limited to a window of time or slots. The Examiner notes that in the context of Nguyen, resource allocation to different UEs may be different and some may be periodic and others aperiodic (i.e., different periodicity) within a window of time slots (i.e., same time-domain validity)).
Re: Claim(s) 10
Nguyen discloses wherein the time- domain validity is configured by another UE via PC5_radio resource control (RRC) signaling (0056 - FIG. 3 is a block diagram of a first wireless communication device 310 in communication with a second wireless communication device 350 based on sidelink. In some examples, the devices 310 and 350 may communicate based on V2X or other D2D communication. The communication may be based on sidelink using a PC5 interface. The devices 310 and the 350 may comprise a UE, an RSU, a base station, etc. Packets may be provided to a controller/processor 375 that implements layer 3 and layer 2 functionality. Layer 3 includes a radio resource control (RRC) layer, and layer 2 includes a packet data convergence protocol (PDCP) layer, a radio link control (RLC) layer, and a medium access control (MAC) layer. 0070 – resource allocation via sidelink disclosed).
Re: Claim(s) 11
Nguyen discloses wherein: the at least one wireless resource comprise a plurality of wireless resources included in the MAC CE, each wireless resource of the plurality of wireless resources having a different periodicity (implicit from 0066 - Sidelink communication may be based on different types or modes of resource allocation mechanisms … In order to coordinate the selection of sidelink resources by individual UEs, each UE may use a sensing technique to monitor for resource reservations by other sidelink UEs and may select resources for sidelink transmissions from unreserved resources. Devices communicating based on sidelink, may determine one or more radio resources in the time and frequency domain that are used by other devices in order to select transmission resources that avoid collisions with other devices. The sidelink transmission and/or the resource reservation may be periodic or aperiodic, where a UE may reserve resources for transmission in a current slot and up to two future slots).
Re: Claim(s) 20
Nguyen discloses wherein the MAC CE is communicated based on a side link (SL) grant from a base station (0066 - For example, a base station 102 or 180 may determine resources for sidelink communication and may allocate resources to different UEs 104 to use for sidelink transmissions. The Examiner notes that the aforementioned allocation and signaling is analogous to a sidelink grant).
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.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nguyen as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 20200288432 A1 to Min; Byoung Yoon et al.
Re: Claim(s) 9
Nguyen discloses those limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim(s) 1 above.
Nguyen further discloses (0066) that sidelink resources may be configured by a base station.
Nguyen does/do not appear to explicitly disclose wherein the time-domain validity is configured by a base station in communication with the UE.
However, further attention is directed to Min which discloses said limitation (Fig. 26 and 0505 - in the case where the terminal receives a resource pool sharing valid time (or a resource sharing period) according to the operation of the base station in step 2607 in FIG. 26, the shared resource pool may be used during the resource pool sharing valid time)
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 Nguyen invention by employing the teaching as taught by Min to provide the ability for a base station to configure sidelink resources for UEs which includes a resource validity time. The motivation for the combination is given by Min (0001-0006).
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nguyen as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 20230180342 A1 to Shin; Cheolkyu et al.
Re: Claim(s) 19
Nguyen discloses those limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim(s) 1 above.
Nguyen does/do not appear to explicitly disclose wherein: the at least one wireless resource is selected, and the MAC CE is communicated, based on an active DRX time of the other UE.
However, attention is directed to Shin which discloses said limitation (0007, 0191, 0294, and claim 1 – mechanism for transmitting sidelink control information and resource selection occurring during a DRX on (i.e., active time of the DRX) is disclosed).
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 Nguyen invention by employing the teaching as taught by Shin to provide the ability to perform sidelink resource allocation and selection during an active DRX time of the other UE. The motivation for the combination is given by Shin (0002-0005).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KASHIF SIDDIQUI whose telephone number is (571)270-3188. The examiner can normally be reached on M-R 6:00 EST to 16:00 EST.
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, Jeffrey Rutkowski can be reached on 571-270-1215. 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.
/KASHIF SIDDIQUI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2415
Prosecution Insights