DETAILED ACTION
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)(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 1-8, 20-26, 29, and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being unpatentable by Park et al. (US 2025/0185063, “Park”).
Regarding claim 1, Park discloses a method for wireless communication of a user equipment (UE) operating using a first radio access technology, comprising:
- identifying a sidelink resource pool of a shared resource band (See S1910 Fig.19, obtaining information related to a channel in a shared spectrum; See ¶.141, a first UE which has selected resource(s) from a resource pool by itself may transmit a PSCCH (e.g., sidelink control information (SCI)) to a second UE by using the resources) and a parameter of a competition level metric for measuring communication activity in the shared resource band (See S1842 & S1840 Fig.18, LBT failure; See ¶.330, the present disclosure is related parameter(s) (e.g., threshold value(s)) may be configured for each congestion level; See ¶.292, according to the type 1 LBT-based NR-U operation, the UE having uplink data to be transmitted may select a CAPC (Channel Access Priority Class) mapped to 5QI of data, and the UE may perform the NR-U operation by applying parameters of the corresponding CAPC (e.g., minimum contention window size, maximum contention window size, etc.); See ¶.315, because time of performing LBT (for example, sensing time whether channel is busy or idle) may be extended if SL-CAPC parameter of higher class is applied, probability of LBT failure may be reduced), the shared resource band associated with communication by the first radio access technology and a second radio access technology that differs from the first radio access technology (See ¶.313, UE may have to occupy channel of sidelink unlicensed band to transmit SL data in SL-U first. For example, to occupy channel of sidelink unlicensed band, UE may perform, by performing LBT (e.g., Type 1 LBT: random backoff-based LBT), process for searching channel that other sidelink UEs are not occupying. For example, UE may perform LBT by selecting [MIN Contention Window Size/MAX. Contention Window Size, parameter used for determining duration detecting whether channel is idle or busy (for example, parameter such as mp of NR-U), and max COT, which are used for process performing LBT (for example, parameter used for selecting backoff counter, for example, UE may randomly select backoff counter between MIN CW and MAX CW)] as [MIN Contention Window Size/MAX Contention Window Size, parameter used for determining duration detecting whether channel is idle or busy, and max COT, which are of SL-CAPC associated with sidelink data for itself to transmit (for example, or SL-CAPC mapped to QoS profile or PQI associated with sidelink data for itself to transmit)]. For example, if UE performing LBT searches channel not occupied by other UEs, UE performing LBT may perform SL data transmission by occupying corresponding channel; See Fig.10, PCC (Licensed band) and SCC (Unlicensed band));
- monitoring, in accordance with the parameter of the competition level metric, at least one resource of the sidelink resource pool to determine the competition level metric for the shared resource band (See S1920 & S1930 Fig.19 and ¶.344, the first device may perform, within a first duration based on a channel access priority class (CAPC), channel access on a first channel in the shared spectrum. In step S1930, the first device may consider that the first channel is idle based on detected power within the first duration being less than a threshold value); and
- transmitting one or more reservations for reserving one or more resources of the sidelink resource pool based at least on part on the competition level metric (See S1940 Fig.19 and ¶.344, S1940, the first device may perform, based on the first channel being idle, transmission on the first channel. For example, the CAPC may be pre-configured for the first device in out of coverage (OOC) to perform the channel access in the shared spectrum).
Regarding claim 2, Park discloses “receiving control signaling that indicates the sidelink resource pool and the parameter of the competition level metric (See ¶.119, the default information may be information related to SLSS and information related to a resource pool; See ¶.128-130, DCI format 3_0 is used for scheduling of NR PSCCH and NR PSSCH in one cell. [0129] The following information is transmitted by means of the DCI format 3_0 with CRC scrambled by SL-RNTI or SL-CS-RNTI: [0130] Resource pool index-ceiling bits, where I is the number of resource pools for transmission configured by the higher layer parameter sl-TxPoolScheduling); See ¶.238, if a CCA threshold is predefined or configured by a higher layer (e.g., RRC), the communication node may determine that the channel is busy if the detected channel energy is higher than the CCA threshold. Otherwise, the communication node may determine that the channel is idle. If it is determined that the channel is idle, the communication node may start the signal transmission in the unlicensed band. The CAP may be replaced with the LBT).”
Regarding claim 3, Park discloses “selecting a number of reservations to send based at least in part on the competition level metric, wherein transmitting the one or more reservations comprises transmitting one or more reservations for reserving the one or more resources of the sidelink resource pool in accordance with the number of reservations (See Fig.12 and ¶.109, a carrier includes a plurality of subcarriers in a frequency domain. A Resource Block (RB) may be defined as a plurality of consecutive subcarriers (e.g., 12 subcarriers) in the frequency domain. A Bandwidth Part (BWP) may be defined as a plurality of consecutive (Physical) Resource Blocks ((P) RBs) in the frequency domain, and the BWP may correspond to one numerology (e.g., SCS, CP length, and so on). A carrier may include a maximum of N number BWPs (e.g., 5 BWPs). Data communication may be performed via an activated BWP. Each element may be referred to as a Resource Element (RE) within a resource grid and one complex symbol may be mapped to each element; See ¶.130, Resource pool index-ceiling (log.sub.2 I) bits, where I is the number of resource pools for transmission configured by the higher layer parameter sl-TxPoolScheduling; See further Fig.7 and ¶.115).”
Regarding claim 4, Park discloses “mapping the competition level metric to the number of reservations from a plurality of different numbers of resource reservations, wherein selecting the number of reservations is based at least in part the mapping (See ¶.292, according to the type 1 LBT-based NR-U operation, the UE having uplink data to be transmitted may select a CAPC mapped to 5QI of data, and the UE may perform the NR-U operation by applying parameters of the corresponding CACP (e.g., minimum contention window size, maximum contention window size, etc.); See further ¶.311, ¶.313, ¶.315 and ¶.328 for a plurality of mapping methods).”
Regarding claim 5, Park discloses “transmitting at least one of the one or more reservations that comprises a reservation reliability indicator that is based at least in part on the competition level metric (See ¶.330, for example, whether or not the (some) proposed method/rule of the present disclosure is applied and/or related parameter(s) (e.g., threshold value(s)) may be configured (differently or independently) for each QoS requirement (e.g., latency, reliability). For example, whether or not the (some) proposed method/rule of the present disclosure is applied and/or related parameter(s) (e.g., threshold value(s)) may be configured (differently or independently) for each PQI (5G QoS identifier (5QI) for PC5). For example, whether or not the (some) proposed method/rule of the present disclosure is applied and/or related parameter(s) (e.g., threshold value(s)) may be configured (differently or independently) for each traffic type (e.g., periodic generation or aperiodic generation)).”
Regarding claim 6, Park discloses “mapping the competition level metric to the reservation reliability indicator from a set of reservation reliability indicators, wherein the reservation reliability indicator is based at least in part on the mapping (See ¶.330, QoS requirements related with parameters; See the cited paragraphs for mapping in claim 5).”
Regarding claim 7, Park discloses “the reservation reliability indicator is associated with resource selection within the sidelink resource pool by one or more other UEs (See ¶.141, the UE may autonomously select or schedule resource(s) for SL transmission. For example, the UE may perform SL communication by autonomously selecting resource(s) within the configured resource pool. For example, the UE may autonomously select resource(s) within a selection window by performing a sensing procedure and a resource (re) selection procedure. For example, the sensing may be performed in a unit of subchannel(s). For example, in step S810, a first UE which has selected resource(s) from a resource pool by itself may transmit a PSCCH (e.g., sidelink control information (SCI) or 1.sup.st-stage SCI) to a second UE by using the resource(s)).”
Regarding claim 8, Park discloses “mapping the competition level metric to a resource reservation restriction of a plurality of resource reservation restrictions, wherein transmitting the one or more reservations for reserving the one or more resources of the sidelink resource pool is based at least in part on the resource reservation restriction (See ¶.128-138 for scheduling; See ¶.145-¶.157, resource reservation configuration according to parameters).”
Regarding claim 20, it is a claim corresponding to the method claim 1, except the step of “receiving, from a second UE, an indication of one or more reservations for reserving one or more resources of the sidelink resource pool, the one or more reservations indicative of the competition level metric for the second UE in the shared resource band (See S1820 Fig.18 and S1910 & S1920 Fig.19)” and is therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of the claim.
Regarding claim 21, it is a claim corresponding to the claim 2 and is therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of the claim.
Regarding claim 22, Park discloses “a number of the one or more reservations is associated with the competition level metric for the second UE (See Fig.16, Figs.18-20).”
Regarding claims 23-26, they are claims corresponding to claims 4-7, respectively and are therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of the claims.
Regarding claim 29, it is an apparatus claim corresponding to the method claim 1, except the limitations “a processor and a memory (See Fig.20)” and is therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of the claim.
Regarding claim 30, it is an apparatus claim corresponding to the method claim 20, except the limitations “a processor and a memory (See Fig.20)” and is therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of the claim.
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 of this title, 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 9-11 and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park in view of Gerami et al. (US 2025/0185029, “Gerami”).
Regarding claim 9, Park does not explicitly disclose what Gerami discloses “determining a signal strength associated with the second radio access technology at one or more measurement periods associated with the sidelink resource pool, wherein the parameter of the competition level metric indicates that the competition level metric comprises the signal strength (Gerami, See ¶.136, RSSI measurements can be very useful particularly when accompanied by information concerning when and for how long time a UE made the RSSI measurements. For example, such information can assist a gNB or eNB to detect a hidden node that is blocking transmissions. Additionally, such information can assist a gNB or eNB to measure carrier load which is useful for load balancing and avoiding/reducing channel access failures; See further ¶.137).”
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to apply the method of “determining a signal strength associated with the second radio access technology at one or more measurement periods associated with the sidelink resource pool, wherein the parameter of the competition level metric indicates that the competition level metric comprises the signal strength” as taught by Gerami into the system of Park, so that it provides a way of assisting a gNB to detect a hidden node that is blocking transmissions (Gerami, See ¶.136).
Regarding claim 10, Park discloses “each of the one or more measurement periods comprises a respective gap symbol of a respective sidelink slot, the respective gap symbol other than symbols used for sidelink transmissions by the first radio access technology (Park, See ¶.131, Time gap-3 bits determined by higher layer parameter sl-DCI-ToSL-Trans; See ¶.193, The UE transmits the PSFCH in a first slot that includes PSFCH resources and is at least a number of slots, provided by sl-MinTimeGapPSFCH-r16, of the resource pool after a last slot of the PSSCH reception; See further ¶.216-219 for gap duration; See ¶.292, measurement duration; Examiner’s Note: Gerami further discloses “gap” in Fig.4).”
Regarding claim 11, Park does not explicitly disclose what Gerami discloses “each of the one or more measurement periods comprises a respective sidelink slot configured for measurement of the signal strength, the respective sidelink slot other than slots used for sidelink transmissions by the first radio access technology (Gerami, See ¶.125, examples of UE cell measurements include received signal strength indicator (RSSI); See ¶.136-137, RSSI measurements can be very useful particularly when accompanied by information concerning when and for how long time a UE made the RSSI measurements. For example, such information can assist a gNB or eNB to detect a hidden node that is blocking transmissions. Additionally, such information can assist a gNB or eNB to measure carrier load which is useful for load balancing and avoiding/reducing channel access failures; [0137] For these and other reasons, LTE LAA included measurements of averaged RSSI and channel occupancy in measurement reports. More specifically, channel occupancy is defined as percentage of time that RSSI was measured above a configured threshold. A RSSI measurement timing configuration (RMTC) is provided for such measurements, including a measurement duration (e.g., 1-5 ms) and a period between measurements (e.g., 40, 80, 160, 320, 640 ms). In 802.11 Wi-Fi, data reception acknowledgement (ACK) feedback is transmitted without performing CCA, but a small time duration (called SIFS) is introduced between the data transmission and the corresponding feedback).” Therefore, this claim is rejected with the similar reasons and motivation set forth in the rejection of claim 9.
Regarding claim 27, it is a claim corresponding to the claim 9 and is therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of the claim.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park in view of Gerami and further in view of Lee et al. (US 2021/0410114, “Lee”).
Regarding claim 12, Park and Gerami do not explicitly disclose what Lee discloses “determining a second signal strength associated with the second radio access technology over a first slot other than a slot in which sidelink control information is decoded (Lee, ¶.324, if a received SCI indicating a priority value lower than p_preemption, if pre-emption is enabled by RRC, schedules a sidelink transmission expected to overlap with a resource(s) assigned to the HARQ process in a selected sidelink grant used to transmit a MAC PDU carrying a MAC CE and/or logical channel(s) of which the highest priority value is higher than the priority value indicated by the received SCI, and a SL-RSRP result measured on the received SCI is higher than the last RSRP threshold: When one of the following criteria of the resource reselection procedure (or, resource reselection procedure) is met for one of the (activated) HARQ processes, the first UE and/or the second UE may clear all resources assigned to all (activated) HARQ processes in the selected sidelink grant, and may trigger the TX resource reservation (or, TX resource (re-) selection) and then reselect all the reserved resources of the selected sidelink grant for all HARQ processes associated to the selected pool of resources in the resource reservation procedure).” Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to apply the method of “determining a second signal strength associated with the second radio access technology over a first slot other than a slot in which sidelink control information is decoded” as taught by Lee into the system of Park and Gerami, so that it provides a way of triggering TX resource reselection associated to the selected pool of resources (Lee, See ¶.324).
Claims 13-15 and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park in view of Hwang et al. (US 2025/0227484, “Hwang”).
Regarding claim 13, Park and Hwang disclose “determining a ratio of failed clear channel assessment procedures within the sidelink resource pool of the shared resource band over a time period, wherein the parameter of the competition level metric indicates that the competition level metric comprises the ratio (Park, S1842 Fig.18, ‘increment LBT failure counter by 1; See ¶.238, it is said that clear channel assessment (CCA) is confirmed. If a CCA threshold is predefined or configured by a higher layer (e.g., RRC), the communication node may determine that the channel is busy if the detected channel energy is higher than the CCA threshold. Otherwise, the communication node may determine that the channel is idle. If it is determined that the channel is idle, the communication node may start the signal transmission in the unlicensed band. The CAP may be replaced with the LBT; Hwang, See ¶.215, ratio of LBT failures; See ¶.204, a channel busy ratio (CBR)).” Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to apply the method of “the parameter of the competition level metric indicating that the competition level metric comprises the ratio” as taught by Hwang into the system of Park, so that it provides a way of determining whether the channel is busy or idle (Hwang, See ¶.238).
Regarding claim 14, Park does not explicitly disclose what Hwang discloses “the ratio of failed clear channel assessment procedures is based at least in part on one or more clear channel assessment procedures other than clear channel assessment procedures performed for sidelink resources selected for communication by the UE (Hwang, See ¶.307, clear channel assessment procedure whether to determine channel busy or idle; See ¶.238, if a CCA threshold is predefined or configured by a higher layer (e.g., RRC), the communication node may determine that the channel is busy if the detected channel energy is higher than the CCA threshold. Otherwise, the communication node may determine that the channel is idle. If it is determined that the channel is idle, the communication node may start the signal transmission in the unlicensed band. The CAP may be replaced with the LBT).” Therefore, this claim is rejected with the similar reasons and motivation set forth in the rejection of claim 13.
Regarding claim 15, Park discloses “the ratio of failed clear channel assessment procedures is associated with clear channel assessment procedures performed for a channel access priority class corresponding to the sidelink resource pool (Park, See ¶.5, the first device may perform, within a first duration based on a channel access priority class (CAPC), channel access on a first channel in the shared spectrum; See ¶.245-¶.250, the detailed function of CAPC).”
Regarding claim 28, it is a claim corresponding to the claim 13 and is therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of the claim.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 16-19 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.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jung H Park whose telephone number is 571-272-8565. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 7:00 AM-3:00 PM.
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, Derrick Ferris can be reached on 571-272-3123. 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.
/JUNG H PARK/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2411
Prosecution Insights