DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
2. 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. 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.
Status of Claims
1. The following is a non-final office action in response to the applicant’s submission received on 10/08/2024.
2. Claims 1 – 18, 25 and 28 are currently pending and have been examined.
Foreign Priority/Domestic benefit
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed under 35 U.S.C. §119 to Chinese patent application No. 202210474697.0 filed on April 29, 2022.
Domestic benefit is claimed with regards to National Stage of International Application No. PCT/CN2023/090881, filed on April 26, 2023.
Oath/Declaration
1. The applicant’s oath/declaration filed on 10/08/2024 has been reviewed by the examiner and is found to conform to the requirements prescribed in 37 C.F.R. 1.63.
Information Disclosure Statement
1. The information disclosure statements filed on 10/08/2024 and 10/30/2025 are in compliance with the provision of 37 CFR 1.97, 1.98 and MPEP § 609. It has been placed in the application file and the information referred to therein has been considered as to the merits.
Drawings
1. The applicant’s drawings submitted on 10/08/2024 are acceptable for examination purposes.
Claim objection(s)
1. Regarding claims 15, 25 and 28 it is recommended to place a colon after the word “comprising” since the demarcation between the preamble and the body of the claim cannot be ascertain. (e.g. what is/are the component/elements in the system and what is further limited throughout the body (or what is presumed to be the body see §1.75(i)).
2. Dependent claims 16 – 18 are objected to by virtue of their dependency on an objected based claim.
3. Independent claims 14 and 25 recite a second message followed by a third message and no mentioning of a first and second message. In other words, claims 14 and 25 appears to be incomplete for omitting essential cooperative relationships or matter disclosed to be essential to the invention as described in the specification , such omission amounting to a gap in the interpretation of the claims [The independent claims fail to interrelate essential elements/steps of the invention as defined by applicant(s) in the specification, See In re Venezia, 530 F.2d 956, 189 USPQ 149 (CCPA 1976). But see Ex parte Nolden, 149 USPQ 378, 380 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1965). MPEP § 2172.01].
Claim interpretation
1. Limitations appearing in the specification but not recited in the claim should not be read into the claim. E-Pass Techs., Inc. v. 3Com Corp., 343 F.3d 1364, 1369, 67 USPQ2d 1947, 1950 (Fed. Cir. 2003) (claims must be interpreted "in view of the specification" without importing limitations from the specification into the claims unnecessarily) [MPEP 2106 Sec I, C]. “Though understanding the claim language may be aided by explanations contained in the written description, it is important not to import into a claim limitations that are not part of the claim. For example, a particular embodiment appearing in the written description may not be read into a claim when the claim language is broader than the embodiment.” Superguide Corp. v. DirecTV Enterprises, Inc., 358 F.3d 870, 875, 69 USPQ2d 1865, 1868 (Fed. Cir. 2004). [MPEP 2111.01 Sec II]. Thus, the Examiner interprets Applicant’s claims "in view of the specification" and does not “import into a claim limitations that are not part of the claim”.
2. When multiple limitations are connected with “OR”, one of the limitations does not have any patentable weight since both of the limitations are optional.
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.
1. Claim(s) 1 – 3, 7 – 9, 11 – 13, 15 – 17 and 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ko et al. (US 2023/0283434) in view of Wang (WO 2023/193901 A1, the international filing date is relied on for support).
Regarding claim 1, Ko discloses: A method for resource selection, performed by a first terminal (see ¶ 0166 and ¶0181 in view of ¶ 0190: a second terminal in communication with a first terminal is being implemented (see figure 18) in order to carry out the method steps that follows), comprising:
determining configuration information for a sidelink measurement gap (SL MG) of the first terminal; and [¶ 0190, the first device receives and determines the configuration of the MG pertaining to the SL PRS transmission. See also ¶ 0007 - ¶ 0008]
[¶ 0190: “… a transmission of SL data may be not allowed in the measurement gap period…”, this implies that UE will use resources which are outside the SL MG for the transmission of data. In the first picture of figure 14 is one embodiment whereby data is not sent in the measurement gap but SL PRS only] [support is found in the provisional application 63/315, 477, filed on 03/01/20233, pages 53/69 – 56/69]
Ko discloses every aspect of claim 1, except the selection is being performed by the terminal for the transmission of data that is outside the MG, such difference is seen in the secondary reference of Wang. First, note on page 14 (lines 12 – 15) of Wang, the definition of a dedicated resource can be “…resource pool, a measurement gap, a BWP, a sub-frequency band, or any subset of available resources for radio transmissions...”. Line 6 on page 14 states “… allocating a dedicated resources for sidelink PRS 402 transmission and measurements…”, the two excerpt above implies the measurement gap pertains to SL PRS transmission and measurement of the PRS transmission which is refer to as dedicated resources.
In lines 6 – 8 of page 14 Wang further states: “… sidelink PRS 402 transmission and measurements, wherein the dedicated resource may be different from a resource that is assigned for (sidelink) data transmission...”, this implies the UE is capable of interpreting the different use of resources and in the event of data transmission it will selects resources that are not used for SL MG but which are assigned for SL data communication. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ko’s system in view of Wang. The motivation for making the above modification would have been to assign resources differently to carry out specific type of sidelink measurement [see line 14 on page 14 of Wang].
Regarding Claims 11 – 13, Claim 11 possesses an optional limitation in which the reference of Ko discloses both “…resource information of a sidelink positioning reference signal (SL PRS) and/or configuration information for a sidelink measurement gap…” see ¶ 0190. If the first option of resource information of a sidelink positioning reference signal (SL PRS) is considered then art is not necessary for claim 12 and 13, since claims 12 – 13 deals with SL-MG. Claims 11 – 13 recites similar features using respective language and are also rejected by the applied references for similar reasons as claim 1.
Claim 25 incorporates claim 11 limitations and is also rejected by the applied references for similar reasons as claim 11. Such elements as a memory, transceiver and processor are seen in the reference of Ko, see figure 18.
Claim 15 recites similar features using respective language and are also rejected by the applied references for similar reasons as claim 1. Such elements as a memory, transceiver and processor are seen in the reference of Ko, see figure 18.
Claim 2, Ko further discloses: The method of claim 1, wherein determining configuration information for the SL MG of the first terminal comprises:
receiving a first message transmitted from a second terminal, wherein the first message carries resource information of a sidelink positioning reference signal (SL PRS) and/or the configuration information for the SL MG; and
determining the configuration information for the SL MG based on the first message. [¶ 0190, the first device receives and determines the configuration of the MG pertaining to the SL PRS transmission (measurement gap period). At the same time ¶ 0190 also discloses SL PRS and it’s configuration is being received pertaining to the MG].
Claim 16 recites similar features using respective language and are also rejected by the applied references for similar reasons as claim 2.
Claim 3, Ko further discloses: The method of claim 2, wherein in case that the first message carries the resource information of the SL PRS, determining the configuration information for the SL MG based on the first message comprises: determining the configuration information for the SL MG based on the resource information of the SL PRS. [¶ 0217: “…obtain information related to a measurement gap period in which a plurality of sidelink (SL) positioning reference signal (PRS) configurations are configured, wherein a transmission of SL data may be not allowed in the measurement gap period;…”].
Claim 17 recites similar features using respective language and are also rejected by the applied references for similar reasons as claim 3.
Claim 7, Ko Further discloses: The method of claim 1, wherein the configuration information for the SL MG comprises one or more of the following:
a frequency point where a sidelink positioning reference signal (SL PRS) locates; a measurement period and offset of a sidelink positioning reference signal (SL PRS); [¶ 0153 deals with the SL offset in view of ¶ 0006 (the measurement gap period is also being received, this gap period is where the SL PRS is being configured)]
a measurement duration of a sidelink positioning reference signal (SL PRS); or
a valid duration of the SL MG.
Claim 8, Ko further discloses: The method of claim 2any of claims 2 to 5, wherein the resource information of the SL PRS comprises one or more of the following:
a positioning resource identifier of the SL PRS;
frequency domain resource information of the SL PRS;
time domain resource information of the SL PRS;
a period of the SL PRS;
a resource period type of the SL PRS;
a resource type of the SL PRS;
a resource bandwidth part identifier of the SL PRS;
quasi co-location information of the SL PRS;
activation time and/or duration of the SL PRS; or a
valid duration of the SL PRS. [multiple options are seen in ¶ 0152 - ¶ 0161].
Claim 9, Ko further discloses: The method of claim 2, wherein the first message comprises any of the following:
a positioning protocol message for sidelink;
a signaling message for sidelink;
a radio resource control message for sidelink;
a media access control-control element (MAC CE) message for sidelink; or physical layer scheduling control information for sidelink. [¶ 0137: “…through pre-configuration and/or a form in which a UE informs other UEs through a predefined (physical layer or higher layer) channel/signal (e.g., SL MAC CE, PC5 RRC)].
2. Claim(s) 4 – 6, 10, 14, 18 and 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ko et al. (US 2023/0283434) in view of Wang (WO 2023/193901 A1, the international filing date is relied on for support) and Bo et al. (US 2022/0240118 A1).
Regarding claim 4, Ko in view of Wang discloses: The method of claim 3 (see rejected claim 3).
Ko in view of Wang does not disclose: wherein determining the configuration information for the SL MG based on the resource information of the SL PRS comprises: transmitting a second message to a first network device based on the resource information of the SL PRS, wherein the second message is used is configured to request the configuration information for the SL MG; and receiving a third message transmitted from the first network device, wherein the third message carries the configuration information for the SL MG.
However, such difference is seen in the reference of Bo, see ¶ 0062, the request message is seen as the second message that requests the MG from the TRP (network device), the MG is provided to the UE which is interpreted as a third message and in this case it can be either RRC, DCI or MAC-CE. This request and response are in view of SL PRS configuration see ¶ 0061 (the MG is configured and sent to the UE to perform measurement in case the PRS is/are SL PRS from another UE) in view of ¶ 0064 (¶ 0003 ).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ko’s system in view of Wang and Bo. The motivation for making the above modification would have been to implement method of measurement gap (MG) configuration of a first user equipment (UE) for sidelink positioning reference signal (SL-PRS) measurements [see ¶ 0004].
Claim 18 recites similar features using respective language and are also rejected by the applied references for similar reasons as claim 4.
Claim 14 (the preamble of claim 14 is not given patentable weight since it appears in the preamble and does not play a part in the body of the claim, however, if the resource selection (preamble of claim 14) must be considered then the reference of Ko in view of Wang is used in combination with Bo) recites similar features using respective language and are also rejected by the applied references for similar reasons as claim 4. [see ¶ 0178 of Yerramalli et al. (US 2025/0175940), for additional reference that covers the entire scope of claim 14].
Claim 28 recites similar features using respective language and are also rejected by the applied references for similar reasons as claim 14. [see ¶ 0178 of Yerramalli et al. (US 2025/0175940), as an additional reference that covers the entire scope of claim 28].
Claim 5, Bo further discloses: The method of claim 4, wherein the second message carries one or more pieces of following information:
a universal set or subset of the resource information of the SL PRS;
a resource information identifier of the SL PRS;
a sidelink identifier of the first terminal and/or the second terminal;
or indication information for indicating to receive the SL PRS. [¶ 0004: “…the second MG configuration scheduling an MG for a period of time during which an SL-PRS is to be measured…”, the period of time is seen as an indication of receiving the SL PRS. This is further clarified in the last sentence of ¶ 0061].
Claim 6, Bo further discloses: The method of claim 1, wherein after determining the configuration information for the SL MG, the method further comprises: transmitting the configuration information for the SL MG to the second terminal. [¶ 0084: “…second UE may send the MG configuration directly to the first UE via a Uu or SL interface,…”, which implies one UE can send the MG configuration to another UE].
Claim 10, Bo further discloses: The method of claim 4, wherein the second message or the third message comprises any of the following: radio resource control message; or media access control-control element (MAC CE) message. [¶ 0084 and ¶ 0062].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAHARISHI V KHIRODHAR whose telephone number is (571)270-7909. The examiner can normally be reached 6:00 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, Nawaz M Asad can be reached at 571-272-3988. 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.
MAHARISHI V. KHIRODHAR
Examiner
Art Unit 2463
/MAHARISHI V KHIRODHAR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2463
Prosecution Insights