DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Introduction
The claims 1-18 and 22-23 are pending in this application. This is a non-final office action in response to Application Number 18/859,919 filed on 24 October 2024 with a preliminary amendment also filed on 24 October 2024 in which the specification was amended, claims 1, 5, 8, and 13 were amended, claims 19-21 and 24-26 were canceled and no claims were added.
A new and different set of claims 1-30 was then filed on 25 October 2024 as well as a clean specification, abstract, and title; however these appear to be substantially similar to U.S. Application 18/859,897 and are not being further considered at this point in time. Examiner requests clarification about what is the intended set of application documents.
The instant application is a 371 of PCT/CN2022/089073 filed on 25 April 2022.
The applicant of record is Apple Inc. in Cupertino, CA, USA. The inventors of record are Hong He, Chunxuan Ye, Dawei Zhang, Wei Zeng, Zhibin Wu, Haitong Sun, and Peng Cheng.
Response to Amendment
As mentioned in the introduction above, a preliminary amendment was filed on 24 October 2025 and the next day another set of clean claims was filed without a marked-up copy. Examiner requests a marked-up version of the abstract, specification, title, and claims if these are the intended documents, however they are not being considered at this point in time.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 25 October 2024, 5 December 2024, and 20 August 2026 were filed after the filing date of the instant application on 24 October 2024 and before the mailing date of the first office action on the merits. The submissions are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because there are multiple versions (amendment with mark-ups filed on 24 Oct 2024 as well as a clean and different version filed on 25 Oct 2024 without mark-ups). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 14 recites “high than or equal to” in line 2. This is grammatically incorrect. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The claims have been considered according to the latest Patent Eligibility Guidelines and are considered eligible.
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)(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 1-3, 5-7, and 13-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Wu et al. (U.S. Patent 12,075,481).
Regarding claim 1, Wu disclosed a baseband processor for a first user equipment (UE), comprising:
a memory interface (see Wu Fig. 8 #800 sidelink UE; #810 computer readable medium; #808 Memory);
one or more processors coupled to the memory interface (see Wu Fig. 8 #800 sidelink UE; #804 processor communicatively coupled with computer readable medium #810 and memory #808), and when executing instructions received via the memory interface, configured to cause the first UE to:
schedule transmission of a first transport block (TB) (see Wu 6:62-7:4: “…the scheduling entity may be responsible for scheduling, assigning, reconfiguring, and releasing resources for one or more scheduled entities. That is, for scheduled communication, UEs or scheduled entities utilize resources allocated by the scheduling entity.”; 17:17-18: “…The PSSCH 408 may carry SCI-2 and data (e.g., a transport block (TB)).” | 12:21-37: “…the UCI may include a scheduling request (SR), i.e., request for the scheduling entity to schedule uplink transmissions. Here, in response to the SR transmitted on the UCI, the scheduling entity may transmit downlink control information (DCI) that may schedule resources for uplink packet transmissions…” | 15:15-20: “In some examples, sidelink (e.g., PC5) communication may be scheduled by use of sidelink control information (SCI)…”; 15:21-29: “SCI-1 may be transmitted on a physical sidelink control channel (PSCCH). SCI-1 may include information for resource allocation of a sidelink resource…”);
receive a resource reservation message on a sidelink channel from a second UE, the resource reservation message indicating resources reserved by the second UE for transmission of a second TB for reception at the first UE (see Wu 7:5-29: “…the UEs 138, 140, and 142 may each function as a scheduling entity or transmitting sidelink wireless communications device and/or a scheduled entity or a receiving sidelink wireless communications device to schedule resources and communicate sidelink signaling 137 therebetween without relying on scheduling or control information from a base station. In other examples, two or more UEs (e.g., UEs 126 and 128) within the coverage area of a base station (e.g., base station 112) may also communicate sidelink signaling 127 over a direct link (sidelink)…” | 15:21-29: “…SCI-1 may include information for resource allocation of a sidelink resource…SCI-1 may further identify a priority level (e.g., Quality of Service (QoS)) of a PSSCH…” | 19:24-51: “According to some aspects of inter-UE coordination, the first sidelink UE may generate and transmit inter-UE coordination information to a second sidelink UE. The inter-UE coordination information may include the first sidelink UE's indication of a preferred resource (e.g., time-frequency resource, such as one or more sub-channels in one or more slots) for the second sidelink UE's future transmission (to the first sidelink UE) …”; 20:30-59: “…A first sidelink UE may transmit respective indications of first reserved resources (e.g., identified in a first SCI-1) and/or first preferred resources (e.g., identified in a first SCI-2); a second sidelink UE may transmit respective indications of second reserved resources (e.g., identified in a second SCI-1) and/or second preferred resources (e.g., identified in a second SCI-2)…”);
determine a potential resource collision of half-duplex operation based on the scheduled transmission of the first TB and the reserved reception of the second TB (see Wu 20:60-21:11: “…The assisting sidelink UE may monitor reservations of reserved resources and/or inter-UE coordination information including indications of preferred resources and/or non-preferred resources, sent from a first sidelink UE and/or a second sidelink UE. The assisting sidelink UE may send a conflict indication to the first sidelink UE and/or the second sidelink UE if the assisting sidelink UE determines that use of the respective reserved resources and/or the respective preferred resources may result in a conflict (e.g., a resource conflict, a resource collision, due at least in part to a violation of the half-duplex constraint). The conflict indication may be, for example an indication that a conflict will occur (e.g., a pre-conflict indication)…” | Fig. 7, 26:52-64: “…The identification of the conflict or collision may be based, for example, on at least one of detection of a complete overlap of respective time resources and respective frequency resources used in first and second transmissions…”); and
generate, for transmission to the second UE, an inter-UE coordination (IUC) indication signal indicating the determination of the potential resource collision (see Wu 20:60-21:11: “…The assisting sidelink UE may send a conflict indication to the first sidelink UE and/or the second sidelink UE if the assisting sidelink UE determines that use of the respective reserved resources and/or the respective preferred resources may result in a conflict (e.g., a resource conflict, a resource collision, due at least in part to a violation of the half-duplex constraint). The conflict indication may be, for example an indication that a conflict will occur (e.g., a pre-conflict indication)…” | Fig. 9, 36:33-44: “Turning now to block 910, which can be reached via either or both blocks 906 and 908, the assisting sidelink UE may send a conflict indication to at least one of the first sidelink UE or the second sidelink UE in response to identifying the collision (e.g., at 906) or the prospective collision (e.g., at 908). While not shown in FIG. 9, the assisting sidelink UE may evaluate if at least one inter-UE coordination criterion is satisfied prior to identifying the collision or the prospective collision. If at least one of the inter-UE coordination criteria is satisfied, the assisting sidelink UE may send the conflict indication to the at least one of: the first sidelink UE, or the second sidelink UE.”).
Regarding claim 2, Wu disclosed the baseband processor of claim 1, wherein the potential resource collision is due to a scheduled NR sidelink transmission of the first UE (see Wu 7:40-49: “Two primary technologies that may be used by V2X networks include…cellular V2X based on LTE and/or 5G (New Radio) standards…” | examiner notes that the claims are written such that they describe NR communication in a sidelink communication with a potential resource collision).
Regarding claim 3, Wu disclosed the baseband processor of claim 1, wherein the potential resource collision is due to a scheduled LTE sidelink transmission of the first UE (see Wu 7:40-49: “Two primary technologies that may be used by V2X networks include…cellular V2X based on LTE and/or 5G (New Radio) standards…” | examiner notes that the claims are written such that they describe LTE communication in a sidelink communication with a potential resource collision).
Regarding claim 5, Wu disclosed the baseband processor of claim 1, wherein the IUC indication signal has a priority value of the minimum of priority values of the first TB and the second TB (see Wu 33:59-34:18: “…According to a third example rule, the conflict indication may be sent to the conflicting UE with a lower (or higher) traffic priority. An indicated traffic priority value may be provided in SCI. If provided in SCI, the indicated traffic priority value is zero for the highest traffic priority and increases as traffic priority decreases…”).
Regarding claim 6, Wu disclosed the baseband processor of claim 5, wherein the first TB is on a NR sidelink (see Wu 7:40-49: “Two primary technologies that may be used by V2X networks include…cellular V2X based on LTE and/or 5G (New Radio) standards…” | examiner notes that the claims are written such that they describe NR communication in a sidelink communication with a potential resource collision).
Regarding claim 7, Wu disclosed the baseband processor of claim 5, wherein the first TB is on a LTE sidelink (see Wu 7:40-49: “Two primary technologies that may be used by V2X networks include…cellular V2X based on LTE and/or 5G (New Radio) standards…” | examiner notes that the claims are written such that they describe LTE communication in a sidelink communication with a potential resource collision).
Regarding claim 13, Wu disclosed a method for a first user equipment (UE) to coordinate inter-UE sidelink communication, comprising:
scheduling transmission of a first transport block (TB) (see Wu 6:62-7:4: “…the scheduling entity may be responsible for scheduling, assigning, reconfiguring, and releasing resources for one or more scheduled entities. That is, for scheduled communication, UEs or scheduled entities utilize resources allocated by the scheduling entity.”; 17:17-18: “…The PSSCH 408 may carry SCI-2 and data (e.g., a transport block (TB)).” | 12:21-37: “…the UCI may include a scheduling request (SR), i.e., request for the scheduling entity to schedule uplink transmissions. Here, in response to the SR transmitted on the UCI, the scheduling entity may transmit downlink control information (DCI) that may schedule resources for uplink packet transmissions…” | 15:15-20: “In some examples, sidelink (e.g., PC5) communication may be scheduled by use of sidelink control information (SCI)…”; 15:21-29: “SCI-1 may be transmitted on a physical sidelink control channel (PSCCH). SCI-1 may include information for resource allocation of a sidelink resource…”);
receiving a resource reservation message on a sidelink channel from a second UE, the resource reservation message indicating resources reserved by the second UE for transmission of a second TB for reception at the first UE (see Wu 7:5-29: “…the UEs 138, 140, and 142 may each function as a scheduling entity or transmitting sidelink wireless communications device and/or a scheduled entity or a receiving sidelink wireless communications device to schedule resources and communicate sidelink signaling 137 therebetween without relying on scheduling or control information from a base station. In other examples, two or more UEs (e.g., UEs 126 and 128) within the coverage area of a base station (e.g., base station 112) may also communicate sidelink signaling 127 over a direct link (sidelink)…” | 15:21-29: “…SCI-1 may include information for resource allocation of a sidelink resource…SCI-1 may further identify a priority level (e.g., Quality of Service (QoS)) of a PSSCH…” | 19:24-51: “According to some aspects of inter-UE coordination, the first sidelink UE may generate and transmit inter-UE coordination information to a second sidelink UE. The inter-UE coordination information may include the first sidelink UE's indication of a preferred resource (e.g., time-frequency resource, such as one or more sub-channels in one or more slots) for the second sidelink UE's future transmission (to the first sidelink UE) …”; 20:30-59: “…A first sidelink UE may transmit respective indications of first reserved resources (e.g., identified in a first SCI-1) and/or first preferred resources (e.g., identified in a first SCI-2); a second sidelink UE may transmit respective indications of second reserved resources (e.g., identified in a second SCI-1) and/or second preferred resources (e.g., identified in a second SCI-2)…”);
determining a potential resource collision if the scheduled transmission of the first TB and the reserved reception of the second TB are overlapped (see Wu 20:60-21:11: “…The assisting sidelink UE may monitor reservations of reserved resources and/or inter-UE coordination information including indications of preferred resources and/or non-preferred resources, sent from a first sidelink UE and/or a second sidelink UE. The assisting sidelink UE may send a conflict indication to the first sidelink UE and/or the second sidelink UE if the assisting sidelink UE determines that use of the respective reserved resources and/or the respective preferred resources may result in a conflict (e.g., a resource conflict, a resource collision, due at least in part to a violation of the half-duplex constraint). The conflict indication may be, for example an indication that a conflict will occur (e.g., a pre-conflict indication)…” | 21:33-63: “…A third UE (referred to herein as the assisting sidelink UE) may decode the reserved resource and/or the preferred resource information and may detect (e.g., identify) a probable (e.g., likely, expected, feasible) conflict. The detection (e.g., identification) of the probable conflict may be based, for example, on a mathematical comparison of the indicated reserved resources and/or preferred resources (e.g., mathematically determining that the resources are in the same slot and have the same, overlapped, or non-overlapped resources in the same slot). The detection of the probable conflict may additionally be based, for example, on knowledge that the two or more sidelink UEs are operating in a TDD mode (e.g., a half-duplex mode). The assisting sidelink UE may send a pre-conflict indication to one or more of the two or more sidelink UEs to indicate the probable conflict…” | Fig. 7, 26:52-64: “…The identification of the conflict or collision may be based, for example, on at least one of detection of a complete overlap of respective time resources and respective frequency resources used in first and second transmissions…”);
comparing a first priority level of the first TB and a second priority level of the second TB (see Wu 15:21-46: “…SCI-1 may include information for resource allocation of a sidelink resource and for decoding of the second stage of sidelink control information (i.e., SCI-2). SCI-1 may further identify a priority level (e.g., Quality of Service (QoS)) of a PSSCH. For example, ultra-reliable-low-latency communication (URLLC) traffic may have a higher priority than text message traffic (e.g., short message service (SMS) traffic). SCI-1 may also include a physical sidelink shared channel (PSSCH) resource assignment and a resource reservation period (if enabled)…”; Fig. 10, 39:4-30: “…That is, the process 1000 may cause the assisting sidelink UE to compare first information indicative of the first set of resources identified in a first message received from the first sidelink UE to second information indicative of the second set of resources identified in a second message received from the second sidelink UE. The assisting sidelink UE may determine that the conflict between the first sidelink UE and the second sidelink UE will occur or has occurred if the first set of resources overlaps with the second set of resources…”); and
selectively transmitting an inter-UE coordination (IUC) indication signal to the second UE based on the comparison of the first priority level and the second priority level indicating the potential resource collision (see Wu 20:60-21:11: “…The assisting sidelink UE may send a conflict indication to the first sidelink UE and/or the second sidelink UE if the assisting sidelink UE determines that use of the respective reserved resources and/or the respective preferred resources may result in a conflict (e.g., a resource conflict, a resource collision, due at least in part to a violation of the half-duplex constraint). The conflict indication may be, for example an indication that a conflict will occur (e.g., a pre-conflict indication)…” | Fig. 9, 36:33-44: “Turning now to block 910, which can be reached via either or both blocks 906 and 908, the assisting sidelink UE may send a conflict indication to at least one of the first sidelink UE or the second sidelink UE in response to identifying the collision (e.g., at 906) or the prospective collision (e.g., at 908). While not shown in FIG. 9, the assisting sidelink UE may evaluate if at least one inter-UE coordination criterion is satisfied prior to identifying the collision or the prospective collision. If at least one of the inter-UE coordination criteria is satisfied, the assisting sidelink UE may send the conflict indication to the at least one of: the first sidelink UE, or the second sidelink UE.” | 33:50-34:18: “By way of a second example, the conflict indication may be sent to one, but not both of the first sidelink UE and the second sidelink UE. If the conflict indication is sent to one, but not both of the first sidelink UE and the second sidelink UE, only one of the sidelink UEs will know of the potential or actual conflict. A rule that may determine the recipient of the conflict indication may be pre-determined and utilized in connection with the second example. Examples of possible rules are provided below…According to a third example rule, the conflict indication may be sent to the conflicting UE with a lower (or higher) traffic priority. An indicated traffic priority value may be provided in SCI. If provided in SCI, the indicated traffic priority value is zero for the highest traffic priority and increases as traffic priority decreases…”; 34:30-47: “…a conflict indication may be sent to one sidelink UE if the conflict indication is for a pre-conflict indication. In this example, sending to one sidelink UE may be sufficient as the one sidelink UE may take action to avoid the conflict (and resources may not be wasted in sending the indication to the other sidelink UE). Having one sidelink UE take action to prevent a conflict before the conflict happens may cure the conflict for the other sidelink UE. This fourth example may be combined with the rules described in the second example…”).
Regarding claim 14, Wu disclosed the method of claim 13, wherein the IUC indication signal is transmitted to the second UE if the first priority level is high than or equal to a second priority level of the second priority level of the second TB (see Wu 33:59-34:18: “…According to a third example rule, the conflict indication may be sent to the conflicting UE with a lower (or higher) traffic priority. An indicated traffic priority value may be provided in SCI. If provided in SCI, the indicated traffic priority value is zero for the highest traffic priority and increases as traffic priority decreases…”).
Regarding claim 15, Wu disclosed the method of claim 13, wherein the IUC indication signal is not transmitted if the first priority level is lower than the second priority level (see Wu 33:59-34:18: “…According to a third example rule, the conflict indication may be sent to the conflicting UE with a lower (or higher) traffic priority. An indicated traffic priority value may be provided in SCI. If provided in SCI, the indicated traffic priority value is zero for the highest traffic priority and increases as traffic priority decreases…”).
Regarding claim 16, Wu disclosed the method of claim 15, wherein the IUC indication signal is not transmitted if the first TB is scheduled on a sidelink with a higher priority level than a priority level of the second TB (see Wu 33:59-34:18: “…According to a third example rule, the conflict indication may be sent to the conflicting UE with a lower (or higher) traffic priority. An indicated traffic priority value may be provided in SCI. If provided in SCI, the indicated traffic priority value is zero for the highest traffic priority and increases as traffic priority decreases…”).
Regarding claim 17, Wu disclosed the method of claim 15, wherein the IUC indication signal is not transmitted if the first TB is scheduled on a sidelink with a priority index associated with a data type and (see Wu 6:2-8: “Telehealth devices may include telehealth monitoring devices and telehealth administration devices, whose communication may be given preferential treatment or prioritized access over other types of information, e.g., in terms of prioritized access for transport of critical service data, and/or relevant QoS for transport of critical service data.”; 33:59-34:18: “…According to a third example rule, the conflict indication may be sent to the conflicting UE with a lower (or higher) traffic priority. An indicated traffic priority value may be provided in SCI. If provided in SCI, the indicated traffic priority value is zero for the highest traffic priority and increases as traffic priority decreases…”);
wherein the second TB has a priority value below a sidelink priority threshold associated with the priority index or the data type (see Wu 33:59-34:18: “…According to a third example rule, the conflict indication may be sent to the conflicting UE with a lower (or higher) traffic priority. An indicated traffic priority value may be provided in SCI. If provided in SCI, the indicated traffic priority value is zero for the highest traffic priority and increases as traffic priority decreases…”; examiner notes that the threshold is a relative threshold).
Regarding claim 18, Wu disclosed the method of claim 17, wherein the IUC indication signal is not transmitted if: the first TB has a priority index of 0 and the second TB has a priority value below a first sidelink priority threshold associated with the priority index of 0; or the first TB has a priority index of 1 and the second TB has a priority value below a second sidelink priority threshold associated with the priority index of 1 (see Wu 33:59-34:18: “…According to a third example rule, the conflict indication may be sent to the conflicting UE with a lower (or higher) traffic priority. An indicated traffic priority value may be provided in SCI. If provided in SCI, the indicated traffic priority value is zero for the highest traffic priority and increases as traffic priority decreases…”).
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.
Claims 4, 8-12, and 22-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu et al. (U.S. Patent 12,075,481) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Farag et al. (U.S. Patent Publication 2022/0095280).
Regarding claim 4, Wu disclosed the invention, substantially as claimed, as described in the baseband processor of claim 1, but did not explicitly disclose “wherein the potential resource collision is due to a scheduled uplink transmission of the first UE”.
However in a related art of detecting potential SL collisions (see Farag Fig. 6, [0116]) and addressing the half-duplex problem (see Farag [0101]), Farag disclosed:
“In step three, after a UE-B receives a grant or trigger signal, indicating a preferred or non-preferred resource for a UE-B, the UE-B can determine whether or not to proceed with a SL transmission on a pre-indicated or reserved SL resource. Non-preferred resources are resources that have a collision or conflict with another SL or UL transmission. If the reserved resource is indicated to have a conflict, UE-B performs resource re-selection to select a new resource for SL transmission.” (see Farag Fig. 6, [0123]).
“Additionally, the second SL resource can be a SL resource that overlaps with an UL transmission such as…(viii) the conflict (i.e., whether the resource is non-preferred or not) can be further determined based on the priority of the UL transmission and the priority of the SL transmission.” (see Farag [0131]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Wu and Farag to further clarify additional types of collision scenarios. Incorporating Farag’s teachings to describe a collision scenario involving UL would clarify how to address this type of scenario. Benefits of incorporating Farag’s teachings include enhancing reliability, reducing latency, and support of URLLC-type SL use cases in more scenarios (see Farag [0098]), as well as taking another UE’s resources into account when selecting resources for transmission (see Farag [0099]).
Regarding claim 8, Wu disclosed the invention, substantially as claimed, as described in the baseband processor of claim 1, wherein the first TB is for an uplink transmission of the first UE (see Farag combination below), and wherein the IUC indication signal is transmitted on a physical sidelink feedback channel (PSFCH) (see Wu 21:12-32: “…notifications of pre-conflict or post-conflict indications and an indication that a given UE is operating in a half-duplex mode may be conveyed on a PSFCH….”) and has a priority value (see Wu 33:59-34:18: “…According to a third example rule, the conflict indication may be sent to the conflicting UE with a lower (or higher) traffic priority. An indicated traffic priority value may be provided in SCI. If provided in SCI, the indicated traffic priority value is zero for the highest traffic priority and increases as traffic priority decreases…”).
Wu did not explicitly disclose the TB involved in the potential collision is “wherein the first TB is for an uplink transmission of the first UE”.
However in a related art of detecting potential SL collisions (see Farag Fig. 6, [0116]) and addressing the half-duplex problem (see Farag [0101]), Farag disclosed:
“In step three, after a UE-B receives a grant or trigger signal, indicating a preferred or non-preferred resource for a UE-B, the UE-B can determine whether or not to proceed with a SL transmission on a pre-indicated or reserved SL resource. Non-preferred resources are resources that have a collision or conflict with another SL or UL transmission. If the reserved resource is indicated to have a conflict, UE-B performs resource re-selection to select a new resource for SL transmission.” (see Farag Fig. 6, [0123]).
“Additionally, the second SL resource can be a SL resource that overlaps with an UL transmission such as…(viii) the conflict (i.e., whether the resource is non-preferred or not) can be further determined based on the priority of the UL transmission and the priority of the SL transmission.” (see Farag [0131]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Wu and Farag to further clarify additional types of collision scenarios. Incorporating Farag’s teachings to describe a collision scenario involving UL would clarify how to address this type of scenario. Benefits of incorporating Farag’s teachings include enhancing reliability, reducing latency, and support of URLLC-type SL use cases in more scenarios (see Farag [0098]), as well as taking another UE’s resources into account when selecting resources for transmission (see Farag [0099]).
Regarding claim 9, Wu-Farag disclosed the baseband processor of claim 8, wherein the priority value of the IUC indication signal is the minimum of a resource pool (pre)configured priority value of a resource pool containing the first TB and a priority value of the second TB (see Wu 14:23-35: “In 5G NR sidelink, sidelink communication may utilize transmission or reception resource pools…”; 33:59-34:18: “…According to a third example rule, the conflict indication may be sent to the conflicting UE with a lower (or higher) traffic priority. An indicated traffic priority value may be provided in SCI. If provided in SCI, the indicated traffic priority value is zero for the highest traffic priority and increases as traffic priority decreases…”).
Regarding claim 10, Wu-Farag disclosed the baseband processor of claim 8, wherein the priority value of the IUC indication signal is the minimum of a pre-defined or fixed priority value of the first TB and a priority value of the second TB (see Wu 33:59-34:18: “…According to a third example rule, the conflict indication may be sent to the conflicting UE with a lower (or higher) traffic priority. An indicated traffic priority value may be provided in SCI. If provided in SCI, the indicated traffic priority value is zero for the highest traffic priority and increases as traffic priority decreases…”).
Regarding claim 11, Wu-Farag disclosed the baseband processor of claim 8, wherein the priority value of the IUC indication signal is associated with a sidelink priority threshold (pre)configured per resource pool (see Farag [0133]: “UE-A can determine a preferred SL transmission on an overlapped or collided SL resource based on prioritization...If a SL resource pre-indicate/reserved by UE-B overlaps or partially overlaps, in time and frequency domains, with a SL resource detected at UE-A (e.g., based on sensing at UE-A) and if; (1) Measured SL RSRP of the resource causing conflict is larger than (or larger than or equal to) the SL RSRP threshold. The SL resource pre-indicated/reserved by UE-B is in conflict, (2) Measured SL RSRP of the resource causing conflict is less than or equal to (or less than) the SL RSRP threshold. The SL resource pre-indicated/reserved by UE-B is not in conflict. Wherein, the SL RSRP threshold can depend on one or more of; (1) priority of UE-B's transmission, priority of the overlapping SL resource at UE-A…”; [0090]: “A resource pool can be configured by higher layer parameter sl-MultiReserveResource, to allow reservation of a sidelink resource for an initial transmission of a Transport Block (TB), by an SCI associated with a different TB based on sensing and resource selection procedure…”) and according to a data type of the first TB (see Farag [0131]: “Additionally, the second SL resource can be a SL resource that overlaps with an UL transmission such as…(viii) the conflict (i.e., whether the resource is non-preferred or not) can be further determined based on the priority of the UL transmission and the priority of the SL transmission.”; examiner interprets UL and SL transmissions as having different data types).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Wu and Farag to further clarify additional types of collision scenarios. Incorporating Farag’s teachings regarding types of parameters to consider when identifying potential collisions would clarify additional details about how potential collisions are identified. Benefits of incorporating Farag’s teachings include enhancing reliability, reducing latency, and support of URLLC-type SL use cases in more scenarios (see Farag [0098]), as well as taking another UE’s resources into account when selecting resources for transmission (see Farag [0099]).
Regarding claim 12, Wu-Farag disclosed the baseband processor of claim 8, wherein the priority value of the IUC indication signal is the minimum of a priority value of the second TB (see Wu 33:59-34:18: “…According to a third example rule, the conflict indication may be sent to the conflicting UE with a lower (or higher) traffic priority. An indicated traffic priority value may be provided in SCI. If provided in SCI, the indicated traffic priority value is zero for the highest traffic priority and increases as traffic priority decreases…”) and a priority value (pre)configured or fixed for the first TB associated with a data type of the first TB, the priority value of the first TB is a sidelink priority threshold parameter or a fixed value based on the data type of the first TB (examiner notes that the phrasing of “threshold parameter or a fixed value based on the data type of the first TB” allows for at least two interpretations: 1) the data type of the first TB affects only the fixed value or 2) the data type of the first TB affects both the threshold parameter and the fixed value although only one of the threshold parameter or the fixed value is used as the priority value | Farag [0133]: “UE-A can determine a preferred SL transmission on an overlapped or collided SL resource based on prioritization...If a SL resource pre-indicate/reserved by UE-B overlaps or partially overlaps, in time and frequency domains, with a SL resource detected at UE-A (e.g., based on sensing at UE-A) and if; (1) Measured SL RSRP of the resource causing conflict is larger than (or larger than or equal to) the SL RSRP threshold. The SL resource pre-indicated/reserved by UE-B is in conflict, (2) Measured SL RSRP of the resource causing conflict is less than or equal to (or less than) the SL RSRP threshold. The SL resource pre-indicated/reserved by UE-B is not in conflict. Wherein, the SL RSRP threshold can depend on one or more of; (1) priority of UE-B's transmission, priority of the overlapping SL resource at UE-A…” | [0131]: “Additionally, the second SL resource can be a SL resource that overlaps with an UL transmission such as…(viii) the conflict (i.e., whether the resource is non-preferred or not) can be further determined based on the priority of the UL transmission and the priority of the SL transmission.”; examiner interprets UL and SL transmissions as having different data types).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Wu and Farag to further clarify additional types of collision scenarios. Incorporating Farag’s teachings regarding types of parameters to consider when identifying potential collisions would clarify additional details about how potential collisions are identified. Benefits of incorporating Farag’s teachings include enhancing reliability, reducing latency, and support of URLLC-type SL use cases in more scenarios (see Farag [0098]), as well as taking another UE’s resources into account when selecting resources for transmission (see Farag [0099]).
Regarding claim 22, Wu disclosed a method for a first user equipment (UE) to coordinate inter-UE sidelink communication, comprising:
scheduling transmission or reception of a first transport block (TB) on a LTE sidelink for the first UE (see Wu 7:40-49: “Two primary technologies that may be used by V2X networks include…cellular V2X based on LTE and/or 5G (New Radio) standards…” | 6:62-7:4: “…the scheduling entity may be responsible for scheduling, assigning, reconfiguring, and releasing resources for one or more scheduled entities. That is, for scheduled communication, UEs or scheduled entities utilize resources allocated by the scheduling entity.”; 17:17-18: “…The PSSCH 408 may carry SCI-2 and data (e.g., a transport block (TB)).” | 12:21-37: “…the UCI may include a scheduling request (SR), i.e., request for the scheduling entity to schedule uplink transmissions. Here, in response to the SR transmitted on the UCI, the scheduling entity may transmit downlink control information (DCI) that may schedule resources for uplink packet transmissions…” | 15:15-20: “In some examples, sidelink (e.g., PC5) communication may be scheduled by use of sidelink control information (SCI)…”; 15:21-29: “SCI-1 may be transmitted on a physical sidelink control channel (PSCCH). SCI-1 may include information for resource allocation of a sidelink resource…”);
receiving a resource reservation message on a new radio (NR) (see Wu 7:40-49: “Two primary technologies that may be used by V2X networks include…cellular V2X based on LTE and/or 5G (New Radio) standards…” | see combination below regarding the combination of LTE and NR) sidelink from a second UE, the resource reservation message indicating resources reserved by the second UE for transmission of a second TB (see Wu 7:5-29: “…the UEs 138, 140, and 142 may each function as a scheduling entity or transmitting sidelink wireless communications device and/or a scheduled entity or a receiving sidelink wireless communications device to schedule resources and communicate sidelink signaling 137 therebetween without relying on scheduling or control information from a base station. In other examples, two or more UEs (e.g., UEs 126 and 128) within the coverage area of a base station (e.g., base station 112) may also communicate sidelink signaling 127 over a direct link (sidelink)…” | 15:21-29: “…SCI-1 may include information for resource allocation of a sidelink resource…SCI-1 may further identify a priority level (e.g., Quality of Service (QoS)) of a PSSCH…” | 19:24-51: “According to some aspects of inter-UE coordination, the first sidelink UE may generate and transmit inter-UE coordination information to a second sidelink UE. The inter-UE coordination information may include the first sidelink UE's indication of a preferred resource (e.g., time-frequency resource, such as one or more sub-channels in one or more slots) for the second sidelink UE's future transmission (to the first sidelink UE) …”; 20:30-59: “…A first sidelink UE may transmit respective indications of first reserved resources (e.g., identified in a first SCI-1) and/or first preferred resources (e.g., identified in a first SCI-2); a second sidelink UE may transmit respective indications of second reserved resources (e.g., identified in a second SCI-1) and/or second preferred resources (e.g., identified in a second SCI-2)…”);
determining a potential resource collision if the scheduled transmission or reception of the first TB and the reserved reception of the second TB are overlapped in time-and-frequency (see Wu 20:60-21:11: “…The assisting sidelink UE may monitor reservations of reserved resources and/or inter-UE coordination information including indications of preferred resources and/or non-preferred resources, sent from a first sidelink UE and/or a second sidelink UE. The assisting sidelink UE may send a conflict indication to the first sidelink UE and/or the second sidelink UE if the assisting sidelink UE determines that use of the respective reserved resources and/or the respective preferred resources may result in a conflict (e.g., a resource conflict, a resource collision, due at least in part to a violation of the half-duplex constraint). The conflict indication may be, for example an indication that a conflict will occur (e.g., a pre-conflict indication)…” | Fig. 7, 26:52-64: “…The identification of the conflict or collision may be based, for example, on at least one of detection of a complete overlap of respective time resources and respective frequency resources used in first and second transmissions…”); and
transmitting an inter-UE coordination (IUC) indication signal to the second UE indicating the determination of the potential resource collision (see Wu 20:60-21:11: “…The assisting sidelink UE may send a conflict indication to the first sidelink UE and/or the second sidelink UE if the assisting sidelink UE determines that use of the respective reserved resources and/or the respective preferred resources may result in a conflict (e.g., a resource conflict, a resource collision, due at least in part to a violation of the half-duplex constraint). The conflict indication may be, for example an indication that a conflict will occur (e.g., a pre-conflict indication)…” | Fig. 9, 36:33-44: “Turning now to block 910, which can be reached via either or both blocks 906 and 908, the assisting sidelink UE may send a conflict indication to at least one of the first sidelink UE or the second sidelink UE in response to identifying the collision (e.g., at 906) or the prospective collision (e.g., at 908). While not shown in FIG. 9, the assisting sidelink UE may evaluate if at least one inter-UE coordination criterion is satisfied prior to identifying the collision or the prospective collision. If at least one of the inter-UE coordination criteria is satisfied, the assisting sidelink UE may send the conflict indication to the at least one of: the first sidelink UE, or the second sidelink UE.”), wherein the IUC indication signal is transmitted on physical sidelink feedback channel (PSFCH) (see Wu 21:12-32: “…notifications of pre-conflict or post-conflict indications and an indication that a given UE is operating in a half-duplex mode may be conveyed on a PSFCH….”) and has a priority value (see Wu 33:59-34:18: “…According to a third example rule, the conflict indication may be sent to the conflicting UE with a lower (or higher) traffic priority. An indicated traffic priority value may be provided in SCI. If provided in SCI, the indicated traffic priority value is zero for the highest traffic priority and increases as traffic priority decreases…”).
Although Wu disclosed using LTE and/or NR technologies (see Wu 7:40-49: “Two primary technologies that may be used by V2X networks include…cellular V2X based on LTE and/or 5G (New Radio) standards…”), Wu did not explicitly disclose the potential collision involves both LTE and NR.
However in a related art of detecting potential SL collisions (see Farag Fig. 6, [0116]) and addressing the half-duplex problem (see Farag [0101]), Farag disclosed:
“In step three, after a UE-B receives a grant or trigger signal, indicating a preferred or non-preferred resource for a UE-B, the UE-B can determine whether or not to proceed with a SL transmission on a pre-indicated or reserved SL resource. Non-preferred resources are resources that have a collision or conflict with another SL or UL transmission. If the reserved resource is indicated to have a conflict, UE-B performs resource re-selection to select a new resource for SL transmission.” (see Farag Fig. 6, [0123]).
“The second SL resource can be an NR SL resources that overlaps with an LTE SL transmission or reception. The conflict (i.e., whether the resource is non-preferred or not) can be further determined based on the priority of the LTE SL transmission or reception and the priority of the NR SL transmission.” (see Farag [0132]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Wu and Farag to further clarify additional types of collision scenarios. Incorporating Farag’s teachings to describe a collision scenario involving NR and LTE would clarify how to address this type of scenario. Benefits of incorporating Farag’s teachings include enhancing reliability, reducing latency, and support of URLLC-type SL use cases in more scenarios (see Farag [0098]), as well as taking another UE’s resources into account when selecting resources for transmission (see Farag [0099]).
Regarding claim 23, Wu-Farag disclosed the method of claim 22, wherein the priority value of the IUC indication signal is the minimum of a priority value of the first TB and a priority value of the second TB (see Wu 33:59-34:18: “…According to a third example rule, the conflict indication may be sent to the conflicting UE with a lower (or higher) traffic priority. An indicated traffic priority value may be provided in SCI. If provided in SCI, the indicated traffic priority value is zero for the highest traffic priority and increases as traffic priority decreases…”).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Angela Widhalm de Rodriguez whose telephone number is (571)272-1035. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 6am-2:30pm 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, Nicholas Taylor can be reached at (571)272-3889. 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.
/ANGELA WIDHALM DE RODRIGUEZ/Examiner, Art Unit 2443
Prosecution Insights