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 .
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.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because it is virtually impossible to read most of the text labels due to being dark gray text inside black boxes.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 15-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi (US 20200328865 A1) in view of Park (US 20210014893 A1).
Regarding claim 15, Choi discloses:
“A method, in a context of New Radio carrier aggregation, to establish a sidelink with a first user device having an air interface with a first base station acting in a first range of frequency, said method comprising, for a second user device having a previously established sidelink in the first range of frequency with the first user device:” ([¶ 0111]: “The terminals may be configured to periodically determine whether the SL BWP (e.g., SL BWP list) requires reconfiguration (S708).”)
“sending, using the sidelink in first range of frequency, an indication on the possibility to establish a sidelink in a second range of frequency, different from the first range of frequency, with the first user device… said second base station having a connection link with the first base station,” ([¶ 0112]: “In response to determining by the participating terminal(s) that the SL BWP (e.g., SL BWP list) require reconfiguration, the participating terminal(s) may be configured to transmit a fifth message requesting reconfiguration of the SL BWP (e.g., SL BWP list) to the terminal #1 (S709).”)
“establishing a sidelink with the first user device in second range of frequency,” ([¶ 0118]: “The participating terminals may be configured to reconfigure the SL BWP(s) based on the reconfiguration information of the SL BWP included in the sixth message (S712).”)
“establishing an air interface with the second base station…” ([¶ 0118]: “When the reconfiguration of the SL BWP(s) is completed, each of the participating terminals may be configured to transmit to the base station a seventh message indicating that the reconfiguration of the SL BWP(s) has been completed (S713).”)
“forwarding flow of data received from the first user device on the sidelink in second range of frequency or received from the second base station on the air interface … to, respectively, the second base station using the air interface … or to the first user device using the sidelink in second range of frequency.” ([¶ 0119]: “The terminals may be configured to perform groupcast sidelink communication using the SL BWP(s) reconfigured by the terminal #1 (S714).”)
Choi does not explicitly disclose the indication is to “establish an air interface in the second range of frequency with a second base station” nor that communications between the user device and base station are “in said second range of frequency.”
However, Park discloses the missing features the indication is to “establish an air interface in the second range of frequency with a second base station” and that communications between the user device and base station are “in said second range of frequency” ([¶ 0296]: “FIG. 26 shows example sidelink communications between two wireless devices via multiple carriers. A first wireless device 2612 may receive, from a second wireless device 2616, at least one sidelink message comprising sidelink capability information of the second wireless device 2616. The sidelink capability information may may comprise band combination information 2608 indicating one or more bands that are allowed to be simultaneously used for sidelink communication at the second wireless device 2616. The band combination information 2608 may indicate whether the second wireless device 2616 supports multiple sidelink carriers (e.g., multi-carrier operation, sidelink carrier aggregation, etc.)…The base station 2604 may determine/assign resources corresponding to multiple carriers, for example, if band combination information 2608 indicates that the second wireless device 2616 supports multiple sidelink carriers…”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, having the teachings of Choi and Park, to modify the technique as disclosed by Choi, to utilize the base station communications as disclosed by Park. The motivation for doing so is that it enhances flexibility. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Choi with Park to obtain the invention as specified in the instant claim.
Claim 16 is similar to claim 15 and is rejected for similar reasons.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9-14 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Regarding claim 9, of the closest prior arts Park (US 20210014893 A1) discloses A method, in a context of New Radio carrier aggregation, to establish a sidelink with a first user device having an air interface with a first base station acting in a first range of frequency,” in paragraph 263; “said method comprising, for the first base station: analyzing neighbor cell measurements received from the first and at least another second user device,” in paragraph 103; “in the case the second user device is in coverage of a second base station acting in a second range of frequency, different from the first range of frequency, said second base station having a connection link with the first base station, evaluating…” in paragraph 129 and 263; and “…in the case the distance between the two user devices is within the range of a sidelink in said second range of frequency: sending an indication to the first user device on the possibility to establish a sidelink in the second range of frequency with the second user device, sending, to the second user device, an indication on the possibility to establish a sidelink in second range of frequency with the first user device and to establish an air interface in second range of frequency with the second base station, in case the sidelink in second range of frequency is established, receiving an indication on the establishment of this sidelink, in case of reception of such an indication, processing, using aggregation, flow of data on the air interface with the first base station in the first range of frequency and flow of data on connection link with the second base station, said flow of data on connection link comprising data from the first user device via the air interface of the second user device with the second base station and the sidelink of the first user device with the second user device in the second range of frequency” in paragraphs 255-257.
However, Park does not disclose evaluating “the distance between the two user devices” in response to the second user device is in coverage of a second base station acting in a second range of frequency, different from the first range of frequency, said second base station having a connection link with the first base station.
The cited references fail to anticipate or render the above limitations in combination with all the recited limitations of claims 9 obvious, over any of the prior art of record, alone or in combination. Claim 12 is similar to claim 9 and contains allowable subject matter for similar reasons. Claims 10-11 and 13-14 depend on claims 9 and 12 and contain allowable subject matter based on their dependence.
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.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAAD KHAWAR whose telephone number is (571)272-7948. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00am - 5:00pm.
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, Charles Jiang can be reached at (571)-270-7191. 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.
/SAAD KHAWAR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2412
Prosecution Insights