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 .
Priority
2. Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for a 371 of PCT/KR2023/007928, filed on June 9, 2023, and foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d) based on Korea Parent Application No. 10-2022-0070846, filed on June 10, 2022.
Application Status
3. Acknowledgment is made of Applicant’s submission of the present application on December 10, 2024. Claims 1-15 are pending. This communication is considered fully responsive and sets forth below.
Information Disclosure Statement
4. Acknowledgment is made of Applicant’s submission of information disclosure statement (IDS), dated on December 10, 2024 and November 6, 2025. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Examiner's Notes
5. Applicant is encouraged to submit a written authorization for Internet communications (PTO/SB/439, http://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/sb0439.pdf) in the instant patent application to authorize the examiner to communicate with the applicant via email. The authorization will allow the examiner to better practice compact prosecution. The written authorization can be submitted via one of the following methods only: (1) Central Fax which can be found in the Conclusion section of this Office action; (2) regular postal mail; (3) EFS WEB; or (4) the service window on the Alexandria campus. EFS web is the recommended way to submit the form since this allows the form to be entered into the file wrapper within the same day (system dependent). Written authorization submitted via other methods, such as direct fax to the examiner or email, will not be accepted. See MPEP § 502.03.
Claim Objections
6. Claims 2-4 are objected to under 37 CFR 1.75(c) because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 2, it recites, “The method of claim 1, wherein a response to the beam acquisition request is received without ID information of the second terminal and the response to the beam acquisition request received without the ID information of the second terminal is received based on a portion of one slot.”
Claim 2 depends from claim 1, which recites, “A method performed by a first terminal in a communication system, the method comprising:
identifying a sidelink resource; transmitting a beam acquisition request on the sidelink resource;
receiving, from a second terminal, a response to the beam acquisition request; and
transmitting ID information of the first terminal to the second terminal,
wherein the beam acquisition request is transmitted based on a reference signal without the ID information of the first terminal, and the beam acquisition request is transmitted based on a portion of one slot.”
The term “a response” indicated in italics in the wherein clause in claim 2 seems to refer back to the term “a response” indicated in italics in the receiving step in claim 1. If this is true, it is suggested to amend it to “the response.”
Same rational applies to the usage of the term “a response” in the wherein clause in claim 3.
Claim 4 is rejected by virtue of dependency on claim 3.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
7. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
8. Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
Regarding claim 4, it recites, “The method of claim 3, further comprising determining whether the second terminal is a target terminal based on the ID information of the second terminal included in the response to the beam acquisition request,
wherein transmitting the ID information of the first terminal to the second terminal is that the ID information of the first terminal is transmitted to the second terminal based on the identification that the second terminal is a target terminal.”
It is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), since there is a lack of antecedent basis for the usage of the term “the identification” as indicated in italics in its ending sentence.
9. Claim 4 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim(s) and any intervening claim(s).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
10. 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 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.
11. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
12. Claims 1-3, 5-8, 10-12, 14, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Ganesan et al. (US 2023/0361955).
Regarding claim 1, Ganesan et al. teach the method performed by a first terminal in a communication system (paragraphs [0034] lines 1–8 & [0072] lines 1–17; Examiner’s Notes: UE, e.g., remote unit 102 depicted in FIG. 1 and First UE 402 depicted in FIG. 4 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a first terminal” in the instant application), the method comprising:
identifying a sidelink resource (paragraph [0118] lines 1-16; Examiner’s Notes: determining/identifying a sidelink resource, e.g., used in between First UE 402 and Second UE 404 as illustrated in FIG. 4 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “identifying a sidelink resource” in the instant application);
transmitting a beam acquisition request on the sidelink resource (paragraph [0039] lines 1-24; Examiner’s Notes: transmitting a beam acquisition request, e.g., via step 416, on the sidelink resource, as illustrated FIG. 4 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “transmitting a beam acquisition request on the sidelink resource” in the instant application);
receiving, from a second terminal, a response to the beam acquisition request (paragraph [0072] lines 1–17; Examiner’s Notes: Second UE 404 depicted in FIG. 4 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a second terminal;”
in fact, receiving, from Second UE 404, a response to the beam acquisition request, as illustrated in step 420 in FIG. 4 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “receiving, from a second terminal, a response to the beam acquisition request” in the instant application); and
transmitting ID information of the first terminal to the second terminal (paragraph [0072] lines 1–17; Examiner’s Notes: UE-1 of the First UE 402 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “ID information of the first terminal;”
in fact, transmitting UE-1 of the First UE 402 to Second UE 404 in FIG. 4 of the prior art teaches the limitation of “transmitting ID information of the first terminal to the second terminal” in the instant application),
wherein the beam acquisition request is transmitted based on a reference signal without the ID information of the first terminal (paragraph [0039] lines 1-24; Examiner’s Notes: transmitting the beam acquisition request according to the reference signal in the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein the beam acquisition request is transmitted based on a reference signal without the ID information of the first terminal” in the instant application), and
the beam acquisition request is transmitted based on a portion of one slot (paragraph [0039] lines 12-24; Examiner’s Notes: a time slot in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a portion of one slot;”
in fact, transmitting the beam acquisition request according to a time slot in the prior art teaches the limitation of “the beam acquisition request is transmitted based on a portion of one slot” in the instant application).
Regarding claim 2, Ganesan et al. further teach the method, wherein a response to the beam acquisition request is received without ID information of the second terminal (paragraph [0039] lines 1-24; Examiner’s Notes: receiving a response to the beam acquisition request according to the reference signal in the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein a response to the beam acquisition request is received without ID information of the second terminal” in the instant application) and
the response to the beam acquisition request received without the ID information of the second terminal is received based on a portion of one slot (paragraph [0039] lines 12-24; Examiner’s Notes: a time slot in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a portion of one slot;”
in fact, receiving the response to the beam acquisition request according to a time slot in the prior art teaches the limitation of “the response to the beam acquisition request received without the ID information of the second terminal is received based on a portion of one slot” in the instant application).
Regarding claim 5, Ganesan et al. further teach the method, wherein the sidelink resource comprises multiple resource subsets (paragraphs [0118] lines 1-16 & [0120] lines 1-22; Examiner’s Notes: sidelink resources including subsets, e.g., the subset for broadcast transmission, the subset for unicast transmission, etc., in the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein the sidelink resource comprises multiple resource subsets” in the instant application), and
each resource subset among the multiple resource subsets is used for sidelink communication with different terminals (paragraph [0072] lines 1–17; Examiner’s Notes: Second UE 404 and Third UE 406 depicted in FIG. 4 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “different terminals;”
in fact, each resource subset is used for sidelink communication with different UEs, e.g., Second UE 404 and Third UE 406, as illustrated in FIG. 4 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “each resource subset among the multiple resource subsets is used for sidelink communication with different terminals” in the instant application).
Regarding claim 6, Ganesan et al. teach the method performed by a second terminal in a communication system (paragraphs [0034] lines 1–8 & [0072] lines 1–17; Examiner’s Notes: UE, e.g., remote unit 102 depicted in FIG. 1 and Second UE 404 depicted in FIG. 4 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a second terminal” in the instant application), the method comprising:
receiving a beam acquisition request from a first terminal on a sidelink resource (paragraph [0039] lines 1-24; Examiner’s Notes: First UE 402 depicted in FIG. 4 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a first terminal;”
receiving a beam acquisition request from First UE 402, e.g., via step 416, on the sidelink resource, as illustrated FIG. 4 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “receiving a beam acquisition request from a first terminal on a sidelink resource” in the instant application);
transmitting a response to the beam acquisition request from the first terminal (paragraph [0072] lines 1–17; Examiner’s Notes: transmitting a response to the beam acquisition request from First UE 402, as illustrated in step 420 in FIG. 4 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “transmitting a response to the beam acquisition request from the first terminal” in the instant application); and
receiving ID information of the first terminal from the first terminal (paragraph [0072] lines 1–17; Examiner’s Notes: UE-1 of the First UE 402 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “ID information of the first terminal;”
in fact, receiving UE-1 of the First UE 402 from First UE 402 in FIG. 4 of the prior art teaches the limitation of “receiving ID information of the first terminal from the first terminal” in the instant application),
wherein the beam acquisition request is received based on a reference signal without the ID information of the first terminal (paragraph [0039] lines 1-24; Examiner’s Notes: receiving the beam acquisition request according to the reference signal in the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein the beam acquisition request is received based on a reference signal without the ID information of the first terminal” in the instant application), and
the beam acquisition request is received based on a portion of one slot (paragraph [0039] lines 12-24; Examiner’s Notes: a time slot in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a portion of one slot;”
in fact, receiving the beam acquisition request according to a time slot in the prior art teaches the limitation of “the beam acquisition request is received based on a portion of one slot” in the instant application).
Regarding claim 7, Ganesan et al. further teach the method, wherein the response to the beam acquisition request is transmitted without the ID information of the second terminal (paragraph [0039] lines 1-24; Examiner’s Notes: transmitting a response to the beam acquisition request according to the reference signal in the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein the response to the beam acquisition request is transmitted without the ID information of the second terminal” in the instant application), and
the response to the beam acquisition request received without the ID information of the second terminal is transmitted based on a portion of one slot (paragraph [0039] lines 12-24; Examiner’s Notes: a time slot in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a portion of one slot;”
in fact, receiving the response to the beam acquisition request according to a time slot in the prior art teaches the limitation of “the response to the beam acquisition request received without the ID information of the second terminal is transmitted based on a portion of one slot” in the instant application).
Regarding claim 10, Ganesan et al. further teach the method, wherein the sidelink resource comprises multiple resource subsets (paragraphs [0118] lines 1-16 & [0120] lines 1-22; Examiner’s Notes: sidelink resources including subsets, e.g., the subset for broadcast transmission, the subset for unicast transmission, etc., in the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein the sidelink resource comprises multiple resource subsets” in the instant application), and
each resource subset among the multiple resource subsets is used for sidelink communication with different terminals (paragraph [0072] lines 1–17; Examiner’s Notes: Second UE 404 and Third UE 406 depicted in FIG. 4 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “different terminals;”
in fact, each resource subset is used for sidelink communication with different UEs, e.g., Second UE 404 and Third UE 406, as illustrated in FIG. 4 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “each resource subset among the multiple resource subsets is used for sidelink communication with different terminals” in the instant application).
Regarding claim 11, Ganesan et al. teach the first terminal in a communication system (paragraphs [0040] lines 1–14 & [0072] lines 1–17; Examiner’s Notes: UE, e.g., remote unit 102 depicted in FIG. 2 and First UE 402 depicted in FIG. 4 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “first terminal” in the instant application) comprising:
a transmitter (paragraph [0040] lines 1–14; Examiner’s Notes: transmitter 210 in UE, e.g., remote unit 102, depicted in FIG. 2 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a transmitter” in the instant application); and
a control unit (paragraph [0040] lines 1–14; Examiner’s Notes: processor 202 in UE, e.g., remote unit 102, depicted in FIG. 2 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a control unit” in the instant application) configured to:
identify a sidelink resource (paragraph [0118] lines 1-16; Examiner’s Notes: determining/identifying a sidelink resource, e.g., used in between First UE 402 and Second UE 404 as illustrated in FIG. 4 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “identify a sidelink resource” in the instant application);
transmit a beam acquisition request on the sidelink resource (paragraph [0039] lines 1-24; Examiner’s Notes: transmitting a beam acquisition request, e.g., via step 416, on the sidelink resource, as illustrated FIG. 4 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “transmit a beam acquisition request on the sidelink resource” in the instant application);
receive, from a second terminal, a response to the beam acquisition request (paragraph [0072] lines 1–17; Examiner’s Notes: Second UE 404 depicted in FIG. 4 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a second terminal;”
in fact, receiving, from Second UE 404, a response to the beam acquisition request, as illustrated in step 420 in FIG. 4 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “receive, from a second terminal, a response to the beam acquisition request” in the instant application); and
transmit ID information of the first terminal to the second terminal (paragraph [0072] lines 1–17; Examiner’s Notes: UE-1 of the First UE 402 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “ID information of the first terminal;”
in fact, transmitting UE-1 of the First UE 402 to Second UE 404 in FIG. 4 of the prior art teaches the limitation of “transmit ID information of the first terminal to the second terminal” in the instant application),
wherein the beam acquisition request is transmitted based on a reference signal without the ID information of the first terminal (paragraph [0039] lines 1-24; Examiner’s Notes: transmitting the beam acquisition request according to the reference signal in the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein the beam acquisition request is transmitted based on a reference signal without the ID information of the first terminal” in the instant application), and
the beam acquisition request is transmitted based on a portion of one slot (paragraph [0039] lines 12-24; Examiner’s Notes: a time slot in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a portion of one slot;”
in fact, transmitting the beam acquisition request according to a time slot in the prior art teaches the limitation of “the beam acquisition request is transmitted based on a portion of one slot” in the instant application).
Regarding claim 12, Ganesan et al. further teach the first terminal, wherein a response to the beam acquisition request is received without ID information of the second terminal (paragraph [0039] lines 1-24; Examiner’s Notes: receiving a response to the beam acquisition request according to the reference signal in the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein a response to the beam acquisition request is received without ID information of the second terminal” in the instant application) and
the response to the beam acquisition request received without the ID information of the second terminal is received based on a portion of one slot (paragraph [0039] lines 12-24; Examiner’s Notes: a time slot in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a portion of one slot;”
in fact, receiving the response to the beam acquisition request according to a time slot in the prior art teaches the limitation of “the response to the beam acquisition request received without the ID information of the second terminal is received based on a portion of one slot” in the instant application).
Regarding claim 14, Ganesan et al. further teach the first terminal, wherein the sidelink resource comprises multiple resource subsets (paragraphs [0118] lines 1-16 & [0120] lines 1-22; Examiner’s Notes: sidelink resources including subsets, e.g., the subset for broadcast transmission, the subset for unicast transmission, etc., in the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein the sidelink resource comprises multiple resource subsets” in the instant application), and
each resource subset among the multiple resource subsets is used for sidelink communication with different terminals (paragraph [0072] lines 1–17; Examiner’s Notes: Second UE 404 and Third UE 406 depicted in FIG. 4 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “different terminals;”
in fact, each resource subset is used for sidelink communication with different UEs, e.g., Second UE 404 and Third UE 406, as illustrated in FIG. 4 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “each resource subset among the multiple resource subsets is used for sidelink communication with different terminals” in the instant application).
Regarding claim 15, Ganesan et al. teach the second terminal in a communication system (paragraphs [0040] lines 1–14 & [0072] lines 1–17; Examiner’s Notes: UE, e.g., remote unit 102 depicted in FIG. 2 and Second UE 404 depicted in FIG. 4 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “second terminal” in the instant application) comprising:
a transmitter (paragraph [0040] lines 1–14; Examiner’s Notes: transmitter 210 in UE, e.g., remote unit 102, depicted in FIG. 2 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a transmitter” in the instant application); and
a control unit (paragraph [0040] lines 1–14; Examiner’s Notes: processor 202 in UE, e.g., remote unit 102, depicted in FIG. 2 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a control unit” in the instant application) configured to:
receive a beam acquisition request from a first terminal on a sidelink resource (paragraph [0039] lines 1-24; Examiner’s Notes: First UE 402 depicted in FIG. 4 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a first terminal;”
in fact, receiving a beam acquisition request from First UE 402, e.g., via step 416, on the sidelink resource, as illustrated FIG. 4 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “receive a beam acquisition request from a first terminal on a sidelink resource” in the instant application);
transmit a response to the beam acquisition request from the first terminal (paragraph [0072] lines 1–17; Examiner’s Notes: transmitting a response to the beam acquisition request from First UE 402, as illustrated in step 420 in FIG. 4 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “transmit a response to the beam acquisition request from the first terminal” in the instant application); and
receive ID information of the first terminal from the first terminal (paragraph [0072] lines 1–17; Examiner’s Notes: UE-1 of the First UE 402 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “ID information of the first terminal;”
in fact, receiving UE-1 of the First UE 402 from First UE 402 in FIG. 4 of the prior art teaches the limitation of “receive ID information of the first terminal from the first terminal” in the instant application),
wherein the beam acquisition request is received based on a reference signal without the ID information of the first terminal (paragraph [0039] lines 1-24; Examiner’s Notes: receiving the beam acquisition request according to the reference signal in the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein the beam acquisition request is received based on a reference signal without the ID information of the first terminal” in the instant application), and
the beam acquisition request is received based on a portion of one slot (paragraph [0039] lines 12-24; Examiner’s Notes: a time slot in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a portion of one slot;”
in fact, receiving the beam acquisition request according to a time slot in the prior art teaches the limitation of “the beam acquisition request is received based on a portion of one slot” in the instant application).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
13. 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.
14. Claims 3 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ganesan et al. (US 2023/0361955).
Regarding claim 3, Ganesan et al. teach the method, wherein a response to the beam acquisition request is received without ID information of the second terminal (paragraph [0039] lines 1-24; Examiner’s Notes: receiving a response to the beam acquisition request according to the reference signal in the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein a response to the beam acquisition request is received without ID information of the second terminal” in the instant application) and
the response to the beam acquisition request received without the ID information of the second terminal is received based on a portion of one slot (paragraph [0039] lines 12-24; Examiner’s Notes: a time slot in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a portion of one slot;”
in fact, receiving the response to the beam acquisition request according to a time slot in the prior art teaches the limitation of “the response to the beam acquisition request received without the ID information of the second terminal is received based on a portion of one slot” in the instant application).
Ganesan et al. teach the claimed invention except for implementing a response to the beam acquisition request comprising ID information of the second terminal.
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to the method, wherein a response to the beam acquisition request comprises ID information of the second terminal and the response to the beam acquisition request comprising the ID information of the second terminal is received based on one slot, since such a modification, i.e., from without ID information to with/comprising ID information, would have involved a mere change of a design choice. A design choice is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Same rational applies to claim 8.
Allowable Subject Matter
15. Claims 9 and 13 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim 6 or 11, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claim(s).
Regarding claim 9, the prior art in single or in combination fails to teach "receiving ID information of the first terminal from the first terminal, wherein receiving the ID information of the first terminal from the first terminal is based on that the second terminal is identified to be the target terminal based on the ID information of the second terminal included in the response to the beam acquisition request” in combination with other limitation of the claim(s).
Regarding claim 13, the prior art in single or in combination fails to teach "wherein the response to the beam acquisition request comprises the ID information of the second terminal; the response to the beam acquisition request comprising the ID information of the second terminal is received based on one slot; and the control unit is configured to: identify whether the second terminal is a target terminal based on the ID information of the second terminal included in the response to the beam acquisition request; and transmit ID information of the first terminal to the second terminal based on the identification that the second terminal is a target terminal” in combination with other limitation of the claim(s).
Conclusion
16. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to
Etemad et al. (US 9,572,063) is cited to show the radio resource control (RRC) signaling for configuring the user equipment to obtain and report channel state information for the downlink channels so that a target user equipment experiences enhanced signal reception and reduced interference;
Amerga et al. (US 2013/0294318) is generally directed to various aspects of the method for transmitting a downlink signal at a base station in a wireless communication system includes generating a user equipment (UE)-specific reference signal sequence and mapping the generated sequence to resource elements (REs) predetermined according to antenna port groups.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WEI ZHAO whose telephone number is (571)270-5672. The examiner can normally be reached from 8:00AM to 5:00PM Monday through Friday.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, JAE Y. LEE can be reached on 571-270-3936. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/WEI ZHAO/ Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2479
