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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-15 received on 9/26/2024 have been examined, of which claims 1, 8 and 15 are independent.
Claim Objections
Claim 12 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 12 recites “a User Equipment (UE)”, which is preceded in claim 10 and directed to “a UE”. For proper antecedent basis in claim, the examiner suggests to amend claim 12 to recite ““the UE”, if claims 10 and 12 are referring to same UE.
Appropriate correction is required.
Double Patenting
Claims 1-15 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 4-8 and 10 of U.S. Patent No. 12133251 (parent application # 17604965). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claim 1 of the patent application recites substantially similar limitation as claim 1, claim 2 of the instant application, and further recite to determine resource reservation. Claim 1 of instant application recites SL-CSI being included in SCI, which is further limited in claim 2 as no shared channel transmission. Claim 1 of the patent application recites specific ID that is included in D2D control information (SCI) and which informs of no shared channel transmission. Thus, the claim 1 of the patent application anticipates the claim 1 of the instant application. Claims 1-15 of instant application are mapped to claims 1, 1, 4-8, 10, 10, 4-8 and 10 respectively of the patent application for the non-statutory double patenting.
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
- Yasukawa et al. (US 20180234994): fig 6-9; para [53]: a radio resource capable of transmitting only SCI corresponding to a MAC PDU of high priority among the radio resources allocated to the PSCCH is reserved in advance, and the user apparatus UE1 of low priority is configured to constantly monitor the reserved radio resource. For example, the subframes in which SCIs shown in “3” and “4” in FIGS. 7A, 7B, 7C and 7D are transmitted may be radio resources capable of transmitting only SCI corresponding to a MAC PDU of high priority.
- Agiwal et al. (US 20170295559): is directed to logical channel prioritization for D2D communication. Agiwal teaches the determination of SCI transmission within the
sidelink control (SC) period or overlapping SC period, to select the sidelink logical
channel that is not previously selected and allocating resource for the new MAC PDU
along the sidelink logical channel for SCI and data transmission.
- Chen et al. (US 20220140964): fig 3; para 29-32: the UE 102 can sense, within a (pre-)configured resource pool, which resources are not in use by other UEs with higher-priority traffic, and select an appropriate amount of resources for sidelink initial transmissions and, optionally, retransmissions. The sensing UE 102 can then select resources for transmission(s) or retransmission(s) from within a resource selection window.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RINA C PANCHOLI whose telephone number is (571)272-2679. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30am-4pm.
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, Chirag Shah can be reached on 571-272-3144. 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.
/RINA C PANCHOLI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2477 7/10/2026
Prosecution Insights