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 .
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
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.
Claims 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claims 1-9, it is unclear what SystemInformationBlockTypeXX (SL PRS related System Information Block) refers to as there are many different types of information in a System Information Block or whether applicant intends to only claim SL PRS related information. If applicant intends to claim SL PRS related System Information Block then it should be explicitly stated including what ‘related’ SL PRS information denotes.
Regarding claim 7, the phrase “systeminformationblocktype1 (mentions) includes the SIBTypeXX” is vague and indefinite.
Regarding claim 9, it is unclear how “transmission circuitry configure to perform…” is a method step of a user equipment.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention.
While the specification and claims refer to a SystemInformationBlockTypeXX (SL PRS related system information block), there is no corresponding disclosure that explains what this limitation is nor how it functions or is signaled within the system, other than the repetition of the claim language. Thus, the claim language lacks enablement in view of the specification.
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.
Claim(s) 1-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Manolakos (2021/0297206) in view of Baek (2023/0221397).
Regarding claim 1, Manolakos discloses a user equipment (UE 104) comprising: higher-layer processing circuitry configured to receive: SL PRS related SIB from a base station (processing system 410) and transmission circuitry (404, transceiver) configured to perform a transmission of sidelink positioning reference signal (SL-PRS) Note Figure 5 and para 101-108 which refer to SL PRS related information transmitted such as PBSCH, PSCCH as well as para 116, UE transmits its own ranging signal SL-PRS. Manolakos discloses when UE is in coverage (mode 1, Figure 8) the UE performances a first procedure of the transmission of SL-PRS (network assigned SL-PRS, par 127) and when out-of coverage (mode 2, Figure 8 para 110-11), the UE performs a second procedure of the SL-PRS transmission (sidelink-assisted para 128). Manolakos fails to disclose that the second procedure is due to pre-configuration. However,Baek teaches in an analogous art, the use of sidelink communications in which the SL-PRS transmission is preconfigured (SL-PRS resources can be preconfigured, para 23-24). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include preconfigured SL-PRS resource pools in order to reduce time for selection.
Regarding claim 8, Manolakos discloses a user equipment (UE 104) comprising: higher-layer processing circuitry configured to receive: SL PRS related SIB from a base station (processing system 410) and reception circuitry (404, transceiver) configured to perform a measurement of sidelink positioning reference signal (SL-PRS) Note Figure 5 and para 101-108 which refer to SL PRS related information transmitted such as PBSCH, PSCCH as well as para 116, UE transmits its own ranging signal SL-PRS. Manolakos discloses when UE is in coverage (mode 1, Figure 8) the UE performances a first procedure of the transmission of SL-PRS (network assigned SL-PRS, par 127) and when out-of coverage (mode 2, Figure 8 para 110-11), the UE performs a second procedure of the SL-PRS transmission (sidelink-assisted para 128). Manolakos fails to disclose that the second procedure is due to pre-configuration. However, Baek teaches in an analogous art, the use of sidelink communications in which the SL-PRS transmission is preconfigured (SL-PRS resources can be preconfigured, para 23-24). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include preconfigured SL-PRS resource pools in order to reduce time for selection.
Regarding claim 9, Manolakos discloses a method for user equipment (UE 104) comprising: receiving SL PRS related SIB from a base station (processing system 410) and transmitting of sidelink positioning reference signal (SL-PRS) Note Figure 5 and para 101-108 which refer to SL PRS related information transmitted such as PBSCH, PSCCH as well as para 116, UE transmits its own ranging signal SL-PRS. Manolakos discloses when UE is in coverage (mode 1, Figure 8) the UE performances a first procedure of the transmission of SL-PRS (network assigned SL-PRS, par 127) and when out-of coverage (mode 2, Figure 8 para 110-11), the UE performs a second procedure of the SL-PRS transmission (sidelink-assisted para 128). Manolakos fails to disclose that the second procedure is due to pre-configuration. However, Baek teaches in an analogous art, the use of sidelink communications in which the SL-PRS transmission is preconfigured (SL-PRS resources can be preconfigured, para 23-24). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include preconfigured SL-PRS resource pools in order to reduce time for selection.
Regarding claims 2-4, Manolakos further discloses the first procedure is selected from a first resource pool (SCI-1 para 113 and resource allocation from the network para 127) while the second procedure is selected from a second resource pool (SCI-2 para 113, as well as para 128 and 136, sci-2 includes additional resources not in network allocated/sci-1). Manolakos also discloses the performing of SL-PRS transmission is also based on a sensing result of the pool (para 131-333, based on sensing of related SL-PRS information).
Regarding claim 5, Manolakos further discloses whether to perform the second procedure further depends on whether to detect SidelinkSystemInformationBlockTypeXX form another UE (para 128, sidelink position only occurs when SCI-2 ranging signals and assisting UEs are received. See para 129-133 as well).
Regarding claim 6, Manolakos further discloses dedicated RRC Configuration information (para 78-81) for indicating a potential sidelink connection (PC5 interface). Li further teaches that a third resource pool can be used for sidelink resources and selection as well (Figure 3 – se of 3 SL resource pools). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include a third pool in order to provide for exception processing in sidelink resource allocation.
Regarding claim 7, Manolakos further discloses that whether to perform the transmission of SL-PRS depends on whether a list of system information described includes the SystemInformationBlockXX (Figure 9, whether PRS resources are transmitted via the network as well as Figure 12, PRS is transmitted on PSSCH).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Roth (2026/0082404) disclose sidelink resources allocation with in and out of coverage.
Ko (12538254) discloses SL PRS signaling for positioning.
Killerich Pratas (2025/0047435) discloses sidelink conflict avoidance with user to user sidelink communications.,
Yu (2024/0381409) discloses system information block sidelink control information.
Li (2024/0356699) discloses preconfigured SL-PRS signaling.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM GEORGE TROST IV whose telephone number is (571)272-7872. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7a-4p, Fridays 7a-2p.
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 Appiah can be reached at 571-272-7904. 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.
WILLIAM GEORGE TROST IV
Primary Patent Examiner
Art Unit 2641
/WILLIAM G TROST IV/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2641
Prosecution Insights