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 1-20 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to independent claim(s) have been considered but are not persuasive. Specifically, while amendments substantially change the scope of the claimed subject matter and necessitate new grounds of rejection, Examiner respectfully maintains the prior art reference(s) cited reasonably teach/suggest the amended limitations of the claim(s) albeit with revised citations.
Regarding remarks on page 6-9, applicants state “Liu does not teach or suggest “determine to transmit the sidelink transmission based on: the first wireless device not being capable of the simultaneous transmissions in the carrier on the uplink and on the sidelink in the carrier; and a priority value of the sidelink transmission being smaller than the sidelink priority threshold value.” Instead, Liu only describes that a COT-sharing initiating node may grant other nodes permission to transmit within the COT. Huang and Yang fail to fail to remedy the deficiencies of Liu…While Yang teaches that a UE can prioritize between UL and SL transmissions based on configured thresholds, Yang does not teach or suggest that a UE “determine simultaneous transmissions scheduled in a carrier and within the COT, wherein the simultaneous transmissions comprise: an uplink transmission on an uplink; and a sidelink transmission, of a multi- consecutive slots transmission (MCSt), on a sidelink.”…Yang likewise fails to disclose or suggest such a feature. For example, while Yang describes various prioritization mechanisms between uplink and sidelink transmissions, including URLLC- related examples, these teachings are limited to selecting which one of multiple candidate transmissions should be prioritized when contention exists. Yang does not disclose or suggest that a UE “determine to transmit the sidelink transmission based on: the first wireless device not being capable of the simultaneous transmissions in the carrier on the uplink and on the sidelink in the carrier.”” Referring to the prior art cited, Yang was cited for (see at least 0073, UE may be configured with RRC parameters including sl-PriorityThresholdULURLLC and sl-PriorityThreshold; the UE may prioritize between sidelink and uplink transmissions using the priority thresholds e.g. a sidelink transmission with priority value smaller than sl-PriorityThresholdULURLLC may be prioritized over an uplink transmission), thus disclosing sidelink/uplink prioritization while Liu and Huang were cited/combined for other claim limitations e.g. COT sharing (Liu 0097) and sidelink MCSt (Huang 0626). Yang is now cited for (see at least 0070, “The UE may perform a prioritization procedure when transmitting the CSI report results in a collision with another transmission. That is, if the UE is not configured to both transmit the CSI report and communicate via the other transmission, the UE may determine which transmission to drop and which transmission to maintain.”), thus disclosing UE may perform prioritization ultimately leading to sidelink transmission, if it is not configured (not being capable) to transmit both colliding (simultaneous) transmissions. Therefore Examiner respectfully submits the prior art references reasonably teach/suggest the amended limitations of the claim(s) including “…determine to transmit the sidelink transmission based on: the first wireless device not being capable of the simultaneous transmissions in the carrier on the uplink and on the sidelink in the carrier, and a priority value of the sidelink transmission being smaller than the sidelink priority threshold value”.
Rejections for similar independent and dependent claims are revised and/or maintained accordingly.
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 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.
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.
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.
Claim 1-20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu et al. (US 2022/0159725) in view of Huang et al. (US 2024/0163904) in view of Yang et al. (US 2022/0386315).
For claim 1, Liu teaches: A first wireless device comprising: one or more processors; and memory storing instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors (see at least fig. 2, UE and BS may comprise processor/memory), cause the first wireless device to:
receive, from a second wireless device, a sidelink control information (SCI) comprising a channel occupancy time (COT) sharing indication that indicates a COT with a duration starting from a first slot, wherein the COT is initiated using a first type of channel access procedure (see at least 0097, an initiating UE may perform cat 4 LBT to secure a COT (fig. 4, 7, COT comprises resource blocks/slots); the initiating UE may transmit SCI including COT-sharing information to other UEs. See at least 0109, COT-SI may comprise COT start/end));
transmit the sidelink transmission within the COT using a second type of channel access procedure (see at least 0097-0099, a UE may use received COT-SI to perform transmission within the shared COT after a shorter cat 1 or cat 2 LBT).
Liu does not explicitly teach: …receive a radio resource control (RRC) message comprising a first configuration parameter indicating a sidelink priority threshold value; or: …determine simultaneous transmissions scheduled in a carrier and within the COT, wherein the simultaneous transmissions comprise: an uplink transmission on an uplink; and a sidelink transmission, of a multi-consecutive slots transmission (MCSt), on a sidelink; determine to transmit the sidelink transmission based on: the first wireless device not being capable of the simultaneous transmissions in the carrier on the uplink and on the sidelink in the carrier; and a priority value of the sidelink transmission being smaller than the sidelink priority threshold value. Huang from an analogous art teaches (see at least 0626, UE may select SL resources in a COT for performing MCSt), Yang from an analogous art teaches (see at least 0070, “The UE may perform a prioritization procedure when transmitting the CSI report results in a collision with another transmission. That is, if the UE is not configured to both transmit the CSI report and communicate via the other transmission, the UE may determine which transmission to drop and which transmission to maintain.” See at least 0073, UE may be configured with RRC parameters including sl-PriorityThresholdULURLLC and sl-PriorityThreshold; the UE may prioritize between sidelink and uplink transmissions using the priority thresholds e.g. a sidelink transmission with priority value smaller than sl-PriorityThresholdULURLLC may be prioritized over an uplink transmission). Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate Huang, Yang to the system of Liu, so the UE receives priority thresholds via RRC including sl-PriorityThresholdULURLLC, and if it is not configured (not capable) to transmit colliding (simultaneous) transmissions, performs prioritization between uplink and sidelink COT transmissions (e.g. MCSt, as suggested by Huang) based on the priority threshold, including prioritizing the sidelink transmission if its priority is smaller than the priority threshold, as suggested by Yang. The motivation would have been to enhance communications by implementing sidelink MCSt for multiple TBs, and prioritizing an appropriate uplink or sidelink transmission in the COT based on configured thresholds (Huang 0626, Yang 0073).
For claim 2, Liu, Huang, Yang teaches claim 1, Yang further teaches: wherein the uplink transmission comprises: a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) with priority index 1; or a physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) with priority index 1 (see at least 0073-0075, UL transmission may have a priority index 1; UL transmissions may be on PUCCH, PUSCH, PRACH, etc.). Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate Yang to the system of claim 1, so the UE performs prioritization between uplink and sidelink COT transmissions, including uplink transmissions on PUCCH or PUSCH with priority index 1, as suggested by Yang. The motivation would have been to enhance communications by prioritizing an appropriate uplink or sidelink transmission including PUCCH/PUSCH uplink transmissions (Yang 0073-0075).
For claim 3, Liu, Huang, Yang teaches claim 1, Huang further teaches: wherein the first type of channel access procedure comprises deferring a time duration for channel sensing one or more times (see at least 0471, UE may perform type 1 channel access procedure to initiate COT (0378, Type 1 is CAT4 LBT). See at least 0360-0367, type 1 channel access comprises defer durations for sensing). Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate Huang to the system of claim 1, so the CAT 4 LBT for initiating COT comprises defer durations, as suggested by Huang. The motivation would have been to enhance communications by implementing well known CAT 4 LBT with defer duration for sensing (Huang 0360-0367).
For claim 4, Liu, Huang, Yang teaches claim 1, Liu further teaches: wherein the second type of channel access procedure comprises a sensing slot of 25 microseconds (see at least 0058, cat 2 LBT comprises 25-μs LBT).
For claim 5, Liu, Huang, Yang teaches claim 1, Huang further teaches: wherein the MCSt comprises a plurality of sidelink transmissions, and wherein: the plurality of sidelink transmissions comprises the sidelink transmission; and each sidelink transmission of the plurality of sidelink transmissions comprises a respective physical sidelink shared channel (PSSCH) (see at least Abstract, 0511-0512, MCSt may comprise sidelink transmission(s) in a plurality of slots, including one or more PSSCH transmissions on multi-slot resources). Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate Huang to the system of claim 1, so the MCSt comprises sidelink PSSCH transmissions over a plurality of slots, as suggested by Huang. The motivation would have been to enhance communications by implementing well known MCSt for sidelink channels including PSSCH (Huang Abstract, 0511-0512).
For claim 6, Liu, Huang, Yang teaches claim 1, Yang further teaches: wherein determining to transmit the sidelink transmission is based on the sidelink transmission having a higher priority than the uplink transmission (see at least 0073, the UE may prioritize between sidelink and uplink transmissions using the priority thresholds e.g. a sidelink transmission with priority value smaller than sl-PriorityThresholdULURLLC may be prioritized over an uplink transmission). Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate Yang to the system of claim 1, so the UE performs prioritization between uplink and sidelink COT transmissions based on the priority threshold, including prioritizing the sidelink transmission over the uplink, as suggested by Yang. The motivation would have been to enhance communications by prioritizing an appropriate uplink or sidelink transmission in the COT based on configured thresholds (Yang 0073).
For claim 7, Liu, Huang, Yang teaches claim 1, Liu further teaches: wherein the sidelink transmission comprises at least one of: PSSCH; or PSCCH (see at least 0087, sidelink communications may comprise PSCCH or PSSCH).
Claim 8 recites a method substantially similar to the method of claim 1 and is rejected under similar reasoning.
Claim 9 recites a method substantially similar to the method of claim 2 and is rejected under similar reasoning.
Claim 10 recites a method substantially similar to the method of claim 3 and is rejected under similar reasoning.
Claim 11 recites a method substantially similar to the method of claim 4 and is rejected under similar reasoning.
Claim 12 recites a method substantially similar to the method of claim 5 and is rejected under similar reasoning.
Claim 13 recites a method substantially similar to the method of claim 6 and is rejected under similar reasoning.
Claim 14 recites a method substantially similar to the method of claim 7 and is rejected under similar reasoning.
Claim 15 recites a non-transitory computer-readable medium substantially similar to the method of claim 1 and is rejected under similar reasoning.
Claim 16 recites a non-transitory computer-readable medium substantially similar to the method of claim 2 and is rejected under similar reasoning.
Claim 17 recites a non-transitory computer-readable medium substantially similar to the method of claim 3 and is rejected under similar reasoning.
Claim 18 recites a non-transitory computer-readable medium substantially similar to the method of claim 4 and is rejected under similar reasoning.
Claim 19 recites a non-transitory computer-readable medium substantially similar to the method of claim 5 and is rejected under similar reasoning.
Claim 20 recites a non-transitory computer-readable medium substantially similar to the method of claim 6 and is rejected under similar reasoning.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SIREN WEI whose telephone number is (571)272-0687. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Thursday 7-4. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Hassan Phillips can be reached on 571-272-3940. 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.
/Siren Wei/
Patent Examiner
Art Unit 2467
Prosecution Insights