DETAILED ACTION
The following is a final office action in response to the Amendments filed on October 17, 2023.
Claims 1, 2, 5, 8, 9, 12, 15, 16, and 18 have been amended.
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Response to Arguments
35 U.S.C. 103 Rejections
Applicant’s arguments filed in the communications on 01/15/2026 have been fully considered but are persuasive.
1) In remarks applicant argues in substance that the cited references do not teach “wherein a set of physical random access channel (PRACH) resources dedicated for recap devices are explicitly configured in the SIB”.
Examiner response
Examiner respectfully disagree and would like to point to paragraph [0055] of Lei reference below.
“configuration information included in one or more SIBs, perform one or more measurements of reference signals (RSs), …For example, the UE 120 may determine one or more physical random access channel (PRACH) transmission parameters to be used to transmit the RAM, may determine one or more parameters for generating a preamble of the RAM, may identify one or more uplink resources on which the RAM is to be transmitted”.
The above paragraph teaches that configuration information can be included in one or more SIBs and that the UE can determine PRACH parameters to be used for transmission.
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Lei et al. (USPGPub 2021/0266970) in view of Rastegardoost et al. (US PGPub 2022/0210806).
As per claim 1, Lei teaches a processor of a user equipment (UE) (Lei, see paragraph [0006], a user equipment (UE), may include receiving) configured to perform operations comprising:
receiving a system information block (SIB) from a base station (Lei, see paragraph [0006], receiving, from the base station and based at least in part on the on-demand SI request, one or more on-demand system information blocks (SIBs) of a set of dedicated on-demand SIBS) wherein a set of physical random access channel (PRACH) resources dedicated for redcap devices are explicitly configured in the SIB (Lei, see paragraph [0048], an example 300 of a call flow for configuring an uplink bandwidth part for a four-step random access channel (RACH) procedure. Also see paragraph [0055], configuration information included in one or more SIBs, perform one or more measurements of reference signals (RSs), …For example, the UE 120 may determine one or more physical random access channel (PRACH) transmission parameters to be used to transmit the RAM, may determine one or more parameters for generating a preamble of the RAM, may identify one or more uplink resources on which the RAM is to be transmitted”) and
transmitting, an indication to the base station that the UE is a reduced capability (redcap) device (Lei, see paragraph [0086], …As shown by reference number 760, a UE B 120 may transmit, and the BS 110 may receive, an on-demand SI request that identifies the same UE category. As shown by reference number 765, the BS 110 may transmit, and the UE A 120 and UE B 120 may receive, a groupcast transmission that includes a set of pre-configured SIBs dedicated to the identified UE category (“reduced capability”)).
Lei doesn’t explicitly teach transmitting, an indication to the base station that the UE is a reduced capability (redcap) device wherein the indication is provided as part of a message 3 (msg3) of a random access channel (RACH) procedure.
In analogous art Rastegardoost teaches transmitting, an indication to the base station that the UE is a reduced capability (redcap) device wherein the indication is provided as part of a message 3 (msg3) of a random access channel (RACH) procedure (Rastegardoost, see paragraph [0302], ..one or more bits of the first UCI may indicate a UE type and/or a reduced capability and/or an enhancement of the UE to the base station via Msg3 PUSCH for an early identification of the UE type/capability/enhancement during an initial access. (Examiner Note: This subject matter is disclosed in the Rastegardoost’s reference provisional application No 63/132,883 filed on December 31, 2020 on paragraph [0282] of the specification as filed))
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to take the teaching of Rastegardoost and apply them on the teaching of Lei as doing so would enable a user equipment (UE) to transmit data to a base station (BS) in efficient manner. (Rastegardoost, see paragraph [0233], [0234]).
As per claim 2, Lei-Rastegardoost teaches the processor of claim 1, wherein the transmitting is performed using a portion of the set of PRACH resources dedicated for recap devices (Lei, see paragraph [0051], sends Msg.1 with a RACH request via a physical random access channel (PRACH).)
As per claim 3, Lei-Rastegardoost teaches the processor of claim 1, wherein message 1 (msg1) of a four step RACH process is explicitly indicated in the SIB for indicating the redcap device (Lei, see paragraph [0086], …As shown by reference number 760, a UE B 120 may transmit, and the BS 110 may receive, an on-demand SI request that identifies the same UE category. As shown by reference number 765, the BS 110 may transmit, and the UE A 120 and UE B 120 may receive, a groupcast transmission that includes a set of pre-configured SIBs dedicated to the identified UE category (“reduced capability”)).
As per claim 4, Lei-Rastegardoost teaches the processor of claim 1, wherein the PRACH resource is entirely within a bandwidth of a redcap uplink (UL) bandwidth part (BWP) (Lei, see paragraph [0114], the on-demand SI request is transmitted using uplink control information (UCI).)
As per claim 5, Lei-Rastegardoost teaches the processor of claim 1, wherein the set of PRACH resources dedicated for recap devices comprises a partition of a PRACH preamble (Lei, see paragraph [0041], may also process system information (e.g., for semi-static resource partitioning information (SRPI) and/or the like) and control information (e.g., CQI requests, grants, upper layer signaling).
As per claim 6, Lei-Rastegardoost teaches the processor of claim 5, wherein the PRACH preamble is a contention based preamble (Lei, see paragraph [0056], msgA, an uplink message, a request message, a first (or initial) message in a two-step RACH procedure, and/or the like. The RAM preamble is sometimes referred to as a message A preamble, a msgA preamble, a preamble, and/or the like).
As per claim 7, Lei-Rastegardoost teaches the processor of claim 1, message A (msgA) of a two step RACH process is explicitly indicated in the SIB for indicating the redcap device (Lei, see paragraph [0086], …As shown by reference number 760, a UE B 120 may transmit, and the BS 110 may receive, an on-demand SI request that identifies the same UE category. As shown by reference number 765, the BS 110 may transmit, and the UE A 120 and UE B 120 may receive, a groupcast transmission that includes a set of pre-configured SIBs dedicated to the identified UE category (“reduced capability”)).
As per claim 8,
[Rejection rational for claim 1 is applicable].
As per claim 9, Lei-Rastegardoost teaches the UE of claim 8, wherein the transmitting is performed using a portion of the set of PRACH resources dedicated for recap devices (Lei, see paragraph [0051], sends Msg.1 with a RACH request via a physical random access channel (PRACH).)
As per claim 10, Lei-Rastegardoost teaches the UE of claim 8, wherein message 1 (msg1) of a four step RACH process is explicitly indicated in the SIB for indicating the redcap device. (Lei, see paragraph [0086], …As shown by reference number 760, a UE B 120 may transmit, and the BS 110 may receive, an on-demand SI request that identifies the same UE category. As shown by reference number 765, the BS 110 may transmit, and the UE A 120 and UE B 120 may receive, a groupcast transmission that includes a set of pre-configured SIBs dedicated to the identified UE category (“reduced capability”)).
As per claim 11, Lei-Rastegardoost teaches the UE of claim 8, wherein the PRACH resource is entirely within a bandwidth of a redcap uplink (UL) bandwidth part (BWP). (Lei, see paragraph [0114], the on-demand SI request is transmitted using uplink control information (UCI).)
As per claim 12, Lei-Rastegardoost teaches the UE of claim 8, wherein the set of PRACH resources comprises a partition of a PRACH preamble dedicated for recap devices. (Lei, see paragraph [0041], may also process system information (e.g., for semi-static resource partitioning information (SRPI) and/or the like) and control information (e.g., CQI requests, grants, upper layer signaling).
As per claim 13, Lei-Rastegardoost teaches the UE of claim 12, wherein the PRACH preamble is a contention based preamble. (Lei, see paragraph [0056], msgA, an uplink message, a request message, a first (or initial) message in a two-step RACH procedure, and/or the like. The RAM preamble is sometimes referred to as a message A preamble, a msgA preamble, a preamble, and/or the like).
As per claim 14, Lei-Rastegardoost teaches the UE of claim 8, message A (msgA) of a two step RACH process is explicitly indicated in the SIB for indicating the redcap device. (Lei, see paragraph [0086], …As shown by reference number 760, a UE B 120 may transmit, and the BS 110 may receive, an on-demand SI request that identifies the same UE category. As shown by reference number 765, the BS 110 may transmit, and the UE A 120 and UE B 120 may receive, a groupcast transmission that includes a set of pre-configured SIBs dedicated to the identified UE category (“reduced capability”)).
As per claim 15,
[Rejection rational for claim 1 is applicable].
As per claim 16, Lei-Rastegardoost teaches the processor of claim 15, wherein the indication is received on a portion of the set of PRACH resources dedicated for recap devices. (Lei, see paragraph [0051], sends Msg.1 with a RACH request via a physical random access channel (PRACH).)
As per claim 17, Lei-Rastegardoost teaches the processor of claim 15, wherein the SIB explicitly indicates that message 1 (msg1) of a four step RACH process is to be used for the indication. (Lei, see paragraph [0086], …As shown by reference number 760, a UE B 120 may transmit, and the BS 110 may receive, an on-demand SI request that identifies the same UE category. As shown by reference number 765, the BS 110 may transmit, and the UE A 120 and UE B 120 may receive, a groupcast transmission that includes a set of pre-configured SIBs dedicated to the identified UE category (“reduced capability”)).
As per claim 18, Lei-Rastegardoost teaches the processor of claim 15, wherein the PRACH resource is entirely within a bandwidth of a redcap uplink (UL) bandwidth part (BWP). (Lei, see paragraph [0114], the on-demand SI request is transmitted using uplink control information (UCI).)
As per claim 19, Lei-Rastegardoost teaches the processor of claim 15, wherein the set of PRACH resources comprises a partition of a PRACH preamble dedicated for recap devices. (Lei, see paragraph [0056], msgA, an uplink message, a request message, a first (or initial) message in a two-step RACH procedure, and/or the like. The RAM preamble is sometimes referred to as a message A preamble, a msgA preamble, a preamble, and/or the like).
As per claim 20, Lei-Rastegardoost teaches the processor of claim 19, wherein the PRACH preamble is a contention based preamble. (Lei, see paragraph [0056], msgA, an uplink message, a request message, a first (or initial) message in a two-step RACH procedure, and/or the like. The RAM preamble is sometimes referred to as a message A preamble, a msgA preamble, a preamble, and/or the like).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 HERMON ASRES whose telephone number is (571)272-4257. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 9AM to 5PM.
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, Vivek Srivastava can be reached at (571)272-7304. 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.
/HERMON ASRES/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2449
Prosecution Insights