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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s arguments filed 14 September 2026 have been fully considered. To the extent the arguments are directed to the previously rejected limitations requiring selection of a random-access type from a plurality including two-step and four-step random access, and initiation of random access based on both the resource and the selected type, the arguments are moot with respect to independent claims 1 and 11 because those limitations have been removed from those claims.
Those limitations remain in dependent claims 2–6 and 12–16 and are also recited in new claim 23. Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive as to those claims because, as explained in the rejections below, Wei discloses two-step and four-step random-access procedures and terminal selection between those procedures based on signal-quality conditions, while Jiang teaches slice-specific random-access configurations.
The previous rejections are withdrawn and replaced by the new grounds of rejection set forth below. Any remaining arguments directed solely to the previous combinations or mappings are moot in view of the withdrawal of those rejections.
Claims 1-19 and 21-23 are pending.
Claims 1-19 and 21-23 are rejected.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 14 September 2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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.
Claims 1, 7–11, 17, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Nokia et al., “Initial Radio Resource Isolation for Slicing,” 3GPP TSG-RAN WG2 #99, R2-1709202 (“Nokia”), in view of Xiaomi, “PRACH Partitioning, Access and Congestion Control Consideration for Network Slicing,” 3GPP TSG-RAN WG2 #97, R2-1700998 (“Xiaomi”), both as recited in the IDS filed 6 April 2023, and further in view of Gao et al. (US 2023/0029004 A1), Wang et al. (US 2019/0037409 A1), and Jiang et al. (US 2023/0094982 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Nokia discloses a random access method, comprising: sending, by a non-access stratum (NAS) of a terminal device, a radio access network (RAN) slicing area identity (RSA ID) of a first network slice service to an access stratum (AS) of the terminal device, wherein the first network slice service is a to-be-initiated network slice service (Nokia, §§1 and 2.1, disclosing slice-assistance information containing identifiers for differentiating and selecting network slices, including slice and service-type identifiers, and providing different PRACH resources for different slices during initial access).
Nokia does not specifically disclose that the slice identifier is sent by NAS to AS. Xiaomi discloses that, to support PRACH partitioning, NAS informs AS of the network slice that triggers RRC connection establishment (Xiaomi, §2.1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Xiaomi’s NAS-to-AS signaling into Nokia’s method to enable AS to identify the network slice for which initial access is being initiated and to select the corresponding slice-specific PRACH resource.
Nokia further discloses wherein the RSA ID corresponds to one or more pieces of single network slice selection assistance information (S-NSSAI) because Nokia’s slice-assistance information includes identifiers representing the slice and service type and uses those identifiers to distinguish and select among network slices.
Nokia-Xiaomi does not specifically disclose wherein a correspondence between the RSA ID and the one or more pieces of S-NSSAI is valid within a range of a tracking area (TA).
Gao discloses that network-slice information, including supported S-NSSAIs, is configured and maintained on a per-tracking-area basis, such that the S-NSSAI information is applicable within the corresponding tracking area (Gao, ¶ [0168]).
It would have been obvious to apply Gao’s tracking-area scope to the correspondence between Nokia’s slice-area identifier and the associated S-NSSAI information. Doing so would provide consistent slice identification within a mobility-management region and reduce repeated signaling as the terminal moves among cells within the same tracking area.
Nokia-Xiaomi-Gao does not specifically disclose wherein the RSA ID is configured by a network device and delivered to the terminal device via non-access stratum (NAS) signaling.
Wang discloses that a network control node determines which network slice is assigned to a WTRU and sends a response NAS message to the WTRU concerning the assigned network slice (Wang, ¶¶ [0065]–[0068]). Wang further discloses that a control entity of the selected network slice sends a NAS message to the WTRU and provides the WTRU with an identity or address pointing to the selected network slice (Wang, ¶ [0069]). Wang also discloses that the network provides available network-slice identifiers to the WTRU (Wang, ¶ [0049]).
It would have been obvious to modify Nokia-Xiaomi-Gao according to Wang such that the network configures the RSA ID identifying the applicable network slice and delivers the RSA ID to the terminal device through network-to-terminal NAS signaling. Doing so would enable the network to control slice assignment and provide the terminal with the identifier needed to identify and subsequently access the assigned network slice.
Nokia further discloses in response to receiving the RSA ID from the NAS of the terminal device, determining, by the AS of the terminal device, a first random access time-frequency resource corresponding to the first network slice service based on the RSA ID and a first mapping relationship, wherein the first mapping relationship is a mapping relationship between a network slice service and a random access time-frequency resource (Nokia, §§1 and 2.1, disclosing differentiation of PRACH resources for different network slices based on slice-assistance information).
Nokia-Xiaomi-Gao-Wang does not specifically disclose that, in response to receiving the RSA ID from NAS, AS determines the corresponding random-access time-frequency resource.
Jiang discloses that, when NAS requests AS to initiate an RRC connection for a particular network slice, AS selects the random-access resource configured by the network device for that slice and initiates the random-access procedure (Jiang, ¶¶ [0075]–[0078]).
It would have been obvious to incorporate Jiang’s AS resource-selection procedure into Nokia-Xiaomi-Gao-Wang to enable AS to select the slice-specific random-access resource identified by the NAS-provided slice information. Such a modification would reduce inter-slice interference and congestion and improve random-access efficiency and slice isolation.
Xiaomi further discloses wherein the first mapping relationship is configured by the network device and received by the terminal device via system information or radio resource control (RRC) signaling because the RAN indicates a slice-specific PRACH configuration or RACH configuration to the terminal through a system information block or dedicated signaling (Xiaomi, §2.1).
It would have been obvious to deliver Nokia’s slice-to-PRACH mapping using Xiaomi’s system-information or dedicated-RRC signaling so that the terminal possesses the network-configured mapping required to select the appropriate random-access resource for the requested network slice.
Nokia-Xiaomi-Jiang-Gao-Wang further render obvious initiating, by the terminal device, random access based on the first random access time-frequency resource because, after determining the PRACH resource corresponding to the requested network slice, the terminal uses that resource to initiate the random-access procedure. Using the determined resource for its intended random-access function constitutes a predictable use of the slice-specific PRACH configuration disclosed by the cited references.
Regarding claim 7, Xiaomi further discloses receiving, by the terminal device, a first message, wherein the first message comprises the first mapping relationship because the RAN provides the slice-specific PRACH configuration or RACH configuration to the terminal (Xiaomi, §2.1).
Regarding claim 8, Xiaomi further discloses wherein the first message comprises a physical random access channel mask index, and the physical random access channel mask index indicates the first mapping relationship because the slice-specific PRACH configuration identifies the PRACH resources applicable to the corresponding slice (Xiaomi, §2.1).
Regarding claim 9, Xiaomi further discloses wherein the first message is a radio resource control (RRC) message, a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) message, or a system message because Xiaomi teaches communicating the slice-specific PRACH or RACH configuration through a system information block or dedicated signaling (Xiaomi, §2.1).
Regarding claim 10, Nokia further discloses if the terminal device has a plurality of to-be-initiated network slice services, determining, by the terminal device from the plurality of to-be-initiated network slice services based on priorities of the network slice services, to initiate the first network slice service, wherein the first network slice service is a network slice service with a highest priority in the plurality of to-be-initiated network slice services. Nokia teaches differentiated treatment and selection among network-slice services according to customer and service requirements, including service priority and expected network behavior.
Claim 11 recites a communication apparatus configured to perform operations corresponding to the method of claim 1, including the same RSA-ID, TA-validity, network configuration, NAS-delivery, mapping, signaling, resource-determination, and random-access limitations. Claim 11 is therefore rejected for substantially the same reasons set forth above regarding claim 1.
Claims 17 and 18 recite apparatus limitations substantially corresponding to claims 7 and 8, respectively, and are rejected for substantially the same reasons.
Claims 2–6, 12–16, and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Nokia in view of Xiaomi, Gao, Wang, and Jiang, as applied above, and further in view of Wei et al. (US 2019/0335381 A1).
The combination applied above does not specifically disclose random-access procedures including both two-step and four-step random-access types and selecting between such procedures based on reference-signal quality.
Wei discloses that random-access procedures include two-step and four-step random-access procedures (Wei, ¶¶ [0065] and [0068] and Figs. 2–4). Wei further discloses that a terminal determines which random-access procedure to use based on operating conditions, including signal-quality thresholds (Wei, ¶¶ [0064], [0082], [0083], [0090], and [0101] and Figs. 2–4).
It would have been obvious to incorporate Wei’s two-step and four-step random-access procedures into the combined system because selecting an access procedure according to prevailing radio conditions would reduce access delay when channel conditions support two-step access while retaining the reliability of four-step access under poorer channel conditions.
Regarding claim 2, Wei further discloses:
the first random access time-frequency resource comprises random access time-frequency resources corresponding to two-step random access and random access time-frequency resources corresponding to four-step random access;
the first random access time-frequency resource comprises only random access time-frequency resources corresponding to two-step random access; or
the first random access time-frequency resource comprises only random access time-frequency resources corresponding to four-step random access(Wei, Figs. 2–4 and ¶¶ [0064], [0081], and [0082]).
It would have been obvious to provide resources for both procedures or only the resources applicable to a supported procedure according to the random-access procedures enabled by the network, thereby conserving radio resources and supporting the desired access procedure.
Regarding claim 3, Wei further discloses wherein the first random access time-frequency resource comprises the random access time-frequency resources corresponding to two-step random access and the random access time-frequency resources corresponding to four-step random access, and wherein the method further comprises: obtaining, by the terminal device, signal quality of a reference signal; and when the signal quality is greater than or equal to a preset threshold, determining, by the terminal device, that a random access type corresponding to the first network slice service is a two-step random access; or when the signal quality is less than a preset threshold, determining, by the terminal device, that a random access type corresponding to the first network slice service is a four-step random access (Wei, Figs. 2–4 and ¶¶ [0064], [0082], [0083], [0090], and [0101]).
Regarding claim 4, Wei further discloses the first random access time-frequency resource comprises only the random access time-frequency resources corresponding to two-step random access; or the first random access time-frequency resource comprises only the random access time-frequency resources corresponding to four-step random access (Wei, Figs. 2–4 and ¶¶ [0064], [0081], [0082], and [0101]).
Regarding claim 5, Wei further discloses wherein the first random access time-frequency resource comprises the random access time-frequency resources corresponding to two-step random access and the random access time-frequency resources corresponding to four-step random access; determining, by the terminal device, that a second random access time-frequency resource is a random access time-frequency resource corresponding to a random access type in the first random access time-frequency resource; and initiating, by the terminal device, random access based on the second random access time-frequency resource (Wei, Figs. 2–4 and ¶¶ [0064], [0082], [0083], [0090], and [0101]).
Regarding claim 6, Wei further renders obvious:
the second random access time-frequency resource comprises only one random access time-frequency resource, and initiating random access by using the second random access time-frequency resource; or
the second random access time-frequency resource comprises a plurality of random access time-frequency resources, selecting randomly one random access time-frequency resource from the plurality, and initiating random access based on the selected random access time-frequency resource(Wei, Figs. 2–4 and ¶¶ [0064], [0082], [0083], and [0101]).
Selecting the sole available resource when only one resource is configured, or randomly selecting among multiple equivalent contention-based resources, would have been a predictable implementation of Wei’s random-access procedure to distribute access attempts and reduce repeated collisions.
Claims 12–16 recite apparatus limitations substantially corresponding to claims 2–6, respectively, and are rejected for substantially the same reasons.
Regarding claim 23, the combination applied to claim 1 does not specifically disclose determining, by the terminal device, a first random access type corresponding to the first network slice service from a plurality of random access types based on a second mapping relationship, wherein the second mapping relationship is a mapping relationship between the network slice service and a random access type, and wherein the plurality of random access types include a two-step random access type and a four-step random access type; and when signal quality of a reference signal is greater than or equal to a preset threshold, determining, by the terminal device, that the first random access type is the two-step random access type, and when the signal quality is less than the preset threshold, determining, by the terminal device, that the first random access type is the four-step random access type.
Wei discloses that random-access procedures include two-step and four-step random-access procedures and that a terminal determines which procedure to use by comparing reference-signal quality with a threshold (Wei, ¶¶ [0064], [0065], [0068], [0082], [0083], [0090], and [0101] and Figs. 2–4).
Jiang further teaches that different network slices correspond to different random-access configurations (Jiang, ¶¶ [0075]–[0078]). Jiang therefore supplies the association between the network-slice service and its random-access configuration, while Wei supplies the available procedure types and the signal-quality criterion for selecting between those procedure types.
It would have been obvious to represent the association between a network-slice service and its supported random-access procedure as a mapping relationship. Such a mapping would permit the terminal to identify the random-access procedures applicable to the requested slice. It further would have been obvious to select between the mapped two-step and four-step procedures using Wei’s signal-quality threshold to reduce access delay when channel conditions permit two-step access and to provide more robust four-step access under poorer signal conditions.
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Nokia in view of Xiaomi, Gao, Wang, and Jiang, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Fu et al. (US 2022/0353804 A1).
The combination applied to claim 1 does not specifically disclose if the terminal device has a plurality of to-be-initiated network slice services, determining, by the terminal device from the plurality of to-be-initiated network slice services based on quantities of corresponding random access time-frequency resources of the network slice services in a preset time period, to initiate the first network slice service, wherein the first network slice service is a network slice service that has a largest quantity of corresponding random access time-frequency resources in the preset time period in the plurality of to-be-initiated network slice services.
Fu discloses that a terminal receives a correspondence between network-slice information and RACH parameters and performs cell access based on that correspondence (Fu, ¶¶ [0075]–[0078]). Fu further discloses that the RACH parameters may include totalNumberOfRA-Preambles, ssb-perRACH-OccasionAndCB-PreamblesPerSSB, and prach-ConfigurationIndex, which define the quantity and temporal configuration of available random-access resources (Fu, ¶ [0078]).
Fu additionally teaches that, when multiple network slices are active or supported, the terminal compares available S-NSSAI combinations, selects a combination having the largest number of active or supported network slices, and determines the corresponding RACH parameter for cell access (Fu, ¶¶ [0103]–[0109] and [0123]).
It would have been obvious to apply Fu’s largest-quantity selection technique to the quantities of slice-specific random-access resources disclosed by the combined system and to select, among multiple network-slice services awaiting initiation, the service having the largest quantity of corresponding random-access resources during a predetermined period. Fu expressly identifies RACH parameters defining both the quantity and temporal arrangement of random-access opportunities. Selecting the service having the greatest number of such opportunities during the relevant period would predictably reduce contention and access delay and increase the probability of successful random access. The particular period over which the resources are counted would have been an optimization variable selected according to the configured PRACH periodicity and scheduling interval.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure (see form 892).
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 LUAT T PHUNG whose telephone number is (571)270-3126. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9 AM - 6 PM.
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, Marcus Smith can be reached on (571) 272-3988. 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.
/Luat Phung/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2468
