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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 01/07/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The amendment to the claims filed on 08/13/2025 complies with the requirements of 37 CFR 1.121(c) and has been entered. Claims 24, 34, and 41 are currently amended. Claims 1-23 remain canceled.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's Arguments/Remarks filed 01/07/2026 (hereinafter Resp.) focus on the combination of Rico Alvarino et al., U.S. Publication No. 2019/0159257 (hereinafter Rico) and Ahn et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20220394777 (hereinafter Ahn) not teaches the amended limitation in independent claims. However true, the argument is moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any references priorly applied, for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Objections
Claims 25, 26, and 30 are objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being substantial duplicate of Amended Claim 24 because Claim 24 now requires a RAR UL grant, as required by Claim 26, therefore inherently requiring a 2-step or a 4-step random access procedure, as required by Claim 25. In addition, Amended Claim 24 requires the limitation recited in Claim 30.
When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(a)
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.
Amended Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
To obtain a valid patent, a patent application must contain a full and clear description of the invention for which a patent is sought in the manner prescribed by 35 U.S.C. 112(a). MPEP § 2162. Here, the claim recites the limitation “the apparatus is configured to indicate which TBS and MCS combination” but neither an identity for the choice of a “TBS and MCS combination” nor a configuration of the claimed apparatus aimed at indicating the identity of the recited TBS and MCS combination are disclosed in the Specification. Furthermore, taking the amended claim as whole, the “TBS and MCS combination” feature lost its patentable significance because the newly claimed “MCS field indicating a maximum MCS index” feature is a species of the “TBS and MCS information” not of a “TBS and MCS combination” purportedly indicated by the configured apparatus. Therefore, a person of ordinary skills in the art, in light of the Specification and the knowledge available before the effective filing date, does not have sufficient structural or functional written description for understanding how the claimed apparatus is “configured to indicate which TBS and MCS combination.”
In addition, Amended Claim 24 recites the limitation “retrieve the TBS and MCS information from the memory” but the limitation is not sufficiently described in the Specification when the Specification merely recites the same limitation using the same language – See Spec., 50:7; see also MPEP §2161.01(I), citing Fiers v. Revel, 984 F.2d 1164, 1170 (Fed. Cir. 1993) (rejecting the argument that "only similar language in the specification or original claims is necessary to satisfy the written description requirement").
Thus, Amended Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. §112(a) for lack of sufficient written description.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
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.
Amended Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Amended Claim 24 recites the limitation "a set of MCS values in the TBS and MCS information". Because the claim also requires “the apparatus . . . to indicate which TBS and MCS combination” it is unclear whether the MCS values must satisfy also the “TBS and MCS combination” indicated by the configurated apparatus or not. Because the scope of this claim limitation is not reasonably ascertainable by those skilled in the art, even in light of the Specification, there is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Applicant could cure the antecedent issue and the lack of written description by removing the “TBS and MCS combination” feature from the claim language.
Claim 33 and 40, dependent from Amended Claims 24 and 34, respectively, recite the limitation “the message is encoded for transmission to the UE via new radio (NR) remaining minimum system information (RMSI), NR other system information (OSI), or dedicated radio resource control (RRC) signaling.” However, Amended Claims 24 and 34 now recite the limitation “the message comprises a Random Access Response (RAR) including a RAR uplink (UL) grant field” clearly requiring a random access procedure for transmitting the RAR uplink (UL) grant field to the UE, whereby a person of ordinary skills in the art would appreciate that a MAC PDU containing the RAR UL grant is sent through Msg2 or MsgB of a RACH procedure distinguishable from other messages such as RRC/SIB or PDCCH/DCI. In addition, Amended Claim 34 specifically requires “the SDT transmission is associated with a four-step random access (RACH) procedure or a two-step RACH procedure.” Because it is unclear to aperson of ordinary skills in the art, in light of the Specification, how to transmit RACH messages through the means required by the claim language, there is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation in the Claims 33 and 40. MPEP §§2173.05(a)&(e).
In sum, Claims 24, 33, and 40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C §112(b) for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
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.
The factual inquiries 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 24-46, as amended, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §102(a)(2) as anticipated by Park et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0288509 (hereinafter Park) or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. §103 as obvious over Park in view of Xue et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2023/0345517 (hereinafter Xue).
Regarding Claim 24, Park teaches an apparatus comprising: memory to store transport block size (TBS) and modulation and coding scheme (MCS) information associated with a small data transmission (SDT) from a user equipment (UE) and; processing circuitry, coupled with the memory (“the base station receives, from the UE, a request for the EDT by using message 1” – See [¶0988] and “In order to perform early data transmission (EDT) in the random access procedure in the wireless communication system, the base station includes a radio frequency (RF) module transmitting and receiving a radio signal, and a processor controlling the RF module” – See [¶1000] wherein “the processor of the base station controls the RF module to transmit, to the UE, a control message including first information indicating whether selection for a second transport size (TBS) smaller than a first TBS for message 3 is permitted and second information for the first TBS” – See [¶1001] and the processor “implements a function, a process, and/or a method which are proposed in FIGS. 1 to 19” while a memory “is connected with the processor to store various information for driving the processor” – See [¶1019], e.g., when “the number of values which may become the maximum TBS is promised 8” – See [¶0654] and “[t]he values . . . preferably include TBS, RU, modulation order, and the like indicated by the legacy MSG3 UL grant” – See [¶0657], “8 separate tables to be referred to are specified in 3GPP TS spec. according to the maximum TBS value via the SIB in order to support more various coding rates, etc. each []BS and the UE may be configured to follow 8 tables” – See [¶0660] and Table 40 showing “a 4-bit (16 states) table for indicating the TBS, the modulation, the number of RUs” – See [¶0662] wherein “it is assumed that the maximum TBS is 1000 and in this case, it is assumed that a total of 4 TBSs including 208, 256, and 680 may be used” – See [¶0663] that can be stored as shown in Figs. 22-25, depending on the amount of EDT information to be encoded, i.e., the amount of RUs and the coding rate for each allowed TBS value) to:
retrieve the TBS and MCS information from the memory (with “a new MSG3 UL Grant including the MCS, the TBS, the RU, etc., which may be indicated by a legacy MSG3 UL Grant” – See [¶0634], any of the tables in Figs. 22-25 may be used/retrieved); and
encode a message for transmission to the UE that includes the TBS and MCS information (e.g., “FIG. 23 shows the MCS index table in the UL grant of Msg.2 RAR, which is suitable for a method of dynamically directly informing 2)” to the UE– See [¶0682], e.g., “2) Simultaneously schedules maximum TBS and N-1 TBSs (less than the maximum TBS value, and each TBS may not overlap each other) induced from the value” – See [¶0830] as shown in Fig. 231 for MCS indices 3-5, wherein “N MCS indexes are used to schedule four TBS sets by the EDT Msg.3 and M MCS indexes are used to schedule only the maximum TBS value to the EDT Msg.3” – See [¶0685] and “N and M may be configured in system information or specified in the 3GPP TS spec. and may be configured as different values according to the CE level or a carrier location of the Msg.1” – See [¶0686] and M could be zero, as shown in Fig. 24 when “the maximum value of the TBS that may be scheduled in Msg.2 may be known from the system information in advance” – See [¶0831] and “the UL grant received from the base station is all scheduled for TBS1, TBS2, TBS3, and TBS4 (when N=4), and which TBS value is used to transmit Msg.3 may be directly selected by the UE by considering the size and type of data accumulated in the UL buffer of the UE” – See [¶0836]),
wherein the TBS and MCS information includes a first TBS and MCS combination and a second TBS and MCS combination (as shown in Figs. 23- 25, a first combination is TBS 88 bits and MCS 0-2, and a second combination is TBS T0, T1, T2, T3 and MCS 3-7)
the apparatus is configured to indicate which TBS and MCS combination (“Top three values of the MCS index may be used to reject the EDT request by the UE and when any other values are allocated, it may be interpreted that four or one TBS is scheduled for the purpose for the EDT” – See [¶0684]),
wherein the message comprises a Random Access Response (RAR) including a RAR uplink (UL) grant field (“a method for introducing a new MSG3 UL Grant including the MCS, the TBS, the RU, etc., which may be indicated by a legacy MSG3 UL Grant [is] described” 2 – See [¶0634] wherein “a first bit (R1 in FIG. 14) of the MAC RAR may be used to discriminate whether the corresponding MAC RAR indicates the UL grant for the EDT purpose” – See [¶0593] and Fig. 14 showing the RAR UL grant field), and
wherein the RAR UL grant field includes an MCS field indicating a maximum MCS index usable by the UE for the SDT from a set of MCS values in the TBS and MCS information (e.g., as shown in Table 40, MCS “States 0 to 2 of each table may be configured to include the same modulation, number of RUs, TBS value as legacy” – See [¶0661], i.e., a state between 0-2 indicates a maximum MCS index of 2 usable by the UE for the SDT/EDT, while any state greater than 2 indicates a maximum MCS index of 7 or 15 usable by the UE for the SDT/EDT, depending on whether the MCS field comprises 3 or 4 bits; alternatively one of the reserved MCS indices in Table 40 could be used to indicate the same).
Therefore, Amended Claim 24 is anticipated by Park. However, in an alternative interpretation of the claim language where the MCS field is required to indicate a maximum MCS value, usable by the UE, e.g., based on spectral efficiency3, during the transmission of the small/early data on one uplink message of the random access procedure, rather than the usable TBS values and the allocated RUs and coding rates associated with the indicated MCS index, as taught in Park, Xue also teaches a method wherein “[t]ransmission parameter designs are diversified and highly flexible” – See [¶0020] e.g., “after the terminal determines to send the uplink data to the access network device in the 2-step random access manner” and “the channel quality is greater than a [] threshold” – See [¶0017], the “threshold [is] used by the terminal to select a proper transmission parameter and a transmission parameter range” and “each of the at least one threshold corresponds to one transmission parameter range” – See [¶0019], whereby the parameter may be MCS or TBS.
Xue further teaches small data transmission (SDT) on random access procedure that when “the uplink data is uplink small data. The channel quality is RSRP. a transmission parameter is an MCS, a transmission parameter range is an MCS range” and a “MCS range may be defined by one upper bound (upper bound) and one lower bound (lower bound). Each bound corresponds to one transmission parameter. For example, each bound is a transmission parameter index value, that is, an MCS index value (l_MCS), and the transmission parameter index value uniquely indicates one transmission parameter” – See [¶0123] and the MsgA-RSRP-MCS-TheresholdForsmallData-r17 shown in [¶0124]. Therefore, Xue teaches the UE is preconfigured with a maximum MCS associated with a threshold RSRP value known to the UE “after the terminal obtains the quality of the channel between the terminal and the access network device” and “the terminal may compare the channel quality with thresholds corresponding to the transmission parameter ranges configured by the access network device to determine thresholds that are in the at least one threshold and that the channel quality is greater than and . . . send the uplink data by using a transmission resource that corresponds to any transmission parameter in a transmission parameter range corresponding to any one of the determined thresholds” – See [¶0121]. To be sure, Xue’s method is 2-step random access manner wherein “if the channel quality is greater than the threshold corresponding to the transmission parameter range, a transmission resource corresponding to a group of transmission parameters in the transmission parameter range may be selected by the terminal to send MsgA, where MsgA includes the preamble and the PUSCH that carries the uplink data the terminal may compare the channel quality with thresholds corresponding to the transmission parameter ranges configured by the access network device” – See [¶0119], i.e., the method is suitable when the UE is in high level coverage, e.g., CEModeB justified by the requirement of high channel quality.4 In that case, i.e., CEModeB, zero bits are allocated for the MCS field of a RAR UL grant, as disclosed in Table 6.2-1, § 6.2, 3GPP TS 36.213, at page 63. Because a UE may receive the RAR UL grant in a MsgB, as known in the art, the UE in CEModeB would be indicated by the lack of a MSC field in the RAR UL grant to use the best MSC corresponding to the RSRP level measured on the channel with the base station, and that is the maximum MSC configured to the UE through MsgA-RSRP-MCS-TheresholdForsmallData-r17. Furthermore, in NR, the UE may be configured with one RSRP threshold and that threshold may be the RSRP threshold for selection between 2-step RA type and 4-step RA type, as known in the art – See, e.g., 3GPP TS 38.321 referenced in footnote 3, so that for measured values higher than this RSRP threshold the UE is in better coverage and uses the method based on the 2-rach procedure in Xue, otherwise used the 4-rach procedure in Park.
Thus, Park and Xue each teach a random access based technique of sending SDT/EDT whereby some parameters associated with the transmission, e.g., the maximum TBS and/or edt-Parameters in Park and the MsgA-RSRP-MCS-TheresholdForsmallData-r17 in Xue, are configured to the UE through system information and/or RRC. A person of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have understood that the technique for sending SDT in the uplink of a 2-step random access procedure using a MsgB RAR UL grant field wherein a MCS field missing indicates to the UE to use the maximum MCS transmission parameter configured to the UE by the base station from a set of MCS values in the TBS and MCS information available to the base station for that UE, as taught by Xue, could improve upon the technique of sending EDT in the uplink of a 4-step random access procedure using a Msg.2 RAR UL grant wherein a MCS field being in a lower or higher range indicates to the UE the maximum MCS index that can be used to determine the transmission parameters configured to the UE by the base station from a set of MCS values in the TBS and MCS information available to the base station, the taught in Park, because the techniques are complementary based on the channel quality/coverage level determined by the UE and Park teaches already “the interpretation of the UL_grant for the EDT may vary for each CE level” – See [¶0576]. Furthermore, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have been able to carry out the combination through techniques known in the art. Finally, the combination achieves the predictable result of allowing the UE to use the faster 2-step RACH procedure when the UE is in better coverage, as taught in Xue, while falling back to the 4-step procedure taught in Park when the channel quality and coverage fall below a threshold. Therefore, Amended Claim 24 is, in the alternative, obvious over Park in view of Xue.
Regarding Claim 25, dependent from Amended Claim 24, Park further teaches the apparatus of claim 24 wherein the SDT transmission is associated with a four-step random access (RACH) procedure or a two-step RACH procedure (“The "early UL data transmission (hereinafter, referred to as 'EDT')" proposed in this specification is a method for transmitting uplink data in a state in which the UE does not enter the RRC_CONNECTED mode in the process of . . . the random access procedure” – See [¶0395], which for NB transmissions is a 4-step RACH procedure including Msg1. to Msg.4 as described in [¶¶0400-414], and “The EDT proposed in this specification is based on a method in which the UE in the RRC_IDLE state transmits the uplink data to the Msg.3 during the random access procedure” – See [¶0426]).
Therefore, Amended Claim 24 is anticipated by Park oor, in the alternative, obvious over Park in view of Xue.
Regarding Claim 26, dependent from Claim 25, Park further teaches wherein the processing circuitry is further to encode a Msg2 random access response (RAR) for transmission to the UE that includes a RAR uplink (UL) grant field (“The base station determines whether the corresponding EDT request is made through . . . the Msg.1 and transmits the Msg.2 to the UE by the corresponding RA-RNTI” – See [¶0513] and “[w]hen the base station accepts the EDT request and schedules the Msg.3 for the EDT request, the base station informs acceptance of the EDT request with a value of '1' in the reserved bit of the MAC RAR of the corresponding
RAPID,” – [¶0516] by “[u]tilizing UL-Grant of Existing RAR” – See [¶0545] and Fig. 14).
Therefore, Claim 26 is anticipated by Park or, in the alternative, obvious over Park in view of Xue.
Regarding Claim 27, dependent from Claim 26, Park further teaches the apparatus of claim 26 wherein the RAR UL grant field indicates a plurality of Msg3 PUSCH frequency domain resource allocations (FDRAs), or a plurality of time domain resource allocations (TDRAs) (e.g., “FIG. 15 is a diagram illustrating an example of repetition transmission of NPUSCH proposed in this specification” showing the Resource Units (RUs) as a plurality of TDRAs and the frequency resources FDRAs based on the subcarrier spacing indication in Table 38, corresponding to the “UL grant of the RAR for the EDT” – See [¶0627] “when the UL grant is indicated by a specific MCS index (when the specific MCS index is indicated as '100' in the table of FIG. 23, for example), when different repetition numbers are used for each TBS, and a parameter of T0 TBS indicated in the UL grant is Δf=15kHz, NRU=2, NscRU=3{3 , 4 , 5}, NslotUL=S , M rep NPUSCH=4 . . .and only T0 and T1 of the TBS are present in the table of FIG. 23 . . . and when R1,1 is 2, 64 slots are used when the UE selects T0 in FIG. 15”- – See [¶0704]).
Therefore, Claim 27 is anticipated by Park or, in the alternative, obvious over Park in view of Xue.
Regarding Claim 28, dependent from Claim 26, Park further teaches the apparatus of claim 26, wherein the RAR UL grant field indicates a single Msg3 PUSCH FDRA and a single Msg3 PUSCH TDRA (e.g., the table in Fig. 22 when the MCS index is ‘010’ indicates a single RU allocated for Msg.3 PUSCH without repetition, whereby “[t]he modulation values for EDT Msg.3 scheduling . . . is selected from pi/2 BPSK or pi/4 QPSK for the single-tone” – See [¶0714] and Fig. 8, showing FDRA inside one Resource Block/RB for single-tone Msg.3 transmission on one TDRA/RU; see also §§ 16.5.1.1-2, 3GPP TS 36.213 referenced in footnote 2, describing resource allocation for NPUSCH).
Therefore, Claim 28 is anticipated by Park or, in the alternative, obvious over Park in view of Xue.
Regarding Claim 29, dependent from Claim 26, Park further teaches the apparatus of claim 26, wherein the RAR UL grant field includes a reserved MCS field information to indicate that the UE is to ignore the MCS field for Msg3 PUSCH transmission (“the UE may inform the base station of the CE level thereof and a multi-tone capability through transmission of the Msg.1” – See [¶0420] and “the base station may perform appropriate Msg. 3 scheduling based thereon” – See [¶0420], whereby “the interpretation of the UL_grant for the EDT may vary for each CE level and in the simplest interpretation, the TBS may be different for each CE level” – See [¶0576], i.e., the contents of the Random Access Response Grant are interpreted according to CEModeA or CEModeB, as shown in Table 6-2, of § 6.2, 3GPP TS 36.213, at page 63, wherein for CEModeB zero bits are allocated for the MCS field, therefore the UE in coverage levels 2 or 3 knows to ignore the MCS field for Msg3 PUSCH transmission wherefor coverage levels 0 or 1 the UE interprets the 3 bits of the MCS field as explained in Park).
Therefore, Claim 29 is anticipated by Park or, in the alternative, obvious over Park in view of Xue.
Regarding Claim 30, dependent from Claim 26, Park already teaches wherein the RAR UL grant field includes an MCS field to indicate a maximum MCS index that the UE can use for Msg3 PUSCH transmission from a set of MCS values in the TBS and MCS information, as explained in Regarding Amended Claim 24. Because Amended Claim 24 and Claim 26 are anticipated by Park or, in the alternative, obvious over Park in view of Xue, Claim 30 is anticipated by Park or, in the alternative, obvious over Park in view of Xue.
Regarding Claim 31, dependent from Amended Claim 24, Park further teaches the apparatus of claim 24, wherein the processing circuitry is further to select PRACH preambles from group A or group B to indicate a TBS or MCS value for transmission of Msg3 PUSCH or MsgA PUSCH (“The request for the EDT may be identified based on . . . or a random access preamble identifier (RAPID)” – See [¶0934], e.g., “maximum TBS value may vary depending on characteristics of Msg.1 transmitted by the UE” – See [¶0832], including “a CE level, a RA-RNTI, a RAPID, and the like” – See [¶0833] whereby the preamble is chosen by the UE according to § 5.1.1 3GPP TS 36.321 referenced in footnote 2, teaching, at page 19-20, that “preambles that are contained in Random Access Preambles group A and Random Access Preambles group B are calculated from the parameters numberOfRA-Preambles and sizeOfRA-PreamblesGroupA” and “[i]f sizeOfRA-PreamblesGroupA is equal to numberOfRA-Preambles then there is no Random Access Preambles group B. The preambles in Random Access Preamble group A are the preambles 0 to sizeOfRA-PreamblesGroupA – 1 and, if it exists, the preambles in Random Access Preamble group B are the preambles sizeOfRA-PreamblesGroupA to numberOfRA-Preambles – 1 from the set of 64 preambles as defined in TS 36.211” wherein the specified parameters are defined in 3GPP specifications,5 therefore, when a UE choses a Preamble group B, i.e., larger size preamble for Msg.1, the base station may infer a larger maximum TBS in the RAR UL grant for the UE with that RAPID).
Therefore, Claim 31 is anticipated by Park or, in the alternative, obvious over Park in view of Xue.
Regarding Claim 32, dependent from Amended Claim 24, Park further teaches wherein the SDT transmission from the UE is associated with a Msg3 transmission (“if the UE transmits MSG1 to a place corresponding to a resource (e.g., a subcarrier index, a resource pool, etc.) predetermined for the EDT, when the same TBS, RU, and modulation order as the value indicated by the legacy MSG3 UL grant in the new MSG3 UL grant, the UE determines that the EDT is rejected and acts on the legacy NPRACH procedure (i.e., falls back)” – See [¶0658], i.e., the EDT transmission from the UE is associated with a Msg3 transmission).
Therefore, Claim 32 is anticipated by Park or, in the alternative, obvious over Park in view of Xue.
Regarding Claim 33, dependent from Amended Claim 24, Park further teaches wherein the message is encoded for transmission to the UE uses information transmitted to the UE via new radio (NR) remaining minimum system information (RMSI), NR other system information (OSI), or dedicated radio resource control (RRC) signaling (e.g., “N and M may be configured in system information or specified in the 3GPP TS spec. and may be configured as different values according to the CE level or a carrier location of the Msg.1” – See [¶0686] and “Table 33 shows an example of the SystemlnformationBlockTypel (SIB1)-NB message” – See [¶0374]; in addition, “The random access procedure may be performed by a request by the base station when the base station needs to transmit downlink data to a specific UE a base station” whereby “the base station may directly indicate the process . . . to the RRC_CONNECTED UE through PDCCH” – See [¶0394], however, “the UL_grant is generally called RAR” and “is delivered to a MAC layer” and “is generally different from the UL_grant (DCI format NO) included in the NPDCCH and is characteristically used only for Msg.3 scheduling” – See [¶¶0406-7]).
Therefore, Claim 33 is anticipated by Park or, in the alternative, obvious over Park in view of Xue.
Regarding Amended Claim 34, Park teaches one or more non-transitory computer-readable media storing instructions that, when executed by one or more processors a next-generation NodeB (gNB) (“The base station includes a processor 2011, a memory 2012 . . . The memory is connected with the processor to store various information for driving the processor” – See [¶1019] and “software code may be stored in the memory and executed by the processor” – See [¶1030] and wherein “(BS) may be substituted with another term, such as a fixed station, a Node B, an eNB (evolved-NodeB)” – See [¶0059]) to:
determine transport block size (TBS) and modulation and coding scheme (MCS) information associated with a small data transmission (SDT) from a user equipment (UE) (“When the base station accepts the EDT request and schedules the Msg.3 for the EDT request, the base station informs acceptance of the EDT request with a value of '1' in the reserved bit of the MAC RAR of the corresponding RAPID” – See [¶0516], and “[t]he base station may contiguously support the EDT by referring to the uplink buffer status of the UE . . additionally delivered through the corresponding NPUSCH after decoding of the received Msg.3 is successful” – See [¶0517] and “[w]hen the uplink buffer data of the UE . . . is bigger than the TBS scheduled by the Msg.3 and may not be transmitted to the Msg.3 by the EDT, the UE may additionally inform such a state by the Msg.3” – See [¶0524] and “[t]he base station may newly transmit the MAC RAR for the Msg.3 transmission with reference to the informing” – See [¶0525], i.e., the base station determines TBS and MCS based on UE needs, e.g., “indicating the TBS and the N_RU . . . by jointly interpreting a modulation and coding scheme (MCS) and a reserved state of I_sc” – See [¶0547] and Tables 39- 40, after “the base station and the UE accurately understand that the transmission of the Msg.1 is intended for the EDT together” – See [¶0551]),
wherein the SDT transmission is associated with a four-step random access (RACH) procedure or a two-step RACH procedure (“The base station determines whether the corresponding EDT request is made through the NPRACH resource (NPRACH starting carrier (tone) index and/or non-anchor carrier index and/or RAPID used for NPRACH transmission) of the Msg.1 and transmits the Msg.2 to the UE by the corresponding RA-RNTI” – See [¶0513], i.e., the SDT/EDT transmission is associated with a 4-step random access procedure); and
execute the encode step recited in Amended Claim 24 comprising the same features and limitations as recited in Amended Claim 24 using the same language.
Because Amended Claim 24 is anticipated by Park or, in the alternative, obvious over Park in view of Xue, Amended Claim 34 is anticipated by Park or, in the alternative, obvious over Park in view of Xue.
Regarding Claims 35-40, dependent from Amended Claim 34, each claim requires the same limitations as in Claims 27-33, respectively, recited with the same language. Because Claims 27-34 are anticipated by Park or, in the alternative, obvious over Park in view of Xue, each of the Claims 35-40 is anticipated by Park or, in the alternative, obvious over Park in view of Xue.
Regarding Claim 41, Park teaches one or more non-transitory computer-readable media storing instructions that, when executed by one or more processors cause a user equipment (UE) (“The UE includes a processor 2021, a memory 2022, and an RF module 2023” and [t]he memory is connected with the processor to store various information for driving the processor”– See [¶¶1020 – 21] and Fig. 20; “In order to perform early data transmission (EDT) in the random access procedure in the wireless communication system, the UE may include a radio frequency (RF) module transmitting and receiving a radio signal, and a processor controlling the RF module” – See [¶0966]) to:
receive, from a next-generation NodeB (gNB), a configuration message (“the processor controls the RF module to receive a UL grant for the message 3 from the base station” – See [¶0970]); and
encode a message for transmission to the gNB based on the configuration message (“the processor controls the RF module to transmit the message 3 to the base station” – See [¶0972]; based on the “first information indicating whether selection for a second transport size (TBS) smaller than a first TBS for message 3 is permitted and second information for the first TBS” – See [¶0967] and/or “select a specific second TBS in the second TBS subset and transmit the message 3 according to a repetition number for the specific second TBS” – See [¶0974], i.e., encoding a message for transmission to the gNB based on the received configuration message)
wherein the SDT transmission is associated with a four-step random access (RACH) procedure or a two-step RACH procedure (“message 1, the UL grant, the message 3, and the message 4 described in FIG. 18 may mean a message to be transmitted and received to and from the base station in the random access procedure” – See [¶0964])
and the configuration message includes the determined transport block size (TBS) and modulation and coding scheme (MCS) information associated with a small data transmission (SDT) from a user equipment (UE) recited in Amended Claim 34, using the same language, and further has the same features and limitations as recited in one of the Amended Claims 24 and 34.
Because each of the Amended Claims 24 and 34 is anticipated by Park or, in the alternative, obvious over Park in view of Xue, Amended Claim 41 is anticipated by Park or, in the alternative, obvious over Park in view of Xue.
Regarding Claim 42, dependent from Amended Claim 41, Park further teaches the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 41, wherein the message is a Msg3 message or a MsgA PUSCH message (“the processor controls the RF module to transmit the message 3 to the base station” – See [¶0972]).
Therefore, Claim 42 is anticipated by Park or, in the alternative, obvious over Park in view of Xue.
Regarding Claim 43, dependent from Amended Claim 41, the claim language recites in the alternative the limitations in Claims 27 and 28, with no other limitations, as applied to the product of Amended Claim 41. Because any one of the Claims 27 and 28 is anticipated by Park, or, in the alternative, obvious over Park in view of Xue, Claim 43 is also anticipated by Park, or, in the alternative, obvious over Park in view of Xue.
Regarding Claim 44, dependent from Claim 43, Park further teaches the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 43 wherein the media further stores instructions for causing the UE to derive one or more TBSs based on the configuration message and the FDRAs or TDRAs indicated in the RAR UL grant field (“the UL grant received from the base station is all scheduled for TBS1, TBS2, TBS3, and TBS4 (when N=4), and which TBS value is used to transmit Msg.3 may be directly selected by the UE by considering the size and type of data accumulated in the UL buffer of the UE” – See [¶0836], e.g., “a TBS value that requires the least amount of padding bits other than the data, may be selected in Msg.3” – See [¶0837] and Fig. 23 wherein the Rij represent the resource allocation for each TBS value indicated and the RUs are shown in Fig. 15 on the resource grid corresponding to the subcarrier spacing indicated in the UL grant, as shown in Table 38 and in Fig. 8).
Therefore, Claim 44 is anticipated by Park or, in the alternative, obvious over Park in view of Xue.
Regarding Claim 45 and 46, dependent from Amended Claim 41, the claim language recites in the alternative the limitations of each of the Claims 29 and 30, and the limitations of Claim 31, respectively, as applied to the product of Amended Claim 41. Because any one of the Claims 29-31 and 41 is anticipated by Park, or, in the alternative, obvious over Park in view of Xue, each of the Claims 45 and 46 is anticipated by Park, or, in the alternative, obvious over Park in view of Xue.
In sum, Claims 24-46, as amended, are rejected under 35 U.S.C § 102(a)(2) over Park, or, in the alternative, under §103 over Park in view of Xue.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Rico Alvarino et al., U.S. Publication No. 2019/0159257, as described in previous Office actions;
Ahn et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20220394777, as described in previous Office actions;
Luo et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0378017 discloses EDT using NPRACH;
Zhao et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0196355 discloses 4-step RACH procedure and RAR UL grant;
Liu et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0058823 discloses EDT according to the uplink grant and/or the broadcast message, a maximum transmission block size allowed during the early data transmission and a resource and a repetition number corresponding thereto;
Lei et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0039147 discloses configuration message indicating a configured grant-small data transfer (CG-SDT) group that includes the UE;
Agiwal et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 20230284329, discloses small data transmission whereby gNB configures the parameter sdt-TBS-groupA and sdt-TBS-groupB which indicates the maximum allowed transport block sizes for small data transmission using 4-step RA for preamble group A and preamble group B;
Charbit et al., U.S. Patent No. 11,039,477, discloses various methods and apparatus for PRACH resource partitioning and multiple grants in random access response (RAR) for early data transmission (EDT);
Ye et al., U.S. Patent No. 10,779,333, discloses methods and apparatus for early data transmission (EDT) that is transmitted during the random access procedure whereby PRACH resources may include one or both of time resources and frequency resources, e.g., a dedicated set of PRACH time resources and/or PRACH frequency resources may be configured to indicate that the UE supports EDT in Msg3;
Chen et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20200100294, discloses methods and apparatus for a UE to transmit multiple Msg3 transmissions on multiple UL grants;
Shin et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20220201772, discloses method and apparatus of a UE performing a 2- or 4-step random access process in a shared spectrum interpreting an FDRA field for PUSCH transmissions corresponding to an RAR in a 4-step random access process or a fallback RAR in a 2-step random access process;
Kim et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20240430930, discloses method of a terminal in random access procedure receiving UL grant included in the Msg2 that may include information indicating a TDRA table used for repeated transmission of the Msg3;
3GPP TS 36.213 V16.2.0 (2020-06), “Technical Specification Group Radio Access Network; Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access (E-UTRA)”;
3GPP TS 36.321 V16.1.0 (2020-07), “Technical Specification Group Radio Access Network; Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access (E-UTRA); Medium Access Control (MAC) protocol specification (Release 16)”;
3GPP TS 36.331 V16.1.1 (2020-07), “Technical Specification Group Radio Access Network; Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access (E-UTRA); Radio Resource Control (RRC); Protocol specification (Release 16)”;
3GPP TS 38.213 V16.2.0 (2020-06), “Technical Specification Group Radio Access Network; NR; Physical layer procedures for control (Release 16);”
3GPP TS 38.214 V16.2.0 (2020-06), “Technical Specification Group Radio Access Network; NR; Physical layer procedures for data (Release 16);”
3GPP TS 38.321 V16.1.0 (2020-07), “Technical Specification Group Radio Access Network; NR; Medium Access Control (MAC) protocol specification (Release 16)”;
3GPP TS 38.331 V16.0.0 (2020-03), “Technical Specification Group Radio Access Network; NR; Radio Resource Control (RRC) protocol specification (Release 16).”
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LUCIA GHEORGHE GRADINARIU whose telephone number is (571)272-1377. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00am - 5:00pm EST.
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, Joseph AVELLINO can be reached at (571)272-3905. 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.
/L.G.G./ Examiner, Art Unit 2478
/JOSEPH E AVELLINO/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2478
1See also [¶0566] (“rejecting or accepting the EDT request or allocating a larger TBS by using MCS index MSB 1 bit in the UL_grant of the existing RAR”) explaining why only 3 bits of the 4-bit MCS field in Table 38 are used for the MCS index in Figs. 22-25.
2 Reference is made to “a narrowband random access response grant according to Lower Paragraph 16.3.3 of 3GPP TS36.213” – See [¶0141]; see also 3GPP TS 36.213 V16.2.0 (2020-06), “3rd Generation Partnership Project;
Technical Specification Group Radio Access Network; Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access (E-UTRA);
Physical layer procedures (Release 16)” (hereinafter 3GPP TS 36.213) wherein, § 16.3.3, at page 528, describes Msg.2 RAR UL grant and shows, in Table 16.3.3-1, the legacy MCS index table for Msg3 NPUSCH corresponding to Fig. 22 in Park, and further discloses that “higher layers indicate the Nr-bit UL Grant to the physical layer, as defined in 3GPP TS 36.321,” referencing § 6.1.5, 3GPP TS 36.321 V16.1.0 (2020-07), “Technical Specification Group Radio Access Network; Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access (E-UTRA); Medium Access Control (MAC) protocol specification (Release 16)” (hereinafter 3GPP TS 36.321) describing, at page 110-112 RAR MAC PDU.
3 See, e.g., Tables 6.1.4.1-1&2, § 6.1.4.1, at page 126-127,3GPP TS 38.214 V16.2.0 (2020-06), “Technical Specification Group Radio Access Network; NR; Physical layer procedures for data (Release 16);” (hereinafter 3GPP TS 38.214).
4 See, e.g., 3GPP TS 36.321, at page 21, discussing “criteria to select PRACH resources based on RSRP measurement per enhanced coverage level supported in the Serving Cell rsrp-ThresholdsPrachInfoList”; see also 3GPP TS 38.321 V16.1.0 (2020-07), “Technical Specification Group Radio Access Network; NR; Medium Access Control (MAC) protocol specification (Release 16)” (hereinafter 3GPP TS 38.321) disclosing, at page 21, “msgA-RSRP-Threshold: an RSRP threshold for selection between 2-step RA type and 4-step RA type when both 2-step and 4-step RA type Random Access Resources are configured in the UL BWP.”
5 See 3GPP TS 36.331 V16.1.1 (2020-07), “Technical Specification Group Radio Access Network; Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access (E-UTRA); Radio Resource Control (RRC); Protocol specification (Release 16)” (hereinafter 3GPP TS 36.331) defining, at page 591, the sizeOfRA-PreamblesGroupA parameter in RACH-ConfigCommon Information Element as maximum 256 bits.