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 .
Status of the Claims
Based on the current set of claims (Claims, 23 April 2026), Claims 1, 3, 6-11 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments regarding a second newly amended feature of Claims 1, 9, 10, and 11 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Zhao does not disclose, suggest, or teach “the transmitter performs the repetitive transmission of the third message based on announcement information containing information elements about the repetitive transmission, the information elements including at least a set of values regarding repetition” because “the information element about repeated transmissions is not contained in announcement information as claimed” (Remarks, 23 April 2026, Pg. 7, Rejections under AIA 35 U.S.C. §103”, Claims 1, 3, 6, and 9-11).
Examiner respectfully disagrees.
The first issue here is whether “announcement information” can be correlated to “radio resource control (RRC) signaling” indicated in the Zhao reference under broadest reasonable interpretation. The rule, here, is “[a]lthough the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims” (See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993)). Upon review of Applicant’s specification, Applicant does not explicitly define the term, “announcement information”. Furthermore, Applicant only provides an example, which states, in part, that “announcement information” may be “RACH-ConfigCommon” (Specification, 14 April 2023, ¶110 & ¶112). Here, an example of a term is not sufficient to define said term. Applicant’s allegation that the recitation of “announcement information” carriers a different meaning to a general allegation that the claims define a patentable invention without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references; thus, Applicant’s argument fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.111(b).
The second issue is whether “the information elements including at least a set of values regarding repetition” is disclosed, suggested, or taught by the Zhao reference. Zhao explicitly states that “first information element is an information element that is in the RRC signaling and that is used to determine the maximum quantity of HARQ transmissions of the second Msg 3” and “second information element is an information element that is in the RRC signaling and that is used to determine the maximum quantity of HARQ transmissions of the first Msg 3” (Zhao, ¶115). Here, Zhao explicitly discloses at least two “information elements” and further discloses a first maximum quantity of HARQ transmissions for a first set of Msg3 and a second maximum quantity of HARQ transmissions for a second set of Msg3 (Zhao, ¶115).
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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.
Claims 1, 3, 6-8, 9, 10, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tirronen et al. (US 20200329508 A1; hereinafter referred to as “Tirronen”) in view of Axnas et al. (US 20230262753 A1; hereinafter referred to as “Axnas”) in further view of Zhao et al. (US 20200367295 A1; hereinafter referred to as “Zhao”).
Regarding Claim 1, Claim 1 is rejected on the same basis as Claim 10.
Regarding Claim 3, Tirronen in view of Axnas in further view of Zhao discloses the terminal of claim 1.
Tirronen further discloses the transmitter performs the repetitive transmission of the third message based on the second message (¶48 & Fig. 4 (404) & ¶68-69 & ¶26, Tirronen discloses that the UE transmits additional random access responses based on uplink (UL) grant included in the random access response (RAR). Examiner correlates the UL grant to “the second message”. Examiner correlates the third message (or MSG3) to “the third message”).
Regarding Claim 6, Tirronen in view of Axnas in further view of Zhao discloses the terminal of claim 1.
Tirronen further discloses the transmitter performs the repetitive transmission of the third message based on the second message (¶48 & Fig. 4 (404) & ¶68-69 & ¶26, Tirronen discloses that the UE transmits additional random access responses based on uplink (UL) grant included in the random access response (RAR)).
Regarding Claim 7, Tirronen in view of Axnas in view of Zhao discloses the terminal of claim 3.
Zhao, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, further teaches the transmitter performs the repetitive transmission of the third message (¶65 & Fig. 3 (302), Zhao discloses a terminal device performing a repetitive transmission of a third message (MSG 3)) based on announcement information containing information elements about the repetitive transmission (¶103 & ¶106 & ¶113-115 & ¶65 & Fig. 3 (302), Zhao discloses a terminal device performing a repetitive transmission of a third message (MSG 3) based upon radio resource control (RRC) signaling containing at least one information element indicating a maximum number of transmissions of the MSG 3) and the second message (¶63-65 & Fig. 3 (301->302), Zhao discloses that the transmission of Msg 3 is based upon a previously received downlink control information (DCI)).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify Tirronen in view of Axnas in further view of Zhao by requiring that the transmitter performs the repetitive transmission of the third message based on announcement information containing information elements about the repetitive transmission and the second message as taught by Zhou because utilization of a transmission resource in a network is improved (Zhao, ¶7-8).
Regarding Claim 8, Tirronen in view of Axnas in further view of Zhao discloses the terminal of claim 1.
Axnas, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, further teaches the transmitter applies an inter-slots frequency hopping during the repetitive transmission of the third message (¶120-121 & Fig. 16 (1640->1650) & ¶70, Axnas discloses the UE applying inter-slot frequency hopping during the repetitive transmission of the third message (MSG 3) based upon previously received downlink control information).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Tirronen in view of Axnas in further view of Zhao by requiring that the transmitter applies an inter-slots frequency hopping during the repetitive transmission of the third message as taught by Axnas because overall New Radio (NR) coverage performance when Msg3 and MsgA coverage is improved using repetition and/or frequency hopping (Axnas, ¶13).
Regarding Claim 9, Claim 9 is rejected on the same basis as Claim 10.
Regarding Claim 10, Tirronen discloses a radio communication system comprising:
a terminal (¶47 & Fig. 4, Tirronen discloses a system comprising a terminal (UE)); and
a base station (¶47 & Fig. 4, Tirronen discloses the system further comprising a base station (BS));
wherein the terminal transmits a random access preamble as the first message (¶48 & Fig. 4 (401), Tirronen discloses that the UE transmits a random access preamble as a first message to the BS. Examiner correlates the random access preamble as the "first message"),
the base station transmits a response message to the first message as the second message (¶48 & Fig. 4 (402), Tirronen discloses that the BS transmits a random access response (Message 2 or MSG2) to the random access preamble as the second message. Examiner correlates the random access response as the "second message"),
the terminal transmits a third message via a physical uplink shared channel, after receiving the second message (¶48 & Fig. 4 (403), Tirronen discloses that the UE transmits a third message (Message 3 or Msg3) via a Physical Uplink Shared Channel (PUSCH) after receiving of the random access response. Examiner correlate the third message as the "third message").
However, Tirronen does not disclose the terminal performs a repetitive transmission of the third message based on downlink control information using TC-RNTI (Temporary Cell Radio Network Temporary Identifier), and the terminal applies an inter-slots frequency hopping during the repetitive transmission of the third message based on information specifying the inter-slots frequency hopping notified by the downlink control information.
Axnas, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, teaches the terminal performs a repetitive transmission of the third message based on downlink control information using TC-RNTI (Temporary Cell Radio Network Temporary Identifier) (¶115 & ¶121 & Fig. 16 (1620->1650) & ¶73, Axnas discloses the UE performing repetitive transmission of a third message (MSG 3) based upon a previously received random access response (RAR) comprising a downlink control information (DCI) scrambled by a Temporary Cell Radio Network Temporary Identifier (TC-RNTI)), and
the terminal applies an inter-slots frequency hopping during the repetitive transmission of the third message based on information specifying the inter-slots frequency hopping notified by the downlink control information (¶120-121 & Fig. 16 (1640->1650) & ¶70, Axnas discloses the UE applying inter-slot frequency hopping during the repetitive transmission of the third message (MSG 3) based upon previously received downlink control information).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Tirronen by requiring that the terminal performs a repetitive transmission of the third message based on downlink control information using TC-RNTI (Temporary Cell Radio Network Temporary Identifier) and that the terminal applies an inter-slots frequency hopping during the repetitive transmission of the third message based on information specifying the inter-slots frequency hopping notified by the downlink control information as taught by Axnas because overall New Radio (NR) coverage performance when Msg3 and MsgA coverage is improved using repetition and/or frequency hopping (Axnas, ¶13).
However, Tirronen in view of Axnas does not disclose the terminal performs the repetitive transmission of the third message based on announcement information containing information elements about the repetitive transmission, the information elements including at least a set of values regarding repetition.
Zhou, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, teaches the terminal performs the repetitive transmission of the third message (¶65 & Fig. 3 (302), Zhao discloses a terminal device performing a repetitive transmission of a third message (MSG 3)) based on announcement information containing information elements about the repetitive transmission (¶103 & ¶106 & ¶113-115 & ¶65 & Fig. 3 (302), Zhao discloses a terminal device performing a repetitive transmission of a third message (MSG 3) based upon radio resource control (RRC) signaling containing at least one information element indicating a maximum number of transmissions of the MSG 3), the information elements including at least a set of values regarding repetition (¶103 & ¶106 & ¶113-115 & ¶65 & Fig. 3 (302), Zhao discloses that the at least one information element includes at least one set of values regarding the maximum number of transmissions of the MSG 3).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify Tirronen in view of Axnas by requiring that the terminal performs the repetitive transmission of the third message based on announcement information containing information elements about the repetitive transmission and that the information elements including at least a set of values regarding repetition as taught by Zhou because utilization of a transmission resource in a network is improved (Zhou, ¶7-8).
Regarding Claim 11, Claim 11 is rejected on the same basis as Claim 10.
Internet Communications
Applicant is encouraged to submit a written authorization for Internet communications (PTO/SB/439, http://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/sb0439.pdf) in the instant patent application to authorize the examiner to communicate with the applicant via email. The authorization will allow the examiner to better practice compact prosecution. The written authorization can be submitted via one of the following methods only: (1) Central Fax which can be found in the Conclusion section of this Office action; (2) regular postal mail; (3) EFS WEB; or (4) the service window on the Alexandria campus. EFS web is the recommended way to submit the form since this allows the form to be entered into the file wrapper within the same day (system dependent). Written authorization submitted via other methods, such as direct fax to the examiner or email, will not be accepted. See MPEP § 502.03.
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 ERIC NOWLIN whose telephone number is (313)446-6544. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 12:00PM-10:00PM.
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, Michael Thier can be reached at (571) 272-2832. 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.
/ERIC NOWLIN/Examiner, Art Unit 2474
Prosecution Insights