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 .
Applicant’s amendment filed 3/9/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 1,20,30, and 39 are amended.
Claims 6-10,12,15-19,24-29,31,37, and 38 are cancelled.
Claim 40 is new.
Claims 1-5,11,13,14,20-23,30,32-36,39, and 40 are pending.
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.
Claim(s) 1,3,4,11,13,20,22,30,33,34,36, 39, and 40 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Futaki (US 20220287102) in view of Jiang (US 20210211941) and Lee (US 20230027824).
Re claim 1:
Futaki discloses transmitting a message 1 (Msg1) in a first uplink bandwidth part (BWP) if at least a second uplink BWP is not configured (Fig. 5 503 MSG1 and Para.[0048] The first initial BWP may also be used for initial access by the second type of UEs, and may be used by the second type of UEs until they receive the second initial BWP configuration);
transmitting the Msg1 in the at least second uplink BWP if the at least second uplink BWP is configured and activated (Fig.3 ref. 301, 302, and 303 and Para.[0062] In step 302, if the UE 2 is the second type of UE, the UE 2 selects the second initial BWP configuration from the received system information and applies the selected second initial BWP configuration); and
receiving a message 2 (Msg2) in a first downlink BWP (Fig.3 and 5 ref. Random Access Response (Msg2)), wherein
the first uplink BWP is configured in a system information block 1 (SIB 1),(Fig.2,3, and 5 ref SIB1).
Futaki does not explicitly disclose transmitting the Msg1 in the first uplink BWP if the at least second uplink BWP is configured and deactivated; if at least a second downlink BWP is configured and deactivated.
Jiang discloses transmitting the Msg1 in the first uplink BWP if the at least second uplink BWP is configured and deactivated; receiving a Msg2 in a first downlink BWP if at least a second downlink BWP is configured and deactivated (Para.[0041] In an example, the BWP belongs to a plurality of active BWPs that are configured for the serving cell for the random access procedure and Para.[0053] In an example, the BWP adapting instruction may specifically be the BWP switching instruction, or the BWP deactivating instruction and Para.[0043] On the basis of the example illustrated in FIG. 2, the target BWP and the BWP for initiating the random access procedure may belong to the active BWPs. Therefore, when the random access procedure on the target BWP is stopped, the random access procedure on the BWP can be directly initiated without performing operations such as being activated, which is helpful to reduce the latency caused by initiating the random access procedure on the BWP and Para.[0037] In an example, the random access messages for a contention-based random access procedure may include MSG1, MSG2, MSG3, and MSG4, while the random access messages for a contention-free random access procedure may include MSG1 and MSG2).
Futaki and Jiang are analogous because they both pertain to data communications.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Futaki to include a signal deactivating a BWP as taught by Jiang in order to reduce latency (Jiang Para.[0043]).
Futaki does not explicitly disclose wherein the first uplink BWP, the at least one second uplink BWP, the first downlink BWP, or the at least second downlink BWP is one of deactivated or activated based on the SIB1.
Lee discloses wherein the first uplink BWP, the at least one second uplink BWP, the first downlink BWP, or the at least second downlink BWP is one of deactivated or activated based on the SIB1 (Para.[0200] Operation 2) The R-UE may activate the selected BWP (e.g., B10 of FIG. 10). For example, if the R-UE selects the initial UL R-BWP, the R-UE may activate the initial UL R-BWP and an initial DL BWP or initial DL R-BWP mapped to the initial UL R-BWP. In this case, the R-UE may deactivate the initial UL BWP or may maintain the initial UL BWP in the active state. On the other hand, the R-UE may deactivate the initial DL BWP or initial DL R-BWP mapped to the initial UL BWP or may maintain the initial DL BWP or initial DL R-BWP in the active state. The R-UE may receive configuration information on the initial DL BWP or initial DL R-BWP mapped to the initial UL R-BWP in SIB1, R-SIB1, or a UE-specific signal).
Futaki and Lee are analogous because they both pertain to data communications.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Futaki to include activating a BWP based on SIB1 as taught by Lee in order to more efficiently perform random access (Lee Para.[0021]).
Re claim 3:
Futaki discloses wherein the at least second uplink BWP is configured and one of activated or deactivated by a configuration included in the SIB 1 (Fig.3 and 5 ref. SIB1).
Re claim 4:
Futaki discloses wherein the at least second uplink BWP is configured by a first signaling in the SIB 1 and the at least second uplink BWP is activated or deactivated by a second signaling in the SIBI (Para.[0048] The gNB 1 transmits a first initial BWP configuration and a second initial BWP configuration… The first initial BWP may also be used for initial access by the second type of UEs, and may be used by the second type of UEs until they receive the second initial BWP configuration or until a predetermined timing. The predetermined timing may be, for example, a point in time when the second type of UE receives a control signal, control information, or RRC message from the gNB 1 that triggers the second initial BWP configuration to be activated in the second type of UE).
Re claim 11:
Futaki discloses wherein receiving the Msg2 in the first downlink BWP if the at least second downlink BWP is not configured; and receiving the Msg2 in the at least second downlink BWP if the at least second downlink BWP is configured and activated (Para.[0048] The first initial BWP includes an initial DL BWP and an initial UL BWP and Para.[0049] The second initial BWP includes one or both of an initial DL BWP and an initial UL BWP and Para.[0065] in step 304, the UE 2 may monitor PDSCH resources configured by PDSCH parameters contained in the second initial BWP configuration to receive a random access response (Msg2) via a PDSCH and Para.[0062] In step 302, if the UE 2 is the second type of UE, the UE 2 selects the second initial BWP configuration from the received system information and applies the selected second initial BWP configuration).
Re claim 13:
Futaki discloses wherein the at least second downlink BWP is configured and one of activated or deactivated by a configuration included in the SIB1 (Fig.3 ref. 301 SIB1 (First Initial BWP Configuration and Second Initial BWP Configuration) and Para.[0048] The first initial BWP includes an initial DL BWP and an initial UL BWP and Para.[0049] The second initial BWP includes one or both of an initial DL BWP and an initial UL BWP).
Re claim 20: Claim 20 is rejected on the same grounds of rejection set forth in claim 1 from the perspective of the base station. Futaki further discloses at least one memory; and at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory (Fig. 16).
Re claim 22: Claim 22 is rejected on the same grounds of rejection set forth in claim 3.
Re claim 30: Claim 30 is rejected on the same grounds of rejection set forth in claim 1. Futaki further discloses at least one memory; and at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory (Fig. 17).
Re claim 33: Claim 33 is rejected on the same grounds of rejection set forth in claim 3.
Re claim 34: Claim 34 is rejected on the same grounds of rejection set forth in claim 4.
Re claim 36: Claim 36 is rejected on the same grounds of rejection set forth in claim 11.
Re claim 39: Claim 39 is rejected on the same grounds of rejection set forth in claim 1 from the perspective of the base station.
Re claim 40:
As discussed above, Futaki in view of Jiang and Takahashi meets all the limitations of the parent claim.
Futaki further discloses the UE of claim 30, wherein at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to: receive the Msg2 in the first downlink BWP based on transmission of the Msg1 in the first uplink BWP (Fig.3 ref. 301, 302, and 303 and Para.[0062] In step 302, if the UE 2 is the second type of UE, the UE 2 selects the second initial BWP configuration from the received system information and applies the selected second initial BWP configuration Fig.3 and 5 ref. Random Access Response (Msg2) – Examiner Note: Msg2 is sent in response to Msg1, therefore Msg2 is received based on the transmission of Msg1).
Claim(s) 2,21, and 32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Futaki in view of Jiang and Lee as applied to claims 1,20, and 30 above, and further in view of Lin (US 20180220468).
Re claim 2:
As discussed above, Futaki in view of Jiang and Lee meets all the limitations of the parent claim
Futaki further discloses (Fig.3 and 5 ref. RRC Setup Request (Msg3) and Para.[0048] The gNB 1 transmits a first initial BWP configuration and a second initial BWP configuration… The first initial BWP may also be used for initial access by the second type of UEs, and may be used by the second type of UEs until they receive the second initial BWP configuration or until a predetermined timing. The predetermined timing may be, for example, a point in time when the second type of UE receives a control signal, control information, or RRC message from the gNB 1 that triggers the second initial BWP configuration to be activated in the second type of UE); and
receiving a message 4 (Msg4) (Fig.3 and 5 ref. RRC Setup (Msg4)).
Futaki does not explicitly disclose wherein if the Msg1 matches the Msg2.
Lin discloses wherein if the Msg1 matches the Msg2 (Para.[0055] The RACH procedure continues if the UE 202 receives a RAR Message 2 that includes the same RAPID as Message 1, …The UE 202 generates and transmits an RRC connection request, also referred to as Message 3).
Futaki and Lin are analogous because they both pertain to data communications.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Futaki to include determining if a Msg1 matches a Msg2 as taught by Lin in order to resolve contention and collision issues (Lin Para.[0062]).
Re claim 21: Claim 21 is rejected on the same grounds of rejection set forth in claim 2 from the perspective of the base station.
Re claim 32: Claim 32 is rejected on the same grounds of rejection set forth in claim 2.
Claim(s) 5,14,23, and 35 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Futaki in view of Jiang and Lee as applied to claims 1,20, and 30 above, and further in view of Hu (US 20210329718).
Re claim 5:
As discussed above, Futaki in view of Jiang and Lee meets all the limitations of the parent claim
Futaki further discloses wherein the at least second uplink BWP is activated or deactivated (Para.[0048] The gNB 1 transmits a first initial BWP configuration and a second initial BWP configuration… The first initial BWP may also be used for initial access by the second type of UEs, and may be used by the second type of UEs until they receive the second initial BWP configuration or until a predetermined timing. The predetermined timing may be, for example, a point in time when the second type of UE receives a control signal, control information, or RRC message from the gNB 1 that triggers the second initial BWP configuration to be activated in the second type of UE).
Futaki does not explicitly disclose a switching indicator included in the Msg2.
Hu discloses a switching indicator included in the Msg2 (Fig. 6B ref. RAR + BWP Switch).
Futaki and Hu are analogous because they both pertain to data communications.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Futaki to include a switching indicator in a RAR as taught by Hu in order to accommodate reduced capability user equipment (Hu Para.[0002]).
Re claim 14:
As discussed above, Futaki in view of Jiang and Lee meets all the limitations of the parent claim.
Futaki further discloses wherein the at least second downlink BWP is activated or deactivated (Para.[0048] The gNB 1 transmits a first initial BWP configuration and a second initial BWP configuration… The first initial BWP may also be used for initial access by the second type of UEs, and may be used by the second type of UEs until they receive the second initial BWP configuration or until a predetermined timing. The predetermined timing may be, for example, a point in time when the second type of UE receives a control signal, control information, or RRC message from the gNB 1 that triggers the second initial BWP configuration to be activated in the second type of UE).
Futaki does not explicitly disclose a switching indicator included in the Msg2.
Hu discloses a switching indicator included in the Msg2 (Fig. 6B ref. RAR + BWP Switch).
Futaki and Hu are analogous because they both pertain to data communications.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Futaki to include a switching indicator in a RAR as taught by Hu in order to accommodate reduced capability user equipment (Hu Para.[0002]).
Re claim 23: Claim 23 is rejected on the same grounds of rejection set forth in claim 5.
Re claim 35: Claim 35 is rejected on the same grounds of rejection set forth in claim 5.
FOR COMPACT PROSECUTION, A SECOND GROUNDS OF REJECTION IS SET BELOW
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.
Claim(s) 1,3,4,11,13,20,22,30,33,34,36, 39, and 40 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Futaki (US 20220287102) in view of Jiang (US 20210211941) and Takahashi (US 20220182983).
Re claim 1:
Futaki discloses transmitting a message 1 (Msg1) in a first uplink bandwidth part (BWP) if at least a second uplink BWP is not configured (Fig. 5 503 MSG1 and Para.[0048] The first initial BWP may also be used for initial access by the second type of UEs, and may be used by the second type of UEs until they receive the second initial BWP configuration);
transmitting the Msg1 in the at least second uplink BWP if the at least second uplink BWP is configured and activated (Fig.3 ref. 301, 302, and 303 and Para.[0062] In step 302, if the UE 2 is the second type of UE, the UE 2 selects the second initial BWP configuration from the received system information and applies the selected second initial BWP configuration); and
receiving a message 2 (Msg2) in a first downlink BWP (Fig.3 and 5 ref. Random Access Response (Msg2)), wherein
the first uplink BWP is configured in a system information block 1 (SIB 1),(Fig.2,3, and 5 ref SIB1).
Futaki does not explicitly disclose transmitting the Msg1 in the first uplink BWP if the at least second uplink BWP is configured and deactivated; if at least a second downlink BWP is configured and deactivated.
Jiang discloses transmitting the Msg1 in the first uplink BWP if the at least second uplink BWP is configured and deactivated; receiving a Msg2 in a first downlink BWP if at least a second downlink BWP is configured and deactivated (Para.[0041] In an example, the BWP belongs to a plurality of active BWPs that are configured for the serving cell for the random access procedure and Para.[0053] In an example, the BWP adapting instruction may specifically be the BWP switching instruction, or the BWP deactivating instruction and Para.[0043] On the basis of the example illustrated in FIG. 2, the target BWP and the BWP for initiating the random access procedure may belong to the active BWPs. Therefore, when the random access procedure on the target BWP is stopped, the random access procedure on the BWP can be directly initiated without performing operations such as being activated, which is helpful to reduce the latency caused by initiating the random access procedure on the BWP and Para.[0037] In an example, the random access messages for a contention-based random access procedure may include MSG1, MSG2, MSG3, and MSG4, while the random access messages for a contention-free random access procedure may include MSG1 and MSG2).
Futaki and Jiang are analogous because they both pertain to data communications.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Futaki to include a signal deactivating a BWP as taught by Jiang in order to reduce latency (Jiang Para.[0043]).
Futaki does not explicitly disclose wherein the first uplink BWP, the at least one second uplink BWP, the first downlink BWP, or the at least second downlink BWP is one of deactivated or activated based on the SIB1.
Takahashi discloses wherein the first uplink BWP, the at least one second uplink BWP, the first downlink BWP, or the at least second downlink BWP is one of deactivated or activated based on the SIB1 (Para. [0030] The user equipment 20 configures parameters applied commonly in the cell by “SIB1”. “SIB1” includes an information element “ServingCellConfigCommon”. With “ServingCellConfigCommon”, the user equipment 20 can configure the initial BWP, i.e., BWP #0 and Para.[0033] Subsequently, in step S3, the user equipment 20 configures an active BWP based on a configuration related to the BWP received from the base station apparatus 10).
Futaki and Takahashi are analogous because they both pertain to data communications.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Futaki to include activating a BWP based on SIB1 as taught by Takahashi in order to appropriately select a BWP (Takahashi Para.[0006]).
Re claim 3:
Futaki discloses wherein the at least second uplink BWP is configured and one of activated or deactivated by a configuration included in the SIB 1 (Fig.3 and 5 ref. SIB1).
Re claim 4:
Futaki discloses wherein the at least second uplink BWP is configured by a first signaling in the SIB 1 and the at least second uplink BWP is activated or deactivated by a second signaling in the SIBI (Para.[0048] The gNB 1 transmits a first initial BWP configuration and a second initial BWP configuration… The first initial BWP may also be used for initial access by the second type of UEs, and may be used by the second type of UEs until they receive the second initial BWP configuration or until a predetermined timing. The predetermined timing may be, for example, a point in time when the second type of UE receives a control signal, control information, or RRC message from the gNB 1 that triggers the second initial BWP configuration to be activated in the second type of UE).
Re claim 11:
Futaki discloses wherein receiving the Msg2 in the first downlink BWP if the at least second downlink BWP is not configured; and receiving the Msg2 in the at least second downlink BWP if the at least second downlink BWP is configured and activated (Para.[0048] The first initial BWP includes an initial DL BWP and an initial UL BWP and Para.[0049] The second initial BWP includes one or both of an initial DL BWP and an initial UL BWP and Para.[0065] in step 304, the UE 2 may monitor PDSCH resources configured by PDSCH parameters contained in the second initial BWP configuration to receive a random access response (Msg2) via a PDSCH and Para.[0062] In step 302, if the UE 2 is the second type of UE, the UE 2 selects the second initial BWP configuration from the received system information and applies the selected second initial BWP configuration).
Re claim 13:
Futaki discloses wherein the at least second downlink BWP is configured and one of activated or deactivated by a configuration included in the SIB1 (Fig.3 ref. 301 SIB1 (First Initial BWP Configuration and Second Initial BWP Configuration) and Para.[0048] The first initial BWP includes an initial DL BWP and an initial UL BWP and Para.[0049] The second initial BWP includes one or both of an initial DL BWP and an initial UL BWP).
Re claim 20: Claim 20 is rejected on the same grounds of rejection set forth in claim 1 from the perspective of the base station. Futaki further discloses at least one memory; and at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory (Fig. 16).
Re claim 22: Claim 22 is rejected on the same grounds of rejection set forth in claim 3.
Re claim 30: Claim 30 is rejected on the same grounds of rejection set forth in claim 1. Futaki further discloses at least one memory; and at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory (Fig. 17).
Re claim 33: Claim 33 is rejected on the same grounds of rejection set forth in claim 3.
Re claim 34: Claim 34 is rejected on the same grounds of rejection set forth in claim 4.
Re claim 36: Claim 36 is rejected on the same grounds of rejection set forth in claim 11.
Re claim 39: Claim 39 is rejected on the same grounds of rejection set forth in claim 1 from the perspective of the base station.
Re claim 40:
As discussed above, Futaki in view of Jiang and Takahashi meets all the limitations of the parent claim.
Futaki further discloses the UE of claim 30, wherein at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to: receive the Msg2 in the first downlink BWP based on transmission of the Msg1 in the first uplink BWP (Fig.3 ref. 301, 302, and 303 and Para.[0062] In step 302, if the UE 2 is the second type of UE, the UE 2 selects the second initial BWP configuration from the received system information and applies the selected second initial BWP configuration Fig.3 and 5 ref. Random Access Response (Msg2) – Examiner Note: Msg2 is sent in response to Msg1, therefore Msg2 is received based on the transmission of Msg1).
Claim(s) 2,21, and 32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Futaki in view of Jiang and Takahashi as applied to claims 1,20, and 30 above, and further in view of Lin (US 20180220468).
Re claim 2:
As discussed above, Futaki in view of Jiang and Takahashi meets all the limitations of the parent claim
Futaki further discloses (Fig.3 and 5 ref. RRC Setup Request (Msg3) and Para.[0048] The gNB 1 transmits a first initial BWP configuration and a second initial BWP configuration… The first initial BWP may also be used for initial access by the second type of UEs, and may be used by the second type of UEs until they receive the second initial BWP configuration or until a predetermined timing. The predetermined timing may be, for example, a point in time when the second type of UE receives a control signal, control information, or RRC message from the gNB 1 that triggers the second initial BWP configuration to be activated in the second type of UE); and
receiving a message 4 (Msg4) (Fig.3 and 5 ref. RRC Setup (Msg4)).
Futaki does not explicitly disclose wherein if the Msg1 matches the Msg2.
Lin discloses wherein if the Msg1 matches the Msg2 (Para.[0055] The RACH procedure continues if the UE 202 receives a RAR Message 2 that includes the same RAPID as Message 1, …The UE 202 generates and transmits an RRC connection request, also referred to as Message 3).
Futaki and Lin are analogous because they both pertain to data communications.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Futaki to include determining if a Msg1 matches a Msg2 as taught by Lin in order to resolve contention and collision issues (Lin Para.[0062]).
Re claim 21: Claim 21 is rejected on the same grounds of rejection set forth in claim 2 from the perspective of the base station.
Re claim 32: Claim 32 is rejected on the same grounds of rejection set forth in claim 2.
Claim(s) 5,14,23, and 35 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Futaki in view of Jiang and Takahashi as applied to claims 1,20, and 30 above, and further in view of Hu (US 20210329718).
Re claim 5:
As discussed above, Futaki in view of Jiang and Takahashi meets all the limitations of the parent claim
Futaki further discloses wherein the at least second uplink BWP is activated or deactivated (Para.[0048] The gNB 1 transmits a first initial BWP configuration and a second initial BWP configuration… The first initial BWP may also be used for initial access by the second type of UEs, and may be used by the second type of UEs until they receive the second initial BWP configuration or until a predetermined timing. The predetermined timing may be, for example, a point in time when the second type of UE receives a control signal, control information, or RRC message from the gNB 1 that triggers the second initial BWP configuration to be activated in the second type of UE).
Futaki does not explicitly disclose a switching indicator included in the Msg2.
Hu discloses a switching indicator included in the Msg2 (Fig. 6B ref. RAR + BWP Switch).
Futaki and Hu are analogous because they both pertain to data communications.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Futaki to include a switching indicator in a RAR as taught by Hu in order to accommodate reduced capability user equipment (Hu Para.[0002]).
Re claim 14:
As discussed above, Futaki in view of Jiang and Takahashi meets all the limitations of the parent claim.
Futaki further discloses wherein the at least second downlink BWP is activated or deactivated (Para.[0048] The gNB 1 transmits a first initial BWP configuration and a second initial BWP configuration… The first initial BWP may also be used for initial access by the second type of UEs, and may be used by the second type of UEs until they receive the second initial BWP configuration or until a predetermined timing. The predetermined timing may be, for example, a point in time when the second type of UE receives a control signal, control information, or RRC message from the gNB 1 that triggers the second initial BWP configuration to be activated in the second type of UE).
Futaki does not explicitly disclose a switching indicator included in the Msg2.
Hu discloses a switching indicator included in the Msg2 (Fig. 6B ref. RAR + BWP Switch).
Futaki and Hu are analogous because they both pertain to data communications.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Futaki to include a switching indicator in a RAR as taught by Hu in order to accommodate reduced capability user equipment (Hu Para.[0002]).
Re claim 23: Claim 23 is rejected on the same grounds of rejection set forth in claim 5.
Re claim 35: Claim 35 is rejected on the same grounds of rejection set forth in claim 5.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1,20,30, and 39 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMMAD SAJID ADHAMI whose telephone number is (571)272-8615. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30-5:00 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, Sujoy Kundu can be reached at (571) 272-8586. 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.
/MOHAMMAD S ADHAMI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2471
Prosecution Insights