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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 01/02/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Applicant’s arguments, see Rejections 35 U.S.C. § 103, filed 01/02/2026, with respect to claims 19, and 24-25, have been fully considered, but are not persuasive. The claims have been rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as discussed above in view of He et al. (US 2018/0368179 A1) and Li et al. (US 2023/0199859 A1). The applicant alleges that the combination of references fail to disclose and/or render obvious the following limitations:
“receiving an indication from a network device, wherein the indication indicates the RA-prioritization for slicing; and performing the RA procedure by using the RA-prioritization for slicing upon receiving the indication”
The applicant points to several paragraphs from He, and generally alleges that He does not disclose the claimed features, in view of these paragraphs. The office respectfully disagrees.
With regard to the above limitations, the disclosure of He is directed to a method for performing a Random Access Procedure (RACH) by a terminal in a wireless communications network, in par.[0004, 0005, and 0009]. Additionally, the disclosure of He teaches a RACH procedure wherein the RACH may be performed for high priority and/or low priority access based on sets of configuration parameters which are signaled to a one or more UE, par.[0009] and fig.9. With regard to the reception of an indication for slicing, different network slices provide different resources which allows for differentiated treatment for access to a network, as discussed in par.[0092]. Thus, the high priority and low priority access directly corresponds to RACH parameters, which are sent to the UE in a broadcast message, and further indicated as discussed in fig.9 element 904. For example, par.[0103] recites, in part, “a network slice is associated with the set of values of the PRACH parameters. The network may establish the association of set(s) of values of PRACH parameters with one or more DRBs, QFIs, or network slices.”. Furthermore, the disclosure teaches that the network transmits to the UE the indication with a set of the plurality of sets, along with the triggering condition as discussed in par.[0107], and fig.9 element 904. Thus, when the UE receives the indication with trigger it would utilize the set upon reception in order to perform the RACH procedure. As can be seen the disclosure of He substantially discloses the claimed invention, and thus, the claims stand rejected in view of He and Li.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
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 of carrying out his invention.
Claim(s) 19 and 24-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, 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, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
With regard to claim 19, the claim has been amended to recite, in part:
“performing the RA procedure by the RA-prioritization for slicing upon receiving the indication”
This is not reflected in the specification as filed. It is known that RACH configurations are sent to a User Equipment (UE) to be used at specific times, for example, a UE may be in RRC_CONNECTED and receive RACH configuration parameters, but would not use said parameters immediately because the UE is already in the RRC_CONNECTED state. However, the UE may perform RACH during Handover/Handoff while in the RRC_CONNECTED state, or in RRC_IDLE or RRC_INACTIVE. That is RACH procedures are triggered for a plurality of reasons as discussed above, and the recitation of “upon receiving the indication” is not expressly stated or implied by applicants originally filed disclosure. Additionally the applicants specification states that the terminal selects the RACH based on a rule in fig(s). 11-12 and in par.[0214] which teaches the reception of the indication from the network at the UE. Thus, the applicants recitation of “upon receiving the indication” is not discussed in the specification as filed because the “upon receiving the indication” means as soon as it is received. The applicant may clarify what is meant by “upon receiving the indication” as to the immediacy of the RACH procedure and whether or not a trigger/rule for using the RACH is implied in the “upon receiving the indication”. The office will interpret the “upon receiving the indication” as receiving the indication and applying a rule/trigger to the use of RACH upon receiving the indication as is discussed in the applicants specification and generally known in the art.
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.
Claim(s) 19 and 24-25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over He et al. (US 2018/0368179 A1) in view of Li et al. (US 2023/0199859 A1).
Regarding claim 19, He discloses:
a method for random access (RA) (par.[0007] describes the RACH procedure and prioritizations), executed by a terminal device (fig.1 depicts a User Equipment), and comprising:
on condition that the terminal device is configured with a plurality of sets of RA-prioritizations (par.[0007] describes selecting from a plurality of sets of PRACH parameters, parameters to use in the PRACH procedure based on a trigger), performing an RA procedure by selecting a set of RA-prioritizations according to a first rule (fig.8 element 802, and par.[0098] wherein the UE detects a trigger sent by the network, the trigger establishing a cause or a need for the UE to perform a RACH based on the trigger. The trigger comprising RACH parameters associated therewith, par.[0099] “the UE selecting from a plurality of sets of PRACH parameters, a set of values of the PRACH parameters to use in the PRACH procedure, based on the trigger.”),
wherein the plurality of set of RA-prioritizations comprise:
an RA-prioritization for slicing (par.[0103] recites, and/or a network slice, along with other PRACH parameters);
wherein performing the RA procedure by selecting the set of RA-prioritizations according to the first rule comprises:
receiving an indication from a network device, wherein the indication indicates the RA-prioritization for slicing (fig.8 element 802, par.[0098] which recites, in part, “with the UE detecting a trigger to perform a physical random access channel (PRACH) procedure.”, in coordination with fig.9 element 904); and
performing the RA procedure by using an RA-prioritization that is indicated by the indication in the plurality of sets of RA-prioritizations (par.[0106 – 0107] wherein the base station configures a plurality of PRACH configurations for high and low priority RACH procedures, wherein, the UE is configured to receive from the base station an indication to perform RACH, wherein the indication includes an indication of a set of one or more sets and a trigger to use the specific set, fig.9 element 904);
wherein the method further comprises:
receiving second configuration information, wherein the second configuration is used to configure the plurality of sets of RA-prioritizations (par.[0099] which describes PRACH parameters for high priority and low priority which are sent in broadcast information).
While the disclosure of He substantially discloses the claimed invention and prioritization for slicing, it does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the plurality of set of RA-prioritizations comprise:
an RA prioritization for a specific-type terminal device and an RA-prioritization for slicing; and
wherein the terminal device belongs to the specific-type terminal device, and wherein the specific-type terminal device is a multimedia priority service (MPS) terminal device or a mission critical service (MCS) terminal device, and the terminal device is an MPS terminal device or an MCS terminal device.
In an analogous art, the disclosure of Li teaches:
wherein the plurality of set of RA-prioritizations comprise:
an RA prioritization for a specific-type terminal device (par.[0001] which describes RA priority for UE-type) and an RA-prioritization for slicing (par.[0103] recites, and/or a network slice, along with other PRACH parameters); and
wherein the terminal device belongs to the specific-type terminal device (par.[0001] which describes a terminal type), and the specific-type terminal device is a multimedia priority service (MPS) terminal device or a mission critical service (MCS) terminal device, and the terminal device is an MPS terminal device or an MCS terminal device (par.[0092] which describes the mission critical services, and/or a multimedia priority services as a function of the selection for the terminal, which recites, in part, “PRACH may be selected if the type of the UE is within the set of one or more UE types. In some aspects, the type of the UE may be a subscription type. In some aspects, the set of one or more UE types may include a mission critical (MC) UE and/or a multimedia priority UE.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant application to combine the random access configuration methods as discussed in He, with the disclosure Li which teaches that prioritizations/parameters can be established for UE-type. The motivation/suggestion would have been to allow for certain devices, such as those used by emergency personnel to receive higher priority or have a means of quickly transmitting and/or receiving data based on the type of user device, (Li: par.[0058]).
Regarding claim 24, He discloses:
wherein the second configuration information is carried in system information (SI) (par.[0099] the broadcast information carrying the configuration information).
Regarding claim 25, He discloses:
Wherein the RA-prioritization comprises at least one of:
a power ramping step (par.[0108] which describes a power ramping step); or
a scaling factor for a backoff indicator (BI) (par.[0108] describes a Backoff parameter value or backoff multiplier value, which would be used for a backoff indication).
Claim(s) 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over He and Li as applied to claim 19 in view of Murray et al. (US 2023/0156583 A1).
Regarding claim 26, the disclosure He and Li disclose the method of claim 19, but fail to disclose:
wherein a use granularity of the RA-prioritization for slicing comprises a single slice group.
In an analogous art, the disclosure of Murray teaches:
wherein a use granularity of the RA-prioritization for slicing comprises a single slice group (par.[0280] teaches preconfigured RACH transmission resources are mapped to network slices. A UE may request a slice or a slice group which helps to support RACH priority).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant application to combine the teachings of He and Li with the disclosure of slice groups as discussed in Murray. The motivation/suggestion would have been to support the random access prioritization in the network or in support of congestion control by the network.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 1, 4, 18, 27 and 35, are allowed.
With regard to claims 1 and 27, the allowable subject matter indicated in the Non-Final Rejection dated 07/18/2025. Thus the claims are in condition for allowance.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
He et al. (US 2019/0059113 A1) “Prioritized Random Access Procedure”
Kwak et al. (US 2019/0239283 A1) “Systems and Method for Physical Random Access Channel Transmissions”
Tao et al. (US 2022/0183081 A1) “User Equipment Involved in Performing a Random Access Procedure”
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMAAL HENSON whose telephone number is (571)272-5339. The examiner can normally be reached M-Thu: 7:30 am - 6:30 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, Derrick Ferris can be reached at (571)272-3123. 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.
JAMAAL HENSON
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2411
/JAMAAL HENSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2411