DETAILED ACTION
This Non-Final Office Action is in response to application number 18/259,329 filed on June 26th 2023. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed on 06/26/2023.
Information Disclosure Statements
The Information Disclosure Statement (IDS), submitted on August 2nd 2023, is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. Claim 9 is directed to a computer storage medium, which is non-statutory unless claimed as a non-transitory computer storage medium. (See In re Nuijten, 500 F.3d 1346,1356-57 (Fed. Cir. 2007) and Interim Examination Instructions for Evaluating Subject Matter Eligibility Under 35 USC 101, Aug. 24, 2009; p.2.
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 may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-6,8, 9,11,12, 14-16,18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C.103 as being unpatentable over Jung et al. (WO-2019030573 Using EP 3665790 B1 as a translation) in view of Yan (WO 2022094820 A1).
Regarding claim 1, 2,3 and 4, Jung et al. disclose a method of operating a wireless device for a wireless communication network, the method comprising transmitting a first random access preamble utilising a first antenna arrangement; and transmitting a second random access preamble utilising a second antenna arrangement (Paragraph 0045 and FIG 2. disclose “The user equipment first chooses the SS block K as the serving SS block, and transmits three RACH preambles, wherein the first two transmissions are performed with the same user equipment Tx beam (first antenna arrangement) with one power ramping in the second transmission and the third transmission is done with a different user equipment Tx beam (second antenna arrangement).”).
Jung et al. fail to explicitly disclose that the first random access preamble and the second random access preamble being shifted relative to each other.
However in an analogous art Yan teaches that the first random access preamble and the second random access preamble being shifted relative to each other (Page 16 Paragraph 2 discloses “If the message 1 is composed of multiple random access preambles, at least one of the sequences of the multiple random access preambles, the cyclic shifts of the sequences, the time where they are located, and the frequency where they are located are different.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified Jung et al. to incorporate the teachings of Yan, to implement shifting of the first random access preamble relative to the second random access preamble, in order to generate distinct random access preambles that are orthogonal to each other even when derived from the same root sequence.
Regarding claims 5,11,15 and 19, Jung et al. disclose the method according to Claim 1.
Jung et al fail to disclose wherein the first random access preamble is based on a first signaling sequence, and the second random access preamble is based on a second signaling sequence.
However in an analogous art Yan teaches wherein the first random access preamble is based on a first signaling sequence, and the second random access preamble is based on a second signaling sequence (Page 16 Paragraph 2 discloses “If the message 1 is composed of multiple random access preambles, at least one of the sequences of the multiple random access preambles, the cyclic shifts of the sequences, the time where they are located, and the frequency where they are located are different.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified Jung et al. to incorporate the teachings of Yan, to implement the first random access preamble using a first sequence and a second random access preamble using a second sequence, in order to generate distinct random access preambles
Regarding claims 6,12,16 and 20, Jung et al. disclose the method according to Claim 1.
Jung et al. fail to explicitly disclose wherein the first random access preamble is shifted relative to the second random access preamble based on one or both of a cyclic shift and/or and a code.
However in an analogous art Yan teaches wherein the first random access preamble is shifted relative to the second random access preamble based on one or both of a cyclic shift and/or and a code (Page 16 Paragraph 2 discloses “If the message 1 is composed of multiple random access preambles, at least one of the sequences of the multiple random access preambles, the cyclic shifts of the sequences, the time where they are located, and the frequency where they are located are different.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified Jung et al. to incorporate the teachings of Yan, to implement shifting of the first random access preamble relative to the second random access preamble, in order to generate distinct random access preambles that are orthogonal to each other even when derived from the same root sequence.
Regarding claim 8,14 and 18 Jung et al. disclose the method according to Claim 1.
Jung et al. fail to explicitly disclose wherein the first random access preamble and the second random access preamble are transmitted on different frequency resources
However in an analogous art Yan teaches wherein the first random access preamble and the second random access preamble are transmitted on different frequency resources (Page 42 Paragraph 2 discloses “…for example, it may also be N random access opportunities that are located in the same time and consecutive frequencies…”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified Jung et al. to incorporate the teachings of Yan, to implement the first random access preamble and the second random access preamble on different frequency resources, in order to support beam management and increase capacity.
Regarding claim 9, Jung et al disclose a computer storage medium storing a computer program comprising instructions causing processing circuitry to one or both control and perform a method, the method comprising: transmitting a first random access preamble utilizing a first antenna arrangement; and transmitting a second random access preamble utilizing a second antenna arrangement (Paragraph 0045 and FIG 2. disclose “The user equipment first chooses the SS block K as the serving SS block, and transmits three RACH preambles, wherein the first two transmissions are performed with the same user equipment Tx beam (first antenna arrangement) with one power ramping in the second transmission and the third transmission is done with a different user equipment Tx beam (second antenna arrangement).”).
Jung et al. fail to explicitly disclose that the first random access preamble and the second random access preamble being shifted relative to each other.
However in an analogous art Yan teaches that the first random access preamble and the second random access preamble being shifted relative to each other ( Yan Page 16 Paragraph 2 discloses “If the message 1 is composed of multiple random access preambles, at least one of the sequences of the multiple random access preambles, the cyclic shifts of the sequences, the time where they are located, and the frequency where they are located are different.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified Jung et al. to incorporate the teachings of Yan, to implement shifting of the first random access preamble relative to the second random access preamble, in order to generate distinct random access preambles that are orthogonal to each other even when derived from the same root sequence.
Claims 7,13,17 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C.103 as being unpatentable over Jung et al. (WO-2019030573 Used EP 3665790 B1) in view of Yan (WO- 2022094820 A1). Further in view of Arunchalam et al.(WO-2018234851 A1).
Regarding claims 7,13,17 and 21, Jung et al. disclose the method according to Claim 1.
Jung et al. fail to explicitly disclose wherein the first random access preamble and the second random access preamble shifted by being based on different root sequences.
However in an analogous art Arunchalam et al. disclose wherein the first random access preamble and the second random access preamble shifted by being based on different root sequences (Paragraph 0083 discloses “The random access preamble pattern for one wireless communication device is constructed such that the random access preamble pattern includes random access preamble sequences derived from different RACH root sequences.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified Jung et al. to incorporate the teachings of Arunchalam et al., to implement the first random access preamble and the second random access preamble shifted by being based on different root sequences, in order to generate distinct random access preambles.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Samuel Dilan Rutnam whose telephone number is 703-756-1374. The examiner can normally be reached between 8:30am-5:00pm Mon-Fri.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Sujoy Kundu can be reached on 571-272-8586.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR.
Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/Samuel Dilan Rutnam/
Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2471
/MOHAMMAD S ADHAMI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2471