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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 January 20, 2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed January 20, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In the remarks, Applicant argues, in substance, that Medles in view of MolavianJazi fails to disclose the newly added limitation of the first PRACH configuration or the second PRACH configuration configures more than one repetition of a PRACH preamble within one frame. The Office disagrees. MolavianJazi clearly discloses multiple PRACH repetitions within one frame. Col. 12 lines 35-56 (previously cited) clearly show that “within each radio frame that includes ROs, one or multiple subframes/slots are specified where ROs can occur…A shorter PRACH periodicity can support both “sparse” and “dense” PRACH configurations such as from 1 subframe to 5 subframes or even the maximum of 10 subframes per SFN for x=1 (10 msec PRACH period), i.e., all subframes [of the frame] can include PRACH.” As such the combination of Medles-MolavianJazi clearly teaches the PRACH configuration configures more than one repetition of a PRACH within one frame and therefore the rejection is maintained.
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.
Claims 1-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Medles et al. (USPN 12356352) (hereinafter Medles in view of MolavianJazi et al. (USPN 11310836) (hereinafter MolavianJazi).
Regarding claim 1, Medles discloses an apparatus (network apparatus capable of NTN communications (Fig. 5 520 and col. 9, line 4-22) for wireless communication at a base station, comprising:
a memory 524 ; and
at least one processor 522 coupled to the memory and configured to:
determine, based on at least one beam, a first physical random-access channel (PRACH) configuration for at least one first user equipment (UE) (Fig. 7, ref 710, col. 12, lines 44-46) and a second PRACH configuration for at least one second UE (Fig. 7 ref 720 col. 12, lines 46-49), the first PRACH configuration including a first random access channel (RACH) occasion (RO) configuration and a first PRACH format (i.e. first set of PRACH configuration to a first set of UE), the second PRACH configuration including a second RO configuration and a second PRACH format (configure a second set of PRACH configuration to a second set of UE) (col. 8 lines 1-28 also Fig. 4 showing two configurations (1 and 2) each with different PRACH formats);
transmit, to at least one of the at least one first UE or the at least one second UE, an indication of the first PRACH configuration and the second PRACH configuration (col. 8 lines 1-28; the PRACH configurations are sent to the two sets of UEs; and
monitor, via the at least one beam, for a PRACH sequence from at least one of the at least one first UE or the at least one second UE (col. 12, lines 50-56: receiving a RACH preamble signal according to the first set of PRACH configuration and the second set of PRACH configuration).
Medles does not explicitly teach that the PRACH configurations are determined based on the UEs being associated with an NTN transmit power device type, and that the first PRACH configuration or the second PRACH configuration configures more than one repetition of a PRACH preamble within one frame. IN analogous art MolavianJazi discloses a first UE of a first UE-type can be configured with a first PRACH configuration, and a second UE of a second UE-type can be configured with a second PRACH configuration (col. 32, lines 42-56). MolavianJazi further a legacy UE can use a first set of preambles while a reduced-capability UE/NR-Light UE can use a second, different set of preambles (col. 32, lines 57-59. MoavianJazi also discloses that a Reduced capability UE can refer to a group of UEs with reduced power class (col. 20, lines 40-45). MoavianJazi further discloses the configurations can configure more than one repetition of a PRACH preamble within one frame (col. 12, lines 35-40: “within each radio frame oe or multiple subframes/slots are specified where ROs can occur, also see col. 12 line 52-53 which discloses that each subframe can include PRACH).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the use of MolavianJazi’s PRACH configuration techniques determination into the system of Medles, including configuring PRACH preamble retransmissions within a single frame, to account for challenges in high collision probabilities due to reduced capabilities in 5G systems (col. 1 lines 25-33).
Regarding claim 2, Medles discloses wherein the first RO configuration includes a first starting RO and a first repetition pattern, and the second RO configuration includes a second starting RO and a second repetition pattern (col. 7, lines 65-67: different periodicities; Fig. 4, and col. 8 lines 17-27: shows configurations 1 and 2 with different starting ROs and repetition patterns).
Regarding claims 3 and 4, Medles discloses the invention as described above. Medles does not explicitly disclose repeating a communication of a PRACH preamble over consecutive ROs within the one frame starting with a corresponding RO and a first or second periodicity. In analogous art. MolvianJazi discloses the system can configure a periodicity for RACH configuration, a configuration for the slots within a PRACh configuration period that can be used and Ros can repeat every x SFNs (x radio frames) (see col. 12, lines 5-35) and start at a particular symbol as indicated by the Starting Symbol (col. 12, lines 54-56). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the use of MolavianJazi’s PRACH repetition techniques determination into the system of Medles to account for challenges in high collision probabilities due to reduced capabilities in 5G systems (col. 1 lines 25-33).
Regarding claim 5, Medles discloses the invention as described above. Medles does not explicitly disclose each RO in the first RO configuration corresponds to a first physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) occasion (PO) and each RO in the second RO configuration corresponds to a second PO. In analogous art MolavianJazi discloses a first UE of a first UE-type can be configured with a first PRACH configuration with a first set of RACH occasions, a first set of PUSCH occasions, and a second UE of a second UE type can be configured with a second PRACH configuration with a second set of RACH occasions, and a second set of PUSCH occasions (col. 32, lines 42-56). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to apply the use of MolavianJazi’s PRACH techniques determination into the system of Medles to account for challenges in high collision probabilities due to reduced capabilities in 5G systems (col. 1 lines 25-33).
Regarding claims 6 and 7, Medles discloses at least one of the first RO configuration or the second RO configuration includes one or more ROs within one or more time division multiplexed time-frequency resources (col. 7 lines 65-67).
Regarding claim 8. Medles discloses the invention as described above. Medles is not explicit on the type of format the PRACH uses, however MolavianJazi discloses the use of the first PRACH format includes a PRACH format 0 and the second PRACH format includes a PRACH format 1 (MolavianJazi at col. 9, lines 11-23 incorporates by reference 3GPP TS38.211 Rel-15 v15.6.0 (see attached) which discloses PRACH preamble formats 0-3 on page 37, and col. 27 lines 30-35 discloses that the original NR Rel-15 configuration Ros can be used for PRACH transmissions). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to apply the use of MolavianJazi’s PRACH techniques determination into the system of Medles to account for challenges in high collision probabilities due to reduced capabilities in 5G systems (col. 1 lines 25-33).
Regarding claim 9, Medles discloses the invention as described above. Medles is not explicit that at least one of the first PRACH format or the second PRACH format further includes a set of usable PRACH sequences. In analogous art, MolavianJazi discloses at least one of the first PRACH format or the second PRACH format further includes a set of usable PRACH sequences (col. 12, lines 57-67). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to apply the use of MolavianJazi’s PRACH techniques determination into the system of Medles to account for challenges in high collision probabilities due to reduced capabilities in 5G systems (col. 1 lines 25-33).
Regarding claim 10, Medles discloses the invention as described above. Medles does not explicitly disclose one first UE is associated with a first reference signal received power (RSRP) higher than a first threshold or a first maximum transmit power higher than a second threshold, and wherein the at least one second UE is associated with a second RSRP lower than the first threshold or a second maximum transmit power lower than the second threshold. In analogous art, MolavianJazi discloses another multiple PRACH configuration system which discloses one first UE is associated with a first reference signal received power (RSRP) higher than a first threshold or a first maximum transmit power higher than a second threshold, and wherein the at least one second UE is associated with a second RSRP lower than the first threshold or a second maximum transmit power lower than the second threshold (Fig. 12, 1220, 1230, 1240, and col. 31, lines 22-34: show determining if the adjusted RSRP is less than a threshold, and determining a number of SSBs/preambles (i.e. configurations) to use). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the use of MolavianJazi’s RSRP threshold determination into the system of Medles to account for challenges in high collision probabilities due to reduced capabilities in 5G systems (col. 1 lines 25-33).
Regarding claim 11, Medles discloses the invention as described above. Medles does not disclose wherein a message 3 (msg3) is repeated a first number of times during a RACH procedure of the at least one first UE, and a msg3 is repeated a second number of times during a RACH procedure of the at least one second UE, the first number of times being less than a third threshold, the second number of times being greater than the third threshold In analogous art MolavianJazi discloses wherein a message 3 (msg3) (i.e. MsgA, which incorporates Msg3) is repeated a first number of times during a RACH procedure of the at least one first UE, and a msg3 is repeated a second number of times during a RACH procedure of the at least one second UE, the first number of times being less than a third threshold, the second number of times being greater than the third threshold (col. 48, lines 9-24: the number of repetitions for PUSCH in MsgA can be provided by separate configurations, which inherently have their own thresholds; also see col. 48, lines 33-44). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the use of MolavianJazi’s RSRP threshold determination into the system of Medles to account for challenges in high collision probabilities due to reduced capabilities in 5G systems (col. 1 lines 25-33).
Regarding claim 12, it is inherent to the system of Medles that in order to transmit the indication, the processor is configured to transmit the indication via at least one of a broadcast message or a unicast message since this is how a PRACH configuration is transmitted to a UE device.
Regarding claim 13, Medles broadly can be interpreted that the beam is associated with a bandwidth part identifier (Fig. 4, ref 400 shows the bandwidth used for the PRACH configurations is part of a bandwidth part which inherently has an associated bandwidth part identifier. However its not explicitly taught that the beam is associated with a BWP ID. MolavianJazi teaches that the beam is associated with a bandwidth part identifier (col. 16. Lines 9-23). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the use of MolavianJazi’s BWP determination into the system of Medles to account for challenges in high collision probabilities due to reduced capabilities in 5G systems (col. 1 lines 25-33).
Claims 14 and 15 are rejected for similar reasons as stated above.
Regarding claim 16, the claims are rejected for similar reasons as stated above. Furthermore Medles discloses an apparatus for wireless communication at a user equipment (See Fig. 5, ref 510) which initiates a RACH procedure for the selected first PRACH configuration or the selected second PRACH configuration (col. 12, lines 50-56: network apparatus receives a RACH preamble signal associated with the first set or the second set of PRACH configurations.
Claims 17-29, and 30 are rejected for similar reasons as stated above.
Regarding claim 29, Medles discloses the invention as described above. Medles does not explicitly state the RACH procedure includes the 4-step RACH procedure, and a message 3 (msg3) is repeated during the RACH procedure. MolavianJazi discloses the RACH procedure includes the 4-step RACH procedure, and a message 3 (msg3) is repeated during the RACH procedure (col. 11, lines 14-36 discloses a four step RA procedure, and that the embodiments applied to a 2-step RACH can apply to the 4-step RACH; col. 48, lines 9-24 disclose repetition in a 2-step RACH procedure). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the use of MolavianJazi’s BWP determination into the system of Medles to account for challenges in high collision probabilities due to reduced capabilities in 5G systems (col. 1 lines 25-33).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Joseph E Avellino whose telephone number is (571)272-3905. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:00am-3:00pm.
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, Jay Kramer can be reached at 571-272-6783. 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.
JOSEPH E. AVELLINO
Supervisory Patent Examiner
Art Unit 2478
/JOSEPH E AVELLINO/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2478
Prosecution Insights