DETAILED ACTION
Claims status
In response to the application filed on 05/21/2026, claims 1 and 4-6 are currently pending for the examination. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
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 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.
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 1-2, and 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LU et al. (US 2021/0392531 A1) in view of Radulescu et al. (US 2021/0092627 A1) and further in view of Zhang et al. (US 2019/0208549 A1).
Regarding claim 1; LU teaches a terminal comprising:
a receiver that receives, in a first band with a first frequency range, information related to a second band including a plurality of bands (See Fig. 11: receiving a first configuration of the first serving cell (i.e., on first band) and a second configuration of the second serving cell (i.e., on second band. ¶ [0257]), with a second frequency range different from the first frequency range (See Fig. 11: wherein a number of the UL BWPs configured on the first serving cell is different from a number of the multiple DL BWPs of the second serving cell. LU’s claim 5 and ¶ [0262]); and
a processor that uses, in combination, a first signal in the first band and a second signal (See Fig. 12: the UE to operate in a paired spectrum (i.e., operating simultaneously) of the configured cell(s). ¶ [0264]), overlapping the first signal in a time domain, in the second band for random access (See Fig. 11: In step 1115, the UE estimates (or derives) a pathloss for an uplink transmission in an uplink bandwidth part of the first serving cell based on a reference signal in the downlink bandwidth part. ¶ [0257]),
wherein signals, including Msg3 (LU-¶ [0039]), transmitted and received in the first band are different from signals transmitted and received in the second band (See Fig. 11: the UE receives a first configuration of a first serving cell and…The UE receives a second configuration of multiple downlink bandwidth parts of the second serving cell. See Abstract); and
the first band is configured for a cell in which initial access is performed and the second band is configured for a cell in which the first band is configured (See Fig. 11: In step 1105, a UE receives a first configuration (i.e., the first band for initial access to first serving cell) of a first serving cell and a second serving cell, wherein the second serving cell is a pathloss reference for the first serving cell. In step 1110, the UE receives a second configuration (i.e., second band being configured for the first serving cell) of multiple downlink bandwidth parts of the second serving cell, wherein a downlink bandwidth part among the multiple downlink bandwidth parts is an active downlink bandwidth part. ¶ [0257]).
[Office’s Note: Because of the alternative claim language such as “at least one of”, only one of the alternative limitations has been analyzed by the examiner].
LU doesn’t explicitly provide the method wherein overlapping the first signal in a time domain.
However, Radulescu further discloses the method wherein overlapping the first signal (Radulescu: See Fig. 3, CSI-RS 310-a may overlap at least one symbol period of SSB 305-a. ¶ [0154]) in a time domain (See Fig. 2: the timing information 215 may trigger CSI-RS measurement at UE 115-a, or the timing information 215 may indicate timing information or multiplexing information for the CSI-RS 210. Note: the two resource blocks are overlapped in time since the timing information is required to trigger the two signals. ¶ [0140]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide the method wherein overlapping the first signal in a time domain. as taught by Radulescu to have incorporated in the system of LU, so that it would provide that control information transmitted in a physical control channel may be distributed between different control regions in a cascaded manner (e.g., between a common control region or common search space and one or more UE-specific control regions or UE-specific search spaces). Radulescu: ¶ [0121].
Neither LU nor Radulescu discloses the signals including Msg2 and Msg4.
However, Zhang teaches the signals including Msg2 and Msg4 (See Fig. 5: At 502, UE 115…determines to gain access to the system, transmits the random access request, Msg1, via mmW on the high-band. UE 115 uses the uplink random access configuration information received via the system information for the high-band transmission. Base station 105 responds, at 503, with the random access response, Msg2, via the low-band. Base station 105 has determined that downlink access is preferable via the low-band for transmitting Msg2. At block 504, UE 115 transmits the uplink message based on the random access response, Msg3, which would typically include the UE identifier (UE-ID). UE 115 continues transmitting its uplink messages using the mmW high-band, as the preferable band. At 505, base station 105 completes the random access procedure by transmitting the contention resolution message, Msg4, via the low-band. ¶ [0070]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide t the signals including Msg2 and Msg4 as taught by Zhang to have incorporated in the system of LU, so that it would provide that UE selects the downlink carrier band based on channel performance characteristics, such as the downlink path loss, as well as the LBT statistics (e.g., the load of the channel or the preamble it observed, etc). Similarly, UE 115 may select the uplink carrier band for initial access based on these channel performance characteristics. Zhang- ¶ [0088].
Regarding claim 5; LU teaches a radio communication method for a terminal, the radio communication method comprising:
receiving, in a first band with a first frequency range, information related to a second band including a plurality of bands (See Fig. 11: receiving a first configuration of the first serving cell (i.e., on first band) and a second configuration of the second serving cell (i.e., on second band. ¶ [0257]), with a second frequency range different from the first frequency range (See Fig. 11: wherein a number of the UL BWPs configured on the first serving cell is different from a number of the multiple DL BWPs of the second serving cell. LU’s claim 5 and ¶ [0262]); and
using, in combination, a first signal in the first band and a second signal (See Fig. 12: the UE to operate in a paired spectrum (i.e., operating simultaneously) of the configured cell(s). ¶ [0264]), overlapping the first signal in a time domain, in the second band for random access (See Fig. 11: In step 1115, the UE estimates (or derives) a pathloss for an uplink transmission in an uplink bandwidth part of the first serving cell based on a reference signal in the downlink bandwidth part. ¶ [0257]),
wherein signals, including Msg3 (LU-¶ [0039]), transmitted and received in the first band are different from signals transmitted and received in the second band (See Fig. 11: the UE receives a first configuration of a first serving cell and…The UE receives a second configuration of multiple downlink bandwidth parts of the second serving cell. See Abstract); and
the first band is configured for a cell in which initial access is performed and the second band is configured for a cell in which the first band is configured (See Fig. 11: In step 1105, a UE receives a first configuration (i.e., the first band for initial access to first serving cell) of a first serving cell and a second serving cell, wherein the second serving cell is a pathloss reference for the first serving cell. In step 1110, the UE receives a second configuration (i.e., second band being configured for the first serving cell) of multiple downlink bandwidth parts of the second serving cell, wherein a downlink bandwidth part among the multiple downlink bandwidth parts is an active downlink bandwidth part. ¶ [0257]).
[Office’s Note: Because of the alternative claim language such as “at least one of”, only one of the alternative limitations has been analyzed by the examiner].
LU doesn’t explicitly provide the method wherein overlapping the first signal in a time domain.
However, Radulescu further discloses the method wherein overlapping the first signal (Radulescu: See Fig. 3, CSI-RS 310-a may overlap at least one symbol period of SSB 305-a. ¶ [0154]) in a time domain (See Fig. 2: the timing information 215 may trigger CSI-RS measurement at UE 115-a, or the timing information 215 may indicate timing information or multiplexing information for the CSI-RS 210. Note: the two resource blocks are overlapped in time sine the timing information is required to trigger the two signals. ¶ [0140]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide the method wherein overlapping the first signal in a time domain. as taught by Radulescu to have incorporated in the system of LU, so that it would provide that control information transmitted in a physical control channel may be distributed between different control regions in a cascaded manner (e.g., between a common control region or common search space and one or more UE-specific control regions or UE-specific search spaces). Radulescu: ¶ [0121].
Neither LU nor Radulescu discloses the signals including Msg2 and Msg4.
However, Zhang teaches the signals including Msg2 and Msg4 (See Fig. 5: At 502, UE 115…determines to gain access to the system, transmits the random access request, Msg1, via mmW on the high-band. UE 115 uses the uplink random access configuration information received via the system information for the high-band transmission. Base station 105 responds, at 503, with the random access response, Msg2, via the low-band. Base station 105 has determined that downlink access is preferable via the low-band for transmitting Msg2. At block 504, UE 115 transmits the uplink message based on the random access response, Msg3, which would typically include the UE identifier (UE-ID). UE 115 continues transmitting its uplink messages using the mmW high-band, as the preferable band. At 505, base station 105 completes the random access procedure by transmitting the contention resolution message, Msg4, via the low-band. ¶ [0070]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide t the signals including Msg2 and Msg4 as taught by Zhang to have incorporated in the system of LU, so that it would provide that UE selects the downlink carrier band based on channel performance characteristics, such as the downlink path loss, as well as the LBT statistics (e.g., the load of the channel or the preamble it observed, etc). Similarly, UE 115 may select the uplink carrier band for initial access based on these channel performance characteristics. Zhang- ¶ [0088].
Regarding claim 6; LU teaches a base station comprising:
a transmitting section that transmits, in a first band with a first frequency range, information related to a second band including a plurality of bands (See Fig. 11: receiving a first configuration of the first serving cell (i.e., on first band) and a second configuration of the second serving cell (i.e., on second band. ¶ [0257]), with a second frequency range different from the first frequency range (See Fig. 11: wherein a number of the UL BWPs configured on the first serving cell is different from a number of the multiple DL BWPs of the second serving cell. LU’s claim 5 and ¶ [0262]); and
a processor that uses, a first signal in the first band and a second signal (See Fig. 12: the UE to operate in a paired spectrum (i.e., operating simultaneously) of the configured cell(s). ¶ [0264]), overlapping the first signal in a time domain, in the second band for random access (See Fig. 11: In step 1115, the UE estimates (or derives) a pathloss for an uplink transmission in an uplink bandwidth part of the first serving cell based on a reference signal in the downlink bandwidth part. ¶ [0257]),
wherein signals, including Msg3 (LU-¶ [0039]), transmitted and received in the first band are different from signals transmitted and received in the second band (See Fig. 11: the UE receives a first configuration of a first serving cell and…The UE receives a second configuration of multiple downlink bandwidth parts of the second serving cell. See Abstract); and
the first band is configured for a cell in which initial access is performed and the second band is configured for a cell in which the first band is configured (See Fig. 11: In step 1105, a UE receives a first configuration (i.e., the first band for initial access to first serving cell) of a first serving cell and a second serving cell, wherein the second serving cell is a pathloss reference for the first serving cell. In step 1110, the UE receives a second configuration (i.e., second band being configured for the first serving cell) of multiple downlink bandwidth parts of the second serving cell, wherein a downlink bandwidth part among the multiple downlink bandwidth parts is an active downlink bandwidth part. ¶ [0257]).
LU doesn’t explicitly provide the method wherein overlapping the first signal in a time domain.
However, Radulescu further discloses the method wherein overlapping the first signal (Radulescu: See Fig. 3, CSI-RS 310-a may overlap at least one symbol period of SSB 305-a. ¶ [0154]) in a time domain (See Fig. 2: the timing information 215 may trigger CSI-RS measurement at UE 115-a, or the timing information 215 may indicate timing information or multiplexing information for the CSI-RS 210. Note: the two resource blocks are overlapped in time sine the timing information is required to trigger the two signals. ¶ [0140]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide the method wherein overlapping the first signal in a time domain. as taught by Radulescu to have incorporated in the system of LU, so that it would provide that control information transmitted in a physical control channel may be distributed between different control regions in a cascaded manner (e.g., between a common control region or common search space and one or more UE-specific control regions or UE-specific search spaces). Radulescu: ¶ [0121].
Neither LU nor Radulescu discloses the signals including Msg2 and Msg4.
However, Zhang teaches the signals including Msg2 and Msg4 (See Fig. 5: At 502, UE 115…determines to gain access to the system, transmits the random access request, Msg1, via mmW on the high-band. UE 115 uses the uplink random access configuration information received via the system information for the high-band transmission. Base station 105 responds, at 503, with the random access response, Msg2, via the low-band. Base station 105 has determined that downlink access is preferable via the low-band for transmitting Msg2. At block 504, UE 115 transmits the uplink message based on the random access response, Msg3, which would typically include the UE identifier (UE-ID). UE 115 continues transmitting its uplink messages using the mmW high-band, as the preferable band. At 505, base station 105 completes the random access procedure by transmitting the contention resolution message, Msg4, via the low-band. ¶ [0070]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide t the signals including Msg2 and Msg4 as taught by Zhang to have incorporated in the system of LU, so that it would provide that UE selects the downlink carrier band based on channel performance characteristics, such as the downlink path loss, as well as the LBT statistics (e.g., the load of the channel or the preamble it observed, etc). Similarly, UE 115 may select the uplink carrier band for initial access based on these channel performance characteristics. Zhang- ¶ [0088].
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LU et al. (US 2021/0392531 A1) in view of Radulescu et al. (US 2021/0092627 A1).
Regarding claim 4; LU teaches the terminal wherein the processor reports capability of carrier signals (See Fig. 3 and ¶ [0034]).
LU doesn’t explicitly provide the method wherein reporting related to the second band, in the first band.
However, Radulescu further discloses the method wherein reporting related to the second band, in the first band (Radulescu: See Fig. 2, control signaling that coordinates operation for the carrier. In some examples (e.g., in a carrier aggregation configuration), a carrier may also have acquisition signaling or control signaling that coordinates operations for other carriers (i.e., one carrier/band related to other band/carrier) ¶ [0120]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide the method wherein reporting related to the second band, in the first band as taught by Radulescu to have incorporated in the system of LU, so that it would provide that control information transmitted in a physical control channel may be distributed between different control regions in a cascaded manner (e.g., between a common control region or common search space and one or more UE-specific control regions or UE-specific search spaces). Radulescu: ¶ [0121].
Response to Arguments
In response to the amendment, Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1 and 4-6 have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to any of the references being used in the current rejection.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAI AUNG whose telephone number is (571)272-3507. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday, Alt Fridays, 7:30 AM- 5:00 PM (EST).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Noel Beharry can be reached on 571-270-5630. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. 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). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/SAI AUNG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2416
Prosecution Insights