DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Claims 1-6 are currently pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
2. 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.
3. 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.
4. 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.
5. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
6. Claims 1, 5, and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Publication No. 2020/0358547 A1 (hereinafter “Liu”), in view of either the non-patent literature document titled Views On Mechanism to Recover From Beam Failure (hereinafter “R1-1702799”) or U.S. Publication No. 2020/0196327 A1 (hereinafter “Zhang”)1.
Regarding claims 1, 5, and 6: Liu teaches a terminal comprising: a receiving section that attempts reception of a first synchronization signal block; and a control section that controls, when the reception of the first synchronization signal block has failed, transmission [indicating] report of the failure (see, e.g., [0005], [0054]; a UE transmits a report when reception of an SSB fails).
Liu does not explicitly state transmission of a preamble using a random access occasion. However, this feature is taught by R1-1702799 (see, e.g., section 2; note the association for occasions and preamble transmission; note also overlapping teachings with respect to reporting regarding SSB reception). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to incorporate features from the system of R1-1702799, such as the signaling functionality, within the system of Liu, in order to improve beam recovery.
Alternatively, the said feature is taught by Zhang (see, e.g., [0204]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to incorporate features from the system of Zhang, such as the signaling functionality, within the system of Liu, in order to improve beam recovery.
The rationale set forth above regarding the terminal of claim 1 is applicable to the method and base station of claims 5 and 6, respectively.
7. Claims 2 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu, in view of either R1-1702799 or Zhang, and alternatively in further view of U.S. Publication No. 2021/0297966 A1 (hereinafter “Noh”).
Regarding claim 2: Liu modified by R1-1702799 or Zhang further teaches the feature wherein when the reception of the first synchronization signal block has failed, the receiving section attempts reception of a second synchronization signal block (see, e.g., R1-1702799 proposals 2 or 4; note reception of further SS-block). The motivation for modification set forth above regarding claim 1 is applicable to claim 2.
To the extent the said feature is not inherent to Liu modified by R1-1702799 or Zhang, it is nevertheless taught by Noh (see, e.g., [0014], [0023]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to incorporate features from the system of Noh, such as the transmission functionality, within the system of Liu modified by R1-1702799 or Zhang, in order to improve channel utilization.
Regarding claim 3: Liu modified by R1-1702799 or Zhang, and alternatively Noh, further teaches wherein when the reception of the first synchronization signal block has failed, the receiving section attempts, after the transmission of the preamble, reception of the second synchronization signal block (see, e.g., R1-1702799 proposals 2 or 4; note reception of further SS-block; or Noh [0014], [0023]). The motivation for modification set forth above regarding claim 2 is applicable to claim 3.
8. Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu, in view of either R1-1702799 or Zhang, alternatively in further view of Noh, and alternatively in further view of U.S. Publication No. 2021/0185734 A1 (hereinafter “Li”)2.
Regarding claim 4: Liu modified by R1-1702799 or Zhang, and alternatively Noh, further teaches wherein when the reception of the first synchronization signal block has failed and the reception of the second synchronization signal block has been successful, the control section controls the transmission of the preamble (see, e.g., Liu [0068]-[0069]).
To the extent the said feature is not inherent to Liu modified by R1-1702799 or Zhang, and alternatively Noh, it is nevertheless taught by Li (see, e.g., [0003]-[0004]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to incorporate features from the system of Li, such as the transmission functionality, within the system of Liu modified by R1-1702799 or Zhang, and alternatively Noh, in order to improve resource utilization.
Relevant Art
9. The following prior art not relied upon in this Office action is considered pertinent to Applicant's disclosure: See form PTO-892.
Conclusion
10. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICHOLAS SLOMS whose telephone number is (571)270-7520. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9AM-5PM EST.
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, Ayaz Sheikh can be reached at (571)272-3795. 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.
/NICHOLAS SLOMS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2476
1 Liu and Zhang were cited in Applicant’s Information Disclosure Statement submitted January 23, 2024 (U.S. Patent Application Publications, cite nos. 1 and 2).
2 Li was cited in Applicant’s Information Disclosure Statement submitted January 23, 2024 (U.S. Patent Application Publications, cite no. 3)