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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 09/03/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment, filed on 09/03/2026, has been entered and carefully considered.
Claims 1, 5-6 are amended; Claims 2-3 and 7 are cancelled; and claim 8 is newly added and Claims 1, 4-6, 8 are currently pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed on 09/03/2026, have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant amended the independent claims significantly, which necessitates the new ground rejection.
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, 5-6, 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lei et al (US 2022/0312501 A1), in view of Cirik et al (US 2022/0030620 A1), further in view of Kundargi et al (US 2019/0132827 A1).
Regarding claims 1, 5, Lei teaches a terminal/method (Fig. 6, UE 115-c) comprising:
a transmitting section (Fig. 7, element 720) that transmits a message in a random access procedure in a physical uplink shared channel (Fig. 4, step 415 and 420; and also see [0129], “UE 115-b may transmit, to base station 105-b, a payload of the first message (e.g., msgA payload), where the payload is transmitted in one or more PUSCH occasions associated with the RACH occasion”); and
a control section (Fig. 7, element 715) that controls a plurality of repetitions of transmission of the physical uplink shared channel (Fig. 3, [0123], “a first random access message of the two-step RACH procedure (e.g., a msgA) may fail as described above, leading to the UE 115 to determine to retransmit the first random access message. However, the UE 115 may determine to reconfigure the first random access message according to a set of transmission configuration options (e.g., transmission parameters that can be changed by the UE 115) to improve performance of the first random access message transmission”),
wherein the control section uses a plurality of beams for the plurality of respective repetitions ([0125], “the retransmission of the first random access message may use a second transmission configuration state 305-b, a third transmission configuration state 305-c, etc. up to a k-th transmission configuration state 305-k”, “the transmission configuration state 305-k may include a different transmit beam than the other transmission configuration states 305, etc”), wherein when initial transmission of the message has failed, the control section controls the plurality of repetitions of the transmission of the physical uplink shared channel (Fig. 3, [0123], “a first random access message of the two-step RACH procedure (e.g., a msgA) may fail as described above, leading to the UE 115 to determine to retransmit the first random access message. However, the UE 115 may determine to reconfigure the first random access message according to a set of transmission configuration options (e.g., transmission parameters that can be changed by the UE 115) to improve performance of the first random access message transmission”), and
Lei doesn’t explicitly teach that i) the beams for the plurality of repetitions of the transmission of the physical uplink shared channel are narrower than a beam for the initial transmission of the message; ii) a receiving section that receives an indication information, wherein an assignment of the number of the plurality of repetition is based on the indication information.
Cirik teaches that i) the beams for the plurality of repetitions of the transmission of the physical uplink shared channel are narrower than a beam for the initial transmission of the message ([0146], “The wireless device and/or the base station may perform procedure U2, for example, using a smaller set of beams than the set of beams used in procedure P1, or using narrower beams than the beams used in procedure P1. Procedure U2 may be referred to as a beam refinement”); ii) a receiving section that receives an indication information, wherein an assignment of the number of the plurality of repetition is based on the indication information ([0291], “The DCI may comprise a time domain resource alignment (TDRA) field. The one or more configuration parameters may indicate a TDRA field for the configured uplink grant (e.g., type 1 configured uplink grant). The TDRA field may indicate a resource allocation table. The resource allocation table may be indicated/configured by the one or more configuration parameters. The resource allocation table may be preconfigured (e.g., fixed). The TDRA field may indicate a quantity of repetitions (e.g., numberofrepetitions) for the transport block”).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the teaching of Cirik in the system disclosed by Lei. The combination is to apply narrow beam refinement to PUSCH repetitions (a known device/method) would predictably yield improved signal gain and coverage – exactly the result both techniques independently aim to achieve. No unexpected result arises from the combination.
The aforementioned references do not expressly teach that an index of the beam for the initial transmission is associated with indexes of the beams for the repetition of transmissions.
Kundargi teaches that an index of the beam for the initial transmission is associated with indexes of the beams for the repetition of transmissions ([0006], “Each narrow beam RS of the second beam set is uniquely linked to a wide beam RS of the first beam set according to a linkage”; [0041] “Implicit Linkage via Nesting Structure Design—Linkage can be implicitly indicated via nesting structure design. Each Beam Pairing between the TRP (transmit/receive point) and UE, which is also called a Beam Pair Link (BPL), is expected to have a unique BPL tag/identifier (ID). The tag/ID of each beam is designed to encode in it the nesting structure, and the SS beam identifier that it corresponds to”; also see Fig. 3A and Fig. 3B).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the teaching of Kundargi in the system disclosed by Lei in view of Cirik. Because any system that switches from a wide initial beam to narrower repetition beams necessarily requires a mechanism to associated the initial beam index with the repetition beam indexes - without such association, the UE and network would have no principled basis for coordinating beam selection across repetitions. Kundargi provides exactly this well-known mechanism, and its application yields only the predictable result of a coherent, implementable beam management system for PUSCH repetition.
Regarding claim 6, Lei teaches a base station comprising:
a receiving section that receives a message in a random access procedure in a physical uplink shared channel (Fig. 4, step 415 and 420; and also see [0129], “UE 115-b may transmit, to base station 105-b, a payload of the first message (e.g., msgA payload), where the payload is transmitted in one or more PUSCH occasions associated with the RACH occasion”); and
a control section that controls a plurality of repetitions of reception of the physical uplink shared channel (Fig. 6, step 630, 635 and 640; see [0126], [0123]).
wherein the control section uses a plurality of beams for the plurality of respective repetitions ([0125], “the retransmission of the first random access message may use a second transmission configuration state 305-b, a third transmission configuration state 305-c, etc. up to a k-th transmission configuration state 305-k”, “the transmission configuration state 305-k may include a different transmit beam than the other transmission configuration states 305, etc”), wherein when initial transmission of the message has failed, the control section controls the plurality of repetitions of the transmission of the physical uplink shared channel (Fig. 3, [0123], “a first random access message of the two-step RACH procedure (e.g., a msgA) may fail as described above, leading to the UE 115 to determine to retransmit the first random access message. However, the UE 115 may determine to reconfigure the first random access message according to a set of transmission configuration options (e.g., transmission parameters that can be changed by the UE 115) to improve performance of the first random access message transmission”), and
Lei doesn’t explicitly teach that i) the beams for the plurality of repetitions of the reception of the physical uplink shared channel are narrower than a beam for the initial transmission of the message; ii) a transmitting section that transmits an indication information, wherein an assignment of the number of the plurality of repetition is based on the indication information.
Cirik teaches that i) the beams for the plurality of repetitions of the reception of the physical uplink shared channel are narrower than a beam for the initial reception of the message ([0146], “The wireless device and/or the base station may perform procedure U2, for example, using a smaller set of beams than the set of beams used in procedure P1, or using narrower beams than the beams used in procedure P1. Procedure U2 may be referred to as a beam refinement”); ii) a transmitting section that transmits an indication information, wherein an assignment of the number of the plurality of repetition is based on the indication information ([0291], “The DCI may comprise a time domain resource alignment (TDRA) field. The one or more configuration parameters may indicate a TDRA field for the configured uplink grant (e.g., type 1 configured uplink grant). The TDRA field may indicate a resource allocation table. The resource allocation table may be indicated/configured by the one or more configuration parameters. The resource allocation table may be preconfigured (e.g., fixed). The TDRA field may indicate a quantity of repetitions (e.g., numberofrepetitions) for the transport block”).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the teaching of Cirik in the system disclosed by Lei. The combination is to apply narrow beam refinement to PUSCH repetitions (a known device/method) would predictably yield improved signal gain and coverage – exactly the result both techniques independently aim to achieve. No unexpected result arises from the combination.
The aforementioned references do not expressly teach that an index of the beam for the initial transmission is associated with indexes of the beams for the repetition of transmissions.
Kundargi teaches that an index of the beam for the initial transmission is associated with indexes of the beams for the repetition of transmissions ([0006], “Each narrow beam RS of the second beam set is uniquely linked to a wide beam RS of the first beam set according to a linkage”; [0041] “Implicit Linkage via Nesting Structure Design—Linkage can be implicitly indicated via nesting structure design. Each Beam Pairing between the TRP (transmit/receive point) and UE, which is also called a Beam Pair Link (BPL), is expected to have a unique BPL tag/identifier (ID). The tag/ID of each beam is designed to encode in it the nesting structure, and the SS beam identifier that it corresponds to”; also see Fig. 3A and Fig. 3B).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the teaching of Kundargi in the system disclosed by Lei in view of Cirik. Because any system that switches from a wide initial beam to narrower repetition beams necessarily requires a mechanism to associated the initial beam index with the repetition beam indexes - without such association, the UE and network would have no principled basis for coordinating beam selection across repetitions. Kundargi provides exactly this well-known mechanism, and its application yields only the predictable result of a coherent, implementable beam management system for PUSCH repetition.
Regarding Claim 8, the aforementioned references further teaches that an assignment of the index of the beam for the initial transmission is based on the indication information (Cirik, [0212], “The wireless device may determine to select at least two default TCI states based on the DCI (e.g., TCI field of the DCI) indicating at least two uplink resources”; [0295], “Each TCI state of the at least two TCI states may indicate a respective reference signal of at least two reference signals. Each TCI state of the at least two TCI states may comprise a reference signal indicator/index (e.g., provided by a higher layer parameter referenceSignal, ssb-index, csi-RS-Index, NZP-CSI-RS-ResourceId) identifying (e.g., indicating, of) the respective reference signal”, it’s noted that ssb-index is the index of the beam for initial transmission).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lei et al (US 2022/0312501 A1), in view of Cirik and Kundargi, further in view of Shih et la (US 11,291,012 B2).
Regarding claim 4, Lei in view of Cirik and Kundargi teaches all of the limitations as applied to claim 1, further teaches that the random access procedure is based on a first synchronization signal block (Lei, Fig. 4, step 405, “SSB” transmitted from BS to UE, SSB correspond to synchronization signal block; [0128], “UE 115-b may perform a downlink synchronization based on the received SSB to synchronize with base station 105-b prior to beginning the two-step RACH procedure”). However, Lei fails to disclose that retransmission of the message is based on a second synchronization signal block.
Shih discloses that retransmission of the message is based on a second synchronization signal block (see Claim 6, “after the transmission using the at least one PUR is not successful, determining whether the first beam becomes unsuitable based on the RSRP of the first SSB; selecting, by the UE, a second SSB from the multiple SSBs to perform a retransmission of the data in the RRC_INACTIVE state if the UE determines that the first beam is unsuitable and the second SSB fulfills the at least one condition”).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the teaching of Shih in the system disclosed by Lei in view of Cirik and Kundargi for the purpose of improving transmission reliability by switching to a different beam associated with another SSB.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SIMING LIU whose telephone number is (571)270-3859. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8:30am-5:00pm.
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, 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.
/SIMING LIU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2411
Prosecution Insights