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 .
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the abstract is missing. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: specification should be submitted in the right format (currently WIPO publication submitted as specification with figures and titles which is not appropriate).
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 5 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 5 recites the limitation "the downlink pathloss reference " in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 10 recites the limitation "the downlink pathloss reference " in lines 5-6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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 col. 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.
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.
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 3-4, 6-7, 8-9, 11-12 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu (US20230164669A1, PCT Priority Date: Apr 8, 2020) in view of Shih et al (US20220150986A1, Pro 63111833 Priority Date: Nov 10, 2020).
Regarding claim 3 (New), Liu’669 discloses a user equipment (UE) (see, Fig. 1 and 8, UEs communicate with BSs in wireless communication system, par 0023, 0201), comprising:
reception circuitry (Fig. 8, communication component and I/O interface can be equated to reception circuitry, par 0202) configured to receive, from a base station (Fig. 1, BS, par 0023), system information (SIB1 can be equated to system information, par 0074) including a configuration for an UL BWP (see, Fig. 1-2, UE receives access configuration from BS the SIB1 carrying configuration information indicating initial uplink BWP configuration, par 0032, 0058-0059, 0074), wherein the UL BWP (initial uplink BWP can be equated to UL BWP, par 0058) is configured with both first 2-step random access (RA) type RA resources and first 4-step RA type RA resources (see, initial access configuration for initial uplink BWP with random access configuration including 2-step random access and 4-step random access configuration, par 0058, 0060, 0065-0066), and both the first 2-step RA type RA resources (random access configuration including RA resources and parameters such as preamble sequence and number of repetitions of the random access can be equated to RA resources, par 0045) and the first 4-step RA type RA resources are not associated with a feature of RedCap (see, same uplink initial BWP configuration with random access configuration including 2-step and 4-step random access configuration for both first type of UEs and the second type of UEs (noted, same uplink initial BWP configuration either redcap or not and thus not associated with a feature of RedCap), par 0058, 0060, 0065-0066. Noted, first type of UE is Redcap UE and second type of UE is eMBB UE, par 0035. Noted further, frequency resources and time domain resources in initial uplink BWP, par 0057); and
control circuitry (see, Fig. 8, processing component including processors, par 0203) configured to.
Liu’669 discloses all the claim limitations but fails to explicitly teach:
select the UL BWP to perform a RA procedure, and to set a RA type of the RA procedure to one of a 4-step RA type and a 2-step RA type based on whether the UL BWP is further configured with second 2-step RA type RA resources and second 4-step RA type RA resources, wherein both the second 2-step RA type RA resources and the second 4-step RA type RA resources are associated with the feature of RedCap.
However Shih’986 from the same field of endeavor (see, Fig. 2, UE communicates with access network through MIMO, par 0018) discloses:
select the UL BWP (UL BWP can be equated to UL BWP, par 0072) to perform a RA procedure (see, UL BWP selected for random access par 0072, 0124), and to set a RA type of the RA procedure to one of a 4-step RA type and a 2-step RA type (set RA type to 4-step RA type or 2-step RA type, par 0127-0129) based on whether the UL BWP is further configured with second 2-step RA type RA resources and second 4-step RA type RA resources (see, set 2-step RA type if the BWP selected for Random Access procedure is only configured with 2-step RA type Random Access resources or set 4-step RA type if the BWP selected for Random Access procedure is only configured with 4-step RA type Random Access resources, par 0122-0123, 0125-0129. Noted, RA type Random Access resources including PRACH resources for legacy RA and PRACH resources for coverage-enhanced RA, and PRACH resources for legacy RA can be equated to second 2-step RA type RA resources, par 0125, 0387. Noted further, PRACH resources for legacy RA or coverage-enhanced RA applicable to 4-Step RA procedure and 2-Step RA procedure, par 0460, 0467), wherein both the second 2-step RA type RA resources (PRACH resources for legacy RA in 2-step RA type RA can be equated to second 2-step RA type RA resources, par 0387, 0460) and the second 4-step RA type RA resources (PRACH resources for legacy RA in 4-step RA type RA resources can be equated to second 4-step RA type RA resources, par 0387, 0460) are associated with the feature of RedCap (see, UE determines whether to use legacy PRACH resources of legacy RA or PRACH resources of coverage-enhanced RA for 4-step or 2 step RA based on measured RSRP of downlink pathloss reference comparing with first threshold of Reduced Capability UE, par 0387-0392. Noted, UE may perform the determination (of whether to use legacy RA or to use coverage-enhanced RA) after determining the RA type of 2-step or 4 step, par 0392. Noted further, 2-step RA resources and 4-step RA resources are different and thus legacy PRACH resources are different for 2-step RA and 4-step RA, par 0125).
In view of the above, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains to implement the UE as taught by Shih’986 into that of Liu’669. The motivation would have been to study potential coverage enhancement solutions for specific scenarios for both FR1 and FR2 (par 0042).
Regarding claim 4 (New), Liu’669 discloses the UE of claim 3 (see, Fig. 1 and 8, UEs communicate with BSs in wireless communication system, par 0023, 0201), wherein the control circuitry (see, Fig. 8, processing component including processors, par 0203) is configured to.
Liu’669 discloses all the claim limitations but fails to explicitly teach:
in a case that the selected UL BWP is further configured with both the second 2-step RA type RA resources and the second 4-step RA type RA resources, set the RA type of the RA procedure to one of a 4-step RA type and a 2-step RA type based on an RSRP of downlink pathloss reference.
However Shih’986 from the same field of endeavor (see, Fig. 2, UE communicates with access network through MIMO, par 0018) discloses:
in a case that the selected UL BWP is further configured with both the second 2-step RA type RA resources and the second 4-step RA type RA resources (if the BWP selected for Random Access procedure is configured with both 2-step and 4-step RA type Random Access Resources, par 0124), set the RA type of the RA procedure to one of a 4-step RA type and a 2-step RA type based on an RSRP of downlink pathloss reference (see, if the BWP selected for Random Access procedure is configured with both 2-step and 4-step RA type Random Access Resources, set RA_TYPE to 2–step RA if RSRP of the downlink pathloss reference is above msgA-RSRP Threshold and set RA_TYPE to 4–step RA otherwise, par 0124, 0127-0129. Noted, UE may perform the determination (of whether to use legacy RA or to use coverage-enhanced RA) after determining the RA type of 2-step or 4 step, par 0392. Noted further, PRACH resources for legacy RA or coverage-enhanced RA applicable to 4-Step RA procedure and 2-Step RA procedure, par 0460, 0467).
In view of the above, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains to implement the UE as taught by Shih’986 into that of Liu’669. The motivation would have been to study potential coverage enhancement solutions for specific scenarios for both FR1 and FR2 (par 0042).
Regarding claim 6 (New), Liu’669 discloses the UE of claim 3 (see, Fig. 1 and 8, UEs communicate with BSs in wireless communication system, par 0023, 0201), wherein the control circuitry (see, Fig. 8, processing component including processors, par 0203) is configured to.
Liu’669 discloses all the claim limitations but fails to explicitly teach:
in a case that the selected UL BWP is configured with the second 4-step RA type RA resources and not configured with the second 2-step RA type RA resources, set the RA type of the RA procedure to the 4-step RA type and select the second 4-step RA type RA resources for the RA procedure.
However Shih’986 from the same field of endeavor (see, Fig. 2, UE communicates with access network through MIMO, par 0018) discloses:
in a case that the selected UL BWP is configured with the second 4-step RA type RA resources and not configured with the second 2-step RA type RA resources (if 4-step RA resources are configured and no 2-step RA resources are configured (derived from if all 4-step and 2-step RA resources are configured or only configured with 2-step RA resources (i.e. no 4-step RACH RA type resources configured) or else, par 0124-0128)), set the RA type of the RA procedure to the 4-step RA type (set RA_TYPE to 4-stepRA, par 0129) and select the second 4-step RA type RA resources (select RA resource according to access type, par 0130) for the RA procedure (see, set RA_TYPE to 4-stepRA and select RA resource according to RA type if 4-step RA resources are configured and no 2-step RA resources are configured, par 0124-0130. Noted, PRACH resources for legacy RA or coverage-enhanced RA applicable to 4-Step RA procedure and 2-Step RA procedure, par 0460, 0467).
In view of the above, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains to implement the UE as taught by Shih’986 into that of Liu’669. The motivation would have been to study potential coverage enhancement solutions for specific scenarios for both FR1 and FR2 (par 0042).
Regarding claim 7 (New), Liu’669 discloses the UE of claim 3 (see, Fig. 1 and 8, UEs communicate with BSs in wireless communication system, par 0023, 0201), wherein the control circuitry (see, Fig. 8, processing component including processors, par 0203) is configured to.
Liu’669 discloses all the claim limitations but fails to explicitly teach:
in a case that the selected UL BWP is configured with the second 2-step RA type RA resources and not configured with the second 4-step RA type RA resources, set the RA type of the RA procedure to the 2-step RA type and select the second 2-step RA type RA resources for the RA procedure.
However Shih’986 from the same field of endeavor (see, Fig. 2, UE communicates with access network through MIMO, par 0018) discloses:
in a case that the selected UL BWP is configured with the second 2-step RA type RA resources and not configured with the second 4-step RA type RA resources (if the BWP selected for Random Access procedure is only configured with 2-step RA type Random Access resources ( i.e. no 4-step RACH RA type resources configured), par 0124), set the RA type of the RA procedure to the 2-step RA type and select the second 2-step RA type RA resources for the RA procedure (see, set RA_TYPE to 2-stepRA and perform RA Resource selection procedure for 2-step RA type if the BWP selected for Random Access procedure is only configured with 2-step RA type Random Access resources, par 0124, 0127, 0132. Noted, PRACH resources for legacy RA or coverage-enhanced RA applicable to 4-Step RA procedure and 2-Step RA procedure, par 0460, 0467).
In view of the above, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains to implement the UE as taught by Shih’986 into that of Liu’669. The motivation would have been to study potential coverage enhancement solutions for specific scenarios for both FR1 and FR2 (par 0042).
Regarding claim 8 (New), Claim 8 recites a base station performing the steps recited in claim 3 and thereby, is rejected for the reasons discussed above with respect to claim 3.
Regarding claim 9 (New), Claim 9 recites a base station performing the steps recited in claim 4 and thereby, is rejected for the reasons discussed above with respect to claim 4.
Regarding claim 11 (New), Claim 11 recites a base station performing the steps recited in claim 6 and thereby, is rejected for the reasons discussed above with respect to claim 6.
Regarding claim 12 (New), Claim 12 recites a base station performing the steps recited in claim 7 and thereby, is rejected for the reasons discussed above with respect to claim 7.
Regarding claim 13 (New), Claim 13 recites a communication method performed by UE performing the steps recited in claim 1 and thereby, is rejected for the reasons discussed above with respect to claim 1.
Claims 5 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu’669 in view of Shih’986 as applied to claims 1 and 8 above respectively, and further in view of Agiwal et al (US20220132464A1, PCT Priority Date: Jun 14, 2021).
Regarding claim 5 (New), Liu’669 discloses the UE of claim 3 (see, Fig. 1 and 8, UEs communicate with BSs in wireless communication system, par 0023, 0201), wherein the control circuitry (see, Fig. 8, processing component including processors, par 0203) is configured to.
The combination of Liu’669 and Shih’986 discloses all the claim limitations but fails to explicitly teach:
in a case that the selected UL BWP is not configured with the second 2-step RA type RA resources and the second 4-step RA type RA resources, set the RA type of the RA procedure to one of a 4-step RA type and a 2-step RA type based on an RSRP of the downlink pathloss reference.
However Agiwal’464 from the same field of endeavor (see, Fig. 2, UEs communicates with each other or with BS when served by RAN and outside of RAN coverage, par 0131) discloses:
in a case that the selected UL BWP (UL BWP selected, par 0082-0084) is not configured with the second 2-step RA type RA resources and the second 4-step RA type RA resources (if UL BWP selected is not configured with only 2 step RACH resources or only 4 step RACH resources or both 2 step and 4 step RACH resources, par 0082-0084), set the RA type of the RA procedure to one of a 4-step RA type and a 2-step RA type (selects 4 step RACH, par 0085) based on an RSRP of the downlink pathloss reference (see, UE selects 4 step RACH if UL BWP selected not configured with 2-step or 4 step RA resources, par 0079-0082. Noted, UE utilize resources provided by cells, and thus 2-step or 4 step RA resources provided by individual cell of cells can be equated to first/second 2-step RA resources and second 4-step RA resources respectively, par 0064).
In view of the above, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains to implement the UE as taught by Agiwal’464 into that of Liu’669. The motivation would have been to develop an improved 5G or pre-5G communication system to meet the increased demand for wireless data traffic (par 0003).
Regarding claim 10 (New), Claim 10 recites a base station performing the steps recited in claim 5 and thereby, is rejected for the reasons discussed above with respect to claim 5.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Lu et al (US20230180273A1, PCT Priority Date: Aug 6, 2020) discloses:
random access process is… a four-step random access procedure or a two-step random access procedure (par 0073);
the terminal equipments supported by Rel-15 and Rel-16 communication systems are also referred to as conventional terminals, and the above terminal equipments with medium and low capabilities are also referred to as unconventional terminals (0009);
Parameters in the common configuration (BWP UplinkCommonRedCap) of the first initial uplink bandwidth part may be identical to those in the common configuration of the second initial uplink bandwidth part, …. The identical parameters may reuse the common configuration of the second initial uplink the bandwidth part, including basic parameters of the uplink BWP (including a frequency domain location and bandwidth of the BWP), common configuration of the random access channel (RACH), common configuration of a two-step random access RACH, MsgA PUSCH configuration, PUSCH common configuration or PUCCH common configuration, etc. Parameters that must be reused are not included in the common configuration of the first initial uplink bandwidth part (par 0114);
for the first additional uplink bandwidth part, the network device 101 may add parameters (uplinkBWP-ToAddModListRedCap) in an uplink bandwidth part list for the unconventional terminal in uplink configuration (UplinkConfig) of configuration of the serving cell. Each element in the list is configuration information of a first additional uplink BWP, and parameters in the first additional uplink BWP configuration (BWP-UplinkRedCap) may reuse the uplink common BWP configuration of the conventional terminal, including the BWP identifier, the uplink common BWP configuration of the unconventional terminal, and uplink dedicated BWP configuration of the unconventional terminal (par 0123).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to XUAN LU whose telephone number is (571)272-2844. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 7:30am-5:30pm.
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, KWANG Yao can be reached on (571)272-3182. 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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.
/XUAN LU/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2473