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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by 3GPP document R2-2104775.
R2-2104775 teaches:
1. (Currently Amended) A method performed by a terminal in a wireless communication system, the method comprising:
receiving, from a network, configuration information related to a first preamble group for a first type feature (Network can configure separate PRACH resources (preambles or Ros) or configurations for RedCap UEs, section 2.2.2 under observation 4);
transmitting, to the network, a first message based on a preamble selected from the first preamble group (network can identify RedCap as early as Msg1/A and then ensure not to schedule Msg2/3/4/B outside of RedCap UE’s maximum bandwidth, section 2.2.2.); and
transmitting, to the network, a second message including a logical channel identifier (LCID) related to a second type feature, wherein the terminal supports both the first type feature and the second type feature (if early identification in Msg3 is agree, introduce new LCID for UL-CCCH/1 message sent by RedCap UEs, Section 2.2.3, proposal 8).
2. (Original) The method according to claim 1, wherein:
the LCID is related to a common control channel (CCCH) for the second type feature (if early identification in Msg3 is agree, introduce new LCID for UL-CCCH/1 message sent by RedCap UEs, Section 2.2.3, proposal 8).
3. (Original) The method according to claim 1, wherein:
the second message corresponds to Msg3 transmitted based on a random access response (RedCap UEs are configured with separate PRACH resources and can be configured with a separate ra-searchSpace for Msg2/MsgB receptions, section 2.2.3, proposal 7).
5. (Original) The method according to claim 1, wherein:
the second message is included in MsgA of a 2-step random access procedure (specify functionality that will enable RedCap UEs to be explicitly identifiable to networks through an early indication in Msg1 and/or Msg3, and Msg A if supported, including the ability for the early indication to be configurable by the network, Section 1, Network can configure separate PRACH resources (preambles or Ros) or configurations for RedCap UEs, section 2.2.2 under observation 4).
8. (Currently Amended) A terminal for performing random access in a wireless communication system, the terminal comprising:
at least one transceiver; and
at least one processor connected to the at least one transceiver, wherein the at least one processor is configured to:
receive, through the at least one transceiver, from a network, configuration information related to a first preamble group for a first type feature (Network can configure separate PRACH resources (preambles or Ros) or configurations for RedCap UEs, section 2.2.2 under observation 4);
transmit, through the at least one transceiver, to the network, a first message based on a preamble selected from the first preamble group (network can identify RedCap as early as Msg1/A and then ensure not to schedule Msg2/3/4/B outside of RedCap UE’s maximum bandwidth, section 2.2.2.); and
transmit, through the at least one transceiver, to the network, a second message including a logical channel identifier (LCID) related to a second type feature, wherein the terminal supports both the first type feature and the second type feature (if early identification in Msg3 is agree, introduce new LCID for UL-CCCH/1 message sent by RedCap UEs, Section 2.2.3, proposal 8).
10. (Currently Amended) A base station for responding to a random access procedure of a terminal in a wireless communication system, the base station comprising:
at least one transceiver; and
at least one processor connected to the at least one transceiver, wherein the at least one processor is configured to:
transmit, through the at least one transceiver, to at least one terminal, configuration information related to a first preamble group for a first type feature (Network can configure separate PRACH resources (preambles or Ros) or configurations for RedCap UEs, section 2.2.2 under observation 4);
receive, through the at least one transceiver, from a specific terminal of the at least one terminal, a first message based on a preamble selected from the first preamble group (network can identify RedCap as early as Msg1/A and then ensure not to schedule Msg2/3/4/B outside of RedCap UE’s maximum bandwidth, section 2.2.2.); and
receive, through the at least one transceiver, from the specific terminal, a second message including a logical channel identifier (LCID) related to a second type feature, wherein the specific terminal supports both the first type feature and the second type feature (if early identification in Msg3 is agree, introduce new LCID for UL-CCCH/1 message sent by RedCap UEs, Section 2.2.3, proposal 8).
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 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(s) 4, 6, and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over R2-2104775 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of 3GPP technical specification TR 38.875 v17.0.0.
R2-2104775 teaches signaling to assist with reduced capacity (RedCap) UEs is a wireless communications network. R2-2104775 does not teach a fallback action in case of a failure in the network. However, TR 38.875 teaches a fallback action in case of a failure in the network. It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time of filing to modify the teachings of R2-2104775 to incorporate the known technique of a fallback action as taught by TR 38.875 in order to obtain the predictable result of reconnecting devices to the network.
The combination teaches:
4. (Original) The method according to claim 3, wherein:
the random access response corresponds to a fallback random access response of a 2- step random access procedure (in case of fallback from 2-step to 4-step RACH during MsgA PUSCH failure, possibility for coverage recovery, TR 38.875, Table 11.1.1-4).
6. (Original) The method according to claim 1, wherein:
based on a 4-step random access procedure being performed after reaching a maximum number of transmissions of MsgA in a 2-step random access procedure, a preamble selected from the first preamble group for the first type feature is transmitted (in case of fallback from 2-step to 4-step RACH during MsgA PUSCH failure, possibility for coverage recovery, TR 38.875, Table 11.1.1-4).
7. (Original) The method according to claim 1, wherein:
the first type feature is Msg3 repetitions for a coverage enhancement (Msg3 retransmission, TR 38.875, p. 72, Section 11.1.1), the second type feature is a reduced capability (RedCap) (because a larger Msg3 has negative impact on cell coverage, extending the current Msg3 or introducing a new larger RRC message is especially undesirable for RedCap UEs, which already suffer from a reduction in coverage due to their reduced capabilities, (R2-2104775, section 2.2.3).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PETER G SOLINSKY whose telephone number is (571)270-7216. The examiner can normally be reached M - Th, 6:30 A - 5:00 P.
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, Asad Nawaz can be reached at 571-272-3988. 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.
PETER G. SOLINSKY
Examiner
Art Unit 2463
/Peter G Solinsky/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2463