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 .
This communication is response to claims filed on 12/28/23 via a preliminary amendment, which is considered by the examiner.
Claims 1-12 & 14-21 are presented for examination.
Claim 13 is canceled.
Claims 1-12 are amended.
Claims 14-21 are newly added.
Information Disclosure Statement’s
7. The information disclosure statement(s) submitted on 01/26/24 have being considered by the examiner and made of record in the application file.
Priority
8. Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d). Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Drawing objection
9. The drawings (Figs 1-2) are objected to because there is a lack of descriptive text legends for Figs 1-2 [see 37 CFR 1.83, CFR 1.84 [5(O)], MPEP § 608.02(e)].
10. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification Objections
11. The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter.
12. Claim 12 recites, "A computer storage medium…" in line 1 and the specification fails to have antecedent basis for the terms in the claims. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o).
Appropriate Correction is required.
Claims Objections
13. Claims 5, 7, 14, 16 & 19-20 are objected to because of minor informalities:
14. Claim 5, in part, recites, “…Message 3, msg3, …in line 2. It’s suggested to change it to: “Message 3[[,]] (msg3)[[,]]”.
15. Claim 14 is also objected for the same reason as claim 5 above.
16. Claim 7, in part, recites, “…MAC …in line 2. For clarity, it is suggested to fully describe an acronym when reciting for the first time in the claim.
17. Claims 16 (MAC) & 20 (i.e., MAC CE) are also objected for the same reason as claim 7 above.
18. Claim 19, in part, recites, “…SSB/PBCH …in line 2. For clarity, it is suggested to fully describe an acronym when reciting for the first time in the claim.
19. Claim 19, in part, recites, “…SSB/PBCH …in line 2. It is suggested to clarify the use of words instead of “/”.
20. Claims 16 & 20 are also objected for the same reason as claim 7 above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
21. 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
22. Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because it fails to be limited to embodiments which fall within a statutory category.
23. Claim 12 recites, “A computer storage medium….” in the preamble of the claim.
Applicant has provided no antecedent basis for the claim terminology “A computer storage medium” since the applicant fails inclusively and specifically provided antecedent basis to limit the specific statutory embodiments. “A computer storage medium “belongs to the intrinsic non statutory embodiments such as carrier signal, radio wave, light wave, and transmission medium/media.
Note that signal claims are not directed to a process since they do not cover an act or series of acts. No part of the signal is a mechanical “device” or “part.” A propagating electromagnetic signal is not a “machine” as that term is used in § 101. Signals, standing alone, are not “manufacture[s]” under the meaning of that term in § 101. A signal comprising a fluctuation in electric potential or in electromagnetic fields is not a “chemical union,” nor a gas, fluid, powder, or solid. Signals are not “composition[s] of matter.” Thus, a transitory, propagating signal is not a “process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter. Those four categories define the explicit scope and reach of subject matter patentable under 35 U.S.C. § 101; thus, such a signal cannot be patentable subject matter. (See In re Nuijten, 500 F. 3d 1346 1356 n.7 (Fed. Cir 2007). In view of the above analysis, claim 12 is ineligible for patent protection as failing to be limited to embodiments which fall within a statutory category.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
24. 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
25. Claims 1-5, 8-12, 14 & 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Singh et al. (hereinafter referred as Singh) International Publication No. WO 2020/159709 A1 (as disclosed in the IDS).
Regarding claims 1 & 2: Singh discloses a method/wireless device (See FIG. 4 0053; a User Equipment (UE) 402) for a wireless communication network, the wireless device configured to:
transmit, in a random access message associated to first reference signaling (Corresponding to Msg 1 (random access preamble)), a measurement report pertaining to second reference signaling (Corresponding to Msg 3 (measurement report)) (See FIG. 4, Para. 0053-0055 & 0061; The UE 402 transmits Msg 1 (Random access preamble) to initiate a random access procedure with a base station 404. the UE 402 may transmit a third random access message (e.g., Msg 3) to the base station 404. The UE 402 reports the measurement of the narrowband for Msg 2, performed at 405, by including a report of the measurement in Msg 3 415 that the UE transmits to the base station).
Regarding claim 5: Singh discloses a method, wherein the random access message is a Message 3, msg3, in a random access procedure (See FIG. 4 & Para. 0060; Msg 3 to initiate a random access procedure).
Regarding claim 8: Singh discloses a method, wherein the measurement report indicates at least one signaling characteristic of the second reference signaling (See FIG. 4, Para. 0053-0055 & 0061; The UE 402 reports the measurement of the narrowband for Msg 2, performed at 405, by including a report of the measurement in Msg 3 415 that the UE transmits to the base station).
Regarding claim 9: Singh discloses a method, wherein the measurement report indicates at least one signaling characteristic differentially relative to the first reference signaling (See FIG. 4, Para. 0053-0055 & 0061; The UE 402 transmits Msg 1 to initiate a random access procedure with a base station 404. the UE 402 may transmit a third random access message (e.g., Msg 3) to the base station 404. The UE 402 reports the measurement of the narrowband for Msg 2, performed at 405, by including a report of the measurement in Msg 3 415 that the UE transmits to the base station).
Regarding claim 10: Singh discloses a method, wherein the measurement report only pertains to the second reference signaling (See FIG. 4, Para. 0053-0055 & 0061; The UE 402 transmits Msg 1 to initiate a random access procedure with a base station 404. the UE 402 may transmit a third random access message (e.g., Msg 3) to the base station 404. report of the measurement in Msg 3 415 that the UE transmits to the base station).
Regarding claim 11: Singh discloses a method, wherein the measurement report is based on measurement performed during a random access procedure (See FIG. 4, Para. 0053-0055 & 0061; the UE initiate a random access procedure with a base station 404 based on the measurement report).
Regarding claims 3 & 4: Singh discloses a method/ network node (See FIG. 4 0053; a base station 404) for a wireless communication network,
the network node configured to:
communicate with a wireless device based on a random access message received from the wireless device, the random access message being associated to first reference signaling (Corresponding to Msg 1 (random access preamble)) and comprising a measurement report pertaining to second reference signaling (Corresponding to Msg 3 (measurement report)) (See FIG. 4, Para. 0053-0055 & 0061; The UE 402 transmits Msg 1 to initiate a random access procedure with a base station 404. the UE 402 may transmit a third random access message (e.g., Msg 3) to the base station 404. The UE 402 reports the measurement of the narrowband for Msg 2, performed at 405, by including a report of the measurement in Msg 3 415 that the UE transmits to the base station. The base station to adapt communication to the needs of the UE 402 based on the conditions of the narrowband experienced at the UE 402. The method further enables the UE 402 to determine which narrowband to measure and report to the base station and enables the base station to identify the measurements reported during the random access procedure).
Regarding claim 14: Singh discloses a method, wherein the random access message is a Message 3, msg3, in a random access procedure (See FIG. 4 & Para. 0060; Msg 3 to initiate a random access procedure).
Regarding claim 17: Singh discloses a method, wherein the measurement report indicates at least one signaling characteristic of the second reference signaling (See FIG. 4, Para. 0053-0055 & 0061; The UE 402 reports the measurement of the narrowband for Msg 2, performed at 405, by including a report of the measurement in Msg 3 415 that the UE transmits to the base station).
Regarding claim 18: Singh discloses a method, wherein the measurement report indicates at least one signaling characteristic differentially relative to the first reference signaling (See FIG. 4, Para. 0053-0055 & 0061; The UE 402 transmits Msg 1 to initiate a random access procedure with a base station 404. the UE 402 may transmit a third random access message (e.g., Msg 3) to the base station 404. The UE 402 reports the measurement of the narrowband for Msg 2, performed at 405, by including a report of the measurement in Msg 3 415 that the UE transmits to the base station).
Regarding claim 12: Singh discloses a computer storage medium (See FIG. 3 0042; a User Equipment (UE) includes a memory 360) storing a computer program comprising instructions causing processing circuitry (See FIG. 3 0042; a User Equipment (UE) includes a controller/processor 359) to one or both control and perform a method, the method comprising:
transmitting, in a random access message associated to first reference signaling, a measurement report pertaining to second reference signaling (See FIG. 4, Para. 0053-0055 & 0061; The UE 402 transmits Msg 1 to initiate a random access procedure with a base station 404. the UE 402 may transmit a third random access message (e.g., Msg 3) to the base station 404. The UE 402 reports the measurement of the narrowband for Msg 2, performed at 405, by including a report of the measurement in Msg 3 415 that the UE transmits to the base station).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
26. 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 section 102 of this title, 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.
27. Claims 6-7, 15-16 & 19-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Singh, in view of Hyoungsuk et al. (hereinafter referred as Hyoungsuk) International Publication No. WO 2021/067921 A1 (as disclosed in the IDS).
Regarding claims 6 & 15: Singh discloses all the limitations of the claimed invention with an exception of wherein one or both of the first reference signaling and the second reference signaling is synchronisation signaling.
However, Hyoungsuk from the same field of endeavor discloses wherein one or both of the first reference signaling and the second reference signaling is synchronisation signaling (See Para. 0247; The wireless device may select a first downlink reference signal among the one or more downlink reference signals. For example, the first downlink reference signal may comprise one or more synchronization signals).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include wherein one or both of the first reference signaling and the second reference signaling is synchronisation signaling as taught by Hyoungsuk in the system of Singh in order to enable the wireless device and the base station to operate in a wireless environment. (See Para. 0209; lines 7-8).
Regarding claim 19: The combination of Singh and Hyoungsuk disclose a method.
Furthermore, Hyoungsuk discloses a method, wherein the synchronisation signaling is SSB/PBCH signaling (See FIG. 11A & Para. 0138; SS/PBCH).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include wherein the synchronisation signaling is SSB/PBCH signaling as taught by Hyoungsuk in the system of Singh in order to enable the wireless device and the base station to operate in a wireless environment. (See Para. 0209; lines 7-8).
Regarding claims 7 & 16: The combination of Singh and Hyoungsuk disclose a method.
Furthermore, Hyoungsuk discloses a method, wherein the measurement report is represented as MAC layer information (See Para. 0188; UE and a base station may exchange control signaling. The control signaling may be referred to as L1/L2 control signaling and may originate from the PHY layer (e.g., layer 1) and/or the MAC layer (e.g., layer 2). The control signaling may comprise downlink control signaling transmitted from the base station to the UE and/or uplink control signaling transmitted from the UE to the base station).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include wherein the measurement report is represented as MAC layer information as taught by Hyoungsuk in the system of Singh in order to enable the wireless device and the base station to operate in a wireless environment. (See Para. 0209; lines 7-8).
Regarding claim 20: The combination of Singh and Hyoungsuk disclose a method.
Furthermore, Hyoungsuk discloses a method, wherein the measurement report is represented as a MAC CE element (See Para. 0163 & 0328; MAC CE).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include wherein the measurement report is represented as a MAC CE element as taught by Hyoungsuk in the system of Singh in order to enable the wireless device and the base station to operate in a wireless environment. (See Para. 0209; lines 7-8).
Regarding claim 21: The combination of Singh and Hyoungsuk disclose a method.
Furthermore, Hyoungsuk discloses a method, wherein the at least one signaling characteristic is one or both of signal strength and signal quality (See Para. 0236; A wireless device may measure one or more downlink reference signals and, based on measured received signal strength and/or quality (or based on other selection rule), may select at least one downlink reference signals among the one or more downlink reference signals. The wireless device may respectively transmit an RAP).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include wherein the at least one signaling characteristic is one or both of signal strength and signal quality as taught by Hyoungsuk in the system of Singh in order to enable the wireless device and the base station to operate in a wireless environment. (See Para. 0209; lines 7-8).
Conclusion
28. The prior art of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
A. Pezeshki et al. 2025/0337474 A1 (Title: Beam blockage event prediction) (See Abstract, Para. 0012 & 0037-0038).
B. Li et al. 2025/0193087 A1 (Title: Machine learning for beam prediction) (See abstract, Para. 0006 & 00813-0016).
C. Yuan et al. 2025/0183984 A1 (Title: Power control parameters reset associated with beam failure…) (See FIG. 1, Para. 0046, 0050 & 0160).
29. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MEWALE A AMBAYE whose telephone number is (571)270-1076. The examiner can normally be reached on M.F 6a.m.-2p.m..
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, Ian Moore can be reached on (571)272-3085. 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.
/MEWALE A AMBAYE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2469