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 .
Examiner has considered Amendment after Non-Final mailed 3/17/2026.
Claims 43-62 are pending.
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) 43-45, 47-48, 50-52, 54-55, 59-62 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wei et al. US 20200245231.
Regarding claim 43, A method by a wireless device (UE, Figure 2, element 6) for reporting information associated with an on demand System Information, SI, request, the method comprising: transmitting, to a network node, information associated with the on-demand SI request, wherein the information indicates that the on-demand SI request was successful or that the on- demand SI request was not successful (the UE who is in out-of-coverage wants to initiate a device-to-device application, para. 0112, D2D related SI (SIB18, SIB19) is set by the network as the on-demand SI, the on demand SI request attempt fails, as detected by the UE, Figure 5, element 41, the UE may record the case into a log, Figure 5, element 42 and sends it, element 43, whereby the on-demand system information request failure is also reported, para. 0113-0114),
wherein the information indicates at least one of: whether or not an acknowledgment for the SI request has been received from a lower laver; that an acknowledgement for the SI request was not received from a lower laver; that an acknowledgement for the SI request was received from a lower laver; whether acquiring at least one SI message has failed while the acknowledgement for the SI request has been received from a lower laver; an indication that the wireless device received only a portion of the at least one SI message requested by the wireless device; an indication of whether the wireless device has checked an SI window for the at least one SI message; an indication of how many SI window occasions has been monitored by the wireless device for the at least one SI message; an indication of how many attempts to receive the at least one SI message the wireless device performed; a number of Hybrid Automatic Repeat Request, HARQ, retransmissions the wireless device made when transmitting a Radio Resource Control, RRC, message to request the at least one SI message; an indication of whether the wireless device received acknowledgment from a HARQ procedure at lower laver; and location information of the wireless device at a time when the wireless device transmitted the on-demand SI request (the user equipment circuitry may be further configured to receive a random access response for acknowledging the receipt of the on-demand system information request, wherein the random access response, para. 0075).
Regarding claim 44, The method of Claim 43, wherein the information comprises an indication of at least one System Information Block, SIB, requested by the wireless device (the on demand SI request attempt fails, as detected by the UE, Figure 5, element 41, the UE may record the case into a log, Figure 5, element 42 and sends it, element 43, whereby the on-demand system information request failure is also reported, para. 0113-0114).
Regarding claim 45, The method of Claim 44, wherein the information indicates whether the wireless device received the at least one SIB requested by the wireless device (the UE who is in out-of-coverage wants to initiate a device-to-device application, para. 0112, D2D related SI (SIB18, SIB19) is set by the network as the on-demand SI, the on demand SI request attempt fails, as detected by the UE, Figure 5, element 41, the UE may record the case into a log, Figure 5, element 42 and sends it, element 43, whereby the on-demand system information request failure is also reported, para. 0113-0114).
Regarding claim 47, The method of Claim 43, further comprising logging the information while performing a SI request procedure associated with transmitting the on-demand SI request (the UE who is in out-of-coverage wants to initiate a device-to-device application, para. 0112, D2D related SI (SIB18, SIB19) is set by the network as the on-demand SI, the on demand SI request attempt fails, as detected by the UE, Figure 5, element 41, the UE may record the case into a log, Figure 5, element 42 and sends it, element 43, whereby the on-demand system information request failure is also reported, para. 0113-0114).
Regarding claim 48, The method of Claim 43, wherein the information is transmitted in a Random Access, RA, report or Random Access Channel, RACH, report (a new information element will be defined as UEInformationResponse-r9 IE, para. 0119, the new information element is included in the message and the UE logs on-demand SI request failure by using the information element and reports it by transmitting the log, Figure 5, element 43, to the network).
Claims 50-52, 54-55, 59-62 are rejected under the same rationale.
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 (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 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.
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.
Claim(s) 46, 53 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wei et al. US 20200245231 in view of Hwang et al. US 20210235505.
Regarding claim 46, The method of Claim 43, Wei does not disclose wherein the information indicates a cell identifier of a cell in which the on-demand SI request is performed.
Hwang discloses when the terminal has completed random access, the terminal may generate a report relating to the completed RACH including a RACH purpose, “requestForOtherSI” for the use for requesting system information, cell identity which indicates an identity of a cell in which the terminal has performed random access, para. 0193-0195. Before the filing of the invention it would have been obvious to modify Wei to include Hwang’s RACH report. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so to effectively perform random-access reporting in a mobile communication system, para. 0008.
Claim 53 is rejected under the same rationale.
Claim(s) 49, 56 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wei et al. US 20200245231 in view of Qiu et al. US 20220191961.
Regarding claim 49, The method of Claim 48, Wei does not disclose wherein the RA report or the RACH report comprises at least one RSRP measurement and/or a pathloss measurement. Qiu discloses the RACH report can include information on one or more triggering events that triggered the measurement performed by the UE, the triggering events can include request for other system information, para. 0087. Before the filing of the invention it would have been obvious to modify Wei to include Qiu’s RACH report including measurements by the UE triggered by system information requests. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so for user equipment and nodes to be configured in real time based on current network conditions.
Claim 56 is rejected under the same rationale.
Claim(s) 57-58 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wei in view of Shi et al. US 20210185736.
Regarding claim 57, Wei does not disclose the method of Claim 50, further comprising optimizing, adapting, tuning, modifying, or changing a configuration for transmitting at least one SI message based on the information. Shi discloses a terminal device sends first information to a first radio access network device, the first information may include random access information of the terminal device on the beam, a measurement result of the beam used by the terminal device in the random access process, an identifier of an uplink carrier used by the terminal device for random access, random access information of the terminal device on the uplink carrier, para. 0117-0118, the first radio access network device optimizes the random access channel, the first radio access network device receives the first information from the terminal device, and optimizes the random access channel based on the first information, that the first radio access network device optimizes the random access channel based on the first information, the first radio access network device may optimize an RSRP threshold of the SSB based on at least one of the identifier of the SSB used by the terminal device in the random access process, random access information of the terminal device on the SSB, and a measurement result of the SSB used by the terminal device in the random access process that are included in the first information and sends optimization information to the terminal device, para. 0140-0143. Before the filing of the invention it would have been obvious to modify Wei to include Shi’s optimization. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so to make an impact on random access performance and system performance, para. 0003.
Regarding claim 58, The method of Claim 57, Wei does not disclose wherein optimizing, adapting, tuning, modifying, or changing the configuration for transmitting the at least one SI message based on the information comprises at least one of: changing how a plurality of SIBs are grouped into different SI messages; changing whether the at least one SI message is broadcast or not; changing an amount of Physical Random Access Channel, PRACH, resources dedicated for a subsequent on-demand SI request; changing a RA related configuration associated with at least one subsequent on-demand SI request; changing a mapping of at least one RA preamble to at least one subsequent SI message for Msgl;changing from a Msgl based SI request to a Msg3 based SI request; changing whether at least one SI message is available via Msgl or Msg3; changing a number of times a subsequent SI message is broadcast; changing a time period for broadcasting a subsequent SI message; changing a scheduling periodicity of subsequent SI messages; changing a number of times an SI message is sent within an associated SI window; changing at least one beam in which a requested SI message is transmitted; changing a mapping between at least one SIB and at least one SI message; and changing a length of an SI window.
Shi discloses a terminal device sends first information to a first radio access network device, the first information may include random access information of the terminal device on the beam, a measurement result of the beam used by the terminal device in the random access process, an identifier of an uplink carrier used by the terminal device for random access, random access information of the terminal device on the uplink carrier, para. 0117-0118, the first radio access network device optimizes the random access channel, the first radio access network device receives the first information from the terminal device, and optimizes the random access channel based on the first information, that the first radio access network device optimizes the random access channel based on the first information, and sends optimization information to the terminal device, para. 0140-0143. Shi discloses the optimization information sent by the first radio access network device to the terminal device may include optimization information indicating that the optimization information belongs to any type of random access for system information request, para. 0151. Before the filing of the invention it would have been obvious to modify Wei to include Shi’s optimization. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so to make an impact on random access performance and system performance, para. 0003.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Examiner appreciates the Applicant’s detailed description of the prior art cited.
Applicant argues Hwang does not disclose the newly amended limitations of claims 43, 50, 59, and 61 that removed the recitation of a cell identifier as originally included in claim 46 prior to the amendment.
Examiner submits reference Wei does disclose the amended limitations. Wei discloses the user equipment circuitry may be further configured to receive a random access response for acknowledging the receipt of the on-demand system information request, wherein the random access response, para. 0075, which teaches the limitation “that an acknowledgement for the SI request was received from a lower laver“. Thus, the rejection is proper.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MELANIE JAGANNATHAN whose telephone number is (571)272-3163. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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, Marcus Smith can be reached at 571-270-1096. 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.
/MELANIE JAGANNATHAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2468
Prosecution Insights