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 office action is in response to application filed 01/08/2024.
Claims 1-14 are pending and presented for examination.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 03/19/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
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.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claims fail to place the invention squarely within one statutory class of invention. Based on the broadest reasonable interpretation of the term "a computer readable storage medium ", the term is not limited to non-transitory computer readable storage media, and can include transitory media (See http://www.uspto.gov/patents/law/comments/2009-08-25_interim_101_instructions.pdf). The transitory media generally stores data/information in form of signals. Signals are form of energy. As such, the claim is drawn to a form of energy and/or signal per se. Energy is not one of the four categories of invention and therefore this claim(s) is/are not statutory. Energy is not a series of steps or acts and thus is not a process. Energy is not a physical article or object and as such is not a machine or manufacture. Energy is not a combination of substances and therefore not a composition of matter. Signal per se does not appear to be a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter.
[Claims that recite nothing but the physical characteristics of a form of energy, such as frequency, voltage or the strength of a magnetic field, define energy or magnetism, per se, and as such are nonstatutory natural phenomena. O'Reilly, 56 U. S. (15 How.) at 112-14. See also In re Nuijten. Docket no. 2006-1371 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 20, 2007)(slip. Op. at 18): "A propagating signal is not a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter"]
Thus, such a signal cannot be patentable subject matter.
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.
Claims 1-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaikkonen et al. (US 2022/0322445 A1) in view of Zhao et al. (WO 2016/165365 A1).
Regarding claims 1, 7, 13 and 14, Kaikkonen discloses a user equipment (UE), method or computer readable storage medium or an apparatus configured to transmit a first message of a random access procedure in a wireless communication system (see para. 0007), the UE comprising:
at least one transceiver (see fig. 4B);
at least one processor (see fig. 4B); and
at least one memory operably connected to the at least one processor and configured to store instructions that, when executed, cause the at least one processor to perform operations (see fig. 4B) comprising:
receiving first information regarding a configuration of the random access procedure through the at least one transceiver (see para. 0046-0050, discloses as an example configuring of enabling LBT for RACH utilizing various configuration);
obtaining second information regarding a plurality of transmission occasions for transmission of the first message based on the first information (see para. 0046-0050, discloses SSB, preambles and ROs are linked such that RO can be determined);
determining an observation period based on a reference point related to the observation period (see para. 0035, discloses observation period for maintain duty cycle, see also para. 0059, discloses a bitmap representing ROs, therefore the start time is reference point); and
transmitting the first message on a transmission occasion within a period corresponding to a duty cycle of the observation period among the plurality of transmission occasions through the at least one transceiver without channel sensing (see para. 0035, 0046-0050, 0052-0056, discloses transmission of preamble in RO without LBT).
Kaikkonen fails to disclose but Zhao discloses wherein the reference point is configured based on a specific system frame number (SFN) or a specific slot (see page 12, paragraph 5-page 13, para. 5, discloses the reference point to be based on specific slot).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify to include wherein the reference point is configured based on a specific system frame number (SFN) or a specific slot as described by Zhao.
The motivation for doing so would be to allow transmission of short important messages without performing LBT.
Regarding claims 2, 8, Kaikkonen discloses the method wherein based on that all of the plurality of transmission occasions within the observation period are included in the duty cycle, the first message is transmitted without the channel sensing (see para. 0046-0049, describes various scenario of performing first transmission without channel sensing or applying SCSe).
Regarding claims 3, 9, Kaikkonen discloses the method wherein based on that the transmission occasion for the first message is not included in the duty cycle, the first message is transmitted after performing the channel sensing (see para. 0046-0050, discloses when first message is not part of duty cycle, i.e. LBT was performed, then performing LBT and then transmitting the message).
Regarding claims 4, 10, Kaikkonen discloses the method wherein based on that information regarding the reference point is not received, the reference point is set to an SFN with index 0 (note that this limitation is optional given the or statement of claim 1).
Regarding claim 5, 11, Kaikkonen discloses the method wherein based on that the transmission occasion for the first message is not included in the duty cycle, the transmission of the first message is dropped (see para. 0056, discloses dropping, i.e. not transmitting when LBT is unsuccessful).
Regarding claims 6, 12, Kaikkonen discloses the method wherein the first message is a message 1 (Msg 1) or a message A (Msg A) (see para. 0046-0056), and wherein the transmission occasion is a random access channel (RACH) occasion for the Msg 1, a RACH occasion for the Msg A, or a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) occasion for the Msg A (see para. 0046-0056, discloses RO for preamble, msg1/A).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NISHANT B DIVECHA whose telephone number is (571)270-3125. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 AM-6:00 PM.
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, Deborah J. Reynolds can be reached at 571-272-0734. 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.
NISHANT B. DIVECHA
Supervisory Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2419
/Nishant Divecha/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2419
Prosecution Insights