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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-30 in the present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, are being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA :
- claims 1, 8, 15, 22, 29, and 30 are amended
b. This is a second non final action on the merits based on Applicant’s claims submitted on 06/23/2026.
Response to Arguments
Regarding Independent claims 1, 15, 29, and 30 previously rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102, Applicant's arguments, see “For example, the Office Action has not shown how selecting a TAG in analogous to, much less discloses, performing a "random access procedure," as claimed. Moreover, the Office Action fails to show how a path loss or path loss offset satisfying a threshold, as discussed in Guo, discloses "a signal strength of the second signaling not exceeding a threshold," as recited in amended independent claim 1. Thus, Guo has not been shown to disclose at least the aforementioned features of amended independent claim 1.” on page 12, filed on 06/23/2026, with respect to Guo et al. Foreign Patent WO2025/118233 (hereinafter “Guo”), have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the previous rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is made in view of Kim et al. US Pub 2010/0309887 (hereinafter “Kim”), in combination with previously applied reference Guo. See section Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 below for complete details.
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 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.
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.
Claims 1, 3, 8, 15, 16, 18, 22, 29, and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guo et al. Foreign Patent WO2025/118233 (hereinafter “Guo”), and in view of Kim et al. US Pub 2010/0309887 (hereinafter “Kim”).
Regarding claim 1 (Currently Amended)
Guo discloses a user equipment (UE) (“UE 1405” in Fig. 14; “UE 905” in Fig. 9), comprising:
one or more memories (“memory 1430” in Fig. 14) storing processor-executable code; and
one or more processors (“controller 1410” in Fig. 14) coupled with the one or more memories and individually or collectively operable to execute the code to cause the UE to:
receive first signaling (“920 control signaling” in Fig. 9) from a first network entity (“network entity 910” in Fig. 9; [0156]) having uplink and downlink transmission capabilities, wherein the first signaling comprises an indication of configuration information (“At 920, the UE 905 may receive control signaling indicating a first TAG and a second TAG for a component carrier” [0157]) associated with a second network entity having uplink-only transmission capabilities (“uplink-only device 915 (e.g., another network entity configured for or deployed for uplink signaling in an uplink-dense deployment)” in Fig. 9; [0156]);
receive second signaling (“925 second control signaling” in Fig. 9) from the first network entity (“network entity 910” in Fig. 9; [0156]) for performing a random access procedure (“at 925, the UE 905 may receive second control signaling indicating the first TA value corresponding to the first TAG, and the first TAG may correspond to SRS resources for beam management.” [0160]) with the second network entity (“uplink-only device 915” in Fig. 9; [0156]); and
Guo does not specifically teach perform the random access procedure with the second network entity based at least in part on the configuration information in the first signaling and based at least in part on a signal strength of the second signaling not exceeding a threshold.
In an analogous art, Kim discloses perform the random access procedure (i.e. “RACH allocation”) with the second network entity (i.e. “new second public cell”) based at least in part on the configuration information in the first signaling and based at least in part on a signal strength of the second signaling not exceeding a threshold (“When the signal of the first public cell falls below the threshold and the signal strength of the second public cell greater than the signal strength of the first public cell is sustained over a certain time duration, the UE releases the RACH allocated from the first public cell and requests the RACH allocation to the new second public cell.” [0098] and furthermore “The above aspects are achieved by providing a method for a terminal to determine a region in a mobile communication system which comprises a home cell and a public cell. The method includes measuring a home cell signal and public cell signals using a measurement period; setting a public cell having the greatest signal among signals measured in the public cells, as a max cell; determining that the terminal locates in a first region when the measured home cell signal is greater than a first threshold (a threshold 1) and greater than the max cell signal by more than a third threshold (a threshold 2); and determining that the terminal locates in a second region when the measured home cell signal is less than the first threshold (the threshold 1) and the max cell signal is greater than a second threshold (a threshold 3).” [0022]).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Guo’s method for supporting multiple timing advance (TA) values for uplink dense deployments, to include Kim’s method for handover between a home cell and a public cell in a mobile communication system, in order to efficiently allocate RACH resources (Kim [0022]). Thus, a person of ordinary skill would have appreciated the ability to incorporate Kim’s method for handover between a home cell and a public cell in a mobile communication system into Guo’s method for supporting multiple timing advance (TA) values for uplink dense deployments since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 3
Guo, as modified by Kim, previously discloses the UE of claim 1, wherein, to receive the first signaling, the one or more processors are individually or collectively further operable to execute the code to cause the UE to:
Guo further discloses receive an indication of a separate timing advance group configuration for each of the first network entity (“network entity 210” [0108]) and the second network entity (“uplink-only device 215” [0108]), wherein performing the random access procedure with the second network entity is based at least in part on the indication of the separate timing advance group configuration (“A TA value may apply to a timing advance group (TAG). In some examples, the network may configure the UE 205 with multiple TAGs (e.g., a first TAG corresponding to communications with the network entity 210, and a second TAG corresponding to uplink communications via an uplink-only device 215).” [0108]).
Regarding claim 8 (Currently Amended)
Guo, as modified by Kim, previously discloses the UE of claim 1, wherein, to receive the second signaling, the one or more processors are individually or collectively further operable to execute the code to cause the UE to:
Kim further discloses receive an indication of the threshold (“The UE in the connection mode within the home cell measures neighbor public cells and examines the possibility of the handover using information such as a public cell signal magnitude, a home cell signal strength, a difference of the public cell signal strength, and a public cell signal stability. When the possibility exceeds a certain threshold, the UE informs the home cell of the information using a measurement message.” [0043]).
Regarding claim 15 (Currently Amended)
Guo discloses a first network entity having uplink and downlink transmission capabilities (“network entity 910” in Fig. 9; [0156]), comprising:
one or more memories (“memory 1430” in Fig. 14) storing processor-executable code ; and
one or more processors (“controller 1410” in Fig. 14) coupled with the one or more memories and individually or collectively operable to execute the code to cause the first network entity having uplink and downlink transmission capabilities to:
output first signaling to a user equipment (UE), wherein the first signaling comprises an indication of configuration information associated with a second network entity having uplink-only transmission capabilities;
output second signaling for performing a random access procedure with the second network entity; and
perform the random access procedure between the second network entity and the UE based at least in part on the configuration information in the first signaling and based at least in part on a signal strength of the second signaling not exceeding a threshold.
The scope and subject matter of apparatus claim 15 are reciprocal to the scope and subject matter as claimed in apparatus claim 1. Therefore apparatus claim 15 corresponds to apparatus claim 1 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 1 rejection above.
Regarding claim 16
Guo, as modified by Kim, previously discloses the first network entity of claim 15, wherein the one or more processors are individually or collectively further operable to execute the code to cause the first network entity having uplink and downlink transmission capabilities to:
Guo further discloses provide, via a backhaul connection with the second network entity (“That is, the uplink receive points may receive the uplink signal from the UE 205 and send the information to the network entity 210 via the backhaul with or without some processing. The uplink-only device 215, the uplink-only device 220, and the uplink-only device 225, may be non-limiting examples of the uplink receive points in the dense uplink deployment. In some examples, the uplink only devices 220 may be referred to as uplink nodes, or uplink TRPs.” [107]), signaling associated with the random access procedure between the UE and the second network entity (see Figs. 2 and 9).
Regarding claim 18
The first network entity of claim 15, wherein, to output the first signaling, the one or more processors are individually or collectively further operable to execute the code to cause the first network entity having uplink and downlink
transmission capabilities to:
output an indication of a separate timing advance group configuration for each of the first network entity and the second network entity, wherein performing the random access procedure with the UE is based at least in part on the indication of the
separate timing advance group configuration.
The scope and subject matter of apparatus claim 18 are reciprocal to the scope and subject matter as claimed in apparatus claim 3. Therefore apparatus claim 18 corresponds to apparatus claim 3 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 3 rejection above.
Regarding claim 22 (Currently Amended)
The first network entity of claim 15, wherein the one or more processors are individually or collectively further operable to execute the code to cause the first network entity having uplink and downlink transmission capabilities to:
output an indication of the threshold.
The scope and subject matter of apparatus claim 22 are reciprocal to the scope and subject matter as claimed in apparatus claim 8. Therefore apparatus claim 22 corresponds to apparatus claim 8 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 8 rejection above.
Regarding claim 29 (Currently Amended)
A method for wireless communications at a user equipment (UE), comprising:
receiving first signaling from a first network entity having uplink and downlink transmission capabilities, wherein the first signaling comprises an indication of configuration information associated with a second network entity having uplink-only transmission capabilities;
receiving second signaling from the first network entity for performing a random access procedure with the second network entity; and
performing the random access procedure with the second network entity based at least in part on the configuration information in the first signaling and based at least in part on a signal strength of the second signaling not exceeding a threshold.
The scope and subject matter of method claim 29 is drawn to the method of using the corresponding apparatus claimed in claim 1. Therefore method claim 29 corresponds to apparatus claim 1 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 1 rejection above.
Regarding claim 30 (Currently Amended)
A method for wireless communications at a first network entity having uplink and downlink transmission capabilities, comprising:
outputting first signaling to a user equipment (UE), wherein the first signaling comprises an indication of configuration information associated with a second network entity having uplink-only transmission capabilities;
outputting second signaling for performing a random access procedure with the second network entity; and
performing the random access procedure between the second network entity and the UE based at least in part on the configuration information in the first signaling and based at least in part on a signal strength of the second signaling not exceeding a threshold.
The scope and subject matter of method claim 30 is drawn to the method of using the corresponding apparatus claimed in claim 15. Therefore method claim 30 corresponds to apparatus claim 15 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 15 rejection above.
Claims 2 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guo, in view of Kim, and further in view of Abedini et al. US Pub 2019/0159156 (hereinafter “Abedini”).
Regarding claim 2
Guo, as modified by Kim, previously discloses the UE of claim 1, wherein, to receive the first signaling, the one or more processors are individually or collectively further operable to execute the code to cause the UE to:
Guo further discloses receive an indication of a common timing advance group configuration that applies to both the first network entity (“network entity 910” in Fig. 9; [0156]) and the second network entity (“uplink-only device 915” in Fig. 9; [0156]), Guo and Kim do not specifically teach wherein performing the random access procedure with either the first network entity or the second network entity is based at least in part on the indication of the common timing advance group configuration.
In an analogous art, Abedini discloses wherein performing the random access procedure with either the first network entity or the second network entity is based at least in part on the indication of the common timing advance group configuration (“the TA command may explicitly indicate each TA value, one TA value for each BPL of the beam TAG, or may indicate a common TA value for all BPLs of the beam TAG, or may indicate a common TA value and a set of TA offset values corresponding to each BPL of the beam TAG.” [0069] and furthermore “The base station may configure a set of beams into a beam TAG, and may send a timing advance (TA) command for the beam TAG. A common timing reference value may be identified based on the TA command. UEs performing uplink transmissions may determine a TA value for the beam TAG based on the common timing reference value, and may adjust a communication timing for one or more of the beams within the beam TAG based at least in part on the common timing reference value and the timing advance value.” [Abstract]).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Guo’s method for supporting multiple timing advance (TA) values for uplink dense deployments, as modified by Kim, to include Abedini’s beam-specific timing advance groups, in order to efficiently adjust communication timings of beams (e.g., of beam pair links) within a beam timing advance group (TAG) (Abedini [Abstract]). Thus, a person of ordinary skill would have appreciated the ability to incorporate Abedini’s beam-specific timing advance groups into Guo’s method for supporting multiple timing advance (TA) values for uplink dense deployments since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 17
The first network entity of claim 15, wherein, to output the first signaling, the one or more processors are individually or collectively further operable to execute the code to cause the first network entity having uplink and downlink transmission capabilities to:
output an indication of a common timing advance group configuration that applies to both the first network entity and the second network entity, wherein performing the random access procedure with the UE is based at least in part on the
indication of the common timing advance group configuration.
The scope and subject matter of apparatus claim 17 are reciprocal to the scope and subject matter as claimed in apparatus claim 2. Therefore apparatus claim 17 corresponds to apparatus claim 2 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 2 rejection above.
Claims 4-6 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guo, in view of Kim, and further in view of Svedman et al. US Pub 2023/0179281 (hereinafter “Svedman”).
Regarding claim 4
Guo, as modified by Kim, previously discloses the UE of claim 1, wherein, to receive the first signaling, the one or more processors are individually or collectively further operable to execute the code to cause the UE to:
Guo further discloses receive an indication of a first quantity of beams (“However, because the uplink-only device 215 does not transmit downlink signaling, the UE 205 may not have access to any corresponding receive beam or downlink reference signal from the uplink-only device 215. Therefore, to transmit a PRACH message to the uplink-only device 215, the UE may perform some beam sweeping procedures.” [0114]) associated with the second network entity (“uplink-only device 215” [0114]) and a random access channel occasion (via SRS resource), wherein performing the random access procedure with the second network entity is based at least in part on the indication of the first quantity of beams (“After RRC connection, the UE 205 may perform beam management procedures (e.g., may transmit SRSs via SRS resources for beam management). The SRS signaling may be used to identify a serviceable (e.g., preferred) uplink-only device 215 (e.g., the uplink-only device 215 may perform measurements and determine an updated TA value) and a good transmit/receive beam pair associated with the uplink-only device 215. In some cases, the beam management SRSs may also be used for initial TA acquisition. As described herein, the UE 205 may determine a TA value and a TAG for the TA value, and may transmit SRSs accordingly to determine an uplink-only device 215 for uplink signaling, to determine an initial TA value to use for subsequent uplink signaling, or both.” [0115]).
Guo and Kim do not specifically teach the association between SRS resource and occasion.
In an analogous art, Svedman discloses the association between SRS resource and occasion (“each indicated SRS resource is assigned to a set of PUSCH occasions” [0247]).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Guo’s method for supporting multiple timing advance (TA) values for uplink dense deployments, as modified by Kim, to include Svedman’s method for beam management for PUSCH in dense deployments, in order to efficiently allocate resources (Svedman [0247-0248]). Thus, a person of ordinary skill would have appreciated the ability to incorporate Svedman’s method for beam management for PUSCH in dense deployments into Guo’s method for supporting multiple timing advance (TA) values for uplink dense deployments since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 5
Guo, as modified by Kim and Svedman, previously discloses the UE of claim 4,
Guo further discloses wherein the signaling for performing the random access procedure with the second network entity (“FIG. 9 shows an example of a process flow 900 that supports multiple TA values for uplink dense deployments” [0156-0160]) is the same or different than signaling for performing a random access procedure with a third network entity having uplink-only transmission capabilities (“FIG. 10 shows an example of a process flow 1000 that supports multiple TA values for uplink dense deployments” [0162-0165]).
Regarding claim 6
Guo, as modified by Kim, previously discloses the UE of claim 1, wherein, to perform the random access procedure, the one or more processors are individually or collectively further operable to execute the code to cause the UE to:
Guo further discloses SRS resources are used for beam management procedure for a first quantity of beams of the second network entity (“After RRC connection, the UE 205 may perform beam management procedures (e.g., may transmit SRSs via SRS resources for beam management). The SRS signaling may be used to identify a serviceable (e.g., preferred) uplink-only device 215 (e.g., the uplink-only device 215 may perform measurements and determine an updated TA value) and a good transmit/receive beam pair associated with the uplink-only device 215. In some cases, the beam management SRSs may also be used for initial TA acquisition. As described herein, the UE 205 may determine a TA value and a TAG for the TA value, and may transmit SRSs accordingly to determine an uplink-only device 215 for uplink signaling, to determine an initial TA value to use for subsequent uplink signaling, or both.” [0115]), one or more random access messages to the second network entity based at least in part on the second network entity having the uplink-only transmission capabilities (as previously taught by Guo Fig. 9 in Claim 5 discussion).
However, Guo and Kim do not specifically teach the association between SRS resource and occasion.
In an analogous art, Svedman discloses the association between SRS resource and occasion (“each indicated SRS resource is assigned to a set of PUSCH occasions” [0247]).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Guo’s method for supporting multiple timing advance (TA) values for uplink dense deployments, as modified by Kim, to include Svedman’s method for beam management for PUSCH in dense deployments, in order to efficiently allocate resources (Svedman [0247-0248]). Thus, a person of ordinary skill would have appreciated the ability to incorporate Svedman’s method for beam management for PUSCH in dense deployments into Guo’s method for supporting multiple timing advance (TA) values for uplink dense deployments since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 19
The first network entity of claim 15, wherein, to output the first signaling, the one or more processors are individually or collectively further operable to execute the code to cause the first network entity having uplink and downlink transmission capabilities to:
output an indication of a first quantity of beams associated with the second network entity and a random access channel occasion, wherein performing the random access procedure is based at least in part on the indication of the first quantity of
beams.
The scope and subject matter of apparatus claim 19 are reciprocal to the scope and subject matter as claimed in apparatus claim 4. Therefore apparatus claim 19 corresponds to apparatus claim 4 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 4 rejection above.
Regarding claim 20
The first network entity of claim 19, wherein the signaling for performing the random access procedure with the second network entity is the same or different than signaling for performing a random access procedure with a third network
entity having uplink-only transmission capabilities.
The scope and subject matter of apparatus claim 20 are similar to the scope and subject matter as claimed in apparatus claim 5. Therefore apparatus claim 20 corresponds to apparatus claim 5 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 5 rejection above.
Claims 7 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guo, in view of Kim and Svedman, and further in view of Tsai et al. US Pub 2018/0124724 (hereinafter “Tsai”).
Regarding claim 7
Guo, as modified by Kim and Svedman, previously discloses the UE of claim 6, wherein the one or more processors are individually or collectively further operable to execute the code to cause the UE to:
Guo, Kim, and Svedman do not specifically teach receive an indication of the first quantity of beams as a subset of a second quantity of beams; and randomly select, from a set of random access occasions associated with the second quantity of beams, the one or more random access occasions for transmitting the one or more random access messages via the first quantity of beams.
In an analogous art, Tsai discloses receive an indication of the first quantity of beams as a subset of a second quantity of beams (“beam sweeping means to generate a subset of these beams in one time interval and change generated beam(s) in other time interval(s), i.e., changing beam in time domain” [0204]); and
randomly select, from a set of random access occasions associated with the second quantity of beams (“The UE should perform measurement on the serving cell and its neighbor cells to find better serving cell based on measurement configuration. The signaling to be measured is provided by beam sweeping. If UE beamforming is used, the UE performs beam sweeping for reception of the signaling.” [0263]), the one or more random access occasions for transmitting the one or more random access messages (e.g. RRC connection establishment) via the first quantity of beams (“The UE establishes connection to BS via connection establishment procedure. During the procedure, the UE needs to perform random access procedure to let network be aware of the UE and provide resources for UL transmission to UE. After the connection is established, the UE enters connected state. Initial beam(s) to be used for the following transmission(s) would be decided during the procedure.” [0242]).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Guo’s method for supporting multiple timing advance (TA) values for uplink dense deployments, as modified by Kim and Svedman, to include Tsai’s method for identifying uplink timing advance in a wireless communication systems, in order to efficiently facilitate the use of timing advance values (Tsai [0005]). Thus, a person of ordinary skill would have appreciated the ability to incorporate Tsai’s method for identifying uplink timing advance in a wireless communication systems into Guo’s method for supporting multiple timing advance (TA) values for uplink dense deployments since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 21
The first network entity of claim 15, wherein the one or more processors are individually or collectively further operable to execute the code to cause the first network entity having uplink and downlink transmission capabilities to:
output an indication of a first quantity of beams as a subset of a second quantity of beams, the first quantity of beams associated with one or more random access messages, wherein the random access procedure is based at least in part on the
indication.
The scope and subject matter of apparatus claim 21 are reciprocal to the scope and subject matter as claimed in apparatus claim 7. Therefore apparatus claim 21 corresponds to apparatus claim 7 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 7 rejection above.
Claims 9-11 and 23-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guo, in view of Kim, and further in view of Yang et al. US Pub 2021/0352745 (hereinafter “Yang”).
Regarding claim 9
Guo, as modified by Kim, previously discloses the UE of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are individually or collectively further operable to execute the code to cause the UE to:
Guo and Kim do not specifically teach receive a random access response message based at least in part on performing the random access procedure, wherein the random access response message comprises an identifier of either the first network entity or the second network entity based at least in part on a random access radio network temporary identifier associated with the random access response message or a field indication in the random access response message.
In an analogous art, Yang discloses receive a random access response message (i.e. “RAR”) based at least in part on performing the random access procedure (“Upon receipt of the RACH preamble from the UE, the BS transmits an RAR message to the UE” [0166]), wherein the random access response message comprises an identifier of either the first network entity or the second network entity based at least in part on a random access radio network temporary identifier (i.e. “RA-RNTI”) associated with the random access response message or a field indication (e.g. “the remaining index (bits)”) in the random access response message (“For example, the radio frame index and/or the carrier index and/or the subband index (or the part (bit(s)) of the index) may be indicated by the DCI scheduling the RAR or the payload of the RAR, and the remaining index (bits) may be represented and/or identified by the RA-RNTI.” [0247]).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Guo’s method for supporting multiple timing advance (TA) values for uplink dense deployments, as modified by Kim, to include Yang’s method for transmitting and receiving a signal in a wireless communication system, in order to efficiently identify the RA-RNTI (Yang [0247]). Thus, a person of ordinary skill would have appreciated the ability to incorporate Yang’s method for transmitting and receiving a signal in a wireless communication system into Guo’s method for supporting multiple timing advance (TA) values for uplink dense deployments since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 10
Guo, as modified by Kim and Yang, previously discloses the UE of claim 9,
Guo further discloses wherein the random access response message (i.e. “RAR”) further comprises an indication of a timing advance value to be applied to a timing advance group associated with the second network entity based at least in part on a separate timing advance group configuration for each of the first network entity and the second network entity (“the UE 205 may receive (e.g., from the network entity 210) an absolute TA value indicated a random access response (RAR) or an absolute TA command media access control (MAC) control element (CE). When two TAGs are configured (e.g., for a CC), a reserved bit in a RAR may indicate whether the TA is for the first TAG or the second TAG. For example, the RAR payload may include a field for a TA command, and a reserved bit may indicate if the TA value indicated in the TA command is for the first TAG or the second TAG.” [0109]).
Regarding claim 11
Guo, as modified by Kim and Yang, previously discloses the UE of claim 9,
Guo further discloses wherein the random access response message further comprises an indication of a reserved timing advance field or an indication of a timing advance value to be applied to a common timing advance group based at least in part on a common timing advance group configuration for both the first network entity and the second network entity (“the UE 205 may receive (e.g., from the network entity 210) an absolute TA value indicated a random access response (RAR) or an absolute TA command media access control (MAC) control element (CE). When two TAGs are configured (e.g., for a CC), a reserved bit in a RAR may indicate whether the TA is for the first TAG or the second TAG. For example, the RAR payload may include a field for a TA command, and a reserved bit may indicate if the TA value indicated in the TA command is for the first TAG or the second TAG.” [0109]).
Regarding claim 23
The first network entity of claim 15, wherein the one or more processors are individually or collectively further operable to execute the code to cause the first network entity having uplink and downlink transmission capabilities to:
output a random access response message based at least in part on performing the random access procedure, wherein the random access response message comprises an identifier of either the first network entity or the second network entity based at least in part on a random access radio network temporary identifier associated with the random access response or a field indication in the random access response message.
The scope and subject matter of apparatus claim 23 are reciprocal to the scope and subject matter as claimed in apparatus claim 9. Therefore apparatus claim 23 corresponds to apparatus claim 9 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 9 rejection above.
Regarding claim 24
The first network entity of claim 23, wherein the random access response message further comprises an indication of a timing advance value to be applied to a timing advance group associated with the second network entity based at least in part on a separate timing advance group configuration for each of the first network entity and the second network entity.
The scope and subject matter of apparatus claim 24 are similar to the scope and subject matter as claimed in apparatus claim 10. Therefore apparatus claim 24 corresponds to apparatus claim 10 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 10 rejection above.
Regarding claim 25
The first network entity of claim 23, wherein the random access response message further comprises an indication of a reserved timing advance field or an indication of a timing advance value to be applied to a common timing advance group based at least in part on a common timing advance group configuration for both the first network entity and the second network entity.
The scope and subject matter of apparatus claim 25 are similar to the scope and subject matter as claimed in apparatus claim 11. Therefore apparatus claim 25 corresponds to apparatus claim 11 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 11 rejection above.
Claims 12 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guo, in view of Kim, and further in view of Yi et al. US Pub 2021/0029736 (hereinafter “Yi”).
Regarding claim 12
Guo, as modified by Kim, previously discloses the UE of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are individually or collectively further operable to execute the code to cause the UE to:
Guo further discloses receive an indication of a random access channel configuration associated with the second network entity (“uplink-only device 915”), wherein performing the random access procedure is based at least in part on receiving the indication of the random access channel configuration (“At 920, the UE 905 may receive control signaling indicating a first TAG and a second TAG for a component carrier. At 930, the UE 9056 may select a first TA value, and a first TAG or the second TAG for beam management SRSs transmissions. For example, as described in greater detail with reference to FIG. 3-5, When two TAGs are configured for a CC configured with an UL-only TRP, the UE 805 determines the TAG and TA value that is used for beam management SRSs based on a TA value of 0 or a special TA value. The TAG associated with beam management is determined as a fixed or preconfigured TAG, or based on a timer (e.g., a timeAlignmentTimer) for a given TAG or a preconfigured association between the SRS and the TAG. At 935, the UE 905 may transmit SRSs (e.g., to the uplink-only device 915) .” [0157-0159]).
Guo discloses receive a RAR from the first network entity (“the UE 205 may receive (e.g., from the network entity 210) an absolute TA value indicated a random access response (RAR)” [0109]) but Guo and Kim do not specifically teach receive a physical downlink control channel order.
In an analogous art, Yi discloses receive a physical downlink control channel order (i.e. PDCCH) associated with the RAR (“In the random access procedure, the UE may transmit a predetermined sequence as a preamble on a Physical Random Access Channel (PRACH) (S203 and S205) and may receive a response message to the preamble on a PDCCH and a PDSCH associated with the PDCCH (S204 and S206)” [0037]; Fig. 2).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Guo’s method for supporting multiple timing advance (TA) values for uplink dense deployments, as modified by Kim, to include Yi’s method of configuring timing advance of a relay node by a user equipment, in order to configure TA value (Yi [0005]). Thus, a person of ordinary skill would have appreciated the ability to incorporate Yi’s method of configuring timing advance of a relay node by a user equipment into Guo’s method for supporting multiple timing advance (TA) values for uplink dense deployments since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 26
The first network entity of claim 15, wherein the one or more processors are individually or collectively further operable to execute the code to cause the first network entity having uplink and downlink transmission capabilities to:
output a physical downlink control channel order to the UE; and
output an indication of a random access channel configuration associated with the second network entity, wherein performing the random access procedure between the second network entity and the UE is based at least in part on outputting the indication of the random access channel configuration.
The scope and subject matter of apparatus claim 26 are reciprocal to the scope and subject matter as claimed in apparatus claim 12. Therefore apparatus claim 26 corresponds to apparatus claim 12 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 12 rejection above.
Claims 13-14 and 27-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guo, in view of Kim, and further in view of Sun et al. US Pub 2024/0107425 (hereinafter “Sun”).
Regarding claim 13
Guo, as modified by Kim, previously discloses the UE of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are individually or collectively further operable to execute the code to cause the UE to:
Guo further discloses receive, from the first network entity, a random access response message (“the UE 205 may receive (e.g., from the network entity 210) an absolute TA value indicated a random access response (RAR)” [0109]) comprising a first indication (“To address such delays, the UE 205 may send uplink transmission according to a TA value (e.g., a time offset prior to a timing for receiving uplink transmission by a network device, such that the propagation delay is accounted for). A TA value may apply to a timing advance group (TAG). In some examples, the network may configure the UE 205 with multiple TAGs (e.g., a first TAG corresponding to communications with the network entity 210, and a second TAG corresponding to uplink communications via an uplink-only device 215).” [0108]) that one or more uplink messages associated with the random access procedure were undetected by the second network entity (“However, transmission by one device (e.g., the UE 205) may be received later by another device (e.g., the uplink only device 215, the network entity 210, or both) due to propagation delay” [0108]), wherein the random access response message further comprises a second indication of a transmit power control (“techniques for TA selection and use resulting in improved communication reliability, reduced latency, improved user experience related to reduced processing, reduced power consumption, more efficient utilization of communication resources, improved coordination between devices, longer battery life, improved throughput, and improved user experience.” [0217]. The TA value is used to select transmission power level); and
Guo and Kim do not specifically teach retransmit the one or more uplink messages associated with the random access procedure to the second network entity in accordance with an updated transmission power based at least in part on the second indication.
In an analogous art, Sun discloses retransmit the one or more uplink messages associated with the random access procedure to the second network entity (“the beam discovery configuration information indicates at least one of a power ramping step size and a quantity of power ramping steps” [0127]) in accordance with an updated transmission power based at least in part on the second indication (“the beam discovery configuration information indicates a timing offset associated with the power ramping scheme” [0127]. The TA value is used to facilitate power ramping scheme during retransmissions of uplink messages).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Guo’s method for supporting multiple timing advance (TA) values for uplink dense deployments, as modified by Kim, to include Sun’s method for beam discovery operations for uplink transmission beam discovery associated with uplink-only network nodes, in order to identify a valid uplink beam associated with the uplink-only network node (Sun [0015]). Thus, a person of ordinary skill would have appreciated the ability to incorporate Sun’s method for beam discovery operations for uplink transmission beam discovery associated with uplink-only network nodes into Guo’s method for supporting multiple timing advance (TA) values for uplink dense deployments since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 14
Guo, as modified by Kim and Sun, previously discloses the UE of claim 13,
Guo further discloses wherein the first indication is based at least in part on a bit in the random access response message (“the UE 205 may receive (e.g., from the network entity 210) an absolute TA value indicated a random access response (RAR) or an absolute TA command media access control (MAC) control element (CE). When two TAGs are configured (e.g., for a CC), a reserved bit in a RAR may indicate whether the TA is for the first TAG or the second TAG. For example, the RAR payload may include a field for a TA command, and a reserved bit may indicate if the TA value indicated in the TA command is for the first TAG or the second TAG.” [0109]) or a value in a frequency domain resource assignment.
Regarding claim 27
The first network entity of claim 15, wherein the one or more processors are individually or collectively further operable to execute the code to cause the first network entity having uplink and downlink transmission capabilities to:
output, to the UE, a random access response message comprising a first indication that one or more uplink messages associated with the random access procedure were undetected by the second network entity, wherein the random access response message further comprises a second indication of a transmit power control.
The scope and subject matter of apparatus claim 27 are reciprocal to the scope and subject matter as claimed in apparatus claim 13. Therefore apparatus claim 27 corresponds to apparatus claim 13 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 13 rejection above.
Regarding claim 28
The first network entity of claim 27, wherein the first indication is based at least in part on a bit in the random access response message or a value in a frequency domain resource assignment.
The scope and subject matter of apparatus claim 27 are similar to the scope and subject matter as claimed in apparatus claim 14. Therefore apparatus claim 28 corresponds to apparatus claim 14 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 14 rejection above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHUONG M NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-8184. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10:00am - 6:30pm.
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, Derrick Ferris can be reached at 571-272-3123. 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.
/CHUONG M NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2411
Prosecution Insights