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
2. This Office Action is in response to amendment filed on 07/16/2026. Claims 1-30 were previously pending. Claims 15-28, 30 are allowed, claims 1-14, 29 are rejected.
Response to Arguments
3. Applicant's arguments filed July 16, 2026, with respect to
Claims 15-19, 21-26, and 30 rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102, and claims 20, 27, and 28 depend on independent claim 15 (Remarks, Page 11-13) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection of claims 15-28, 30 are withdrawn.
Claims 1-5, 7-12, 29 rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102, Claims 6, 13, and 14 depend on independent claim 1 (Remarks, Page 11-13), have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Because “the derivation of the second PRACH configuration”, is performed by the network node (Specification [0097-98] and [0100-102]), it does not impose any constraint on the structure or steps performed by the UE. Therefore, the claims 1-14, 29 are rejected based on the same rationale as in the prior office action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
4. 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.
4.1. 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.
4.2. Claim(s) 1-5, 7-12, and 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Shibaike et al., (“Shi”, US 2025/0351185 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Shi teaches, A user equipment (UE) for wireless communication (Shi, FIG.1, radio communication system 10, user equipment (UE) 200, [0037]: Radio communication system 10 includes UE 200), comprising:
a processing system that includes one or more processors and one or more memories coupled with the one or more processors, the processing system configured to cause the UE to (Shi, FIG.18, processor 1001, memory 1002, [0270-275]: UE 200 includes processors 1001 and memory 1002. Memory 1002 can save a program code, and can be executed to carry out the radio communication method):
receive a first physical random access channel (PRACH) configuration index associated with a first PRACH configuration (Shi, [0123]: receive initial PRACH configuration index for configuring an RO (resource) for the PRACH initial transmission);
receive a second PRACH configuration index associated with a second PRACH configuration, wherein derivation of the second PRACH configuration is from the first PRACH configuration, wherein the derivation of the second PRACH configuration is in accordance with a PRACH configuration restriction, to achieve nested random access channel (RACH) configurations, that restricts parameters of the second PRACH configuration based at least in part on parameters of the first PRACH configuration and causes the second PRACH configuration to include the first PRACH configuration as a subset (Shi, [0123]: receive a second PRACH configuration index transmitting the random access channel and at least partially different from the first resource); Shi, [0121]: The random access configuration for PRACH repetition illustrated in FIG.12 (“second PRACH configuration”) and the existing (conventional) random access configuration table illustrated in FIG. 7 (“first PRACH configuration”) are associated with each other by linking the “PRACH configuration index (for initial)” field illustrated in FIG. 12 and the “PRACH configuration index” field illustrated in FIG. 7. Note that, in FIG. 12, the symbol “-” indicates that the value there is the same as in the corresponding field of the table illustrated in FIG. 7.”second PRACH configuration includes the first PRACH configuration as subset”). To be more specific, in a case where the PRACH configuration index for initial transmission is 75, the row with the PRACH configuration index of 75 is referred to in the table illustrated in FIG. 7 for the RO configuration for repetition. In the table illustrated in FIG. 12, in the case where the PRACH configuration index for the initial transmission is 75, subframes with subframe numbers 3 and 8 are configured (determined or selected) for the additional RO, unlike the RO configuration for the initial transmission illustrated in FIG. 7. The “derivation of the second PRACH configuration” is performed by the network node, and does not impose any constraint on the structure performed by the UE); and
transmit a PRACH transmission in accordance with the first PRACH configuration and the second PRACH configuration (Shi, [0123]: UE 200 may perform the PRACH initial transmission (illustrated in FIG12) to gNB 100 using the configured RO, and perform the PRACH repetition to gNB 100 using the configured RO (illustrated in FIG.12)).
Regarding Claim 2, Shi teaches, The UE of claim 1, wherein the second PRACH configuration index is associated with a first set of parameters, and a second set of parameters for the second PRACH configuration are associated with the first PRACH configuration index, in accordance with the PRACH configuration restriction (Shi, [0124]: the RO for PRACH initial transmission and the RO for PRACH repetition (“second set ) do not overlap at least partially (are different at least partially), thereby preventing or avoiding a contention between the contention PRACH initial transmission and the PRACH repetition; Shi, [0122]: To be more specific, In the table illustrated in FIG. 12, in the case where the PRACH configuration index for the initial transmission is 75 (“second set of parameters”) for the RO configuration for repetition, subframes with subframe numbers 3 and 8 are configured for the additional RO, unlike the RO configuration for the initial transmission illustrated in FIG. 7).
Regarding Claim 3, Shi teaches, The UE of claim 2, wherein the first set of parameters is associated with one or more of: (Shi, FIG.7, [0122]: in a case where the PRACH configuration index for initial transmission is 75, the row with the PRACH configuration index of 75 is referred to in the table illustrated in FIG. 7 for the RO configuration for repetition).
Regarding Claim 4, Shi teaches, The UE of claim 2, wherein the second set of parameters is associated with one or more of: a preamble format, a periodicity, a subframe number, a starting symbol, a number of PRACH slots within a subframe, a number of time-domain PRACH occasions within a PRACH slot, or a PRACH duration (Shi, FIG.12, [0122]: In the table illustrated in FIG. 12, in the case where the PRACH configuration index for the initial transmission is 75 (“second set of parameters”) for the RO configuration for repetition, subframes with subframe numbers 3 and 8 are configured for the additional RO, unlike the RO configuration for the initial transmission illustrated in FIG.12).
Regarding Claim 5, Shi teaches, The UE of claim 2, wherein the first set of parameters is different from the second set of parameters (Shi, [0122, 78]: in a case where the PRACH configuration index for initial transmission is 75, the row with the PRACH configuration index of 75 is referred to in the table illustrated in FIG. 7 for the RO configuration for repetition (The ROs are mapped in subframes with subframe numbers 4 and 9, and the starting symbol of the ROs is 0); [0122]: In the table illustrated in FIG. 12, in the case where the PRACH configuration index for the initial transmission is 75 (“second set of parameters”) for the RO configuration for repetition, subframes with subframe numbers 3 and 8 are configured (determined or selected) for the additional RO, unlike the RO configuration for the initial transmission illustrated in FIG. 7) .
Regarding Claim 7, Shi teaches, The UE of claim 1, wherein a set of parameters is associated with both the first PRACH configuration and the second PRACH configuration, in accordance with the PRACH configuration restriction (Shi, FIG.12, [0122]: Table illustrated in FIG. 12 (“second PRACH configuration”) is the same as the value in the corresponding field of the table illustrated in FIG. 7 (“first PRACH configuration”), the same value may be written in the table instead of omitting the value. In this case, UE 200 only needs to refer to the table illustrated in FIG. 12 to confirm the additional RO for repetition).
Regarding Claim 8, Shi teaches, The UE of claim 7, wherein the set of parameters includes one or more of: a PRACH format, (Shi, FIG.7, [0077-78]: When PRACH configuration index is 75, A1 is specified as a PRACH preamble format (may be referred to as a PRACH format, a preamble format, etc.).
Regarding Claim 9, Shi teaches, The UE of claim 1, wherein the first PRACH configuration is associated with a first set of random access channel occasions (ROs) and the second PRACH configuration is associated with a second set of Ros (Shi, [0123]: UE 200 may configure an RO (resource) for the PRACH initial transmission (“first PRACH configuration”), and configure an RO based on received PRACH configuration index (second information on a second resource that is for transmitting the random access channel and at least partially different from the first resource)).
Regarding Claim 10, Shi teaches, The UE of claim 9, wherein the second set of ROs is a superset of the first set of ROs, in accordance with the PRACH configuration restriction (It is obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to implement FIG.12, PRACH configuration index for the initial transmission is 75, subframes with subframe numbers includes 4, 9, 3 and 8 (“super set” but restricts 4, 9) are configured for the additional RO).
Regarding Claim 11, Shi teaches, The UE of claim 9, wherein the first set of ROs is a subset of the second set of ROs, in accordance with the PRACH configuration restriction (Shi, [0123]: UE 200 configures Ros for PRACH initial transmission on the received PRACH configuration index (FIG.12), but index 75, subframes with subframe numbers 4 and 9, (“restrict”) but 3 and 8).
Regarding Claim 12, Shi teaches, The UE of claim 9, wherein a combination of the first set of ROs and the second set of ROs map to an existing PRACH configuration in a specification, in accordance with the PRACH configuration restriction (Shi, [0122]: Note that, in the case where the value in the table illustrated in FIG. 12 is the same as the value in the corresponding field of the table illustrated in FIG. 7, the same value may be written in the table instead of omitting the value. In this case, UE 200 only needs to refer to the table illustrated in FIG. 12 to confirm the additional RO for repetition).
Regarding Claim 29, Shi teaches, A method for wireless communication by a user equipment (UE) (Shi, FIG.1, radio communication system 10, user equipment (UE) 200, [0037]: Radio communication system 10 includes UE 200), comprising:
receiving a first physical random access channel (PRACH) configuration index associated with a first PRACH configuration (Shi, [0123]: receive initial PRACH configuration index for configuring an RO (resource) for the PRACH initial transmission);
receiving a second PRACH configuration index associated with a second PRACH configuration, wherein derivation of the second PRACH configuration is from the first PRACH configuration in accordance with a PRACH configuration restriction, to achieve nested random access channel (RACH) configurations, that restricts parameters of the second PRACH configuration based at least in part on parameters of the first PRACH configuration and causes the second PRACH configuration to include the first PRACH configuration as a subset (Shi, [0123]: receive a second PRACH configuration index transmitting the random access channel and at least partially different from the first resource); Shi, [0121]: The random access configuration for PRACH repetition illustrated in FIG.12 (“second PRACH configuration”) and the existing (conventional) random access configuration table illustrated in FIG. 7 (“first PRACH configuration”) are associated with each other by linking the “PRACH configuration index (for initial)” field illustrated in FIG. 12 and the “PRACH configuration index” field illustrated in FIG. 7. Note that, in FIG. 12, the symbol “-” indicates that the value there is the same as in the corresponding field of the table illustrated in FIG. 7.”second PRACH configuration includes the first PRACH configuration as subset”). To be more specific, in a case where the PRACH configuration index for initial transmission is 75, the row with the PRACH configuration index of 75 is referred to in the table illustrated in FIG. 7 for the RO configuration for repetition. In the table illustrated in FIG. 12, in the case where the PRACH configuration index for the initial transmission is 75, subframes with subframe numbers 3 and 8 are configured (determined or selected) for the additional RO, unlike the RO configuration for the initial transmission illustrated in FIG. 7. The “derivation of the second PRACH configuration” is performed by the network node, and does not impose any constraint on the steps performed by the UE); and
transmitting a PRACH transmission in accordance with the first PRACH configuration and the second PRACH configuration (Shi, [0123]: UE 200 may perform the PRACH initial transmission (illustrated in FIG12) to gNB 100 using the configured RO, and perform the PRACH repetition to gNB 100 using the configured RO (illustrated in FIG.12)).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5.1. 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.
5.2. 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.
5.3. Claim(s) 6, 13, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by Shibaike et al., (“Shi”, US 2025/0351185 A1) in view of Choi et al., ("Choi", US 2025/0301505 A1).
Regarding Claim 6, Shi teaches, The UE of claim 1, but not expressly teaches wherein:
the first PRACH configuration is associated with a legacy UE; and
the second PRACH configuration is associated with a network energy savings PRACH adaptation or a subband full duplex (SBFD)-aware UE.
Choi teaches
the first PRACH configuration is associated with a legacy UE (Choi, [0011]: the SBFD UE and the legacy terminal (“non-SBFD UE”) can have different valid RACH occasions. Combined Shi, [0123]-Choi, [0011] teaches UE (“legacy: ) configure an RO for the PRACH initial transmission based on the received PRACH configuration index “first PRACH configuration”)); and
the second PRACH configuration is associated with a network energy savings PRACH adaptation or a subband full duplex (SBFD)-aware UE (Combined Shi, [0123]-Choi, [0011] teaches configure an RO that is used for SBFD based on the received PRACH configuration index (“second PRACH configuration”).
Prior to the effective filing date of invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to implement the “validity of the SBFD resource configuration” of Choi into the invention of Shi. The suggestion/motivation would have improved accuracy of the SBFD terminal in determining the validity of the PRACH transmission time, and allowing the SBFD terminal to utilize a greater number of RACH opportunities in the process of performing random access. Including the “validity of the SBFD resource configuration” of Choi into the invention of Shi was within the ordinary ability of one of ordinary skill in the art based on the teachings of Choi.
Regarding Claim 13, Shi teaches, The UE of claim 1, but not expressly teaches wherein a separate PRACH configuration is not configured for subband full duplex (SBFD)-aware UEs, the first PRACH configuration is associated with the SBFD-aware UEs, and random access channel occasions (ROs) in SBFD symbols are valid for the SBFD-aware UEs.
Choi teaches (Choi, Abstract: determining respective indexes of first random access channel (RACH) occasions that are commonly valid in the TDD resource configuration information and the SBFD resource configuration information. Combined Shi, [0123]-Choi, Abstract teaches UE configure (determine) an RO (resource) for the PRACH initial transmission based on the received PRACH configuration index (FIG.12) that is for transmitting the random access channel and at least partially different from the first resource).
Prior to the effective filing date of invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to implement the “validity of the SBFD resource configuration” of Choi into the invention of Shi. The suggestion/motivation would have improved accuracy of the SBFD terminal in determining the validity of the PRACH transmission time, and allowing the SBFD terminal to utilize a greater number of RACH opportunities in the process of performing random access. Including the “validity of the SBFD resource configuration” of Choi into the invention of Shi was within the ordinary ability of one of ordinary skill in the art based on the teachings of Choi.
5.4. Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by Shibaike et al., (“Shi”, US 2025/0351185 A1) in view of Zhang et al., (“Zhang”, US 2022/0312487 A1).
Regarding Claim 14, Shi teaches, The UE of claim 1, but not expressly teaches wherein the processing system is configured to cause the UE to:
receive signaling that dynamically activates or deactivates the second PRACH configuration, wherein the second PRACH configuration is associated with subband full duplex (SBFD)-aware UEs.
Zhang teaches (Zhang, Abstract, dynamically activating and deactivating random-access channel (RACH) occasions (ROs)).
Prior to the effective filing date of invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to implement the “activation/deactivation of RACH ROs” of Zhang into the invention of Shi. The suggestion/motivation enables supporting activation and deactivation of RACH ROs in the wireless communication system and reducing likelihood of self-interference or crosslink interference. Including the “activation/deactivation of RACH ROs” of Zhang into the invention of Shi was within the ordinary ability of one of ordinary skill in the art based on the teachings of Zhang.
Allowable Subject Matter
6. Claims 15-28, 30 are allowed.
The following is an examiner's statement of reasons for allowance.
The prior art of record fails to teach neither singly nor in combination, the claimed limitations of
“transmit a second PRACH configuration index associated with a second PRACH configuration, wherein derivation of the second PRACH configuration is from the first PRACH configuration,
wherein the derivation of the second PRACH configuration is in accordance with a PRACH configuration restriction, to achieve nested random access channel (RACH) configurations, that restricts parameters of the PRACH configuration based at least in part on parameters of the first PRACH configuration and causes the second PRACH configuration to include the first PRACH configuration as a subset”
stated in claim 15, 30. These limitations, in conjunction with other limitations in the independent claim, are not specifically disclosed or remotely suggested in the prior art of record. A review of claims 15-28, 30 indicated claims 15-28, 30 are allowable over the prior art of record.
Conclusion
7. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
Lei et al., US 2021/0014900 A1, Method Of Wireless Communication Performed By User Equipment (UE), Involves Receiving Message Comprising Information On Physical Downlink Control Channel And Message Payload On Physical Downlink Shared Channel From Serving Base Station.
8. 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 replying 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 extension fee 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 CHHIAN (AMY) LING whose telephone number is (571)270-1074. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-6 ET.
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, MOO JEONG can be reached at (571)272-9617. 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.
/C.L./
Examiner
Art Unit 2418
/MICHAEL A KELLER/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2418
Prosecution Insights