DETAILED ACTION
Notice of 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 .
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.
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged. In particular, this Application is the bypass application of an internation application that claims foreign priority to a Chinese application field on 15 Oct 2021. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statements
The information disclosure statements, submitted on 12 May 2025 and 3 July 2025, are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Invention I in the reply filed on 27 Apr 2026 is acknowledged.
Response to Arguments
The Reply finds “Xiong does not relate to a case that one SSB is associated with multiple ROs.” Reply, 6 (emphasis omitted). Xiong teaches an “RO bundle,” which constitutes “multiple ROs.” E.g. Xiong, ¶89. The starting position of the RO bundle may be the “[f]irst RO among the ROs to which a single SSB is mapped.” Xiong, ¶97 (emphasis added). The Examiner finds the “single SSB” of Xiong to be “one SSB” and it is “mapped” or “associated” with a plurality of ROs.
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, 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.
Claims 1, 2, 7, 9, 18, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable by MolavianJazi (US 20210076384) in view of Xiong (US 20220046725).
Regarding claims 1 and 18, MolavianJazi teaches a random access processing method and a terminal, comprising: a memory, a processor, and programs stored in the memory and executable on the processor, wherein the programs, when executed by the processor, cause the terminal to perform the method comprising:
transmitting, by a terminal, a preamble with repetitions on a plurality of physical random access channel occasions (RO), wherein the preamble is used for random access (MolavianJazi, figure 9 and ¶¶98, 170, 187 – UE transmits a PRACH preamble in multiple occasions); and
starting, by the terminal, a random access response (RAR) window (MolavianJazi, ¶¶195, 201 – starts window for monitoring PDCCH for scheduling a PDSCH that provides a RAR in response to the PRACH preamble transmission), and
monitoring RAR information (MolavianJazi, ¶212 and figure 9 – PDCCH monitoring window for scheduling a PDSCH reception providing a RAR when the PRACH preamble is transmitted with repetitions),
wherein the RAR window starts from a first symbol of an earliest control resource set associated with a first physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) (MolavianJazi, ¶196 – window begins at the first symbol of the earliest PDCCH CORESET), and the first PDCCH is a PDCCH in a Type 1-physical downlink control channel (Type1-PDCCH) common resource set (MolavianJazi, ¶196 – PDCCH for type1 PDCCH CSS set);
the RAR window satisfies the RAR window is at least one symbol following a last symbol of a last RO occupied by the preamble with repetitions. MolavianJazi, ¶¶196-198 and figures 9 and 10 (various starting locations for monitoring window – see ¶196 and the top figure of figure 9 in particular for window starting after the last symbol of the last RO of the PRACH transmission).
MolavianJazi does not explicitly teach “wherein in a case that one synchronization signal block corresponds to one RO, the plurality of ROs are located at RO positions corresponding to the same synchronization signal block in an association period, and the preamble transmitted with repetitions has a same preamble index.” However, Xiong teaches a single SSB mapped to a first RO of a plurality of ROs. Xiong, ¶97. In Xiong, there is an association period between an SSB and ROs. Id. at ¶¶99-100. Xiong also teaches all preambles in an RO bundle having the same preamble index. Id. at ¶144. At the time of the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to use the same preamble index, as taught by Xiong, when transmitting the PRACH preamble repetitions, taught by MolavianJazi, in order to enable the base station to determine that the same UE transmitted the preambles. Id. at ¶144. At the time of the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to map an SSB to one or more ROs, as taught by Xiong, when implementing the random access procedure, taught by MolavianJazi, in order to map a downlink beam signal and a RACH resource. Id. at ¶134.
Regarding claims 2 and 19, the combination of MolavianJazi and Xiong also teaches determining, by the terminal, a random access radio network temporary identifier (RA-RNTI), wherein the RA-RNTI is used for scrambling a monitored PDCCH for scheduling the RAR information. MolavianJazi, ¶¶102, 112 (UE monitors in type1-PDCCH CSS set identified by a RA-RNTI).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of MolavianJazi and Xiong also teaches wherein the plurality of ROs are associated with a same synchronization signal block. MolavianJazi, ¶¶97-98 (some PRACH preambles are associated with an SSB).
Regarding claim 9, MolavianJazi does not explicitly teach “wherein in a case that one synchronization signal block corresponds to at least two ROs, the plurality of ROs are located at RO positions corresponding to the same synchronization signal block in an association period.” Xiong teaches a RO bundle (at least two ROs) mapped to a downlink beam signal, where the downlink beam signal may be a SSB. Xiong, ¶¶132-133. Xiong also teaches the starting point (i.e. position) of the RO bundle within an association period of an SSB. Id. at ¶136. At the time of the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to implement an association period, as taught by Xiong, when transmitting the PRACH preamble repetitions, taught by MolavianJazi, in order to ensure the UE uses a valid RO bundle. Id. at ¶141.
Claims 3, 4, 21, and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MolavianJazi in view of Xiong (both of record) and further in view of Zhang (US 20230209606).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of MolavianJazi and Xiong teaches the method according to claim 2 and starting a monitoring window at the first symbol of the earliest CORESET (MolavianJazi, ¶¶196-198), but does not explicitly teach “wherein the RA-RNTI satisfies the RA-RNTI is determined based on an M.sup.th RO occupied by the preamble with repetitions, and M is a positive integer.”
However, Zhang teaches a UE determining one or more RA-RNTIs for multiple ROs. Zhang, e.g. figure 9 (step 930 or 940). In one embodiment, the UE determines a single RA-RNTI for multiple ROs, where a “predetermined RO” is used to determine the RA-RNTI. Zhang, ¶90 (e.g. the BS indicates that the kth RO is used as the predetermined RO and the UE uses that RO to determine the RA-RNTI). At the time of the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to determine the RA-RNTI(s) and RAR windows, taught by the combination of MolavianJazi and Xiong, using the configuration information, taught by Zhang, in order to ensure the UE monitors the proper window in PRACH repetition situations. Zhang, ¶¶41-43.
Regarding claim 4, the combination of MolavianJazi, Xiong, and Zhang also teaches wherein M is indicated by a protocol agreement or a network-side device. Zhang, ¶¶64, 90 (BS specifies the predetermined RO among the multiple ROs for determining a single RA-RNTI).
Regarding claims 21 and 23, the combination of MolavianJazi, Xiong, and Zhang also teaches wherein the RA-RNTI is determined based on the last RO occupied by the preamble with repetitions. Zhang, ¶90 (BS indicates which predetermined RO for determining the single RA-RNTI, where “the predetermined RO may correspond to a last RO (RO4) or a last repetition among the ROs 402”).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure includes figure 2 and paragraphs 54 and 58 of He.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 BENJAMIN S LAMONT whose telephone number is (571)270-7514 and email address is benjamin.lamont@uspto.gov (see MPEP 502.03 for using EFS or mail, but not email to authorize electronic communications). The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7am to 3pm EST.
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, Huy Vu can be reached at 571-272-3155. 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.
/Benjamin Lamont/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2461
Prosecution Insights