DETAILED ACTION
This Office action is in response to the amendment filed 1 July 2026. Claims 21-40 are pending in this application.
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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 21-23, 25, 28-29, 31-33, 35, and 38-30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (US 2022/0353943) in view of Christoffersson et al. (US 2024/0267914).
For Claims 21 and 31, Lee teaches a method and an apparatus, comprising: at least one processor; and a memory coupled to the at least one processor and configured to store executable instructions for execution by the at least one processor (see paragraphs 311-312); the method comprising:
in response to a terminal device being in a radio resource control (RRC) inactive state (see paragraphs 5, 187), selecting, by the terminal device, a first synchronization signal block (SSB) at first time, and sending, to a first network device, first small data transmission (SDT) data through a first configured grant (CG) resource corresponding to the first SSB (see paragraph 241).
Though Lee does teach reevaluating SSBs and using the first SSB for a second SDT transmission (see paragraph 256), Lee as applied above is not explicit as to, but Christoffersson teaches, in response to signal quality of a plurality of SSBs comprising the first SSB at second time being greater than a first threshold, selecting, by the terminal device, the first SSB for the first SDT data from the plurality of SSBs at the second time regardless of whether another SSB of the plurality of SSBs has greater signal quality than the first SSB (see paragraphs 32, 164: selecting an SSB; paragraphs 133, 146: keep using the same SSB), and sending second SDT data to the network device through a second CG resource corresponding to the first SSB, wherein the second SDT data comprises new transmitted SDT data (see paragraphs 177-184: subsequent SDTs).
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to continue using the same SSB as in Christoffersson when implementing the method of Lee. The motivation would be to reduce overhead by continuing to use the same resources.
For Claims 28 and 38, Lee teaches a method and an apparatus, comprising: at least one processor; and a memory coupled to the at least one processor and configured to store executable instructions for execution by the at least one processor (see paragraphs 311-312); the method comprising:
receiving, by a network device, first small data transmission (SDT) data that is sent by a terminal device in a radio resource control (RRC) inactive state through a first configured grant (CG) resource corresponding to a first synchronization signal block (SSB) (see paragraph 241); and
receiving, by the network device, second SDT data that is sent by the terminal device through a second CG resource corresponding to the first SSB (see paragraph 256).
Though Lee does teach reevaluating SSBs and using the first SSB for a second SDT transmission (see paragraph 256), Lee as applied above is not explicit as to, but Christoffersson teaches that second SDT data is sent by the terminal device through a second CG resource corresponding to the first SSB for the first SDT data, wherein the second SDT data comprises newly transmitted SDT data (see paragraphs 177-184: subsequent SDTs), signal quality of a plurality of SSBs comprising the first SSB is greater than a first threshold, and the first SSB is selected from the plurality of SSBs regardless of whether another SSB of the plurality of SSBs has greater signal quality than the first SSB (see paragraphs 32, 164: selecting an SSB; paragraphs 133, 146: keep using the same SSB).
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to continue using the same SSB as in Christoffersson when implementing the method of Lee. The motivation would be to reduce overhead by continuing to use the same resources.
For Claims 22 and 32, Lee teaches the method, wherein the method further comprises: in response to signal quality of one or more SSBs at the second time being greater than the first threshold and signal quality of the first SSB being less than or equal to the first threshold, selecting, by the terminal device, a second SSB from the one or more SSBs at the second time, and sending the second SDT data to the network device through a CG resource corresponding to the second SSB (see paragraphs 172, 220).
For Claims 23 and 33, Lee teaches the method, wherein selecting, by the terminal device, the first SSB from the plurality of SSBs at the second time comprises: in response to the terminal device failing to receive acknowledgment (ACK) indication information of the first SDT data or receiving negative acknowledgment (NACK) indication information of the first SDT data, selecting, by the terminal device, the first SSB from the plurality of SSBs at the second time (see paragraph 256).
For Claims 25, 29, 35, and 39, Lee teaches the method, wherein the method further comprises: receiving, by the terminal device, a first message sent by the network device, wherein the first message indicates to enter the RRC inactive state (see paragraphs 5, 187).
Claim(s) 24 and 34 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (US 2022/0353943) and Christoffersson et al. (US 2024/0267914) as applied to claims 21 and 31 above, and further in view of R2-2103265 (3GPP TSG-RAN WG2 Meeting #113 bis electronic, Online, April 12-April 20, 2021, listed on the IDS).
For Claims 24 and 34, Lee further teaches the method, wherein the method further comprises: in response to the terminal device receiving ACK indication information of the first SDT data, sending another SDT communication (see paragraph 256).
The references as applied above are not explicit as to, but R2-2103265 teaches selecting, by the terminal device, a third SSB from the plurality of SSBs at the second time, and sending the second SDT data to the network device through a CG resource corresponding to the third SSB (see fourth page, paragraph beginning Option 2).
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to have the option to select another SSB as in R2-2103265 when performing ongoing SDT communications as in Lee. One of ordinary skill would have been able to do so with the reasonably predictable result of improving throughput by using optimal resources.
Claim(s) 26-27, 30, 36-37, and 40 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (US 2022/0353943) and Christoffersson et al. (US 2024/0267914) as applied to claims 21, 25, 31, and 35 above, and further in view of Tsai et al. (US 2022/0210798).
For Claims 26 and 36, the references as applied above are not explicit as to, but Tsai teaches the method, wherein the first message comprises duration of a first timer (see paragraphs 85-93), and selecting, by the terminal device, the first SSB from the plurality of SSBs at the second time comprises:
starting, by the terminal device, the first timer when sending the first SDT data (see paragraphs 94, 180); and
in a running period of the first timer, selecting, by the terminal device, the first SSB from the plurality of SSBs at the second time, wherein the second time is within the running period of the first timer (see paragraphs 95, 258-261, 263: timer is running).
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to maintain the beam selection as in Tsai while performing SDT transmissions as in Lee. The motivation would be to avoid increasing signaling overhead during SDT communications.
For Claims 27 and 37, the references as applied above are not explicit as to, but Tsai teaches the method, wherein the first message comprises duration of a first timer (see paragraphs 85-93), and the method further comprises:
starting, by the terminal device, the first timer when sending the first SDT data (see paragraphs 94, 180); and
after the first timer expires, selecting, by the terminal device, a fourth SSB from the plurality of SSBs at the second time, and sending the second SDT data to the network device by using a CG resource corresponding to the fourth SSB, wherein the second time is after an expiration time of the first timer (see paragraphs 255-256: after timer expires; paragraphs 95, 258-261 272).
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to have the option to select another SSB after the timer expires as in Tsai when performing ongoing SDT communications as in Lee. One of ordinary skill would have been able to do so with the reasonably predictable result of improving throughput by using optimal resources.
For Claims 30 and 40, the references as applied above are not explicit as to, but Tsai teaches the method, wherein the first message comprises duration of a first timer, and the duration of the first timer indicates time for selecting the first SSB (see paragraphs 85-93).
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to use a timer as in Tsai when performing SDT communications as in Lee. The motivation would be to ensure the terminal acts to send the SDT in a timely manner.
Response to Arguments
The amendment filed 1 July 2026 has been entered.
Previous rejections under 35 USC 112 are withdrawn in light of the amendments.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to rejections over prior art have been fully considered, but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection introduced herein. The claims remain rejected under 35 USC 103.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Shah et al. (US 2025/0089097) teaches a system using any acceptable SSB, and continuing the use of a same SSB for subsequent SDTs. Jeon et al. (US 2023/0363041) teaches using a threshold comparison to select an SSB.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CASSANDRA L DECKER whose telephone number is (571)270-3946. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 am - 4:00 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, Faruk Hamza can be reached at 571-272-7969. 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.
/CASSANDRA L DECKER/Examiner, Art Unit 2466 7/23/2026
/FARUK HAMZA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2466
Prosecution Insights