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 .
(note: the earliest priority date for the application is Jan. 18, 2021 as supported by the provisional app. 63138617 filed on Jan. 18, 2021 and provisional app. 62989438 does not provide support for the claims)
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 21-40 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 21-24, 30-33, 39, 40 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by LIN (US 20250287385 with foreign app. WO PCT/CN2021/071441 filed on 01/13/2021).
Regarding claim 21, 30, 39, LIN (US 20250287385) teaches an apparatus for User Equipment (UE) (UE), comprising:
a memory (UE); and
processor circuitry coupled with the memory and configured to cause the UE (UE) to:
monitor, based on a search space (SS) set, a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) during a random access based small data transmission (RA-SDT) procedure (par. 103, 122, 126, 127, 131, 132, the UE 110 may be configured with a different CORESET/SS for monitoring PDCCH during a SDT procedure than that used during the above RA-based SDT procedure or CG-based SDT procedure…the search space configured for PDCCH monitoring during the small data transmissions may be at least one of the Type3-PDCCH CSS set);
decode control information of an access node (AN) for the UE from the PDCCH (par. 125, the PDCCH, monitored during small data transmission, mentioned in following embodiments may be a PDCCH for a DCI format with CRC scrambled by C-RNTI or by a CS-RNTI or by a SDT specific RNTI (e.g., SDT-RNTI)); and
perform communication with the AN based on the control information (par. 154, 156, a search space specific for SDT transmission may be configured in an RRC release message for UE to monitor the PDCCH addressed by C-RNTI during the small data transmission in RRC inactive state. For another example, a search space separately defined in system information may be used for UEs to do SDT),
wherein to monitor, based on the SS set, the PDCCH during the RA-SDT procedure (par. 127, or RACH based SDT, the RA search space may be used for monitoring PDCCH) comprises: monitoring, in a case where an SS set dedicated for the RA-SDT procedure is provided (par. 127, 185, the message may comprise an SS field dedicated for SDT), the PDCCH based on the SS set dedicated for the RA-SDT procedure (par. 127, 131, 132, 185, the RA search space may be used for monitoring PDCCH scheduling RAR PDSCH or MsgB PDSCH in 4-step RACH or 2-step RACH, and this search space may also be used for PDCCH monitoring with C-RNTI, for example, when a Type3-PDCCH CSS set is not available); and monitoring. when the SS set dedicated for the RA-SDT procedure is not provided, the PDCCH based on another SS set other than the SS set dedicated for the RA-SDT procedure (par. 127, 135, 185, the RA search space may be used for monitoring PDCCH scheduling RAR PDSCH or MsgB PDSCH in 4-step RACH or 2-step RACH, and this search space may also be used for PDCCH monitoring with C-RNTI, for example, when a Type3-PDCCH CSS set is not available).
Regarding claims 22, 31, 40, LIN (US 20250287385) teaches the apparatus of claim 21, wherein to perform the communication comprises performing the communication in an RRC_INACTIVE state (par. 88, 122, he UE in RRC_INACTIVE should be able to send multiple UL and DL packets as part of the same SDT mechanism and the UE has to monitor the PDCCH addressed to the C-RNTI after successful completion of the RACH procedure during RA-SDT).
Regarding claims 23, 32, LIN (US 20250287385) teaches the apparatus of claim 21, wherein the communication comprises a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) transmission (par. 89, 98, the SDT on the configured RACH and PUSCH resources).
Regarding claims 24, 33, LIN (US 20250287385) teaches the apparatus of claim 21, wherein the RA-SDT procedure is performed by a 2-step or 4-step Random Access procedure (par. 89, 127, 4-step RACH or 2-step RACH).
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.
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.
Claim(s) 25, 34 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LIN (US 20250287385 with foreign app. WO PCT/CN2021/071441 filed on 01/13/2021) in view of SHIH et al. (US 20190182870).
Regarding claims 25, 34, LIN does not teach the apparatus of claim 21, wherein to monitor the PDCCH comprises monitoring the PDCCH until the RA-SDT procedure is terminated.
But, SHIH et al. (US 20190182870) in a similar or same field of endeavor teaches wherein to monitor the PDCCH comprises monitoring the PDCCH until the RA-SDT procedure is terminated (par. 417, monitor the PDCCH until mac-ContentionResolutionTimer expires or is stopped; The Contention Resolution Timer is a MAC layer timer used in the Random Access (RACH) procedure of cellular networks… The timer defines the time the UE monitors the PDCCH for a successful contention resolution message (Msg4) addressed to its Temporary C-RNTI. If the timer expires before successful contention resolution, the RACH procedure fails).
Thus, it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effectively filing date of the claimed invention to implement the system or method as taught by SHIH in the system of LIN to stop monitoring.
The motivation would have been to prevent delay and waste of resource.
Claim(s) 26, 27, 29, 35, 36, 38 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LIN (US 20250287385 with foreign app. WO PCT/CN2021/071441 filed on 01/13/2021) view of WEI et al. (US 20210274525 as supported by provisional app. 62982713 filed on 02/27/2020).
Regarding claims 26, 35, LIN (US 20250287385) teaches the apparatus of claim 21, wherein the processor circuitry is further configured to cause the UE to:
perform uplink transmission based on configured grant (par. 89, 93, 95, in the CG based SDT, the SDT may be transmitted over configured grant type-1 PUSCH resources…the gNB 120 may respond with an RAR (“RA Response”) message (Msg2) which comprises an uplink grant for the UE 110's SDT and a temporary C-RNTI (TC-RNTI) for the UE 110…a timing advance to the UE 110 and thus the 4-step approach is needed for random access procedure).
However, LIN does not teach perform uplink transmission based on configured grant, when a timing advance (TA) is valid.
But, WEI et al. (US 20210274525) in a similar or same field of endeavor teaches perform uplink transmission based on configured grant, when a timing advance (TA) is valid (par. 199, the condition of contention resolution for a UE that has a valid timing advance value may be that a PDCCH is received and the PDCCH is addressed to the C-RNTI and contains a UL grant for a new transmission).
Thus, it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effectively filing date of the claimed invention to implement the system or method as taught by WEI in the system of LIN to perform uplink transmission based on timing advance.
The motivation would have been to synchronize the transmission and reception.
Regarding claims 27, 36, LIN (US 20250287385) does not teach the apparatus of claim 26, wherein if the TA is valid is determined based on one or more parameters configured by radio resource control (RRC) layer.
But, WEI et al. (US 20210274525) in a similar or same field of endeavor teaches wherein if the TA is valid is determined based on one or more parameters configured by radio resource control (RRC) layer (par. 147, 151, 178, 179, 199, RRC… The timer may be started or restarted from its initial value, which may be configured by a BS (e.g., a gNB) via DL RRC signaling).
Thus, it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effectively filing date of the claimed invention to implement the system or method as taught by WEI in the system of LIN to perform uplink transmission based on timing advance.
The motivation would have been to synchronize the transmission and reception.
Regarding claims 29, 38, LIN (US 20250287385) does not teach the apparatus of claim 26, wherein the TA is determined invalid if a time alignment timer is not running.
But, WEI et al. (US 20210274525) in a similar or same field of endeavor teaches wherein the TA is determined invalid if a time alignment timer is not running (par. 199, whether the UE has a valid timing advance value or not (time alignment timer is running or not)).
Thus, it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effectively filing date of the claimed invention to implement the system or method as taught by WEI in the system of LIN to perform uplink transmission based on timing advance.
The motivation would have been to synchronize the transmission and reception.
Claim(s) 28, 37 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LIN (US 20250287385 with foreign app. WO PCT/CN2021/071441 filed on 01/13/2021) and WEI et al. (US 20210274525 as supported by provisional app. 62982713 filed on 02/27/2020) as applied to claims 27, 36 above, and further in view of LIBERG et al. (US 20210306968).
Regarding claims 28, 37, WEI teaches the apparatus of claim 27, wherein the one or more parameters comprise a reference signal received power (RSRP) threshold (par. 147, 178, 179, RRC…RSRP threshold).
However, LIN and WEI do not teach if the TA is valid is determined based on RSRP threshold.
But, LIBERG et al. (US 20210306968) in a similar or same field of endeavor teaches if the TA is valid is determined based on RSRP threshold (par. 64, 67, 68, 69, the device again measures the absolute signal strength RSRP(T.sub.1) of the serving cell and compares RSRP(T.sub.1) to a predefined or preconfigured signal strength threshold RSRP.sub.TH. If RSRP(T.sub.1)>RSRP.sub.TH, the device takes this as an indication that it is still in proximity to the base station and assumes that the stored TA(T.sub.0) value is still valid).
Thus, it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effectively filing date of the claimed invention to implement the system or method as taught by LIBERG in the system of LIN and WEI to determine valid TA.
The motivation would have been to keep synchronizing the communication.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
OU et al. (US 20210112559) teaches an apparatus for User Equipment (UE), comprising: monitor, based on a search space (SS) set, a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) during PUR and a random access based small data transmission (RA-SDT) procedure (par. 264, 265, 266, The UE could monitor Physical Downlink Control Channel (PDCCH) for receiving Network (NW) response (for PUR) after transmitting the UL data using PUR… The UE may initiate a RA procedure if the UE determines that the UL data could not be transmitted using PUR… The conditions may include whether the (potential) data size of the UL data is not larger than a threshold (and the threshold may be predefined or configured in the PUR configuration)); decode control information of an access node (AN) for the UE from the PDCCH (par. 264, The NW response could be a Uplink (UL) grant scheduling retransmission of the UL data. The NW response could be a Downlink (DL) assignment scheduling DL data and the UE receives the corresponding DL data according to the DL assignment); and perform communication with the AN based on the control information (par. 264, The NW response could be a Uplink (UL) grant scheduling retransmission of the UL data. The NW response could be a Downlink (DL) assignment scheduling DL data and the UE receives the corresponding DL data according to the DL assignment); wherein to perform the communication comprises performing the communication in an RRCINACTIVE state (par. 264, while the UE is in e.g. RRC_IDLE state or RRC_INACTIVE state, when there is UL data available for transmission, the UE could transmit the UL data using PUR instead of initiating a RA procedure); perform uplink transmission based on configured grant, when a timing advance (TA) is valid (par. 157, When the TA is validated and found to be invalid and the UE has data to send, the UE can obtain a valid TA and may send data via legacy RACH or EDT procedures; par. 264, 267, The NW response could be a Uplink (UL) grant scheduling retransmission of the UL data… The UE may consider the TA for PUR to be valid if (at least) a TA timer (for PUR) is running. The UE may consider the TA for PUR to be valid if (at least) the measured Radio Signal Received Power (RSRP) of the Serving Cell is above (or not below) a threshold (and the threshold could be predefined or configured in the PUR configuration)); wherein if the TA is valid is determined based on one or more parameters configured by radio resource control (RRC) layer (par. 264, 265, 268, RRC);wherein the one or more parameters comprise a reference signal received power (RSRP) threshold (par. 264, 267, The NW response could be a Uplink (UL) grant scheduling retransmission of the UL data… The UE may consider the TA for PUR to be valid if (at least) a TA timer (for PUR) is running. The UE may consider the TA for PUR to be valid if (at least) the measured Radio Signal Received Power (RSRP) of the Serving Cell is above (or not below) a threshold (and the threshold could be predefined or configured in the PUR configuration)); wherein the TA is determined invalid if a time alignment timer is not running (par. 267, The UE may consider the TA for PUR to be valid if (at least) a TA timer (for PUR) is running).
OH (US 20170099660) teaches a base station 200 transmits parameters associated with a small-sized data transmission (SDT) to wireless terminals 100 through a system information block (SIB) (S110). The parameters associated with the SDT may include a maximum SDT size, an SDT common identifier, and random access preamble group information for the SDT (par 39).
Moderator (ZTE) (“Summary on the physical layer aspects of small data transmission”, R1-210xxxx) teaches RA-SDT (page 1).
SHA et al. (US 20220264617) teaches D-PUR user-specific PDCCH search space (USS) identified by the D-PUR RNTI…the UE's attempt to communicate data over the D-PUR fails. In some such instances, it can be beneficial for the BS to have knowledge of the failure so that the BS can implement reconfiguration or optimization of the D-PUR dedicated resource configuration, to reduce the risk of failure for instance. In step 806, the BS does not receive the D-PUR transmission response and D-PUR transmission also fails. The UE, upon failure to transmit on the uplink with D-PUR, can fall back on RRC messaging to transmit a message indicating D-PUR failure to the BS. . For example, in step 808, the UE can transmit a Physical Random Access Channel (PRACH) preamble to the BS, which initiates the random access procedure. In response, in step 810, the BS responds with a Random Access Response (RAR) message indicating the reception of the preamble and providing a time-alignment command adjusting the transmission timing of the UE based on the timing of the received preamble. In step 812 the UE can communicate a EDT Message3 to the BS. The EDT Message3 from the UE can include a message indicating that the UE's attempt to communicate over the D-PUR has failed (par. 62).
SHA et al. (US 20210168895) teaches With the introduction of EDT (Early Data Transmission), wherein small data packets can be transmitted in the PRACH process, UEs transmitting small data packets do not need to enter the RRC connection state (par. 19); An RRC idle state data transmission mode UE-specific search space (USS_IDLE) monitoring maximum duration (USS_IDLE Monitoring Window Length) (par. 47); An RRC idle state data transmission mode UE dedicated search space (USS_IDLE) start monitoring time (USS_IDLE_START) (par. 48);
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 THINH D TRAN whose telephone number is (571)270-3934. The examiner can normally be reached mon-fri 9-6.
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 5712727969. 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.
/THINH D TRAN/for /Thinh Tran/, Patent Examiner of Art Unit 2466 04/03/2026