CTNF 18/700,005 CTNF 101678 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Priority 02-26 AIA 2. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55 Information Disclosure Statement 3. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on April 10, 2024 and May 10, 2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Specification 06-31 AIA 4. The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant' s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification. 5. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 5. 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA 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. 07-20-02-aia AIA This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. 07-21-aia AIA 6. Claim (s) 27-29, 31-38, 39, 42-47 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. ( WO 2020/198632 A1 ) in view of Zhao et al. ( WO 2015016754 A1 ) . 7. Regarding claim 27 , A method performed by a user equipment, UE, for handling communication in a wireless communications network, the method comprising: determining a first preamble from a group of preambles out of one or more groups of preambles, wherein the group of preambles is selected based on whether one or more conditions, associated with the group, are fulfilled or not, Park et al. teaches. (“For a contention based random access procedure, a UE may select a SS RSRP above the RSRP threshold . If random access preambles group B exists. a UE may select one or more random access preambles from a group A or a group B depending on a Msg3 1240 size . If a random-access preambles group B does not exist, a UE may select the one or more random access preambles from a group A ” [ 00140 ]). A UE select SS RSRP above the RSRP threshold teaches UE for handling communication in a wireless communication network. A UE may select one or more random access preambles from group A or group B depending on a Msg3 size which teaches determining a first preamble from a group of preambles out of one or more groups of preambles. In further, and transmitting, to a radio network node, a physical random access channel, PRACH, transmission using the determined first preamble, Park et al. teaches, (“A UE may perform one or more Msg1 1220 transmissions by transmitting the selected random access preamble ” [ 00143 ] … “ A UE may transmit , to a base station , a selected random access preamble via a selected PRACH occasions ” [ 00143 ]). The base station is a radio network node. The one or more Msg1 transmissions (e.g. selected random access preamble) teaches the transmission using the determined first preamble. Although Park et al. teaches A method performed by a user equipment, UE, for handling communication in a wireless communications network, the method comprising: determining a first preamble from a group of preambles out of one or more groups of preambles, wherein the group of preambles is selected based on whether one or more conditions, associated with the group, are fulfilled or not; and transmitting, to a radio network node, a physical random access channel, PRACH, transmission using the determined first preamble, Park et al. does not explicitly teach wherein the group of preambles is further selected based on a priority rule defining an order of selection of the one or more groups of preambles; and wherein the group of preambles is selected based on level of signal strength and/or number of conditions of respective group of preambles; and transmitting, to a radio network node, a physical random access channel, PRACH, transmission using the determined first preamble In the same field of endeavor of including wherein the group of preambles is further selected based on a priority rule defining an order of selection of the one or more groups of preambles, Zhao et al. teaches, (“…the wireless device fulfills the criteria to select a preamble from the first preamble group, wherein the threshold values sent on the dedicated signaling differ from the broadcast threshold values; and prioritize preambles of the first preamble group over preambles of the second preamble group .” [ Pg. 3 Lines 28-31 ]). The wireless device prioritizes preambles of the first preamble group over the second preamble group which teaches a group of preambles is selected based on a priority rule defining an order of selection. In further, and wherein the group of preambles is selected based on level of signal strength and/or number of conditions of respective group of preambles; and transmitting, to a radio network node, a physical random access channel, PRACH, transmission using the determined first preamble, Park et al. teaches, (“the one or more threshold values sent in the dedicated signaling overriding a corresponding broadcasted threshold value and being set so that the wireless device fulfills the criteria to select a preamble from the first preamble group , wherein the threshold values sent on the dedicated signaling differ from the broadcast threshold values; and prioritizing preambles of the first preamble group over preambles of the second preamble group” [ Pg. 3 Lines 26-31 ]). The threshold value that is overriding a corresponding broadcasted threshold value teaches a level of signal strength. The wireless device fulfills the criteria to select a preamble from the first preamble group which teaches a group of preambles is selected based on level of signal strength and/or number of conditions of respective group of preambles. Following up with, (“A UE may perform one or more Msg1 1220 transmissions by transmitting the selected random access preamble ” [ 00143 ] … “ A UE may transmit , to a base station , a selected random access preamble via a selected PRACH occasions ” [ 00143 ]). The base station is a radio network node. The one or more Msg1 transmissions (e.g. selected random access preamble) teaches the transmission using the determined first preamble. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Park et al. to include prioritizing the first preamble over the second preamble, one or more threshold values to override a corresponding broadcasted threshold value, and a UE transmitting a preamble via PRACH occasions as taught by Zhao et al… The suggestion/motivation to do so would allow (“for a more flexible ordering of random access responses in a contention based random access procedure and in particular enables differentiation of the wireless devices. The method thereby enables e.g. differentiating and prioritizing of wireless devices in a handover situation over other wireless device. Reduced handover drop rates are achieved and thereby also increased user satisfaction” [ Pg. 3 Lines 12-17 ]). 8. Regarding claim 28, the method according to claim 27, further comprising obtaining a configuration for the PRACH transmission, wherein the configuration comprises the one or more groups of preambles having its respective one or more conditions, Park et al. teaches, (“In an example, a base station may transmit (e.g., unicast, multicast, or broadcast), to a UE , a RACH configuration 1210 via one or more beams. The RACH configuration 1210 may comprise one or more parameters indicating at least one of following : available set of PRACH resources for a transmission of a random access preamble , initial preamble power (e.g., random access preamble initial received target power), an RSRP threshold for a selection of a SS block and corresponding PRACH resource, a power-ramping factor (e.g., random access preamble power ramping step), random access preamble index, a maximum number of preamble transmission, preamble group A and group B, a threshold (e.g., message size) to determine the groups of random access preambles , a set of one or more random access preambles for system information request and corresponding PRACH resource(s), if any, a set of one or more random access preambles for beam failure recovery request and corresponding PRACH resource(s), if any, a time window to monitor RA response(s), a time window to monitorresponse(s) on beam failure recovery request, and/or a contention resolution timer” [ 00139 ]). The base station transmits to a UE a RACH configuration comprising of PRACH resource for transmitting preambles teaching obtaining a configuration for the PRACH transmission. The RACH also comprises of preamble group A and group B, a threshold to determine groups of preambles teaching the one or more groups of preambles having its respective one or more conditions. 9. Regarding claim 29, the method according to claim 27, wherein respective group of the one or more groups further indicates one or more features associated with the respective group, Park et al. teaches, (“If a base station semi-statistically configures a UE with an association between random access preambles and SS blocks, the UE may select a random access preamble index randomly with equal probability from one or more random access preambles associated with a selected SS block and a selected group ” [ 00140 ]). The UE may select a random access preamble index from one or more random access preambles associated with a selected SS block and a selected group teaching further indicates one or more features associated with the respective group. Following up with, ( “For a contention based random access procedure, a UE may select a SS block with a RSRP above the RSRP threshold. If random access preambles group B exists, a UE may select one or more random access preambles from a group A or a group B depending on a potential Msg3 1240 size” [ 00140 ] ). Preambles from group A or group B verifies one or more groups. 10. Regarding claim 31, The method according to claim 27, wherein determining the first preamble comprises disregarding a group of preambles where one or more conditions associated with the group of preambles are not fulfilled, and selecting the group of preambles for which one or more conditions are fulfilled, Park et al. teaches, (“For a contention based random access procedure, a UE may select a SS RSRP above the RSRP threshold. If random access preambles group B exists. a UE may select one or more random access preambles from a group A or a group B depending on a Msg3 1240 size . If a random access preambles group B does not exist, a UE may select the one or more random access preambles from a group A ” [ 00140 ]). The group A or group B that is not selected based on the Msg3 1240 size teaches disregarding a group of preambles where one or more conditions associated with the group of preambles are not fulfilled. Selecting a group A or group B preamble depending on Msg3 1240 size teaches selecting group of preamble for which one or more conditions are fulfilled. 11. Regarding claim 32, preambles in each group, Park et al. teaches, (“For a contention based random access procedure, a UE may select a SS RSRP above the RSRP threshold. If random access preambles group B exists. a UE may select one or more random access preambles from a group A or a group B depending on a Msg3 1240 size . If a random access preambles group B does not exist, a UE may select the one or more random access preambles from a group A ” [ 00140 ]). Although Park et al. teaches preambles in each group Park et al. does not explicitly teach the method according to claim 27, wherein the priority rule is: based on a configured priority index; based on amount of preambles in each group; based on a metric regarding performance; based on number of conditions; based on feature of the group; setting different levels of signal strength for different features; and/or based on priority of the UE. In the same field of endeavor of including the method according to claim 27, wherein the priority rule is: based on a configured priority index; based on amount of preambles in each group; based on a metric regarding performance; based on number of conditions; based on feature of the group; setting different levels of signal strength for different features; and/or based on priority of the UE, Zhao et al. teaches, (“…the wireless device fulfills the criteria to select a preamble from the first preamble group , wherein the threshold values sent on the dedicated signaling differ from the broadcast threshold values ; and prioritize preambles of the first preamble group over preambles of the second preamble group .” [ Pg. 3 Lines 28-31 ]). The wireless device (e.g. UE) fulfills the criteria to select a preamble teaching a priority rule. The threshold values sent on the dedicated signaling teaches the limitation based on a metric regarding performance; and based on number of conditions. The wireless device (e.g. UE) prioritize the first preamble group teaches the limitation the priority rule is based on priority of the UE. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Park et al. to include criteria to select a preamble from the first preamble group, threshold values sent on the dedicated signaling, and prioritize preambles of the first preamble group over preambles of the second preamble group as taught by Zhao et al… The suggestion/motivation to do so would allow (“for a more flexible ordering of random access responses in a contention based random access procedure and in particular enables differentiation of the wireless devices. The method thereby enables e.g. differentiating and prioritizing of wireless devices in a handover situation over other wireless device. Reduced handover drop rates are achieved and thereby also increased user satisfaction” [ Pg. 3 Lines 12-17 ] following up with, “Within each group (i.e., CFRA, CBRA group B, CBRA group A), preambles are sorted based on received signal strength By using the above, it is possible to prioritize between the wireless devices” [ Pg. 10 Lines 25-27 ] following up with, “a new way of handling CBRA preamble group A and group B enabling prioritized CBRA for e.g. HO wireless devices. An advantage of the present teachings is thus that HO wireless devices can be prioritized within the CBRA. As HO drop rate is one of the most important parameters for operators of communication networks, this is a most welcome aspect” [ Pg. 17 Lines 27-31 ]). 12. Regarding claim 33 , A method performed by a radio network node for handling communication in a wireless communications network, the method comprising: configuring a user equipment, UE, with a configuration for a physical random access channel, PRACH, transmission, wherein the configuration comprises one or more groups of preambles, wherein each group of preambles comprises respective one or more conditions, associated with the group, that need to be fulfilled to be selected, Park et al. teaches, (“In an example, a base station may transmit (e.g., unicast, multicast, or broadcast), to a UE , a RACH configuration 1210 via one or more beams . The RACH configuration 1210 may comprise one or more parameters indicating at least one of following: available set of PRACH resources for a transmission of a random access preamble , initial preamble power (e.g., random access preamble initial received target power), an RSRP threshold for a selection of a SS block and corresponding PRACH resource , a power-ramping factor (e.g., random access preamble power ramping step), random access preamble index, a maximum number of preamble transmission, preamble group A and group B , a threshold (e.g., message size) to determine the groups of random access preambles , a set of one or more random access preambles for system information request and corresponding PRACH resource(s) , if any, a set of one or more random access preambles for beam failure recovery request and corresponding PRACH resource(s), if any, a time window to monitor RA response(s), a time window to monitorresponse(s) on beam failure recovery request, and/or a contention resolution timer” [ 00139 ]). The base station transmitting to a UE, RACH configuration via one or more beams teaches a wireless communication network. The RACH configuration comprises PRACH resources teaching PRACH transmission. The RACH configuration further comprises maximum number of preamble transmission, preamble group A and group B, a threshold to determine groups of preambles teaching the configuration comprises one or more groups of preambles, wherein each group of preambles comprises respective one or more conditions, associated with the group, that need to be fulfilled to be selected. Although Park et al. teaches a method performed by a radio network node for handling communication in a wireless communications network, the method comprising: configuring a user equipment, UE, with a configuration for a physical random access channel, PRACH, transmission, wherein the configuration comprises one or more groups of preambles, wherein each group of preambles comprises respective one or more conditions, associated with the group, that need to be fulfilled to be selected, Park et al. does not explicitly teach wherein the configuration comprises a priority rule defining an order of selection of the one or more groups of preambles, and the one or more conditions comprises a level of signal strength and the priority rule comprises number of conditions of respective group of preambles. In the same field of endeavor of including wherein the configuration comprises a priority rule defining an order of selection of the one or more groups of preambles, Zhao et al. teaches, (“the wireless device fulfills the criteria to select a preamble from the first preamble group , wherein the threshold values sent on the dedicated signaling differ from the broadcast threshold values; and prioritize preambles of the first preamble group over preambles of the second preamble group .” [ Pg. 3 Lines 28-31 ]). The wireless device prioritizes preambles of the first preamble group over the second preamble group, teaching a priority rule defining an order of selection of the one or more groups of preambles. In further, the one or more conditions comprises a level of signal strength and the priority rule comprises number of conditions of respective group of preambles, Zhao et al. teaches, (“ The method 10 comprises broadcasting 11 one or more threshold values enabling the wireless devices 4, 5 to determine fulfillment of one or more criteria fl, f2 for selecting a contention based random access preamble either from a first preamble group or from a second preamble group for use in a contention based random access procedure” [ Pg. 11 Lines 12-15 ]). The one or more threshold values to determine fulfillment of one or more criteria for selecting a preamble teaches one or more conditions comprises a level of signal strength. Following up with, (“The method 10 further comprises prioritizing 13 preambles of the first preamble group over preambles of the second preamble group ” [ Pg. 11 Lines 27-28 ]). Prioritizing 13 preambles of the first preamble group over the second preamble group teaches the priority rule comprises number of conditions of respective group of preambles. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Park et al. to include prioritize preambles of the first preamble group over preambles of the second preamble group and broadcasting one or more threshold values as taught by Zhao et al… The suggestion/motivation to do so would allow (“for a more flexible ordering of random access responses in a contention based random access procedure and in particular enables differentiation of the wireless devices. The method thereby enables e.g. differentiating and prioritizing of wireless devices in a handover situation over other wireless device. Reduced handover drop rates are achieved and thereby also increased user satisfaction” [ Pg. 3 Lines 12-17 ] following up with, “Within each group (i.e., CFRA, CBRA group B, CBRA group A), preambles are sorted based on received signal strength By using the above, it is possible to prioritize between the wireless devices” [ Pg. 10 Lines 25-27 ] following up with, “a new way of handling CBRA preamble group A and group B enabling prioritized CBRA for e.g. HO wireless devices. An advantage of the present teachings is thus that HO wireless devices can be prioritized within the CBRA. As HO drop rate is one of the most important parameters for operators of communication networks, this is a most welcome aspect” [ Pg. 17 Lines 27-31 ]). 13. Regarding claim 34 , the method according to claim 33, further comprising receiving a physical random access channel, PRACH, transmission using a determined first preamble out of a group of the one or more groups of preambles, Park et al. teaches, (“A UE may transmit, to a base station, a selected random access preamble via a selected PRACH occasions.” [ 00143 ]). Transmitting a preamble via PRACH occasion teaches receiving a PRACH transmission using a determined first preamble out of a group of one or more groups of preambles. 14. Regarding claim 35, the method according to claim 33, wherein respective group of the one or more groups further indicates one or more features associated with the respective group, Park et al. teaches, (“If a base station semi-statistically configures a UE with an association between random access preambles and SS blocks, the UE may select a random access preamble index randomly with equal probability from one or more random access preambles associated with a selected SS block and a selected group ” [ 00140 ]). The UE may select a random access preamble index from one or more random access preambles associated with a selected SS block and a selected group teaching further indicates one or more features associated with the respective group. Following up with, ( “For a contention based random access procedure, a UE may select a SS block with a RSRP above the RSRP threshold. If random access preambles group B exists, a UE may select one or more random access preambles from a group A or a group B depending on a potential Msg3 1240 size” [ 00140 ] ). Preambles from group A or group B verifies one or more groups. The method comprises a base station (e.g. radio network node) that configures a UE with association between preambles and SS blocks. 15. Regarding claim 36, preambles in each group, Park et al. teaches, (“For a contention based random access procedure, a UE may select a SS RSRP above the RSRP threshold. If random access preambles group B exists. a UE may select one or more random access preambles from a group A or a group B depending on a Msg3 1240 size . If a random access preambles group B does not exist, a UE may select the one or more random access preambles from a group A ” [ 00140 ]). Although Park et al. teaches preambles in each group Park et al. does not explicitly teach the method according to claim 27, wherein the priority rule is: based on a configured priority index; based on amount of preambles in each group; based on a metric regarding performance; based on number of conditions; based on feature of the group; setting different levels of signal strength for different features; and/or based on priority of the UE. In the same field of endeavor of including the method according to claim 27, wherein the priority rule is: based on a configured priority index; based on amount of preambles in each group; based on a metric regarding performance; based on number of conditions; based on feature of the group; setting different levels of signal strength for different features; and/or based on priority of the UE, Zhao et al. teaches, (“…the wireless device fulfills the criteria to select a preamble from the first preamble group , wherein the threshold values sent on the dedicated signaling differ from the broadcast threshold values ; and prioritize preambles of the first preamble group over preambles of the second preamble group .” [ Pg. 3 Lines 28-31 ]). The wireless device (e.g. UE) fulfills the criteria to select a preamble teaching a priority rule. The threshold values sent on the dedicated signaling teaches the limitation based on a metric regarding performance; and based on number of conditions. The wireless device (e.g. UE) prioritize the first preamble group teaches the limitation the priority rule is based on priority of the UE. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Park et al. to include criteria to select a preamble from the first preamble group, threshold values sent on the dedicated signaling, and prioritize preambles of the first preamble group over preambles of the second preamble group as taught by Zhao et al… The suggestion/motivation to do so would allow (“for a more flexible ordering of random access responses in a contention based random access procedure and in particular enables differentiation of the wireless devices. The method thereby enables e.g. differentiating and prioritizing of wireless devices in a handover situation over other wireless device. Reduced handover drop rates are achieved and thereby also increased user satisfaction” [ Pg. 3 Lines 12-17 ] following up with, “Within each group (i.e., CFRA, CBRA group B, CBRA group A), preambles are sorted based on received signal strength By using the above, it is possible to prioritize between the wireless devices” [ Pg. 10 Lines 25-27 ] following up with, “a new way of handling CBRA preamble group A and group B enabling prioritized CBRA for e.g. HO wireless devices. An advantage of the present teachings is thus that HO wireless devices can be prioritized within the CBRA. As HO drop rate is one of the most important parameters for operators of communication networks, this is a most welcome aspect” [ Pg. 17 Lines 27-31 ]). 16. Regarding claim 37, a computer program product comprising a non-transitory computer readable storage medium storing instructions, which, when executed on at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to carry out the method according to claim 27, as performed by the radio network node and UE, respectively, Park et al. teaches, (“FIG. 3 is a block diagram of base stations (base station 1, 120A, and base station 2, 120B) and a wireless device 110. A wireless device may be called an UE . A base station may be called a NB, eNB, gNB, and/or ng-eNB. In an example, a wireless device and/or a base station may act as a relay node” [ 0056 ]). A wireless device is a UE and a base station is a radio network node. Following up with, (“The wireless device 110 may comprise at least one communication interface 310 (e.g. a wireless modem, an antenna, and/or the like), at least one processor 314, and at least one set of program code instructions 316 stored in non-transitory memory 315 and executable by the at least one processor 314 ” [ 0069 ]). Following up with, (“The base station 1, 120A, may comprise at least one communication interface 320A (e.g. a wireless modem, an antenna, a wired modem, and/or the like), at least one processor 321A, and at least one set of program code instructions 323A stored in non-transitory memory 322A and executable by the at least one processor 321A . The base station 2, 120B, may comprise at least one communication interface 320B, at least one processor 321B, and at least one set of program code instructions 323B stored in non-transitory memory 322B and executable by the at least one processor 321B” [ 0056 ]) . 17. Regarding claim 38 , is rejected the same as claim 27. 18. Regarding claim 39 , is rejected the same as claim 28. 19. Regarding claim 40 , is rejected the same as claim 29. 20. Regarding claim 41 , is rejected the same as claim 30. 21. Regarding claim 42 , is rejected the same as claim 31. 22. Regarding claim 43 , is rejected the same as claim 32. 23. Regarding claim 44 , is rejected the same as claim 33. 24. Regarding claim 45 , is rejected the same as claim 34. 25. Regarding claim 46 , is rejected the same as claim 35. 26. Regarding claim 47 , is rejected the same as claim 36 . 07-21-aia AIA 27. Claim (s) 30 and 41 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. ( WO 2020/198632 A1 ) in view of Zhao et al. ( WO 2015016754 A1 ) in further view of Li et al. ( US 20220417999 A1 ) . 28. Regarding claim 30, the method according to claim 29, wherein the group of preambles is selected further based on a capability of the UE, Park et al. teaches, (“If random access preambles group B exists. a UE may select one or more random access preambles from a group A or a group B depending on a Msg3 1240 size” [ 00140 ]). The UE selects preamble from group A or group B teaches group of preambles is selected. Although Park et al. in view of Zhao et al. teaches group of preambles is selected , Park et al. in view of Zhao et al. does not explicitly teach the group of preambles is selected further based on a capability of the UE. In the same field of endeavor of including wherein the group of preambles is selected further based on a capability of the UE, Li et al. teaches, (“The UE may identify a first set of random access channel (RACH) opportunities (ROs) over which to transmit a preamble associated with a RACH procedure; selecting a first preamble sequence group from among a plurality of preamble sequence groups associated with the identified first set of ROs based on a downlink receive capability of the UE ”). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Park et al. in view of Zhao et al. to include selecting a first preamble sequence group from among a plurality of preamble sequence groups associated with the identified first set of ROs based on a downlink receive capability of the UE as taught by Li et al… The suggestion/motivation to do so would allow (“a selection that is based on a relationship between the one or more signal reception quality measurements and at least one signal reception quality measurement threshold” [ 0103 ]). 29. Regarding claim 41 , is rejected the same as claim 30 . Conclusion 07-96 AIA 30. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. 31. The relevance of this prior art, “ Non-blind Scheduling of a Physical Downlink Control Channel (PDCCH) Control Channel Element (CCE) Aggregation Level (AL) For Common Search Space (CSS) ” Document ID US 12004231 B1; The aspect of the present technology helps support a non-blind scheduling of a PDCCH CCE AL for a CSS. The method comprises of broadcasting an assign PRACH preamble group for the device to schedule PDCCH CCE AL. The method includes determining the radio frequency condition to determine a PRACH preamble group for the device for scheduling. 32. The relevance of this prior art, “ TRANSMISSION AND RECEPTION OF POWER SAVING COMMAND ” Document ID CA 3134681 A1; The invention focuses on improving network coverage / efficiency of a wireless network. The method comprises transmitting/receiving packets of an MCG bearer via one or more cells and a PRACH resource for a transmission of a random-access preamble . 07-96 AIA 33. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892 form. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAUL THANH TRAN whose telephone number is (571)272-9841. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri Flex 8:00am-5:00pm . Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAUL THANH TRAN whose telephone number is (571)272-9841. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri Flex 8:00am-5:00pm. 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, Gary Mui can be reached at 571-270-1420. 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. /PAUL THANH TRAN/Examiner, Art Unit 2465 April 28, 2026 /GARY MUI/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2465 Application/Control Number: 18/700,005 Page 2 Art Unit: 2465 Application/Control Number: 18/700,005 Page 3 Art Unit: 2465 Application/Control Number: 18/700,005 Page 4 Art Unit: 2465 Application/Control Number: 18/700,005 Page 5 Art Unit: 2465 Application/Control Number: 18/700,005 Page 6 Art Unit: 2465 Application/Control Number: 18/700,005 Page 7 Art Unit: 2465 Application/Control Number: 18/700,005 Page 8 Art Unit: 2465 Application/Control Number: 18/700,005 Page 9 Art Unit: 2465 Application/Control Number: 18/700,005 Page 10 Art Unit: 2465 Application/Control Number: 18/700,005 Page 11 Art Unit: 2465 Application/Control Number: 18/700,005 Page 12 Art Unit: 2465 Application/Control Number: 18/700,005 Page 13 Art Unit: 2465 Application/Control Number: 18/700,005 Page 14 Art Unit: 2465 Application/Control Number: 18/700,005 Page 15 Art Unit: 2465 Application/Control Number: 18/700,005 Page 16 Art Unit: 2465 Application/Control Number: 18/700,005 Page 17 Art Unit: 2465 Application/Control Number: 18/700,005 Page 18 Art Unit: 2465 Application/Control Number: 18/700,005 Page 19 Art Unit: 2465 Application/Control Number: 18/700,005 Page 20 Art Unit: 2465
Prosecution Insights