DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Claims 1, 5, 6, 8, 9, 13-17, 19, 20 and 23-28 are pending in this office action.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the amendment filed 5/26/26 have been considered but are moot in view of new grounds of rejection using the same reference.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "wherein re-initiating the random access comprises" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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.
Claims 1, 5, 6, 8, 9, 13-17, 19, 20 and 23-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Rastegardoost et al (US 2022/0210806 A1).
Regarding claims 1 and 23, Rastegardoost teaches a random access method, performed by a first type of terminal configured to carry terminal type indication information in a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) of a random access message MsgA, comprising:
sending the MsgA to a base station (Rastegardoost: Fig. 13C; [0216], MsgA transmitted);
receiving a random access response (RAR) sent by the base station (Rastegardoost: Fig. 13C; [0216]-[0217], MsgB received in RAR) and
determining that a preset configuration is not configured (Rastegardoost: [0251] identification of UE type (RedCap) done during Msg3 transmission, i.e. configuration that this is not the case is not configured) and sending a Msg3 according to an indication from the base station, in response to wherein the RAR being isa fallback random access response (fallback RAR) (Rastegardoost: Fig. 13C; [0225], MsgB comprising fallback RAR and UE transmits Msg3),
wherein the preset configuration comprises at least one of: an initial uplink bandwidth part (initial UL BWP) configured for the first type of terminal being different from an initial UL BWP configured for a second type of terminal; an initial UL BWP configured for the first type of terminal sharing a PRACH resource with an initial UL BWP configured for a second type of terminal; an initial UL BWP configured for a second type of terminal being greater than a maximum bandwidth supported by the first type of terminal;
a mechanism in which the first type of terminal carries the terminal type indication information in the Msg3 being disabled (Rastegardoost: [0251] identification of UE type (RedCap) allowed during Msg3 transmission, i.e. configuration that this is not the case is not configured);
or the first type of terminal transmitting the Msg3 based on an intra-slot frequency hopping scheme, and a frequency hopping amplitude in the intra-slot frequency hopping scheme being greater than a maximum bandwidth supported by the first type of terminal.
Regarding claims 13, 20 and 24, Rastegardoost teaches a random access method, performed by a base station, comprising:
receiving a MsgA sent by a first type of terminal (Rastegardoost: Fig. 13C; [0216], MsgA transmitted);
sending a random access response (RAR) to the terminal (Rastegardoost: Fig. 13C; [0216]-[0217], MsgB received in RAR), wherein the RAR is a fallback random access response (fallback RAR); and indicating to the terminal to send a Msg3 when the terminal is not configured with a preset configuration (Rastegardoost: [0251] identification of UE type (RedCap) done during Msg3 transmission, i.e. configuration that this is not the case is not configured) and receiving a Msg3 sent by the terminal (Rastegardoost: Fig. 13C; [0225], MsgB comprising fallback RAR and UE transmits Msg3),
wherein the preset configuration comprises at least one of: an initial uplink bandwidth part (initial UL BWP) configured for the first type of terminal being different from an initial UL BWP configured for a second type of terminal; an initial UL BWP configured for the first type of terminal sharing a PRACH resource with an initial UL BWP configured for a second type of terminal; an initial UL BWP configured for a second type of terminal being greater than a maximum bandwidth supported by the first type of terminal;
a mechanism in which the first type of terminal carries the terminal type indication information in the Msg3 being disabled (Rastegardoost: [0251] identification of UE type (RedCap) allowed during Msg3 transmission, i.e. configuration that this is not the case is not configured);
or the first type of terminal transmitting the Msg3 based on an intra-slot frequency hopping scheme, and a frequency hopping amplitude in the intra-slot frequency hopping scheme being greater than a maximum bandwidth supported by the first type of terminal.
Regarding claim 19, Rastegardoost teaches a random access apparatus, applicable to a first type of terminal, configured to carry terminal type indication information in a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) of a random access message MsgA, comprising: one or more processors configured to:
send the MsgA to a base station (Rastegardoost: Fig. 13C; [0216], MsgA transmitted);
receive a random access response (RAR) sent by the base station (Rastegardoost: Fig. 13C; [0216]-[0217], MsgB received in RAR); and
determining that a preset configuration is not configured (Rastegardoost: [0251] identification of UE type (RedCap) done during Msg3 transmission, i.e. configuration that this is not the case is not configured) and sending a Msg3 according to an indication from the base station, in response to wherein the RAR being isa fallback random access response (fallback RAR) (Rastegardoost: Fig. 13C; [0225], MsgB comprising fallback RAR and UE transmits Msg3),
wherein the preset configuration comprises at least one of: an initial uplink bandwidth part (initial UL BWP) configured for the first type of terminal being different from an initial UL BWP configured for a second type of terminal; an initial UL BWP configured for the first type of terminal sharing a PRACH resource with an initial UL BWP configured for a second type of terminal; an initial UL BWP configured for a second type of terminal being greater than a maximum bandwidth supported by the first type of terminal;
a mechanism in which the first type of terminal carries the terminal type indication information in the Msg3 being disabled (Rastegardoost: [0251] identification of UE type (RedCap) allowed during Msg3 transmission, i.e. configuration that this is not the case is not configured);
or the first type of terminal transmitting the Msg3 based on an intra-slot frequency hopping scheme, and a frequency hopping amplitude in the intra-slot frequency hopping scheme being greater than a maximum bandwidth supported by the first type of terminal.
Regarding claims 5 and 14, Rastegardoost teaches wherein before sending the Msg3 according to the indication from the base station, the method further comprises: determining whether to re-initiate the random access when the fallback RAR is received according to the indication from the base station (Rastegardoost: Fig. 13C; [0225], MsgB comprising fallback RAR and UE transmits Msg3).
Regarding claims 6, 15 and 25, Rastegardoost teaches determining not to re-initiate the random access when the fallback RAR is received, and sending the random access message Msg3 to the base station according to the fallback RAR (Rastegardoost: Fig. 13C; [0225], MsgB comprising fallback RAR and UE transmits Msg3).
Regarding claims 8, Rastegardoost teaches wherein the indication from the base station is implemented in the fallback RAR or broadcast information (Rastegardoost: Fig. 13C; [0225], MsgB comprising fallback RAR indicating the UE to transmit Msg3).
Regarding claims 27, Rastegardoost teaches determine that the terminal does not re-initiate the random access when the fallback RAR is received, and receive the Msg3 sent by the terminal according to the fallback RAR (Rastegardoost: Fig. 13C; [0225], MsgB comprising fallback RAR and UE transmits Msg3).
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 9, 16, 17, 26 and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rastegardoost et al (US 2022/0210806 A1) in view of Lee et al (US 2024/0340973 A1).
Regarding claims 9 and 26, Rastegardoost does not explicitly disclose wherein re-initiating the random access in response to the RAR being the fallback random access response (fallback RAR) comprises determining that a preset configuration is configured and re-initiating the random access.
Lee teaches wherein re-initiating the random access in response to the RAR being the fallback random access response (fallback RAR) comprises determining that a preset configuration is configured and re-initiating the random access (Lee: [0167], [0220] different types of UE with same UL BWP and performing RACH).
It would have been obvious to a person having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Rastegardoost wherein re-initiating the random access in response to the RAR being the fallback random access response (fallback RAR) comprises determining that a preset configuration is configured and re-initiating the random access as disclosed by Lee to provide a system of random access process (Lee: Abstract).
Regarding claims 16 and 28, Rastegardoost in view of Lee teaches determining that the terminal is configured with the preset configuration, and prohibiting the first type of terminal from carrying the terminal type indication information in a PUSCH of the MsgA (Lee: [0212] identification of type in MsgA not supported).
Regarding claim 17, Rastegardoost in view of Lee teaches wherein the preset configuration comprises at least one of: an initial UL BWP configured for the first type of terminal being different from an initial UL BWP configured for a second type of terminal; an initial UL BWP configured for the first type of terminal sharing a PRACH resource with an initial UL BWP configured for a second type of terminal; an initial UL BWP configured for a second type of terminal being greater than a maximum bandwidth supported by the first type of terminal;
a mechanism in which the first type of terminal carries the terminal type indication information in the Msg3 being disabled (Rastegardoost: [0251] identification of UE type (RedCap) allowed during Msg3 transmission, i.e. configuration that this is not the case is not configured);
or the first type of terminal transmitting the Msg3 based on an intra-slot frequency hopping scheme, and a frequency hopping amplitude in the intra-slot frequency hopping scheme being greater than a maximum bandwidth supported by the first type of terminal.
Conclusion
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 KODZOVI ACOLATSE whose telephone number is (571)270-1999. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 10 am to 6pm.
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, Avellino Joseph can be reached at (571) 272-3905. 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.
/KODZOVI ACOLATSE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2478
Prosecution Insights