DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to the Application filed on 7 June 2024.
Claims 1-17, 23 and 29-30 are presented for examination.
Claims 1-2, 6-7, 10-11, 15-16, 23 and 29-30 are amended.
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 14 March 2025. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: Determining A Threshold In Contention-Free Random Access (CFRA)
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because of undue length. The abstract is currently 164 words, however per the MPEP, the abstract in an application filed under 35 U.S.C. 111 may not exceed 150 words in length. Correction is required. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
The Abstract contains phrases, “The present disclosure…” in lines 1 and 10-11. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
The Abstract should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “This disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “This disclosure describes,” etc.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 6, 16, 23 and 30 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 6 recites the limitation “being”. Please amend to remove “being”.
Claim 16, line 11 recites the limitation “the first version the second version. This appears to be a typo and the word “or” is missing.
Claim 23, lines 4-5 recites the limitation “the more than one CBRA configuration”. In Claim 1 there is not “more than one CBRA configuration”. For clarity and consistency, it is suggested to revise to “more than one CBRA configuration”.
Claim 30, line 7 recites "... the method according to claim 16." It is suggested to write out the method of claim 16 instead of writing, "… the method according to claim 1".
Appropriate correction is required.
Dependent claim 17 is also rejected since they are dependent upon the rejected claims set forth above.
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.
Claims 1-2, 6-7, 15-17, 23 and 29 are 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 1, line 7 recites the pronoun “that”. It is unclear which components represent “that”. Please amend and clarify what “that” is. Please apply to claims 16 and 29 as well.
Claim 1, lines 13-14 recites the limitation “an RSRP threshold”. It is unclear whether “an RSRP threshold” is the same as “an RSRP threshold” in claim 1, lines 7-8. Please amend and clarify what “that” is. Please apply to claims 16 and 29 as well.
Claim 2, line 4 recites the limitation “an RSRP threshold”. It is unclear whether “an RSRP threshold” is the same as “an RSRP threshold” in claim 1, lines 7-8.
Claim 6, line 2 recites the limitation “a CBRA configuration”. It is unclear whether “a CBRA configuration” is the same as “a CBRA configuration” in claim 1, line 14.
Claim 6, line 3 recites the limitation “a CBRA configuration”. It is unclear whether “a CBRA configuration” is the same as “a CBRA configuration” in claim 1, line 14.
Claim 7, line 3 recites the limitation “a CBRA configuration”. It is unclear whether “a CBRA configuration” is the same as “a CBRA configuration” in claim 1, line 14.
Claim 15, line 2 recites the limitation “a CFRA configuration”. It is unclear whether “a CFRA configuration” is the same as “a CFRA configuration” in claim 1, line 8-9.
Claim 16, lines 4-5 recites the limitation “a CBRA configuration”. It is unclear whether “a CBRA configuration” is the same as “a CBRA configuration” in claim 16, lines 4-5.
Claim 16, lines 5-6 recites the limitation “a CBRA configuration”. It is unclear whether “a CBRA configuration” is the same as “a CBRA configuration” in claim 16, line 3.
Dependent claims 17, 23 and 30 are also rejected since they are dependent upon the rejected claims set forth above.
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) 1-2 and 29-30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZTE et al (“Resource Configuration for 2-step CFRA”), hereinafter ZTE NPL, in view of Nagaraja et al (US 2018/0324653 A1), hereinafter Nagaraja.
Regarding Claim 1, ZTE NPL discloses a method for determining a threshold in contention-free random access (CFRA), performed by a user equipment (UE), the method comprising:
in response to the UE triggering the CFRA (see Section 2.1 Configuration of Contention-free Preamble Resource in 2-step CFRA and Proposal 2; in response to the UE triggering the CFRA/triggering during 2-step or 4-step RACH CFRA and CBRA), and determining that a reference signal received power (RSRP) threshold is not configured in a CFRA configuration, determining a target version (see Section 2.1 Configuration of Contention-free Preamble Resource in 2-step CFRA and Proposal 2; and determining that a reference signal received power (RSRP) threshold/rsrp-ThresholdCSI-RS is not configured in a CFRA configuration/(IE is absent for 2-step CFRA, then the configuration for 2-step CBRA will be reused for 2-step CFRA), determining a target version/rsrp-Threshold configured for 2-step CBRA); and
determining an RSRP threshold in CFRA according to an RSRP threshold in a contention-based random access (CBRA) configuration corresponding to the target version (see Section 2.1 Configuration of Contention-free Preamble Resource in 2-step CFRA and Proposals 1 and 2; determining an RSRP threshold/rsrp-ThresholdCSI-RS in CFRA/CFRA according to an RSRP threshold/rsrp-ThresholdCSI-RS in a contention-based random access (CBRA) configuration/(2-step CBRA) corresponding to the target version/rsrp-Threshold configured for 2-step CBRA).
Although ZTE NPL discloses determining that a reference signal received power (RSRP) threshold is not configured in a CFRA configuration as set forth above,
ZTE NPL does not disclose “the target version comprising at least one of a first version or a second version, wherein the first version is earlier than the second version”.
However, Nagaraja discloses a method for determining a threshold in contention-free random access (CFRA), performed by a user equipment (UE), the method comprising:
in response to the UE triggering the CFRA (see Figure 4, step 404 and paragraph 26; in response to the UE triggering/initiation the CFRA/CFRA), determining a target version (see Figure 4, step 402 and paragraph 74; determining a target version/Is resource CFRA or CBRA), the target version comprising at least one of a first version or a second version (see Figure 4, steps 403 and 404 and paragraphs 74; the target version comprising at least one of a first version/CBRA or a second version/CFRA), wherein the first version is earlier than the second version (see Figure 4, steps 403 and 404 and paragraphs 74; wherein the first version is earlier than the second version/the request using the CBRA at step 403 is earlier than the request using the CFRA in step 404).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include “the target version comprising at least one of a first version or a second version, wherein the first version is earlier than the second version” as taught by Nagaraja in the system of ZTE NPL to provide user equipment (UE) selection of contention-free random access (CFRA) and contention-based random access (CBRA) for handover processing.
Regarding Claim 2, ZTE NPL discloses the method, further comprising:
determining the RSRP threshold being configured in the CFRA configuration (see Section 2.1 Configuration of Contention-free Preamble Resource in 2-step CFRA and Proposals 1 and 2; determining the RSRP threshold/rsrp-ThresholdCSI-RS being configured in the CFRA configuration/2-step CFRA); and
determining the RSRP threshold in CFRA according to an RSRP threshold in the CFRA configuration (see Section 2.1 Configuration of Contention-free Preamble Resource in 2-step CFRA and Proposals 1 and 2; determining the RSRP threshold/rsrp-ThresholdCSI-RS in CFRA/CFRA according to an RSRP threshold/rsrp-ThresholdCSI-RS in the CFRA configuration/2-step CFRA).
Regarding Claim 29, ZTE NPL discloses a user equipment (UE) (see Section 2.2 Configuration of the associated PUSCH resource in 2-step CFRA; a user equipment (UE)/UE), comprising;
a processor (see Section 2.2 Configuration of the associated PUSCH resource in 2-step CFRA; a processor/UE contains a processor); and
a memory (see Section 2.2 Configuration of the associated PUSCH resource in 2-step CFRA; a memory/UE contains a memory), storing a computer program executable by the processor (see Section 2.2 Configuration of the associated PUSCH resource in 2-step CFRA; storing a computer program executable by the processor/UE stores a computer program executable by the processor);
wherein the processor (see Section 2.2 Configuration of the associated PUSCH resource in 2-step CFRA; wherein the processor/UE contains a processor) is configured to:
in response to the UE triggering the CFRA (see Section 2.1 Configuration of Contention-free Preamble Resource in 2-step CFRA and Proposal 2; in response to the UE triggering the CFRA/the triggering during 2-step or 4-step RACH CFRA and CBRA), and determining that a reference signal received power (RSRP) threshold is not configured in a CFRA configuration, determining a target version (see Section 2.1 Configuration of Contention-free Preamble Resource in 2-step CFRA and Proposal 2; and determining that a reference signal received power (RSRP) threshold/rsrp-ThresholdCSI-RS is not configured in a CFRA configuration/(IE is absent for 2-step CFRA, then the configuration for 2-step CBRA will be reused for 2-step CFRA), determining a target version/rsrp-Threshold configured for 2-step CBRA); and
determining an RSRP threshold in CFRA according to an RSRP threshold in a contention-based random access (CBRA) configuration corresponding to the target version (see Section 2.1 Configuration of Contention-free Preamble Resource in 2-step CFRA and Proposals 1 and 2; determining an RSRP threshold/rsrp-ThresholdCSI-RS in CFRA/CFRA according to an RSRP threshold/rsrp-ThresholdCSI-RS in a contention-based random access (CBRA) configuration/(2-step CBRA) corresponding to the target version/rsrp-Threshold configured for 2-step CBRA).
Although ZTE NPL discloses determining that a reference signal received power (RSRP) threshold is not configured in a CFRA configuration as set forth above,
ZTE NPL does not disclose “the target version comprising at least one of a first version or a second version, wherein the first version is earlier than the second version”.
However, Nagaraja discloses a user equipment (UE), comprising:
in response to the UE triggering the threshold in CFRA (see Figure 4, step 404 and paragraph 26; in response to the UE triggering/initiation the threshold/threshold CFRA/CFRA), determining a target version (see Figure 4, step 402 and paragraph 74; determining a target version/Is resource CFRA or CBRA), the target version comprising at least one of a first version or a second version (see Figure 4, steps 403 and 404 and paragraphs 74; the target version comprising at least one of a first version/CBRA or a second version/CFRA), wherein the first version is earlier than the second version (see Figure 4, steps 403 and 404 and paragraphs 74; wherein the first version is earlier than the second version/the request using the CBRA at step 403 is earlier than the request using the CFRA in step 404).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include “the target version comprising at least one of a first version or a second version, wherein the first version is earlier than the second version” as taught by Nagaraja in the system of ZTE NPL to provide user equipment (UE) selection of contention-free random access (CFRA) and contention-based random access (CBRA) for handover processing.
Regarding Claim 30, ZTE NPL discloses a network side device (see Section 2.1 Configuration of Contention-free Preamble Resource in 2-step CFRA and Proposal 2; a network side device/base station), comprising;
a processor (see Section 2.1 Configuration of Contention-free Preamble Resource in 2-step CFRA and Proposal 2; a processor/base station contains a processor); and
a memory (see Section 2.1 Configuration of Contention-free Preamble Resource in 2-step CFRA and Proposal 2; a memory/base station contains a memory), wherein storing a computer program executable by the processor (see Section 2.1 Configuration of Contention-free Preamble Resource in 2-step CFRA and Proposal 2; wherein storing a computer program executable by the processor/base station stores a computer program executable by the processor);
wherein the processor (see Section 2.1 Configuration of Contention-free Preamble Resource in 2-step CFRA and Proposal 2; wherein the processor/base station contains a processor) is configured to perform the method according to claim 16 (as set forth in claim 16).
Claim(s) 3, 5 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZTE NPL in view of Nagaraja and further in view of Uchino et al (US 2023/0042828 A1), hereinafter Uchino.
Regarding Claim 3, Although the combination of ZTE NPL and Nagaraja discloses the method as set forth above,
The combination of ZTE NPL and Nagaraja does not explicitly disclose “wherein the first version comprises at least one version, and one version in the first version corresponds to at least one CBRA configuration” or “the second version comprises at least one version, and one version in the second version corresponds to at least one CBRA configuration”.
However, Uchino discloses the method,
wherein the first version comprises at least one version (see Figure 6 and paragraph 119; wherein the first version comprises at least one version/2-step CBRA), and one version in the first version corresponds to at least one CBRA configuration (see Figure 6 and paragraph 119; and one version in the first version corresponds to at least one CBRA configuration/2-step contention based random access configuration);
the second version comprises at least one version (see Figure 6 and paragraph 119; wherein the first version comprises at least one version/4-step CBRA), and one version in the second version corresponds to at least one CBRA configuration (see Figure 6 and paragraph 119; and one version in the second version corresponds to at least one CBRA configuration/2-step contention based random access configuration).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include “wherein the first version comprises at least one version, and one version in the first version corresponds to at least one CBRA configuration” or “the second version comprises at least one version, and one version in the second version corresponds to at least one CBRA configuration” as taught by Uchino in the combined system of ZTE NPL and Nagaraja to provide techniques for secondary cell (SCell) establishment for uplink control information (UCI) (see page 1, paragraph 1 of Uchino).
Regarding Claim 5, Although the combination of ZTE NPL and Nagaraja discloses the CBRA configuration as set forth above,
The combination of ZTE NPL and Nagaraja does not explicitly disclose “wherein the CBRA configuration comprises at least one of: a 2-step CBRA configuration; or a 4-step CBRA configuration”.
However, Uchino discloses the method, wherein the CBRA configuration comprises at least one of:
a 2-step CBRA configuration (see Figure 6 and paragraph 119; a 2-step CBRA configuration/2-step contention based random access configuration); or
a 4-step CBRA configuration (see Figure 6 and paragraph 119; a 2-step CBRA configuration/2-step contention based random access configuration).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include “wherein the CBRA configuration comprises at least one of: a 2-step CBRA configuration; or a 4-step CBRA configuration” as taught by Uchino in the combined system of ZTE NPL and Nagaraja to provide techniques for secondary cell (SCell) establishment for uplink control information (UCI) (see page 1, paragraph 1 of Uchino).
Regarding Claim 17, Although the combination of ZTE NPL and Nagaraja discloses the method as set forth above,
The combination of ZTE NPL and Nagaraja does not explicitly disclose “wherein the first version comprises at least one version, and one version in the first version corresponds to at least one CBRA configuration” or “the second version comprises at least one version, and one version in the second version corresponds to at least one CBRA configuration”.
However, Uchino discloses the method,
wherein the first version comprises at least one version (see Figure 6 and paragraph 119; wherein the first version comprises at least one version/2-step CBRA), and one version in the first version corresponds to at least one CBRA configuration (see Figure 6 and paragraph 119; and one version in the first version corresponds to at least one CBRA configuration/2-step contention based random access configuration);
the second version comprises at least one version (see Figure 6 and paragraph 119; wherein the first version comprises at least one version/4-step CBRA), and one version in the second version corresponds to at least one CBRA configuration (see Figure 6 and paragraph 119; and one version in the second version corresponds to at least one CBRA configuration/2-step contention based random access configuration).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include “wherein the first version comprises at least one version, and one version in the first version corresponds to at least one CBRA configuration” or “the second version comprises at least one version, and one version in the second version corresponds to at least one CBRA configuration” as taught by Uchino in the combined system of ZTE NPL and Nagaraja to provide techniques for secondary cell (SCell) establishment for uplink control information (UCI) (see page 1, paragraph 1 of Uchino).
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZTE NPL in view of Nagaraja and further in view of Kung et al (US 2020/0015236 A1), hereinafter Kung.
Regarding Claim 4, Although the combination of ZTE NPL and Nagaraja discloses the RSRP threshold as set forth above,
The combination of ZTE NPL and Nagaraja does not explicitly disclose “wherein the RSRP threshold comprises at least one of: a supplementary uplink (SUL) selection threshold; or a synchronization signal block (SSB) selection threshold”.
However, Kung discloses the method, wherein the RSRP threshold comprises at least one of:
a supplementary uplink (SUL) selection threshold (see paragraph 104; wherein the RSRP threshold/(RSRP threshold) comprises at least one of: a supplementary uplink (SUL) selection threshold/supplemental uplink (SUL)); or
a synchronization signal block (SSB) selection threshold (see paragraph 104; wherein the RSRP threshold/(RSRP threshold) comprises at least one of: a synchronization signal block (SSB) selection threshold/rsrp-ThresholdSSB).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include “the egress flexible port includes a transmit protocol conversion module that inspects the packet received from the first flexible port” as taught by Kung in the combined system of ZTE NPL and Nagaraja to provide a method and apparatus for performing Random Access resource selection in New Radio Access Technology-unlicensed (NR-U) (see page 1, paragraph 2 of Nagaraja).
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZTE NPL in view of Nagaraja and further in view of Agiwal et al (US 2021/0051708 A1), hereinafter Agiwal ‘708.
Regarding Claim 7, Although the combination of ZTE NPL and Nagaraja discloses the method as set forth above,
The combination of ZTE NPL and Nagaraja does not explicitly disclose “acquiring at least one of a CBRA configuration corresponding to the first version or a CBRA configuration corresponding to the second version through a system message”.
However, Agiwal ‘708 discloses the method, further comprising:
acquiring at least one of a CBRA configuration corresponding to the first version or a CBRA configuration corresponding to the second version through a system message (see Figure 2, step 210 and paragraphs 75, 81 and 86; acquiring/signaled at least one of a CBRA configuration/CBRA corresponding to the first version/(2 step CBRA) or a CBRA configuration/CBRA corresponding to the second version/(4 step CBRA) through a system message/RRC signalling message, e.g., RRC Reconfiguation).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include “acquiring at least one of a CBRA configuration corresponding to the first version or a CBRA configuration corresponding to the second version through a system message” as taught by Agiwal ‘708 in the combined system of ZTE NPL and Nagaraja to provide a system for determining preambles and random access channel (RACH) occasions for 2-step random access in wireless communication system (see page 1, paragraph 2 of Agiwal ‘708).
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZTE NPL in view of Nagaraja and further in view of Lei et al (US 2020/0383141 A1), hereinafter Lei.
Regarding Claim 8, Although the combination of ZTE NPL and Nagaraja discloses the method as set forth above,
The combination of ZTE NPL and Nagaraja does not explicitly disclose “wherein determining the target version comprises at least one of: determining the target version according to a UE capability”.
However, Lei discloses the method, further comprising:
wherein determining the target version comprises at least one of:
determining the target version according to a UE capability (see paragraph 23; determining the target version/(4-step random access procedure) according to a UE capability/UE capability).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include “wherein determining the target version comprises at least one of: determining the target version according to a UE capability” as taught by Lei in the combined system of ZTE NPL and Nagaraja to improve methods, systems, devices, and apparatuses that support beam association in random access procedures (see page 1, paragraph 5 of Lei).
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZTE NPL in view of Nagaraja and further in view of Lin et al (US 2019/0313264 A1), hereinafter Lin.
Regarding Claim 9, Although the combination of ZTE NPL and Nagaraja discloses the method as set forth above,
The combination of ZTE NPL and Nagaraja does not explicitly disclose “wherein determining the target version comprises at least one of: determining the first version as the target version” or “determining the second version as the target version” or “determining the first version and the second version as the target version”.
However, Lin discloses the method, wherein determining the target version comprises at least one of:
determining the first version as the target version (see paragraph 4; determining the first version as the target version/CBRA fallback);
determining the second version as the target version (see paragraph 4; determining the second version as the target version/CFRA).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include “wherein determining the target version comprises at least one of: determining the first version as the target version” or “determining the second version as the target version” as taught by Lin in the combined system of ZTE NPL and Nagaraja to provide support for beam failure recovery on secondary cell in mobile communications (see page 1, paragraph 2 of Lin).
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZTE NPL in view of Nagaraja and further in view of Jiang et al (EP 4 531 319 A1), hereinafter Jiang.
Regarding Claim 13, Although the combination of ZTE NPL and Nagaraja discloses the CFRA configuration as set forth above,
The combination of ZTE NPL and Nagaraja does not explicitly disclose “wherein the CFRA comprises at least one of: CFRA triggered according to a beam failure recovery (BFR)”.
However, Jiang discloses the method, wherein the CFRA comprises at least one of:
CFRA triggered according to a beam failure recovery (BFR) (see paragraphs 9, 25 and 29; wherein the CFRA/CFRA comprises at least one of: CFRA/CFRA triggered/triggered according to a beam failure recovery (BFR)/beam failure recovery).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include “wherein the CFRA comprises at least one of: CFRA triggered according to a beam failure recovery (BFR)” as taught by Jiang in the combined system of ZTE NPL and Nagaraja to provide terminal initiated contention-free random access (CFRA) multi-PRACH transmission and/or contention-based random access (CBRA) multi-PRACH transmission (see page 1, paragraph 2 of Jiang).
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZTE NPL in view of Nagaraja and further in view of Tsai et al (US 2021/0227587 A1), hereinafter Tsai.
Regarding Claim 14, Although the combination of ZTE NPL and Nagaraja discloses the CFRA as set forth above,
The combination of ZTE NPL and Nagaraja does not explicitly disclose “wherein a type of the CFRA comprises at least one of: 2-step CFRA or 4-step CFRA”.
However, Tsai discloses the method, wherein a type of the CFRA comprises at least one of:
2-step CFRA (see Figure 4 and paragraph 69-74; wherein a type/type of the CFRA/CFRA comprises at least one of: 2-step CFRA/2-step CFRA); or
4-step CFRA (see Figure 3 and paragraph 65-67; wherein a type/type of the CFRA/CFRA comprises at least one of: 4-step CFRA/4-step CFRA).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include “wherein a type of the CFRA comprises at least one of: 2-step CFRA or 4-step CFRA” as taught by Tsai in the combined system of ZTE NPL and Nagaraja to provide improvements in wireless communication for the next-generation wireless communication system (see page 1, paragraph 5 of Tsai).
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZTE NPL in view of Nagaraja and further in view of Agiwal et al (US 2021/0307060 A1), hereinafter Agiwal ‘060.
Regarding Claim 15, Although the combination of ZTE NPL and Nagaraja discloses a CFRA as set forth above,
The combination of ZTE NPL and Nagaraja does not explicitly disclose “acquiring a CFRA configuration sent by a network side device”.
However, Agiwal ‘060 discloses the method, further comprising:
acquiring a CFRA configuration sent by a network side device (see Figure 1A, step 105 and paragraphs 94 and 145-146; acquiring a CFRA configuration/(rach-ConfigDedicated IE) sent by a network side device/UE receives).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include “acquiring a CFRA configuration sent by a network side device” as taught by Agiwal ‘060 in the combined system of ZTE NPL and Nagaraja to provide a method for performing an RA procedure in a wireless communication system (see page 1, paragraph 2 of Agiwal ‘060).
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nagaraja in view of ZTE NPL.
Regarding Claim 16, Nagaraja discloses a method for determining a threshold in contention-free random access (CFRA), performed by a network side device, the method comprising:
sending a contention-based random access (CBRA) configuration to a user equipment (UE) (see Figure 4, step 400 and paragraph 72; sending/(UE receives) a contention-based random access (CBRA) configuration/(configuration for CBRA) to a user equipment (UE)/UE 115), the CBRA configuration comprising at least one of a CBRA configuration corresponding to a first version or a CBRA configuration corresponding to a second version (see Figure 4, steps 403 and 404 and paragraphs 74; the CBRA configuration/CBRA comprising at least one of a CBRA configuration/CBRA corresponding to a first version/(CBRA step 403) or a CBRA configuration corresponding to a second version/CFRA step 404), the first version being earlier than the second version (see Figure 4, steps 403 and 404 and paragraphs 74; the first version is earlier than the second version/the request using the CBRA at step 403 is earlier than the request using the CFRA in step 404);
determining the UE triggering the CFRA (see Figure 4, step 404 and paragraph 26; determining the UE triggering/initiation the CFRA/CFRA) and no reference signal received power (RSRP) threshold configured in a CFRA configuration; and
indicating a target version to the UE (see Figure 4, step 400 and paragraph 72; indicating/(receives signals) a target version to the UE/UE receives random access configuration for both CFRA and CBRA), the target version comprising at least one of the first version the second version (see Figure 4, steps 403 and 404 and paragraphs 74; the target version comprising at least one of the first version/CBRA and the second version/CFRA).
Although Nagaraja discloses a method for determining a threshold in contention-free random access (CFRA) as set forth above,
Nagaraja does not explicitly disclose “and no reference signal received power (RSRP) threshold configured in a CFRA configuration”.
However, ZTE NPL discloses a method for determining a threshold in contention-free random access (CFRA), performed by a network side device, the method comprising:
and no reference signal received power (RSRP) threshold configured in a CFRA configuration (see Section 2.1 Configuration of Contention-free Preamble Resource in 2-step CFRA and Proposal 2; and no reference signal received power (RSRP) threshold configured in a CFRA configuration/(IE is absent for 2-step CFRA, then the configuration for 2-step CBRA will be reused for 2-step CFRA).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include “and no reference signal received power (RSRP) threshold configured in a CFRA configuration” as taught by ZTE NPL in the system of Nagaraja to provide considerations on the configuration of CRA resource (see Section 1. Introduction, lines 3-4 of ZTE NPL).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6, 10-12 and 23 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Li et al (US 2022/0132349 A1) discloses Measuring nr reference signal receive power (rsrp) by over the air signals. Specifically, see paragraphs 213-216.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LATRESA A McCALLUM whose telephone number is (571)270-5385. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00am-4pm.
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, IAN N MOORE can be reached at 571-272-3085. 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.
/L.A.M/ Examiner, Art Unit 2469
/JACKIE ZUNIGA ABAD/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2469
Prosecution Insights