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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 06-24-2026 has been entered and considered.
Claims 1-5, and 11-25 are pending in the current application.
Claims 6-10 are canceled.
Claims 1-5, and 11-25 remain rejected as discussed below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-3, 5, 11-17, 19, 21, and 23-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jang et al (US 2023/0087223 Continuation of PCT/KR2021/001884) in view of Ibrahim et al (US 2022/0377689). Hereinafter referred to as Jang and Ibrahim.
Regarding claims 1, 11, 15, and 25. Jang discloses a method performed by a user equipment (UE), the method comprising receiving information indicating a plurality of timing advance groups (TAG) s in a serving cell configured with a plurality of indexes, wherein each control resource set (CORESET) in the serving cell is associated with a corresponding index of the plurality of indexes (see at least paragraphs [0385]-[0386] and figure 11); receiving a timing advance (TA) command associated with a TAG of the plurality of TAGs, wherein the TAG is associated with an index of the plurality of indexes (see at least figure 11 and paragraphs [0262]-[0263]); and transmitting an uplink transmission associated with the index in the serving cell according to the TA command (see at least paragraphs [0375], [0382] and [0386]).
Jang discloses all the limitations of the claimed invention with the exception that each TAG of the plurality of TAGs is associated with the corresponding index of the plurality of indexes and transmitting is based on association between the TAG and the index. However, Ibrahim, from the same field of endeavor, teaches each TAG of the plurality of TAGs is associated with the corresponding index of the plurality of indexes and transmitting is based on association between the TAG and the index (see at least paragraphs [0112]-[0113], [0137], and [0168]). Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the invention to employ the teaching of Ibrahim, as indicated into the communication method of Jang for the purpose of improving resource utilization)
Regarding claims 2, 12 and 16. Jang in view of Ibrahim discloses a method wherein the TA command is included in a message as one of: a TA command media access control (MAC) control element (CE); an absolute TA command MAC CE; a MAC random access response (RAR); or a fallback RAR (see at least figure 11A, paragraphs [0021], [0262]-[0263]).
Regarding claims 3, 13, and 17. Jang in view of Ibrahim discloses a method wherein the TAG is associated with the index according to a predefined rule or a radio resource control (RRC) signaling (see at least figure 17 and paragraphs [0271], [0321] and [0382]).
Regarding claims 5, 14 and 19, Jang in view of Ibrahim discloses a method wherein, if the TA command is included in a message as one of: an absolute TA command media access control (MAC) control element (CE); a MAC random access response (RAR); or a fallback RAR; then a bit in the message indicates that the TA command is associated with the TAG of the plurality of TAGs (see at least figure 11A and paragraphs [0263]).
Regarding claim 21. Jang in view of Ibrahim discloses a UE wherein if the TA command is included in a message as one of: an absolute TA command media access control (MAC) control element (CE); a MAC random access response (RAR); or a fallback RAR; then the TA command is associated with the TAG according to a physical random access channel (PRACH) resource to which the message is in response, wherein the PRACH resource is associated with the TAG (see at least figure 11A and paragraphs [0103], [0261], [0386]).
Regarding claim 23. Jang in view of Ibrahim discloses a UE wherein the PRACH resource is associated with the TAG by grouping PRACH resources in the serving cell into a plurality of PRACH resource sets, and each of the plurality of TAGs and each of the plurality of PRACH resource sets are one to one associated (see at least paragraphs [0103] and [0386]).
Regarding claim 24. Jang in view of Ibrahim discloses a UE wherein the PRACH resource is associated with a synchronization signal (SS) physical broadcast channel (PBCH) block (SSB), wherein the SSB is associated with the TAG by grouping SSBs in the serving cell into a plurality of SSB sets, and each of the plurality of TAGs and each of the plurality of SSB sets are one to one associated (see at least paragraphs [0103] and [0386]).
Claims 4, 18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jang in view of Ibrahim and further in view of Yuan et al (US 2023/0189180). Hereinafter referred to as Yuan.
Regarding claims 4 and 18. Jang in view of Ibrahim discloses all the limitations of the claimed invention with the exception that the uplink transmission is associated with the index in the serving cell according to downlink control information (DCI), or radio resource control (RRC) signaling. However, Yuan, from the same field of endeavor, teaches the uplink transmission is associated with the index in the serving cell according to downlink control information (DCI), or radio resource control (RRC) signaling (see at least paragraph [0080], and [0082]). Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the invention to employ the teaching of Yuan, as indicated, into the communication method of Jang in view of Ibrahim for the purpose of improving network communication.
Regarding claim 20, Jang in view of Ibrahim discloses a UE wherein if the TA command is included in a message as one of: an absolute TA command media access control (MAC) control element (CE); a MAC random access response (RAR); or a fallback RAR (see at least figure 11A and paragraphs [0263]);
Jang in view of Ibrahim discloses all the limitations of the claimed invention with the exception that the TA command is associated with the TAG according to a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) carrying the message, wherein the PDSCH is associated with the index associated with the TAG. However, Yuan, from the same field of endeavor, teaches the TA command is associated with the TAG according to a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) carrying the message, wherein the PDSCH is associated with the index associated with the TAG (see at least paragraphs [0079]). Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the invention to employ the teaching of Yuan, as indicated, into the communication method of Jang in view of Ibrahim (see at least paragraph [0105]) for the purpose of improving network communication.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-5, and 11-25 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO_892.
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.
In the case of amending the claimed invention, Applicant is respectfully requested to indicate the portion(s) of the specification which dictate(s) the structure relied on for proper interpretation and also to verify and ascertain the metes and bounds of the claimed invention.
When responding to this office action, applicants are advised to clearly point out the patentable novelty which they think the claims present in view of the state of the art disclosed by the references cited or the objections made. Applicants must also show how the amendments avoid such references or objections. See 37C.F.R 1.111(c). In addition, applicants are advised to provide the examiner with the line numbers and pages numbers in the application and/or references cited to assist examiner in locating the appropriate paragraphs.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOUNIR MOUTAOUAKIL whose telephone number is (571)270-1416. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10AM-4PM EST.
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, Ayaz Sheikh can be reached at 571-272-3795. 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.
/MOUNIR MOUTAOUAKIL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2476
Prosecution Insights