CTNF 18/723,156 CTNF 86380 DETAILED ACTION This communication is response to the application filed 06/21/2024. Claims 1, 2, 4-21 are pending and presented for examination. A preliminary amendment submitted on 06/27/2024 is acknowledged. Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 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 09/24/2024 and 10/27/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-02 AIA 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. 07-34-01 Claims 1, 2, and 4-21 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. Regarding claims 1, 2, 4-8, 10-12, and 15-21 , the term “FD functionality” and “non-FD functionality” are unclear, as these terms are vague and not clearly defined in the claim. It is unclear whether the “FD functionality” refers to a time-domain condition (e.g., DL and UL overlapping. Moreover, it is unclear what differentiates “FD functionality” and “non-FD functionality”. Thus, the subject-matter of the claims is unclear and renders the claims indefinite. Regarding claims 2 and 18 , the feature “a number of ROs and a start of a first RO within the UL bandwidth part” is unclear as the phrase “a start of a first RO” is vague and not defined. It is unclear if the phrase refers to time (e.g., symbol, slot), or a frequency position. Regarding claims 11-14 and 18 , the term “separate” as recited in the claim is unclear, since this term is no defined. It is unclear whether this term refers to separate in frequency, time or in configuration or usage type. Thus, the term is unclear and renders the claim indefinite. Regarding claims 1, 17, and 21 , the feature “at least an uplink (UL) bandwidth part” suggests that only the UL bandwidth part may be configured or available, whereas the feature “the UL bandwidth part and a downlink (DL) bandwidth part are available simultaneously” implies that both UL and DL bandwidth parts are configured and available at the same time. These claim features creates an inconsistency in the claims, as it is unclear whether both UL and DL bandwidth parts are required to be present or only the UL bandwidth part may be configured. The feature “determine a set of valid Random Access Channel (RACH) occasions (ROs) within the UL bandwidth part for Full Duplex (FD) functionality” is unclear and vague, since it is not defined how valid ROs are determined. Thus, the claim feature is unclear and renders the claim indefinite. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. 07-15-aia AIA Claim(s) 1, 11, 12, 14-17, 20, and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by MODERATOR (QUALCOMM INC): “FL summary #5 on duplex operation for RedCap”, 3GPP DRAFT; R1-2108478 (hereafter 3GPP), see IDS dated 10/27/2025 . Regarding claim 1 , 3GPP discloses a user equipment (UE) for wireless communication, comprising: at least one memory; and at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory and configured to cause the UE to: receive a bandwidth part configuration for at least an uplink (UL) bandwidth part from a base station (BS); and determine a set of valid Random Access Channel (RACH) Occasions (ROs) within the UL bandwidth part for Full Duplex (FD) functionality (see Qualcomm, page 32, section 3.1, FL4: Regarding Qualcomm’s comment …. Configuration of PRACH resources is per UL BWP and all the PRACH resources will be within the BWP bandwidth based on the following text in 38.211, section 6.3.3.2. Therefore … the valid ROs are in its initial UL BWP … FL4 High Priority Proposal 3.1-1: … all ROs are valid (same as FD-FDD) … overlapping with valid RO, … Qualcomm …. ZTE … valid RO definition same with FD-FDD), wherein the UL bandwidth part and a downlink (DL) bandwidth part are available simultaneously in time domain in a same carrier (see 3GPP, page 12 par a: ZTE … Specifically … the FD-FDD UEs can do UL transmission and DL reception simultaneously). For UEs to perform UL and DL transmission in FD-FDD, the base station will configure relevant DL and UL resources for transmission and reception simultaneously in time domain in the same carrier. Regarding claim 11 , 3GPP discloses the UE of Claim 1, wherein the set of valid ROs includes at least one of: at least one separate valid RO, or at least one shared valid RO for both FD functionality and non-FD functionality (see 3GPP, pages 27-29, section 3.1). Regarding claim 12 , 3GPP discloses the UE of Claim 11, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to cause the UE to receive at least one Synchronization Signal Block (SSB associated with the at least one separate valid RO which is separated from at least one SSB associated with at least one RO for non- FD functionality (see 3GPP, pages 27-29, section 3.1). Regarding claim 14 , 3GPP discloses the UE of Claim 11, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to cause the UE to receive a third configuration setting a set of preambles in the at least one separate valid RO for a 4- step Random Access (RA) procedure to be available for a 2-step RA procedure (see 3GPP, section 2.2, pages 18-19, 27, and 34). Regarding claim 15 , it is rejected for the same reasons as set forth in claim 1. Applicant is merely claiming the transmission side of the invention. Regarding claim 16 , 3GPP discloses the UE of claim 14, wherein for the 2-step RA procedure, the set of preambles are associated with a set of Physical Uplink Shared Channel (PUSCH) Resource Units (PRUs) configured for non-FD functionality, or associated with a set of Physical Uplink Shared Channel (PUSCH) Resource Units (PRUs) configured for non-FD functionality (see 3GPP, section 2.2, pages 18-19, 27, and 34). Regarding claim 17 , it is rejected for the same reasons as set forth in claim 1. Regarding claim 20 , it is rejected for the same reasons as set forth in claim 11. Regarding claim 21 , it is rejected for the same reasons as set forth in claim 1. Although phrased as a method claim, the claim is nevertheless simple repetitions of the subject matter of claim 1 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 1, 11, 15, 17, 20, and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2021/0329646 to Fakoorian et al. (hereafter Fakoorian) in view of US 2023/0269776 to ABEDINI et al. (hereafter Abedini) . Regarding claim 1 , Fakoorian discloses a user equipment (UE) for wireless communication, comprising: at least one memory; and at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory (see Fakoorian, ¶ 0006: The apparatus may include a processor, memory coupled with the processor, and instructions stored in the memory) and configured to cause the UE to: receive a bandwidth part configuration for at least an uplink (UL) bandwidth part from a base station (BS) (see Fakoorian, ¶ 0006: transmit an indication of a capability of the UE to operate in a full duplex mode on a single carrier in an unpaired radio frequency spectrum based on a first BWP configuration, receive an indication of a second BWP configuration for one or more slots of a set of multiple slots based on transmitting the indication of the capability of the UE; ¶ 0109: Based on receiving BWP configuration 215 and adjusting the associated uplink BWPs, downlink BWPs, or both, UE 115-a and base station 105-a may communicate according to the adjusting uplink BWPs and downlink BWPs; ¶ 0147: the UE 115 may receive the BWP configuration in an uplink DCI 735. A base station 105 may transmit the downlink DCI 720, indicating the BWP configuration. A base station 105 may also transmit the uplink DCI 735, indicating the BWP configuration); and the UL bandwidth part for Full Duplex (FD) functionality (see Fakoorian, ¶ 008: transmit an indication of a capability of the UE to operate in a full duplex mode on a single carrier in an unpaired radio frequency spectrum based on a first BWP configuration, receive an indication of a second BWP configuration for one or more slots of a set of multiple slots based on transmitting the indication of the capability of the UE; ¶ 0280: A method for wireless communications at a UE, comprising: transmitting an indication of a capability of the UE to operate in a full duplex mode on a single carrier in an unpaired radio frequency spectrum based at least in part on a first BWP configuration), wherein the UL bandwidth part and a downlink (DL) bandwidth part are available simultaneously in time domain in a same carrier (see Fakoorian, ¶ 0131: The UE 115 may monitor downlink BWP 505-a while concurrently or simultaneously transmitting uplink transmissions in uplink BWP 510-a; ¶ 0132: The UE 115 may monitor downlink BWP 505-a while concurrently or simultaneously transmitting uplink transmissions in uplink BWP 510-a. The downlink BWP 505-a and the uplink BWP 510-a may be separated by guard band 515-b). Fakoorian does not explicitly disclose “determine a set of valid Random Access Channel (RACH) Occasions (ROs). However, Abedini discloses determine a set of valid Random Access Channel (RACH) Occasions (ROs) within the UL bandwidth part for Full Duplex (FD) functionality (see Abedini, ¶ 0082: the frequency domain resources may be an initial UL bandwidth part (BWP), an indicated BWP for FD operations, or another defined BWP. In some aspects, the frequency domain resources may be a collection of staggered resource block (RB) groups. In some aspects, the frequency domain resources may be different for different time-domain symbols/slots. For example, for a first slot/symbol, an initial UL BWP may be indicated to be used for spectrum sensing. For a second slot/symbol, an indicated BWP for FD operations may be indicated to be used for spectrum sensing; ¶ 0098: the set of resources may include one or more time domain resources including one or more UL or FD symbols or slots associated with the spectrum sensing. In some aspects, the one or more UL or FD symbols or slots associated with the spectrum sensing may include all UL symbols or slots, all flexible symbols or slots, or all FD symbols or slots associated with a TDD configuration. In some aspects, the set of resources may include one or more frequency domain resources. In some aspects, the one or more frequency domain resources may include an initial UL BWP. In some aspects, the one or more frequency domain resources may include a dedicated BWP for the FD operation. In some aspects, the one or more frequency domain resources may include a collection of staggered RB groups. In some aspects, the one or more frequency domain resources may include at least one different frequency domain resource associated with at least one different time domain resource. In some aspects, the set of resources may include a time window prior to the RO. In some aspects, the configuration may include one or more conditions associated with a selection of the RO or the one or more cells (e.g., one cell of the one or more cells); ¶ 0100: the UE may select a RO or a cell of the one or more cells based on the acquired information about the at least one of the FD operation or the CLI. For example, the UE 602 may select a RO or a cell of the one or more cells based on the acquired information about the at least one of the FD operation or the CLI at 609. In some aspects, 906 may be performed by access component 1142 in FIG. 11. In some aspects, the cell of the one or more cells may be a cell with a reduced chance of a high CLI. In some aspects, the set of resources may be selected based on the configuration, the configuration being a TDD configuration or a BWP configuration. In some aspects, the information about the FD operation or CLI may be based on one or more FD resources. In some aspects, as part of 906, at 908, the UE may determine that the at least one resource may include at least one UL resource and at least one DL resource. In some aspects, as part of 906, at 910, the UE may determine that a cell associated with the at least one resource is an FD cell). Regarding claim 11 , Fakoorian in view of Abedini discloses the UE of Claim 1, Fakoorian does not explicitly disclose wherein the set of valid ROs includes at least one of: at least one separate valid RO, or at least one shared valid RO for both FD functionality and non-FD functionality. wherein the set of valid ROs includes at least one of: at least one separate valid RO, or at least one shared valid RO for both FD functionality and non-FD functionality (see Abedini, ¶ 0082; ¶ 0098; ¶ 0112). Regarding claim 15 , it is rejected for the same reasons as set forth in claim 1. Applicant is merely claiming the transmission side of the invention. Regarding claim 17 , it is rejected for the same reasons as set forth in claim 1. Regarding claim 20 , it is rejected for the same reasons as set forth in claim 11. Regarding claim 21 , it is rejected for the same reasons as set forth in claim 1. Although phrased as a method claim, the claim is nevertheless simple repetitions of the subject matter of claim 1 . Allowable Subject Matter 07-43-02 AIA Claim s 2-10, 13, 18, and 19 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 2020/0045745 to Cirik et al. US 2022/0116855 to AMURU et al. US 2022/0022222 to ABOTAL et al. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RASHEED GIDADO whose telephone number is (571)270-7645. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8AM-5PM 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, Ricky Ngo can be reached at 571-272-3139. 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. /RASHEED GIDADO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2464 Application/Control Number: 18/723,156 Page 2 Art Unit: 2464 Application/Control Number: 18/723,156 Page 3 Art Unit: 2464 Application/Control Number: 18/723,156 Page 4 Art Unit: 2464 Application/Control Number: 18/723,156 Page 5 Art Unit: 2464 Application/Control Number: 18/723,156 Page 6 Art Unit: 2464 Application/Control Number: 18/723,156 Page 7 Art Unit: 2464 Application/Control Number: 18/723,156 Page 8 Art Unit: 2464 Application/Control Number: 18/723,156 Page 9 Art Unit: 2464 Application/Control Number: 18/723,156 Page 10 Art Unit: 2464 Application/Control Number: 18/723,156 Page 11 Art Unit: 2464 Application/Control Number: 18/723,156 Page 12 Art Unit: 2464
Prosecution Insights