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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 4, 9, 12, 14-15, 17-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Taherzadeh Boroujeni et al. (12,171,020).
For claims 1, 19, Boroujeni teaches a PRACH repetition transmission (background, summary and claims; col. 4, lines 10-60) method and system (abstract), comprising:
obtaining, by a terminal (col. 5, lines 50-55), resource configuration information (col. 7, line 60 – col. 8, line 20) for physical random access channel (PRACH) (col. 14, lines 25-60) repetition transmission (col. 14, lines 60-col. 15, line 10), wherein the resource configuration information comprises a resource configuration type for the PRACH repetition transmission (col. 24, line 60 – col. 25, line 5);
determining, by the terminal based on the resource configuration type, a random access channel occasion (RO) used for the PRACH repetition transmission (col. 17, lines 25-40); and
performing, by the terminal, PRACH repetition transmission based on the RO (col. 17, lines 40-60).
For claim 3, 14, 15, Boroujeni teaches obtaining first information corresponding to the first RO (col. 17, lines 25-40); and determining the first RO based on the first information (col. 17, lines 40-60).
For claims 4, 17, Boroujeni teaches wherein the first information comprises at least one of the following:
the number of PRACH repetition transmissions (col. 14, line 60 – col. 15, line 10);
a time interval between a plurality of time domain multiplexing ROs (col. 7, line 50 – col. 8, line 20);
a frequency spacing between a plurality of frequency domain multiplexing ROs (col. 7, lines 20-50);
a configuration parameter for a preamble corresponding to the first RO (col. 16, lines 30-55); or
a mapping relationship between a common RO in a PRACH slot and the first RO (col. 19, line 60 – col. 20, line 30); wherein
the common RO is a common configured RO used by the PRACH repetition transmission and PRACH non-repetition transmission (col. 19, line 60 – col. 20, line 30).
For claims 9, 18, Boroujeni teaches that the PRACH slot comprises at least one common RO group, and each common RO group corresponds to one first RO group (col. 19, line 60 – col. 20, line 30).
For claims 12, 20, Boroujeni teaches a PRACH repetition transmission, (background, summary and claims; col. 4, lines 10-60) method and system (abstract), comprising:
obtaining, by a network-side device (col. 5, lines 10-30), resource configuration information (col. 7, line 60 – col. 8, line 20) for PRACH (col. 14, lines 25-60) repetition transmission (col. 14, lines 60-col. 15, line 10), wherein the resource configuration information comprises a resource configuration type for the PRACH repetition transmission (col. 24, line 60 – col. 25, line 5); and
sending, by the network-side device, the resource configuration information (col. 14, lines 20-60) to a terminal (col. 5, lines 50-55).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
Claim(s) 2, 6, 8, 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boroujeni as applied to claims 1, 4, 12 above, and further in view of Yang et al. (12,550,160).
For claims 2, 13, Boroujeni does not expressly disclose the limitations. Yang teaches a method and system (abstract) in the current art (background, summary and claims) wherein the resource configuration type comprises at least one of the following:
all ROs for PRACH non-repetition transmission are used for the PRACH repetition transmission (col. 15, lines 10-65); or
an independently configured first RO is used for the PRACH repetition transmission (col. 19, lines 15-65); wherein
the PRACH non-repetition transmission comprises PRACH non-repetition transmissions with one or more characteristics (col. 19, lines 15-65).
At the time of filing, one of ordinary skill in the art would have added Yang in order to provide improvements to Ros (col. 1, lines 25-60).
For claim 6, Yang teaches performing resource mapping based on the mapping relationship (col. 6, lines 10-45) between the common RO in the PRACH slot and the first RO (col. 18, lines 30-35).
For claim 8, Yang teaches wherein the common RO in the PRACH slot for resource mapping is a valid common RO (col. 6, lines 10-45); and the first RO for resource mapping is a valid RO configured relative to the PRACH slot (col. 18, lines 30-35).
Claim(s) 5, 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boroujeni and Yang as applied to claims 2, 14 above, and further in view of Lee et al. (12,137,479).
For claims 5, 16, Boroujeni and Yang do not expressly disclose the limitations. Lee teaches a method and system (abstract) in the relevant art (background, summary and claims) where the first RO is a RO configured relative (col. 29, lines 40 – col. 30, line 5) to the common RO (col. 32, line 60 – col. 33, line 30); or the first RO is a RO configured relative to the PRACH slot in which the common RO is located (col. 33, line 30 – col. 34, line 40). At the time of filing, one of ordinary skill in the art would have added Lee in order to provide improvements to ROs during reduced capacity (col. 1, lines 40-65).
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boroujeni and Yang as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Xiong et al. (12,052,762).
For claim 7, Boroujeni teaches the mapping ratio (col./ 19, lines 1-30; SINR) but not the details. Xiong teaches a method and system (abstract) in the relevant art (background, summary and claims) wherein the performing resource mapping based on the mapping relationship between the common RO in the PRACH slot and the first RO (col. 9, line 30 – col. 10, line 50) comprises:
performing mapping on ROs in the PRACH slot and the first RO according to a first defined order (col. 11, line 50 – col. 12, line 25); wherein
a mapping ratio of the ROs in the PRACH slot to the first RO (col. 21, line 50 – col. 22, line 45) is related to the number of PRACH repetition transmissions and/or the number of common ROs (col. 14, lines 10-55).
At the time of filing, one of ordinary skill in the art would have added Xiong in order to provide improvements to determining data validity (col. 3, lines 50-65).
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boroujeni and Yang as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Christoffersson et al. (2022/0,408,478).
For claim 10, Boroujeni does not expressly disclose regarding targeting ROs. Christoffersson teaches a method and system (abstract) in the relevant art (background, summary and claims) where the determining, based on the resource configuration type, a RO for PRACH repetition transmission comprises:
determining a target resource configuration type corresponding to the terminal from at least one resource configuration type (Para 161); and
determining the RO, indicated in the target resource configuration type, for the PRACH repetition transmission (Paras 140-142).
At the time of filing, one of ordinary skill in the art would have added Christoffersson in order to provide improvements to reducing latencies (Paras 3-12).
For claim 11, Christoffersson teaches wherein the determining a target resource configuration type corresponding to the terminal from at least one resource configuration type comprises:
receiving radio resource control (RRC) signaling sent by a network-side device (Para 75), wherein the RRC signaling indicates the target resource configuration type corresponding to the terminal (Para 76-78); or,
determining the target resource configuration type based on whether the terminal receives the first information corresponding to the first RO (Paras 92-96).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MELVIN H POLLACK whose telephone number is (571)272-3887. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:00.
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, Oscar Louie can be reached at (571)270-1684. 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.
/MELVIN H POLLACK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2445
Prosecution Insights