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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-10 are pending.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the conflicting application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement.
Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b).
Claim 1, 3, 5, 10 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of US Patent 12,096,484 in view of Shrestha et al. (US 2023/0094907).
Regarding claim 1, 10, although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other:
Instant application claim 1
‘484 patent Claim 1
A method by a terminal, the method comprising: receiving a first radio resource control (RRC) message, wherein the first RRC message comprises:
A method by a terminal, the method comprising: receiving, by the terminal, a RRCReconfiguration, wherein the RRCReconfiguration comprises a first common offset2 and a first common offset3;
an offset related to scheduling; and an offset related to transmission timing;
Not disclosed
running a random access response window based on: the offset related to scheduling; the offset related to transmission timing; and number of slots in relation to a specific unit time;
running, by the terminal, a first ra-ResponseWindow based on: the first common offset2, the first common offset3, and a number of first slots per specific unit time;
receiving a Random Access Response (RAR) while the random access response window is running;
receiving, by the terminal, a first Random Access Response (RAR) while the first ra-Response Window is running;
transmitting a message 3 based on the RAR;
transmitting, by the terminal, a first Msg3 based on the first RAR;
running a timer related to contention resolution based on: the offset related to scheduling; and the offset related to transmission timing;
running, by the terminal, a first ra-ContentionResolutionTimer based on the first common offset2 and the first common offset3;
stopping the timer related to contention resolution in case that: a Physical Downlink Control Channel (PDCCH) is received while the timer related to contention resolution is running; the PDCCH transmission is addressed to a Cell-Radio Network Temporary Identifier (C-RNTI); and the PDCCH contains an uplink grant for a new transmission;
stopping, by the terminal, the first ra-ContentionResolutionTimer in case that: a Physical Downlink Control Channel (PDCCH) is received while the first ra-ContentionResolutionTimer is running; the PDCCH transmission is addressed to a Cell-Radio Network Temporary Identifier (C-RNTI); and the PDCCH contains an uplink grant for a new transmission;
receiving a second RRC message, wherein the second RRC message causes state transition to RRC_INACTIVE state;
receiving, by the terminal, a RRCRelease, wherein the RRCRelease comprises a SuspendConfig;
receiving a system information, wherein the system information comprises:
receiving, by the terminal, system information, wherein the system information comprises a second common offset2 and a second common offset3;
a second offset related to scheduling; and a second offset related to transmission timing;
Not disclosed
initiating transmission of a third RRC message for requesting resume;
initiating, by the terminal, transmission of RRCResumeRequest;
running a random access response window based on: the second offset related to scheduling; the second offset related to transmission timing; and number of slots in relation to the specific unit time;
running, by the terminal, a second ra-ResponseWindow based on: the second common offset2, the second common offset3, and a number of second slots per specific unit time;
receiving a second RAR while the random access response window is running;
receiving, by the terminal, a second RAR while the second ra-Response Window is running;
transmitting a second message 3 based on the second RAR; and
transmitting, by the terminal, a second Msg3 based on the second RAR; and
running the timer related to contention resolution based on: the second offset related to scheduling; and the second offset related to transmission timing.
running, by the terminal, a second ra-ContentionResolutionTimer based on the second common offset2 and the second common offset3.
Claim 1 of ‘484 does not disclose: an offset related to scheduling; and an offset related to transmission timing, or: a second offset related to scheduling; and a second offset related to transmission timing. However, Shrestha teaches multiple RA window offsets (0057, two offsets may be signaled for RAR window; first timing offset may be minimum gap between preamble and start of RAR (thus related to scheduling). 0059, second timing offset may be further applied and corresponds to NTN RTT (thus related to transmission timing)). Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to incorporate Shrestha into the system of claim 1 of ‘484 in order to enhance RAR window timing.
Regarding claim 3, although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other:
Instant application claim 3
‘484 patent Claim 1
the method further comprising: performing by the terminal a set of operations at a specific time point.
A method by a terminal…
(any method steps performed by a terminal comprises a set of operations at a given time)
Regarding claim 5, although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other:
Instant application claim 5
‘484 patent Claim 1
wherein the specific time point is a time point when a specific time duration elapsed after the second RRC message is received
receiving, by the terminal, a RRCRelease, wherein the RRCRelease comprises a SuspendConfig…
(any method steps after this step are specified to be performed at time points afterwards)
It has been held that the omission of an element and its function is an obvious expedient if the remaining elements perform the same function as before. In re Karlson, 136 USPQ 184 (CCPA). Also note Ex parte Rainu, 168 USPQ 375 (Bd.App.1969); omission of a reference element whose function is not needed would be obvious to one skilled in the art. Moreover, the doctrine of double patenting seeks to prevent the unjustified extension of patent exclusivity beyond the term of a patent.
Claim 2 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of US Patent 12,096,484 in view of Shrestha et al. (US 2023/0094907) in view of Ye et al. (US 2023/0039715).
Claim 2 is rejected in view of Ye, who teaches: wherein the specific unit time is related to a specific subcarrier spacing (0087, 0089, RAR window offset K_mac may be defined in units of slots for a given subcarrier spacing). Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to incorporate Ye into the system of claim 1 of ‘484 in order to enhance appropriate timing offset configuration for a given subcarrier spacing.
Claim 4 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of US Patent 12,096,484 in view of Shrestha et al. (US 2023/0094907) in view of Singh et al. (US 2023/0389081).
Claim 4 is rejected in view of Singh, who teaches: wherein the set of operations comprises: resetting Medium Access Control (MAC); reestablishing Radio Link Control (RLC) for a specific signaling radio bearer (SRB); and entering RRC_INACTIVE state (0075-0077, UE may reset MAC and reestablish RLC entities for SRB1 when going to RRC INACTIVE). Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to incorporate Singh into the system of claim 1 of ‘484 in order to enhance RRC INACTIVE transition.
Claim 6, 7, 8 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of US Patent 12,096,484 in view of Shrestha et al. (US 2023/0094907) in view of Fujishiro et al. (US 2020/0187245).
Claim 6 is rejected in view of Fujishiro, who teaches: the method further comprising: receiving by the terminal a message 4 while the timer related to contention resolution is running based on the second offset related to scheduling and the second offset related to transmission timing (0253, 0569, UE may receive Msg4 while contention resolution timer is running). Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to incorporate Fujishiro into the system of claim 1 of ‘484 in order to facilitate random access procedure Msg4 reception.
Claim 7 is rejected in view of Fujishiro, who teaches: wherein the message 4 comprises a RRC message for connection resumption (0230, Msg4 may be RRC connection resume message). Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to incorporate Fujishiro into the system of claim 1 of ‘484 in order to facilitate RRC resume messaging via Msg4 reception.
Claim 8 is rejected in view of Fujishiro, who teaches: the method further comprising: transmitting by the terminal hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) acknowledgement in response to the message 4 (0242, eNB may receive HARQ ACK/NACK in response to Msg4). Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to incorporate Fujishiro into the system of claim 1 of ‘484 in order to facilitate acknowledgment messaging for Msg4 reception.
Claim 9 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of US Patent 12,096,484 in view of Shrestha et al. (US 2023/0094907) in view of Chi (US 2025/0138198) in view of Tseng et al. (US 2023/0344508).
Claim 9 is rejected in view of Chi, Tseng, who teaches: the method further comprising: reporting, by the terminal to a base station and before reception of the first RRC message, capability related to non-terrestrial network (NTN), wherein the capability related to NTN indicates that a specific random access related timer adaptation is supported by the terminal (Chi 0222, UE may report GNSS capability to network device. Tseng 0131-0135, specific RACH resources may be configured for NTN UEs capable of timing offset compensation (adaptation) based on GNSS capability). Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to incorporate Chi, Tseng into the system of claim 1 of ‘484 in order to facilitate NTN configuration of GNSS-capable UEs for timing offset/adaptation.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 1-10 objected to as being allowable upon any double patenting and/or 35 USC 112 issues addressed.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Qiu et al. (US 2022/0007431) discloses a method for random access resource configuration and resource selection and performing RACH.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SIREN WEI whose telephone number is (571)272-0687. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Thursday 7-4. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Hassan Phillips can be reached on 571-272-3940. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Siren Wei/
Patent Examiner
Art Unit 2467
