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
This office action is in response to the application filed on 08/07/2024.
Claims 1-30 are currently pending.
Claims 4, 7-12, 16, 19-24 are objected to as being dependent upon rejected base claims.
Claims 1-3, 5-6, 13-15, 17-18, 25-30 are rejected.
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.
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.
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.
Claims 1, 9, 11-12, 14-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Yiqing Cao et al (WO 2021/056170 A1) in view of Sarma V. Vangala et al (US 20150173094 A1).
For Claim 1, Cao discloses a method for wireless communication at a user equipment (UE) (Cao teaches, in FIG. 6, a block diagram of a UE 600 that comprises a CA Configuration Identifier 610, RACH Occasion Determination Component 640), comprising:
receiving a second message that includes second information indicative of a random access procedure configuration that includes a rule pertaining to whether random access channel messages are to be transmitted over multiple carriers, a mapping of a plurality of random access channel occasions to at least one synchronization signal block index, and a repetition number that indicates a quantity of random access channel message repetitions for transmission by the UE (Cao teaches, in paras. [122]- [123], pages 34-35, "At 310, UE 115-b may receive, e.g., from base station 105-b, a RACH occasion configuration scheduling a set of RACH occasions for the set of CCs based on an SSB of the TDD band. For example, the RACH occasion configuration may include a frequency configuration. a time configuration, a sequence configuration, or a combination thereof for the set of RACH occasions. In some cases, UE 115-b may receive the RACH occasion configuration in the TDD band, where the set of RACH occasions are configured in at least a CC of the at least one FDD band, the TDD band, or a combination thereof. Additionally, UE 115-b may receive carrier information which indicates which CCs are used for the set of RACH occasions. Additionally or alternatively, UE 115-b may receive the RACH occasion configuration in the at least one FDD band, where one or more RACH occasions of the set of RACH occasions are configured in an uplink CC of the at least one FDD band, the TDD band, or a combination thereof. In some cases, UE 115-b may determine the uplink CC based on the SSB of the TDD band, an additional SSB block of a different CC than the uplink CC, or a combination thereof. Additionally, UE 115-b may receive CC information which indicates which corresponding CCs of the uplink CC are configured with the one or more RACH occasions in the at least one FDD band"); and
transmitting the quantity of random access channel message repetitions based at least in part on the mapping, wherein the quantity of random access channel message repetitions are transmitted over one carrier or over the multiple carriers of the set of carriers is based at least in part on the rule (Cao teaches, in para. [125], page 35, "At 320, UE 115-b may transmit the first RACH message for at least one CC during a RACH occasion of the set of RACH occasions based on the RACH occasion configuration UE 115-b may receive, e.g., from base station 105-b, a TDM pattern for transmitting the first RACH message and may determine one or more available RACH occasions based on the TDM pattern, where the first RACH message is transmitted in at least one of the one or more available RACH occasions").
Cao fails to expressly disclose receiving a first message that includes first information indicative of an inter-band carrier aggregation configuration that identifies a set of carriers for carrier aggregation communication between the UE and a network entity.
However, Vangala, in the analogous art, discloses receiving a first message that includes first information indicative of an inter-band carrier aggregation configuration that identifies a set of carriers for carrier aggregation communication between the UE and a network entity (Vangala teaches, in ¶ 0034, that Once the band combination is selected for the UE 205, the eNB 230 may transmit the carrier aggregation configuration to the UE 205. Subsequently, the UE 205 may exchange data with the network using carrier aggregation at the selected band combination indicated in the carrier aggregation configuration).
Vangala teaches, in ¶ 0013, that Specifically, FIG. 1 shows the two component carriers in an intra-band carrier aggregation with continuous component carriers.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system in Cao with the priority data taught in Vangala. The motivation is to enable a UE to utilize carrier aggregation on a preferred band combination [Vangala: ¶ 0012].
For Claim 13, please refer to the rejection of Claim 1, above.
For Claim 25, please refer to the rejection of Claim 1, above.
For Claim 28, please refer to the rejection of Claim 1, above.
Claims 2, 5, 14, 17, 26-27, 29-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yiqing Cao et al (WO 2021/056170 A1) in view of Sarma V. Vangala et al (US 20150173094 A1) as applied to claim 1, 13, 25 or 28 above, and further in view of BOROUJENI Mahmoud et al (US 20250024506 A1).
For Claims 2, 14, 26, 29, Cao and Vangala disclose all of the claimed subject matter with the exception of transmitting the quantity of random access channel message repetitions over the one carrier in accordance with the rule.
However, Mahmoud, in the analogous art, discloses transmitting the quantity of random access channel message repetitions over the one carrier in accordance with the rule (Mahmoud teaches, in ¶ 0011, transmitting the number of repetitions of the random access preamble to the network entity via a set of physical random access channel (PRACH) resources and transmitting the second number of repetitions of the random access payload to the network entity via a set of physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) resources. Mahmoud teaches, in ¶ 0260, wherein the frequency-based repetitions comprise repetitions over different component carriers or repetitions over a single component carrier; and the time-based repetitions comprise repetitions in different random access channel occasions or repetitions in a single random access channel occasion).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system in Cao and Vangala with the number of repetitions taught in Mahmoud. The motivation is to increase the reliability of the random access procedure [Mahmoud: ¶ 0004].
For Claims 5, 17, 27, 30, Cao and Vangala disclose all of the claimed subject matter with the exception of transmitting the quantity of random access channel message repetitions over at least two carriers of the multiple carriers in accordance with the rule.
However, Mahmoud, in the analogous art, discloses transmitting the quantity of random access channel message repetitions over at least two carriers of the multiple carriers in accordance with the rule (Mahmoud teaches, in ¶ 0011, transmitting the number of repetitions of the random access preamble to the network entity via a set of physical random access channel (PRACH) resources and transmitting the second number of repetitions of the random access payload to the network entity via a set of physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) resources. Mahmoud teaches, in ¶ 0260, wherein the frequency-based repetitions comprise repetitions over different component carriers or repetitions over a single component carrier; and the time-based repetitions comprise repetitions in different random access channel occasions or repetitions in a single random access channel occasion).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system in Cao and Vangala with the number of repetitions taught in Mahmoud. The motivation is to increase the reliability of the random access procedure [Mahmoud: ¶ 0004].
Claims 3, 6, 15, 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yiqing Cao et al (WO 2021/056170 A1) in view of Sarma V. Vangala et al (US 20150173094 A1) & BOROUJENI Mahmoud et al (US 20250024506 A1) as applied to claim 2, 5, 14, or 17, above, and further in view of Guodong Zhang et al (US 20100130218 A1).
For Claims 3, 6, 15, 18, Cao, Vangala and Mahmoud disclose all of the claimed subject matter with the exception of transmitting the quantity of random access channel message repetitions over the one carrier in accordance with the rule.
However, Zhang, in the analogous art, discloses transmitting the quantity of random access channel message repetitions over the one carrier in accordance with the rule (Zhang teaches, in ¶ 0007, The WTRU may receive data via aggregated carriers comprising at least two component carriers including a data carrier for the peak traffic condition. The data carrier may be a component carrier assigned for data transfer to the WTRU in a connected state. Mahmoud teaches, in ¶ 0022, that “The component carriers may be categorized as an anchor carrier or a data carrier”). A data carrier, Examiner notes, is a non-anchor carrier.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system in Cao, Vangala and Mahmoud with the spectrum aggregation taught in Zhang. The motivation is to improve the quality of service (QoS) for end users [Zhang: ¶ 0004].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 7-12, 16, 19-24 are objected to as being dependent upon rejected base claims, 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. Langer et al (US 11569849 B2) teaches an apparatus for wireless communication is provided. The apparatus includes a processing circuit configured to allow intra-band uplink carrier aggregation as well as inter-band uplink carrier aggregation.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMED A KAMARA whose telephone number is (571)2705629. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9AM-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, CHARLES JIANG can be reached at (571)2707191. 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.
/MOHAMED A KAMARA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2412
Prosecution Insights