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.
Claims 1, 24, 42 and 43 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Chen et al. (US 2022/0264661 A1, referred to herein as “Chen”).
Regarding claim 1, Chen discloses: A multi-physical random access channel (PRACH) transmission method (Chen: paragraphs [0034]-[0035], disclosing multi physical random access channel communication), performed by a terminal (Chen: Fig. 5, paragraph [0055], disclosing devices for use with a PRACH transmission method that includes a terminal), comprising:
determining a triggering condition for a multi-PRACH transmission (Chen: paragraphs [0008] and [0043], disclosing that a PRACH transmission may be triggered by a condition—e.g., a condition associated with a beam failure recovery request); and
triggering the multi-PRACH transmission according to the triggering condition for the multi-PRACH transmission (Chen: Fig. 6, paragraphs [0059]-[0066], disclosing that the PRACH transmission may be triggered based on the condition), wherein the multi-PRACH transmission is used to indicate that the terminal performs multiple PRACH transmissions when sending Msg1 or MsgA for a random access (Chen: paragraphs [0030] and [0032], disclosing PRACH transmission that includes sending Msg1 and MsgA; paragraph [0034]-[0035], disclosing multiple PRACH transmission occasions).
Regarding claim 24, Chen discloses: A multi-physical random access channel (PRACH) transmission method (Chen: paragraphs [0034]-[0035], disclosing multi physical random access channel communication), performed by a network device (Chen: Fig. 5, paragraph [0055], disclosing network devices for use with a PRACH transmission method), comprising:
receiving Msg1 or MsgA sent by a terminal based on a multi-PRACH transmission (Chen: paragraphs [0030] and [0032], disclosing PRACH transmission that includes sending Msg1 and MsgA; paragraph [0034]-[0035], disclosing multiple PRACH transmission occasions);
wherein the multi-PRACH transmission is initiated by the terminal based on a triggering condition (Chen: Fig. 6, paragraphs [0059]-[0066], disclosing that the PRACH transmission may be triggered based on the condition).
Regarding claim 42, Chen discloses: A communication apparatus, comprising:
a processor (Chen: paragraphs [0012] and [0222], disclosing that a terminal device may include a processor), and
a memory for storing computer programs (Chen: paragraphs [0012] and [0222], disclosing that the terminal device may include a memory for storing a program), wherein the processor is configured to:
determine a triggering condition for a multi-PRACH transmission (Chen: paragraphs [0008] and [0043], disclosing that a PRACH transmission may be triggered by a condition—e.g., a condition associated with a beam failure recovery request); and
trigger the multi-PRACH transmission according to the triggering condition for the multi-PRACH transmission (Chen: Fig. 6, paragraphs [0059]-[0066], disclosing that the PRACH transmission may be triggered based on the condition), wherein the multi-PRACH transmission is used to indicate that the communication apparatus performs multiple PRACH transmissions when sending Msgl or MsgA for a random access (Chen: paragraphs [0030] and [0032], disclosing PRACH transmission that includes sending Msg1 and MsgA; paragraph [0034]-[0035], disclosing multiple PRACH transmission occasions).
Regarding claim 43, Chen discloses: A communication apparatus, comprising: a processor, and a memory for storing computer programs, wherein the processor is configured to perform the method according to claim 24 (Chen: paragraphs [0012] and [0222], disclosing a memory and processor for implementing the communication method).
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.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Wang (US 2022/0039096 A1, referred to herein as “Wang”).
Regarding claim 2, Chen discloses: The method according to claim 1, wherein triggering the multi- PRACH transmission according to the triggering condition for the multi-PRACH transmission comprises: triggering the multi-PRACH transmission in a case that the triggering condition is reached (Chen: paragraphs [0008] and [0043], disclosing that a PRACH transmission may be triggered by a condition), wherein a first PRACH resource is configured for the multi- PRACH transmission (Chen: paragraphs [0034]-[0038], disclosing configuration for multiple PRACH transmission)…
Chen does not disclose: the triggering condition is that a bandwidth part (BWP) initiating the random access is configured with the first PRACH resource.
However, Wang discloses: the triggering condition is that a bandwidth part (BWP) initiating the random access is configured with the first PRACH resource (Wang: paragraph [0060], disclosing that a bandwidth part is configured with the PRACH).
At the time the application was effectively filed, it would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art to use the bandwidth part PRACH configuration of Wang in the method of Chen.
One would have been motivated to modify Chen in this manner in order to adaptive adjust operating bandwidth and improve energy efficiency by selecting a most suitable bandwidth part having PRACH resources available (Wang: paragraphs [0004]-[0005] and [0060]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 5, 6, 9, 10, 14, 16, 18, 19, 20, 22, 25, 26, 28, 32 and 36 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claims 3, 25, 26 and 28, Chen, either alone or in combination with other prior art of record, does not teach, suggest, or disclose where triggering the multi-PRACH transmission in a case that the triggering condition is reached comprises one of: triggering the multi-PRACH transmission in a case that the BWP being is configured with the first PRACH resource only, or triggering the multi-PRACH transmission in a case that the first PRACH resource comprises only a second PRACH resource and the terminal has a coverage enhancement (CE) characteristic; wherein the second PRACH resource is a PRACH resource available to a terminal having the CE characteristic.
Regarding claims 5, 6, 32 and 36, Chen, either alone or in combination with other prior art of record, does not teach, suggest, or disclose where triggering the multi- PRACH transmission according to the triggering condition for the multi-PRACH transmission comprises: determining whether the multi-PRACH transmission is in an enabled state; and triggering the multi-PRACH transmission in a case that the triggering condition is reached, wherein the triggering condition is that the multi-PRACH transmission is in the enabled state.
Regarding claims 9, 10, 14 and 16, Chen, either alone or in combination with other prior art of record, does not teach, suggest, or disclose where triggering the multi- PRACH transmission according to the triggering condition for the multi-PRACH transmission comprises: triggering the multi-PRACH transmission in a case that the triggering condition is reached, wherein the triggering condition is that a reference signal receiving power (RSRP) value of a downlink pathloss reference point satisfies a first RSRP triggering threshold.
Regarding claim 18, Chen, either alone or in combination with other prior art of record, does not teach, suggest, or disclose where triggering the multi-PRACH transmission according to the triggering condition for the multi-PRACH transmission comprises: triggering the multi-PRACH transmission and a Msg3 repetition in a case that the triggering condition is reached, wherein the triggering condition is that an RSRP value of a downlink pathloss reference point satisfies a first RSRP triggering threshold, and the first RSRP triggering threshold is an RSRP triggering threshold configured by a network device for both the multi-PRACH transmission and the Msg3 repetition.
Regarding claims 19, 20 and 22, Chen, either alone or in combination with other prior art of record, does not teach, suggest, or disclose where triggering the multi-PRACH transmission according to the triggering condition for the multi-PRACH transmission comprises: determining a triggering occasion of the multi-PRACH transmission; and triggering the multi-PRACH transmission according to the triggering condition for the multi-PRACH transmission at the triggering occasion.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Christopher Braniff whose telephone number is (571) 270-5009. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7AM to 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, Thai Tran can be reached at (571) 272-7382. 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.
CHRISTOPHER T. BRANIFF
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2484
/CHRISTOPHER BRANIFF/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2484
Prosecution Insights