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 INTERPRETATION
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
Use of the word “means” (or “step for”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim element is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. § 112 (pre-AIA § 112, sixth paragraph). The presumption that § 112 (pre-AIA § 112, sixth paragraph) is invoked is rebutted when the function is recited with sufficient structure, material, or acts within the claim itself to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step for”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim element is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. § 112 (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph). The presumption that § 112 (pre-AIA § 112, sixth paragraph) is not invoked is rebutted when the claim element recites function but fails to recite sufficiently definite structure, material or acts to perform that function.
Claim elements in this application that use the word “means” (or “step for”) are presumed to invoke § 112, 6th except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Similarly, claim elements that do not use the word “means” (or “step for”) are presumed not to invoke § 112, 6th except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
The limitation of claim 8 that recites “a first sending module” has been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. § 112 (sixth paragraph) because it uses a generic placeholder "module" couple with the functional language “sending” without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Furthermore, the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structure modifier. A review of the specification shows that transmission device (see [0023] USPN 20250048445) is associated with this feature.
The limitation of claim 8 that recites “a first obtaining module” has been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. § 112 (sixth paragraph) because it uses a generic placeholder "module" couple with the functional language “obtaining” without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Furthermore, the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structure modifier. A review of the specification shows that transmission device (see [0023] USPN 20250048445) is associated with this feature.
The limitation of claim 8 that recites “a second obtaining module” has been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. § 112 (sixth paragraph) because it uses a generic placeholder "module" couple with the functional language “obtaining” without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Furthermore, the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structure modifier. A review of the specification shows that processor (see [0023] USPN 20250048445) is associated with this feature.
The limitation of claim 8 that recites “a second sending module” has been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. § 112 (sixth paragraph) because it uses a generic placeholder "module" couple with the functional language “sending” without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Furthermore, the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structure modifier. A review of the specification shows that transmission device (see [0023] USPN 20250048445) is associated with this feature.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph; or
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
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)(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.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 6, 8-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) as being anticipated by MolavianJazi et al (USPN 20210076384).
Regarding claim 1, MolavianJazi discloses
a random access method, applied to a terminal device, comprising: (method performed by UE [0099-0103]
sending a random access request to a network device (transmitting PRACH preamble/Msg1 [0099]
obtaining downlink control information corresponding to the terminal device sent by the network device from a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) according to the random access request, wherein the downlink control information comprises a random access response (UE receives RAR/PDCCH in response [0100, 0102]
decoding the downlink control information, extracting scheduling information of a random access instruction from the random access response (UE decodes PDCCH which includes TA command, uplink grant, and C-RNTI [0047, 0106]
sending the random access instruction to the network device according to the scheduling information (UE applies TA and uplink grant to transmit Msg3 [0112]
Regarding claim 6, MolavianJazi discloses
a random access method, applied to a network device, comprising: (random access method performed by gNB [0058, 0094, 0099]
obtaining a random access request sent by a terminal device (receives random access request sent by UE [0099, 0091]
sending downlink control information corresponding to the terminal device to a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) according to the random access request, wherein the downlink control information comprises a random access response (gNB sends PDCCH comprising a RAR in response to receiving random access request [0007, 0100-0103, 0106]
Regarding claim 2, MolavianJazi discloses “wherein the downlink control information also comprises a random access preamble identifier (RAPID); (PDCCH comprises RAPID [0105, 0106]
the obtaining the downlink control information corresponding to the terminal device sent by the network device from the PDCCH according to the random access request comprises: obtaining a random access preamble code comprised in the random access request; obtaining the RAPID in the downlink control information sent by the network device from the PDCCH; and in response to that the random access preamble code and the RAPID are consistent, determining the downlink control information sent by the network device being the downlink control information corresponding to the terminal device.” (the MAC RAR contained in PDSCH part of RAR contains RAPID and the RAPID in MAC RAR matches preamble selected and transmitted by UE in Msg1 [0112]
Regarding claim 4, MolavianJazi discloses “wherein the obtaining the RAPID in the downlink control information sent by the network device from the PDCCH comprises: obtaining a random access wireless network temporary identifier; (obtain RA-RNTI [0102]
descrambling the downlink control information sent by the network device from the PDCCH through the random access wireless network temporary identifier to obtain the descrambled downlink control information; (UE attempts to detect a DCI using RA-RNTI [0150, 0157]
and extracting the RAPID from the descrambled downlink control information” (obtain RAPID from descrambled DCI [0106, 0112]
Regarding claim 8, MolavianJazi discloses
a random access apparatus, configured in a terminal device, comprising: (UE, FIG. 3 #116, configured to [0045-0045]
a first sending module (transceiver, FIG. 3 #310) configured to send a random access request to a network device (transmitting PRACH preamble/Msg1 [0099, 0047]
a first obtaining module (transceiver, FIG. 3 #310) configured to obtain downlink control information corresponding to the terminal device sent by the network device from a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) according to the random access request, wherein the downlink control information comprises a random access response (UE receives RAR/PDCCH in response [0100, 0102, 0047]
a second obtaining module (processor)configured to decode the downlink control information, extracting scheduling information of a random access instruction from the random access response (UE decodes PDCCH which includes TA command, uplink grant, and C-RNTI [0047-0050, 0106]
a second sending module configured to send (transceiver, FIG. 3 #310) the random access instruction to the network device according to the scheduling information (UE applies TA and uplink grant to transmit Msg3 [0112, 0047]
Regarding claim 9, MolavianJazi discloses “A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a computer program, wherein the computer program is configured to execute the method according to claim 1 when running” memory, FIG. 3 #360, comprising instructions executable by processor to perform operations of claim 1 [0049, 0050, 0010]
Regarding claim 10, MolavianJazi discloses “An electronic device, comprising: a memory; and a processor, (UE, FIG. 3 #116, comprising memory, FIG. 3 #360, and processor, FIG. 3 #340 [0049, 0050]
wherein the memory stores a computer program, and the processor is configured to run the computer program to execute the method according to claim 1” memory, FIG. 3 #360, comprising instructions executable by processor to perform operations of claim 1 [0049, 0050, 0010]
Regarding claim 11, MolavianJazi discloses “A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a computer program, wherein the computer program is configured to execute the method according to claim 6 when running” memory, FIG. 2 #230, comprising computer instructions executable by processor, FIG. 2 #225 operable to perform operations of claim 6 [0040-0043, 0010]
Regarding claim 12, MolavianJazi discloses “An electronic device, comprising: a memory; and a processor, (gNB, FIG. 2 #102, comprising memory, FIG. 2 #230, and processor, FIG. 2 #225 [0041-0043
wherein the memory stores a computer program, and the processor is configured to run the computer program to execute the method according to claim 6” memory, FIG. 2 #230, comprising computer instructions executable by processor, FIG. 2 #225 operable to perform operations of claim 6 [0040-0043, 0010]
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.
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.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MolavianJazi in view of Shin et al (USPN 20220159744).
Regarding claim 3, MolavianJazi discloses “wherein the random access response comprises the scheduling information, and the scheduling information comprises a timing advance command, an uplink grant, and a temporary cell-radio network temporary identifier (Temporary C-RNTI); (gNB sends RAPID along with MAC payload comprising TA command, uplink grant, and C-RNTI [0106]
the sending the random access instruction to the network device according to the scheduling information comprising: sending the scrambled random access instruction to the network device through a resource configuration indicated by the uplink grant at a sending time indicated by the timing advance command” (UE applies TA and processes RAR UL grant to transmit Msg3 [0112, 0256-0258]
MolavianJazi does not expressly disclose scrambling the random access instruction via the Temporary C-RNTI
Shin discloses Msg3 scrambled by TC-RNTI [0328]
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement “scrambling the random access instruction via the Temporary C-RNTI” as taught by Shin into MolavianJazi’s system with the motivation to reduce interference and enhance decoding correctness as well known in the art.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MolavianJazi in view of Kim et al (USPN 20190327768).
Regarding claim 5, MolavianJazi does not expressly disclose “obtaining number of bits of the downlink control information; and determining the downlink control information comprising the random access response in response to that the number of bits is different from a preset number of bits”
Kim discloses UE receiving RAR transmitted using a DCI format 1C which is a shortened DCI format than typical DCI format and does not include information related to HARQ [0036], FIGs. 5, 6
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement “obtaining number of bits of the downlink control information; and determining the downlink control information comprising the random access response in response to that the number of bits is different from a preset number of bits” as taught by Kim into MolavianJazi’s system with the motivation to enable a UE to check payload size against preset/expected value prior to descrambling.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MolavianJazi in view of Guo et al (USPN 20150263818).
Regarding claim 7, MolavianJazi does not expressly disclose “obtaining a current occupancy parameter of the PDCCH; and determining that the current occupancy parameter is less than a threshold”
Guo discloses PDCCH load of a cell being a ratio of used resource elements to total available resource elements within the cell and base station’s threshold-based decision of whether current PDCCH load permits transmitting additional scheduling signaling [0008, 0039, 0044, 0045, 0011]
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement “obtaining a current occupancy parameter of the PDCCH; and determining that the current occupancy parameter is less than a threshold” as taught by Guo into MolavianJazi’s system with the motivation to determining a load of PDCCH and available resources in a cell prior to transmitting, as well known the art.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Shi et al (USPN 20190090282) FIG. 1
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THAI NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7632. The examiner can normally be reached M-F campus 10:30-5pm, telework 6pm-8pm| Telework count days.
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, Ian N Moore can be reached at (571)272-3085. 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.
/THAI NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2469
Prosecution Insights