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 .
This communication is response to claims filed on 10/30/24.
Claims 1-20 are presented for examination.
Information Disclosure Statement’s
4. The information disclosure statement(s) submitted on 11/19/24 have being considered by the examiner and made of record in the application file.
Drawing
5. The drawings filed on 10/30/24 are accepted by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
6. 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 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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
7. Claims 1-7, 9-15 & 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (hereinafter referred as Lee) US Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0037569 A1, in view of Chen et al. (hereinafter referred as Chen) US Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0110300 A1.
Regarding claims 1 & 9: Baruch discloses a user equipment (UE) (See FIG. 1 B & Para. 0033; WTRU 102)/method, comprising:
at least one radio (See FIG. 1 B & Para. 0033; WTRU 102 includes Transceiver); and
at least one processor (See FIG. 1 B & Para. 0033; WTRU 102 includes processor), configured cause the UE to perform operations comprising:
receiving, from a base station, information indicating that a coverage enhancement mode is supported (See Para. 0070-0072 & 0075; CE levels and associated parameters include PRACH configuration, power control parameters and number of supported CE levels and associated parameters are provided by broadcast signaling from an eNB supporting CE/WTRUs in CE mode); and
in response to determining to enter the coverage enhancement mode (Para. 0070-0072 & Para. 0164-0165; determining whether the WTRU is in CE mode and therefore performing CE-mode communication with repetition)), transmitting a reserved preamble to the base station to initiate random access for the coverage enhancement mode (Para. 0070-0072 & Para. 0164-0165; partitioning PRACH preamble between normal mode and CE mode: from M available preambles, the first N may be used for normal mode and the next P preamble used for CE mode).
determining whether to enter the coverage enhancement mode based on a downlink measurement (See Para. 0093-0094; the WTRU determines a CE level from a downlink measurement. Specifically, the ETRU measures RSRP and an RSRP value/range).
Lee does not explicitly disclose determining whether to enter the coverage enhancement mode based on a downlink signal synchronization block (DL SSB).
However, Chen from the same field of endeavor discloses determining whether to enter the coverage enhancement mode based on a downlink signal synchronization block (DL SSB) (See FIG. 24; Step 2464; the UE determines whether the SS-RSRP of a SSB satisfies a threshold).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include determining whether to enter the coverage enhancement mode based on a downlink signal synchronization block (DL SSB) as taught by Chen in the system of Lee in order to select a random access channel (RACH) resource in a multi-beam environment (See Para. 0006; line 1).
Regarding claims 2 & 10: The combination of Lee and Chen discloses the UE/method.
Furthermore, Chen discloses the UE/method, wherein the UE determines to enter the coverage enhancement mode in response to when a measured DL SSB Reference Signal Received Power (RSRP) is lower than a SSB RSRP threshold (See Chen; FIG. 24; Step 2464; the UE determines whether the SS-RSRP of a first SSB is greater than a first threshold).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include wherein the UE determines to enter the coverage enhancement mode in response to when a measured DL SSB Reference Signal Received Power (RSRP) is lower than a SSB RSRP threshold as taught by Chen in the system of Lee in order to select a random access channel (RACH) resource in a multi-beam environment (See Para. 0006; line 1).
Regarding claims 3 & 11: The combination of Lee and Chen discloses the UE/method.
Furthermore, Lee discloses the UE/method, further comprising receiving, from the base station, a random access response (RAR) grant that schedules a physical uplink shared Channel (PUSCH) message 3 (Msg3) for the coverage enhancement mode (See Para. 0213-0216 & 0220; a RAR for CE PRACH preamble transmission and RAR may contain a scheduling grant for uplink transmission of msg3 on PUSCH).
Regarding claims 4 & 12: The combination of Lee and Chen discloses the UE/method.
Furthermore, Lee discloses the UE/method, further comprising transmitting, to the base station, the PUSCH MSG3 in coverage enhancement mode (See FIG. 2, Para. 0091 & 0220-0223; scheduled/granted uplink transmission is made by the ETRU using resource identified by the RAR scheduling grant/ RAR schedules Msg3 on PUSCH).
Regarding claims 5 & 13: The combination of Lee and Chen discloses the UE/method.
Furthermore, Lee discloses the UE/method, further comprising receiving, from the base station, configuration parameters for operating physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH), physical downlink control channel (PDCCH), PUSCH, and physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) in the coverage enhancement mode (See Para. 0072 & 0074; PDSCH, PDCCH, PUSCH and PUCCH).
Regarding claims 6 & 14: The combination of Lee and Chen discloses the UE/method.
Furthermore, Lee discloses the UE/method, receiving a communication from the base station through the PDSCH and the PDCCH in the coverage enhancement mode using the configuration parameters (See Para. 0407; receiving physical downlink channel from a radio access network while in CE mode. The second downlink physical channel as PDSCH and the PDCCH and the first downlink physical channel as (e)PDCCH).
Regarding claims 7 & 15: The combination of Lee and Chen discloses the UE/method.
Furthermore, Lee discloses the UE/method, further comprising transmitting a communication to the base station through the PUSCH and the PUCCH in the coverage enhancement mode using the configuration parameters (See Para. 0407; receiving physical downlink channel from a radio access network while in CE mode. The second downlink physical channel as PDSCH and the PDCCH and the first downlink physical channel as (e)PDCCH).
Regarding claim 17: Baruch discloses a baseband processor of a user equipment (UE) (See FIG. 1 B & Para. 0033; WTRU 102 includes processor), configured to cause the UE to perform operations comprising:
receiving, from a base station, coverage enhancement information indicating that a coverage enhancement mode is supported (See Para. 0070-0072 & 0075; CE levels and associated parameters include PRACH configuration, power control parameters and number of supported CE levels and associated parameters are provided by broadcast signaling from an eNB supporting CE/WTRUs in CE mode);
in response to determining to enter the coverage enhancement mode (Para. 0070-0072 & Para. 0164-0165; determining whether the WTRU is in CE mode and therefore performing CE-mode communication with repetition)), transmitting a reserved preamble to the base station to initiate random access for the coverage enhancement mode (Para. 0070-0072 & Para. 0164-0165; partitioning PRACH preamble between normal mode and CE mode: from M available preambles, the first N may be used for normal mode and the next P preamble used for CE mode).
determining whether to enter the coverage enhancement mode based on a downlink measurement (See Para. 0093-0094; the WTRU determines a CE level from a downlink measurement. Specifically, the ETRU measures RSRP and an RSRP value/range).
Lee does not explicitly disclose determining whether to enter the coverage enhancement mode based on a downlink signal synchronization block (DL SSB).
However, Chen from the same field of endeavor discloses determining whether to enter the coverage enhancement mode based on a downlink signal synchronization block (DL SSB) (See FIG. 24; Step 2464; the UE determines whether the SS-RSRP of a SSB satisfies a threshold).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include determining whether to enter the coverage enhancement mode based on a downlink signal synchronization block (DL SSB) as taught by Chen in the system of Lee in order to select a random access channel (RACH) resource in a multi-beam environment (See Para. 0006; line 1).
Regarding claim 18: The combination of Lee and Chen discloses the baseband processor of the UE.
Furthermore, Chen discloses the baseband processor of the UE, wherein the UE determines to enter the coverage enhancement mode in response to when a measured DL SSB Reference Signal Received Power (RSRP) is lower than a SSB RSRP threshold (See Chen; FIG. 24; Step 2464; the UE determines whether the SS-RSRP of a first SSB is greater than a first threshold).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include wherein the UE determines to enter the coverage enhancement mode in response to when a measured DL SSB Reference Signal Received Power (RSRP) is lower than a SSB RSRP threshold as taught by Chen in the system of Lee in order to select a random access channel (RACH) resource in a multi-beam environment (See Para. 0006; line 1).
Regarding claim 19: The combination of Lee and Chen discloses the baseband processor of the UE.
Furthermore, Lee discloses the baseband processor of the UE, further comprising receiving, from the base station, a random access response (RAR) grant that schedules a physical uplink shared Channel (PUSCH) message 3 (MSG3) for the coverage enhancement mode (See FIG. 2, Para. 0091 & 0220-0223; scheduled/granted uplink transmission is made by the ETRU using resource identified by the RAR scheduling grant/ RAR schedules Msg3 on PUSCH).
Regarding claim 20: The combination of Lee and Chen discloses the baseband processor of the UE.
Furthermore, Lee discloses the baseband processor of the UE, further comprising transmitting, to the base station, the PUSCH MSG3 in coverage enhancement mode (See Para. 0072 & 0074; PDSCH, PDCCH, PUSCH and PUCCH).
8. Claims 8 & 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee, in view of Chen, further in view of Lyu et al. (hereinafter referred as Lyu) US Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0052827 A1.
Regarding claims 8 & 16: The combination of Lee and Chen disclose all the limitations of the claimed invention with a exception of the additional configuration parameters comprise a time domain repetition and a frequency hopping parameter.
However, Lyu from the same field of endeavor discloses the additional configuration parameters comprise a time domain repetition and a frequency hopping parameter (See Para. 01200142 & 0148; configuring a UE with a repetition format, including slot-based or mini-slot/non-slot-based repetition, wherein higher-layer/RRC signaling may indicate the repetition format. It further discloses PUSCH-config in RRC signaling includes a frequency hopping parameters for configuring frequency-hopping operation, including intra-slot and inter-slot frequency hopping).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the additional configuration parameters comprise a time domain repetition and a frequency hopping parameter as taught by Lyu in the combined system of Chen and Lee in order to allocate resource for transmission of repetitions, using mini-slot based repetition and/or using frequency hopping (See Para. 0002; lines 2-3).
Conclusion
9. The prior art of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicants’ disclosure.
A. Lei et al. 2026/0122560 A1 (Title: Mobility during small date transmission) (See Abstract, Para. 0012 & 0037-0038).
B. Sedin et al. 2026/0075641 A1 (Title: coverage enhancement random access signaling and config) (See abstract, Para. 0006 & 00813-0016).
C. Kim et al. 2025/0234385 A1 (Title: TCP Host) (See FIG. 1, Para. 0046, 0050 & 0160).
10. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MEWALE A AMBAYE whose telephone number is (571)270-1076. The examiner can normally be reached on M.F 6a.m.-2p.m..
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 Moore can be reached on (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 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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.
/MEWALE A AMBAYE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2469
Prosecution Insights