Patent Application 17995056 - METHOD AND DEVICE FOR SUPPORTING RANDOM ACCESS

Title: METHOD AND DEVICE FOR SUPPORTING RANDOM ACCESS FOR LOW-CAPABILITY TERMINAL IN WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SYSTEM

Application Information

Invention Title: METHOD AND DEVICE FOR SUPPORTING RANDOM ACCESS FOR LOW-CAPABILITY TERMINAL IN WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SYSTEM
Application Number: 17995056
Submission Date: 2025-05-16T00:00:00.000Z
Effective Filing Date: 2022-09-29T00:00:00.000Z
Filing Date: 2022-09-29T00:00:00.000Z
National Class: 370
National Sub-Class: 329000
Examiner Employee Number: 85726
Art Unit: 2477
Tech Center: 2400

Rejection Summary

102 Rejections: 1
103 Rejections: 2

Cited Patents

The following patents were cited in the rejection:

Office Action Text

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 .

Response to Amendment
Acknowledgement is made of amendment filed on 04/29/2025. The amendments of Applicant are entered and have been considered by Examiner. Claims 1-15 were previously pending. Claims 1-15 have been amended. Claims 16-20 have been added. Claims 1-20 are currently pending.

Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.

Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.

Claim(s) 1, 2, 5, 6, 8, 9, 12, 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US 2022/0287102 A1 (foreign priority date of Feb. 13, 2020) to Futaki et al.

Regarding Claim 1, Futaki teaches a method performed by a terminal in a wireless communication system, the method comprising:
receiving, from a base station, a system information block (SIB) including a first parameter set for a random access and information related to whether the terminal is supported. (Figure 3 and [0061], discloses In step 301, the gNB 1 (i.e. base station) broadcasts both the first (i.e. first parameter set) and second initial BWP configurations via system information (e.g., SIB1). [0072], further discloses In the procedure shown in FIG. 3, the second initial BWP configuration (i.e. information related to whether the terminal is supported) broadcast in step 301 may imply the support for the second type of UEs (e.g., reduced capability UEs) in the cell 10. Figure 7 and [0096], discloses in step 701, the gNB 1 broadcasts the first initial BWP configuration (i.e. first parameter set for random access) via system information (e.g., SIB1). The gNB 1 further broadcasts an indication indicating the support for the second type of UEs (i.e. information related to whether the terminal is supported) via the system information).
identifying whether a cell on which the SIB is received is available to access based on the information; ([0072], discloses In the procedure shown in FIG. 3, the second initial BWP configuration broadcast in step 301 may imply the support for the second type of UEs (e.g., reduced capability UEs) in the cell 10. If the second initial BWP configuration cannot be received in a cell, the second type of UEs may recognize that access to that cell is barred (i.e. indicating availability to access))
in case that the cell is identified to be available to access based on the information, identifying whether the SIB includes a second parameter set for a random access of the terminal; ([0061]-[0062], discloses the gNB 1 broadcasts both the first and second initial BWP configurations (i.e. via system information (e.g., SIB1). If the UE 2 is the second type of UE, the UE 2 selects the second initial BWP configuration (i.e. identifying a second parameter set) from the received system information and applies the selected second initial BWP configuration.)
and in case that the SIB includes the second parameter set for the random access of the terminal, transmitting, to the base station, a random access preamble based on the second parameter set, ([0064], discloses the UE 2 may select a random access preamble transmitted in step 303 according to random access parameters contained in the second initial BWP configuration)
wherein the terminal has reduced capabilities and a bandwidth supported by the terminal is limited to a predetermined value. ([0047], disclsoes the UEs 2 are classified into a first type and a second type. The second type of UEs are UEs with limited capability (i.e. reduced capabilities) compared to the first type of UEs. The second type of UEs may have limited RF capability compared to the first type of UEs. In other words, the second type of UEs may support a limited UE bandwidth (i.e. predetermined value) (e.g., UE channel bandwidth, UE carrier bandwidth, or UE RF bandwidth) compared to the first type of UEs. The second type of UEs may be the above-described reduced capability NR devices, while the first type of UEs may be normal UEs (e.g., eMBB devices or URLLC devices))

Regarding Claim 2, Futaki teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising:
In case that the SIB does not include the second parameter set for the random access of the terminal, transmitting, to the base station, a random access preamble based on the first parameter set. ([0096]-[0097], discloses FIG. 7 shows an example of operations of the gNB 1 and the UE 2 according to this embodiment. It is assumed here that the UE 2 is the second type of UE. In step 701, the gNB 1 broadcasts the first initial BWP configuration via system information (e.g., SIB1). The gNB 1 further broadcasts an indication indicating the support for the second type of UEs via the system information (i.e. does not include the second parameter set). In step 702, the UE 2 receives the system information from the gNB 1 and applies the received first initial BWP configuration (i.e. based on the first parameter set). In step 703, the UE 2 transmits a random access preamble to the gNB 1)

Regarding Claim 5, Futaki teaches a method performed by a base station in a wireless communication system, the method comprising:
transmitting a system information block (SIB) including a first parameter set for a random access and information related to whether a terminal is supported. (Figure 3 and [0061], discloses In step 301, the gNB 1 (i.e. base station) broadcasts both the first (i.e. first parameter set) and second initial BWP configurations via system information (e.g., SIB1). [0072], further discloses In the procedure shown in FIG. 3, the second initial BWP configuration (i.e. information related to whether the terminal is supported) broadcast in step 301 may imply the support for the second type of UEs (e.g., reduced capability UEs) in the cell 10. Figure 7 and [0096], discloses in step 701, the gNB 1 broadcasts the first initial BWP configuration (i.e. first parameter set for random access) via system information (e.g., SIB1). The gNB 1 further broadcasts an indication indicating the support for the second type of UEs (i.e. information related to whether the terminal is supported) via the system information).
wherein the terminal has reduced capabilities and a bandwidth supported by the terminal is limited to a predetermined value. ([0047], discloses the UEs 2 are classified into a first type and a second type. The second type of UEs are UEs with limited capability (i.e. reduced capabilities) compared to the first type of UEs. The second type of UEs may have limited RF capability compared to the first type of UEs. In other words, the second type of UEs may support a limited UE bandwidth (i.e. predetermined value) (e.g., UE channel bandwidth, UE carrier bandwidth, or UE RF bandwidth) compared to the first type of UEs. The second type of UEs may be the above-described reduced capability NR devices, while the first type of UEs may be normal UEs (e.g., eMBB devices or URLLC devices))
in case that a cell on which the SIB is transmitted is available for the terminal to access identified to be available to access, receiving, from the terminal, a random access preamble ([0061]-[0062], discloses the gNB 1 broadcasts both the first and second initial BWP configurations (i.e. via system information (e.g., SIB1). If the UE 2 is the second type of UE, the UE 2 selects the second initial BWP configuration (i.e., indicating support which indicates available to access) from the received system information and applies the selected second initial BWP configuration)
and in case that the SIB includes the second parameter set for the random access of the terminal, the random access preamble is associated with the second parameter set, ([0064], discloses the UE 2 may select a random access preamble transmitted in step 303 according to random access parameters contained in the second initial BWP configuration)

Regarding Claim 6, Futaki teaches the method of claim 5, further comprising:
In case that the SIB does not include the second parameter set for the random access of the terminal, the random access preamble is associated with the first parameter set. ([0096]-[0097], discloses FIG. 7 shows an example of operations of the gNB 1 and the UE 2 according to this embodiment. It is assumed here that the UE 2 is the second type of UE. In step 701, the gNB 1 broadcasts the first initial BWP configuration via system information (e.g., SIB1). The gNB 1 further broadcasts an indication indicating the support for the second type of UEs via the system information (i.e. does not include the second parameter set). In step 702, the UE 2 receives the system information from the gNB 1 and applies the received first initial BWP configuration (i.e. based on the first parameter set). In step 703, the UE 2 transmits a random access preamble to the gNB 1)

Regarding Claim 8, Futaki teaches a terminal in a wireless communication system, the terminal comprising: (Figure 1 and 17, illustrates a UE)
A transceiver; and a controller configured to: (Figure 17 and [0142], discloses a UE comprising transceiver and processor)
receive, from a base station via the transceiver, a system information block (SIB) including a first parameter set for a random access and information related to whether the terminal is supported. (Figure 3 and [0061], discloses In step 301, the gNB 1 (i.e. base station) broadcasts both the first (i.e. first parameter set) and second initial BWP configurations via system information (e.g., SIB1). [0072], further discloses In the procedure shown in FIG. 3, the second initial BWP configuration (i.e. information related to whether the terminal is supported) broadcast in step 301 may imply the support for the second type of UEs (e.g., reduced capability UEs) in the cell 10. Figure 7 and [0096], discloses in step 701, the gNB 1 broadcasts the first initial BWP configuration (i.e. first parameter set for random access) via system information (e.g., SIB1). The gNB 1 further broadcasts an indication indicating the support for the second type of UEs (i.e. information related to whether the terminal is supported) via the system information).
Identify whether a cell on which the SIB is received is available to access based on the information; ([0072], discloses In the procedure shown in FIG. 3, the second initial BWP configuration broadcast in step 301 may imply the support for the second type of UEs (e.g., reduced capability UEs) in the cell 10. If the second initial BWP configuration cannot be received in a cell, the second type of UEs may recognize that access to that cell is barred (i.e. indicating availability to access))
in case that the cell is identified to be available to access based on the information, identifying whether the SIB includes a second parameter set for a random access of the terminal; ([0061]-[0062], discloses the gNB 1 broadcasts both the first and second initial BWP configurations (i.e. via system information (e.g., SIB1). If the UE 2 is the second type of UE, the UE 2 selects the second initial BWP configuration (i.e. identifying a second parameter set) from the received system information and applies the selected second initial BWP configuration.)
and in case that the SIB includes the second parameter set for the random access of the terminal, transmit, to the base station, a random access preamble based on the second parameter set, ([0064], discloses the UE 2 may select a random access preamble transmitted in step 303 according to random access parameters contained in the second initial BWP configuration)
wherein the terminal has reduced capabilities and a bandwidth supported by the terminal is limited to a predetermined value. ([0047], disclsoes the UEs 2 are classified into a first type and a second type. The second type of UEs are UEs with limited capability (i.e. reduced capabilities) compared to the first type of UEs. The second type of UEs may have limited RF capability compared to the first type of UEs. In other words, the second type of UEs may support a limited UE bandwidth (i.e. predetermined value) (e.g., UE channel bandwidth, UE carrier bandwidth, or UE RF bandwidth) compared to the first type of UEs. The second type of UEs may be the above-described reduced capability NR devices, while the first type of UEs may be normal UEs (e.g., eMBB devices or URLLC devices))

Claim 9 is rejected for having the same limitations as claim 2, except the claim is in terminal apparatus format.
Regarding Claim 12, Futaki teaches a base station in a wireless communication system, the base station comprising: (Figure 16, illustrates base station)
A transceiver; and a controller to: (Figure 16 and [0134], illustrates base station comprising transceiver and processor)
transmitting a system information block (SIB) including a first parameter set for a random access and information related to whether a terminal is supported. (Figure 3 and [0061], discloses In step 301, the gNB 1 (i.e. base station) broadcasts both the first (i.e. first parameter set) and second initial BWP configurations via system information (e.g., SIB1). [0072], further discloses In the procedure shown in FIG. 3, the second initial BWP configuration (i.e. information related to whether the terminal is supported) broadcast in step 301 may imply the support for the second type of UEs (e.g., reduced capability UEs) in the cell 10. Figure 7 and [0096], discloses in step 701, the gNB 1 broadcasts the first initial BWP configuration (i.e. first parameter set for random access) via system information (e.g., SIB1). The gNB 1 further broadcasts an indication indicating the support for the second type of UEs (i.e. information related to whether the terminal is supported) via the system information).
wherein the terminal has reduced capabilities and a bandwidth supported by the terminal is limited to a predetermined value. ([0047], discloses the UEs 2 are classified into a first type and a second type. The second type of UEs are UEs with limited capability (i.e. reduced capabilities) compared to the first type of UEs. The second type of UEs may have limited RF capability compared to the first type of UEs. In other words, the second type of UEs may support a limited UE bandwidth (i.e. predetermined value) (e.g., UE channel bandwidth, UE carrier bandwidth, or UE RF bandwidth) compared to the first type of UEs. The second type of UEs may be the above-described reduced capability NR devices, while the first type of UEs may be normal UEs (e.g., eMBB devices or URLLC devices))
in case that a cell on which the SIB is transmitted is available for the terminal to access identified to be available to access, receiving, from the terminal via the transceiver, a random access preamble ([0061]-[0062], discloses the gNB 1 broadcasts both the first and second initial BWP configurations (i.e. via system information (e.g., SIB1). If the UE 2 is the second type of UE, the UE 2 selects the second initial BWP configuration (i.e., indicating support which indicates available to access) from the received system information and applies the selected second initial BWP configuration)
and in case that the SIB includes the second parameter set for the random access of the terminal, the random access preamble is associated with the second parameter set, ([0064], discloses the UE 2 may select a random access preamble transmitted in step 303 according to random access parameters contained in the second initial BWP configuration)

Claim 13 is rejected for having the same limitations as claim 6 above, except the claim is in base station apparatus format.

Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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(s) 3, 10, 14, 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Futaki in view of US 2023/0164845 A1 (foreign priority date of Dec. 24, 2019) to Li et al. (hereinafter “Li”)

Regarding Claim 3, Futaki teaches the method of claim 1, wherein Futaki does not explicitly teach the predetermined value is 20Mhz.
However, in a similar field of endeavor, Li discloses in [0097], Wireless communication systems, such as a NR-Light network, may support communications by a reduced capability or low-tier UE, such as smart wearable devices, industrial sensors, video surveillance devices, IoT devices, vehicle-based devices, and the like. These devices may be considered a reduced capability UE in that they support a reduced transmit power level (e.g., the uplink transmit power level may be as much as 10 dB less than other UE), have fewer antennas (e.g., may only be equipped with a single transmit antenna), have a reduced transmit/receive bandwidth (e.g., 5 to 20 MHz bandwidth for both transmit and receive, in some examples).
Therefore, 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 teachings of Futaki to include the above limitations as suggested by Li, thus allowing for less complex/resource intensive communication protocols as indicated in [0055].

Therefore, 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 teachings of Futaki to include the above limitations as suggested by Li, as uplink repetition may be used to recover from the loss due to fewer antennas, lower transmit power level, etc and improving reliability as indicated in [0055]-[0056] of Li.

Claim 10 is rejected for having the same limitations as claim 3, except the claim is in terminal apparatus format.

Regarding Claim 14, Futaki teaches the base station of claim 12, wherein Futaki does not explicitly teach the predetermined value is 20Mhz.
However, in a similar field of endeavor, Li discloses in [0097], Wireless communication systems, such as a NR-Light network, may support communications by a reduced capability or low-tier UE, such as smart wearable devices, industrial sensors, video surveillance devices, IoT devices, vehicle-based devices, and the like. These devices may be considered a reduced capability UE in that they support a reduced transmit power level (e.g., the uplink transmit power level may be as much as 10 dB less than other UE), have fewer antennas (e.g., may only be equipped with a single transmit antenna), have a reduced transmit/receive bandwidth (e.g., 5 to 20 MHz bandwidth for both transmit and receive, in some examples).
Therefore, 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 teachings of Futaki to include the above limitations as suggested by Li, thus allowing for less complex/resource intensive communication protocols as indicated in [0055].

Claim 17 is rejected for having the same limitations as claim 5, except the claim is in base station apparatus format.

Claim(s) 4, 7, 11, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Futaki in view of US 2023/0007702 A1 (Foreign priority date of Mar. 5, 2020) to Park (hereinafter “Park”)

Regarding Claim 4, Futaki teaches the method of claim 1, wherein Futaki does not explicitly teach the second parameter set includes information indicating a number of repetitions of transmitting the random access preamble.
However, in a similar field of endeavor, Park discloses in [0140]-[0142] and Table 5, An RC UE (i.e. reduced capability UE) that receives random access configuration related information (i.e. second parameter set) via system information (e.g., SIB1) obtained from a base station may determine parameter values for performing random access. Part of system information (e.g., SIB1) related to random access configuration related information to which the examples of the disclosure is applicable may be listed as shown in Table 5. Table 5 illustrates “numRepetitionPerPreamble” (i.e. number of repetitions for transmitting the random access preamble).
Therefore, 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 teachings of Futaki to include the above limitations as suggested by Park, for the purpose of compensation associated with coverage for an RC UE having a low transmission capability from the perspective of uplink transmission as indicated in [0149] of Park.

Regarding Claim 7, Futaki teaches the method of claim 5, wherein Futaki does not explicitly teach the second parameter set includes information indicating a number of repetitions of transmitting the random access preamble.
However, in a similar field of endeavor, Park discloses in [0140]-[0142] and Table 5, An RC UE (i.e. reduced capability UE) that receives random access configuration related information (i.e. second parameter set) via system information (e.g., SIB1) obtained from a base station may determine parameter values for performing random access. Part of system information (e.g., SIB1) related to random access configuration related information to which the examples of the disclosure is applicable may be listed as shown in Table 5. Table 5 illustrates “numRepetitionPerPreamble” (i.e. number of repetitions for transmitting the random access preamble).
Therefore, 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 teachings of Futaki to include the above limitations as suggested by Park, for the purpose of compensation associated with coverage for an RC UE having a low transmission capability from the perspective of uplink transmission as indicated in [0149] of Park.

Claim 11 is rejected for having the same limitations as claim 4, except the claim is in terminal apparatus format.

Claim 15 is rejected for having the same limitations as claim 7 above, except the claim is in base station apparatus format.

Regarding Claim 16, Futaki/Park teaches The method of claim 4, wherein Park further teaches the second parameter set further includes information associated with a random access preamble group for the terminal and information on a reference signal received power (RSRP) threshold of synchronization signal and physical broadcast channel (SSB) for the random access of the terminal. (Park discloses in [0140]-[0142] and [0152] and Table 5, a preamble group configured for the RC UE, and “rsrp-ThresholdSSB-repetition”) Examiner maintains same motivation to combine as indicated in Claim 4 above.

Regarding Claim 18, Futaki/Park teaches The method of claim 7, wherein the second parameter set further includes information associated with a random access preamble group for the terminal and information on a reference signal received power (RSRP) threshold of synchronization signal and physical broadcast channel (SSB) for the random access of the terminal. (Park discloses in [0140]-[0142] and [0152] and Table 5, a preamble group configured for the RC UE, and “rsrp-ThresholdSSB-repetition”) Examiner maintains same motivation to combine as indicated in Claim 4 above.

Claim 19 is rejected for having the same limitations as claim 11 above, except the claim is in terminal apparatus format.

Claim 20 is rejected for having the same limitations as claim 15 above, except the claim is in base station apparatus format.

Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.

Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JENKEY VAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7160. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9am - 5pm.
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, Chirag Shah can be reached at (571)272-3144. 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.

/JENKEY VAN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2477