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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 06/02/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment/Remarks
This communication is considered fully responsive to the amendment filed on 05/18/2026.
Claims 1-4, 6-13, 15-19, 21-26, 29-34, 36 are pending and are examined in this office action.
Claims 1, 9, 16, 22 have been amended.
No new claim has been added and previously claims 5, 14, 20, 27-28, 35 had been canceled.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, 05/18/2026, with respect to claim(s) 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.
Priority
The later-filed application must be an application for a patent for an invention which is also disclosed in the prior application (the parent or original nonprovisional application or provisional application). The disclosure of the invention in the parent application and in the later-filed application must be sufficient to comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or the first paragraph of pre-AlA 35 U.S.C. 112, except for the best mode requirement. See Transco Products, Inc. v. Performance Contracting, Inc., 38 F.3d 551,32 USPQ2d 1077 (Fed. Cir. 1994) The disclosure of the prior-filed application, PRO 63/029,014 fails to provide adequate support or enablement in the manner provided by 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AlA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph for one or more claims of this application. None of the priority documents explicitly or implicitly disclose claim limitations as required by all independent claims. Therefore, the effective filing date of the application has been deemed to be the filing date, 05/20/2021, of the instant application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-4, 6-13, 15-19, 21-26, 29-34, 36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, recite amendment to the previous claim, i.e.
“transmit, to a second wireless communication device, a set of communications, each communication of the set of communications comprising one or more respective pilots for estimation of a respective power amplifier nonlinearity state used to transmit each communication of the set of communications;
transmit, in a message to the second wireless communication device, an indication of the respective power amplifier nonlinearity state used to transmit each communication of the set of communications, the message being different from the set of communications. “
However, there is no support in the specification and drawings for this feature. Without identifying claimed language claimed, specifically “……each communication of the set of communications comprising one or more respective pilots for estimation of a respective power amplifier nonlinearity state used to transmit each communication of the set of communications, … transmit, in a message to the second wireless communication device, an indication of the respective power amplifier nonlinearity state used to transmit each communication of the set of communications, the message being different from the set of communications” is vague and uncertain to cause one of ordinary skill in the art to reasonably be able to assume that applicant had possession of the invention as claimed. MPEP 2163.01.
It seems that applicant is trying to cover Figure 3, 4 in independent claim.
The applicant claims that “Example support for the amended claims may be found in, for example, paragraphs 70-74 of the specification as filed” ( see argument filled on 05/18/2026) .
Following the from Applicant’s speciation as filed originally.
“
[0070] As shown by reference number 315, the UE may transmit, and the base station may receive, an indication of a capability of the UE to communicate based at least in part on an indication of a power amplifier nonlinearity state. For example, the UE may indicate a capability of the UE to freeze (e.g., prohibit changing) a power amplifier nonlinearity state based at least in part on receiving an indication to freeze the power amplifier nonlinearity state. In some aspects, the UE may indicate a capability to identify a set of parameters for transmitting communications based at least in part on an indication from the base station (e.g., an indication of an identifier associated with a set of parameters). In some aspects, the UE may transmit the indication via RRC signaling, one or more MAC CEs, a physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) message, and/or the like.
[0071] As shown by reference number 320, the UE may transmit, and the base station may receive, one or more communications, and indicate power amplifier nonlinearity states used to transmit respective communications of the one or more communications. In some aspects, the UE may transmit one or more pilots within the one or more communications that may be used to estimate nonlinearities associated with different power amplifier nonlinearity states. In some aspects, individual transmissions may have an insufficient number of pilots to accurately (e.g., with an accuracy that satisfies a threshold) estimate a nonlinearity for the individual transmission.
[0072] In some aspects, combining (e.g., aggregating, averaging, and/or the like) a set of the one or more communications may provide a sufficient number of pilots to accurately estimate the nonlinearity for the set of the one or more communications. Based at least in part on indicating the power amplifier nonlinearity states used to transmit the one or more communications, a receiving device (e.g., the base station) may be able to combine a set of the one or more communications that were transmitted with a same power amplifier nonlinearity state to estimate a nonlinearity of communications transmitted with the same power amplifier nonlinearity state.
[0073] As shown by reference number 325, the base station may store power amplifier nonlinearity information for the power amplifier nonlinearity state. For example, the base station may store information (e.g., information from pilots) from respective communications from the UE and may identify the information based at least in part on the indicated power amplifier nonlinearity state. In this way, the base station may be capable of averaging the stored information for one or more of the power amplifier nonlinearity states to estimate nonlinearities of the power amplifier nonlinearity states.
[0074] As shown by reference number 330, the UE may receive, and the base station may transmit, an indication of a power amplifier nonlinearity state to use for transmitting one or more communications. In some aspects, the indication of the power amplifier nonlinearity state may include a power amplifier (PA) transmission configuration indicator (TCI) state. The PA TCI state may be identified in a quasi co-location (QCL) type indicator.”
Claim 1 recites, inter alia, two transmitting steps. The 1st step transmits “a set of communications” and the 2nd transmit step transmits “a message”. See claim 1. With that said, the 1st transmit message includes the pilot signals. The underlying issue is that this appears to be message 320 give the teachings of paragraph [0071] (emphasis added).
This is important, because there is no further (2) transmit message after message 320 that makes sense for the claim and that contains the respective power amplifier nonlinearity state .. to transmit each communication of the set of communications as claimed.
Applicant is welcome to point out where in the specification the Examiner can find written description for the above-mentioned limitations if Applicant believes otherwise.
Regarding claim2 9, 16, 22 , the independent claims is/are interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 1.
All dependent claims which depend on the above rejected independent claims are also interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth for their respective independent claims above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. See PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to M MOSTAZIR RAHMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-4785. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30am-5:00pm PST.
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, Derrick Ferris can be reached at 571-272-3123. 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.
/M Mostazir Rahman/Examiner, Art Unit 2411
/DERRICK W FERRIS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2411
Prosecution Insights