DETAILED ACTION
Applicant’s response filed on 03/11/2026 has been entered and made of record.
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 Status
Claims 1 and 6 are amended.
No new claim is/are added.
Claim 1, 3-4, 6 and 8-9 are pending for examination.
Applicant Argument
Applicant’s arguments (remark pages 5-7), filed on 03/11/2025, with respect to claims 1, 3-4, 6 and 8-9 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground of rejection below which better address the claimed invention as amended.
This Office Action is made Final.
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.
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.
Claims 1, 3-4, 6 and 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by Jin et al. (US 20230345384 A1), hereinafter “Jin”, in view of Kim et al. (US 20120207112 A1), hereinafter “Kim”.
Per claim 1 and 6:
Regarding claim 6, Jin teaches ‘A user equipment (UE)’ (Jin: [0002]: “UE for each transmission reception point (TRP) in a wireless communication system”); ‘comprising: at least one processor’ (Jin: [FIG.1M]: “baseband processor”); ‘at least one computer memory’ (Jin: [0301]: “memory”); ‘storing instructions’ (Jin: [0301]: “a memory in which the program is stored”); ‘when executed by the at least one processor, cause the UE to perform operations’ (Jin: [0047]: “the instructions that execute on the computer or other programmable apparatus provide steps for implementing the functions”); ‘comprising:
determining, by a first medium access control (MAC) entity of the UE, that’ (Jin: [0237]: “LTE MAC entity”; [0015]: “perform a PHR with respect to multiple TRPs is determined”);
‘i) an uplink (UL) resource is allocated for a new transmission’ (Jin: [0192]: “the UE inserts the generated PHR MAC CE into the MAC PDU and transfers the same to the base station according to an uplink grant resource”);
‘ii) the first MAC entity is not configured with two power headroom report (PHR) mode’ (Jin: [0236]: “A case that when processing of a PHR report for multiple TRPs is not supported by the LTE node … In this case, a legacy PHR MAC CE is applied to the LTE”, LTE MAC entity not configured with two PHR mode);
‘iii) a serving cell is configured with multiple Transmission and Reception Points (TRPs)’ (Jin: [FIG.1E]: “NR gNB (CU)”; [0136]: “a cell serviced by an NR gNB 1e-05 operating based on beamforming may include multiple transmission reception points (TRPs) … The UE 1e-50 accesses the NR gNB 1e-05 and an external network through the TRPs”; [0012]: “a method of a UE for performing a power headroom report (PHR) with respect to multiple transmission reception points (TRPs) to a base station”);
‘iv) a second MAC entity of the UE, to which the serving cell belongs, is configured with two PHR mode’ (Jin: [FIG.1D]: “UE”: “NR MAC”; [0182]: “multiTRP-PHR (twoPHRMode field): Indicator for activating PHR report with respect to TRPs to the UE”; [0266]: “processing of a PHR report for multiple TRPs is supported or configured by the NR node”; [0267]: “the NR MAC entity use PHR MAC CE formats … the TRP-based PH value report is performed in cells of NR cells, in which a PHR report for multiple TRPs is configured”);
‘based on determining and based on there being a real transmission, obtaining, by the first MAC entity, a first power headroom value related to the multiple TRPs for the serving cell, wherein the first power headroom value is obtained from a power headroom value of the real transmission’ (Jin: [FIG.1K]: block 1k-25: “Calculate PH value according to configuration conditions and generate PHR MAC CE”; [0158]: “V bit is configured to 0 in case of actual transmission and the report is performed by calculating the PH value is calculated and reported according to the actual transmission”; [0138]: “the UE actually performs transmission”; obtain (calculate) a PH value based on a real (actual) transmission). However, Jin fails to expressly teach based on determination that there being a real transmission;
‘based on determining and based on there not being the real transmission, obtaining, by the first MAC entity, a second power headroom value related to the multiple TRPs for the serving cell’ (Jin: [FIG.1K]; block “1K-25”: “Calculate PH value according to configuration condition and generate PHR MAC CE”, block “1K-15”: “Trigger PHR according to PHR configuration configured for each cell group”; [0266]-[0267]: “A case that when processing of a PHR report for multiple TRPs is not supported by the LTE node, even if processing of a PHR report for multiple TRPs is supported or configured by the NR node … The new PHR MAC CE format is designed to include a PH value in the LTE and a PH value in the NR, a cell-based PH report (using one TRP) is performed in the LTE as in the conventional method”; [0158]: “V bit is configured to 1 in case of no transmission and a value calculated under the assumption that predetermined virtual transmission is performed is reported as PH. The virtual transmission is referred to as a PUSCH reference format”). However, Jin fails to expressly teach based on determination that there not being the real transmission;
‘transmitting, by the first MAC entity, a PHR MAC control element (CE) including the obtained first power headroom value or the second power headroom value for the serving cell’ (Jin: [FIG.1K]: block 1k-30: “Transmit PHR MAC CE”; [0273]: “in operation 1k-30, the UE inserts the generated MAC CE into uplink grant received from the base station to be transferred to the base station”; [0267]: “The new PHR MAC CE format is designed to include a PH value in the LTE and a PH value in the NR, a cell-based PH report (using one TRP) is performed in the LTE as in the conventional method, and a PHR report is performed through multiple TRPs in the NR”).
Jin does not expressly teach ‘wherein the second power headroom value is obtained from a power headroom value related to a lowest index’.
However, Kim in the same field of endeavor teaches determine there being real transmission or there being no real transmission (Kim: [FIG.6]: “Real transmission”, “no transmission”; [0071]: “a situation in which an actual transmission takes place”; [0076]: “For the serving cell having no actual transmission”), eNB can trigger PHR to acquire pathloss although there is no actual PUSCH transmission (Kim: [0080]: “Although there is no actual PUSCH transmission, the eNB can trigger PHR to acquire pathloss on a specific uplink carrier … the UE sets the V bit to a predetermined value (e.g., 0) if the UE calculates the PH for the corresponding cell based on the real PUSCH transmission (i.e. using real transmission format) or another value (e.g. 1) if the UE calculates the PH for the corresponding cell using the reference format (i.e., number of RBs=1 and .DELTA..sub.TF=0) because of no real PUSCH transmission in the corresponding cell”; [0082]: “The UE records the information on the pathloss, P.sub.CMAX, P-MPR, and whether the PH is calculated in consideration of real data transmission that are applied in PH calculation per serving cell”) and a power headroom value related to a lowest index (Kim: [FIG.7]; [0081]: “PH 770 and P.sub.CMAX 775 for SCell having the lowest index”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Kim’s teaching with that of Jin to obtain a first power headroom value related to the multiple TRPs for the serving cell based on determination that there being a real transmission and obtain a second power headroom value related to the multiple TRPs for the serving cell, wherein the second power headroom value is obtained from a power headroom value related to a lowest index, based on determination that there not being the real transmission in order to improve PHR report (Kim: [Abstract]: “An improved method and an apparatus for reporting Power Headroom (PH) of a UE are provided”).
Regarding claim 1, claim 1 recites the method implemented by the UE of claim 6 (discussed above).
Per claim 3 and 8:
Regarding claim 8, combination of Jin and Kim teaches the UE of claim 6 (discussed above).
Jin teaches ‘wherein the PHR MAC CE further includes a power headroom value for another serving cell belonging to the first MAC entity not configured with two PHR mode’ (Jin: [FIG.1K]; block “1K-25”: ”Calculate PH value according to configuration condition and generate PHR MAC CE”, block “1K-15”: “Trigger PHR according to PHR configuration configured for each cell group”; [0266]-[0267]: “A case that when processing of a PHR report for multiple TRPs is not supported by the LTE node, even if processing of a PHR report for multiple TRPs is supported or configured by the NR node … The new PHR MAC CE format is designed to include a PH value in the LTE and a PH value in the NR, a cell-based PH report (using one TRP) is performed in the LTE as in the conventional method”; include a PHR value for LTE MAC entity not configured with two PHR mode).
Regarding claim 3, claim 3 recites the method implemented by the UE of claim 8 (discussed above).
Per claim 4 and 9:
Regarding claim 9, combination of Jin and Kim teaches the UE of claim 8 (discussed above).
Jin teaches ‘wherein the power headroom value for the serving cell and the power headroom value for another serving cell are included in the PHR in ascending order of a serving cell index’ (Jin: [FIG.1FB]: “Multiple Entry PHR MAC CE format (1f-31)”, “PH (Type X, Serving Cell 1)”, “PH (Type X, Serving Cell n)”, first PH value and second PH value are included in PHR in ascending order of a serving cell index).
Regarding claim 4, claim 4 recites the method implemented by the UE of claim 9 (discussed above).
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 GUOXING FAN whose telephone number is (703)756-1310. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00 am - 5:30 pm ET.
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, Yemane Mesfin can be reached at (571)272-3927. 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.
/G.F./Examiner, Art Unit 2462
/YEMANE MESFIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2462
Prosecution Insights