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 Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s)1-30 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 § 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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 11-15, 18-21, 24-30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Balasubramanian et al. US Patent Pub. No. 2016/0150450 A1, hereinafter, ‘Balasubramanian’ in view of Chen et al. US Patent Pub. No.: 2021/0266809, hereinafter, ‘Chen’ and further in view of Ngai et al. US Patent Pub. No.: 2012/0270592 A1, hereinafter, ‘Ngai’.
Consider Claims 1, 19, 26 and 30, Balasubramanian teaches a method for wireless communication, comprising: receiving, at a user equipment (UE) (e.g., see at least figure 7 architecture of device 115 )that supports concurrent communications using a first radio access technology and a second radio access technology (e.g., this is met based on the teachings of at least 0046-0048- “The wireless communications system 100 may include base stations 105 of different types (e.g., macro or small cell base stations). Each of the base stations 105 may be configured to communicate using one or more communication technologies, and there may be overlapping geographic coverage areas 110 for different technologies”), a plurality of indications indicating upper power limits for uplink transmissions over a plurality of cells that support the first radio access technology(e.g., this is net based on at least the teachings of 0057 -0059 – “the UE 115 may receive one or more system information block (SIBs)… Decoding SIB1 may enable the UE 115 to receive SIB2. SIB2 may contain RRC configuration information related to … power control…”); selecting a first cell of the plurality of cells based at least in part on a selection criteria being satisfied by the first cell; and transmitting an uplink transmission over the first cell(e.g., this is met based on at least 0038 – “parameters associated with cell selection criteria used by a UE to determine whether to connect to a cell may be signaled by the network through system information messages”, 0059 –“This offset may also be derived from SIB1. P.sub.comp may be the maximum of P.sub.Emax−P.sub.Umax or 0, where P.sub.Emax is the maximum power allowed in the cell and P.sub.Umax is the maximum transmit power of the UE 115. Thus, a UE 115 may receive several cells (e.g., from different PLMNs) and may select a cell after reading SIB1, determining if the cell belongs to its home PLMN, and applying the above criteria (or any other cell selection criteria” and transmitting an uplink transmission over the first cell – this is met based on at least 0058- “a UE 115 may also perform a cell selection procedure to establishing a connection with a base station 105. For example, a UE 115 may camp on a cell of a base station 105 after verifying that specific criteria have been fulfilled”).
However, Balasubramanian does not specifically teach an upper power limit for the first cell being less than or equal to a threshold; and transmitting an uplink transmission over the cell in accordance with the upper power limit for the cell (i.e., the problem to be solved is determining the most suitable cells based on power constraints and optimizing cell (re)selection).
In analogous art, Chen teaches in at least 0128-0129 – “The network device sends system information to the terminal device. The system information includes first information”- 0144 – “the first information may include: determining whether a maximum transmit power of the terminal device is not less than (or greater than or equal to) a sum of the minimum received signal power corresponding to the first cell and a first threshold… Optionally, if the maximum transmit power of the terminal device is not less than (or greater than or equal to) the sum of the minimum received signal power corresponding to the first cell and the first threshold, the first cell is determined as a camped cell.” 0148 -0149– “it is assumed that P_max is the maximum transmit power of the terminal device, and P_threshold is the uplink transmit power threshold corresponding to the first cell. For example, if P_max≥P_threshold, the first cell is determined as the camped cell. Otherwise, the first cell is abandoned”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to try an upper power limit for the cell being less than or equal to a threshold; and transmitting an uplink transmission over the cell in accordance with the upper power limit for the cell for the purpose of optimizing cell (re)selection.
However, Balasubramanian as modified by Chen does not specifically teach thresholds associated with concurrent communication wherein the uplink transmission is concurrent with a second communication over a second cell that supports the second radio access technology, and wherein the upper power limit being less than or equal to the threshold enables the concurrent communication of the uplink transmission and the second communication.
In analogous art, Ngai teaches “access terminal 106 may be multimode, capable of operating using different radio access technologies (RATs) such as radio access technologies defined by standards such as cdma2000 1x, 1x-EV-DO, LTE, eHRPD and the like. An access terminal 106 may perform a plurality of tasks across various communication systems using different radio access technologies.” -0054… “dynamic transmission power limit management may be provided for multiple RAT types. For example, implementations described herein may be used in conjunction with RAT types such as 1x, DO, GSM (and EDGE/GPRS), WCDMA/UMTS (and HSPA/HSPA+), LTE (FDD and TDD), TD-SCDMA, WLAN, and the like. Furthermore, as described above with reference to FIGS. 14-18, dynamic transmission power limit may be supported for a variety of concurrent RAT transmissions. For example, concurrent transmissions of 1x+DO, 1x+LTE, 1x WLAN, DO+WLAN, GSM+WLAN, WCDMA/UMTS+WLAN, LTE+WLAN, TD-SCDMA+WLAN, 1x+DO+WLAN, 1x+LTE+WLAN, GSM+LTE, GSM+LTE+WLAN, 1x+GSM, DO+GSM, GSM+GSM, GSM+WCDMA/UMTS, GSM+TD-SCDMA, and the like may be supported. As such, transformations and applicable LUTs for managing transmission power levels of one RAT based on priorities of transmissions for another RAT may be included for each of these combinations.” – Paragraph 0128
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to try thresholds associated with concurrent communication wherein the uplink transmission is concurrent with a second communication over a second cell that supports the second radio access technology, and wherein the upper power limit being less than or equal to the threshold enables the concurrent communication of the uplink transmission and the second communication providing transmission power limit back-off for Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) compliance as suggest by Ngai.
Consider Claims 2, 20 and 27, Balasubramanian teaches the claimed invention except further comprising: estimating an amount of power to support uplink transmissions over a second cell that supports the second radio access technology; and determining the threshold based at least in part on the amount of power.
In analogous art, Chen teaches estimating an amount of power to support uplink transmissions over a second cell that supports the second radio access technology; and determining the threshold based at least in part on the amount of power (e.g., this is met based on at least 0157-0174- that teaches “a minimum received signal power corresponding to a second cell…”and “…an uplink transmit power threshold corresponding to the second cell” -0159).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to try cell selection based on power requirements and thresholds comprising: estimating an amount of power to support uplink transmissions over a second cell that supports the second radio access technology; and determining the threshold based at least in part on the amount of power for the purpose of optimizing cell (re)selection.
Consider Claims 3, 21 and 28, Balasubramanian teaches claimed invention except wherein a second upper power limit for the second cell is based at least in part on the threshold and the upper power limit for the cell, the method further comprising: transmitting, concurrently with the uplink transmission over the cell, a second uplink transmission over the second cell in accordance with the second upper power limit.
In analogous art, Chen teaches wherein a second upper power limit for the second cell is based at least in part on the threshold and the upper power limit for the cell, the method further comprising: transmitting, concurrently with the uplink transmission over the cell, a second uplink transmission over the second cell in accordance with the second upper power limit (e.g., see at least 157-174 – “…an uplink transmit power threshold corresponding to the second cell”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to try wherein a second upper power limit for the second cell is based at least in part on the threshold and the upper power limit for the cell, the method further comprising: transmitting, concurrently with the uplink transmission over the cell, a second uplink transmission over the second cell in accordance with the second upper power limit for the purpose of optimizing cell (re)selection.
Consider Claims 11, Balasubramanian teaches the claimed invention except further comprising: receiving, from a base station, an indication of the threshold based at least in part on supporting concurrent communications using the first radio access technology and the second radio access technology (e.g., see first information indicated by the cell in 0131 and 0139).
In analogous art, Chen teaches the claimed invention except further comprising: receiving, from a base station, an indication of the threshold based at least in part on supporting concurrent communications using the first radio access technology and the second radio access technology (e.g., see first information indicated by the cell in 0131 and 0139).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to try receiving, from a base station, an indication of the threshold based at least in part on supporting concurrent communications using the first radio access technology and the second radio access technology for the purpose of optimizing cell (re)selection.
Consider Claim 12, Balasubramanian teaches the claimed invention except wherein selecting the cell comprises: selecting the cell based at least in part on determining that the upper power limit for the cell is the lowest of a plurality of upper power limits for the plurality of cells.
In analogous art, Chen teaches in at least 0128-0129 – “The network device sends system information to the terminal device. The system information includes first information”- 0144 – “the first information may include: determining whether a maximum transmit power of the terminal device is not less than (or greater than or equal to) a sum of the minimum received signal power corresponding to the first cell and a first threshold… Optionally, if the maximum transmit power of the terminal device is not less than (or greater than or equal to) the sum of the minimum received signal power corresponding to the first cell and the first threshold, the first cell is determined as a camped cell.” 0148 -0149– “it is assumed that P_max is the maximum transmit power of the terminal device, and P_threshold is the uplink transmit power threshold corresponding to the first cell. For example, if P_max≥P_threshold, the first cell is determined as the camped cell. Otherwise, the first cell is abandoned”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to try an upper power limit for the cell being less than or equal to a threshold; and transmitting an uplink transmission over the cell in accordance with the upper power limit for the cell for the purpose of optimizing cell (re)selection.
Consider Claims 13, 24 and 29, Balasubramanian teaches the claimed invention except storing an indication of a subset of the plurality of cells having upper power limits that are below the threshold, the subset of the plurality of cells comprising the cell; and identifying the cell is included in the subset of the plurality of cells based at least in part on the indication, wherein the cell is selected based at least in part on the identifying.
In analogous art, Chen teaches “a type of the cell selection includes initial cell selection and cell selection based on stored information” ...in at least 0084).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to try storing an indication of a subset of the plurality of cells having upper power limits that are below the threshold, the subset of the plurality of cells comprising the cell; and identifying the cell is included in the subset of the plurality of cells based at least in part on the indication, wherein the cell is selected based at least in part on the identifying.
Consider Claims 14 and 25, Balasubramanian teaches the claimed invention further comprising: activating a second cell that supports the second radio access technology; and modifying, based at least in part on activating the second cell, a procedure for selecting cells to be based at least in part on a threshold(e.g., this is met based on the teachings of at least 0046-0048- “The wireless communications system 100 may include base stations 105 of different types (e.g., macro or small cell base stations). Each of the base stations 105 may be configured to communicate using one or more communication technologies, and there may be overlapping geographic coverage areas 110 for different technologies”).
Consider Claims 15, Balasubramanian teaches the claimed invention further comprising: receiving a plurality of system information messages comprising the plurality of indications, wherein the plurality of system information messages comprise one or more of a system information block (SIB) 1 message, a SIB 3 message, a SIB 5 message, or a SIB 6 messages (e.g., see SIBs in at least 0057-0059).
Consider Claim 18, Balasubramanian teaches wherein the UE is operating in an idle mode and cells that supports the second radio access technology are absent for selection by the UE (i.e., this is met based on camping noted in at least 0058).
Claim(s) 4-10, 16-17, 22-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Balasubramanian et al. US Patent Pub. No. 2016/0150450 A1, hereinafter, ‘Balasubramanian’ in view of Chen et al. US Patent Pub. No.: 2021/0266809, hereinafter, ‘Chen’ and further in view of Ngai et al. US Patent Pub. No.: 2012/0270592 A1, hereinafter, ‘Ngai’ and further in view of Ryoo et al. US Patent Pub. No.: 2014/0329551 A1, hereinafter, ‘Ryoo’.
Consider Claims 4 and 22, Balasubramanian as modified by Chen teaches the claimed invention except wherein estimating the amount of power to support uplink transmissions over the second cell comprises: estimating a first amount of power based at least in part on identifying a first amount of uplink information for transmission over the second cell; or estimating a second amount of power based at least in part on identifying a second amount of uplink information for transmission over the second cell, wherein the second amount of power is greater than the first amount of power based at least in part on the second amount of uplink information being greater than the first amount of uplink information.
In analogous art, Ryoo teaches in at least 0013 - “…adjusting uplink transmission power distributed to each BS to which a UE is being connected based on a data amount of an uplink buffer for a relevant BS in a wireless communication system where the UE supports a transmission link for a plurality of BSs simultaneously”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to try wherein estimating the amount of power to support uplink transmissions over the second cell comprises: estimating a first amount of power based at least in part on identifying a first amount of uplink information for transmission over the second cell; or estimating a second amount of power based at least in part on identifying a second amount of uplink information for transmission over the second cell, wherein the second amount of power is greater than the first amount of power based at least in part on the second amount of uplink information being greater than the first amount of uplink information for the purpose of controlling uplink power.
Consider claim 5, Balasubramanian teaches the claimed invention except wherein determining the threshold comprises: determining a first threshold based at least in part on the first amount of power; or determining a second threshold based at least in part on the second amount of power, the second threshold being lower than the first threshold.
In analogous art, Chen teaches determining the threshold comprises: determining a first threshold based at least in part on the first amount of power; or determining a second threshold based at least in part on the second amount of power, the second threshold being lower than the first threshold(i.e., selection based on thresholds/power constraints ) (e.g., this is met based on the first threshold noted in at least 0013 and a second threshold noted in at least 0021).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to try wherein determining the threshold comprises: determining a first threshold based at least in part on the first amount of power; or determining a second threshold based at least in part on the second amount of power, the second threshold being lower than the first threshold for the purpose of optimizing cell (re)selection.
Consider Claims 6 and 23, Balasubramanian teaches the claimed invention except further comprising: selecting, prior to selecting the cell of the plurality of cells, a third cell of the plurality of cells based at least in part on the selection criteria being satisfied, wherein a third upper power limit for the third cell is greater than the upper power limit for the cell; determining, based at least in part on the third upper power limit for the third cell, a second upper power limit for uplink transmissions over the second cell that supports the second radio access technology; and selecting, during a reselection procedure, the cell of the plurality of cells having the upper power limit that is less than the third upper power limit based at least in part on the estimated amount of power for supporting uplink transmissions over the second cell exceeding the second upper power limit.
In analogous art, Chen teaches selecting, prior to selecting the cell of the plurality of cells, a third cell of the plurality of cells based at least in part on the selection criteria being satisfied(i.e., this is met based on sorting candidate cells - 0093), wherein a third upper power limit for the third cell is greater than the upper power limit for the cell; determining, based at least in part on the third upper power limit for the third cell, a second upper power limit for uplink transmissions over the second cell that supports the second radio access technology; and selecting, during a reselection procedure, the cell of the plurality of cells having the upper power limit i.e., this is met based on the cell reselection process sorting -0093 and considering candidates based on power constraints further noted in the sections cited above)
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to try selecting, prior to selecting the cell of the plurality of cells, a third cell of the plurality of cells based at least in part on the selection criteria being satisfied, wherein a third upper power limit for the third cell is greater than the upper power limit for the cell; determining, based at least in part on the third upper power limit for the third cell, a second upper power limit for uplink transmissions over the second cell that supports the second radio access technology; and selecting, during a reselection procedure, the cell of the plurality of cells having the upper power limit
However, Balasubramanian as modified by Chen does not specifically teach wherein the specific power constraint is the upper power limit that is less than an upper power limit based at least in part on the estimated amount of power for supporting uplink transmissions over the second cell exceeding the second upper power limit (i.e., in considering a cell for reselection, constraining the power so it does not exceed a total power needed to transmit simultaneously).
In analogous art, Ryoo teaches wherein the specific power constraint is the upper power limit that is less than an upper power limit based at least in part on the estimated amount of power for supporting uplink transmissions over the second cell exceeding the second upper power limit (i.e., in considering a cell for reselection, constraining the power so it does not exceed a total power needed to transmit simultaneously)(e.g., this is met based on at least 0075, 0089 and figure 3b ).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to try further comprising: selecting, prior to selecting the cell of the plurality of cells, a third cell of the plurality of cells based at least in part on the selection criteria being satisfied, wherein a third upper power limit for the third cell is greater than the upper power limit for the cell; determining, based at least in part on the third upper power limit for the third cell, a second upper power limit for uplink transmissions over the second cell that supports the second radio access technology; and selecting, during a reselection procedure, the cell of the plurality of cells having the upper power limit that is less than the third upper power limit based at least in part on the estimated amount of power for supporting uplink transmissions over the second cell exceeding the second upper power limit for the purpose of power control.
Consider Claims 7, Balasubramanian as modified by Chen teaches the claimed invention further comprising: determining, based at least in part on the i.e., constrained under a power threshold) (e.g., this is met based on the teachings of at least 0046-0048- “The wireless communications system 100 may include base stations 105 of different types (e.g., macro or small cell base stations). Each of the base stations 105 may be configured to communicate using one or more communication technologies, and there may be overlapping geographic coverage areas 110 for different technologies”… based on at least 0038 – “parameters associated with cell selection criteria used by a UE to determine whether to connect to a cell may be signaled by the network through system information messages”, 0059 –“This offset may also be derived from SIB1. P.sub.comp may be the maximum of P.sub.Emax−P.sub.Umax or 0, where P.sub.Emax is the maximum power allowed in the cell and P.sub.Umax is the maximum transmit power of the UE 115. Thus, a UE 115 may receive several cells (e.g., from different PLMNs) and may select a cell after reading SIB1, determining if the cell belongs to its home PLMN, and applying the above criteria (or any other cell selection criteria”).
However, Balasubramanian does not specifically teach an upper power limit for the cell being less than or equal to a threshold; and transmitting an uplink transmission over the cell in accordance with the upper power limit for the cell (i.e., the problem to be solved is determining the most suitable cells based on power constraints and optimizing cell (re)selection).
Chen teaches in at least 0128-0129 – “The network device sends system information to the terminal device. The system information includes first information”- 0144 – “the first information may include: determining whether a maximum transmit power of the terminal device is not less than (or greater than or equal to) a sum of the minimum received signal power corresponding to the first cell and a first threshold… Optionally, if the maximum transmit power of the terminal device is not less than (or greater than or equal to) the sum of the minimum received signal power corresponding to the first cell and the first threshold, the first cell is determined as a camped cell.” 0148 -0149– “it is assumed that P_max is the maximum transmit power of the terminal device, and P_threshold is the uplink transmit power threshold corresponding to the first cell. For example, if P_max≥P_threshold, the first cell is determined as the camped cell. Otherwise, the first cell is abandoned”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to try an upper power limit for the cell being less than or equal to a threshold; and transmitting an uplink transmission over the cell in accordance with the upper power limit for the cell for the purpose of optimizing cell (re)selection.
However, Balasubramanian as modified by Chen does not specifically teaches the claimed invention further comprising: wherein the estimated amount of power for supporting uplink transmissions over the second cell meets is less than or equal to the fourth upper a power limit(i.e., constraint) (i.e., in considering a cell for reselection, constraining the power so it does not exceed a total power needed to transmit simultaneously).
In analogous art, Ryoo teaches the claimed invention further comprising: wherein the estimated amount of power for supporting uplink transmissions over the second cell meets is less than or equal to an upper a power limit(i.e., constrained under a power threshold) (i.e., in considering a cell for reselection, constraining the power so it does not exceed a total power needed to transmit simultaneously)(e.g., this is met based on at least 0075, 0089 and figure 3b ).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to try teaches the claimed invention further comprising: determining, based at least in part on the upper power limit for the cell, a fourth upper power limit for uplink transmissions over the second cell that supports the second radio access technology, wherein the estimated amount of power for supporting uplink transmissions over the second cell meets is less than or equal to the fourth upper a power limit(i.e., constrained under a power threshold) for the purpose of power control.
Consider Claims 8, Balasubramanian teaches wherein a first signal quality for the cell is less than a second signal quality for the second cell (e.g., this is met based on cell selection noted in 0057-0059).
Consider Claims 9, Balasubramanian teaches wherein the cell is included in a primary cell group and the second cell is included in a secondary cell group(e.g., this is met based on the fundamental of cell selection – 0057-0059 when considered within the context of different RATs/vplmn - 0043).
Consider Claims 10, Balasubramanian teaches further comprising: determining a second amount of power available for uplink transmissions over the second cell based at least in part on the upper power limit for the cell; and modifying, based at least in part on the amount of power exceeding the second amount of power by a third amount, a procedure for selecting cells i.e., this is met based on at least the selection criteria noted in at least 0006 “…modify cell selection criteria based on the identified asymmetry which includes power consideration.)
However, Balasubramanian does not specifically teach a procedure for selecting cells i.e., the problem to be solved is determining the most suitable cells based on power constraints and optimizing cell (re)selection).
Chen teaches in at least 0128-0129 – “The network device sends system information to the terminal device. The system information includes first information”- 0144 – “the first information may include: determining whether a maximum transmit power of the terminal device is not less than (or greater than or equal to) a sum of the minimum received signal power corresponding to the first cell and a first threshold… Optionally, if the maximum transmit power of the terminal device is not less than (or greater than or equal to) the sum of the minimum received signal power corresponding to the first cell and the first threshold, the first cell is determined as a camped cell.” 0148 -0149– “it is assumed that P_max is the maximum transmit power of the terminal device, and P_threshold is the uplink transmit power threshold corresponding to the first cell. For example, if P_max≥P_threshold, the first cell is determined as the camped cell. Otherwise, the first cell is abandoned”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to try determining a second amount of power available for uplink transmissions over the second cell based at least in part on the upper power limit for the cell; and modifying, based at least in part on the amount of power exceeding the second amount of power by a third amount, a procedure for selecting cells to be based at least in part on the threshold for the purpose of optimizing cell (re)selection.
Consider Claims 16, Balasubramanian as modified by Chen teaches the claimed invention except wherein a second upper power limit for uplink transmissions over a second plurality of cells that support the second radio access technology is based at least in part on the upper power limit for the cell.
In analogous art, Ryoo teaches in at least 0098 “a method for distributing in advance maximum transmission power of a UE to a plurality of BSs that are being connected to the UE…see also equation in figure 5B , Pmax equation.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to try wherein a second upper power limit for uplink transmissions over a second plurality of cells that support the second radio access technology is based at least in part on the upper power limit for the cell for the purpose of power control.
Consider Claims 17, Balasubramanian as modified by Chen teaches the claimed invention except wherein the second upper power limit decreases when the upper power limit for uplink transmissions over the plurality of cells that support the first radio access technology increases, and wherein the second upper power limit increases when the upper power limit for uplink transmissions over the plurality of cells decreases.
In analogous art, Ryoo teaches in at least 0098 “a method for distributing in advance maximum transmission power of a UE to a plurality of BSs that are being connected to the UE…see also equation in figure 5B , Pmax equation.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to try wherein the second upper power limit decreases when the upper power limit for uplink transmissions over the plurality of cells that support the first radio access technology increases, and wherein the second upper power limit increases when the upper power limit for uplink transmissions over the plurality of cells decreases for the purpose of power control.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20120082046 A1 teaches a determination is made of a first power available for transmitting a first signal using a first radio access technology while simultaneously transmitting a second signal using a second radio access technology different from the first radio access technology.
US 20190045456 A teaches A user equipment for performing multi-RAT concurrent transmission according to an embodiment of the present invention receives, from a base station, information on subframe sets and power management parameters to be applied to each of the subframe sets, sets the maximum transmission power of each of a first RAT signal and a second RAT signal using the power management parameters, and transmits at least one of the first RAT signal and the second RAT signal based on the set maximum transmission power. The subframe sets may include a first subframe set in which only transmission of the first RAT signal is allowed and a second subframe set in which multi-RAT concurrent transmission is allowed, and the power management parameters may include a parameter for limiting the maximum transmission power of the second RAT signal to be transmitted concurrently with the first RAT signal in the second subframe set.
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 CHARLES TERRELL SHEDRICK whose telephone number is (571)272-8621. The examiner can normally be reached 8A-5P.
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, Matthew D Anderson can be reached at 571 272 4177. 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.
/CHARLES T SHEDRICK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2646
Prosecution Insights