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) 2/4/2026 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
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.
Claim(s) 1-8 and 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over OROSKAR et al. (US 10721746 B1, hereinafter, "OROSKAR") in view of YANG et al. (US 20210068062 A1,hereinafter, "YANG") and PAWAR et al. (US 10021693 B1, hereinafter, "PAWAR").
Regarding claim 1, OROSKAR teaches a method for improving coverage of a cellular system, the
method comprising:
OROSKAR writes, “In an effort to boost coverage and enhance throughput in wireless networks, network
operators have proposed deployment of high power wireless devices (e.g., power class 1 or 2 wireless
devices, illustrated in Table 1 below) throughout the wireless network alongside default and/or other
currently deployed low power wireless devices (e.g., power class 3 or 4 wireless devices, illustrated in
Table 1 below)” (column 2, lines 38-40).
obtaining, by a base station (BS), a transmission power capability of a user equipment (UE);
OROSKAR writes, “...an access node configured to determine...that the wireless device is configured to
transmit an uplink signal at a first power level that is higher than a default power level…” (column 1,
lines 63-67; column 2, lines 1-3).
determining, by the BS, a-one or more time-frequency opportunities allocated to the UE;
OROSKAR writes, “Wireless devices 302, 304, and 306 can be connected with access node 308 through
communication links 318, 320, and 322” (figure 3; column 9, lines 40-43). OROSKAR continues, “...user
communication between wireless devices 302, 304, and 306, and access node 308 could share the same
representative wireless link, but be transferred over different communication sessions, frequencies,
timeslots, packets, ports, sockets, logical transport links, or in different directions—including
combinations thereof” (figure 3; column 9, lines 53-58). OROSKAR adds, “In an embodiment, a scheduler
for access node 308 may comprise a scheduling algorithm (e.g., proportional fairness, round robin, data
rate, and the like) that assigns resource blocks for uplink transmissions to wireless device 302 based on,
among other information, the identified quality of service metric, a reported CQI, and an assigned
MCS...” (figure 3; column 15, lines 5-30).
determining, by the BS, a modulation and coding scheme (MCS) associated with the UE;
OROSKAR writes, “In an embodiment, a scheduler for access node 308 may comprise a scheduling
algorithm (e.g., proportional fairness, round robin, data rate, and the like) that assigns resource blocks
for uplink transmissions to wireless device 302 based on, among other information, the identified
quality of service metric, a reported CQI, and an assigned MCS...” (figure 3; column 15, lines 5-30).
and indicating, by the BS, an increase in the instantaneous transmit power level to the UE
according to the transmission power capability of the UE, the time-frequency opportunities and the
associated MCS,
OROSKAR writes, “In an embodiment, a scheduler for access node 308 may comprise a scheduling
algorithm that assigns resource blocks for uplink transmissions to wireless device 302 based on, among
other information, the identified quality of service metric, a reported CQI, an assigned MCS, and a
reported PHR. In this example, and similar to the reduction to CQI, when the identified quality of service
metric fails to meet the quality of service criteria, the reported PHR may be reduced in accordance with
a power class for wireless device 302 (e.g., +1 db corresponds to a 1 dB reduction, +3 dB corresponds to
a 3 dB reduction). In some embodiments, the scheduling algorithm assigns default resource blocks
based on the reduced CQI, the corresponding default MCS, and the reduced PHR (rather than the
reported CQI, the corresponding MCS, and the reported PHR). In this embodiment, the reduction in the
reported CQI, PHR, and default MCS aims to treat the high power wireless device as a default wireless
device, and thus compensates for the increased channel quality caused by the increased transmission
power for the high power wireless device. The resultant resource blocks assigned based on the reduced
CQI, default MCS, and reduced PHR may comprise default uplink resources (e.g., a reduced number of
resource blocks for uplink transmission than would be assigned if the reported CQI, reported PHR, and
corresponding MCS were used to schedule uplink resources)” (column 15, lines 31-56).
OROSKAR fails to explicitly disclose information regarding, “wherein the indicated increase in the instantaneous transmit power level” and “enables uplink transmission over multiple time-frequency resources within a scheduling interval.”
However, in analogous art, YANG teaches wherein the indicated increase in the instantaneous transmit power level
YANG writes, “A method of wireless communication is described. The method may include receiving an uplink grant that schedules a transmission of uplink data using a first number of symbols; identifying, based at least in part on the uplink grant, an uplink transmission opportunity during which the uplink data is to be transmitted, wherein the uplink transmission opportunity includes a second number of symbols different from the first number of symbols; determining a transmission power for the uplink transmission opportunity based at least in part on the first number of symbols; and transmitting the uplink data during the uplink transmission opportunity using the transmission power” (paragraph 0006). YANG explains that an uplink grant is received that uses a number of symbols to determine transmission power and transmit data based on the determined transmission power. Therefore, the symbols are used to indicate the transmission power, including an increase in the instantaneous transmit power level.
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 method and invention of OROSKAR to include aspects described by YANG that “relates generally to wireless communications and more specifically to power control for repeated uplink transmissions.” YANG provides the motivation for modification stating, “reduc[ing] reception complexity at the base station and allow combination of the repetitions, thereby increasing reliability and system efficiency” (YANG, paragraph 0094).
OROSKAR and YANG fail to explicitly disclose information regarding, “enables uplink transmission over multiple time-frequency resources within a scheduling interval.”
However, in analogous art, PAWAR teaches enables uplink transmission over multiple time-frequency resources within a scheduling interval.
PAWAR writes, “The eNodeB could then allocate the determined number of PRBs in an upcoming TTI for use by the UE with the determined MCS and could direct the UE to engage in the transmission accordingly. For instance, the eNodeB could transmit in an earlier downlink TTI to the UE a downlink control information (DCI) message that specifies the allocated PRBs in the upcoming TTI and that specifies the MCS to be used by the UE for the transmission. And in response to this directive, the UE could then engage in the transmission accordingly in the specified PRBs of the upcoming TTI” (column 7, lines 1-10). PAWAR indicates that PRBs are allocated in an upcoming TTI for use by the UE to carry out the transmission accordingly.
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 method and invention of OROSKAR and YANG to include aspects described by PAWAR that relates to improving uplink voice quality. PAWAR provides the motivation for modification stating, "applying an uplink coverage boosting process for the device, including limiting or reducing the number of frequency blocks that the base station allocates to the device for uplink transmission per transmission time interval, to help increase the device's per-frequency-block transmission power" (PAWAR, abstract).
Regarding claim 2, OROSKAR, YANG, and PAWAR teach the method as claimed in claim 1,
Additionally, OROSKAR teaches wherein the transmission power capability is a function of the
MCS.
OROSKAR writes, “In an embodiment, a scheduler for access node 308 may comprise a scheduling
algorithm (e.g., proportional fairness, round robin, data rate, and the like) that assigns resource blocks
for uplink transmissions to wireless device 302 based on, among other information, the identified
quality of service metric, a reported CQI, and an assigned MCS...” (figure 3; column 15, lines 5-30).
Regarding claim 3, OROSKAR, YANG, and PAWAR teach the method as claimed in claim 1,
Additionally, OROSKAR teaches wherein the time-frequency opportunities comprises one of
contiguous or discontiguous transmission opportunities in time.
OROSKAR writes, “Wireless network protocols can comprise Code Division Multiple Access (CDMA)
1×RTT, Global System for Mobile communications (GSM), Universal Mobile Telecommunications System
(UMTS), High-Speed Packet Access (HSPA), Evolution Data Optimized (EV-DO), EV-DO rev. A, Third
Generation Partnership Project Long Term Evolution (3GPP LTE), and Worldwide Interoperability for
Microwave Access (WiMAX). Wired network protocols that may be utilized by wireless network 110
comprise Ethernet, Fast Ethernet, Gigabit Ethernet, Local Talk (such as Carrier Sense multiple Access
with Collision Avoidance), Token Ring, Fiber Distributed Data Interface (FDDI), and Asynchronous
Transfer Mode (ATM). Wireless network 110 can also comprise additional base stations, controller
nodes, telephony switches, internet routers, network gateways, computer systems, communication
links, or some other type of communication equipment, and combinations thereof” (column 6, lines 11-
27).
Regarding claim 4, OROSKAR, YANG, and PAWAR teach the method as claimed in claim 1,
Additionally, OROSKAR teaches wherein the modulation scheme is one of a binary phase shift
keying (BPSK), a pi/2 BPSK, a Quadrature Phase Shift Keying (QPSK) and a quadrature amplitude
modulation (QAM).
OROSKAR writes, “For example, access node 308 may assign wireless device 302 a MCS (e.g., QPSK,
QAM16, QAM64, and the like) for communicating with the access node” (column 14, lines 18-20).
Claims 5-8 and 25 are method and apparatus claims corresponding to the method claims 1-4
that have already been rejected above. The applicant’s attention is directed to the rejection of claims 1-
4. Claims 5-8 and 25 are rejected under the same rational as claims 1-4.
Claims 9-23 have been withdrawn by the applicant, respectfully.
Claim 24 has been cancelled by the applicant, respectfully.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 CHRISTOPHER A REYES whose telephone number is (703)756-4558. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 - 5:00 EDT.
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, KASSIM KHALED can be reached at 571-270-3770. 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.
/Christopher A. Reyes/Examiner, Art Unit 2475 5/6/2026
/KHALED M KASSIM/supervisory patent examiner, Art Unit 2475
Prosecution Insights