DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Amendment filed 12/17/2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 1, 3, 13, and 15 have been amended.
Claim 12 has been previously cancelled.
Claims 1-11 and 13-20 remain pending.
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.
Claims 1-8 and 13-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou et al. (US20210297959A1), hereafter Zhou, in view of Yan et al. (US20200076462A1), hereafter Yan, and Saeki (US202300514402A1).
Regarding claims 1 and 13,
Zhou discloses an apparatus (Fig. 15A) for wireless communications at a user equipment (UE) (Fig. 15A, wireless device 1502) comprising memory (Fig. 15A, memory 1524); transceiver (Fig. 15A, air interface and Tx/Rx processing systems 1506/1520/1522); and at least one processor of the UE (Fig. 15A, processor 1518), the at least one processor coupled with the memory and the transceiver and configured to perform a method (Fig. 33) comprising transmitting, to a network entity (Fig. 33, base station 3310), an advertisement message indicating an uplink transmission duty cycle associated with a first power class mode of the UE (paragraph 291-293, 353; wireless device sends capability information including power class and associated maxUplinkDutyCycle to base station), the first power class mode of the UE corresponding to a higher transmission power level than a second power class mode of the UE (paragraphs 291-292, 365 define max output power for particular power class of the wireless device).
Zhou further shows receiving, from the network entity, a plurality of uplink grants associated with a time interval (Fig. 33, step 3320-3325; paragraph 334-335; plurality of uplink grants including configured and dynamic grants), a quantity of transmission resources scheduled by the plurality of uplink grants during the time interval exceeding the uplink transmission duty cycle associated with the first power class mode (paragraph 351-353; first and second uplink duty cycle greater than threshold/maxUplinkDutyCycle) and transmitting, using the first power class mode, a first subset of uplink messages associated with a first subset of the plurality of uplink grants to satisfy the uplink transmission duty cycle for the time interval (apply P-MPR based on uplink duty cycle greater than threshold/maxUplinkDutyCycle).
Zhou does not expressly disclose transmitting a subset of messages associated with the uplink grant resources based at least in part on dropping transmission of another subset messages associated with the uplink grant resources.
Yan discloses analogous art for transmission throttling for emission exposure management (Title) transmitting a subset of messages associated with the uplink grant resources based at least in part on dropping transmission of another subset messages associated with the uplink grant resources (Fig. 4-6; Fig. 5, steps 502-504; Fig. 6, steps 601-602; paragraphs 69-72; transmitting subset of transmission blocks 401, 403, 405 while dropping/skipping a subset of transmission blocks 402, 404 within time interval 410 to satisfy computed transmit duty cycle if MPE is exceeded).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing to modify Zhou by transmitting a subset of messages associated with the uplink grant resources based at least in part on dropping transmission of another subset messages associated with the uplink grant resources, as shown by Yan, thereby optimizing uplink transmit power over allocated resources while adhering to maximum permissible exposure limits.
Zhou discloses consideration of BLER identified (i.e. measured) by the UE (Zhou: paragraph 181-182; BLER measured by UE) but the combination of Zhou and Yan fails to expressly disclose BLER associated with the second power class satisfying a threshold or a transition from the second power class to the first power class mode.
Saeki discloses analogous art relating to power control (Title; Background) including consideration of BLER associated with the second power class satisfying a threshold (paragraphs 52, 65, 115, 159, 187; satisfying error rate threshold in power saving mode that is higher than normal mode) and a transition (i.e. release) from the second power class to the first power class mode (Fig. 4, steps 5-9; Fig. 6, steps S12-16; paragraph 56-57, 65-70 ; temporarily releasing of power save mode to return to the normal mode with different error rate threshold and restarting power saving mode).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing to modify Zhou and Yan by considering BLER associated with the second power class satisfying a threshold, as shown by Saeki, thereby enabling higher error rates in different power modes as well as real-time confirmation of the use condition of the device by temporary transitioning between those different power modes.
Regarding claims 2 and 14,
The combination of Zhou, Yan, and Saeki discloses transmitting, using the second power class mode, a plurality of uplink signals based at least in part on a second quantity of transmission resources scheduled during a second time interval (paragraph 103, 135-137, 145-149, 232, 268-270, 291, 365-367, 448-450, 564; secondary cell group/second CC) exceeding the uplink transmission duty cycle associated with the first power class mode (paragraph 291-292; power class considerations).
Regarding claims 3 and 15,
The combination of Zhou, Yan, and Saeki discloses transmitting the first subset of the uplink messages further comprises transmitting the first subset of the uplink messages using the first power class mode based at least in part on a distance between the UE and network satisfying a threshold (Zhou: paragraph 287; wireless device measuring proximity within a threshold distance).
Regarding claims 4 and 16,
The combination of Zhou, Yan, and Saeki discloses receiving a first uplink grant and a second uplink grant of the plurality of uplink grants, each of the first uplink grant and the second uplink grant being associated with a different carrier (Zhou: paragraph 149; PCC and SCC), wherein the first subset of the uplink messages comprises a first uplink message scheduled by the first uplink grant in accordance with a prioritization scheme indicating to prioritize the first uplink grant indicating a first resource allocation that is larger than a second resource allocation of the second uplink grant (Zhou: paragraphs 105, 331, 470, 484, 569; fig. 52; prioritization of logical channels including PCC/SCC/SRS transmissions; Fig. 9-10B; different sized allocations).
Regarding claims 5 and 17,
The combination of Zhou, Yan, and Saeki discloses receiving a first uplink grant of the plurality of uplink grants that indicates a first resource allocation on a primary component carrier and a second uplink grant of the plurality of uplink grants that indicates a second resource allocation on a different, secondary component carrier (Zhou: paragraph 149; PCC and SCC), wherein the first subset of the uplink messages comprises a first uplink message scheduled by the first uplink grant on the primary component carrier in accordance with a prioritization scheme indicating to prioritize transmission via the primary component carrier (Zhou: paragraphs 105, 331, 470, 484, 569; fig. 52; prioritization of logical channels including PCC/SCC/SRS transmissions).
Regarding claims 6 and 18,
The combination of Zhou, Yan, and Saeki discloses receiving a first uplink grant of the plurality of uplink grants that indicates a first resource allocation on a first carrier for transmission of control information and first data and a second uplink grant of the plurality of uplink grants that indicates a second resource allocation on a second carrier for transmission of second data (Zhou: paragraph 149; PCC and SCC), wherein the first subset of the uplink messages comprises the control information and the first data scheduled by the first uplink grant in accordance with a prioritization scheme indicating to prioritize multiplexing data with control information (Zhou: paragraphs 105, 331, 470, 484, 569; fig. 52; prioritization of logical channels including PCC/SCC/SRS transmissions).
Regarding claims 7 and 19,
The combination of Zhou, Yan, and Saeki discloses transmitting, using the first power class mode, the first subset of the uplink messages associated with the first subset of the plurality of uplink grants based at least in part on the first subset of the uplink messages being associated with single transmission chain transmission (i.e. RF chain; Zhou: paragraph 291, 413; capability per power class including MIMO/RF chain activation).
Regarding claims 8 and 20,
The combination of Zhou, Yan, and Saeki discloses selecting the first subset and the second subset of the plurality of uplink grants based at least in part on a prioritization scheme for prioritization of transmission of uplink messages associated with the plurality of uplink grants (Zhou: paragraphs 105, 331-335, 470, 484, 569; Fig. 52; Fig. 33, step 3320-3325; plurality of uplink grants including configured and dynamic grants prioritization of logical channels including PCC/SCC/SRS transmissions and selection of configured or dynamic grants).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9-11 are allowed, as previously indicated.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/17/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In the Remarks on pg. 9-11 of the Amendment, Applicant contends Saeki fails to disclose the amended limitation in which transmitting using the first power class is based at least in part on a transition from the second power class mode to the first power class mode in response to identification by the UE of a block error rate associated with the second power class mode satisfying a threshold. Applicant alleges that Saeki’s disclosure shows a network controller confirming switching instructions by identifying BLER, rather than by the UE.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). As now shown in the rejection, Zhou is relied upon to show the identification of BLER by the UE, as now claimed. Zhou is only admittedly deficient in considering BLER as a basis for “a transition from the second power class mode to the first power class mode”. Saeki’s disclosure of “releasing” a device from power class mode to normal mode would be recognized by one of ordinary skill to be equivalent to a “transition” from a second power class mode to a first, higher power class mode. Further, Saeki’s disclosure of different block error rate thresholds in the power saving and normal modes describes releasing and restarting power saving mode after real-time confirmation of a use condition of the device. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the BLER identified by the UE in Zhou could be used as the basis for transitioning between power class modes, as in Saeki, thereby meeting a broadest reasonable interpretation of the pending claims without improperly reading limitations in from the disclosure. Therefore, the rejections based on the combination of Zhou, Yan, and Saeki are maintained.
Applicant’s arguments on pg. 12-14 of the amendment with respect to the previous 103 rejections based on Jung, Yan, and Saeki have been considered but are moot because this ground of rejection has been withdrawn.
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 GREGORY B SEFCHECK whose telephone number is (571)272-3098. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 6AM-4PM.
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 on 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.
/GREGORY B SEFCHECK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2477
Prosecution Insights