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 the claims 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 § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 4, 7-8, 12 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Baldemair et al, hereinafter, ‘Baldemair’.
Consider Claim 7 and as applied to the Method of claim 12, Baldemair teaches a wireless terminal of a cellular telecommunication system (e.g., see UE and RAN architecture noted in at least 0047 and figure 2), the wireless terminal communicating over a radio interface with an access node of a radio access network(e.g., see UE and RAN architecture noted in at least 0047 and figure 2), the wireless terminal comprising :receiver circuitry configured to receive, over the radio interface (e.g., see radio interface as noted architecture noted in at least 0047 and figure 2), information upon which determination of allocation type determination formula(e) is dependent (e.g., see allocation and formulas outlined in at least 0034-0046 );processor circuitry (e.g., see processing circuitry as noted architecture noted in at least 0047 and figure 2) configured to :use the received information to determine which allocation type determination formula(e) is to be used to determine an allocation type (e.g., see RB allocation types , edge, outer, etc. outlined in at least 0034-0046 – “rb allocation rule” );use the allocation type determination formula(e) to determine the allocation type(e.g., see formulas outlined in at least 0035-0043 ), a type of the allocation type being determined depending on location of an allocated resource block for the uplink channel relative to channel bandwidth(e.g., see “relative position of frequency resources” - outlined in at least abstract, 0005 and 0012 );use the allocation type to determine a parameter for a configured maximum transmission power for an uplink channel upon which an uplink transmission is transmitted (e.g., see context of maximum transmission power in at least 0011, 0018, 0029, 0034 and figure 1 ); wherein the received information is used to determine both a first allocation type determination formula and a second allocation type determination formula(e.g., see context of allocation in at least 0011, 0018, 0029, 0034 and figure 1 ) , and wherein the processor circuitry is configured to: determine a first maximum power reduction parameter using a first allocation type determined using the first allocation type determination formula (see allocation formulas in at least 0035-0043); determine a second maximum power reduction parameter using a second allocation type determined using the second allocation type determination formula (see allocation formulas in at least 0035-0043 with respect to table of figure 1);make a selection of the first maximum power reduction parameter and the second maximum power reduction parameter (e.g., see UE capability in at least 0011 with respect to outlined formulas above and figure 1) and transmitting the uplink transmission over the radio interface using transmission power determined by the parameter (see uplink signaling in at least 0013 and 0122 - claim 2).
Consider Claims 4 and as applied to the method of claim 16, Baldemair wherein in accordance with the first allocation type formulae the allocation type is determined to be: an edge resource block allocation in a case that (1) the allocated resource blocks are at a lowermost or uppermost edge of the channel bandwidth and (2) a number of resource blocks (LCRB) allocated for the uplink transmission is equal to or smaller than predefined integer M (e.g. see at least 0035-0043 where integer M =2);
PNG
media_image1.png
302
808
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(See formulations outlined in at least 0035-0043).
Consider Claim 8, Baldemair teaches the processor circuitry is configured to make a selection of a greatest of the first maximum power reduction parameter and the second maximum power reduction parameter (e.g., this is based on the management of transmission power outlined in at least 0011).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-2 and 9-11 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The closest art of record teaches frequency resources and allocations based on relative positions of the frequency resources. However, the claims as noted teaches wherein the alternatives are provided regardless of the noted locations and number of resource blocks.
Claims 5 and 17 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Claims 5 and 17 include the allowable matter of claim 1 and therefore is indicated as allowable for similar rationale.
Conclusion
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