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 .
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) 1-9 and 18-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gross et al. (US. Pub. No. 2006/0246936 A1; hereinafter “GROSS”) in view of Kopikare et al. (US. 7,653,408 B1; hereinafter “KOPIKARE”)
Regarding claim 1, GROSS teaches an electronic device (see GROSS, fig. 3), comprising:
at least one processor (see GROSS, cl. 16); and
a non-transitory computer readable storage medium storing a program that is executable by the at least one processor (see GROSS, cl. 16), the program including instructions for:
determining that a network transmission status satisfies a first condition (see GROSS, fig. 6, 606, FER threshold), and reducing a first transmit power to second transmit power in response to the first transmit power after the reducing being greater than a lower limit power of a first transmit power range (see GROSS, fig. 4, reducing 402, to 404, greater than floor 418, para. [0047]); or
determining that the network transmission status does not satisfy the first condition (see GROSS, fig. 6, 606, above FER threshold, para. [0066]), and adjusting network transmission parameters to enable the network transmission status to satisfy the first condition (see GROSS, fig. 6, 610, increase tx power, para. [0066]).
GROSS is silent to teaching that wherein a first transmit power range corresponding to a first transmission rate.
In the same field of endeavor, KOPIKARE teaches a device wherein a first transmit power range corresponding to a first transmission rate (see KOPIKARE, fig. 4, col. 5, lines 5-20).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of GROSS with the teaching of KOPIKARE in order to maintain communication quality and manage power consumption (see KOPIKARE, col. 1, lines 10-20).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of GROSS and KOPIKARE teaches the electronic device according to claim 1, wherein whether the network transmission status satisfies the first condition is determined by using the following methods:
determining, when data is transmitted at the first transmission rate and the first transmit power, whether an obtained first packet error ratio is less than an error ratio threshold (see GROSS, fig. 6, 606);
in response to that the first packet error ratio is less than the error ratio threshold, determining whether the first transmit power is greater than the lower limit power of the first transmit power range corresponding to the first transmission rate (see GROSS, fig. 6, 612); and
in response to that the first transmit power is greater that the lower limit power of the first transmit power range, determining that the network transmission status satisfies the first condition (see GROSS, fig. 4, 403, para. [0047], fig. 6,614).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of GROSS and KOPIKARE teaches the electronic device according to claim 1, wherein whether the network transmission status satisfies the first condition is determined by using the following methods:
determining, when data is transmitted at the first transmission rate and the first transmit power, whether an obtained first packet error ratio is less than an error ratio threshold (see GROSS, fig. 6, 606);
in response to that the first packet error ratio is less than the error ratio threshold, determining whether the first transmit power is greater than the lower limit power of the first transmit power range corresponding to the first transmission rate (see GROSS, fig. 6, 612); and
in response to that the first transmit power is equal to the lower limit power of the first transmit power range, determining that the network transmission status does not satisfy the first condition (see GROSS, fig. 6, 612, YES, para. [0047,67]).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of GROSS and KOPIKARE teaches the electronic device according to claim 3, wherein the adjusting network transmission parameters comprises:
increasing the first transmission rate to a second transmission rate (see KOPIKARE, fig. 2, 212, col. 6, lines 40-47), and adjusting the first transmit power to third transmit power, wherein the third transmit power is upper limit power of a third transmit power range corresponding to the second transmission rate (see KOPIKARE, fig. 4, P2, col. 5, lines 5-20).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of GROSS and KOPIKARE teaches the electronic device according to claim 1, wherein whether the network transmission status satisfies the first condition is determined by using the following methods:
determining, when data is transmitted at the first transmission rate and the first transmit power, whether an obtained first packet error ratio is less than an error ratio threshold (see GROSS, fig. 6, 606);
in response to that the first packet error ratio is greater than the error ratio threshold, determining whether the first transmit power is less than an upper limit power of the first transmit power range corresponding to the first transmission rate (see GROSS, fig. 6, 608, fig. 4, 410, ceiling); and
in response to that the first transmit power is less than the upper limit power of the first transmit power range corresponding to the first transmission rate, determining that the network transmission status does not satisfy the first condition (see GROSS, fig. 6, 610, para. [0066]).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of GROSS and KOPIKARE teaches the electronic device according to claim 5, wherein the adjusting network transmission parameters comprises: increasing the first transmit power to fourth transmit power (see GROSS, fig. 6, 610, para. [0066]).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of GROSS and KOPIKARE teaches the electronic device according to claim 1, wherein whether the network transmission status satisfies the first condition is determined by using the following methods:
determining, when data is transmitted at the first transmission rate and the first transmit power, whether an obtained first packet error ratio is less than an error ratio threshold (see GROSSS, fig. 6, 606);
in response to that the first packet error ratio is greater than the error ratio threshold, determining whether the first transmit power is less than an upper limit power of the first transmit power range corresponding to the first transmission rate (see GROSS, fig. 6, 608, power ceiling); and
in response to that the first transmit power is equal to the upper limit power of the first transmit power range corresponding to the first transmission rate, determining that the network transmission status does not satisfy the first condition (see GROSS, fig. 6, 608, 610, para. [0047,66]).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of GROSS and KOPIKARE teaches the electronic device according to claim 7, wherein the adjusting network transmission parameters comprises:
reducing the first transmission rate to a third transmission rate (see KOPIKARE, fig. 2, 218) and adjusting the first transmit power to fifth transmit power, wherein the fifth transmit power is upper limit power of a fifth transmit power range corresponding to the third transmission rate (see KOPIKARE, fig. 4, P2, col. 5, lines 5-20).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of GROSS and KOPIKARE teaches the electronic device according to any one of claim 1, further comprising: starting, when detecting that a current moment reaches a start time of a detection period, to determine whether a current network transmission status satisfies the first condition (see GROSS, fig. 6, 602, start, para. [0065]).
Regarding claim 18, GROSS teaches an electronic device (see GROSS, fig. 3), comprising:
at least one processor (see GROSS, cl. 16); and
a non-transitory computer readable storage medium storing a program that is executable by the at least one processor (see GROSS, cl. 16), the program including instructions for:
when data is transmitted at a first transmit power (see GROSS, fig. 2, power 208, para. [0038-39]), an obtained first packet error ratio is less than an error ratio threshold (see GROSS, fig. 6, 606, para. [0066]) and the first transmit power is greater than lower limit power of a transmit power range (see GROSS, fig. 6, 612, para. [0067]), reducing the first transmit power to second transmit power (see GROSS, fig. 6, 614, para. [0067]).
GROSS is silent to teaching that wherein data is transmitted at a first transmission rate and wherein a transmit power range corresponding to the first transmission rate.
In the same field of endeavor, KOPIKARE teaches a device wherein data is transmitted at a first transmission rate and wherein a transmit power range corresponding to the first transmission rate (see KOPIKARE, fig. 4, col. 5, lines 5-20).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of GROSS with the teaching of KOPIKARE in order to maintain communication quality and manage power consumption (see KOPIKARE, col. 1, lines 10-20).
Regarding claims 19-23, the dependent claims are interpreted and rejected for the same reasons as set forth above in claims 4, 3, 6, 8 and 9, respectively.
Claim(s) 24-26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KOPIKARE in view of Charipadi (US. Pub. No. 2020/0252882 A1; hereinafter “CHARIPADI”) and Hellhake et al. (US. Pub. No. 2017/0156118 A1; hereinafter “HELLHAKE”).
Regarding claim 24, KOPIKARE teaches an electronic device (see KOPIKARE, fig. 1), comprising:
at least one processor (see KOPIKARE, fig. 1, processor 110); and
a non-transitory computer readable storage medium storing a program that is executable by the at least one processor (see KOPIKARE, fig. 1, memory 112), the program including instructions for:
transmitting data at a sixth transmission rate and seventh transmit power (see KOPIKARE, fig. 2, 202, Max Rate, Min Power, col. 4, lines 40-55);
determining whether a network transmission status satisfies a first condition (see KOPIKARE, fig. 2, 204, link quality);
in response to that the network transmission status does not satisfy the first condition (see KOPIKARE, fig. 2, below threshold, 207), determining a seventh transmission rate (see KOPIKARE, fig. 2, decrease rate 218) and eighth transmit power that enable total transmission power consumption to satisfy a power consumption condition (see KOPIKARE, fig. 2, 216, fig. 4, P0,P1,P2, col. 5, lines 5-15); and
transmitting the data at the seventh transmission rate and the eighth transmit power (see KOPIKARE, fig. 4, col. 5, lines 5-15).
KOPIKARE is silent to teaching that
wherein the first condition comprises:
a currently obtained first received signal-to-noise ratio is the same as a previously obtained second received signal-to-noise ratio; and
the determining a seventh transmission rate and eighth transmit power that enable total transmission power consumption to satisfy a power consumption condition comprises:
determining, based on the first received signal-to-noise ratio, minimum transmit power that satisfies target signal-to-noise ratios corresponding to respective transmission rates and that is at respective transmission rates; and
selecting, from the transmission rates and the minimum transmit power corresponding to the transmission rates, the seventh transmission rate and the eighth transmit power that enable the total transmission power consumption to satisfy the power consumption condition.
In the same field of endeavor, CHARIPADI teaches a device wherein the determining a seventh transmission rate and eighth transmit power that enable total transmission power consumption to satisfy a power consumption condition comprises:
determining, based on the first received signal-to-noise ratio (see CHARIPADI, fig. 7, 704,708, SINR), minimum transmit power that satisfies target signal-to-noise ratios corresponding to respective transmission rates and that is at respective transmission rates (see CHARIPADI, para. [0091]); and
selecting, from the transmission rates and the minimum transmit power corresponding to the transmission rates, the seventh transmission rate and the eighth transmit power that enable the total transmission power consumption to satisfy the power consumption condition (see CHARIPADI, fig. 6, para. [0081-82], required MCS).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of KOPIKARE with the teaching of CHARIPADI in order to improve battery life and reduce interference (see CHARIPADI, para. [0006]).
The combination of KOPIKARE and CHARIPADI is silent to teaching that wherein the first condition comprises: a currently obtained first received signal-to-noise ratio is the same as a previously obtained second received signal-to-noise ratio.
In the same field of endeavor, HELLHAKE teaches a device wherein the first condition comprises: a currently obtained first received signal-to-noise ratio is the same as a previously obtained second received signal-to-noise ratio (see HELLHAKE, fig. 6, 610, para. [0040], less than 1dB is considered as the same).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of KOPIKARE and CHARIPADI with the teaching of HELLHAKE in order to dynamically adapt to changes in network environment and reduce power requirements (see HELLHAKE, para. [0003]).
Regarding claim 25, the combination of KOPIKARE, CHARIPADI and HELLHAKE teaches the electronic device according to claim 24, wherein the determining, based on the first received signal-to-noise ratio, minimum transmit power that satisfies target signal-to-noise ratios corresponding to respective transmission rates and that is at respective transmission rates comprises:
determining, based on a difference between the first received signal-to-noise ratio and the seventh transmit power, a linear relationship between the target signal-to-noise ratio and the minimum transmit power (see HELLHAKE, fig. 3, para. [0058], noise figure and PUSCH power; 302,304,306); and
determining, based on the linear relationship, the minimum transmit power that satisfies the target signal-to-noise ratios corresponding to the transmission rates and that is at the transmission rates (see HELLHAKE, fig. 3,4, para. [0060], table 2).
Regarding claim 26, the combination of KOPIKARE, CHARIPADI and HELLHAKE teaches the electronic device according to claim 24, wherein the selecting the seventh transmission rate and the eighth transmit power that enable the total transmission power consumption to satisfy the power consumption condition comprises:
calculating respective total transmission power consumption when the data is transmitted at respective transmission rates and the minimum transmit power corresponding to respective transmission rates, using a transmission rate that is corresponding to the total transmission power consumption satisfying the power consumption condition and that is in the total transmission power consumption as the seventh transmission rate, and using minimum transmit power corresponding to the seventh transmission rate as the eighth transmit power (see HELLHAKE, fig. 6, para. [0073], total power).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Li (2015/0351048), Chen (2013/0023298), Zhu (2008/0125160), Shinozaki (2008/0214230), Lee (2003/0125068), Odigie (2006/0050798), Laakso (7,587,217) teach wireless transmit power control systems.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WEN WU HUANG whose telephone number is (571)272-7852. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 10-6.
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, Wesley Kim can be reached at (571) 272-7867. 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.
/WEN W HUANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2648