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 have been fully considered.
Applicant has amended the claims and argued these amendments. Examiner agrees that the previous rejection is overcome with these amendments. However, new art teaches these limitations. Please see the rejections that follow.
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, 4, 5, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gutman (2023/0133987) and further in view of Liu (2022/0006495).
Regarding claim 1, Gutman discloses an apparatus for wireless communication at a user equipment (UE), comprising:
at least one memory; and
at least one processor coupled to the at least one memory and, based at least in part on information stored in the at least one memory, the at least one processor is configured to: (See Gutman fig. 2; UE with a processor executing an algorithm stored in memory ;see also para. 59, 60)
transmit, to a network node, a signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) indication for at least one signal associated with the network node; (See Gutman para. 85; UE performs signal measurements including SNR before and/or after DPoD algorithm and sends to base station (e.g. network node); para. 78; UE measures signals received from base station (e.g. at least one signal associated with))
receive, from the network node, a non-linearity (NL) indication, wherein the NL indication indicates an activation or a deactivation of NL cancelation by the UE; and (See Gutman fig. 6, para. 103; action 618 base station signals a DPoD instruction to UE to implement or disable a DPoD algorithm (e.g. an algorithm to compensate and/or correct for non-linear distortion))
demodulate data based on the NL indication. (See Gutman para. 79; UE implements DPoD on signals received from base station; para. 56; receive processor in UE demodulates data for UE)
Gutman does not explicitly disclose wherein the NL indication is based on the SNR indication. However, Liu does disclose wherein the NL indication is based on the SNR indication. (See Liu para. 93; NL is performed (or not performed) based upon measured SNR) Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the apparatus of Gutman to include the teaching of wherein the NL indication is based on the SNR indication of Liu with the motivation being to improve throughput when possible but reduce power when not measurably better than other methods and further to reduce retransmissions and increase connectivity caused by the UE being in a difficult wireless environment but reduce battery and processing when wireless conditions improve.
Regarding claim 4, Gutman in view of Liu discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the NL indication indicates the activation of the NL cancelation by the UE, (See Gutman fig. 6, para. 103; action 618 base station signals a DPoD instruction to UE to implement or disable a DPoD algorithm (e.g. an algorithm to compensate and/or correct for non-linear distortion))
wherein to demodulate the data, the at least one processor is configured to:
demodulate the data based on digital post-distortion (DPoD) processing at the UE. (See Gutman para. 79; UE implements DPoD on signals received from base station; para. 56; receive processor in UE demodulates data for UE)
Regarding claim 5, Gutman in view of Liu discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the SNR indication is associated with a prior activation of the NL cancelation at the UE. (See Gutman para. 85; SNR before and/or after (e.g. prior activation) implementing DPoD; see also fig. 6)
Regarding claim 12, Gutman in view of Liu discloses the apparatus of claim 1, further comprising at least one transceiver coupled to the at least one processor, wherein the at least one processor is configured to:
transmit the SNR indication via the transceiver for the at least one signal associated with the network node; and
receive the NL indication via the transceiver. (See Gutman fig. 6; step 612, UE sends measurements to BS, step 618 BS sends UE DPoD instructions; fig. 2; processors, memory, transceiver, etc.)
Claims 7, 8, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gutman (2023/0133987) and further in view of Liu (2022/0006495) and further in view of Gutman’682 (2021/0119682).
Regarding claim 7, Gutman in view of Liu discloses the apparatus of claim 1. Gutman does not explicitly disclose wherein the NL indication is also based on at least one of a NL distortion level at the network node or a thermal noise level at the network node that are associated with at least one power amplifier (PA) of the network node. However, Gutman’682 does disclose wherein the NL indication is also based on at least one of a NL distortion level at the network node or a thermal noise level at the network node that are associated with at least one power amplifier (PA) of the network node. (See Gutman’682 para. 29-30; DPoD processing for NL distortion at UE based upon NL distortion cause by transmitter (e.g. it has a certain amount or level); see also para. 95; thermal noise) Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the apparatus of Liu to include the teaching of wherein the NL indication is also based on at least one of a NL distortion level at the network node or a thermal noise level at the network node that are associated with at least one power amplifier (PA) of the network node of Gutman’682 with the motivation being to enhance power amplifier efficiency and further to compensate for distortions from multiple sources and further to allow for flexibility with adaptive schemes and further to support future wideband systems and further to avoid the need for complex, power-hungry feedback processing at the transmitter.
Regarding claim 8, Gutman in view of Liu in view of Gutman’682 discloses the apparatus of claim 7,
wherein the NL indication indicates the deactivation of the NL cancelation by the UE based on the thermal noise level meeting a threshold condition; or
wherein the NL indication indicates the activation of the NL cancelation by the UE based on the thermal noise level failing to meet the threshold condition. (See Gutman fig. 6, para. 103; action 618 base station signals a DPoD instruction to UE to implement or disable a DPoD algorithm (e.g. an algorithm to compensate and/or correct for non-linear distortion); para. 86; calculating Xpre which is a difference or ratio between thermal-noise power and preDPoD nonlinear distortion power and Xpost which has a similar corresponding relationship after DPoD; para. 89-90; if Xpost is negative that means throughput is thermal noise limited and if Xpost is positive nonlinear-distortion is limited (that is, thermal-noise level is compared to a threshold of 0); para. 103; implementing DPoD based upon Xpre or Xpost in order to optimize throughput)
wherein thermal noise is associated with network node. (See Gutman’682 para. 29-30; DPoD processing for NL distortion at UE based upon NL distortion cause by transmitter (e.g. it has a certain amount or level); see also para. 95; thermal noise) the motivation being to enhance power amplifier efficiency and further to compensate for distortions from multiple sources and further to allow for flexibility with adaptive schemes and further to support future wideband systems and further to avoid the need for complex, power-hungry feedback processing at the transmitter.
Regarding claim 10, Gutman in view of Liu in view of Gutman’682 discloses the apparatus of claim 7,
wherein the NL indication indicates the deactivation of the NL cancelation by the UE or wherein the NL indication indicates the activation of the NL cancelation by the UE (See Gutman fig. 6, para. 103; action 618 base station signals a DPoD instruction to UE to implement or disable a DPoD algorithm (e.g. an algorithm to compensate and/or correct for non-linear distortion);
Gutman also discloses UE measures SNR and reports to base station. (See Gutman para. 85, fig. 6)
Gutman does not explicitly disclose based on an SNR that corresponds to the SNR indication meeting a threshold condition; or based on the SNR that corresponds to the SNR indication failing to meet the threshold condition. However, Liu does disclose based on an SNR that corresponds to the SNR indication meeting a threshold condition; or based on the SNR that corresponds to the SNR indication failing to meet the threshold condition. (See Liu para. 93; if SINR (e.g. SNR) is less than set threshold (e.g. failure to meet) the non-linear processing is used (e.g. it is activated)) Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the apparatus of Gutman to include the teaching of based on an SNR that corresponds to the SNR indication meeting a threshold condition; or based on the SNR that corresponds to the SNR indication failing to meet the threshold condition of Liu with the motivation being to improve throughput when possible but reduce power when not measurably better than other methods and further to reduce retransmissions and increase connectivity caused by the UE being in a difficult wireless environment but reduce battery and processing when wireless conditions improve.
Claims 2, and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gutman (2023/0133987) and further in view of Liu (2022/0006495) and further in view of Islam (2017/0245259).
Regarding claim 2, Gutman in view of Liu discloses the apparatus of claim 1. Gutman does not explicitly disclose wherein a control signal is sent using a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH). However, Islam does disclose wherein a control signal is sent using a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH). (See Islam para. 239; send control indication information via PDCCH) Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the apparatus of Gutman to include the teaching of wherein a control signal is sent using a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) of Islam with the motivation being to increase speed and efficiency by using a lower-layer that handles time-sensitive, dynamic scheduling inf arm at ion and further to reduce latency by allowing for rapid resource allocation and feedback and further to reduce overhead because PDCCH via DCI is fixed-size messages that are highly optimized for efficiency and further it is dynamic and flexible because PDCCH supports making decisions on a subframe-by-subframe or slot-by-slot basis and further using the PDCCH is more reliable as it uses different aggregation levels to make transmission more robust for devices experiencing poor channel conditions.
Regarding claim 3, Gutman in view of Liu discloses the apparatus of claim 1. Gutman discloses that the UE implements DPoD on signals received from base station. (See Gutman para. 79)
Gutman does not explicitly disclose using a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH). However, Islam does disclose using a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH). (See Islam para. 64; BS sends data using PDSCH; see also para. 69) Therefore it would have been obvious to modify the apparatus of Gutman to include the teaching of using a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) of Islam with the motivation being to conform to the 3GPP suite of standards which saves time and money and further to boost capacity, speed and reliability by dynamically adapting to changing conditions and further to increase performance and throughput by allowing for massive MIMO, high-order modulation, and/or dynamic scheduling and further to improve coverage and reliability by allowing for multiple TRPs, flexible repetition, and HARQ and further to enhance efficiency and adaptability by allowing for flexible resource mapping, frequency diversity, and support for system
information and further to reduce signaling overhead by using codebook based
beam forming and embedded reference signals.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gutman (2023/0133987) and further in view of Liu (2022/0006495) and further in view of Gutman’682 (2021/0119682) and further in view of Choi (2010/0067367).
Regarding claim 11, Gutman in view of Liu in view of Gutman’682 discloses the apparatus of claim 10. Gutman does not explicitly disclose wherein the threshold condition is an SNR value associated with properly decoding a modulation and coding scheme (MCS). However, Choi does disclose wherein the threshold condition is an SNR value associated with properly decoding a modulation and coding scheme (MCS). (See Choi para. 53, fig. 4; measured SNR is compared to SNR threshold for each level in the MCS lookup table; see also para. 50, 51) Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the apparatus of Gutman to include the teaching of wherein the threshold condition is an SNR value associated with properly decoding a modulation and coding scheme (MCS) of Choi with the motivation being to satisfy a FER level (See Choi para. 53) and further to improve throughput and further to reduce retransmissions and increase connectivity caused by the UE being in a difficult wireless environment.
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 13, 23, and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gutman (2023/0133987) and further in view of Liu (2022/0006495).
Regarding claim 13, Gutman discloses an apparatus for wireless communication at a network node, comprising:
at least one memory; and
at least one processor coupled to the at least one memory and, based at least in part on information stored in the at least one memory, the at least one processor is configured to: (See Gutman fig. 2, para. 61; base station which has a processor executing an algorithm stored in memory)
receive, from a user equipment (UE), a signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) indication for at least one signal associated with the network node; and (See Gutman para. 85; UE performs signal measurements including SNR before and/or after DPoD algorithm and sends to base station (e.g. network node); para. 78; UE measures signals received from base station (e.g. at least one signal associated with))
transmit, to the UE, a non-linearity (NL) indication, wherein the NL indication indicates an activation or a deactivation of NL cancelation by the UE. (See Gutman fig. 6, para. 103; action 618 base station signals a DPoD instruction to UE to implement or disable a DPoD algorithm (e.g. an algorithm to compensate and/or correct for non-linear distortion))
Gutman does not explicitly disclose wherein the NL indication is based on the SNR indication. However, Liu does disclose wherein the NL indication is based on the SNR indication. (See Liu para. 93; NL is performed (or not performed) based upon measured SNR) Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the apparatus of Gutman to include the teaching of wherein the NL indication is based on the SNR indication of Liu with the motivation being to improve throughput when possible but reduce power when not measurably better than other methods and further to reduce retransmissions and increase connectivity caused by the UE being in a difficult wireless environment but reduce battery and processing when wireless conditions improve.
Regarding claim 23, Gutman in view of Liu discloses the apparatus of claim 13, wherein the NL indication indicates the deactivation of the NL cancelation by the UE or wherein the NL indication indicates the activation of the NL cancelation by the UE (See Gutman fig. 6, para. 103; action 618 base station signals a DPoD instruction to UE to implement or disable a DPoD algorithm (e.g. an algorithm to compensate and/or correct for non-linear distortion);
Gutman also discloses UE measures SNR and reports to base station. (See Gutman para. 85, fig. 6)
Gutman does not explicitly disclose based on an SNR that corresponds to the SNR indication meeting a threshold condition; or based on the SNR that corresponds to the SNR indication failing to meet the threshold condition. However, Liu does disclose based on an SNR that corresponds to the SNR indication meeting a threshold condition; or based on the SNR that corresponds to the SNR indication failing to meet the threshold condition. (See Liu para. 93; if SINR (e.g. SNR) is less than set threshold (e.g. failure to meet) the non-linear processing is used (e.g. it is activated)) Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the apparatus of Gutman to include the teaching of based on an SNR that corresponds to the SNR indication meeting a threshold condition; or based on the SNR that corresponds to the SNR indication failing to meet the threshold condition of Liu with the motivation being to improve throughput when possible but reduce power when not measurably better than other methods and further to reduce retransmissions and increase connectivity caused by the UE being in a difficult wireless environment but reduce battery and processing when wireless conditions improve.
Regarding claim 25, Gutman in view of Liu discloses the apparatus of claim 13, further comprising at least one transceiver coupled to the at least one processor, wherein the at least one processor is configured to:
receive the SNR indication, via the transceiver, for the at least one signal associated with the network node; and
provide the NL indication via the transceiver. (See Gutman fig. 6; step 612, UE sends measurements to BS, step 618 BS sends UE DPoD instructions; fig. 2; processors, memory, transceiver, etc.)
Claims 14 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gutman (2023/0133987) and further in view of Liu (2022/0006495) and further in view of Gutman’682 (2021/0119682).
Regarding claim 14, Gutman in view of Liu discloses the apparatus of claim 13. Gutman does not explicitly disclose wherein the NL indication is also based on at least one of a NL distortion level at the network node or a thermal noise level at the network node that are associated with at least one power amplifier (PA) of the network node. However, Gutman’682 does disclose wherein the NL indication is also based on at least one of a NL distortion level at the network node or a thermal noise level at the network node that are associated with at least one power amplifier (PA) of the network node. (See Gutman’682 para. 29-30; DPoD processing for NL distortion at UE based upon NL distortion cause by transmitter (e.g. it has a certain amount or level); see also para. 95; thermal noise) Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the apparatus of Liu to include the teaching of wherein the NL indication is also based on at least one of a NL distortion level at the network node or a thermal noise level at the network node that are associated with at least one power amplifier (PA) of the network node of Gutman’682 with the motivation being the motivation being to enhance power amplifier efficiency and further to compensate for distortions from multiple sources and further to allow for flexibility with adaptive schemes and further to support future wideband systems and further to avoid the need for complex, power-hungry feedback processing at the transmitter.
Regarding claim 21, Gutman in view of Liu discloses the apparatus of claim 13. wherein the NL indication indicates the deactivation of the NL cancelation by the UE based on the thermal noise level meeting a threshold condition; or
wherein the NL indication indicates the activation of the NL cancelation by the UE
based on the thermal noise level failing to meet the threshold condition. (See Gutman fig. 6, para. 103; action 618 base station signals a DPoD instruction to UE to implement or disable a DPoD algorithm (e.g. an algorithm to compensate and/or correct for non-linear distortion); para. 86; calculating Xpre which is a difference or ratio between thermal-noise power and preDPoD nonlinear distortion power and Xpost which has a similar corresponding relationship after DPoD; para. 89-90; if Xpost is negative that means throughput is thermal noise limited and if Xpost is positive nonlinear-distortion is limited (that is, thermal-noise level is compared to a threshold of 0); para. 103; implementing DPoD based upon Xpre or Xpost in order to optimize throughput)
Gutman does not explicitly disclose wherein thermal noise is associated with network node. However, Gutman’682 does disclose wherein thermal noise is associated with network node. (See Gutman’682 para. 29-30; DPoD processing for NL distortion at UE based upon NL distortion cause by transmitter (e.g. it has a certain amount or level); see also para. 95; thermal noise) Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the apparatus of Gutman to include the teaching of wherein thermal noise is associated with network node of Gutman’682 with the motivation being to enhance power amplifier efficiency and further to compensate for distortions from multiple sources and further to allow for flexibility with adaptive schemes and further to support future wideband systems and further to avoid the need for complex, power-hungry feedback processing at the transmitter.
Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gutman (2023/0133987) and further in view of Liu (2022/0006495) and further in view of Choi (2010/0067367).
Regarding claim 24, Gutman in view of Liu discloses the apparatus of claim 23.
Gutman does not explicitly disclose wherein the threshold condition is an SNR value associated with properly decoding a modulation and coding scheme (MCS). However, Choi does disclose wherein the threshold condition is an SNR value associated with properly decoding a modulation and coding scheme (MCS). (See Choi para. 53, fig. 4; measured SNR is compared to SNR threshold for each level in the MCS lookup table; see also para. 50, 51) Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the apparatus of Gutman to include the teaching of wherein the threshold condition is an SNR value associated with properly decoding a modulation and coding scheme (MCS) of Choi with the motivation being to satisfy a FER level (See Choi para. 53) and further to improve throughput and further to reduce retransmissions and increase connectivity caused by the UE being in a difficult wireless environment.
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 26-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gutman (2023/0133987) and further in view of Liu (2022/0006495).
Regarding claim 26, Gutman discloses a method of wireless communication at a user equipment (UE), comprising: (See Gutman fig. 2; UE with a processor executing an algorithm stored in memory; see also para. 59, 60)
transmitting, to a network node, a signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) indication for at least one signal associated with the network node; (See Gutman para. 85; UE performs signal measurements including SNR before and/or after DPoD algorithm and sends to base station (e.g. network node); para. 78; UE measures signals received from base station (e.g. at least one signal associated with))
receiving, from the network node, a non-linearity (NL) indication wherein the NL indication indicates an activation or a deactivation of NL cancelation by the UE; and (See Gutman fig. 6, para. 103; action 618 base station signals a DPoD instruction to UE to implement or disable a DPoD algorithm (e.g. an algorithm to compensate and/or correct for non-linear distortion))
demodulating data based on the NL indication. (See Gutman para. 79; UE implements DPoD on signals received from base station; para. 56; receive processor in UE demodulates data for UE)
Gutman does not explicitly disclose wherein the NL indication is based on the SNR indication. However, Liu does disclose wherein the NL indication is based on the SNR indication. (See Liu para. 93; NL is performed (or not performed) based upon measured SNR) Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the apparatus of Gutman to include the teaching of wherein the NL indication is based on the SNR indication of Liu with the motivation being to improve throughput when possible but reduce power when not measurably better than other methods and further to reduce retransmissions and increase connectivity caused by the UE being in a difficult wireless environment but reduce battery and processing when wireless conditions improve.
Regarding claim 27, Gutman in view of Liu discloses the method of claim 26, wherein the NL indication indicates the activation of the NL cancelation by the UE, wherein demodulating the data includes: (See Gutman fig. 6, para. 103; action 618 base station signals a DPoD instruction to UE to implement or disable a DPoD algorithm (e.g. an algorithm to compensate and/or correct for non-linear distortion))
demodulating the data based on digital post-distortion (DPoD) processing at the UE. (See Gutman para. 79; UE implements DPoD on signals received from base station; para. 56; receive processor in UE demodulates data for UE)
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 28 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gutman (2023/0133987) and further in view of Liu (2022/0006495).
Regarding claim 28, Gutman discloses a method of wireless communication at a network node, comprising: (See Gutman fig. 2, para. 61; base station which has a processor executing an algorithm stored in memory)
receiving, from a user equipment (UE), a signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) indication for at least one signal associated with the network node; and (See Gutman para. 85; UE performs signal measurements including SNR before and/or after DPoD algorithm and sends to base station (e.g. network node); para. 78; UE measures signals received from base station (e.g. at least one signal associated with))
transmitting, to the UE, a non-linearity (NL) indication, wherein the NL indication indicates an activation or a deactivation of NL cancelation by the UE. (See Gutman fig. 6, para. 103; action 618 base station signals a DPoD instruction to UE to implement or disable a DPoD algorithm (e.g. an algorithm to compensate and/or correct for non-linear distortion))
Gutman does not explicitly disclose wherein the NL indication is based on the SNR indication. However, Liu does disclose wherein the NL indication is based on the SNR indication. (See Liu para. 93; NL is performed (or not performed) based upon measured SNR) Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the apparatus of Gutman to include the teaching of wherein the NL indication is based on the SNR indication of Liu with the motivation being to improve throughput when possible but reduce power when not measurably better than other methods and further to reduce retransmissions and increase connectivity caused by the UE being in a difficult wireless environment but reduce battery and processing when wireless conditions improve.
Claim 29 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gutman (2023/0133987) and further in view of Liu (2022/0006495) and further in view of Gutman’682 (2021/0119682).
Regarding claim 29, Gutman in view of Liu discloses the method of claim 28. Gutman does not explicitly disclose wherein the NL indication is also based on at least one of a NL distortion level at the network node or a thermal noise level at the network node that are associated with at least one power amplifier (PA) of the network node. However, Gutman’682 does disclose wherein the NL indication is also based on at least one of a NL distortion level at the network node or a thermal noise level at the network node that are associated with at least one power amplifier (PA) of the network node. (See Gutman’682 para. 29-30; DPoD processing for NL distortion at UE based upon NL distortion cause by transmitter (e.g. it has a certain amount or level); see also para. 95; thermal noise) Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the apparatus of Liu to include the teaching of wherein the NL indication is also based on at least one of a NL distortion level at the network node or a thermal noise level at the network node that are associated with at least one power amplifier (PA) of the network node of Gutman’682 with the motivation being the motivation being to enhance power amplifier efficiency and further to compensate for distortions from multiple sources and further to allow for flexibility with adaptive schemes and further to support future wideband systems and further to avoid the need for complex, power-hungry feedback processing at the transmitter.
Claim 30 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gutman (2023/0133987) and further in view of Liu (2022/0006495) and further in view of Gutman’682 (2021/0119682) and further in view of Wang (2023/0253995).
Regarding claim 30, Gutman in view of Liu in view of Gutman’682 discloses the method of claim 29.
Gutman does not explicitly disclose wherein the NL distortion level is configured for the network node; or wherein the method further comprises: calculating the NL distortion level based on the initial NL distortion level and the thermal noise level,
wherein calculating the NL distortion level comprises comparing, for the at least one
power amplifier (PA) of the network node, a digital representation of a transmission
signal prior to power amplification with an analog representation of a power amplified
output using a feedback chain. However, Wang does disclose wherein the NL distortion
level is configured for the network node; or wherein the method further comprises: calculating the NL distortion level based on the initial NL distortion level and the thermal noise level, wherein calculating the NL distortion level comprises comparing, for the at least one power amplifier (PA) of the network node, a digital representation of a transmission signal prior to power amplification with an analog representation of a power amplified output using a feedback chain. (See Wang para. 17; DPD, digital predistortion, coefficients are calculated (e.g. the NL distortion level is configured)) Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the method of Gutman to include the teaching of wherein the NL distortion level is configured for the network node; or wherein the method further comprises: calculating the NL distortion level based on the initial NL distortion level and the thermal noise level, wherein calculating the NL distortion level comprises comparing, for the at least one power amplifier (PA) of the network node, a digital representation of a transmission signal prior to power amplification with an analog representation of a power amplified output using a feedback chain of Wang with the motivation being to allow the power amplifier to operate in the most efficient region without causing signal distortion and further to allow for significant power savings and further to enhance signal quality and linearity by reducing distortion, minimizing spectral regrowth, and lowering error vector magnitude and further flexible by providing adaptability and supports wideband signaling found in 5G and 6G 3GPP networks.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6, 9, 15-20, and 22 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHEN J CLAWSON whose telephone number is (571)270-7498. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-5:00 pm est.
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, Huy D Vu can be reached at (571) 272-3155. 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.
/Stephen J Clawson/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2461
Prosecution Insights