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 § 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.
Claims 1-4, 6, 9, 14-18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by FONG (US 2025/0184918 A1, hereinafter “FONG”).
Regarding claim 1:
FONG discloses a method comprising:
detecting, by a processing system (e.g., Fig. 4, 410, [0149]) including at least one processor (e.g., Fig. 4, 475), a presence of a plurality of user endpoint devices within a cell of a radio access network, wherein the plurality of user endpoint devices includes a first user endpoint device (e.g. Fig. 8, 808) and a second user endpoint device (e.g., Fig. 8, 804);
identifying, by the processing system, a plurality of resource blocks of the cell that are available for allocation to the plurality of user endpoint devices, wherein the plurality of resource blocks includes a first resource block and a second resource block that is located closer to an end of a radio frequency spectrum band of the cell than the first resource block (e.g., [0146]-[0147], frequency resources in the middle of the channel, and frequency resources closer to the channel edge, e.g., see Fig. 7, the region closer to the channel edge corresponds to a higher A-MPR than the region in the middle of the channel).
determining, by the processing system, that the first user endpoint device is more likely than the second user endpoint device to be negatively impacted by maximum power reduction (e.g., [0048], [0149], UE closer to the cell edge, Fig. 8, UE 808); and
allocating, by the processing system in response to the determining, the first resource block to the first user endpoint device (e.g., [0048], [0149], the base station schedules UE 808 with resources that correspond to a lower or no A-MPR).
Regarding claim 2:
FONG further discloses wherein the radio access network is a fifth generation radio access network (e.g., [0061]).
Regarding claim 3:
FONG further discloses wherein the fifth generation radio access network supports a time division duplexing mode (e.g., [0097]).
Regarding claim 4:
FONG further discloses wherein the radio frequency spectrum band has a bandwidth of up to nine hundred megahertz (e.g., [0064]).
Regarding claim 6:
FONG further discloses wherein a magnitude of the maximum power reduction is greater for the second resource block than for the first resource block (e.g., Fig. 7, [0146]-[0149]).
Regarding claim 9:
FONG further discloses wherein the determining comprises determining that the first user endpoint device is located closer to an edge of the cell than the second user endpoint device (e.g., [0048], [0149], Fig. 8).
Regarding claim 14:
FONG further discloses wherein the allocating further comprises allocating the second resource block to the second user endpoint device (e.g., [0048], [0149], the base station schedules UE 804 with resources that correspond to a higher A-MPR).
Regarding claim 15:
FONG further discloses wherein the processing system is part of a base station that provides radio frequency coverage to the cell (e.g., Fig. 8, 802).
Regarding claim 16:
FONG discloses a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing instructions (e.g., Fig. 4, 476) which, when executed by a processing system including at least one processor (e.g., Fig. 4, 475), cause the processing system to perform operations, the operations comprising: detecting a presence of a plurality of user endpoint devices within a cell of a radio access network, wherein the plurality of user endpoint devices includes a first user endpoint device and a second user endpoint device; identifying a plurality of resource blocks of the cell that are available for allocation to the plurality of user endpoint devices, wherein the plurality of resource blocks includes a first resource block and a second resource block that is located closer to an end of a radio frequency spectrum band of the cell than the first resource block; determining that the first user endpoint device is more likely than the second user endpoint device to be negatively impacted by maximum power reduction; and allocating, in response to the determining, the first resource block to the first user endpoint device. (See rejection of claim 1 with respect to similar features.)
Regarding claim 17:
FONG further discloses wherein a magnitude of the maximum power reduction is greater for the second resource block than for the first resource block (e.g., Fig. 7, [0146]-[0149]).
Regarding claim 18:
FONG further discloses wherein the determining comprises determining that the first user endpoint device is located closer to an edge of the cell than the second user endpoint device (e.g., [0048], [0149], Fig. 8).
Regarding claim 20:
FONG discloses a device (e.g., Fig. 4, 410) comprising: a processing system including at least one processor (e.g., Fig. 4, 475); and a computer-readable medium (e.g., Fig. 4, 476) storing instructions which, when executed by the processing system, cause the processing system to perform operations, the operations comprising: detecting a presence of a plurality of user endpoint devices within a cell of a radio access network, wherein the plurality of user endpoint devices includes a first user endpoint device and a second user endpoint device; identifying a plurality of resource blocks of the cell that are available for allocation to the plurality of user endpoint devices, wherein the plurality of resource blocks includes a first resource block and a second resource block that is located closer to an end of a radio frequency spectrum band of the cell than the first resource block; determining that the first user endpoint device is more likely than the second user endpoint device to be negatively impacted by maximum power reduction; and allocating, in response to the determining, the first resource block to the first user endpoint device. (See rejection of claim 1 with respect to similar features.)
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.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over FONG.
Regarding claim 5:
FONG is silent regarding the radio frequency spectrum band is at least one of: an n77 band, an n78 band, or an n79 band. However, Examiner takes Official notice that these radio frequency spectrum bands are well known in the art in 5G NR communications. It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include in FONG the feature that the radio frequency spectrum band is at least one of: an n77 band, an n78 band, or an n79 band, in order to enhance adoptability to existing network standards for various applications.
Claims 7 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over FONG in view of UMEDA et al. (US 2024/0340810 A1, hereinafter “UMEDA”).
Regarding claim 7:
FONG teaches the magnitude of the maximum power reduction ranges from approximately zero decibels moving from a middle of the radio frequency spectrum band to the end of the radio frequency spectrum band (e.g., Fig. 7).
However, FONG is silent regarding the magnitude of the maximum power reduction approximately 3.5 decibels at the end of the radio frequency spectrum band.
UMEDA teaches a maximum power reduction ranges from approximately zero decibels to approximately 3.5 decibels moving from a middle of the radio frequency spectrum band to the end of the radio frequency spectrum band (e.g. [0011]).
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system of FONG in view of UMEDA to include the feature wherein the magnitude of the maximum power reduction ranges from approximately zero decibels to approximately 3.5 decibels moving from a middle of the radio frequency spectrum band to the end of the radio frequency spectrum band, in order to optimize uplink performance for a high power UE.
Regarding claim 8:
FONG teaches the magnitude of the maximum power reduction ranges from approximately zero decibels moving from a middle of the radio frequency spectrum band to the end of the radio frequency spectrum band (e.g., Fig. 7).
However, FONG is silent regarding the magnitude of the maximum power reduction approximately 6.5 decibels at the end of the radio frequency spectrum band.
UMEDA teaches a maximum power reduction ranges from approximately zero decibels to approximately 6.5 decibels moving from a middle of the radio frequency spectrum band to the end of the radio frequency spectrum band (e.g. [0009]).
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system of FONG in view of UMEDA to include the feature wherein the magnitude of the maximum power reduction ranges from approximately zero decibels to approximately 6.5 decibels moving from a middle of the radio frequency spectrum band to the end of the radio frequency spectrum band, in order to optimize uplink performance for a high power UE.
Claims 10 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over FONG in view of John Wilson et al. (US 2020/0205092 A1, hereinafter “JOHN WILSON”).
Regarding claim 10:
FONG is silent regarding wherein the determining comprises determining that the first user endpoint device is utilizing ultra-reliable and low latency communications.
JOHN WILSON teaches determining a user endpoint device is utilizing ultra-reliable and low latency communications (e.g., [0084], [0085]).
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system of FONG in view of JOHN WILSON to include the feature wherein the determining comprises determining that the first user endpoint device is utilizing ultra-reliable and low latency communications, in order to ensure uplink reception quality of high priority traffic meets service requirements.
Regarding claim 12:
FONG is silent regarding wherein the determining comprises determining that the first user endpoint device is supporting a physical uplink control channel.
JOHN WILSON teaches determining that a first user endpoint device is supporting a physical uplink control channel (e.g., [0083], [0085], [0087]).
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system of FONG in view of JOHN WILSON to include the feature wherein the determining comprises determining that the first user endpoint device is supporting a physical uplink control channel, in order to ensure high priority uplink transmission is prioritized while improving delay of low priority uplink traffic.
Claims 11 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over FONG in view of Kazmi et al. (US 2019/0372741 A1, hereinafter “KAZMI”).
Regarding claims 11 and 19:
FONG is silent regarding wherein the determining comprises determining that the first user endpoint device is utilizing a first responder service.
KAZMI teaches determining that a first user endpoint device is utilizing a first responder service (e.g., [0108], public safety operation).
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system of FONG in view of KAZMI to include the feature wherein the determining comprises determining that the first user endpoint device is utilizing a first responder service, in order to improve network performance of mission critical traffic.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over FONG in view of Piipponen et al. (US 2020/0280926 A1, hereinafter “PIIPPONEN”).
Regarding claim 13:
FONG is silent regarding wherein the determining comprises determining that the first user endpoint device is utilizing a bandwidth part.
PIIPPONEN teaches determining that a first user endpoint device is utilizing a bandwidth part ( [0034], [0035], [0039], [0041]).
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system of FONG in view of PIIPPONEN to include the feature wherein the determining comprises determining that the first user endpoint device is utilizing a bandwidth part, in order to improve signal interference and optimize power consumption by the UE.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Alvin ZHU whose telephone number is (571)270-1086. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 6am-9am and 2pm-7pm.
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, Gary Mui can be reached at 571-270-1420. 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.
/BO HUI A ZHU/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2465