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.
Claims 1-8 and 10-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mayginnes et al. (US Pat Pub# 2015/0146529) in view of Kumar et al. (US Pat Pub# 2022/0408286).
Mayginnes teaches a system, comprising a processor 260 (Fig. 2); and a memory 270 (Fig. 2) that stores executable instructions that, when executed by the processor, facilitate performance of operations, comprising determining ratio data representative of a received signal to interference and noise ratio of a transmission, of a group of cellular transmissions, via a cellular node (Sections 0018-0019 and Claims 1, 12, and 19, receiving signals in a cellular environment from a group and determining the received signal to interference and noise ratio); based on the ratio data, determining a metric (Sections 0018-0019 and Claims 1, 12, and 19, signal quality metrics etc.). Mayginnes fails to teach power control and a nominal power parameter.
Kumar teaches a system, comprising a processor (Fig. 3); and a memory (Fig. 3) that stores executable instructions that, when executed by the processor, facilitate performance of operations, comprising determining a power control metric applicable to uplink power control for user equipment (Sections 0029, 0060, 0073, and 0165, uplink power control metric etc.); based on the power control metric, determining a nominal power parameter for catch uplink channel involving the cellular node (Sections 0029, 0060, 0073, and 0165, uplink power control metric to determine power control etc.); and applying the nominal power parameter to subsequent connections made via the cellular node subsequent to the determining of the nominal power parameter (Sections 0029-0030, 0060, 0073, and 0165, uplink power control metric to determine power control after communication has been established between the user equipment’s and base stations etc.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious at the time of the invention to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate power control and a nominal power parameter as taught by Kumar into Mayginnes’s system in order to improve performance and efficiency.
Regarding claim 2, the combination including Mayginnes teaches wherein the control metric is a function of a mean of received signal to interference and noise ratios, comprising the received signal to interference and noise ratio, of the transmission (Sections 0018-0019 and Claims 1, 12, and 19, received signal to interference and noise ratio).
Regarding claim 3, the combination including Mayginnes teaches wherein the control metric is a function of a standard deviation of received signal to interference and noise ratios, comprising the received signal to interference and noise ratio, of the transmission (Sections 0018-0019 and Claims 1, 12, and 19, received signal to interference and noise ratio which has a signal quality metric that can use standard deviations etc.).
Regarding claim 4, the combination including Maygrinnes teaches wherein the control metric is a function of a histogram of received signal to interference and noise ratios, comprising the received signal to interference and noise ratio, of the transmission (Sections 0018-0019 and Claims 1, 12, and 19, received signal to interference and noise ratio which has a signal quality metric that can use histograms etc.).
Regarding claim 5, the combination including Maygrinnes teaches wherein the control metric is a function of a cumulative distribution function of received signal to interference and noise ratios, comprising the received signal to interference and noise ratio, of the transmission (Sections 0018-0019 and Claims 1, 12, and 19, receiving signals in a cellular environment from a group and determining the received signal to interference and noise ratio).
Regarding claim 6, the combination including Maygrinnes teaches wherein the power control metric is a function of a complementary cumulative distributive function of received signal to interference and noise ratios, comprising the received signal to interference and noise ratio, of the transmission (Sections 0018-0019 and Claims 1, 12, and 19, receiving signals in a cellular environment from a group and determining the received signal to interference and noise ratio).
Regarding claim 7, the combination including Kumar teaches wherein the determining of the nominal power parameter comprises determining the nominal power parameter based on a configured fraction of pathloss to be compensated via the cellular node (Sections 0023, 0029-0030, 0037, 0048, 0060, 0064, 0066, 0073, and 0165, uplink power control metric to determine power control with pathloss considered etc.).
Regarding claim 8, the combination including Kumar teaches wherein the determining of the nominal power parameter comprises determining the nominal power parameter based on at least one received signal power measurement of the transmission, of the group of cellular transmissions, via the cellular node (Sections 0029-0030, 0048, 0060, 0073, and 0165, uplink power control metric to determine power control of groups etc.).
Regarding claim 10, the combination including Kumar teaches wherein the at least one received signal power measurement comprises a reference signal received power applicable to the transmission (Sections 0029-0030, 0052-0053, 0056, 0060, 0073, and 0165, reference signal etc.).
Regarding claim 11, the combination including Mayginnes teaches wherein the cellular node is part of a self-organizing network (Fig. 1 and Section 0019, cellular network etc.).
Regarding claim 12, the combination including Kumar teaches wherein the nominal power parameter represents a target normalized received power for each uplink channel involving the cellular node (Sections 0029-0030, 0060, 0073, and 0165, uplink power control metric to determine power control after communication has been established between the user equipment’s and base stations etc.).
Regarding claim 13, the combination including Kumar teaches wherein the determining of the power control metric comprises determining the power control metric based on a threshold minimum quantity of data points applicable to the power control metric (Sections 0029-0030, 0060, 0073, and 0165, uplink power control metric to determine power control based on a threshold etc.).
Regarding claim 14, the combination including Kumar teaches wherein the determining of the power control metric comprises determining the power control metric in response to a defined threshold amount of time being determined to have elapsed from commencement of the transmission (Sections 0029-0030, 0060, 0073, and 0165, uplink power control metric to determine power control based on a threshold etc.).
Regarding claim 15, the combination including Kumar teaches wherein the nominal power parameter comprises a first nominal power parameter of a first nominal power profile associated with a first defined condition, and wherein respective nominal power profiles are employable via the cellular node based on respective defined conditions (Sections 0029-0030, 0060, 0073, and 0165, uplink power control metric to determine power control etc.).
Regarding claim 16, the combination including Kumar teaches wherein the respective defined conditions comprise respective times of day (Sections 0029-0030, 0060, 0073, and 0165, uplink power control metric to determine power control etc.).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mayginnes et al. (US Pat Pub# 2015/0146529) in view of Kumar et al. (US Pat Pub# 2022/0408286) and further in view of Zhang et al. (US Pat Pub# 2021/0029653).
Regarding claim 9, Mayginnes in view of Kumar teaches the limitations in claims 1 and 8. Mayginnes and Kumar fail to teach a received signal strength indicator.
Zhang teaches wherein the at least one received signal power measurement
comprises a received signal strength indicator applicable to the transmission (Sections 0063 and 0067 and Claims 6 and 8, received signal strength indicator).
Therefore, it would have been obvious at the time of the invention to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a received signal strength indicator as taught by Zhang into power control and a nominal power parameter as taught by Kumar into Mayginnes’s system in order to improve performance.
Claims 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al. (US Pat Pub# 2021/0029653) in view of Kumar et al. (US Pat Pub# 2022/0408286)
Zhang teaches a non-transitory machine-readable medium, comprising executable instructions that, when executed by a processor, facilitate performance of operations, comprising determining a received signal strength indicator of a transmission, of a group of cellular transmissions, via a cellular node (Fig. 1, Sections 0063 and 0067 and Claims 6 and 8, determining received signal strength indicator in a group as shown etc.); based on the received signal strength indicator of the transmission, determining a metric Fig. 1, Sections 0063 and 0067 and Claims 6 and 8, using received signal strength indicator to set transmission power metrics etc.). Zhang fails to teach and a nominal power parameter.
Kumar teaches a non-transitory machine-readable medium, comprising executable instructions that, when executed by a processor, facilitate performance of operations, comprising determining a power control metric applicable to user equipment uplink power control (Sections 0029, 0060, 0073, and 0165, uplink power control metric etc.); based on the power control metric, determining a nominal power parameter of each uplink channel to the cellular node (Sections 0029, 0060, 0073, and 0165, uplink power control metric to determine power control etc.); and using the nominal power parameter for subsequent connections via the cellular node (Sections 0029-0030, 0060, 0073, and 0165, uplink power control metric to determine power control after communication has been established between the user equipment’s and base stations etc.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious at the time of the invention to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a nominal power parameter as taught by Kumar into Zhang’s medium in order to improve performance and efficiency.
Regarding claim 18, the combination including Zhang teaches wherein the power control metric is based on a cumulative distribution function of received signal strength indicators, comprising the received signal strength indicator, of the transmission (Sections 0063 and 0067 and Claims 6 and 8, received signal strength indicator).
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kumar et al. (US Pat Pub# 2022/0408286).
Kumar teaches a method, comprising determining, by network equipment comprising a processor, a reference signal received power of a transmission, of a group of cellular transmissions, via a cellular node (Fig. 1 and Sections 0023, 0030, 0047, 0049, 0052-0053, 0071-0072, and 0081, receiving a reference signal from a group of a cellular network etc.); based on the reference signal received power of the transmission, determining, by the network equipment, a power control metric applicable to uplink power control for user equipment (Sections 0029, 0060, 0073, and 0165, uplink power control metric etc.); based on the power control metric, determining, by the network equipment, a nominal power parameter applicable to each uplink channel to the cellular node (Sections 0029, 0060, 0073, and 0165, uplink power control metric to determine power control etc.); and after determining the nominal power parameter, applying, by the network equipment, the nominal power parameter to subsequent connections via the cellular node (Sections 0029-0030, 0060, 0073, and 0165, uplink power control metric to determine power control after communication has been established between the user equipment’s and base stations etc.).
Regarding claim 20, Kumar teaches wherein the power control metric comprises an application of a cumulative distribution function of reference signal received powers, comprising the reference signal received power, of the transmission (Fig. 1 and Sections 0023, 0030, 0047, 0049, 0052-0053, 0071-0072, and 0081, receiving a reference signal from a group of a cellular network etc.).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW WENDELL whose telephone number is (571)272-0557. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30AM-5PM.
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.
/ANDREW WENDELL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2648 2/6/2026