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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 01/17/2025 and 04/14/2025 has been considered by examiner and made of record in the application file.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 1-9, 16-24 in the reply filed on 12/08/2025 is acknowledged.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
The following limitations are interpreted as invoking 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
Regarding Claim 31
means for determining a first transmit power for transmitting an uplink positioning reference signal;
The corresponding structure in the disclosure for “means for determining…” (Specification, paragraph [0062], Fig.2:210, “processor,”).
means for determining a second transmit power for transmitting a demodulated reference signal bundle;
The corresponding structure in the disclosure for “means for determining…” (Specification, paragraph [0062], Fig.2:210, “processor,”).
means for determining a common transmit power based at least in part on the first transmit power and the second transmit power,
The corresponding structure in the disclosure for “means for determining…” (Specification, paragraph [0062], Fig.2:210, “processor,”).
means for transmitting the uplink positioning reference signal…
The corresponding structure in the disclosure for “means for transmitting…” (Specification, paragraph [0062], Fig.2:210, “a transceiver interface 214 for a transceiver 215 (that includes a wireless transceiver 240 and a wired transceiver 250),”).
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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(s) 1-2, 9, 16-17, 24, 31-32, and 39-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GO (US-20230216632-A1) in view of BAE (US-20230092533-A1).
Regarding Claim 1, GO discloses a method for transmitting positioning reference signals and demodulated reference signal bundles (paragraph [0223], "‘a time domain bundling configuration/indication of an SRS and a DMRS’ may be ‘an indication which transmits an SRS port and a DMRS port on the same antenna port’" and paragraph [0224], "‘a time domain bundling configuration/indication of an SRS and a DMRS’" and paragraph [0264], "In addition, SRS-related configuration information may include…positioning," (i.e., terminal sending SRS and DMRS, wherein the SRS positioning.)), comprising:
determining a first transmit power for transmitting an uplink positioning reference signal (paragraph [0256], "an (openloop(OL)/closed-loop(CL)) power control configuration/indication of an SRS (resource set)" (i.e., there is a power control configuration being performed in SRS which includes positioning.));
determining a second transmit power for transmitting a demodulated reference signal bundle (paragraph [0256], "an (OL/CL) power control configuration/indication of a LTL(PUCCH/PUSCH) DMRS." (i.e., Power determination for DMRS.));
determining a common transmit power based at least in part on the first transmit power and the second transmit power (paragraph [0278] and [0256], "an (openloop(OL)/closed-loop(CL)) power control configuration/indication of an SRS (resource set) is the same as an (OL/CL) power control configuration/indication of a LTL(PUCCH/PUSCH) DMRS." (i.e., there is a common transmit power since its configuring to make SRS and DMRS power the same.)),
transmitting the uplink positioning reference signal and the demodulated reference signal bundle with the common transmit power (paragraph [0223], "‘a time domain bundling configuration/indication of an SRS and a DMRS’ may be ‘an indication which transmits an SRS port and a DMRS port on the same antenna port’" and paragraph [0224], "‘a time domain bundling configuration/indication of an SRS and a DMRS’ may be explicitly indicated by higher layer signaling (e.g., RRC signaling, MAC CE)"and paragraph [0256], "an (openloop(OL)/closed-loop(CL)) power control configuration/indication of an SRS (resource set) is the same as an (OL/CL) power control configuration/indication of a LTL(PUCCH/PUSCH) DMRS." and paragraph [0278], " In addition, the same power control configuration of open loop and/or closed loop may be configured for the SRS and the uplink DMRS…" (i.e., Par.223-224, 256, and 278 implying the SRS and DMRS are transmitted with the common power.)).
However, GO does not explicitly disclose wherein the common transmit power is configured to maintain phase continuity in the demodulated reference signal bundle.
BAE discloses wherein the common transmit power is configured to maintain phase continuity in the demodulated reference signal bundle (paragraph [0044], "To maintain DMRS bundling, the UE is generally able to maintain phase continuity and power consistency across the bundling duration;" (i.e., explicitly discloses maintaining phase continuity.)).
GO and BAE are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field Arrangements affording multiple use of the transmission path. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified GO to implement the method of BAE maintain phase continuity and power consistency across the bundling duration because its obvious to try to maintain the power signal over multiple slots or repetitions and avoiding interference or error if the phase is not maintained (BAE, paragraph [0019], “These requirements include maintenance of phase continuity among PUSCH resources with bundled DMRS resources, and maintenance of power consistency (i.e., same power level within an acceptable tolerance level) among bundled DMRS resources. This translates into conditions on the configurations associated with UL transmissions, which occur on the cell where DMRS bundling is desired. For example, if DMRS bundling is desired over a group of PUSCH repetitions in one cell, it needs to be ensured that the transmission power of these PUSCHs is identical and that the time between two consecutive PUSCHs does not exceed a set time duration.”).
Regarding Claim 2, GO in view of BAE discloses all the limitation of claim 1.
GO further discloses wherein the uplink positioning reference signal is a sounding reference signal for positioning (abstract, "a sounding reference signal (SRS)," and paragraph [0224], "‘a time domain bundling configuration/indication of an SRS and a DMRS’ may be explicitly indicated by higher layer signaling (e.g., RRC signaling, MAC CE)" and paragraph [0264], "SRS-related configuration information may include…positioning," (i.e., discloses SRS for positioning.)).
Regarding Claim 9, GO in view of BAE discloses all the limitation of claim 1.
GO further discloses wherein the first transmit power and the second transmit power are equal to the common transmit power (paragraph [0256], "Proposal B: In the proposal A-1 and A-2, for equivalent association of an SRS and an UL DMRS, a pre-configuration of a base station may be performed so that an (openloop(OL)/closed-loop(CL)) power control configuration/indication of an SRS (resource set) is the same as an (OL/CL) power control configuration/indication of a LTL(PUCCH/PUSCH) DMRS." and paragraph [0278], " In addition, the same power control configuration of open loop and/or closed loop may be configured for the SRS and the uplink DMRS…" (i.e., using the same OL/CL and same power control configuration leading to a common value.)).
Regarding Claim 16, which is similar in scope to claim 1, thus rejected under the same rationale.
Regarding Claim 17, which is similar in scope to claim 2, thus rejected under the same rationale.
Regarding Claim 24, which is similar in scope to claim 9, thus rejected under the same rationale.
Regarding Claim 31, which is similar in scope to claim 1, thus rejected under the same rationale.
Regarding Claim 32, which is similar in scope to claim 2, thus rejected under the same rationale.
Regarding Claim 39, which is similar in scope to claim 9, thus rejected under the same rationale.
Regarding Claim 40, which is similar in scope to claim 1, thus rejected under the same rationale.
Claim(s) 3, 6-7, 18, 21-22, 33, and 36-37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GO (US-20230216632-A1) in view of BAE (US-20230092533-A1) in further view of ZHANG (US-20190349868-A1).
Regarding Claim 3, GO in view of BAE discloses all the limitation of claim 1.
GO further discloses wherein determining the first transmit power includes receiving uplink reference signal configuration information including (paragraph [0256], "a pre-configuration of a base station may be performed so that an (openloop(OL)/closed-loop(CL)) power control configuration/indication of an SRS (resource set)" (i.e., There is an open-loop and closed-loop being performed to communicate power parameters.)).
However, GO in view of BAE do not exility disclose an indication.
ZHANG discloses wherein determining the first transmit power includes receiving uplink reference signal configuration information including an indication of the first transmit power (paragraph [0094], Fig.1, "In step S102, the network device sends the power control information to the terminal device." and paragraph [0095], "In step S103, the terminal device receives the power indication information." and paragraph [0096], "The power indication information includes at least one of the transmit power adjustment value, the transmit power adjustment value, and the path loss information." (i.e., To explicitly show the network device can sent configurations indication such as adjustment value, path lost information, and transmit power adjustment value.)).
GO in view of BAE and ZHANG are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field Arrangements affording multiple use of the transmission path. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified GO to implement the method of ZHANG in order to reduce signaling overhead and the independent power adjustment value adapts to any beam shape (ZHANG, paragraph [0084], “The target power and the path loss information are shared to reduce signaling overheads. An independent power adjustment value adapts to any beam shape, so that the power is accurately controlled.”).
Regarding Claim 6, GO in view of BAE discloses all the limitation of claim 1.
GO further discloses wherein determining the second transmit power includes receiving demodulated reference signal bundle configuration information including (paragraph [0256], "a pre-configuration of a base station may be performed so…an (OL/CL) power control configuration/indication of a LTL(PUCCH/PUSCH) DMRS." (i.e., There is an open-loop and closed-loop being performed to communicate power parameters.)).
However, GO in view of BAE do not exility disclose an indication.
ZHANG discloses wherein determining the second transmit power includes receiving demodulated reference signal bundle configuration information including an indication of the second transmit power (paragraph [0094], Fig.1, "In step S102, the network device sends the power control information to the terminal device." and paragraph [0095], "In step S103, the terminal device receives the power indication information." and paragraph [0096], "The power indication information includes at least one of the transmit power adjustment value, the transmit power adjustment value, and the path loss information." (i.e., To explicitly show the network device can sent configurations indication such as adjustment value, path lost information, and transmit power adjustment value.)).
GO in view of BAE and ZHANG are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field Arrangements affording multiple use of the transmission path. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified GO to implement the method of ZHANG in order to reduce signaling overhead and the independent power adjustment value adapts to any beam shape (ZHANG, paragraph [0084], “The target power and the path loss information are shared to reduce signaling overheads. An independent power adjustment value adapts to any beam shape, so that the power is accurately controlled.”).
Regarding Claim 7, GO in view of BAE in further view of ZHANG discloses all the limitation of claim 6.
GO further discloses wherein the demodulated reference signal bundle configuration information is received from a base station (paragraph [0256], "for equivalent association of an SRS and an UL DMRS, a pre-configuration of a base station may be performed so that…same as an (OL/CL) power control configuration/indication of a LTL(PUCCH/PUSCH) DMRS." (i.e., The OL/CL is being performed with a base station.)).
Regarding Claim 18, which is similar in scope to claim 3, thus rejected under the same rationale.
Regarding Claim 21, which is similar in scope to claim 6, thus rejected under the same rationale.
Regarding Claim 22, which is similar in scope to claim 7, thus rejected under the same rationale.
Regarding Claim 33, which is similar in scope to claim 3, thus rejected under the same rationale.
Regarding Claim 36, which is similar in scope to claim 6, thus rejected under the same rationale.
Regarding Claim 37, which is similar in scope to claim 7, thus rejected under the same rationale.
Claim(s) 4, 19 and 34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GO (US-20230216632-A1) in view of BAE (US-20230092533-A1) in view of ZHANG (US-20190349868-A1) in further view of HOANG (WO-2024035708-A1).
Regarding Claim 4, GO in view of BAE in further view of ZHANG discloses all the limitation of claim 3.
However, GO in view of BAE in further view of ZHANG do not disclose wherein the uplink reference signal configuration information is received from a location management function.
HOANG discloses wherein the uplink reference signal configuration information is received from a location management function (paragraph [0157], "the WTRU may use a high transmit power for a high accuracy requirement positioning service. The QoS requirement of the positioning service may be indicated…from network (e.g., LMF, gNB)," and paragraph [0174], "the WTRU may use the transmission power preconfigured by the network (e.g., gNB, LMF)" (i.e., power configuration can come from LMF.)).
GO in view of BAE in further view of ZHANG and HOANG are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field Power management. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified GO to implement the method of HOANG to wherein configuration information such as power configuration can come from LMF because its obvious to try to reduce signaling by having the LMF specify the power for transmission when requesting the user location information and HOANG provides the wireless transceiver receiver unit (WTRU) to obtain transmission power from gNB, LMF, or WTRU for flexibility (HOANG, paragraph [0174], “the WTRU may use the transmission power preconfigured by the network (e.g., gNB, LMF) or WTRU.”).
Regarding Claim 19, which is similar in scope to claim 4, thus rejected under the same rationale.
Regarding Claim 34, which is similar in scope to claim 4, thus rejected under the same rationale.
Claim(s) 5, 8, 20, 23, 35, and 38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GO (US-20230216632-A1) in view of BAE (US-20230092533-A1) in further view of Boudreau (US-20150351044-A1).
Regarding Claim 5, GO in view of BAE in further view of ZHANG discloses all the limitation of claim 3.
However, GO in view of BAE in further view of ZHANG do not disclose wherein the indication of the first transmit power includes an uncertainty value associated with the first transmit power.
Boudreau discloses wherein the indication of the first transmit power includes an uncertainty value associated with the first transmit power (paragraph [0064], "Coverage specific radio parameters may be determined in any suitable manner…For example, coverage specific radio parameters may be pre-defined, configured by one or more network nodes 115…or broadcasted by one or more network node 115." and paragraph [0065], "Radio parameters that may be coverage specific radio transmission or transmitter parameters (also known as RF transmitter parameters) may be any suitable radio parameters…transmit power tolerance or accuracy (e.g., absolute or relative power tolerance such as +/1 dB)," (i.e., In addition to sending power indication information, that can also include the tolerance.)).
GO in view of BAE in further view of ZHANG and Boudreau are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field Power management. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified GO to implement the method of Boudreau to have a tolerance level in order to conserve the UE battery and only to amplify the signal whenever it is necessary (Boudreau, paragraph [0012], “Conservation of UE battery power can be facilitated when the UE has an efficient power amplifier (PA)…the UE is allowed to reduce its maximum UL transmission power in some scenarios. This is called maximum power reduction (MPR) or UE power back-off in some literature. For instance, a UE with maximum transmit power of 24 dBm power class may reduce its maximum power from 24 dBm to 23 or 22 dBm, depending upon the configuration.”).
Regarding Claim 8, GO in view of BAE in further view of ZHANG discloses all the limitation of claim 6.
However, GO in view of BAE in further view of ZHANG do not disclose wherein the indication of the second transmit power include an uncertainty value associated with the second transmit power.
Boudreau discloses wherein the indication of the second transmit power include an uncertainty value associated with the second transmit power (paragraph [0064], "Coverage specific radio parameters may be determined in any suitable manner…For example, coverage specific radio parameters may be pre-defined, configured by one or more network nodes 115…or broadcasted by one or more network node 115." and paragraph [0065], "Radio parameters that may be coverage specific radio transmission or transmitter parameters (also known as RF transmitter parameters) may be any suitable radio parameters…transmit power tolerance or accuracy (e.g., absolute or relative power tolerance such as +/1 dB)," (i.e., In addition to sending power indication information, that can also include the tolerance.)).
GO in view of BAE in further view of ZHANG and Boudreau are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field Power management. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified GO to implement the method of Boudreau to have a tolerance level in order to conserve the UE battery and only to amplify the signal whenever it is necessary (Boudreau, paragraph [0012], “Conservation of UE battery power can be facilitated when the UE has an efficient power amplifier (PA)…the UE is allowed to reduce its maximum UL transmission power in some scenarios. This is called maximum power reduction (MPR) or UE power back-off in some literature. For instance, a UE with maximum transmit power of 24 dBm power class may reduce its maximum power from 24 dBm to 23 or 22 dBm, depending upon the configuration.”).
Regarding Claim 20, which is similar in scope to claim 5, thus rejected under the same rationale.
Regarding Claim 23, which is similar in scope to claim 8, thus rejected under the same rationale.
Regarding Claim 35, which is similar in scope to claim 5, thus rejected under the same rationale.
Regarding Claim 38, which is similar in scope to claim 8, thus rejected under the same rationale.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Erkin S. Abdullaev whose telephone number is (571)272-4135. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday - 8:00 am - 5:00 pm.
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.
ERKIN S. ABDULLAEV
Examiner
Art Unit 2648
/ERKIN ABDULLAEV/Examiner, Art Unit 2648
/WESLEY L KIM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2648