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, filed on 12/08/2025, have been considered but are moot in view of new ground(s).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 9-11, and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Papasakellariou (US 20180310257) in view of Wakabayashi et al. (US 20250203528), and in view of HomChaudhuri et al. (US 20160345270).
Regarding claim 1, Papasakellariou discloses a method of calculating an uplink pathloss with a user equipment (UE), comprising:
determining, by the UE, a transmission power of a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) transmission (Txppusch), wherein the PUSCH transmission is from the UE to a base station (UE can derive a PUSCH transmission power P.sub.PUSCH,c(i); [0099]);
calculating a receiving power at the base station of a sounding reference signal (SRS) sent from the UE to at the base station (Rxpsrs) (gNB can determine a measured SRS reception power at the gNB; [0129]);
wherein the receiving power at the base station of the SRS sent from the UE is calculated based on a transmission power of the SRS (TXPsrs) sent by the UE to the base station (gNB can again obtain the PL measurement from a power headroom report for an UL data channel transmission and a measured received power for the UL data channel transmission, for example from the DMRS associated with the UL data channel transmission. Further, the gNB can obtain the PL measurement based on SRS transmissions from the UE where the gNB can configure the SRS transmission power or can derive the SRS transmission power from a power headroom report for an UL data channel transmission when the SRS transmission power and the UL data channel transmission power are linked; [0153]); and
calculating the uplink pathloss based on the Txppusch and the Rxpsrs (SRS transmission power can be determined in association with a PUSCH transmission power as in Equation 5; [0107].
gNB measures a PL experienced by transmissions from the UE. The gNB can then configure the measured PL to the UE. gNB can determine a PL as a ratio between an SRS transmission power at the UE and a measured SRS reception power at the gNB; [0128-0129]).
Papasakellariou does not expressly disclose calculating an uplink pathloss by a user equipment (UE); and wherein the receiving power at the base station of a signal sent from the UE is calculated by the UE based on a transmission power of the signal sent by the UE to the base station.
In an analogous art, Wakabayashi discloses calculating an uplink pathloss by a user equipment (UE) (base station 1016 transmits (S1136) the measurement of the received signal power (at the uplink TRP 1014) of the SRS transmissions to the UE 1012. Using the transmission power of the SRS transmissions (as determined by the UE 1012) and the measurement of the received signal power received from the base station 1016, the UE 1012 calculates (S1138) the uplink pathloss between the UE 1012 and the uplink TRP 1014; [0114]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add the features taught by Wakabayashi into the system of Papasakellariou in order to enable measurements of an uplink pathloss between a UE and an infrastructure equipment with an uplink only for the UE, where it is not possible to rely on conventional downlink transmissions (Wakabayashi; [0115]).
The combination of Papasakellariou and Wakabayashi does not expressly disclose wherein the receiving power at the base station of a signal sent from the UE is calculated by the UE based on a transmission power of the signal sent by the UE to the base station.
In an analogous art, HomChaudhuri discloses wherein the receiving power at the base station of a signal sent from the UE is calculated by the UE based on a transmission power of the signal sent by the UE to the base station (link budget may be an accounting of all gains and losses from a transmitter of the wireless device 110-c through the medium to the AP 105-b. The link budget may be represented as a received power being equal to a transmitted power plus the gains minus the losses. wireless device 110-d can choose the optimal MCS based on the received power guidance and its estimate of link budget derived from the feedback provided by AP; [0071, 0083]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add the features taught by HomChaudhuri into the system of Papasakellariou and Wakabayashi in order to achieve high performance at reduced power levels, and optimize amount of collisions in an inter-or intra-basic service set (BSS) (HomChaudhuri; [0040]).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Papasakellariou, HomChaudhuri, and Wakabayashi, particularly Papasakellariou discloses wherein the Txppusch is determined based on a power headroom report (PHR) (When different functions correspond to different indexes d for configurations of a set of parameters used for determining a PUSCH transmission power, a UE can provide separate power headroom reports for each corresponding index d; [0176]).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Papasakellariou, HomChaudhuri, and Wakabayashi, particularly Papasakellariou discloses wherein the calculating the uplink pathloss comprises:
determining the TXPsrs based on the Txppusch (SRS transmission power can be determined in association with a PUSCH transmission power as in Equation 5; [0107]).
Wakabayashi discloses calculating the uplink pathloss based on a difference between the TXPsrs and the RXPsrs by PLsrs= Txpsrs- RXPsrs (After received the SRS received signal power measurement(s) and the SRS transmission power, the base station 1016 uses these to calculate (S1038) the uplink pathloss between the UE 1012 and the uplink TRP 1014. The uplink pathloss is calculated as the transmission power of the SRS transmissions minus the received signal power of the SRS transmissions; [0110]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add the features taught by Wakabayashi into the system of Papasakellariou and HomChaudhuri in order to enable measurements of an uplink pathloss between a UE and an infrastructure equipment with an uplink only for the UE, where it is not possible to rely on conventional downlink transmissions (Wakabayashi; [0115]).
Regarding claim 9, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the reasons cited in claim 1.
Regarding claim 10, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the reasons cited in claim 2.
Regarding claim 11, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the reasons cited in claim 3.
Regarding claim 17, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the reasons cited in claim 1.
Regarding claim 18, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the reasons cited in claim 2.
Regarding claim 19, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the reasons cited in claim 3.
Allowable Subject Matter
Dependent claims 4-8, 12-16, and 20 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.
Dependent claim 4, if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims, would comprise a combination of elements which is not taught by the prior art of record. The same remarks apply to dependent claims 5-8, 12-16, and 20 mutatis mutandis.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Yavuz et al. (US 9521585), “Method And Apparatus For Dynamic Adjustment Of Uplink Transmission Time.”
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OUSSAMA ROUDANI whose telephone number is (571)272-4727. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 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, UN C CHO can be reached at (571) 272 7919. 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.
/OUSSAMA ROUDANI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2413