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 filed 02/23/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive because of the following reason:
Regarding claims 1 and 14-18, Applicant argues that (see, pages 7-10):
Claims 1 and 14-18 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) as allegedly being anticipated by Sambhwani et al. (U.S. 2022/0408378 Al, hereinafter Sambhwani).
Applicant respectfully traverses this rejection with respect to the claims as amended.
A claim is anticipated only if each and every element as set forth in the claim is found, either expressly or inherently described, in a single prior art reference." Verdegaal Bros. v. UnionOil Co. of California, 814 F.2d 628, 631, 2 USPQ2d 1051, 1053 (Fed. Cir. 1987). "The identical invention must be shown in as complete detail as is contained in the ... claim." Richardson v. Suzuki Motor Co., 868 F.2d 1226, 1236, 9 USPQ2d 1913, 1920 (Fed. Cir. 1989). The elements must be arranged as required by the claim. In re Bond, 910 F.2d 831, 15 USPQ2d 1566 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
In this case, Applicant submits that the Office has failed to show that Sambhwani discloses "each and every element as set forth" in claims 1 and 14-18 "in as complete detail as is contained in the ... claim."
With regard to claim 1, for example, the Office has failed to adequately show that Sambhwani teaches or suggests "obtaining scaling information indicative of a relationship between a first ... RF ... exposure limit and a second RF exposure limit" and "transmitting a signal at a transmit power determined based at least in part on ... the scaling information," as recited in claim 1.
The Office relies on Sambhwani, [0064] for allegedly disclosing "obtaining scaling information indicative of a relationship between a first radio frequency (RF) exposure limit and a second RF exposure limit (At operation 80, RFE budget conversion circuitry 36 and remaining RFE budget calculation circuitry 66 on radio 28 may receive SAR budget BGTSAR and/or MPE budget BGTMPE from RF exposure metric manager 26, [0064])." OA, p. 14.
However, despite the Office's contention, rather than teach or suggest "obtaining scaling information indicative of a relationship between a first ... RF ... exposure limit and a second RF exposure limit," as recited in claim 1, Sambhwani merely discloses receiving separate exposure budgets. As explained in Sambhwani, "radio 28 may receive SAR budget BGTSAR and/or MPE budget BGTMPE from RF exposure metric manager 26." Sambhwani, [0064]. Respectfully, Applicant submits Sambhwani is silent regarding obtaining any information indicative of the relationship between the SAR budget and the MPE budget, let alone obtaining scaling information indicative of a relationship between the SAR budget and the MPE budget. Moreover, Applicant respectfully submits that the mere receipt of separate SAR and MPE budgets does not teach or suggest "scaling information indicative of a relationship between a first ... RF ... exposure limit and a second RF exposure limit," as recited in claim 1.
Thus, it follows that Sambhwani cannot teach or suggest "obtaining scaling information indicative of a relationship between a first ... RF ... exposure limit and a second RF exposure limit," as recited in claim 1.
Further, the Office relies on Sambhwani, [0065] for allegedly disclosing "transmitting a signal at a transmit power determined based at least in part on ... the scaling information (... RFE budget conversion circuitry 82 may generate maximum transmit power level PMAXSAR based on SAR budget BGT and antenna coefficient C1 ... . Additionally or alternatively, RFE budget conversion circuitry 82 may generate maximum transmit power level PMAXMPE based on MPE budget BGTMPE and antenna coefficient C2, [0064]-[0065])." OA, p. 14-15.
However, contrary to the Office's contention, rather than teach or suggest "transmitting a signal at a transmit power determined based at least in part on ... the scaling information," as recited in claim 1, Sambhwani instead merely discloses computing independent maximum transmit power limits based on the SAR budget and MPE budget, respectively. As explained in Sambhwani, "RFE budget conversion circuitry 82 may generate PMAXSAR based on SAR budget BGTSAR and ... generate PMAXMrE based on MPE budget BGTMrE.." Sambhwani, [0064]. Thus, while Sambhwani applies each exposure limit independently to determine a corresponding maximum transmit power, Sambhwani is completely silent with respect to transmitting a signal at a transmit power determined based at least in part on scaling information indicative of a relationship between the SAR budget and MPE budget. Therefore, it follows that Sambhwani cannot teach or suggest "transmitting a signal at a transmit power determined based at least in part on ... the scaling information," as recited in claim 1.
For at least these reasons, Applicant submits independent claim 1 and its dependents are allowable and respectfully requests withdrawal of this rejection with respect to these claims.
Regarding claim 14, for similar reasons noted above with regard to claim 1, Applicant submits Sambhwani does not teach or suggest "obtaining scaling information indicative of a relationship between a first radio frequency (RF) exposure limit and a second RF exposure limit" and "transmitting a signal at a transmit power determined based at least in part on a maximum allowed time-averaged transmit power and the scaling information," as recited in claim 14.
For at least these reasons, Applicant submits independent claim 14 and its dependents are allowable and respectfully requests withdrawal of this rejection with respect to these claims.
Regarding claim 18, for similar reasons noted above with regard to claim 1, Applicant submits Sambhwani does not teach or suggest "obtaining scaling information indicative of a relationship between a first radio frequency (RF) exposure limit and a second RF exposure limit" and "controlling transmission of a signal at a transmit power determined based at least in part on a maximum allowed time-averaged transmit power for a time interval and the scaling information," as recited in claim 18.
For at least these reasons, Applicant submits independent claim 18 and its dependents are allowable and respectfully requests withdrawal of this rejection with respect to these claims.
Examiner respectfully disagrees for the following reason:
Applicant's above arguments have been fully considered but are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Sambhwani merely discloses receiving separate SAR and MPE budgets and does not disclose “obtaining scaling information indicative of a relationship between a first RF exposure limit and a second RF exposure limit.” Applicant further argues that the separate SAR and MPE budgets are applied independently and therefore do not constitute the claimed scaling information.
This argument is not persuasive. Sambhwani is not relied upon merely for the isolated receipt of two unrelated budget values. Rather, Sambhwani teaches an RF exposure management framework in which SAR and MPE budgets are received and converted into corresponding maximum transmit power levels using antenna
coefficients. In particular, Sambhwani discloses that, at operation 80, RFE budget conversion circuitry 36 and remaining RFE budget calculation circuitry 66 receive SAR budget BGTSAR and/or MPE budget BGTMPE from RF exposure metric manager 26. Sambhwani, para. [0064]. Sambhwani further discloses that, at operation 82, the RFE budget conversion circuitry generates maximum transmit power level PMAXSAR based on SAR budget BGTSAR and antenna coefficient Cl, and additionally or alternatively generates maximum transmit power level PMAXMPE based on MPE budget BGTMPE and antenna coefficient C2. Sambhwani, para. [0065].
Thus, Sambhwani expressly teaches obtaining information used to scale or convert RF exposure limits/budgets into corresponding transmit power levels. The claimed language does not require that the “scaling information” be a single combined value, nor does it require that the first and second RF exposure limits be mathematically
merged into one shared budget. Instead, the claim broadly recites obtaining scaling information indicative of a relationship between a first RF exposure limit and a second RF exposure limit. Sambhwani's disclosure of receiving SAR and MPE budgets and converting those budgets into corresponding maximum transmit power levels using antenna coefficients reasonably teaches the claimed scaling information because the SAR and MPE exposure limits are both used within the same RF exposure management process to determine allowed transmit power.
Applicant's characterization of Sambhwani as merely receiving separate budgets is therefore too narrow. Paragraph [0065] makes clear that the budgets are not simply received, they are converted into maximum transmit power levels based on antenna coefficients. The antenna coefficients correspond to the active antenna, duty cycle, frequency band, radio access technology, and current device position or orientation.
Sambhwani, para. [0065]. Accordingly, the scaling information is reflected in the conversion of the RF exposure budgets into transmit power limits based on the applicable antenna coefficients.
Applicant also argues that Sambhwani does not disclose "transmitting a signal at a transmit power determined based at least in part on ... the scaling information." This argument is likewise not persuasive. Sambhwani discloses that the generated maximum transmit power levels PMAXSAR and/or PMAXMPE are provided to transmitter 40. Sambhwani, para. [0065]. Sambhwani further explains that the transmitter transmits RF signals subject to those maximum transmit power levels. Therefore, the transmit power is determined based at least in part on the same budget conversion/scaling process relied upon above.
Accordingly, the disclosure of Sambhwani, particularly paras. [0064] and [0065], reasonably teaches or suggests the disputed limitations. Applicant's arguments do not identify a structural or functional distinction between the claimed “scaling information” and Sambhwani's disclosed use of SAR/MPE budgets and antenna coefficients to generate corresponding maximum transmit power levels. Therefore, the rejection of independent claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. § 102 is maintained.
For the same reasons, Applicant's arguments regarding independent claims 14 and 18 are also not persuasive. Claims 14 and 18 recite similar limitations directed to obtaining scaling information and transmitting or controlling transmission at a transmit power determined based at least in part on that scaling information. As discussed above, Sambhwani teaches receiving SAR and/or MPE budgets and converting those budgets, using antenna coefficients, into maximum transmit power levels that are then used to control transmission. Therefore, the rejection of claims 14 and 18 is maintained.
With respect to the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103, Applicant argues that Nadakuduti does not cure the alleged deficiencies of Sambhwani. This argument is not persuasive because, as discussed above, Sambhwani already teaches the disputed limitations of the independent claims. Nadakuduti is relied upon for the additional limitations of the dependent claims. Since Sambhwani teaches the limitations argued by Applicant, and Nadakuduti is applied for the dependent claim features, the combination remains proper. Accordingly, the rejection of claims 2-7, 10-13, 19-24, and 27-30 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is maintained.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 1 and 14-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sambhwani et al. (US 20220408378, hereinafter “Sambhwani”).
Regarding claim 1, Sambhwani discloses,
A method of wireless communication by a wireless device (FIG. 5 is a flow chart of illustrative operations that may be performed by a given radio 28 on device 10, [0064]), comprising:
obtaining scaling information indicative of a relationship between a first radio frequency (RF) exposure limit and a second RF exposure limit (At operation 80, RFE budget conversion circuitry 36 and remaining RFE budget calculation circuitry 66 on radio 28 may receive SAR budget BGTSAR and/or MPE budget BGTMPE from RF exposure metric manager 26, [0064]); and
transmitting a signal at a transmit power determined based at least in part on a maximum allowed time-averaged transmit power for a time interval and the scaling information (Radio 28 may also receive information identifying the current averaging period TAVG from RF exposure metric manager 26. At operation 82, during a first instantaneous period of the current averaging period TAVG, RFE budget conversion circuitry 82 may generate maximum transmit power level PMAXSAR based on SAR budget BGT and antenna coefficient C1 (e.g., according to equation 1). Additionally or alternatively, RFE budget conversion circuitry 82 may generate maximum transmit power level PMAXMPE based on MPE budget BGTMPE and antenna coefficient C2, [0064]-[0065]).
Regarding claim 14, Sambhwani discloses,
A method of wireless communication by a wireless device (FIG. 5 is a flow chart of illustrative operations that may be performed by a given radio 28 on device 10, [0064]), comprising:
obtaining scaling information indicative of a relationship between a first radio frequency (RF) exposure limit and a second RF exposure limit (At operation 80, RFE budget conversion circuitry 36 and remaining RFE budget calculation circuitry 66 on radio 28 may receive SAR budget BGTSAR and/or MPE budget BGTMPE from RF exposure metric manager 26, [0064]); and
transmitting a signal at a transmit power determined based at least in part on a maximum allowed time-averaged transmit power for a time interval and the scaling information (Radio 28 may also receive information identifying the current averaging period TAVG from RF exposure metric manager 26. At operation 82, during a first instantaneous period of the current averaging period TAVG, RFE budget conversion circuitry 82 may generate maximum transmit power level PMAXSAR based on SAR budget BGT and antenna coefficient C1 (e.g., according to equation 1). Additionally or alternatively, RFE budget conversion circuitry 82 may generate maximum transmit power level PMAXMPE based on MPE budget BGTMPE and antenna coefficient C2, [0064]-[0065]), wherein the transmit power is less than or equal to the maximum allowed time-averaged transmit power scaled by a factor associated with the first RF exposure limit (The RF exposure metric manager may assign a radio-frequency exposure (RFE) budget (e.g., SAR and/or MPE budgets) to each of the radios. Each radio may generate a first maximum transmit power level based on its assigned RFE budget and an antenna coefficient associated with an antenna used by the radio for transmission……. The radio may transmit first radio-frequency signals during a first subperiod of the averaging period. The radio may generate an instantaneous RFE metric value based on the conducted transmit power of the radio and antenna during the first subperiod and based on the antenna coefficient. The radio may generate a consumed RFE metric value by averaging the instantaneous RFE metric value with one or more instantaneous RFE metric values gathered during one or more prior subperiods of the averaging period [0006]-[0009]).
Regarding claim 15, Sambhwani discloses,
wherein the scaling information comprises the factor (RFE budget and antenna coefficient database c, [0006]-[0009]) associated with the first RF exposure limit (Regulatory requirements often impose limits on the amount of RF energy exposure permissible for external object 8 within the vicinity of antenna(s) 34 over a specified time period (e.g., an SAR limit and an MPE limit over a corresponding averaging period), [0030]-[0032]).
Regarding claim 16, Sambhwani discloses,
wherein the factor corresponds to a ratio associated with the first RF exposure limit (wherein the scaling information comprises a factor corresponding to a first ratio associated with the first RF exposure limit and a second ratio associated with the second RF exposure limit, [0037]-[0039]).
Regarding claim 17, Sambhwani discloses,
wherein the determination of the transmit power is independent of a time-averaging RF exposure evaluation on one or more transmit powers of the wireless device (The radio may measure instantaneous TX power and duty cycle and may convert the TX power back to consumed instantaneous SAR/MPE values. The instantaneous SAR/MPE values may be used for time domain averaging of SAR/MPE. The radio may calculate the remaining SAR/MPE budget based on the averaged SAR/MPE and may adjust TX power level and duty cycle to maintain the averaged SAR/MPE within the provided overall budget, [0044]-0046]).
Regarding claim 18, Sambhwani discloses,
An apparatus for wireless communication, comprising FIG. 5 is a flow chart of illustrative operations that may be performed by a given radio 28 on device 10, [0064]), comprising:
one or more memories collectively storing computer-executable instructions; and one or more processors coupled to the one or more memories, the one or more processors being collectively configured to execute the computer-executable instructions to cause the apparatus to perform an operation (Control circuitry 14 may include processing circuitry such as processing circuitry 18. Processing circuitry 18 may be used to control the operation of device 10. Processing circuitry 18 may include on one or more processors, microprocessors, microcontrollers, digital signal processors, host processors, baseband processor integrated circuits, application specific integrated circuits, central processing units (CPUs), graphics processing units (GPUs), etc. Control circuitry 14 may be configured to perform operations in device 10 using hardware (e.g., dedicated hardware or circuitry), firmware, and/or software, [0018]-[0020]) comprising:
obtaining scaling information indicative of a relationship between a first radio frequency (RF) exposure limit and a second RF exposure limit (At operation 80, RFE budget conversion circuitry 36 and remaining RFE budget calculation circuitry 66 on radio 28 may receive SAR budget BGTSAR and/or MPE budget BGTMPE from RF exposure metric manager 26, [0064]); and
controlling transmission of a signal at a transmit power determined based at least in part on a maximum allowed time-averaged transmit power for a time interval and the scaling information (Radio 28 may also receive information identifying the current averaging period TAVG from RF exposure metric manager 26. At operation 82, during a first instantaneous period of the current averaging period TAVG, RFE budget conversion circuitry 82 may generate maximum transmit power level PMAXSAR based on SAR budget BGT and antenna coefficient C1 (e.g., according to equation 1). Additionally or alternatively, RFE budget conversion circuitry 82 may generate maximum transmit power level PMAXMPE based on MPE budget BGTMPE and antenna coefficient C2, [0064]-[0065]).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 2-7, 10-13, 19-24 and 27-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sambhwani, and further in view of Nadakuduti et al. (US 20220070795, hereinafter “Nadakuduti”).
Regarding claim 2, Sambhwani discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 1), however Sambhwani does not disclose, wherein the first RF exposure limit comprises a total RF exposure for a transmission interval less than a specified duration, and wherein the second RF exposure limit comprises a time-averaged RF exposure limit.
In the same field of endeavor, Nadakuduti discloses, wherein the first RF exposure limit comprises a total RF exposure for a transmission interval less than a specified duration (the transmission power level may be determined based on a sum of the RF exposures being less than or equal to a threshold (e.g., 1.0) [00138]-[0140]. the total normalized composite map is less than a threshold (for example, 1.0) adjusted backoff factors, until the condition (e.g., the total normalized composite map being less than or equal to the threshold) at block 810 is satisfied [0111]-[0112]), and wherein the second RF exposure limit comprises a time-averaged RF exposure limit (ensuring the RF exposure compliance may include evaluating the RF exposure compliance in terms of time-averaged RF exposure such as a time-averaged SAR or a time-averaged PD over a time window. In aspects, the time window may be in a range from 1 second to 360 seconds. For example, the time window may be 100 seconds or 360 seconds, [0102]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Sambhwani by specifically providing wherein the first RF exposure limit comprises a total RF exposure for a transmission interval less than a specified duration, and wherein the second RF exposure limit comprises a time-averaged RF exposure limit, as taught by Nadakuduti for the purpose of enabling the wireless communication device to assess RF exposure from the wireless communication device in real time and adjust the transmission power of the wireless communication device accordingly to comply with the RF exposure limit [0003].
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Sambhwani and Nadakuduti discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 2), further Sambhwani discloses, wherein the scaling information comprises a factor corresponding to a first ratio associated with the first RF exposure limit and a second ratio associated with the second RF exposure limit (wherein the scaling information comprises a factor corresponding to a first ratio associated with the first RF exposure limit and a second ratio associated with the second RF exposure limit, [0037]-[0039]).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Sambhwani and Nadakuduti discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 3), further Sambhwani discloses, wherein the factor is a ratio of the first ratio to the second ratio (wherein the scaling information comprises a factor corresponding to a first ratio associated with the first RF exposure limit and a second ratio associated with the second RF exposure limit, [0037]-[0039]).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Sambhwani and Nadakuduti discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 3), in addition Nadakuduti discloses, wherein the second ratio is a quotient of a peak transmit power to a maximum time-averaged transmit power level (the backoff factor for each transmitter (or antenna, or group of antennas or transmitters) may be determined based on a proportion of RF exposure attributable to each transmitter at a (e.g., peak) location and an amount of desired reduction in exposure. In some examples, the backoff factor may be determined based on a priority of a transmitter coupled to an antenna. In some examples, the backoff factor for an antenna that contributes most to the RF exposure at a (e.g., peak) is the largest backoff factor as compared to backoff factors for other antennas or group, [0109]-[0112]).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Sambhwani and Nadakuduti discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 3), in addition Nadakuduti discloses, wherein the second ratio is a quotient of a peak transmit power to a maximum time-averaged transmit power level (the UE may transmit the signal at the transmission power level based on a time-averaged sum of RF exposures for each of the antenna groups being less than or equal to a threshold (e.g., 1.0). A backoff factor may be applied to the RF exposures for each of the antenna groups in the case of the sum of RF exposures or the time-averaged sum of RF exposures, 0139]-[0140])
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Sambhwani and Nadakuduti discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 1), however Sambhwani does not disclose, adjusting a normalized power report and the maximum allowed time-averaged transmit power in a time window associated with the second RF exposure limit based on the scaling information; and determining the transmit power based at least in part on the adjusted normalized power report and the adjusted maximum allowed time-averaged transmit power.
In the same field of endeavor, Nadakuduti discloses, adjusting a normalized power report and the maximum allowed time-averaged transmit power in a time window associated (ensuring the RF exposure compliance may include evaluating the RF exposure compliance in terms of time-averaged RF exposure such as a time-averaged SAR or a time-averaged PD over a time window. In aspects, the time window may be in a range from 1 second to 360 seconds. For example, the time window may be 100 seconds or 360 seconds. The range from 1 second to 360 seconds is an example, and other suitable values for the time window may be used, [0102]) with the second RF exposure limit based on the scaling information (in a system of N antennas which are grouped into k antenna groups, first obtained normalized RF exposure distribution of each of i=1 to N antennas on all exposure surfaces of interest=normalized.map(s,x,y,z,i), represented in block 804, such that the maximum value of RF exposure distributions out of all surfaces is max{normalized.map(s,x,y,z)}=1.0. Then, obtain composite map out of all n antennas inside antenna group k=normalized.composite.map.AG.sub.k(S,x,y,z) max{normalized.map(s,x,y,z,i=1 to n)}, represented in block 806, =normRFexposure(k,s,x,y,z). This normalized composite map is termed as normalized RF exposure for antenna group k, [0143]-[0146]); and determining the transmit power based at least in part on the adjusted normalized power report and the adjusted maximum allowed time-averaged transmit power (the transmission power level may be determined based on a sum of the RF exposures being less than or equal to a threshold (e.g., 1.0) [00138]-[0140]. The total normalized composite map is less than a threshold (for example, 1.0) adjusted backoff factors, until the condition (e.g., the total normalized composite map being less than or equal to the threshold) at block 810 is satisfied [0111]-[0112]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Sambhwani by specifically providing adjusting a normalized power report and the maximum allowed time-averaged transmit power in a time window associated with the second RF exposure limit based on the scaling information; and determining the transmit power based at least in part on the adjusted normalized power report and the adjusted maximum allowed time-averaged transmit power, as taught by Nadakuduti for the purpose of enabling the wireless communication device to assess RF exposure from the wireless communication device in real time and adjust the transmission power of the wireless communication device accordingly to comply with the RF exposure limit [0003].
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Sambhwani and Nadakuduti discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 1), in addition Nadakuduti discloses, wherein transmitting the signal comprises transmitting the signal at the transmit power for a duration that is in compliance with the first RF exposure limit (the transmission power level may be determined based on a sum of the RF exposures being less than or equal to a threshold (e.g., 1.0) [00138]-[0140]. the total normalized composite map is less than a threshold (for example, 1.0) adjusted backoff factors, until the condition (e.g., the total normalized composite map being less than or equal to the threshold) at block 810 is satisfied [0111]-[0112]).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Sambhwani and Nadakuduti discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 10), in addition Nadakuduti discloses,
wherein the duration corresponds to a highest ratio of a peak transmit power to a maximum time-averaged transmit power level supported by the wireless device (In such scenarios, a peak-to-average-power ratio (PAPR) can be used as a metric to determine if P.sub.limit is relatively low or high. The PAPR in dB may be given by P.sub.max−P.sub.limit, where P.sub.max and P.sub.limit may be in dBm. For example, if PAPR is positive (say, a few dB, for example 2 dB, 3 dB, or 6 dB), then P.sub.limit may be considered low for that specific technology/band/antenna. Similarly, if PAPR is less than one of these example values or negative, then P.sub.limit may be considered high, [0126]).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Sambhwani and Nadakuduti discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 1), in addition Nadakuduti discloses, wherein the scaling information is based on a regulatory value for the second RF exposure limit independent of a backoff applied to the second RF exposure limit (The MPE limit is a regulatory metric for exposure based on area, e.g., an energy density limit defined as a number, X, watts per square meter (W/m.sup.2) averaged over a defined area and time-averaged over a frequency-dependent time window in order to prevent a human exposure hazard represented by a tissue temperature change, [0051], [0119]).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Sambhwani and Nadakuduti discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 1), in addition Nadakuduti discloses, wherein the scaling information is based at least in part on an approximate function for the first RF exposure limit that is less than a regulatory function for the first RF exposure limit (The MPE limit is a regulatory metric for exposure based on area, e.g., an energy density limit defined as a number, X, watts per square meter (W/m.sup.2) averaged over a defined area and time-averaged over a frequency-dependent time window in order to prevent a human exposure hazard represented by a tissue temperature change, [0051], [0119]).
Regarding claim 19, Sambhwani discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 18), however Sambhwani does not disclose, wherein the first RF exposure limit comprises a total RF exposure for a transmission interval less than a specified duration, and wherein the second RF exposure limit comprises a time-averaged RF exposure limit.
In the same field of endeavor, Nadakuduti discloses, wherein the first RF exposure limit comprises a total RF exposure for a transmission interval less than a specified duration (the transmission power level may be determined based on a sum of the RF exposures being less than or equal to a threshold (e.g., 1.0) [00138]-[0140]. the total normalized composite map is less than a threshold (for example, 1.0) adjusted backoff factors, until the condition (e.g., the total normalized composite map being less than or equal to the threshold) at block 810 is satisfied [0111]-[0112]), and wherein the second RF exposure limit comprises a time-averaged RF exposure limit (ensuring the RF exposure compliance may include evaluating the RF exposure compliance in terms of time-averaged RF exposure such as a time-averaged SAR or a time-averaged PD over a time window. In aspects, the time window may be in a range from 1 second to 360 seconds. For example, the time window may be 100 seconds or 360 seconds, [0102]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Sambhwani by specifically providing wherein the first RF exposure limit comprises a total RF exposure for a transmission interval less than a specified duration, and wherein the second RF exposure limit comprises a time-averaged RF exposure limit, as taught by Nadakuduti for the purpose of enabling the wireless communication device to assess RF exposure from the wireless communication device in real time and adjust the transmission power of the wireless communication device accordingly to comply with the RF exposure limit [0003].
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Sambhwani and Nadakuduti discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 19), further Sambhwani discloses, wherein the scaling information comprises a factor corresponding to a first ratio associated with the first RF exposure limit and a second ratio associated with the second RF exposure limit (wherein the scaling information comprises a factor corresponding to a first ratio associated with the first RF exposure limit and a second ratio associated with the second RF exposure limit, [0037]-[0039]).
Regarding claim 21, the combination of Sambhwani and Nadakuduti discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 20), further Sambhwani discloses, wherein the factor is a ratio of the first ratio to the second ratio (wherein the scaling information comprises a factor corresponding to a first ratio associated with the first RF exposure limit and a second ratio associated with the second RF exposure limit, [0037]-[0039]).
Regarding claim 22, the combination of Sambhwani and Nadakuduti discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 20), in addition Nadakuduti discloses, wherein the second ratio is a quotient of a peak transmit power to a maximum time-averaged transmit power level (the backoff factor for each transmitter (or antenna, or group of antennas or transmitters) may be determined based on a proportion of RF exposure attributable to each transmitter at a (e.g., peak) location and an amount of desired reduction in exposure. In some examples, the backoff factor may be determined based on a priority of a transmitter coupled to an antenna. In some examples, the backoff factor for an antenna that contributes most to the RF exposure at a (e.g., peak) is the largest backoff factor as compared to backoff factors for other antennas or group, [0109]-[0112]).
Regarding claim 23, the combination of Sambhwani and Nadakuduti discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 20), in addition Nadakuduti discloses, wherein the second ratio is a quotient of a peak transmit power to a maximum time-averaged transmit power level (the UE may transmit the signal at the transmission power level based on a time-averaged sum of RF exposures for each of the antenna groups being less than or equal to a threshold (e.g., 1.0). A backoff factor may be applied to the RF exposures for each of the antenna groups in the case of the sum of RF exposures or the time-averaged sum of RF exposures, 0139]-[0140])
Regarding claim 24, the combination of Sambhwani and Nadakuduti discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 18), however Sambhwani does not disclose, adjusting a normalized power report and the maximum allowed time-averaged transmit power in a time window associated with the second RF exposure limit based on the scaling information; and determining the transmit power based at least in part on the adjusted normalized power report and the adjusted maximum allowed time-averaged transmit power.
In the same field of endeavor, Nadakuduti discloses, adjusting a normalized power report and the maximum allowed time-averaged transmit power in a time window associated (ensuring the RF exposure compliance may include evaluating the RF exposure compliance in terms of time-averaged RF exposure such as a time-averaged SAR or a time-averaged PD over a time window. In aspects, the time window may be in a range from 1 second to 360 seconds. For example, the time window may be 100 seconds or 360 seconds. The range from 1 second to 360 seconds is an example, and other suitable values for the time window may be used, [0102]) with the second RF exposure limit based on the scaling information (in a system of N antennas which are grouped into k antenna groups, first obtained normalized RF exposure distribution of each of i=1 to N antennas on all exposure surfaces of interest=normalized.map(s,x,y,z,i), represented in block 804, such that the maximum value of RF exposure distributions out of all surfaces is max{normalized.map(s,x,y,z)}=1.0. Then, obtain composite map out of all n antennas inside antenna group k=normalized.composite.map.AG.sub.k(S,x,y,z) max{normalized.map(s,x,y,z,i=1 to n)}, represented in block 806, =normRFexposure(k,s,x,y,z). This normalized composite map is termed as normalized RF exposure for antenna group k, [0143]-[0146]); and determining the transmit power based at least in part on the adjusted normalized power report and the adjusted maximum allowed time-averaged transmit power (the transmission power level may be determined based on a sum of the RF exposures being less than or equal to a threshold (e.g., 1.0) [00138]-[0140]. The total normalized composite map is less than a threshold (for example, 1.0) adjusted backoff factors, until the condition (e.g., the total normalized composite map being less than or equal to the threshold) at block 810 is satisfied [0111]-[0112]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Sambhwani by specifically providing adjusting a normalized power report and the maximum allowed time-averaged transmit power in a time window associated with the second RF exposure limit based on the scaling information; and determining the transmit power based at least in part on the adjusted normalized power report and the adjusted maximum allowed time-averaged transmit power, as taught by Nadakuduti for the purpose of enabling the wireless communication device to assess RF exposure from the wireless communication device in real time and adjust the transmission power of the wireless communication device accordingly to comply with the RF exposure limit [0003].
Regarding claim 27, the combination of Sambhwani and Nadakuduti discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 18), in addition Nadakuduti discloses, wherein transmitting the signal comprises transmitting the signal at the transmit power for a duration that is in compliance with the first RF exposure limit (the transmission power level may be determined based on a sum of the RF exposures being less than or equal to a threshold (e.g., 1.0) [00138]-[0140]. the total normalized composite map is less than a threshold (for example, 1.0) adjusted backoff factors, until the condition (e.g., the total normalized composite map being less than or equal to the threshold) at block 810 is satisfied [0111]-[0112]).
Regarding claim 28, the combination of Sambhwani and Nadakuduti discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 27), in addition Nadakuduti discloses,
wherein the duration corresponds to a highest ratio of a peak transmit power to a maximum time-averaged transmit power level supported by the apparatus (In such scenarios, a peak-to-average-power ratio (PAPR) can be used as a metric to determine if P.sub.limit is relatively low or high. The PAPR in dB may be given by P.sub.max−P.sub.limit, where P.sub.max and P.sub.limit may be in dBm. For example, if PAPR is positive (say, a few dB, for example 2 dB, 3 dB, or 6 dB), then P.sub.limit may be considered low for that specific technology/band/antenna. Similarly, if PAPR is less than one of these example values or negative, then P.sub.limit may be considered high, [0126]).
Regarding claim 29, the combination of Sambhwani and Nadakuduti discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 18), in addition Nadakuduti discloses, wherein the scaling information is based on a regulatory value for the second RF exposure limit independent of a backoff applied to the second RF exposure limit (The MPE limit is a regulatory metric for exposure based on area, e.g., an energy density limit defined as a number, X, watts per square meter (W/m.sup.2) averaged over a defined area and time-averaged over a frequency-dependent time window in order to prevent a human exposure hazard represented by a tissue temperature change, [0051], [0119]).
Regarding claim 30, the combination of Sambhwani and Nadakuduti discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 18), in addition Nadakuduti discloses, wherein the scaling information is based at least in part on an approximate function for the first RF exposure limit that is less than a regulatory function for the first RF exposure limit (The MPE limit is a regulatory metric for exposure based on area, e.g., an energy density limit defined as a number, X, watts per square meter (W/m.sup.2) averaged over a defined area and time-averaged over a frequency-dependent time window in order to prevent a human exposure hazard represented by a tissue temperature change, [0051], [0119]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8, 9, 25 and 26 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.
Regarding claim 8, the following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the closest prior art, Sambhwani and Nadakuduti, whether taken along or in combination does not teach the following novel feature:
“the method comprising wherein adjusting the normalized power report and the maximum allowed time-averaged transmit power comprises: scaling the normalized power report by a first factor of the scaling information, the first factor corresponding to a first ratio of a first transmit power to a maximum time-averaged transmit power level; and scaling the maximum allowed time-averaged transmit power by a second factor of the scaling information, the second factor corresponding to a second ratio of a second transmit power to the maximum time-averaged transmit power level”, in combination with the other limitations in claim 1 and claim 7.
Dependent claim 9 is allowed as those inherit the allowable subject matter from claim 8.
Regarding claim 25, the following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the closest prior art, Sambhwani and Nadakuduti, whether taken along or in combination does not teach the following novel feature:
“the apparatus comprising wherein adjusting the normalized power report and the maximum allowed time-averaged transmit power comprises: scaling the normalized power report by a first factor of the scaling information, the first factor corresponding to a first ratio of a first transmit power to a maximum time-averaged transmit power level; and scaling the maximum allowed time-averaged transmit power by a second factor of the scaling information, the second factor corresponding to a second ratio of a second transmit power to the maximum time-averaged transmit power level”, in combination with the other limitations in claim 18 and claim 24.
Dependent claim 26 is allowed as those inherit the allowable subject matter from claim 8.
Prior Art of the Record:
The prior art made of record not relied upon and considered pertinent to
Applicant’s disclosure:
US 20230180150: Certain aspects of the present disclosure provide techniques and apparatus for operating a wireless communication device pursuant to radio frequency (RF) exposure compliance. A method that may be performed by a wireless device includes determining a base reserve and a dynamic reserve for each of a plurality of radios.
US 20230156615: This disclosure presents methods and devices that implement dynamic transmit power control techniques in terminal devices with multiple radio frequency (RF) transmitters and/or in a multi-terminal device environment to comply with regulatory RF exposure limits and standards while enhancing device performance.
US 20230139016: Certain aspects of the present disclosure provide techniques and apparatus for operating a wireless communication device pursuant to radio frequency (RF) exposure across tissues and/or body locations. An example method of wireless communication by a user equipment generally includes determining a time-averaged RF exposure per exposure scenario or category.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 GOLAM SOROWAR whose telephone number is (571)270-3761. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 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, Charles Appiah can be reached at (571) 272-7904. 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.
/GOLAM SOROWAR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2641
Prosecution Insights