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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. 16/477,790, filed on 7/12/2019.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 7/7/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding double patenting rejection, while applicant argues “independent claim 1 has been amended to recite "send, in response to the first timer not running and content of a second message being different from previous content in a last transmission, the second message not comprising the assistance information." Independent claims 10 and 18 contain similar limitations. Claims 1-20 of Xu do not include these limitations” and “the Applicant respectfully requests that the double patenting rejections of claims 1-19 be withdrawn.” The examiner respectfully disagrees.
The examiner notes MPEP 804 Definition of Double Patenting “The public should . . . be able to act on the assumption that upon the expiration of the patent it will be free to use not only the invention claimed in the patent but also modifications or variants which would have been obvious to those of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made, taking into account the skill in the art and prior art other than the invention claimed in the issued patent.” Accordingly, merely being “different” does not obviate a double patenting rejection and thus, the corresponding rejection is maintained.
Applicant’s variously argues on pages 10-15 “the combination of Azuma [JP 2011193141 A] and Roessel '220 [US 2017/0164220 A1] fails to send, in response to a first timer not running and content of a second message being different from previous content in a last transmission, the second message not comprising the assistance information, wherein the second message not comprising the assistance information indicates that the overheating problem is alleviated”, and “Roessel '220 does not signal the PPI = 1 in response to the high state timer elapsing and content of a second message being different from previous content in a last transmission, wherein the second message does not comprise assistance information, wherein the second message not comprising the assistance information indicates that the overheating problem is alleviated”. The examiner respectfully disagrees.
While applicant’s arguments have focused arguments on cited para. [33, 40-41, 44-45, and 77] of Roessel '220, the examiner notes para. 46 and Fig. 5 have been cited on page 11 of the OA and which includes “For the thermal automaton 500 shown in FIG. 5, a plurality of PPI bits are used to signal to the network to which target state the UE has transitioned” and Fig. 5 shows “a permanent state 510, a high state 512, a recovery state 514, an emergency shutdown state 516, a low state, various emergency states” (the cited “PPI indicates thermal state including recovery/permanent/high states [omitting assistance information]”) thus, PPI used to transmit high state (PPI=0) by the UE is reasonably disclosed, and referring back to Fig. 4, PPI=0 at 412 moves to PPI=1 autonomously (406), and based on the condition the timer elapsed (406) (not running), sends PPI=1 to the network so the network (420) can perform its configurations. Accordingly, the combination of Azuma and Roessel220 teaches “sending, in response to the first timer not running and content of a second message being different from previous content in a last transmission, the second message not comprising the assistance information, wherein the second message indicates that the overheating problem is alleviated.” (UE transitions to recovery with PPI=1; para. 41, UE in recovery state until UE signals PPI=0 [second message different than first message to enter recovery state and different than including assistance information]; para. 44, recovery state during a minimum time duration of tmincool or 60 seconds until safe to return to higher/permanent state; para. [33, 45, 77], PPI indicates thermal state including recovery/permanent/high states [omitting assistance information]; para. 46 and Fig. 5, recovery state during a minimum time duration of tmincool or 60 seconds until safe [overheating alleviated] to return to higher/permanent state; para. [33, 77])
Applicant’s arguments on page 15 include “Roessel '220 does not recite that PPI=0 comprises the assistance information which comprises a preferred number of maximum multiple-input, multiple-output (MIMO) layers that is preferred to be configured in a downlink, and/or a preferred number of maximum MIMO layers. Roessel '220”. The examiner respectfully disagrees.
It is noted Azuma, not Roessel'220, has been cited to teach limitations regarding MIMO on pages 9-10 of the OA. Further, motivation to combine Azuma and Roessel'220 has been provided as “it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Roessel220 to the system of Azuma, where Azuma’s preventing excessive temperature rise (para. 06) along with Roessel220’s configurable reduced capability (para. [19, 33]) improves user experience by avoiding emergency situations.”
Accordingly, in light of the above, the examiner finds applicant’s arguments non-persuasive.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-3, 6-8, 10-12, 14, and 16-17 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 and 2 of U.S. Patent No. 11, 856,514 B1. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because take an example of comparing claims 10 and 1(and 9) of pending application and claims 1 and 3 of U.S. Patent No. US 11, 856,514 B1.
Pending application 18/508,685
U.S. Patent No. US 11, 856,514 B1
(claim 10) A method, comprising: sending, upon detecting an overheating problem, a first message, wherein the first message comprises assistance information,
(claim 1) A method ... comprising: sending a first message ... upon detecting an overheating problem ... wherein the first message comprises assistance information,
and wherein the assistance information comprises a preferred number of maximum multiple-input, multiple-output (MIMO) layers that is preferred to be configured in downlink, and/or a preferred number of maximum MIMO layers that is preferred to be configured in uplink;
and wherein the assistance information comprises a preferred number of maximum MIMO layers that the user equipment prefers to be configured in downlink, and/or a preferred number of maximum MIMO layers that the user equipment prefers to be configured in uplink;
starting or restarting a first timer when a procedure of sending the first message is initiated;
starting or restarting a first timer ... a procedure of sending the first message
and sending, in response to the first timer not running and content of a second message being different from previous content in a last transmission, the second message not comprising the assistance information,
...when content of a second message is different than previous content in a last transmission; and sending the second message ... and the first timer is not running,
wherein the second message indicates that the overheating problem is alleviated.
wherein the second message indicates that the overheating problem is alleviated by not comprising the assistance information.
Pending application 18/508,685
U.S. Patent No. US 11, 856,514 B1
(claim 1) An apparatus, comprising:
a memory configured to store a program instruction; and one or more processors coupled to the memory and configured to execute the program instruction to cause the apparatus to:
(claim 9) the apparatus of claim 1, ... wherein the apparatus comprises a user equipment.
(claim 3) User equipment, comprising:
a memory configured to store a program instruction; and one or more processors coupled to the memory and configured to invoke the program instruction to cause the user equipment to be configured to:
send, upon detecting an overheating problem, a first message, wherein the first message comprises assistance information, and wherein the assistance information comprises a preferred number of maximum multiple-input, multiple-output (MIMO) layers that is preferred to be configured in a downlink, and/or a preferred number of maximum MIMO layers that is preferred to be configured in an uplink;
send a first message ... upon detecting an overheating problem ... wherein the first message comprises assistance information, and wherein the assistance information comprises a preferred number of maximum MIMO layers ... prefers to be configured in downlink, and/or a preferred number of maximum MIMO layers that ... prefers to be configured in uplink;
start or restart a first timer when a procedure of sending the first message is initiated; and
start or restart a first timer when ... initiates a procedure of sending the first message, ...
send, in response to the first timer not running and content of a second message being different from previous content in a last transmission, the second message not comprising the assistance information, wherein the second message indicates that the overheating problem is alleviated.
content of a second message is different than previous content in a last transmission; and send the second message when the overheating problem is alleviated and the first timer is not running, wherein the second message indicates that the overheating problem is alleviated by not comprising the assistance information.
Regarding claim 2, the claim corresponds to claim 5 of U.S. Patent No. 11, 856,514 B1.
Regarding claim 3, the claim corresponds to claim 6 of U.S. Patent No. 11, 856,514 B1.
Regarding claim 6, the claim corresponds to claim 4 of U.S. Patent No. 11, 856,514 B1.
Regarding claim 7, the claim corresponds to claims 10 and 16 of U.S. Patent No. 11, 856,514 B1.
Regarding claim 8, the claim corresponds to claim 19 of U.S. Patent No. 11, 856,514 B1.
Regarding claim 11, the claim corresponds to claims 5 and 11 of U.S. Patent No. 11, 856,514 B1.
Regarding claim 12, the claim corresponds to claims 6 of U.S. Patent No. 11, 856,514 B1.
Regarding claim 16, the claim corresponds to claims 9 of U.S. Patent No. 11, 856,514 B1.
Regarding claim 17, the claim corresponds to claims 20 of U.S. Patent No. 11, 856,514 B1.
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.
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.
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, 5-6, 9-10, 18-19, and 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Azuma et al. (JP 2011193141 A, made of record in the IDS filed 11/14/2023, citations are from European Patent Office translation) in view of Roessel et al. (US 2017/0164220 A1, made of record in the IDS filed 11/14/2023) hereinafter Roessel220.
Regarding claim 1, Azuma teaches an apparatus (wireless communication device; para. 10 and Fig. 1), comprising: a memory configured to store a program instruction; and one or more processors coupled to the memory and configured to execute the program instruction (storage unit 160 storing program for CPU 140; para. 17 and Figs. 1, 3, 5, 7-8) to cause the apparatus to: send, upon detecting an overheating problem, a first message (wireless communication device detects temperature and sends request [first message] to reduce heat [overheating problem]; para. [18, 23, 32]), wherein the first message comprises assistance information (wireless communication device detects temperature and sends request including parameter; para. [18, 23, 32]), and wherein the assistance information comprises a preferred number of maximum multiple-input, multiple-output (MIMO) layers that is preferred to be configured in a downlink, and/or a preferred number of maximum MIMO layers that is preferred to be configured in an uplink (request includes parameter to change from multiple-input, multiple-output (MIMO) to Single Input Single Output (SISO) [maximum MIMO layers, where SISO is a special case of MIMO] or reduce number of paths [layers] by step [preferring a particular maximum number of layers]; para. 32 at least suggesting at least the uplink and/or at least the downlink, examiner notes the use of alternative language here, thus, only one of the alternative features need to be shown by reference).
While Azuma discloses returning to MIMO after sufficient temperature reduction, Azuma does not explicitly disclose start or restart a first timer when a procedure of sending the first message is initiated; and send, in response to the first timer not running and content of a second message being different from previous content in a last transmission, the second message not comprising the assistance information, wherein the second message indicates that the overheating problem is alleviated.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Roessel220 teaches start or restart a first timer (UE-autonomous transitions; para. 39-40, recovery state during a minimum time duration of tmincool or 60 seconds; para. [33, 77] at least suggesting a first timer to determine duration of tmincool or 60 seconds autonomously, examiner notes the use of alternative language here, thus, only one of the alternative features need to be shown by reference) when a procedure of sending the first message is initiated (UE transmits signal of power preference indicator (PPI) at autonomous transitions including recovery; para. [27, 39-40, 44] and Figs. [2, 4]); and send, in response to the first timer not running and content of a second message being different from previous content in a last transmission (PPI indicates thermal state including recovery / permanent / high states [omitting assistance information], PPI bits are used to signal to the network to which target state the UE has transitioned; para. 46 and Fig. 5, UE-autonomous transitions; para. 39-40, recovery state during a minimum time duration of tmincool or 60 seconds until safe to return to higher/permanent state; para. [33, 45, 77] at least suggesting stop/elapse/expiry of timer, UE transitions to recovery with PPI=1; para. 41, UE in recovery state until UE signals PPI=0 [second message different than first message to enter recovery state and different than including assistance information]; para. 44, recovery state during a minimum time duration of tmincool or 60 seconds until safe to return to higher/permanent state; para. [33, 45, 77]), the second message not comprising the assistance information, wherein the second message indicates that the overheating problem is alleviated (PPI indicates thermal state including recovery/permanent/high states [omitting assistance information]; para. 46 and Fig. 5, recovery state during a minimum time duration of tmincool or 60 seconds until safe [overheating alleviated] to return to higher/permanent state; para. [33, 77]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Roessel220 to the system of Azuma, where Azuma’s preventing excessive temperature rise (para. 06) along with Roessel220’s configurable reduced capability (para. [19, 33]) improves user experience by avoiding emergency situations.
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Azuma and Roessel220 teaches the limitation of previous claim 1.
Azuma further teaches receive a fourth message, and wherein the fourth message instructs the apparatus to configure a number of maximum MIMO layers in the downlink or in the uplink (BS permits change [UE receives message] to SISO or number of paths; para. 34).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Azuma and Roessel220 teaches the limitation of previous claim 5.
Azuma further teaches turn off, according to the fourth message, a corresponding number of radio frequency receiving links or a corresponding number of radio frequency transmitting links (change to SISO or decrease number of paths by steps [turning off at least receiving links or at least transmitting links] based on permission [response] of base station; para. [31-32, 34], examiner notes the use of alternative language here, thus, only one of the alternative features need to be shown by reference).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Azuma and Roessel220 teaches the limitation of previous claim 1.
Azuma further teaches wherein a duration length of the first timer is from a network device (minimum time duration configured by wireless communication system; para. 83).
While Azuma discloses GSM, Azuma does not explicitly disclose wherein the apparatus comprises a user equipment (UE).
However, in the same field of endeavor, Roessel220 further teaches wherein the apparatus comprises a user equipment (UE) (user equipment (UE); para. 21 and Fig. 1, UE-autonomous transitions; para. 39-40).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Roessel220 to the modified system of Azuma and Roessel220, where Azuma and Roessel220’s modified system along with Roessel220’s configurable reduced capability (para. [19, 33]) improves user experience by avoiding emergency situations.
Regarding claim 23, the combination of Azuma and Roessel220 teaches the limitation of previous claim 1.
Azuma further teaches wherein the assistance information further comprises (wireless communication device detects temperature and sends request including parameter; para. [18, 23, 32]) a preferred number of maximum MIMO layers that is preferred to be configured in a downlink or a preferred number of maximum MIMO layers that is preferred to be configured in an uplink (request includes parameter to change from multiple-input, multiple-output (MIMO) to Single Input Single Output (SISO) [maximum MIMO layers, where SISO is a special case of MIMO] or reduce number of paths [layers] by step [preferring a particular maximum number of layers]; para. 32 at least suggesting at least the uplink and/or at least the downlink, examiner notes the use of alternative language here, thus, only one of the alternative features need to be shown by reference).
Azuma does not explicitly disclose of each serving cell.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Roessel220 teaches of each serving cell (device specified to be 4 DL CA [serving cell] 4×4 MIMO−DL coordinated multipoint (CoMP) transmission and/or reception).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Roessel220 to the modified system of Azuma and Roessel220, where Azuma and Roessel220’s modified system along with Roessel220’s configurable reduced capability (para. [19, 33]) improves user experience by avoiding emergency situations.
Regarding claim 10, Azuma teaches a method, comprising: sending, upon detecting an overheating problem, a first message (wireless communication device detects temperature and sends request [first message] to reduce heat [overheating problem]; para. [18, 23, 32]), wherein the first message comprises assistance information (wireless communication device detects temperature and sends request including parameter; para. [18, 23, 32]), and wherein the assistance information comprises a preferred number of maximum multiple-input, multiple-output (MIMO) layers that is preferred to be configured in downlink, and/or a preferred number of maximum MIMO layers that is preferred to be configured in uplink (request includes parameter to change from multiple-input, multiple-output (MIMO) to Single Input Single Output (SISO) [maximum MIMO layers, where SISO is a special case of MIMO] or reduce number of paths [layers] by step [preferring a particular maximum number of layers]; para. 32 at least suggesting at least the uplink and/or at least the downlink, examiner notes the use of alternative language here, thus, only one of the alternative features need to be shown by reference).
While Azuma discloses returning to MIMO after sufficient temperature reduction, Azuma does not explicitly disclose starting or restarting a first timer when a procedure of sending the first message is initiated; and sending, in response to the first timer not running and content of a second message being different from previous content in a last transmission, the second message not comprising the assistance information, wherein the second message indicates that the overheating problem is alleviated.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Roessel220 teaches starting or restarting a first timer (UE-autonomous transitions; para. 39-40, recovery state during a minimum time duration of tmincool or 60 seconds; para. [33, 77] at least suggesting a first timer to determine duration of tmincool or 60 seconds autonomously, examiner notes the use of alternative language here, thus, only one of the alternative features need to be shown by reference) when a procedure of sending the first message is initiated (UE transmits signal of power preference indicator (PPI) at autonomous transitions including recovery; para. [27, 39-40, 44] and Figs. [2, 4]); and sending, in response to the first timer not running and content of a second message being different from previous content in a last transmission (PPI indicates thermal state including recovery / permanent / high states [omitting assistance information], PPI bits are used to signal to the network to which target state the UE has transitioned; para. 46 and Fig. 5, UE-autonomous transitions; para. 39-40, recovery state during a minimum time duration of tmincool or 60 seconds until safe to return to higher/permanent state; para. [33, 45, 77] at least suggesting stop/elapse/expiry of timer, UE transitions to recovery with PPI=1; para. 41, UE in recovery state until UE signals PPI=0 [second message different than first message to enter recovery state and different than including assistance information]; para. 44, recovery state during a minimum time duration of tmincool or 60 seconds until safe to return to higher/permanent state; para. [33, 45, 77]), the second message not comprising the assistance information (UE transitions to recovery with PPI=1; para. 41, UE in recovery state until UE signals PPI=0 [second message different than first message to enter recovery state and different than including assistance information]; para. 44, recovery state during a minimum time duration of tmincool or 60 seconds until safe to return to higher/permanent state; para. [33, 45, 77]), wherein the second message indicates that the overheating problem is alleviated (PPI indicates thermal state including recovery/permanent/high states [omitting assistance information]; para. 46 and Fig. 5, recovery state during a minimum time duration of tmincool or 60 seconds until safe [overheating alleviated] to return to higher/permanent state; para. [33, 77]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Roessel220 to the system of Azuma, where Azuma’s preventing excessive temperature rise (para. 06) along with Roessel220’s configurable reduced capability (para. [19, 33]) improves user experience by avoiding emergency situations.
Regarding claim 18, Azuma teaches an apparatus (base station (BS); para. [23, 27] and Figs. [4, 6]), comprising: receive a first message from a user equipment (UE), wherein the first message comprises assistance information to indicate an overheating problem (BS receives request [first message] from UE to reduce heat [overheating problem]; para. [18, 23, 32]), and wherein the assistance information comprises a preferred number of maximum multiple-input, multiple-output (MIMO) layers that is preferred to be configured in a downlink or a preferred number of maximum MIMO layers that is preferred to be configured in an uplink (request includes parameter to change from multiple-input, multiple-output (MIMO) to Single Input Single Output (SISO) [maximum MIMO layers, where SISO is a special case of MIMO] or reduce number of paths [layers] by step [preferring a particular maximum number of layers]; para. 32 at least suggesting at least the uplink and/or at least the downlink, examiner notes the use of alternative language here, thus, only one of the alternative features need to be shown by reference).
While Azuma discloses returning to MIMO after sufficient temperature reduction, Azuma does not explicitly disclose a memory configured to store a program instruction; and one or more processors coupled to the memory and configured to execute the program instruction to cause the apparatus to: receive a second message from the UE, wherein the second message does not comprise the assistance information, wherein the second message is transmitted from the UE in response to a first timer is not running and content of a second message being different from previous content in a last transmission wherein the second message indicates that the overheating problem is alleviated.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Roessel220 teaches a memory configured to store a program instruction (storage medium including instructions; para. 51); and one or more processors coupled to the memory and configured to execute the program instruction (processor executes instructions in storage medium; para. 51) to cause the apparatus to: receive a second message from the UE (PPI indicates thermal state including recovery / permanent / high states [omitting assistance information], PPI bits are used to signal to the network to which target state the UE has transitioned; para. 46 and Fig. 5, UE transitions to recovery with PPI=1; para. 41, UE in recovery state until UE signals PPI=0 [second message different than first message to enter recovery state and different than including assistance information]; para. 44, recovery state during a minimum time duration of tmincool or 60 seconds until safe to return to higher/permanent state; para. [33, 45, 77]), wherein the second message does not comprise the assistance information (PPI indicates thermal state including recovery/permanent/high states [omitting assistance information]; para. 46 and Fig. 5, recovery state during a minimum time duration of tmincool or 60 seconds until safe [overheating alleviated] to return to higher/permanent state; para. [33, 77]), wherein the second message is transmitted from the UE in response to a first timer is not running and content of a second message being different from previous content in a last transmission (BS receives signal of power preference indicator (PPI) from UE at autonomous transitions by UE including recovery; para. [27, 39-40, 44] and Figs. [2, 4], UE-autonomous transitions; para. 39-40, recovery state during a minimum time duration of tmincool or 60 seconds until safe to return to higher/permanent state; para. [33, 45, 77] at least suggesting stop/elapse/expiry of timer, UE transitions to recovery with PPI=1; para. 41, UE in recovery state until UE signals PPI=0 [second message different than first message to enter recovery state and different than including assistance information]; para. 44, recovery state during a minimum time duration of tmincool or 60 seconds until safe to return to higher/permanent state; para. [33, 45, 77]) wherein the second message indicates that the overheating problem is alleviated (PPI indicates thermal state including recovery/permanent/high states [omitting assistance information]; para. 46 and Fig. 5, recovery state during a minimum time duration of tmincool or 60 seconds until safe [overheating alleviated] to return to higher/permanent state; para. [33, 77]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Roessel220 to the system of Azuma, where Azuma’s preventing excessive temperature rise (para. 06) along with Roessel220’s configurable reduced capability (para. [19, 33]) improves user experience by avoiding emergency situations.
Regarding claim 19, the combination of Azuma and Roessel220 teaches the limitation of previous claim 18.
Azuma further teaches send a fourth message, and wherein the fourth message instructs to configure a number of maximum MIMO layers in the downlink or in the uplink (BS permits change [UE receives message] to SISO or number of paths; para. 34 at least suggesting at least the uplink and/or at least the downlink, examiner notes the use of alternative language here, thus, only one of the alternative features need to be shown by reference).
Azuma does not explicitly disclose before receiving the second message.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Roessel220 further teaches before receiving the second message (UE receives [from BS] UE capability profile upon attachment; para. 82 at least suggesting maximum MIMO layers prior to an arbitrary message).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Roessel220 to the modified system of Azuma and Roessel220, where Azuma and Roessel220’s modified system along with Roessel220’s configurable reduced capability (para. [19, 33]) improves user experience by avoiding emergency situations.
Claim(s) 2-3, 8, 11-14, 17, and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Azuma in view Roessel220, and further in view of Young et al. (US 2014/0018085 A1, made of record in the IDS filed 11/14/2023) hereinafter Young.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Azuma and Roessel220 teaches the limitation of previous claim 1.
While the combination of Azuma and Roessel220 discloses various signaling between the UE and BS, the combination of Azuma and Roessel220 does not explicitly disclose receive first indication information, and wherein the first indication information notifies the apparatus that the apparatus is able to report the assistance information.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Young teaches receive first indication information (UE receives message including N/P indication; para. 121 and Fig. 12 step 1215), and wherein the first indication information notifies the apparatus that the apparatus is able to report the assistance information (UE determines network supports assistant information [UE able to report first message] upon receipt of N/P indication; para. 121 and Fig. 12 step 1222).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Young to the modified system of Azuma and Roessel220, where Azuma and Roessel220’s modified system along with Young’s UE's suggest/request to adjust resources (para. [77, 98]) improves user experience by reducing power to extend battery life and reducing generated heat.
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Azuma, Roessel220, and Young teaches the limitation of previous claim 2.
While Azuma discloses transmitting requests, Azuma does not explicitly disclose send a third message, wherein the third message comprises second indication information, and wherein the second indication information indicates whether the apparatus supports the first message.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Roessel220 further teaches send a third message, wherein the third message comprises second indication information (UE specifies UE capability profile to network; para. 36), and wherein the second indication information indicates whether the apparatus supports the first message (UE specifies UE capability profile to network to enable thermal management [supports first message for thermal management]; para. 36).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Roessel220 to the modified system of Azuma, Roessel220, and Young, where Azuma, Roessel220, and Young’s modified system along with Roessel220’s configurable reduced capability (para. [19, 33]) improves user experience by avoiding emergency situations.
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Azuma and Roessel220 teaches the limitation of previous claim 1.
The combination of Azuma and Roessel220 does not explicitly disclose not initiate, in response to the content of the second message being the same as the previous content in the last transmission, a process for sending the second message.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Young teaches not initiate, in response to the content of the second message being the same as the previous content in the last transmission, a process for sending the second message (prevent UE from transmitting repeating [same as previous content] PPI; para. 104-105 and Table 11).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Young to the modified system of Azuma and Roessel220, where Azuma and Roessel220’s modified system along with Young’s UE's suggest/request to adjust resources (para. [77, 98]) improves user experience by reducing power to extend battery life and reducing generated heat.
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Azuma and Roessel220 teaches the limitation of previous claim 10.
While the combination of Azuma and Roessel220 discloses various signaling between the UE and BS, the combination of Azuma and Roessel220 does not explicitly disclose receiving first indication information, wherein the first indication information notifies an apparatus that the apparatus is able to report the assistance information.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Young teaches receiving first indication information (UE receives message including N/P indication; para. 121 and Fig. 12 step 1215), wherein the first indication information notifies an apparatus that the apparatus is able to report the assistance information (UE determines network supports assistant information [UE able to report first message] upon receipt of N/P indication; para. 121 and Fig. 12 step 1222).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Young to the modified system of Azuma and Roessel220, where Azuma and Roessel220’s modified system along with Young’s UE's suggest/request to adjust resources (para. [77, 98]) improves user experience by reducing power to extend battery life and reducing generated heat.
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Azuma, Roessel220, and Young teaches the limitation of previous claim 11.
While Azuma discloses transmitting requests, Azuma does not explicitly disclose sending a third message, wherein the third message comprises second indication information, and wherein the second indication information indicates whether the apparatus supports the first message.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Roessel220 further teaches sending a third message, wherein the third message comprises second indication information (UE specifies UE capability profile to network; para. 36), and wherein the second indication information indicates whether the apparatus supports the first message (UE specifies UE capability profile to network to enable thermal management [supports first message for thermal management]; para. 36).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Roessel220 to the modified system of Azuma, Roessel220, and Young, where Azuma, Roessel220, and Young’s modified system along with Roessel220’s configurable reduced capability (para. [19, 33]) improves user experience by avoiding emergency situations.
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Azuma, Roessel220, and Young teaches the limitation of previous claim 11.
Azuma further teaches receiving a fourth message, wherein the fourth message instructs to configure a number of maximum MIMO layers in the downlink or in the uplink (BS permits change [UE receives message] to SISO or number of paths; para. 34).
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Azuma, Roessel220, and Young teaches the limitation of previous claim 13.
Azuma further teaches turning off, according to the fourth message, a corresponding number of radio frequency receiving links or a corresponding number of radio frequency transmitting links (change to SISO or decrease number of paths [turning off at least receiving links or at least transmitting links] based on permission [response] of base station; para. [31-32, 34], examiner notes the use of alternative language here, thus, only one of the alternative features need to be shown by reference).
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Azuma and Roessel220 teaches the limitation of previous claim 10.
The combination of Azuma and Roessel220 does not explicitly disclose not initiating, in response to the content of the second message being the same as the previous content in the last transmission, a process for sending the second message.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Young teaches not initiating, in response to the content of the second message being the same as the previous content in the last transmission, a process for sending the second message (prevent UE from transmitting repeating [same as previous content] PPI; para. 104-105 and Table 11).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Young to the modified system of Azuma and Roessel220, where Azuma and Roessel220’s modified system along with Young’s UE's suggest/request to adjust resources (para. [77, 98]) improves user experience by reducing power to extend battery life and reducing generated heat.
Regarding claim 21, the combination of Azuma and Roessel220 teaches the limitation of previous claim 18.
While the combination of Azuma and Roessel220 discloses various signaling between the UE and BS, the combination of Azuma and Roessel220 does not explicitly disclose send first indication information, and wherein the first indication information notifies that a user equipment is able to report the assistance information.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Young teaches send first indication information (BS transmits message including N/P indication; para. 121 and Fig. 12 step 1215), and wherein the first indication information notifies that a user equipment is able to report the assistance information (UE determines network supports assistant information [UE able to report first message] upon receipt of N/P indication; para. 121 and Fig. 12 step 1222).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Young to the modified system of Azuma and Roessel220, where Azuma and Roessel220’s modified system along with Young’s UE's suggest/request to adjust resources (para. [77, 98]) improves user experience by reducing power to extend battery life and reducing generated heat.
Claim(s) 15 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Azuma in view Roessel220, further in view of Young, and further in view of Roessel et al. (US 2016/0127998 A1) hereinafter Roessel998.
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Azuma, Roessel220, and Young teaches the limitation of previous claim 13.
Azuma further teaches wherein a duration length of the first timer is from a network device (minimum time duration configured by wireless communication system; para. 83).
The combination of Azuma, Roessel220, and Young does not explicitly disclose wherein the fourth message further instructs to release a secondary serving cell (SCell), and
However, in the same field of endeavor, Roessel998 teaches wherein the fourth message further instructs to release a secondary serving cell (SCell) (UE receives a response message of request deactivation instructing UE to deactivate/release SCell; para. 36-37).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Roessel998 to the modified system of Azuma, Roessel220, and Young, where Azuma, Roessel220, and Young’s modified system along with Roessel998’s handling power consumption (para. 02) improves user experience by increasing time a terminal can be used on battery and recharging the battery infrequently.
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Azuma, Roessel220, and Young teaches the limitation of previous claim 19.
The combination of Azuma, Roessel220, and Young does not explicitly disclose wherein the fourth message further instructs a terminal device to release a secondary serving cell (SCell).
However, in the same field of endeavor, Roessel998 teaches wherein the fourth message further instructs a terminal device to release a secondary serving cell (SCell) (UE receives a response message of request deactivation instructing UE to deactivate/release SCell; para. 36-37).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Roessel998 to the modified system of Azuma, Roessel220, and Young, where Azuma, Roessel220, and Young’s modified system along with Roessel998’s handling power consumption (para. 02) improves user experience by increasing time a terminal can be used on battery and recharging the battery infrequently.
Claim(s) 4, 7, and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Azuma in view Roessel220, and further in view of Roessel998.
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Azuma and Roessel220 teaches the limitation of previous claim 1.
Azuma further teaches wherein sending the first message upon detecting the overheating problem comprises sending the first message upon detecting the overheating problem (wireless communication device detects temperature and sends request [first message] to reduce heat [overheating problem]; para. [18, 23, 32]).
The combination of Azuma and Roessel220 does not explicitly disclose obtaining, based on the overheating problem, a number of secondary serving cells (SCells) in the downlink or in the uplink to be reduced, wherein the assistance information further comprises a specific number of SCells that is preferred to be configured in the downlink or a specific number of SCells that is preferred to be configured in the uplink.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Roessel998 teaches obtaining, based on the overheating problem, a number of secondary serving cells (SCells) in the downlink or in the uplink to be reduced (based on overheating from high processing load / power consumption, UE signals request to network deactivation of one or more downlink/uplink secondary cells; para. [31, 36], examiner notes the use of alternative language here, thus, only one of the alternative features need to be shown by reference), wherein the assistance information further comprises a specific number of SCells that is preferred to be configured in the downlink or a specific number of SCells that is preferred to be configured in the uplink (based on overheating from high processing load / power consumption, UE signals request to network deactivation of one or more downlink/uplink secondary cells; para. [31, 36], certain [specific number] secondary cells in second setting less than first setting; para. 39).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Roessel998 to the modified system of Azuma and Roessel220, where Azuma and Roessel220’s modified system along with Roessel998’s handling power consumption (para. 02) improves user experience by increasing time a terminal can be used on battery and recharging the battery infrequently.
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Azuma and Roessel220 teaches the limitation of previous claim 5.
The combination of Azuma and Roessel220 does not explicitly disclose wherein the fourth message further instructs the apparatus to release a secondary serving cell (SCell).
However, in the same field of endeavor, Roessel998 teaches wherein the fourth message (UE receives a response message of request deactivation of one or more downlink/uplink secondary cells; para. 36-37) further instructs the apparatus to release a secondary serving cell (SCell) (UE receives a response message instructing UE to deactivate/release SCell; para. 36-37).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Roessel998 to the modified system of Azuma and Roessel220, where Azuma and Roessel220’s modified system along with Roessel998’s handling power consumption (para. 02) improves user experience by increasing time a terminal can be used on battery and recharging the battery infrequently.
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Azuma and Roessel220 teaches the limitation of previous claim 10.
Azuma further teaches wherein sending the first message upon detecting the overheating problem comprises sending the first message upon detecting the overheating problem (wireless communication device detects temperature and sends request [first message] to reduce heat [overheating problem]; para. [18, 23, 32]).
The combination of Azuma and Roessel220 does not explicitly disclose obtaining, based on the overheating problem, a number of secondary serving cells (SCells) in the downlink or in the uplink to be reduced, wherein the assistance information further comprises a specific number of SCells that is preferred to be configured in the downlink or a specific number of SCells that is preferred to be configured in the uplink.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Roessel998 teaches obtaining, based on the overheating problem, a number of secondary serving cells (SCells) in the downlink or in the uplink to be reduced (based on overheating from high processing load / power consumption, UE signals request to network deactivation of one or more downlink/uplink secondary cells; para. [31, 36], examiner notes the use of alternative language here, thus, only one of the alternative features need to be shown by reference), wherein the assistance information further comprises a specific number of SCells that is preferred to be configured in the downlink or a specific number of SCells that is preferred to be configured in the uplink (based on overheating from high processing load / power consumption, UE signals request to network deactivation of one or more downlink/uplink secondary cells; para. [31, 36], certain [specific number] secondary cells in second setting less than first setting; para. 39).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Skaaksrud et al. (US 2017/0013547 A1) discloses systems, apparatus, and methods of checkpoint summary based monitoring for an event candidate related to an ID node within a wireless node network.
Hunt-Schroeder et al. (US 2017/0208544 A1) discloses an environmentally aware mobile computing devices.
JP 2011193141 A (Azuma) made of record in the IDS filed 11/14/2023, and the European Patent Office translation made of record in the parent application no. 16/477,790 in the OA of 4/21/2022, are not included in the instant OA. Further, Wikipedia entry for MIMO, made of record in the IDS of 11/14/2023 and describing SISO as a special case of MIMO, is not included in the instant OA.
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 JOSE L PEREZ whose telephone number is (571) 270-7348. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 11 am - 3 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/uspto-automated-interview-request-air-form.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Michael Thier can be reached at (571) 272-2832. 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.
/JOSE L PEREZ/Examiner, Art Unit 2474
Prosecution Insights