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 .
This is in response to the Applicant’s arguments, and amendments filed on April 22, in which claims 1-2, 4, 6-7, 9-10, 13, 16, and 18-19 have been amended, claim 15 has been canceled. Claims 1-14 and 16-20 are currently pending.
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 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Takahashi (US 2024/0137876).
Regarding claim 1, Takahashi teaches an apparatus for wireless communication at a user equipment (UE) (terminal apparatus comprising: a communicator configured to transmit, to a base station apparatus, capability information including radio frequency parameters; and a processor configured to: include an information bit indicating that the terminal apparatus supports restricted ranges of a frequency band in a specific area and an information bit indicating that the terminal apparatus supports a modified maximum power reduction indicated per frequency band in the radio frequency parameters [0004], [0020]), comprising: one or more memories (fig. 2 120); and one or more processors coupled to the one or more memories and, the one or more processors (fig. 2, 130), configured to cause the UE to: transmit, to a network node, UE specific additional maximum power reduction (A- MPR) information and an indication of an association with for one or more waveforms/(signals) (i.e., In case of supporting the modified MPR or A-MPR, the UE 100 reports, to the base station 200, the maximum-power-reduction information indicating the modified MPR or A-MPR ([0085], [0137])); and communicate with the network node based on the UE specific A-MPR information associated with the UE (i.e., In case of supporting the modified MPR or A-MPR, the UE 100 reports, to the base station 200, the maximum-power-reduction information indicating the modified MPR or A-MPR. The base station 200 performs resource allocation to the uplink of the UE 100 and power control for the uplink of the UE 100 on the basis of the maximum-power-reduction information ([0085, [0137])).
Regarding claim 2, Takahashi teaches one or more antennas coupled to the one or more processors ([0053], [0085]).
.
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.
Claims 3, 8-9, 13-14, and 20-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takahashi (US 2024/0137876) in view of Klomsdorf et al. (US 2024/0314698).
Regarding claim 3, Takahashi teaches all the limitations above except the network node is a non-terrestrial network (NTN) node.
However, the preceding limitation is known in the art of communications. Klomsdorf teaches base node 202 may provide geographic coverage area 210 for which base node 202 may support services (e.g., voice, video, packet data, messaging, broadcast, etc.) for one or more UEs 204 within geographic coverage area 210. For example, base node 202 and UE 204 may support wireless communication of signals related to services (e.g., voice, video, packet data, messaging, broadcast, etc.) according to one or multiple radio access technologies. In some implementations, base node 202 may be moveable. For example, base node 202 may be a satellite associated with a non-terrestrial network ([0035]). The A-MPR applies to all modulation and waveform types unless indications are received specific to modulation and waveform types: For single transmit scenarios, MPR/A-MPR is applied to the maximum output power for the single active transmitter. For dual transmit scenarios, MPR/A-MPR could be applied equally, as currently implemented, or unequally to both transmitters, according to aspects of the present disclosure [0040]-[0041]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the invention, to have implemented the technique of Klomsdorf within the system Takahashi in order to receive satellite broadcast signals from GPS satellites in a wireless communications system that supports wireless communication with optimized MPR/A-MPR by communication devices.
Regarding claim 8, Takahashi further teaches it possible to additionally adapt to additional modifications of frequency ranges caused by the laws and regulations. It is thus possible to increase extensibility for modifications of frequency ranges available to the UE 100 in an allocated frequency band ([0124]-[0125]). Takahashi fails to specifically teach indicate support for an increased power class for a subset of waveforms.
However, the preceding limitation is known in the art of communications. Klomsdorf teaches the A-MPR applies to all modulation and waveform types unless indications are received specific to modulation and waveform types: For single transmit scenarios, MPR/A-MPR is applied to the maximum output power for the single active transmitter. For dual transmit scenarios, MPR/A-MPR could be applied equally, as currently implemented, or unequally to both transmitters, according to aspects of the present disclosure [0040]-[0041]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the invention, to have implemented the technique of Klomsdorf within the system Takahashi in order to receive satellite broadcast signals from GPS satellites in a wireless communications system that supports wireless communication with optimized MPR/A-MPR by communication devices.
Regarding claim 9, Takahashi in view of Klomsdorf teaches all the limitations above. “receive a resource allocation in an A-MPR region of frequency resources for the one or more waveforms for which the UE supports the increased power class” could have been derived by one of ordinary skill in the art from Klomsdorf’s reference which discloses the A-MPR applies to all modulation and waveform types unless indications are received specific to modulation and waveform types: For single transmit scenarios, MPR/A-MPR is applied to the maximum output power for the single active transmitter. For dual transmit scenarios, MPR/A-MPR could be applied equally, as currently implemented, or unequally to both transmitters, according to aspects of the present disclosure [0040]-[0041]). Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art, could have easily conceived the invention in claim 3 from a combination of Takahashi in view of Klomsdorf.
Regarding claim 13, Takahashi teaches an apparatus for wireless communication at a network node, comprising: one or more memories; and one or more processors coupled to the one or more memories and, the one or more processors (i.e., a communicator configured to receive, from a terminal apparatus, capability information including radio frequency parameters; and a processor configured to: [0005], [0021], [0067]), configured to cause the network node to: obtain additional maximum power reduction (A-MPR) information an indication of an association with for one or more waveforms/signals (i.e., obtain an information bit indicating that the terminal apparatus supports restricted ranges of a frequency band in a specific area and an information bit indicating that the terminal apparatus supports a modified maximum power reduction indicated per frequency band from the radio frequency parameters, in a case where the terminal apparatus supports first restricted ranges of the frequency band in the specific area and the modified maximum power reduction indicated per frequency band ([0005], [0021], [0067]), supporting the modified MPR or A-MPR, the UE 100 reports, to the base station 200, the maximum-power-reduction information indicating the modified MPR or A-MPR [0085], [0108], [0153]).
Takahashi does not specifically teach schedule communication from the UE based on the A-MPR information associated with the UE.
However, the preceding limitation is known in the art of communications. Klomsdorf teaches that communication devices are allowed by a scheduling base node to reduce the maximum output power due to higher order modulations and transmit bandwidth configurations, which is referred to as maximum power reduction (MPR). Additional maximum power reduction (A-MPR) provides for additional emission requirements that can be signaled by the network. The total reduction to user equipment (UE) maximum output power is the maximum of MPR and A-MPR. When encountering a need to reduce maximum output power, the UE sets MPR or A-MPR equally for both transmit chains. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the invention, to have implemented the technique of Klomsdorf within the system of Takahashi in order to optimize additional maximum power reduction (A-MPR) during a cooperative uplink concurrent uplink transmission mode
Regarding claim 14, Takahashi teaches all the limitations above except the network node is a non-terrestrial network (NTN) node.
However, the preceding limitation is known in the art of communications. Klomsdorf teaches base node 202 may provide geographic coverage area 210 for which base node 202 may support services (e.g., voice, video, packet data, messaging, broadcast, etc.) for one or more UEs 204 within geographic coverage area 210. For example, base node 202 and UE 204 may support wireless communication of signals related to services (e.g., voice, video, packet data, messaging, broadcast, etc.) according to one or multiple radio access technologies. In some implementations, base node 202 may be moveable. For example, base node 202 may be a satellite associated with a non-terrestrial network ([0035]). The A-MPR applies to all modulation and waveform types unless indications are received specific to modulation and waveform types: For single transmit scenarios, MPR/A-MPR is applied to the maximum output power for the single active transmitter. For dual transmit scenarios, MPR/A-MPR could be applied equally, as currently implemented, or unequally to both transmitters, according to aspects of the present disclosure [0040]-[0041]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the invention, to have implemented the technique of Klomsdorf within the system Takahashi in order to receive satellite broadcast signals from GPS satellites in a wireless communications system that supports wireless communication with optimized MPR/A-MPR by communication devices.
Regarding claim 20, Takahashi in view of Klomsdorf teaches all the limitations. “a indicate support for an increased power class for a subset of waveforms” could have been derived by one of ordinary skill in the art from Klomsdorf’s reference which discloses the A-MPR applies to all modulation and waveform types unless indications are received specific to modulation and waveform types: For single transmit scenarios, MPR/A-MPR is applied to the maximum output power for the single active transmitter. For dual transmit scenarios, MPR/A-MPR could be applied equally, as currently implemented, or unequally to both transmitters, according to aspects of the present disclosure [0040]-[0041]). Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art, could have easily conceived the invention in claim 20 from a combination of Takahashi and Klomsdorf.
Regarding claim 21, Takahashi in view of Klomsdorf teaches all the limitations above. “schedule the communication from the UE in an A-MPR region of frequency resources for the one or more waveforms for which the UE supports the increased power class” could have been derived by one of ordinary skill in the art from Klomsdorf’s reference which discloses the A-MPR applies to all modulation and waveform types unless indications are received specific to modulation and waveform types: For single transmit scenarios, MPR/A-MPR is applied to the maximum output power for the single active transmitter. For dual transmit scenarios, MPR/A-MPR could be applied equally, as currently implemented, or unequally to both transmitters, according to aspects of the present disclosure [0040]-[0041]). Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art, could have easily conceived the invention in claim 21 from a combination of Takahashi in view of Klomsdorf.
Regarding claim 22, Takahashi in view of Klomsdorf teaches all the limitations above one or more antennas coupled to the one or more processors ([0072]).
Claims 27-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Park et al. (US 2022/0346036) over in view of Umeda et al. (US 2024/0298272).
Regarding claim 27, Park teaches an apparatus for wireless communication at a network node ([0106]), comprising: one or more memories (typical feature gNB); and one or more processors coupled to the one or more memories (typical feature gNB), the one or more processors configured to cause the network node (figs. 32-33) to: schedule communication from a user equipment (UE) based on an additional maximum power reduction (A-MPR) region of frequency resources for a waveform {(i.e., A time taken for one subframe to be transmitted is referred to as a transmission time interval (TTI). The TTI may be referred to as a scheduling unit for data transmission ([0074], [0109]), DFT-s-OFDM is used for NR waveform A-MPR measurement ([0463]), the base station may transmit a network signal for A-MPR to the UE. The network signal for A-MPR may refer to a network signal related to A-MPR. The base station may request to apply the A-MPR when the UE determines an uplink transmission power by transmitting the network signal for A-MPR to the UE ([0692]-[0693])}; and obtain the communication with the repetition (i.e., the UE may transmit an uplink signal to the base station based on the transmission power determined in step S3102 [0720]).
Park does not specifically teach schedule communication with repetition based on an additional maximum power reduction (A-MPR).
However, the preceding limitation is known in the art of communications. Umeda teaches the network has to optimize its scheduler based on the specified A-MPR and its conditions, the network has to schedule RBs to UEs in a very pessimistic way such that the number of allocated RBs is limited more than necessary and/or a lower order modulation is selected. For example, the network may allocate a very limited number of RBs at a certain frequency position to a UE, if a larger number of RB allocation at the position requires a larger A-MPR based on the current specification ([0062], [0069], [0091], [0095]); A technical advantage provided by some exemplary embodiments is that they enable a UE to decrease the A-MPR by applying a more suitable (adjusted) A-MPR using an A-MPR defined for a narrower CBW that is identified based on the distance between the DC location and the edges of the uplink BWP that is used. Based on the DC location indicated by the UE, the network is able to identify the adjusted maximum amount of A-MPR that can be applied by the UE, and thus resource usage may become more efficient ([0097]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the invention, to have implemented the technique of Umela within the system of Park in order to prevent unnecessary uplink power reduction, and enable the network to schedule radio resources for UEs more efficiently.
Regarding claim 28, Park in view of Umela teaches all the limitations above. Park teaches schedule additional uplink communication without the repetition in a non-A- MPR region of the frequency resources for the waveform.
Regarding claim 29, Park in view of Umela teaches all the limitations above. Umela teaches schedule additional uplink communication with fewer repetitions than the communication scheduled with the repetition based on the communication being scheduled for first frequency resources associated with a higher A-MPR than second frequency resources scheduled for the additional uplink communication ([0295], [0298], [0322], [0324], [0336], [0345], [0391]).
Regarding claim 30, Park in view of Umela teaches all the limitations above. Umela teaches wherein the A-MPR region and a non-A-MPR region are defined ([0336], [0345], [0391]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10-12, 23-26 are allowed.
Claims 4-7, 16-19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 04/22/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The Applicant argues that Takahashi does not disclose or suggest "UE specific [A-MPR] information" and further fails to disclose or suggest "an indication of an association with one or more waveforms," as in amended claim 1.
However, the Examiner disagrees with the preceding arguments. The Examiner the disclosure of Takahashi reads on the claims limitations recited above, wherein a terminal apparatus (UE specific) comprising: a communicator configured to transmit, to a base station apparatus (network node), capability information including radio frequency parameters; and a processor configured to: include an information bit indicating that the terminal apparatus supports restricted ranges of a frequency band in a specific area and an information bit indicating that the terminal apparatus supports a modified maximum power reduction indicated per frequency band in the radio frequency parameters, in a case where the terminal apparatus supports first restricted ranges of the frequency band in the specific area and the modified maximum power reduction indicated per frequency band ([0004]). The UE 100 reports, to the base station 200, the maximum-power-reduction information indicating the modified MPR or A-MPR ([0085]). See Office Action at page 3. Therefore, the Examiner maintains the rejections as recited above.
It is to be noted that radio signal is defined by its waveform ([0071]). The radio signal is an electromagnetic wave (corresponding the UE transmits its capability information to the network/base station over the air (radio signal) which inherently take the shape of waveform).
The Applicant further argues that claims 1 and 13 contain similar limitations and allowable for the reason. Therefore, the rejection of claim is maintained for the same reason recited for claim 1 above.
The Applicant further argues that claims 1-3, 8-9, 13-14, and 20-22 depend on 1 and 13 respectively are allowable for their dependence on allowable claims 1 and 13. Therefore, the Examiner disagrees with the preceding assertion and maintains the rejections because claims 1 and 13 are not allowable for reasons recited above.
The Applicant argues that "Park does not specifically teach schedule communication with repetition based on an additional maximum power reduction (A-MPR)" and cites Umeda to cure the deficiency in Park. Umeda fails to disclose or suggest "schedule[d] with repetition based on an additional maximum power reduction (A-MPR) region of frequency resources associated with the particular waveform," (emphasis added).
However, the Examiner disagrees with the preceding argument and maintains that the disclosure of Park in view of Umeda reads on the claim limitations wherein Umeda teaches the network has to optimize its scheduler based on the specified A-MPR and its conditions, the network has to schedule RBs to UEs in a very pessimistic way such that the number of allocated RBs is limited more than necessary and/or a lower order modulation is selected. For example, the network may allocate a very limited number of RBs at a certain frequency position to a UE, if a larger number of RB allocation at the position requires a larger A-MPR based on the current specification ([0062], [0069], [0091], [0095]); A technical advantage provided by some exemplary embodiments is that they enable a UE to decrease the A-MPR by applying a more suitable (adjusted) A-MPR using an A-MPR defined for a narrower CBW that is identified based on the distance between the DC location and the edges of the uplink BWP that is used. Based on the DC location indicated by the UE, the network is able to identify the adjusted maximum amount of A-MPR that can be applied by the UE, and thus resource usage may become more efficient ([0097]). (the repetition is associated adjusted A-MPR to increase/decrease resource block). The Examiner maintains the rejection as recited above and the rejection is final.
It is to be noted that radio signal is defined by its waveform ([0071]). The radio signal is an electromagnetic wave (corresponding the UE transmits its capability information to the network/base station over the air (radio signal) which inherently take the shape of waveform).
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 JEAN ALLAND GELIN whose telephone number is (571)272-7842. The examiner can normally be reached MON-FR 9-6 PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, JINSONG HU can be reached at 571-272-3965. 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.
/JEAN A GELIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2643
Prosecution Insights