DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDSs), submitted on 12 December 2023 and 31 May 2024, were filed after the mailing date of the patent application on 12 December 2023. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings, received on 12 December 2023, are acceptable for examination.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 8, and 15 are objected to because of the following informalities: Said claims recite “a PHR” and further recites “a first power headroom report (PHR)” and “a second PHR”. Here, Applicant is reciting a generic term, which renders the claim unclear because Examiner is unable to determine whether “a PHR” or “the PHR” refers back to “a first PHR” or “a second PHR”. For the purpose of examination, Examiner will interpret that “a PHR”/”the PHR” as one of “the first PHR” and “the second PHR”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: Said claims recite “determining a PHR for the power based on (i) the first set of parameters when the slot is from the first subset of slots or (ii) the second set of parameters when the slot is from the second subset of slots”. Examiner reminds Applicant that "[the] broadest reasonable interpretation of a method (or process) claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met", See MPEP 2111.04 and See Ex Parte Schulhauser, Appeal No. 2015-007421 (Jan. 31, 2016). Here, the contingent limitation, (i.e. “when the slot is from the first subset of slots” and “when the slot is from the second subset of slots”) is not a condition that is required to occur, therefore the entire limitation is not required to occur. Given that the limitation is not required to occur, said limitation does not possess patentable weight. Examiner has, in the interest of compact prosecution, treated the limitation. Examiner respectfully suggests amending to “in response to the slot being from the first subset of slots” and “in response to the slot being from the second subset of slots” respectively. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 1, 8, and 15 are objected to because of the following informalities: Said claims recite “wherein the second subset of slots includes time-domain resources indicated for simultaneous transmission and reception on the cell”. Here, the term, “simultaneous transmission and reception” has been previously recited. In order to improve claim clarity, Examiner respectfully suggests amending to “the simultaneous transmission and reception” in accordance with antecedent basis. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities: Said claim recites “the reporting condition is met (i) when a reporting timer expires or (ii) when a change in pathloss value or a change in power management maximum power reduction (P-MPR) value is equal to or larger than a threshold value”. Examiner reminds Applicant that "[the] broadest reasonable interpretation of a method (or process) claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met", See MPEP 2111.04 and See Ex Parte Schulhauser, Appeal No. 2015-007421 (Jan. 31, 2016). Here, the contingent limitation, (i.e. “(i) when a reporting timer expires or (ii) when a change in pathloss value or a change in power management maximum power reduction (P-MPR) value is equal to or larger than a threshold value”) is not a condition that is required to occur, therefore the entire limitation is not required to occur. Given that the limitation is not required to occur, said limitation does not possess patentable weight. Examiner has, in the interest of compact prosecution, treated the limitation. Examiner respectfully suggests amending to “the reporting condition is met (i)[[ when]] a reporting timer [[expires]] expiring or (ii) [[ when]] in response to a change in pathloss value or a change in power management maximum power reduction (P-MPR) value [[is]] being equal to or larger than a threshold value”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 4-5, 11-12, and 18-19 are objected to because of the following informalities: Said claims recite “the first or second set of parameters”. Here, the recitation is not supported by antecedent basis. Examiner respectfully suggests amending to “the first set of parameters or the second set of parameters”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities: Said claim recites “when a slot is disabled”. Examiner reminds Applicant that "[the] broadest reasonable interpretation of a method (or process) claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met", See MPEP 2111.04 and See Ex Parte Schulhauser, Appeal No. 2015-007421 (Jan. 31, 2016). Here, the contingent limitation, (i.e. “when a slot is disabled”) is not a condition that is required to occur, therefore the entire limitation is not required to occur. Given that the limitation is not required to occur, said limitation does not possess patentable weight. Examiner has, in the interest of compact prosecution, treated the limitation. Examiner respectfully suggests amending to “[[when]] in response to a slot [[is]] being disabled”. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-4, 6-11, 13-18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shim et al. (US 20230284155 A1; hereinafter referred to as “Shim”) in view of Zhang et al. (US 20220110072 A1; hereinafter referred to as “Zhang”).
Regarding Claim 1, Claim 1 is rejected on the same basis as Claim 8.
Regarding Claim 2, Claim 2 is rejected on the same basis as Claim 9.
Regarding Claim 3, Claim 3 is rejected on the same basis as Claim 10.
Regarding Claim 4, Claim 4 is rejected on the same basis as Claim 11.
Regarding Claim 6, Claim 6 is rejected on the same basis as Claim 13.
Regarding Claim 7, Claim 7 is rejected on the same basis as Claim 14.
Regarding Claim 8, Shim discloses a user equipment (UE) comprising:
a transceiver (¶219-220 & Fig. 21, Shim discloses a wireless device comprising transceivers 114) configured to:
receive first information (¶117 & Fig. 11 (S1110), Shim discloses receiving, by a mobile terminal (MT), configuration information for a power headroom report (PHR) procedure) for a first set of parameters for a first power headroom report (PHR) (¶191 & ¶175-176 & Fig. 13, Shim discloses that the configuration information for the PHR procedure includes a second periodic timer for half-duplex-based transmission. ¶184-185 & Table 6, Shim discloses that the configuration information further includes additional parameters) associated with a first subset of slots from a set of slots (¶175-176 & Fig. 13, Shim discloses a first subset of slots including a first downlink (DL) slot and a fifth uplink (UL) slot where the first subset of slots is a portion of a plurality of slots where the plurality of slots include a first downlink (DL) slot, the second SBFD slot, the third SBFD slot, the fourth SBFD slot, and a fifth uplink (UL) slot) on a cell (¶65-66 & Fig. 5, Shim discloses a cell), and
receive second information (¶117 & Fig. 11 (S1110), Shim discloses receiving, by a mobile terminal (MT), configuration information for a power headroom report (PHR) procedure) for a second set of parameters for a second PHR (¶191 & ¶175-176 & Fig. 13, Shim discloses that the configuration information for the PHR procedure includes a first periodic timer for full-duplex-based transmission, such as FD-phr-PeriodicTimer. ¶184-185 & Table 6, Shim discloses that the configuration information further includes additional parameters, such as FD-phr-ProhibitTimer) associated with a second subset of slots from the set of slots on the cell (¶175-176 & Fig. 13, Shim discloses a second subset of slots including a second SBFD slot, a third SBFD slot, and a fourth SBFD slot where the second subset of slots is a portion of the plurality of slots); and
a processor operably coupled with the transceiver (¶219-220 & Fig. 21, Shim discloses the wireless device further comprising a processor 110 coupled to the transceivers 114), the processor configured to:
determine a power for transmission of a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) (¶121-122, Shim discloses determining, by the mobile terminal, an estimated transmit power of an uplink shared channel (UL-SCH). Examiner correlates the UL-SCH to a PUSCH) in a slot from the set of slots (¶175-176 & Fig. 13, Shim discloses a slot in which the PHR is performed may occur in a slot within the first subset of slots or a second subset of slots), and
determine a PHR for the power (¶119 & Fig. 11 (S1120-S1130), Shim discloses determining, by the MT, a power headroom report (PHR) based upon whether a PHR triggering event occurs) based on (i) the first set of parameters when the slot is from the first subset of slots or (ii) the second set of parameters when the slot is from the second subset of slots (¶118 & Fig. 11 (S1120-S1130), Shim discloses the PHR triggering event is based upon the phr-PeriodicTimer, phr-ProhibitTimer, and a set value. ¶191 & ¶175-176 & Fig. 13, Shim further discloses that the phr-PeriodicTimer and phr-ProhibitTimer are based on whether the slot is full duplex or half duplex),
wherein the transceiver (¶219-220 & Fig. 21, Shim discloses a wireless device comprising transceivers 114) is further configured to transmit the PHR based on whether a reporting condition is met (¶118-119 & Fig. 11 (S1120-S1130) & 163, Shim discloses transmitting PHR information in response to the PHR triggering event occurring),
wherein the first subset of slots does not include time-domain resources indicated for simultaneous transmission and reception on the cell (¶175-176 & Fig. 13, Shim discloses a first subset of slots including a first downlink (DL) slot and a fifth uplink (UL) slot where the first subset of slots are used for non-SBFD transmission), and
wherein the second subset of slots includes time-domain resources indicated for simultaneous transmission and reception on the cell (¶175-176 & Fig. 13, Shim discloses the second subset of slots include the second SBFD slot, the third SBFD slot, and the fourth SBFD slot where the SBFD slots are used for full duplex communication).
However, Shim does not disclose a medium access control (MAC) control element (CE) including the PHR.
Zhang, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, teaches a medium access control (MAC) control element (CE) including the PHR (¶134-135 & ¶113, Zhang discloses a medium access control control element (MAC-CE) including a power headroom report (PHR)).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Shim by requiring a medium access control (MAC) control element (CE) including the PHR as taught by Zhang because transmit power is optimized by enabling a user equipment (UE) to provide a power headroom report according to a full duplex (FD) operating mode and/or a half duplex (HD) operating mode (Zhang, ¶53).
Regarding Claim 9, Shim in view of Zhang discloses the UE of Claim 8.
Shim further discloses wherein:
the reporting condition is met (i) when a reporting timer expires (¶118 & Fig. 11 (S1120), Shim discloses that the occurrence of a first PHR triggering event is when a phr-PeriodicTimer expires) or (ii) when a change in pathloss value or a change in power management maximum power reduction (P-MPR) value is equal to or larger than a threshold value (¶118 & Fig. 11 (S1120), Shim discloses that the occurrence of a second PHR triggering event is when a change in a pathloss value of an associated activated serving cell is greater than a set value), and the reporting condition is not met when a prohibit timer is not expired (¶118 & Fig. 11 (S1120), Shim discloses that the occurrence of the second PHR triggering event does not occur when the phr-ProhibitTimer has not expired).
Regarding Claim 10, Shim in view of Zhang discloses the UE of Claim 8.
Shim further discloses wherein:
the slot is from the second subset of slots (¶175-176 & Fig. 13, Shim discloses that a slot may within a second subset of slots including a second SBFD slot, a third SBFD slot, and a fourth SBFD slot where the second subset of slots is a portion of the plurality of slots) and the PUSCH is an actual PUSCH or a virtual PUSCH (¶215, Shim discloses that the PUSCH transmitted by the MT), and the processor is further configured to determine the PHR for transmission of the actual PUSCH or the virtual PUSCH in the slot from the second subset of slots (¶119 & Fig. 11 (S1120-S1130), Shim discloses determining, by the MT, a power headroom report (PHR) based upon whether a PHR triggering event occurs and further based on the slot type).
Regarding Claim 11, Shim in view of Zhang discloses the UE of Claim 8.
Shim further discloses wherein:
the processor (¶219-220 & Fig. 21, Shim discloses the wireless device further comprising the processor 110) is further configured to select, based on the slot for transmission of the PUSCH, a timer value from a plurality of timer values for the reporting condition (¶190-191 & Fig. 16 & ¶172-174 & Fig. 12 & ¶121, Shim discloses selecting, based upon a resource region for transmission of a PUSCH corresponding to a type-2 Power Headroom (PH) report, a first timer or a second timer), and the plurality of timer values are provided in the first or second set of parameters (¶117 & Fig. 11 (S1110), Shim discloses that the first timer and the second timer are provided via configuration information for PHR procedure).
Regarding Claim 13, Shim in view of Zhang discloses the UE of Claim 8.
Shim further discloses wherein:
the processor is further configured to determine, based on a type of symbols in the second subset of slots, the PHR (¶183 & ¶119 & Fig. 11 (S1120-S1130), Shim discloses determining, by the MT, the PHR based upon whether the MT is operating in full duplex mode, namely SFFD or SBFD, or half duplex mode), and the type of symbols is one of a downlink (DL) symbol, an uplink (UL) symbol, or a flexible symbol (¶185, Shim discloses a specific time resource, being either a slot or symbol, can be indicated as a flexible resource, downlink resource, or uplink resource).
Regarding Claim 14, Shim in view of Zhang discloses the UE of Claim 8.
Shim further discloses wherein:
the transceiver (¶219-220 & Fig. 21, Shim discloses a wireless device comprising transceivers 114) is further configured to:
receive third information (¶117 & Fig. 11 (S1110), Shim discloses receiving, by the MT, configuration information for a power headroom report (PHR) procedure) enabling or disabling the PHR for the transmission of the PUSCH in the slot from the first subset of slots (¶191 & ¶183 & ¶118 & Fig. 11 (S1120), Shim discloses that the first periodic timer for half-duplex-based transmission may enable or disable the PHR procedure if the PHR triggering event does not occur based upon the first periodic timer), and receive fourth information (¶117 & Fig. 11 (S1110), Shim discloses receiving, by a mobile terminal (MT), configuration information for a power headroom report (PHR) procedure) enabling or disabling the PHR for the transmission of the PUSCH in the slot from the second subset of slots (¶191 & ¶183 & ¶118 & Fig. 11 (S1120), Shim discloses that the second periodic timer for full-duplex-based transmission may enable or disable the PHR procedure if the PHR triggering event does not occur based upon the second periodic timer), and the reporting condition is not met when a slot is disabled (¶118 & Fig. 11 (S1120), Shim discloses that the occurrence of the PHR triggering event does not occur when the phr-ProhibitTimer has not expired).
Regarding Claim 15, Shim discloses a base station (BS) comprising:
a processor (¶219-220 & Fig. 21, Shim discloses a wireless device comprising a processor); and
a transceiver operably coupled with the processor (¶219-220 & Fig. 21, Shim discloses the wireless device further comprising transceivers 114 coupled to the processor 110), the transceiver configured to:
transmit first information (¶117 & Fig. 11 (S1110), Shim discloses receiving, by a mobile terminal (MT), configuration information for a power headroom report (PHR) procedure) for a first set of parameters for a first power headroom report (PHR) (¶191 & ¶175-176 & Fig. 13, Shim discloses that the configuration information for the PHR procedure includes a second periodic timer for half-duplex-based transmission. ¶184-185 & Table 6, Shim discloses that the configuration information further includes additional parameters) associated with a first subset of slots from a set of slots (¶175-176 & Fig. 13, Shim discloses a first subset of slots including a first downlink (DL) slot and a fifth uplink (UL) slot where the first subset of slots is a portion of a plurality of slots where the plurality of slots include a first downlink (DL) slot, the second SBFD slot, the third SBFD slot, the fourth SBFD slot, and a fifth uplink (UL) slot) on a cell (¶65-66 & Fig. 5, Shim discloses a cell),
transmit second information (¶117 & Fig. 11 (S1110), Shim discloses transmitting, to the MT, configuration information for a power headroom report (PHR) procedure) for a second set of parameters for a second PHR (¶191 & ¶175-176 & Fig. 13, Shim discloses that the configuration information for the PHR procedure includes a first periodic timer for full-duplex-based transmission, such as FD-phr-PeriodicTimer. ¶184-185 & Table 6, Shim discloses that the configuration information further includes additional parameters, such as FD-phr-ProhibitTimer) associated with a second subset of slots from the set of slots on the cell (¶175-176 & Fig. 13, Shim discloses a second subset of slots including a second SBFD slot, a third SBFD slot, and a fourth SBFD slot where the second subset of slots is a portion of the plurality of slots), and
receive, based on whether a reporting condition is met, a PHR (¶118-119 & Fig. 11 (S1120-S1130) & 163, Shim discloses transmitting PHR information in response to the PHR triggering event occurring) for a power for a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) (¶121-122, Shim discloses determining, by the mobile terminal, an estimated transmit power of an uplink shared channel (UL-SCH). Examiner correlates the UL-SCH to a PUSCH) in a slot from the set of slots (¶175-176 & Fig. 13, Shim discloses a slot in which the PHR is performed may occur in a slot within the first subset of slots or a second subset of slots),
wherein the PHR is based on (i) the first set of parameters when the slot is from the first subset of slots or (ii) the second set of parameters when the slot is from the second subset of slots (¶118 & Fig. 11 (S1120-S1130), Shim discloses the PHR triggering event is based upon the phr-PeriodicTimer, phr-ProhibitTimer, and a set value. ¶191 & ¶175-176 & Fig. 13, Shim further discloses that the phr-PeriodicTimer and phr-ProhibitTimer are based on whether the slot is full duplex or half duplex),
wherein the first subset of slots does not include time-domain resources indicated for simultaneous transmission and reception on the cell (¶175-176 & Fig. 13, Shim discloses a first subset of slots including a first downlink (DL) slot and a fifth uplink (UL) slot where the first subset of slots are used for non-SBFD transmission), and
wherein the second subset of slots includes time-domain resources indicated for simultaneous transmission and reception on the cell (¶175-176 & Fig. 13, Shim discloses the second subset of slots include the second SBFD slot, the third SBFD slot, and the fourth SBFD slot where the SBFD slots are used for full duplex communication).
However, Shim does not disclose a medium access control (MAC) control element (CE) including the PHR.
Zhang, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, teaches a medium access control (MAC) control element (CE) including the PHR (¶134-135 & ¶113, Zhang discloses a medium access control control element (MAC-CE) including a power headroom report (PHR)).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Shim by requiring a medium access control (MAC) control element (CE) including the PHR as taught by Zhang because transmit power is optimized by enabling a user equipment (UE) to provide a power headroom report according to a full duplex (FD) operating mode and/or a half duplex (HD) operating mode (Zhang, ¶53).
Regarding Claim 16, Shim in view of Zhang discloses the BS of Claim 15.
Shim further discloses wherein:
the reporting condition is met (i) when a reporting timer expires (¶118 & Fig. 11 (S1120), Shim discloses that the occurrence of a first PHR triggering event is when a phr-PeriodicTimer expires) or (ii) when a change in pathloss value or a change in power management maximum power reduction (P-MPR) value is equal to or larger than a threshold value (¶118 & Fig. 11 (S1120), Shim discloses that the occurrence of a second PHR triggering event is when a change in a pathloss value of an associated activated serving cell is greater than a set value), and the reporting condition is not met when a prohibit timer is not expired (¶118 & Fig. 11 (S1120), Shim discloses that the occurrence of the second PHR triggering event does not occur when the phr-ProhibitTimer has not expired).
Regarding Claim 17, Shim in view of Zhang discloses the BS of Claim 15.
Shim further discloses wherein:
the slot is from the second subset of slots (¶175-176 & Fig. 13, Shim discloses that a slot may within a second subset of slots including a second SBFD slot, a third SBFD slot, and a fourth SBFD slot where the second subset of slots is a portion of the plurality of slots) and the PUSCH is an actual PUSCH or a virtual PUSCH (¶215, Shim discloses that the PUSCH transmitted by the MT), and the processor is further configured to determine the PHR for transmission of the actual PUSCH or the virtual PUSCH in the slot from the second subset of slots (¶119 & Fig. 11 (S1120-S1130), Shim discloses determining, by the MT, a power headroom report (PHR) based upon whether a PHR triggering event occurs and further based on the slot type).
Regarding Claim 18, Shim in view of Zhang discloses the BS of Claim 15.
Shim further discloses wherein:
a timer value for the reporting condition is based on the slot for transmission of the PUSCH (¶190-191 & Fig. 16 & ¶172-174 & Fig. 12 & ¶121, Shim discloses selecting, based upon a resource region for transmission of a PUSCH corresponding to a type-2 Power Headroom (PH) report, a first timer or a second timer), and a plurality of timer values including the timer value are provided in the first or second set of parameters (¶117 & Fig. 11 (S1110), Shim discloses that the first timer and the second timer are provided via configuration information for PHR procedure).
Regarding Claim 20, Shim in view of Zhang discloses the BS of Claim 15.
Shim further discloses wherein:
the transceiver is further configured to:
transmit third information (¶117 & Fig. 11 (S1110), Shim discloses transmitting, to the MT, configuration information for a power headroom report (PHR) procedure) enabling or disabling the PHR for the PUSCH in the slot from the first subset of slots (¶191 & ¶183 & ¶118 & Fig. 11 (S1120), Shim discloses that the first periodic timer for half-duplex-based transmission may enable or disable the PHR procedure if the PHR triggering event does not occur based upon the first periodic timer), and
transmit fourth information (¶117 & Fig. 11 (S1110), Shim discloses transmitting, to the MT, configuration information for a power headroom report (PHR) procedure) enabling or disabling the PHR for the PUSCH in the slot from the second subset of slots (¶191 & ¶183 & ¶118 & Fig. 11 (S1120), Shim discloses that the second periodic timer for full-duplex-based transmission may enable or disable the PHR procedure if the PHR triggering event does not occur based upon the second periodic timer), and the reporting condition is not met when a slot is disabled (¶118 & Fig. 11 (S1120), Shim discloses that the occurrence of the PHR triggering event does not occur when the phr-ProhibitTimer has not expired).
Claims 5, 12, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shim in view of Zhang in further view of Liu et al. (US 20250016693 A1; hereinafter referred to as “Liu”).
Regarding Claim 5, Claim 5 is rejected on the same basis as Claim 12.
Regarding Claim 12, Shim in view of Zhang discloses the UE of Claim 8.
However, Shim in view of Zhang does not disclose wherein: the PUSCH is a virtual PUSCH, the processor is further configured to select, based on the slot for transmission of the virtual PUSCH, a value from a plurality of values for one of a transmission power, a maximum power reduction, or a power-control parameter, and the plurality of values are provided in the first or second set of parameters.
Liu, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein:
the PUSCH is a virtual PUSCH (¶112, Liu discloses a virtual power headroom (PH) corresponding to a Physical Uplink Shared Channel (PUSCH)),
the processor is further configured to select, based on the slot for transmission of the virtual PUSCH, a value from a plurality of values for one of a transmission power, a maximum power reduction, or a power-control parameter (¶112 & Fig. 3 (302) & ¶9-10, Liu discloses selecting at least one value corresponding to an estimated power for the UL-SCH, a maximum power reduction, or remaining parameters), and the plurality of values are provided in the first or second set of parameters (¶112 & Fig. 3 (302) & ¶9-10, Liu discloses that the parameters are provided according to a specification).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Shim in view of Zhang by requiring that the PUSCH is a virtual PUSCH and that the processor is further configured to select, based on the slot for transmission of the virtual PUSCH, a value from a plurality of values for one of a transmission power, a maximum power reduction, or a power-control parameter, and the plurality of values are provided in the first or second set of parameters as taught by Liu because power headroom reporting is improved by enabling multiple P-MPR reporting for maximum permissible exposure (MPE) (Liu, ¶1 & Abstract).
Regarding Claim 19, Shim in view of Zhang discloses the BS of Claim 15.
However, Shim in view of Zhang does not disclose wherein: the PUSCH is a virtual PUSCH, a value for one of a transmission power, a maximum power reduction, or a power-control parameter is based on the slot for transmission of the virtual PUSCH, and a plurality of values including the value are provided in the first or second set of parameters.
Liu, a prior art reference in the field of endeavor, teaches wherein:
the PUSCH is a virtual PUSCH (¶112, Liu discloses a virtual power headroom (PH) corresponding to a Physical Uplink Shared Channel (PUSCH)),
a value for one of a transmission power, a maximum power reduction, or a power-control parameter is based on the slot for transmission of the virtual PUSCH (¶112 & Fig. 3 (302) & ¶9-10, Liu discloses selecting at least one value corresponding to an estimated power for the UL-SCH, a maximum power reduction, or remaining parameters), and a plurality of values including the value are provided in the first or second set of parameters (¶112 & Fig. 3 (302) & ¶9-10, Liu discloses that the parameters are provided according to a specification).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Shim in view of Zhang by requiring that the PUSCH is a virtual PUSCH, a value for one of a transmission power, a maximum power reduction, or a power-control parameter is based on the slot for transmission of the virtual PUSCH, and a plurality of values including the value are provided in the first or second set of parameters as taught by Liu because power headroom reporting is improved by enabling multiple P-MPR reporting for maximum permissible exposure (MPE) (Liu, ¶1 & Abstract).
Internet Communications
Applicant is encouraged to submit a written authorization for Internet communications (PTO/SB/439, http://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/sb0439.pdf) in the instant patent application to authorize the examiner to communicate with the applicant via email. The authorization will allow the examiner to better practice compact prosecution. The written authorization can be submitted via one of the following methods only: (1) Central Fax which can be found in the Conclusion section of this Office action; (2) regular postal mail; (3) EFS WEB; or (4) the service window on the Alexandria campus. EFS web is the recommended way to submit the form since this allows the form to be entered into the file wrapper within the same day (system dependent). Written authorization submitted via other methods, such as direct fax to the examiner or email, will not be accepted. See MPEP § 502.03.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIC NOWLIN whose telephone number is (313)446-6544. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 12:00PM-10:00PM.
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, 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.
/ERIC NOWLIN/Examiner, Art Unit 2474