DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
The following is a final office action in response to applicant’s amendment filed on 02/04/2026 for response of the office action mailed on 11/05/2025. Independent Claims 59, 69 and 71 and dependent Claims 60, 62-63, 67-68, 70, and 74-75 are amended. Claims 59-78 are pending in the application.
Applicant’s amendments to Claims 62-63, 67-68, 74-75, have overcome each and every objection set forth in the office action mailed 11/05/2025 as it relates to those claims.
Applicant on page 7, states Claims 65 and 77 were amended. However, the claims are stated as “(previously presented)”. Therefore, the objections to Claims 65 and 77 remain, as stated herein.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to independent Claims 59, 69 and 71 have been fully considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Objections
Claims 65 and 77 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 65, line 2 and Claim 77, line 3, the term “and/or” should read -- or -- to avoid any ambiguity.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or non-obviousness.
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.
Claims 59 – 77 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over FUJISHIRO et al. (US 20190098697 A1, as disclosed in IDS), hereinafter FUJISHIRO in view of SUZUKI et al. (US 20190261286 A1), hereinafter SUZUKI.
Regarding Claim 59, FUJISHIRO teaches a method performed by a wireless device (FUJISHIRO, FIG. 10, ¶0125, method performed by UE 100), the method comprising:
determining a coverage detection criterion based on one or more obtained parameters (FUJISHIRO FIG. 10, ¶0125 at S10, eNB 200 transmits determination criterion/“coverage detection criterion” to UE; [and] ¶0126 may include parameters (e.g. threshold parameters) or be defined by at least one of a reception level); [and] ¶0125-0132 detail one or more “obtained parameters” related to reception threshold level and transmission level of terminal, . . . for e.g. ¶0129 first determination criterion may be related to a transmission power in the sidelink) or ¶0130 may be criterion/S-criterion for determining a coverage area of the cell; see also ¶222-229 coverage criterion and evaluation);
determining, based on the determined coverage detection criterion, whether sidelink operation of the wireless device is considered to be inside or outside the coverage of the cell (FUJISHIRO, FIG. 10, ¶0134 at S20, . . .determine which control is to be executed (first, second or third control) based on information of the determination criterion the UE is located within or outside a first coverage/ ”the coverage of the cell”; . . . ¶0145, when the S-criterion is not satisfied, the UE is located outside the coverage of the cell (co-called out-of-coverage); see also FIG. 7-9, ¶0134-0145 concept disclosed throughout); and
adjusting the sidelink operation in response that the sidelink operation of the wireless device is considered to be outside the coverage of the cell (FUJISHIRO, ¶0150, the UE 100 can execute an executable control among the first control, the second control, and the third control ... the UE 100A may execute the second control in preference to the first control . . . [and] FIG. 11, ¶0156, when the UE 100B determines that the second control is to be executed, the UE 100B can start an operation for searching for a relay UE, interpreted to correspond to “adjusting the sidelink operation”; ¶0207, the UE 100 may determine the control to be prioritized based on the S-criterion / ”determined coverage detection criterion” [and] . . . if the S-criterion in a normal coverage is not satisfied and the-S criterion in an enhanced coverage is satisfied, the UE 100 may execute the second control, interpreted to correspond to “adjusting the sidelink operation”; see also ¶0026, [t]he controller may execute the second control (relay/ sidelink) when the second determination criterion is satisfied and a first determination criterion for determining a coverage area of the predetermined cell is not satisfied),
FUJISHIRO further teaches compensation and power class parameters (¶0210, TABLE 1 which detail S-Criterion and compensation and power class parameters, P.sub.PowerClass Maximum RF output power (dBm) of UE that complies with UE power class, interpreted to correspond to a power class of the wireless device in SL).
FUJISHIRO does not explicitly teach the one or more obtained parameters for determining coverage detection criteria comprises a power class of the wireless device in sidelink (PPowerClass, SL).
However, in the analogous art, SUZUKI explicitly discloses the one or more obtained parameters for determining coverage detection criteria comprises a power class of the wireless device in sidelink (PPowerClass, SL) (SUZUKI, FIG. TBD, ¶0197 P-Max for the sidelink in the non-serving cell may be configured in advance. . . [and] may be the same as the value of the power class PPowerClass corresponding to the band to which the non-serving cell belongs; see also ¶0196 P-Max may be used for computing a parameter (also referred to as a parameter Pcompensation) used to determine whether the cell selection criterion is satisfied. In other words, the parameter P-Max corresponds to the parameter PEMAX, c).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine FUJISHIRO’s invention of a mobile terminal with SUZUKI’s terminal device and communication method. The motivation would be to efficiently control the transmit power and provide efficient communication among devices [SUZUKI, ¶0225].
Regarding Claim 60, FUJISHIRO and SUZUKI teach claim 59.
FUJISHIRO further teaches the one or more obtained parameters for determining coverage detection criteria comprises at least one of: maximum transmit power of the wireless device in a cell (PEMAX) and maximum transmit power of the wireless device in the sidelink (PMAX, SL) (FUJISHIRO, FIG. 10, ¶0120-0121, the determination criterion, i.e. “the one or more parameters” comprises transmission-power level or power-class values; ¶0124 [t]he transmission level may be, for example, a maximum power (value) defined based on parameters set in the UE 100 . . .for example, the transmission level may be the maximum RF output power based on the UE power class; see also ¶0210, TABLE 1 which detail S-Criterion and compensation and power class parameters).
Regarding Claim 61, FUJISHIRO and SUZUKI teach claim 60. [Broadest reasonable interpretation that this claim is further limiting the origin of the obtained parameters to be from the network node]
FUJISHIRO further teaches obtaining at least one of the one or more obtained parameters from a network node (FUJISHIRO, FIG. 10, ¶0125, at S10, the UE obtains information of a determination criterion, i.e. “the one or more parameters”; as detailed in Claim 59) from the eNB 200, a “network node”).
Regarding Claim 62, FUJISHIRO and SUZUKI teach claim 59.
FUJISHIRO further teaches determining the coverage detection criterion comprises: determining a power compensation, Pcompensation, value based on the one or more parameters (FUJISHIRO, ¶0114, [t]he UE 100B can receive the information of the transmission power from the eNB 200 (cell). . . [which] may be included in information of a determination criterion; ¶0208 [t]he UE 100 may use the second determination criterion obtained by setting a compensation term (Pcompensation) of the transmission level used in the S-criterion, “coverage detection criterion”; see also ¶0135, the UE 100 performs the determination based on the information of the determination criterion).
Regarding Claim 63, FUJISHIRO and SUZUKI teach claim 62.
FUJISHIRO further teaches determining whether sidelink operation of the wireless device is considered to be inside or outside the coverage of the cell comprises: determining based on a signal strength threshold which is determined according to the value of Pcompesation (FUJISHIRO, FIG. 10, ¶0128 The first determination criterion may be, for example, a criterion related to a reception power (RSRP: Reference Signal Received Power) of the DL signal; ¶0208, TABLE 1 [t]he UE 100 may use the second determination criterion obtained by setting a compensation term (Pcompensation) of the transmission level used in the S-criterion, “coverage detection criterion”; see also ¶0135 the UE 100 performs the determination based on the information of the determination criterion; ¶0137 . . whether the UE 100 is located outside the first coverage [is] based on the first determination criterion, ¶0137 when the reception level (RSRP) of the DL signal is greater than or equal to the first threshold value, the UE 100 determines that the first control can be executed).
Regarding Claim 64, FUJISHIRO and SUZUKI teach claim 63.
FUJISHIRO further teaches the signal strength threshold is further determined according to one or more of the following parameters: reference signal received power (RSRP), reference signal received quality (RSRQ), received signal strength indicator (RSSI), signal-to-interference ratio (SIR), signal-to- interference plus noise ratio (SINR) (FUJISHIRO, ¶0137 . . . when the reception level (RSRP) of the DL signal is greater than or equal to the first threshold value, the UE 100 determines that the first control can be executed. When the RSRP of the DL signal is less than the first threshold value, the UE 100 determines that the first control cannot be executed.).
Regarding Claim 65, FUJISHIRO and SUZUKI teach claim 59.
FUJISHIRO further teaches adjusting the sidelink operation comprises: stopping transmission and/or reception of sidelink signals, and/or switching a mode used by the wireless device (FUJISHIRO, FIG. 7-9; 10 ¶0150, [illustrates] the UE 100 can execute an executable control among the first control, the second control, and the third control for example, ¶0145-0147 adjusting the sidelink operation comprises the UE transition from a first control or a second control or a third control, i.e., a communication mode switch; see also ¶0108-0119; ¶0114 further illustrates UE execution of modes (cellular / ProSe/autonomous sidelink or relay)).
Regarding Claim 66, FUJISHIRO and SUZUKI teach claim 59.
FUJISHIRO further teaches adjusting the sidelink operation comprises reducing a maximum transmit power used for transmission of sidelink signals (FUJISHIRO ¶0124, the transmission level may be the maximum RF output power based on the UE power class . . .[or] may be a minimum power (value) defined based on parameters set in the UE 100; ¶0129-0130, a determination criterion [is] related to a transmission power in the sidelink).
Regarding Claim 67, FUJISHIRO and SUZUKI teach claim 59.
FUJISHIRO further teaches in response to determining that the wireless device is outside coverage of any cell, performing one or more of the following: enabling transmission of sidelink signals; enabling reception of sidelink signals or increasing a maximum transmit power used for transmission of the sidelink signals (FUJISHIRO, ¶0145, when the S-criterion is not satisfied, the UE 100 is located outside the coverage of the cell (so-called out-of-coverage); the UE determines that the third control is to be executed, which at FIG. 9, ¶0115-0119, corresponds to enabling transmission and reception of sidelink signals).
Regarding Claim 68, FUJISHIRO and SUZUKI teach claim 59.
FUJISHIRO further teaches determining whether the sidelink operation of the wireless device is considered to be inside or outside the coverage of the cell is performed with respect to one or more carriers with respect to one or more carriers that are: same as a carrier that the wireless device uses for sidelink; adjacent to the carrier that the wireless device uses for sidelink operation; in a same band as the carrier that the wireless device uses for sidelink operation; or within a pre-determined frequency of the carrier that the wireless device uses for sidelink operation (FUJISHIRO, ¶0107-0111, in the second control (for sidelink/relay communication), the UE 100B directly receives the downlink information from the cell (eNB 200) . . .i.e., the eNB 200 directly transmits the downlink information to the UE 100B . . [[and] reception (transmission) of the downlink information is executed in the same manner as the first control (for eNB to UE communication)).
Regarding Claims 69 -70, the claims disclose similar features of Claims 59-60, respectively and are rejected based on the same rationales of Claims 59-60 (FUJISHIRO, ¶0125, a method performed by a network node (FUJISHIRO FIG. 10, ¶0125 at S10, eNB 200)).
Regarding Claims 71 – 77, the claims disclose similar features of Claims 59-65, respectively and are rejected based on the same rationales of Claims 59-65, in apparatus form (FUJISHIRO FIG. 10, a wireless device, UE, 100 performing the method of Claim 59).
Claim 78 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over FUJISHIRO in view of Chen et al. (US 20220256407 A1), hereinafter Chen.
Regarding Claim 78, FUJISHIRO and SUZUKI teach Claim 69.
FUJISHIRO further teaches the network node comprising: processing circuitry configured to perform the method according to claim 69 (FUJISHIRO, ¶0218, a chip may be provided which is configured by: a memory for storing a program for performing each process performed by any one of the UE 100 and the eNB 200; and a processor) for executing the program stored in the memory; examiner notes it is well established a chip provides the circuitry to supply power and perform the necessary processing for the eNB, network node).
FUJISHIRO does not explicitly teach the network node comprising: power supply circuitry configured to supply power to the network node.
However, in the analogous art, Chen explicitly discloses the network node comprising: power supply circuitry configured to supply power to the network node (Chen, ¶0170, the 5G network node comprising processing circuitry and power supply circuitry configured to supply power to the 5G network node).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine FUJISHIRO’s invention of a mobile terminal and SUZUKI’s terminal device and communication method with base station/network node with Chen’s systems and methods for handling a wireless device and 5G network node apparatus. The motivation would be to improve end user performance [Chen, ¶0029].
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TRACY L WILLIAMS whose telephone number is 571-270-7694. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:30-5:30. 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, Ayman Abaza can be reached at 571-270-0422. 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.
/TRACY L WILLIAMS/Examiner, Art Unit 2465
/AYMAN A ABAZA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2465
Prosecution Insights