DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments/remarks made in an amendment filed on 3/02/2026 have been fully considered. In view of the amended claims 1-3,5-8 and 10-14 and upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection, necessitated by the amendments is made in view of different interpretation of the previously applied references and new prior art as presented in this Office action. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-3,5-8 and 10-14 are therefore moot.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3,5-8 and 10-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al (US 11,716,691) hereinafter Zhang in view of Park et al. (US Patent No. 8918135) hereinafter Park.
Per claim 1 and 6, Zhang disclose a method and a terminal (see figure 1 and item 103) in a communication system, the terminal (see figure 9) comprising: a transceiver (see items 306 and 308); and a controller (see item 304) coupled with the transceiver and configured to: receive a plurality of signals from a plurality of transmission and reception points (TRPs) (see column 12 and lines 57-column 13 and line 3), respectively, obtain each of a plurality of channel gains (pathloss of the channel or channel response) corresponding to each of the TRPs based on the received plurality of signals (see column 9 and item s29-34, column 10 and lines 8-21), obtain a parameter P for identifying an uplink transmission power and a reception power for a P-th strongest TRP , identify the uplink transmission power for the P-th strongest TRP among the plurality of TRPs based on the parameter P, the target reception power and a channel gain associated with P th strongest RP, and transmit an uplink signal based on the identified uplink transmission power (see column 8 and lines 40 -column 9 and lines 40 and column 15 lines 20-58, a UE is able to determine the best uplink power transmission based on the channel estimation form the downlinks from the plurality of TRPs) .
Zhang doesn’t expressly teach the determination of the transmission power (uplink power) is based on a best or better reception power from a network node. Parker teaches such technical feature (see abstract, column 3 and lines 65-column 6 and lines 35).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Parker with Zhang uplink power control to more accurately and effectively determine the uplink power control with a determination of the channel response based on the receiving powers from the network.
Per claim 2 and 7, Zhang further discloses that the plurality of signals correspond to synchronization signal blocks (SSBs) from the plurality of TRPs respectively (see column 12 and lines 1-35).
Per claim 3 and 8, Zhang further teaches that the parameter is obtained based on a received system information block (SIB) or preconfigured information (see column 1 and lines 55-65).
Per claim 5 and 10, Zhang further teaches that the parameter is associated with a quality of service or a traffic load (see column 1 and liens 48-54).
Per claim 11 and 13, Zhang discloses a method and a base station in a communication system (see figure 1 and item 101), the base station (see figure 4 and item 400) comprising: a transceiver(see figure 4 and item 407 and 409); and a controller (see figure 4 and item 401)coupled with the transceiver and configured to: transmit, to a terminal (see figure 1 and item 103), a plurality of signals corresponding to a plurality of transmission and reception points (TRPs) (see figure 1, plurality of beam from different base station as TRPs), respectively, transmit, to the terminal, a parameter for identifying an uplink transmission power via system information block (SIB) (see column 12 and lines 1-35), and receive, from the terminal, an uplink signal for a TRP, wherein the uplink signal is transmitted according to the uplink transmission power for the TRP associated with the parameter and a channel gain associated with the TRP (see column 8 and lines 40 -column 9 and lines 40 and column 15 lines 20-58, a UE is able to determine the best uplink power transmission based on the channel estimation form the downlinks from the plurality of TRPs).
Zhang doesn’t expressly teach the determination of the transmission power (uplink power) is based on a best or better reception power from a network node. Parker teaches such technical feature (see abstract, column 3 and lines 65-column 6 and lines 35).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Parker with Zhang uplink power control to more accurately and effectively determine the uplink power control with a determination of the channel response based on the receiving powers from the network.
Per claim 12 and 14, Zhang further teaches that the plurality of signals correspond to synchronization signal blocks (SSBs) from the plurality of TRPs respectively (see figure 1 and items 105 and 107).
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 Supervisory Patent Examiner (SPE) YUWEN PAN whose telephone number is (571)272-7855. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00am-5:00pm.
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.
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.
YUWEN . PAN
Supervisory Patent Examiner
Art Unit 2649
/YUWEN PAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2649
Prosecution Insights