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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 23-38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 23 recites “assuming” in line 6 and “the assumed” in line 9, which causing uncertainty and unclear boundary. Same argument applies to claims 26, 31 and 34.
Claims 24-30 and 32-38 are rejected for depend from claim 23 or 31.
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) 23-25, 30-33 and 38 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koo (US 20040106425 A1) in view of Chen (US 20040184417 A1).
For claim 23. Koo discloses ([0004]) A method for uplink (UL) power control performed by a network node of a wireless communication network, the method comprising: determining, for a user equipment (UE), a UE-specific Signal to Interference and Noise Ratio (SINR) link adaption target (SINRLA) ([0078] the target SIR) based on UE-specific Quality of Service (QOS) information ([0079]) for the UE, wherein the determination of the UE-specific SINRLA comprises: assuming allocation of a first number of Physical Resource Blocks (PRB) to the UL transmission ([0023]); determining whether the TBS is larger than or equal to a packet size D ([0023] “selectively sized block allocations” or [0057] “TTI size S” as the claimed TBS, [0078] more than “one transport block” as packet size D; hence the selected sized block allocations is more than one transport block; [0019], [0081] “variable bit rate services”, as variable size/bits within TTI); and when the TBS is larger than or equal to the packet size D, determining the UE-specific SINRLA ([0078] the target SIR) based on the UE-specific QoS information ([0079]) and the first MCS ([0013], [0016], W-CDMA); determining a power target, P0, for the UE, based on the UE-specific SINRLA, and on an estimated interference ([0054] time-varying propagation channel and interference, or interference value in SINR) for UL signals at the network node (claims 9, 11, 20, 22); and sending information on the determined P0 to the UE, so that the UE can transmit packets in UL with a transmission power based on the determined P0 (claims 9, 11, 20, 22).
But fails to mention selecting a first Modulation and Coding Scheme (MCS) for coding of the packet to be transmitted, based on the assumed allocated first number of PRBs, which results in a Transport block size (TBS).
This teaching is disclosed by Chen ([0003], [0032]-[0035]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the selection techniques taught by Chen into the art of Koo as to use selecting MCS to meet different channel qualities, hence updating SINR target based on previous transmission parameters/QoS including selected MCS.
For claim 24. Koo in combination with Chen substantially teaches the method of claim 23, Koo discloses wherein the UE-specific QoS information is packet error rate, and the UE-specific SINRLA is determined based on the packet error rate and on packet size D ([0068]-[0070]).
For claim 25. Koo in combination with Chen substantially teaches the method of claim 23, Koo discloses wherein the method further comprises: estimating a transmit power of the UE based on the determined P0 and an estimation of pathloss between the UE and the network node, and when the estimated transmit power is below or equal to a maximum transmit power of the UE, perform the sending of the information on the determined P0 to the UE ([0043], maximum transmit power inherently the limitation of the UE).
For claim 30. Koo in combination with Chen substantially teaches the method of claim 23, Koo discloses wherein the UE-specific QoS information is a UE packet delay budget, PDB, the method comprising determining a BLER target based on the PDB, and wherein the UE-specific SINRLA is determined based on the BLER target ([0019]-[0021]).
For claim 31. Koo discloses ([0004]) A network node configured to operate in a wireless communication network, and configured for UL power control, the network node comprising a processing circuitry and a memory, said memory containing instructions executable by said processing circuitry, whereby the network node is operative for: determining, for a User Equipment, UE, a UE-specific Signal to Interference and Noise Ratio (SINR) link adaption target (SINRLA) ([0078] the target SIR) based on UE-specific Quality of Service (QOS) information ([0079]) for the UE, wherein determining the SINRLA comprises: assuming allocation of a first number of Physical Resource Blocks (PRB) to the UL transmission ([0023]); determining whether the TBS is larger than or equal to a packet size D ([0023] “selectively sized block allocations” or [0057] “TTI size S” as the claimed TBS, [0078] more than “one transport block” as packet size D; hence the selected sized block allocations is more than one transport block; [0019], [0081] “variable bit rate services”, as variable size/bits within TTI); and when the TBS is larger than or equal to the packet size D, determining the UE-specific SINRLA ([0078] the target SIR) based on the UE-specific QoS information ([0079]) and the first MCS ([0013], [0016], W-CDMA); determining a power target, P0, for the UE, based on the UE-specific SINRLA, and on an estimated interference ([0054] time-varying propagation channel and interference, or interference value in SINR) for UL signals at the network node (claims 9, 11, 20, 22); and sending information on the determined P0 to the UE, so that the UE can transmit packets in UL with a transmission power based on the determined P0 (claims 9, 11, 20, 22).
But fails to mention selecting a first Modulation and Coding Scheme (MCS) for coding of the packet to be transmitted, based on the assumed allocated first number of PRBs, which results in a Transport block size (TBS).
This teaching is disclosed by Chen ([0003], [0032]-[0035]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the selection techniques taught by Chen into the art of Koo as to use selecting MCS to meet different channel qualities, hence updating SINR target based on previous transmission parameters/QoS including selected MCS.
For claim 32. Koo in combination with Chen substantially teaches the network node of claim 31, Koo discloses wherein the UE-specific QoS information is packet error rate, and the UE-specific SINRLA is determined based on the packet error rate and on packet size D ([0068]-[0070]).
For claim 33. Koo in combination with Chen substantially teaches the network node of claim 31, Koo discloses further being operative for: estimating a transmit power of the UE based on the determined P0 and an estimation of pathloss between the UE and the network node, when the estimated transmit power is below or equal to a maximum transmit power of the UE, perform the sending of the information on the determined P0 to the UE ([0043], maximum transmit power inherently the limitation of the UE).
For claim 38. Koo in combination with Chen substantially teaches the network node of claim 31, Koo discloses wherein the UE-specific QoS information is a UE packet delay budget, PDB, the network node being operative for determining a BLER target based on the PDB, and wherein the UE-specific SINRLA is determined based on the BLER target ([0019]-[0021]).
Allowable Subject Matter
9. Claims 26-29 and 34-37 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims, because none of the references, either alone or in combination, discloses or renders obvious the claims 26-29 and 34-37.
Conclusion
Any response to this Office Action should be faxed to (571) 273-8300, submitted online via the USPTO's Electronic Filing System-Web (EFS-Web) (Registered eFilers only, Registered users of the USPTO's EFS-Web system may submit a response electronically through EFS-Web at https://efs.uspto.gov/TruePassSample/AuthenticateUserLocalEPF.html), or mailed to:
Commissioner for Patents
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Rui Meng Hu whose telephone number is 571-270-1105, email is ruimeng.hu@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday, 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m., EST.
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 on (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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Rui Meng Hu/
R.H./rh
January 21, 2026
/JINSONG HU/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2643