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 § 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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 8-10, 15, 16, 19, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Spring et al. (US 2023/0309024) in view of Wang et al. (US 2026/0247301).
Referring to Claim 1, Spring teaches a user equipment (UE) for wireless communication, comprising:
at least one memory; and
at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory (see paragraph 57 which shows the processor 359 and memory 360) and configured to cause the UE to:
transmit an indication of differences in insertion losses between a reference sounding reference signal (SRS) port and each of one or more additional SRS ports (see fig. 7 which shows the process of transmitting an offset matrix correction which includes insertion loss for each antenna).
Spring does not teach transmitting a power headroom report one SRS port in a set of SRS ports that include the reference SRS port and the one or more additional SRS ports. Wang teaches transmitting a power headroom report one SRS port in a set of SRS ports that include the reference SRS port and the one or more additional SRS ports (see ABSTRACT which shows the UE transmitting a power headroom report for each individual antenna port which implies one port for each report). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to provide the teachings of Wang to the device of Spring in order to more accurately determine the ideal transmission power level for each antenna.
Claims 9 and 19 have similar limitations as claim 1.
Referring to Claim 16, Spring teaches a base station for wireless communication, comprising:
at least one memory; and at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory (see processor 375 and memory 376 of base station 310 in fig. 3) and configured to cause the base station to:
receive an indication of differences in insertion losses between a reference sounding reference signal (SRS) port of a user equipment (UE) and each of one or more additional SRS ports of the UE (see fig. 7 which shows the process of receiving from a UE an offset matrix correction which includes insertion loss for each antenna).
Spring does not teach receiving a power headroom report for one SRS port in a set of SRS ports that include the reference SRS port and the one or more additional SRS ports. Wang teaches receiving a power headroom report for one SRS port in a set of SRS ports that include the reference SRS port and the one or more additional SRS ports (see ABSTRACT which shows the UE transmitting a power headroom report for each individual antenna port which implies one port for each report). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to provide the teachings of Wang to the device of Spring in order to more accurately determine the ideal transmission power level for each antenna.
Referring to Claims 2, 10, and 20, Spring also teaches the reference SRS port comprises an SRS port of the UE having a smallest insertion loss (see paragraph 67 which shows an offset coefficient which represents the amount of insertion loss and the reference port determined based on the coefficient).
Referring to Claims 8 and 15, Spring also teaches causing the UE to transmit, in response to a change in SRS port mappings, an updated indication of differences in insertion losses between the reference SRS port and each of one or more additional SRS ports (see paragraph 71 which shows dynamic updating of SRS insertion losses).
Claim(s) 3-7, 11-14, 17, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Spring and Wang and further in view of Sun et al. (US 2025/0267675).
Referring to Claims 3, 11, and 17, Spring and Wang do not teach the one SRS port of the set of SRS ports has a smallest insertion loss. Sun teaches the one SRS port of the set of SRS ports has a smallest insertion loss (see paragraph 51 which shows transmitting one or more headroom reports which implies the inclusion of the transmitting of the headroom report for the SRS port with the smallest insertion loss). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to provide the teachings of Sun to the modified device of Spring and Wang in order to more efficiently manage power distribution within devices.
Referring to Claims 4 and 12, Sun also teaches the power headroom report including a configured maximum power for the one SRS port having the smallest insertion loss (see paragraph 46 which shows the PHR including the max transmission power).
Referring to Claim 5, Sun also teaches the indication of differences in insertion losses comprising differences in insertion losses between the reference SRS port and each of the one or more additional SRS ports (see paragraph 29 which shows the difference in insertion losses between antenna ports). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to provide the teachings of Sun to the modified device of Spring and Wang in order to more efficiently manage power distribution within devices.
Referring to Claim 6, Sun also teaches the indication of differences in insertion losses comprising differences in configured maximum power values between the reference SRS port and each of the one or more additional SRS ports (see paragraph 47 which shows differences between multiple max transmission powers). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to provide the teachings of Sun to the modified device of Spring and Wang in order to more efficiently manage power distribution within devices.
Claims 13 and 18 have similar limitations as claims 5 and 6.
Referring to Claims 7 and 14, Sun also teaches causing the UE to transmit an identity of the reference SRS port (see paragraph 29 which shows the identifying of SRS resources further noting that PHRs transmitted from the UE is implied to also contain the SRS resource identification information). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to provide the teachings of Sun to the modified device of Spring and Wang in order to more efficiently manage power distribution within devices.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 have been 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.
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 EUGENE YUN whose telephone number is (571)272-7860. The examiner can normally be reached 9am-5pm.
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, Wesley Kim can be reached at 5712727867. 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.
/EUGENE YUN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2648
Prosecution Insights