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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of claims 1-12 and 33 in the reply filed on 05/26/2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically traverse or point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
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.
Claim 5 is 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.
Regarding claim 5, the acronyms/abbreviations “CSI” and “SRS” are not defined or written out in the claim, e.g. written as “channel state information (CSI) and sounding reference signal (SRS)”.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claim 5, line 6, has been amended to recite “layer 1 (L1) feedback comprising all of HARQ-ACK, CSI and SRS”. However, the specification does not have support for this amendment to claim 5.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 2, 3, 33************** are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Balasubramanian et al (US 2017/0,265,148; hereinafter Balasubramanian).
Regarding claim 1 and 33, Balasubramanian disclose a method and an apparatus (650; Fig. 6), comprising: at least one processor (656, 659, 668); and at least one memory (660) comprising computer program code, the at least one memory and computer program code configured, with the at least one processor (paragraphs [0014], [0065]-[0067], [0102]), to cause the apparatus at least to perform:
determining, by a user equipment, for a given transmission or service, whether to use a first uplink transmission power or a second uplink transmission power over a radio channel bandwidth, based on obtained configuration information (a UE manage its uplink transmission power at the UE beginning at step 902 (Fig. 9), where a UE determines a SAR margin over a time period, e.g., as described in Fig. 8, based on transmission power used for one or more previous transmissions during the time period, at step 904, the UE adjusts transmission power to be used in transmitting one or more packets on an uplink channel based, at least in part, on the determined SAR margin, at step 906, the UE transmits the one or more packets based on the adjusted transmission power; in one aspect, the UE may adjust the transmission power based, in part, on a priority of data carried in the one or more packets, e.g. when the UE gets high priority traffic in its UL buffer, the UE may reduce the transmitted power on other packets so that less of the SAR margin is used, the UE may adjust the transmission power based on a priority of data carried in the one or more packets includes reducing transmission power to a first uplink transmission power used for transmitting data having a low priority, and increasing transmission power to a second uplink transmission power used for transmitting data having a high priority; paragraphs [0090]-[0092]; Fig. 9),
wherein the user equipment is configured to support the first uplink transmission power associated with a first power limit over the radio channel bandwidth and the second uplink transmission power associated with a second power limit over the radio channel bandwidth, and wherein the second uplink transmission power is equal to or higher than the first uplink transmission power (at step 1002, once the UE determines that high priority traffic is present in the UL buffer, the UE proceeds to 1004 where the UE determines if the high priority application performance is lower than a threshold, e.g., if the traffic is getting a certain number of retransmissions, if so, at 1006, the UE determines if a real-time SAR averaging method is running on the UE side instead of an absolute SAR method, if so the UE applies a penalty to the first uplink transmission power of lower priority traffic channel at step 1008, and applies a boost to the transmit power of higher priority traffic channel at step 1010, i.e. an increase to the second uplink transmission power that exceed an instantaneous SAR limit while maintaining compliance with a SAR limit; paragraphs [0084], [0093]-[0095]; Fig. 10); and
transmitting the transmission or service applying the determined first or second uplink transmission power limit (at step 906, the UE transmits the one or more packets based on the adjusted transmission power; paragraphs [0091]-[0092]; Fig. 9).
Regarding claim 2, Balasubramanian disclose the method of claim 1, wherein, when it is determined to use the second uplink transmission power, the transmitting comprises transmitting the transmission or service over at least one channel configured for carrying the second uplink transmission power associated with the second power limit (the UE applies a boost to the transmit power of higher priority traffic channel at step 1010; ¶ [0095];
Fig. 10).
Regarding claim 3, Balasubramanian disclose the method of claim 1, wherein the determining comprises determining to use the second uplink transmission power when a type of the transmission or service comprises a certain type of transmissions or services that are configured to use the second uplink transmission power associated with the second power limit (adjusting the transmission power based on a priority of data carried in the one or more packets includes increasing transmission power used for transmitting data having a high priority, i.e. an increase to the second uplink transmission power that exceed an instantaneous SAR limit while maintaining compliance with a SAR limit/margin, i.e. second power limit; paras. [0092], [0095]).
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.
Claims 4 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Balasubramanian et al (US 2017/0,265,148) in view of (Skyworks Solutions et al: "UL Duty Cycle Dependent Power Boost for NR” Applicability to HPUE" 3GPP TSG, vol. RAN WG4 NR AH Meeting 2, R4-1706614, Agenda 3.3.3.1, June 27-29, 2017; hereinafter Skyworks Solutions).
Regarding claim 4, Balasubramanian disclose the method of claim 1, wherein the first power limit comprises a first power class and the second power limit comprises a second power class, or wherein one of the first power limit and second power limit comprises a power class and an other of the first power limit and second power limit is derived from the first power limit by applying an offset. In the same field of endeavor, Skyworks Solutions disclose wherein the first power limit comprises a first power class and the second power limit comprises a second power class, or wherein one of the first power limit and second power limit comprises a power class and an other of the first power limit and second power limit is derived from the first power limit by applying an offset (first power limit comprises first power class PC3 without power boosting, and the second power limit comprise a power class PC2 with power boosting; section 2.2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to do so in order provide different power classes with or without power boosting or different power classes before and after power boosting.
Regarding claim 6, Balasubramanian disclose the method of claim 1, further comprising maintaining an average uplink transmission power at or below an upper limit for transmission power, wherein the upper limit is a lower one of the first power limit and the second power limit (maintaining an average transmission power that is compliance with the time averaged SAR power limit where power boosting is performed, or the instantaneous power limit where no power boosting is performed; paragraphs [0084], [0093]-[0094]). Balasubramanian do not explicitly disclose an average transmission power. In the same field of endeavor, Skyworks Solutions disclose maintaining an average uplink transmission power at or below an upper limit for transmission power, wherein the upper limit is a lower one of the first power limit and the second power limit (the total transmitted average power is limited to 23dBm in relation to SAR limit, section 2.2.5). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to do so in order to have the UE transmission power meet the 23dBm SAR standard limit on average.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Balasubramanian et al (US 2017/0,265,148) in view of Krishnamoorthy et al (US 2021/0,337,590; hereinafter Krishnamoorthy).
Regarding claim 5, Balasubramanian disclose the method of claim 1, wherein Balasubramanian do not disclose the certain type of transmissions or services comprise all of: random access messages; radio resource control (RRC) messages; medium access control (MAC) feedback; layer 1 (L1) feedback comprising all of HARQ-ACK, CSI and SRS; session initiation protocol (SIP) messages; and voice over new radio (VoNR) traffic. In the same field of endeavor, Krishnamoorthy disclose the certain type of transmissions or services comprise all of: random access messages (random access signals ¶ [0006]); radio resource control (RRC) messages (RRC connections; ¶ [0034]); medium access control (MAC) feedback (¶ [0034]); layer 1 (L1) feedback (¶ [0032]) comprising all of HARQ-ACK (paras. [0033]-[0034], [0042]), CSI (¶ [0039]) and SRS (¶ [0041]); session initiation protocol (SIP) messages (¶ [0028]); and voice over new radio (VoNR) traffic (¶ [0066]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to do so in order to provide a variety of diverse and different transmissions and/or services for the UE based on each user’s preference of service.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Balasubramanian et al (US 2017/0,265,148) in view of Lu et al (US 2022/0,159,582; hereinafter Lu).
Regarding claim 6, Balasubramanian disclose the method of claim 1, further comprising maintaining an average uplink transmission power at or below an upper limit for transmission power, wherein the upper limit is a lower one of the first power limit and the second power limit (maintaining an average transmission power that is compliance with the time averaged SAR power limit where power boosting is performed, or the instantaneous power limit where no power boosting is performed; paras. [0084], [0093]-[0094]). Balasubramanian do not explicitly disclose an average transmission power. In the same field of endeavor, Lu disclose maintaining an average transmission power within the Plimit associated with the RF exposure limit (paras. [0027], [0137], [0156]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to do so in order to facilitate a consistent level of performance for the UE during the time window associated with the RF exposure limit (Lu;
¶ [0156]).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Balasubramanian et al (US 2017/0,265,148) in view of Papasakellariou et al (US 2011/0,243,039; hereinafter Papasakellariou).
Regarding claim 12, Balasubramanian disclose the method of claim 1, wherein Balasubramanian do not disclose the user equipment is configured to operate in at least one of frequency division duplex (FDD) or time division duplex (TDD) systems. In the same field of endeavor, Papasakellariou disclose the user equipment is configured to operate in at least one of frequency division duplex (FDD) or time division duplex (TDD) systems (¶ [0078]-[0080]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to do so in order to have the UE capable of operating in different modes, for indexing resources for transmission of acknowledgement signals in an uplink of a communication system using time division multiplexing or frequency division duplexing (Papasakellariou; ¶ [0003]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-11 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding claim 7, Balasubramanian and Skyworks Solutions disclose the method of claim 6, wherein the cited prior art fails to further disclose or fairly suggest the maintaining comprises: receiving an uplink grant, from a network node, scheduling at least one of the remainder of the uplink slots with less than the upper limit, with reduced time allocation, or not scheduling some slots at all.
Regarding claim 8, Balasubramanian and Skyworks Solutions disclose the method of claim 6, wherein the cited prior art fails to further disclose or fairly suggest the maintaining comprises: calculating, by the user equipment, a running transmission power average after each slot in which an uplink transmission occurred, considering an entire control window as a reference interval for the transmission power average.
Regarding claim 9, the cited prior art fails to further disclose or fairly suggest the method of claim 8, wherein, when the running transmission power average is less than the upper limit, the transmitting comprises transmitting the transmission or service with the second uplink transmission power applying the second power limit.
Regarding claim 10, the cited prior art fails to further disclose or fairly suggest the method of claim 8, wherein, when the running transmission power average is greater than or equal to the upper limit, the transmitting comprises transmitting the transmission or service with a transmission power associated with a lower power limit than the second power limit or skipping the transmitting of the transmission or service.
Regarding claim 11, the cited prior art fails to further disclose or fairly suggest the method of claim 8, wherein a duration of the control window is set depending on the type of the transmission or service and a size of an evaluation period set for the upper limit.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LANA N LE whose telephone number is (571)272-7891. 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.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Wesley Kim can be reached at (571) 272-7867. 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.
/LANA N LE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2648
Prosecution Insights