CTNF 18/698,271 CTNF 80319 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on April 10, 2024 and December 17, 2025 have been considered by the Examiner and made of record in the application file. Preliminary Amendment The present Office Action is based upon the original patent application filed on April 03, 2024 as modified by the preliminary amendment also filed on the same date. Claims 13-21 are now pending in the present application. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-12-aia AIA (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. 07-15-03-aia AIA Claim s 13, 17 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Cha et al. (US 2023/0208483, “Cha”) . Regarding claim 13 , Cha teaches UE (user equipment) (FIG. 4A) , comprising: a transceiver to transmit a signal and to receive a signal (FIG. 4A, RFIC 410) ; and a processor to control the transceiver (FIG. 4a, Communication Processor 260) , wherein the transceiver includes two antennas (FIG. 4a, antennas 441, 442) , wherein the maximum output power of the UE is 26 dBm, wherein the processor determines transmission power based on MPR (Maximum Power Reduction) ([0103] “For example, when the power class is PC2, the maximum transmittable power may be determined as a value (e.g., 25 to 27 dBm) in a range configured based on 26 dBm. ” Note: it is well known in the art that 3GPP defines power class 2 (PC2) corresponds to maximum power of 26 dBm, with tolerance of +/- 2dB), wherein the MPR is based on Edge RB allocations, Outer RB allocations and Inner RB allocations (par [0117], table 3 lists MPR values depending on Edge, Outer, Inner RB), wherein the MPR is based on CP (Cyclic Prefix)-OFDM (Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing) (par [0117], table 3 lists modulation schemes including CP-OFDM QPSK, 16, 64 and 256 QAM), wherein the MPR is based on QPSK (quadrature phase-shift keying), 16QAM (Quadrature Amplitude Modulation), 64QAM and 256QAM (par [0117], table 3 lists modulation schemes including CP-OFDM QPSK, 16, 64 and 256 QAM), wherein the transceiver transmits a signal to a base station with the transmission power ([0121] “when the minimum values of P-MAX Power and UE Tx MAX Power are calculated by applying the MPR backoff of <Table 2> and <Table 3> to the UE Tx MAX Power). Regarding claim 17 , Cha teaches a method for performing communication, performed by a UE (user equipment), comprising: determining transmission power based on MPR (Maximum Power Reduction); and transmitting a signal to a base station with the transmission power ([0121] “when the minimum values of P-MAX Power and UE Tx MAX Power are calculated by applying the MPR backoff of <Table 2> and <Table 3> to the UE Tx MAX Power) , wherein the UE includes two antennas (FIG. 4a, antennas 441, 442) , wherein the maximum output power of the UE is 26 dBm ([0103] “For example, when the power class is PC2, the maximum transmittable power may be determined as a value (e.g., 25 to 27 dBm) in a range configured based on 26 dBm. ” Note: it is well known in the art that 3GPP defines power class 2 (PC2) corresponds to maximum power of 26 dBm, with tolerance of +/- 2dB) , wherein the MPR is based on Edge RB allocations, Outer RB allocations and Inner RB allocations (par [0117], table 3 lists MPR values depending on Edge, Outer, Inner RB) , wherein the MPR is based on CP (Cyclic Prefix)-OFDM (Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing) (par [0117], table 3 lists modulation schemes including CP-OFDM QPSK, 16, 64 and 256 QAM) , wherein the MPR is based on QPSK (quadrature phase-shift keying), 16QAM (Quadrature Amplitude Modulation), 64QAM and 256QAM (par [0117], table 3 lists modulation schemes including CP-OFDM QPSK, 16, 64 and 256 QAM) . Regarding claim 21 , Cha teaches a non-volatile computer readable storage medium having recorded instructions, wherein the instructions, based on being executed by one or more processors ([0270]) , cause the one or more processors to: determining transmission power based on MPR (Maximum Power Reduction); and transmitting a signal to a base station with the transmission power ([0121] “when the minimum values of P-MAX Power and UE Tx MAX Power are calculated by applying the MPR backoff of <Table 2> and <Table 3> to the UE Tx MAX Power) , wherein a UE (User Equipment) including the non-volatile computer readable storage medium includes two antennas (FIG. 4a, antennas 441, 442) , wherein the maximum output power of the UE is 26 dBm, wherein the MPR is based on Edge RB allocations, Outer RB allocations and Inner RB allocations (par [0117], table 3 lists MPR values depending on Edge, Outer, Inner RB) , wherein the MPR is based on CP (Cyclic Prefix)-OFDM (Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing) (par [0117], table 3 lists modulation schemes including CP-OFDM QPSK, 16, 64 and 256 QAM) , wherein the MPR is based on QPSK (quadrature phase-shift keying), 16QAM (Quadrature Amplitude Modulation), 64QAM and 256QAM (par [0117], table 3 lists modulation schemes including CP-OFDM QPSK, 16, 64 and 256 QAM) . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA 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. 07-20-02-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 14-16, 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cha in view of “CR for TS 38.101-1 TX diversity requirements” (Huawei, HiSilicon, 3GPPTSG-W4 Meeting #98-e, R4-2102384 cited by IDS filed on December 17, 2025; “R4-2102384”) . Regarding claim 14, Cha teaches claim 13 but does not teach signal is transmitted by modulation scheme of the QPSK, wherein the signal is transmitted via the Edge RB allocations, wherein the MPR is 4.0 dB. or less than 4.0 dB . However, R4-2102384 teaches a change to the standard to eliminate the ambiguity for supporting transparent Tx diversity, in which signal is transmitted by modulation scheme of the QPSK, wherein the signal is transmitted via the Edge RB allocations, wherein the MPR is 4.0 dB. or less than 4.0 dB (Table 6.2.2-2a, list CP-OFDM QPSK having MPR value for Edge RB allocations being ≤ 4 dB) It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the feature signal is transmitted by modulation scheme of the QPSK, wherein the signal is transmitted via the Edge RB allocations, wherein the MPR is 4.0 dB. or less than 4.0 dB, as taught by R4-2102384 in Cha to eliminate the ambiguity for supporting transparent Tx diversity. Regarding claim 15, Cha teaches claim 13 but does not teach wherein the signal is transmitted by modulation scheme of the 16QAM, wherein the signal is transmitted via the Edge RB allocations, wherein the MPR is 4.0 dB. or less than 4.0 dB . However, R4-2102384 teaches a change to the standard to eliminate the ambiguity for supporting transparent Tx diversity, in which wherein the signal is transmitted by modulation scheme of the 16QAM, wherein the signal is transmitted via the Edge RB allocations, wherein the MPR is 4.0 dB. or less than 4.0 dB (Table 6.2.2-2a, list CP-OFDM 16 QAM having MPR value for Edge RB allocations being ≤ 4 dB) It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the feature wherein the signal is transmitted by modulation scheme of the 16QAM, wherein the signal is transmitted via the Edge RB allocations, wherein the MPR is 4.0 dB. or less than 4.0 dB, as taught by R4-2102384 n Cha to eliminate the ambiguity for supporting transparent Tx diversity. Regarding claim 16, Cha teaches claim 13 but does not teach wherein the signal is transmitted by modulation scheme of the 256QAM, wherein the MPR is 8.0 dB. or less than 8.0 dB . However, R4-2102384 teaches a change to the standard to eliminate the ambiguity for supporting transparent Tx diversity, in which wherein the signal is transmitted by modulation scheme of the 256QAM, wherein the MPR is 8.0 dB. or less than 8.0 dB (Table 6.2.2-2a, list CP-OFDM 256 QAM having MPR value for Edge RB allocations being ≤ 6.5 dB. Since MPR ≤ 6.5 it is less than 8.0dB) It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the feature wherein the signal is transmitted by modulation scheme of the 256QAM, wherein the MPR is 8.0 dB. or less than 8.0 dB, as taught by R4-2102384 in Cha to eliminate the ambiguity for supporting transparent Tx diversity. Regarding claim 14, Cha teaches claim 13 but does not teach wherein the signal is transmitted by modulation scheme of the QPSK, wherein the signal is transmitted via the Edge RB allocations, wherein the MPR is 4.0 dB. or less than 4.0 dB . However, R4-2102384 teaches a change to the standard to eliminate the ambiguity for supporting transparent Tx diversity, in which wherein the signal is transmitted by modulation scheme of the QPSK, wherein the signal is transmitted via the Edge RB allocations, wherein the MPR is 4.0 dB. or less than 4.0 dB (Table 6.2.2-2a, list CP-OFDM QPSK having MPR value for Edge RB allocations being ≤ 4 dB) It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the feature wherein the signal is transmitted by modulation scheme of the QPSK, wherein the signal is transmitted via the Edge RB allocations, wherein the MPR is 4.0 dB. or less than 4.0 dB, as taught by R4-2102384 in Cha to eliminate the ambiguity for supporting transparent Tx diversity. Regarding claim 19, Cha teaches claim 17 but does not teach wherein the signal is transmitted by modulation scheme of the 16QAM, wherein the signal is transmitted via the Edge RB allocations, wherein the MPR is 4.0 dB. or less than 4.0 dB . However, R4-2102384 teaches a change to the standard to eliminate the ambiguity for supporting transparent Tx diversity, in which wherein the signal is transmitted by modulation scheme of the 16QAM, wherein the signal is transmitted via the Edge RB allocations, wherein the MPR is 4.0 dB. or less than 4.0 dB (Table 6.2.2-2a, list CP-OFDM 16 QAM having MPR value for Edge RB allocations being ≤ 4 dB) It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the feature wherein the signal is transmitted by modulation scheme of the 16QAM, wherein the signal is transmitted via the Edge RB allocations, wherein the MPR is 4.0 dB. or less than 4.0 dB, as taught by R4-2102384 in Cha to eliminate the ambiguity for supporting transparent Tx diversity. Regarding claim 20, Cha teaches claim 117 but does not teach wherein the signal is transmitted by modulation scheme of the 256QAM, wherein the MPR is 8.0 dB. or less than 8.0 dB . However, R4-2102384 teaches a change to the standard to eliminate the ambiguity for supporting transparent Tx diversity, in which wherein the signal is transmitted by modulation scheme of the 256QAM, wherein the MPR is 8.0 dB. or less than 8.0 dB (Table 6.2.2-2a, list CP-OFDM 256 QAM having MPR value for Edge RB allocations being ≤ 6.5 dB. Since MPR ≤ 6.5 it is less than 8.0dB) It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the feature wherein the signal is transmitted by modulation scheme of the 256QAM, wherein the MPR is 8.0 dB. or less than 8.0 dB, as taught by R4-2102384 Cha to eliminate the ambiguity for supporting transparent Tx diversity . Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. " WF on TxD MPR values ", Skyworks Solutions Inc, 3GPP TSG-RAN WG4 Meeting # 100e, R4-2114753, August 2021, 5 pages, discloses MPR specifications for two TX PC2 based on two PC3 PAs (section 3.2) and 2 TX PC2 ULFPTx MIMO based on two PC2 PAs (section 3.4). Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to QUOC THAI NGOC VU whose telephone number is (571)270-5901. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9:30AM-6:00PM. 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, Rafael Perez-Gutierrez can be reached at 571-272-7915. 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. /QUOC THAI N VU/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2642 Application/Control Number: 18/698,271 Page 2 Art Unit: 2642 Application/Control Number: 18/698,271 Page 3 Art Unit: 2642 Application/Control Number: 18/698,271 Page 4 Art Unit: 2642 Application/Control Number: 18/698,271 Page 5 Art Unit: 2642 Application/Control Number: 18/698,271 Page 6 Art Unit: 2642 Application/Control Number: 18/698,271 Page 7 Art Unit: 2642 Application/Control Number: 18/698,271 Page 8 Art Unit: 2642 Application/Control Number: 18/698,271 Page 9 Art Unit: 2642 Application/Control Number: 18/698,271 Page 10 Art Unit: 2642
Prosecution Insights