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 Amendment
This communication is in response to the amendment filed 7/9/2026. The amendment has been entered and considered.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 6-12, 25-30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bergstrom et al. “Bergstrom” US 2021/0092690 in view of Lim et al. “Lim” US 2019/0104476.
Regarding claims 1, 25, and 27, Bergstrom teaches a method and medium for reporting a UE capability and a communication apparatus that supports UL MIMO and UL carrier aggregation (Paragraphs 38 and 64 discuss UE capabilities for UL MIMO and paragraphs 41 and 130 teaches a UE utilizing carrier aggregation) comprising a processor and memory configured (Figure 1 and paragraph 150) to execute a pogrom to:
Transmit UL signaling to a network device (Figure 2 is a diagram of functions performed by a UE (10 of Figure 1). The UE generates a capability report (s12) that includes a set of power classes and transmits the capability report to the network node (S14); Paragraphs 52-56. The wireless device can use multiple carriers; Paragraphs 58-60));
Wherein transmitting the UL signaling comprises:
transmitting second signaling to the network device, wherein the second signaling includes second capability information used to indicate the power class of the UE corresponds to each transmitting link in the multi-carrier transmission (Paragraph 53 shows the capability information includes each power class applying to a transmission band. Figures 3-5 show the power classes being applied to each band and the wireless device can use multiple carriers; Paragraphs 58-60. The specific band information is viewed as the second signaling with second capability information. Applicant’s claim nor spec define this second signaling to be a different transmitting message all together than the first, thus the single transmission of claim 1 can include multiple information (i.e. claimed second indication/signaling). The wireless device supports a plurality of transmission bands and can report power classes for different transmission bands; Paragraphs 73-74 (Figures 3-5));
transmitting third signaling to the network device, wherein the third signaling includes third capability information used to indicate the whether the UE supports transmitting links corresponding to different power classes on a band of a multi-carrier transmission (Paragraph 53 shows the capability information includes each power class applying to a transmission band. Figures 3-5 show the power classes being applied to each band and the wireless device can use multiple carriers; Paragraphs 58-60. Thus, one can see from Figures 3-5 that the UE supports transmitting on different power classes with respect to a band. Applicant’s claim nor spec define this third signaling to be a different transmitting message all together than the first, thus the single transmission of claim 1 can include multiple information (i.e. claimed third indication/signaling)); and
wherein the second and third capability indication enable the network device to determine a radio frequency structure of the UE (the power class information that is in the capability information is associated with frequency ranges; Paragraph 30. Thus, the network node would be enabled to determine the RF structure of the UE. The Examiner notes this limitation is on the network node side, thus does not add any patentably weight to what the UE is doing).
Bergstrom does not expressly disclose the use of intra-band contiguous CA; however, Lim teaches UL MIMO and intra-band contiguous CA as shown in Figure 4A; Paragraph 82. Lim further discloses various power classes with respect to UE capabilities for operating bands; Paragraph 197.
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing to modify the teachings of Bergstrom to include intra-band contiguous CA as taught by Lim.
One would be motivated to make the modification such that the system can realize high-speed wireless transmission as taught by Lim; Paragraph 82.
Regarding claims 2 and 29, Bergstrom teaches:
Transmitting first signaling to the network device, wherein the first signaling comprises first capability indication information used to indicate a power class combination supported by the UE in the multi-carrier transmission (Figure 2 is a diagram of functions performed by a UE (10 of Figure 1). The UE generates a capability report (s12) that includes a set of power classes and transmits the capability report to the network node (S14); Paragraphs 52-56. The wireless device can use multiple carriers; Paragraphs 58-60). The wireless device determines a first and second power class applicable to the UE; Paragraph 57. Figures 3-5 show power classes with respect to different band combinations. Thus one can see the transmitted capability report indicates a power class combination supported by the UE).
Regarding claims 3 and 30, Bergstrom teaches the power class combination includes at least two pieces of power class information (Paragraphs 66-72 disclose various combinations of antennas and power levels with respect to power classes. The antennas, power levels and MIMO thresholds are all viewed as pieces of power class information. Figures 7 and 8 are also another example of information in the indication messages with respect to power class conditions)).
Regarding claim 6, Bergstrom teaches determining, based on the power classes corresponding to respective bands in the multi-carrier transmission, whether the UE supports transmitting link corresponding to different power classes on the current band (Figure 3 shows the various bands associated with power classes, thus it is determined the UE supports this information. Further, it appears this limitation is directed towards the function of the network device, thus not adding any functionality to the method of a UE. Assuming this, Figures 9-10 of Bergstrom disclose a base station receiving the capability report (s16) and determining the power class for each association (S22)).
Regarding claims 7, 26, and 28, Bergstrom teaches a method and medium for receiving a UE capability and a communication apparatus that supports UL MIMO and UL carrier aggregation (Paragraphs 38 and 64 discuss UE capabilities for UL MIMO and paragraphs 41 and 130 teaches a UE utilizing carrier aggregation) comprising a processor and memory configured (Figure 1 and paragraph 150) to execute a pogrom to:
receiving UL signaling transmitted by a UE (Figure 2 is a diagram of functions performed by a UE (10 of Figure 1). The UE generates a capability report (s12) that includes a set of power classes and transmits the capability report to the network node (S14); Paragraphs 52-56. The wireless device can use multiple carriers; Paragraphs 58-60));
Wherein receiving the UL signaling comprises:
receiving second signaling from the UE, wherein the second signaling includes second capability information used to indicate the power class of the UE corresponds to each transmitting link in the multi-carrier transmission (Paragraph 53 shows the capability information includes each power class applying to a transmission band. Figures 3-5 show the power classes being applied to each band and the wireless device can use multiple carriers; Paragraphs 58-60. The specific band information is viewed as the second signaling with second capability information. Applicant’s claim nor spec define this second signaling to be a different transmitting message all together than the first, thus the single transmission of claim 1 can include multiple information (i.e. claimed second indication/signaling). The wireless device supports a plurality of transmission bands and can report power classes for different transmission bands; Paragraphs 73-74 (Figures 3-5));
receiving third signaling from the UE, wherein the third signaling includes third capability information used to indicate the whether the UE supports transmitting links corresponding to different power classes on a band of a multi-carrier transmission (Paragraph 53 shows the capability information includes each power class applying to a transmission band. Figures 3-5 show the power classes being applied to each band and the wireless device can use multiple carriers; Paragraphs 58-60. Thus, one can see from Figures 3-5 that the UE supports transmitting on different power classes with respect to a band. Applicant’s claim nor spec define this third signaling to be a different transmitting message all together than the first, thus the single transmission of claim 1 can include multiple information (i.e. claimed third indication/signaling)); and
determine a RF structure of the UE based on the second and third capability indication (the power class information that is in the capability information is associated with frequency ranges; Paragraph 30. Thus, the network node would be enabled to determine the RF structure of the UE).
Bergstrom does not expressly disclose the use of intra-band contiguous CA; however, Lim teaches UL MIMO and intra-band contiguous CA as shown in Figure 4A; Paragraph 82. Lim further discloses various power classes with respect to UE capabilities for operating bands; Paragraph 197.
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing to modify the teachings of Bergstrom to include intra-band contiguous CA as taught by Lim.
One would be motivated to make the modification such that the system can realize high-speed wireless transmission as taught by Lim; Paragraph 82.
Regarding claim 8, Bergstrom teaches:
receiving first signaling transmitted by the UE, wherein the first signaling comprises first capability indication information used to indicate a power class combination supported by the UE in the multi-carrier transmission (Figure 2 is a diagram of functions performed by a UE (10 of Figure 1). The UE generates a capability report (s12) that includes a set of power classes and transmits the capability report to the network node (S14); Paragraphs 52-56. The wireless device can use multiple carriers; Paragraphs 58-60). The wireless device determines a first and second power class applicable to the UE; Paragraph 57. Figures 3-5 show power classes with respect to different band combinations. Thus one can see the transmitted capability report indicates a power class combination supported by the UE).
Regarding claim 9, Bergstrom teaches the power class combination includes at least two pieces of power class information (Paragraphs 66-72 disclose various combinations of antennas and power levels with respect to power classes. The antennas, power levels and MIMO thresholds are all viewed as pieces of power class information. Figures 7 and 8 are also another example of information in the indication messages with respect to power class conditions)).
Regarding claim 10, Bergstrom teaches receiving second signaling transmit by the UE, wherein the second signaling includes second capability information used to indicate the power class of the UE corresponds to each transmitting link in the multi-carrier transmission (Paragraph 53 shows the capability information includes each power class applying to a transmission band. Figures 3-5 show the power classes being applied to each band and the wireless device can use multiple carriers; Paragraphs 58-60. The specific band information is viewed as the second signaling with second capability information. Applicant’s claim nor spec define this second signaling to be a different transmitting message all together than the first, thus the single transmission of claim 1 can include multiple information (i.e. claimed second indication/signaling)).
Regarding claim 11, Bergstrom teaches receiving third signaling transmit by the UE, wherein the third signaling includes third capability information used to indicate the whether the UE supports transmitting links corresponding to different power classes on a band of a multi-carrier transmission (Paragraph 53 shows the capability information includes each power class applying to a transmission band. Figures 3-5 show the power classes being applied to each band and the wireless device can use multiple carriers; Paragraphs 58-60. Thus, one can see from Figures 3-5 that the UE supports transmitting on different power classes with respect to a band. Applicant’s claim nor spec define this third signaling to be a different transmitting message all together than the first, thus the single transmission of claim 1 can include multiple information (i.e. claimed third indication/signaling)).
Regarding claim 12, Bergstrom teaches whether the UE supports the transmitting links corresponding different power classes on the current band in the multi-carrier transmission is determined by the UE based on the different power classes corresponding to respective bands in the multi-carrier transmission (Figure 3 shows the various bands associated with power classes, thus it is determined the UE supports this information. Figures 9-10 of Bergstrom disclose a base station receiving the capability report (s16) and determining the power class for each association (S22). Thus based on the information from the UE (which the UE has determined) the base station knows if the UE can support transmitting links for different power classes).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 7/9/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding the independent claims, Applicant argues Bergstrom does not teach content related to the transmitting link or the power classes corresponding to the transmitting link. Applicant further argues Bergstrom does not teach transmitting links corresponding to different power classes because Bergstrom teaches different power classes associated with the same band. Applicant further argues Bergstrom does not teach multi-carrier transmissions.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Bergstrom the ability to perform carrier aggregation which is for a multi-carrier system (Paragraph 41). Paragraph 130 teaches the system uses multicarrier operations. Paragraph 53 discusses the UE capability information with respect to power classes being applied to a transmission band. In Figures 3-5 one can see there are a plurality of different bands and the power value is different for those bands. Paragraphs 73-74 make clear the UE supports a plurality of transmission bands and reports power classes for different transmission bands. Thus there is a power class associated with each transmission band as claimed. The Examiner notes there is nothing in the claim language that discuses a plurality of transmission links let alone any indication the same band supports transmitting links corresponding to different power classes as argued on pages 15-16.
The Examiner suggests better defining the claims to positively recite the argued information. As written, the claims are merely sending capability information from a UE to a base station, but none of the bands, links, etc. are actually used in anyway nor is the information used for any particular reason.
Applicant further argues Bergstrom does not disclose the radio frequency of the UE is determined by the network device in order to perform power configuration in a more accurate manner.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. First, anything happening by the network device does not add any patentable weight to the claims directed to the UE. Further, the way the claim is written, this is merely intended use as well. Bergstrom shows the UE sending it’s capability information with respect to power classes/frequency information as discussed in the rejection thus the base station has knowledge and can determine the “Frequency structure” of the UE.
The Examiner suggest better defining what is meant by “Frequency structure” as well as define what the network device does in response to receiving the capability information from the UE. Such details to the claim which capture the solution of the instant application would help overcome the cited art of record.
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 BRANDON M RENNER whose telephone number is (571)270-3621. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7am-5pm 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, Derrick Ferris can be reached at (571)-272-3123. 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.
/BRANDON M RENNER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2411
Prosecution Insights