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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 07/09/24 has been considered by the examiner.
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 9-10 and 12-14 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 9 recites “The method of claim 1 … lower than a or the PS3 priority.” which indicates that the claims is directed towards either “a PS3 priority” or “the PS3 priority” that indicates antecedence to a preceding limitation by reciting “the PS3 priority”. However, none of the preceding limitation from which the claims are dependent upon recites “a PS3 priority” and as such, the claims lack antecedent basis which renders the claims indefinite as it is unclear to the examiner as to whether the claims should be dependent upon applicant’s claim 7 that recites “a PS3 priority” or if the claims should be dependent upon claim 1 in view of the claims also reciting “a PS3 priority”.
For the purposes of the interpretation and the examination provided below, the examiner will interpret the claims to be dependent upon claim 7 and be rewritten as “lower than the PS3 priority” (i.e. “The method of claim 1 … lower than).
Claim 10 is dependent upon claim 9 and as such are subject to the same rejection for the same reasons as indicated above.
Claim 12 recites “… at least one of … a CSI report and/or a CQI; a positioning measurement report.” which indicates a number of options but fails to explicitly recite the conjunctions of either “and” or “or” between the second to the last option “a CSI report and/or a CQI” and the last option “a positioning measurement report.” which renders the claims indefinite as it is unclear to the examiner whether the conjunctions to be utilizes is directed towards “and” or “or”.
For the purpose of examination and the rejection provided herein, the examiner will interpret the claims to recite “or” in between the second to the last option and the last option (i.e. “… at least one of … a CSI report and/or a CQI; or a positioning measurement report.”).
Claim 13 recites “The method of claim 1, wherein at least one of: the least one UL signal belonging to the or each procedure in the PS1 and the least one UL signal belonging to the or each procedure in the PS2 is performed in a frequency range 2, FR2, …” which indicates antecedence to a preceding limitation by reciting “the PS2”. However, none of the applicant’s previous limitations from which the claims are dependent upon recites “a PS2” which therefore lacks antecedent basis and renders the claims indefinite as it is unclear to the examiner as to what the relationship of the claimed “the PS2” is directed towards.
A review of applicant’s claims shows that claim 9 recites “a second set of procedures, PS2” and as such, for the purpose of the examination and the rejection seen below, the examiner will interpret the claims to be dependent upon claim 9 instead of the current claim 1 (“The method of claim 9, wherein at least one of: …”).
Claim 14 recites “The method of claim 1, wherein a signal belonging to the UTPM procedure or each procedure in the PS3 is a radio detection and ranging signal, radar signal and/or wherein the UTPM procedure or each procedure in the PS3 uses in the at least one UL gap a frequency range outside of at least one of: …” which indicates a number of options corresponding to “a radio detection and ranging signal” and “radar signal” and then proceeds to continue with new limitations but fails to explicitly recite the conjunctions of either “and” or “or” between the second to the first option “a radio detection and ranging signal” and the last option “radar signal” which renders the claims indefinite as it is unclear to the examiner whether the conjunctions to be utilizes is directed towards “and” or “or”.
In addition, Claim 14 recites “The method of claim 1, … or each procedure in the PS3 is a radio detection and ranging signal, radar signal … each procedure in the PS2.” which indicates antecedence to a preceding limitation by reciting “the PS2” and “the PS3”. However, none of the applicant’s previous limitations from which the claims are dependent upon recites “a PS2” and “a PS3” which therefore lacks antecedent basis and renders the claims indefinite as it is unclear to the examiner as to what the relationship of the claimed “the PS2” and “the PS3” is directed towards.
A review of applicant’s claims shows that claim 9 recites “a second set of procedures, PS2” and “the PS3” as such, for the purpose of the examination and the rejection seen below, the examiner will interpret the claims to be dependent upon claim 9 instead of the current claim 1 and the examiner will interpret the claims to recite “or” in between the first option and the last option (i.e. “The method of claim 9 wherein a signal belonging to the UTPM procedure or each procedure in the PS3 is a radio detection and ranging signal, or radar signal”).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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)(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.
Claim(s) 1, 3-4, 6 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by NIU et al. (US Patent Publication 2024/0032022 herein after referenced as Niu).
Regarding claim 1, Niu discloses:
A method performed by a radio device (Niu, Fig. 4 & [0056] discloses FIG. 4 illustrates an operation flow/algorithmic structure 400 in accordance with some embodiments. The operation flow/algorithmic structure 400 may be performed or implemented by a UE (i.e. reads on by a radio device) such as, for example, UE 102, 104, 106, or 800; or components thereof, for example, baseband processor 804A).
for an uplink transmit power management (UTPM) procedure, the method comprising or initiating: determining a timing relation between a timing of at least one uplink (UL) gap for the UTPM procedure and a timing of at least one UL signal belonging to a procedure in a first set of procedures (PS1); (Niu, [0059]-[0060] discloses The operation flow/algorithmic structure 400 may include, at block 412, determining a relative priority (i.e. reads on determining a timing relation) of performing a BPS transmission (i.e. reads on for the UTPM procedure) during the first uplink gap slot (i.e. reads on between a timing of at least one UL gap) and transmitting the signal in the first uplink gap slot (i.e. reads on a timing of at least one UL signal belonging to a procedure in a PS1) and discloses structure 400 may include determining that the signal indicated by the first scheduling information is a channel quality indication CQI signal, and dropping the CQI signal and performing the BPS transmission during the first uplink gap slot based on a determination that the relative priority prioritizes performing the BPS transmission over transmitting the CQI signal; Niu, [0034] discloses Transmit power management may benefit from periodic monitoring of information from the surrounding environment e.g., body proximity sensing or BPS. Claim 3 recites “wherein the UTPM procedure comprises at least one of … a proximity detection or body proximity sensing (BPS) at the radio device”; Claim 12 recites “… wherein the at least one UL signal belonging to the respective procedure in the PS1 comprises or is indicative of at least one of: … a CSI report and/or a CQI; …”).
and selectively using the at least one UL gap for the UTPM procedure depending on the determined timing relation (Niu, [0060] discloses structure 400 may include determining that the signal indicated by the first scheduling information is a channel quality indication CQI signal, and dropping the CQI signal and performing the BPS transmission (i.e. reads on for the UTPM procedure) during the first uplink gap slot (i.e. reads on selectively using the at least one UL gap) based on a determination that the relative priority (i.e. reads on depending on the determined timing relation) prioritizes performing the BPS transmission over transmitting the CQI signal).
Regarding claim 3, Niu discloses:
The method of claim 1, (see claim 1).
wherein the UTPM procedure comprises at least one of: (Niu, [0060] discloses structure 400 may include determining that the signal indicated by the first scheduling information is a channel quality indication CQI signal, and dropping the CQI signal and performing the BPS transmission during the first uplink gap slot based on a determination that the relative priority prioritizes performing the BPS transmission over transmitting the CQI signal; Niu, Fig. 4 & [0056] discloses FIG. 4 illustrates an operation flow/algorithmic structure 400 in accordance with some embodiments. The operation flow/algorithmic structure 400 may be performed or implemented by a UE such as, for example, UE 102, 104, 106, or 800; or components thereof, for example, baseband processor 804A; Niu, [0034] discloses Transmit power management may benefit from periodic monitoring of information from the surrounding environment e.g., body proximity sensing or BPS. EXAMINER’S NOTE: The examiner notes that the claims are written in an alternative limitation format requiring and contingent on the selection of only one of various alternative options presented and as such the non-selected alternative options are crossed out (i.e. the limitations reciting “calibration or self-calibration of a power amplifier (PA) of the radio device;” and “a power management maximum power reduction (P-MPR) of a transmit power of the radio device or a P-MPR that depends on a proximity of a body to the radio device”) and are not given patentable weight as being directed towards limitations that are not required to be performed as is indicated in MPEP 2143.03 that recites “Language that suggests or makes a feature or step optional but does not require that feature or step does not limit the scope of a claim under the broadest reasonable claim interpretation. In addition, when a claim requires selection of an element from a list of alternatives, the prior art teaches the element if one of the alternatives is taught by the prior art” and in MPEP 2111.04, Section ll that recites “The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition precedent are not met”).
Regarding claim 4, Niu discloses:
The method of claim 1, (see claim 1).
wherein the at least one UL gap for performing the UMTP is a gap in an UL transmission of the radio device (Niu, [0059]-[0060] discloses The operation flow/algorithmic structure 400 may include, at block 412, determining a relative priority of performing a BPS transmission during the first uplink gap slot and transmitting the signal in the first uplink gap slot and discloses structure 400 may include determining that the signal indicated by the first scheduling information is a channel quality indication CQI signal, and dropping the CQI signal and performing the BPS transmission during the first uplink gap slot based on a determination that the relative priority prioritizes performing the BPS transmission over transmitting the CQI signal; Niu, [0035] discloses The gNB does not expect to receive an UL transmission from the UE during the UL gap).
Regarding claim 6, Niu discloses:
The method of claim 1, (see claim 1).
wherein the radio device determines whether or not to use the at least one UL gap based on the determined timing relation (Niu, [0059]-[0060] discloses The operation flow/algorithmic structure 400 may include, at block 412, determining a relative priority of performing a BPS transmission during the first uplink gap slot and transmitting the signal in the first uplink gap slot and discloses structure 400 may include determining that the signal indicated by the first scheduling information is a channel quality indication CQI signal, and dropping the CQI signal and performing the BPS transmission during the first uplink gap slot based on a determination that the relative priority prioritizes performing the BPS transmission over transmitting the CQI signal).
Regarding claim 12, Niu discloses:
The method of claim 1, (see claim 1).
or is indicative of at least one of: (Niu, [0060] discloses structure 400 may include determining that the signal indicated by the first scheduling information is a channel quality indication CQI signal, and dropping the CQI signal and performing the BPS transmission during the first uplink gap slot based on a determination that the relative priority prioritizes performing the BPS transmission over transmitting the CQI signal. EXAMINER’S NOTE: The examiner notes that the claims are written in an alternative limitation format requiring and contingent on the selection of only one of various alternative options presented and as such the non-selected alternative options are crossed out (i.e. the limitations reciting “wherein the PS1 comprises at least one of the following procedures: a cell change; a cell selection; a handover, HO; a dual active protocol stack HO, DAPS HO, a conditional HO, CHO; transmitting emergency information; transmitting an UL signal related to a beam failure recovery; a random access procedure during a cell change; a random access channel, RACH, transmission for acquisition of synchronization; a random access channel, RACH, transmission upon expiry of a time alignment timer, TAT; a radio resource control, RRC, reestablishment; an RRC connection release; activation of a secondary cell, SCell; deactivation of an SCell; dormancy of an SCell; transmitting a channel state information, CSI, report, and/or a channel quality indicator, CQI; transmission of positioning measurement report; UL transmission after or based on the outcome of a clear channel assessment, CCA, procedure on a carrier subject to CCA; and attempting transmission in an unlicensed carrier, and/or” and “emergency information; a beam failure recovery; a random access preamble, RAP; a RAP for acquisition of synchronization; an RRC reestablishment request; a response to a command for activation of an SCell; a CSI report and/or” and “or a positioning measurement report”) and are not given patentable weight as being directed towards limitations that are not required to be performed as is indicated in MPEP 2143.03 that recites “Language that suggests or makes a feature or step optional but does not require that feature or step does not limit the scope of a claim under the broadest reasonable claim interpretation. In addition, when a claim requires selection of an element from a list of alternatives, the prior art teaches the element if one of the alternatives is taught by the prior art” and in MPEP 2111.04, Section ll that recites “The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition precedent are not met”).
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) 5, 7-11, 13, 15-17, 24 and 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over NIU et al. (US Patent Publication 2024/0032022 herein after referenced as Niu).
Regarding claim 5, Niu discloses:
The method of claim 1, (see claim 1).
Niu discloses in one embodiment that a body proximity sensing BPS transmission is sent in the UL gap based on the relative priority to an uplink transmission but fails to explicitly recite in the same embodiment the uplink transmission being sent instead of the BPS transmission and therefore fails to disclose in the same embodiment, the limitations of “wherein the radio device transmits an UL signal when the at least one UL gap is not used for the UTPM procedure.”
In a different embodiment, Niu discloses:
wherein the radio device transmits an UL signal when the at least one UL gap is not used for the UTPM procedure (Niu, [0046] discloses In a second example of the option to prioritize transmission of the P/SP configured signal, UE 102/104/106 may prioritize transmission of the P/SP configured signal by deferring the UL gap slot. In this case, it may be desired that UL slots with periodic and SP transmission e.g., CQI, SRS are not counted as static UL slots. Due to the number of UL signals that may be configured in the UL channels, it is possible that at least one opportunity for transmission of a P/SP configured signal has been scheduled for every static UL slot. It may be desired to apply this second example only to selected P/SP configured signals. In such case, it may be desired to apply another relative priority to other P/SP configured signals e.g., as described below. FIG. 3B illustrates an example of prioritizing transmission of a P/SP configured signal by deferring the UL gap slot in accordance with some embodiments. Such a rule may be implemented to allow the UE to defer a UL gap slot to a UL slot that occurs beyond the gap length of the UL gap configuration. In the example shown in FIG. 3B, prioritization of the P/SP configured signals continues beyond the UL gap configuration, and the two deferred gap slots occur two and four UL slots, respectively, after the last slot of the UL gap configuration; Niu, [0048] discloses It may be desired for a UE to apply more than one relative priority between BPS transmissions and UL transmissions that are P/SP configured signals. The relative priority that is to be applied to a particular collision may be based, for example, on the type of P/SP configured signal that is scheduled for transmission in the UL gap slot. In one such example, a rule to prioritize transmission of the P/SP configured signal by puncturing the UL gap configuration e.g., as described above with reference to FIG. 3A is applied e.g., by a UE 102/104/106 when the P/SP configured signal is a PUCCH-BFR; a rule to prioritize transmission of the P/SP configured signal by deferring the UL gap slot e.g., as described above with reference to FIG. 3B is applied when the P/SP configured signal is a HARQ-ACK for DL SPS transmission; and a rule to prioritize the BPS transmission e.g., as described above with reference to FIG. 3C is applied for other P/SP configured signals. Other selections among the relative priorities as described above e.g., based on the type of P/SP configured signal that is scheduled for transmission in the UL gap slot may also be implemented).
Therefore, at the time before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Niu to incorporate the teachings of the different embodiments for the purpose of conforming to the intent of the invention to modify and combine the various different embodiment (Niu, [0143]-[0144]) to make the system more dynamic and adaptable by providing the system with various different alternatives in design and functionality, thereby allowing the system to handle a number of various different combination of specific design structure and scenarios and preventing the system from being limited to a single specific design structure and scenario and furthermore, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize based on the guidelines to rationales supporting a conclusion of obviousness seen on MPEP 2143, that the modification would involve use of a simple substitution of one known element and base device (i.e. performing a process of an embodiment of transmitting either a BPS transmission or an UL transmission in an UL gap based on a determination of relative priority as taught by Niu) with another known element and comparable device utilizing a known technique (i.e. performing a process of a similar embodiment of an embodiment of transmitting either a BPS transmission or an UL transmission in an UL gap based on a determination of relative priority with additional and/or alternative features and functionalities of the other embodiments as taught by Niu) to improve the similar devices in the same way and to obtain the predictable result of the system performing a process of an embodiment of an embodiment of transmitting either a BPS transmission or an UL transmission in an UL gap based on a determination of relative priority (i.e. as taught by Niu) and is dependent upon the specific intended use, design incentives, needs and requirements (i.e. such as due to teachings of a known standard, current technology, conservation of resources, personal preferences, economic considerations, etc.) of the user and the system as has been established in MPEP 2144.04.
Regarding claim 7, Niu discloses:
The method of claim 1, (see claim 1).
Niu discloses in one embodiment that a body proximity sensing BPS transmission is sent in the UL gap based on the relative priority to an uplink transmission but fails to explicitly recite in the same embodiment the uplink transmission having different priorities with other uplink transmission and therefore fails to disclose in the same embodiment, the limitations of “wherein the PS1 or each procedure in the PS1 or the at least one UL signal belonging to the procedure in the PS1 is associated with a PS1 priority that is higher than a PS3 priority.”
In a different embodiment, Niu discloses:
wherein the PS1 or each procedure in the PS1 or the at least one UL signal belonging to the procedure in the PS1 is associated with a PS1 priority that is higher than a PS3 priority (Niu, [0046] discloses In a second example of the option to prioritize transmission of the P/SP configured signal, UE 102/104/106 may prioritize transmission of the P/SP configured signal by deferring the UL gap slot. In this case, it may be desired that UL slots with periodic and SP transmission e.g., CQI, SRS are not counted as static UL slots. Due to the number of UL signals that may be configured in the UL channels, it is possible that at least one opportunity for transmission of a P/SP configured signal has been scheduled for every static UL slot. It may be desired to apply this second example only to selected P/SP configured signals. In such case, it may be desired to apply another relative priority to other P/SP configured signals e.g., as described below. FIG. 3B illustrates an example of prioritizing transmission of a P/SP configured signal by deferring the UL gap slot in accordance with some embodiments. Such a rule may be implemented to allow the UE to defer a UL gap slot to a UL slot that occurs beyond the gap length of the UL gap configuration. In the example shown in FIG. 3B, prioritization of the P/SP configured signals continues beyond the UL gap configuration, and the two deferred gap slots occur two and four UL slots, respectively, after the last slot of the UL gap configuration; Niu, [0048] discloses It may be desired for a UE to apply more than one relative priority between BPS transmissions and UL transmissions that are P/SP configured signals. The relative priority that is to be applied to a particular collision may be based, for example, on the type of P/SP configured signal that is scheduled for transmission in the UL gap slot. In one such example, a rule to prioritize transmission of the P/SP configured signal by puncturing the UL gap configuration e.g., as described above with reference to FIG. 3A is applied e.g., by a UE 102/104/106 when the P/SP configured signal is a PUCCH-BFR; a rule to prioritize transmission of the P/SP configured signal by deferring the UL gap slot e.g., as described above with reference to FIG. 3B is applied when the P/SP configured signal is a HARQ-ACK for DL SPS transmission; and a rule to prioritize the BPS transmission e.g., as described above with reference to FIG. 3C is applied for other P/SP configured signals. Other selections among the relative priorities as described above e.g., based on the type of P/SP configured signal that is scheduled for transmission in the UL gap slot may also be implemented).
Therefore, at the time before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Niu to incorporate the teachings of the different embodiments for the purpose of conforming to the intent of the invention to modify and combine the various different embodiment (Niu, [0143]-[0144]) to make the system more dynamic and adaptable by providing the system with various different alternatives in design and functionality, thereby allowing the system to handle a number of various different combination of specific design structure and scenarios and preventing the system from being limited to a single specific design structure and scenario and furthermore, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize based on the guidelines to rationales supporting a conclusion of obviousness seen on MPEP 2143, that the modification would involve use of a simple substitution of one known element and base device (i.e. performing a process of an embodiment of transmitting either a BPS transmission or an UL transmission in an UL gap based on a determination of relative priority as taught by Niu) with another known element and comparable device utilizing a known technique (i.e. performing a process of a similar embodiment of an embodiment of transmitting either a BPS transmission or an UL transmission in an UL gap based on a determination of relative priority with additional and/or alternative features and functionalities of the other embodiments as taught by Niu) to improve the similar devices in the same way and to obtain the predictable result of the system performing a process of an embodiment of an embodiment of transmitting either a BPS transmission or an UL transmission in an UL gap based on a determination of relative priority (i.e. as taught by Niu) and is dependent upon the specific intended use, design incentives, needs and requirements (i.e. such as due to teachings of a known standard, current technology, conservation of resources, personal preferences, economic considerations, etc.) of the user and the system as has been established in MPEP 2144.04.
Regarding claim 8, Niu discloses:
The method of claim 7 (see claim 7).
wherein the radio device cancels the at least one UL gap and/or transmits the at least one UL signal belonging to the procedure in the PS1 in the at least one UL gap, if at least one of the following conditions is fulfilled: if the at least one UL signal belonging to the procedure in the PS1 overlaps in time with the at least one UL gap; if the at least one UL gap occurs during the procedure in the PS1; (Niu, [0048] discloses It may be desired for a UE to apply more than one relative priority between BPS transmissions and UL transmissions that are P/SP configured signals. The relative priority that is to be applied to a particular collision may be based, for example, on the type of P/SP configured signal that is scheduled for transmission in the UL gap slot. In one such example, a rule to prioritize transmission of the P/SP configured signal by puncturing the UL gap configuration e.g., as described above with reference to FIG. 3A is applied e.g., by a UE 102/104/106 when the P/SP configured signal is a PUCCH-BFR; a rule to prioritize transmission of the P/SP configured signal by deferring the UL gap slot e.g., as described above with reference to FIG. 3B is applied when the P/SP configured signal is a HARQ-ACK for DL SPS transmission; and a rule to prioritize the BPS transmission e.g., as described above with reference to FIG. 3C is applied for other P/SP configured signals. Other selections among the relative priorities as described above e.g., based on the type of P/SP configured signal that is scheduled for transmission in the UL gap slot may also be implemented; Niu, [0059]-[0060] discloses The operation flow/algorithmic structure 400 may include, at block 412, determining a relative priority of performing a BPS transmission during the first uplink gap slot and transmitting the signal in the first uplink gap slot and discloses structure 400 may include determining that the signal indicated by the first scheduling information is a channel quality indication CQI signal, and dropping the CQI signal and performing the BPS transmission during the first uplink gap slot based on a determination that the relative priority prioritizes performing the BPS transmission over transmitting the CQI signal. EXAMINER’S NOTE: The examiner notes that the claims are written in an alternative limitation format requiring and contingent on the selection of only one of various alternative options presented and as such the non-selected alternative options are crossed out (i.e. the limitations reciting “and if the at least one UL signal belonging to the procedure in the PS1 and the UL gap are close in time to each other or are closer in time to each other than a predefined threshold.” ) and are not given patentable weight as being directed towards limitations that are not required to be performed as is indicated in MPEP 2143.03 that recites “Language that suggests or makes a feature or step optional but does not require that feature or step does not limit the scope of a claim under the broadest reasonable claim interpretation. In addition, when a claim requires selection of an element from a list of alternatives, the prior art teaches the element if one of the alternatives is taught by the prior art” and in MPEP 2111.04, Section ll that recites “The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition precedent are not met”).
Regarding claim 9, Niu discloses:
The method of claim 7, (see claim 7).
wherein the radio device performs, or is configured to perform, one or more procedures in a second set of procedures, PS2, wherein each procedure in the PS2 comprises transmitting at least one UL signal belonging to the respective procedure in the PS2, and wherein a PS2 priority is lower than the PS1 priority (Niu, [0048] discloses It may be desired for a UE to apply more than one relative priority between BPS transmissions and UL transmissions that are P/SP configured signals. The relative priority that is to be applied to a particular collision may be based, for example, on the type of P/SP configured signal that is scheduled for transmission in the UL gap slot. In one such example, a rule to prioritize transmission of the P/SP configured signal by puncturing the UL gap configuration e.g., as described above with reference to FIG. 3A is applied e.g., by a UE 102/104/106 when the P/SP configured signal is a PUCCH-BFR; a rule to prioritize transmission of the P/SP configured signal by deferring the UL gap slot e.g., as described above with reference to FIG. 3B is applied when the P/SP configured signal is a HARQ-ACK for DL SPS transmission; and a rule to prioritize the BPS transmission e.g., as described above with reference to FIG. 3C is applied for other P/SP configured signals. Other selections among the relative priorities as described above e.g., based on the type of P/SP configured signal that is scheduled for transmission in the UL gap slot may also be implemented; Niu, [0105] discloses cause the UE to determine that the signal indicated by the first scheduling information is a SRS; and drop the SRS and perform the BPS transmission during the first uplink gap slot based on a determination that the relative priority prioritizes performing the BPS transmission over transmitting the SRS; Niu, [0108]-[0109] discloses cause the UE to determine that the second signal indicated by the second scheduling information is a BFR signal to be transmitted on a PUCCH; and transmit the BFR signal during the second uplink gap slot based on a determination that the second relative priority prioritizes transmitting the BFR signal over performing the BPS transmission and discloses cause the UE to determine that the second signal indicated by the second scheduling information is a HARQ-ACK for a DL SPS transmission; and transmit the HARQ ACK during the second uplink gap slot based on a determination that the second relative priority prioritizes transmitting the HARQ ACK over performing the BPS transmission. EXAMINER’S NOTE: The examiner notes that the claims are written in an alternative limitation format requiring and contingent on the selection of only one of various alternative options presented and as such the non-selected alternative options are crossed out (i.e. the limitations reciting “and/or lower than a or the PS3 priority”) and are not given patentable weight as being directed towards limitations that are not required to be performed as is indicated in MPEP 2143.03 that recites “Language that suggests or makes a feature or step optional but does not require that feature or step does not limit the scope of a claim under the broadest reasonable claim interpretation. In addition, when a claim requires selection of an element from a list of alternatives, the prior art teaches the element if one of the alternatives is taught by the prior art” and in MPEP 2111.04, Section ll that recites “The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition precedent are not met”).
Regarding claim 10, Niu discloses:
The method of claim 9, (see claim 9).
wherein the radio device performs the UTPM procedure at least one of the following conditions is fulfilled: if the at least one UL signal belonging to the procedure in the PS2 overlaps in time with the at least one UL gap; if the at least one UL gap occurs during the procedure in the PS2; (Niu, [0048] discloses It may be desired for a UE to apply more than one relative priority between BPS transmissions and UL transmissions that are P/SP configured signals. The relative priority that is to be applied to a particular collision may be based, for example, on the type of P/SP configured signal that is scheduled for transmission in the UL gap slot. In one such example, a rule to prioritize transmission of the P/SP configured signal by puncturing the UL gap configuration e.g., as described above with reference to FIG. 3A is applied e.g., by a UE 102/104/106 when the P/SP configured signal is a PUCCH-BFR; a rule to prioritize transmission of the P/SP configured signal by deferring the UL gap slot e.g., as described above with reference to FIG. 3B is applied when the P/SP configured signal is a HARQ-ACK for DL SPS transmission; and a rule to prioritize the BPS transmission e.g., as described above with reference to FIG. 3C is applied for other P/SP configured signals. Other selections among the relative priorities as described above e.g., based on the type of P/SP configured signal that is scheduled for transmission in the UL gap slot may also be implemented; Niu, [0059]-[0060] discloses The operation flow/algorithmic structure 400 may include, at block 412, determining a relative priority of performing a BPS transmission during the first uplink gap slot and transmitting the signal in the first uplink gap slot and discloses structure 400 may include determining that the signal indicated by the first scheduling information is a channel quality indication CQI signal, and dropping the CQI signal and performing the BPS transmission during the first uplink gap slot based on a determination that the relative priority prioritizes performing the BPS transmission over transmitting the CQI signal. EXAMINER’S NOTE: The examiner notes that the claims are written in an alternative limitation format requiring and contingent on the selection of only one of various alternative options presented and as such the non-selected alternative options are crossed out (i.e. the limitations reciting “or one or more UTPM procedures in the PS3 and/or drops or postpones the transmission of the at least one UL signal belonging to a procedure in the PS2 in the at least one UL gap” and “and if the at least one UL signal belonging to the procedure in the PS2 and the UL gap are close in time to each other or are closer in time to each other than a predefined threshold.” ) and are not given patentable weight as being directed towards limitations that are not required to be performed as is indicated in MPEP 2143.03 that recites “Language that suggests or makes a feature or step optional but does not require that feature or step does not limit the scope of a claim under the broadest reasonable claim interpretation. In addition, when a claim requires selection of an element from a list of alternatives, the prior art teaches the element if one of the alternatives is taught by the prior art” and in MPEP 2111.04, Section ll that recites “The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition precedent are not met”).
Regarding claim 11, Niu discloses:
The method of claim 7, (see claim 7).
at least one of, or a third set of procedures, PS3, comprising at least one of: (Niu, [0046] discloses In a second example of the option to prioritize transmission of the P/SP configured signal, UE 102/104/106 may prioritize transmission of the P/SP configured signal by deferring the UL gap slot. In this case, it may be desired that UL slots with periodic and SP transmission e.g., CQI, SRS are not counted as static UL slots. Due to the number of UL signals that may be configured in the UL channels, it is possible that at least one opportunity for transmission of a P/SP configured signal has been scheduled for every static UL slot. It may be desired to apply this second example only to selected P/SP configured signals. In such case, it may be desired to apply another relative priority to other P/SP configured signals e.g., as described below. Fig. 3B illustrates an example of prioritizing transmission of a P/SP configured signal by deferring the UL gap slot in accordance with some embodiments. Such a rule may be implemented to allow the UE to defer a UL gap slot to a UL slot that occurs beyond the gap length of the UL gap configuration. In the example shown in FIG. 3B, prioritization of the P/SP configured signals continues beyond the UL gap configuration, and the two deferred gap slots occur two and four UL slots, respectively, after the last slot of the UL gap configuration; Niu, [0048] discloses It may be desired for a UE to apply more than one relative priority between BPS transmissions and UL transmissions that are P/SP configured signals. The relative priority that is to be applied to a particular collision may be based, for example, on the type of P/SP configured signal that is scheduled for transmission in the UL gap slot. In one such example, a rule to prioritize transmission of the P/SP configured signal by puncturing the UL gap configuration e.g., as described above with reference to FIG. 3A is applied e.g., by a UE 102/104/106 when the P/SP configured signal is a PUCCH-BFR; a rule to prioritize transmission of the P/SP configured signal by deferring the UL gap slot e.g., as described above with reference to FIG. 3B is applied when the P/SP configured signal is a HARQ-ACK for DL SPS transmission; and a rule to prioritize the BPS transmission e.g., as described above with reference to FIG. 3C is applied for other P/SP configured signals. Other selections among the relative priorities as described above e.g., based on the type of P/SP configured signal that is scheduled for transmission in the UL gap slot may also be implemented; Niu, [0059]-[0060] discloses The operation flow/algorithmic structure 400 may include, at block 412, determining a relative priority of performing a BPS transmission during the first uplink gap slot and transmitting the signal in the first uplink gap slot and discloses structure 400 may include determining that the signal indicated by the first scheduling information is a channel quality indication CQI signal, and dropping the CQI signal and performing the BPS transmission during the first uplink gap slot based on a determination that the relative priority prioritizes performing the BPS transmission over transmitting the CQI signal. EXAMINER’S NOTE: The examiner notes that the claims are written in an alternative limitation format requiring and contingent on the selection of only one of various alternative options presented and as such the non-selected alternative options are crossed out (i.e. the limitations reciting “wherein the PS3 priority is associated with at least one or each of: the at least one UL gap; the ULGP; and the one or more UL gaps of the ULGP, or” and “the UTPM procedure; the UTPM procedure performed during UL gaps; and a procedure that is related to the UTPM and/or” ) and are not given patentable weight as being directed towards limitations that are not required to be performed as is indicated in MPEP 2143.03 that recites “Language that suggests or makes a feature or step optional but does not require that feature or step does not limit the scope of a claim under the broadest reasonable claim interpretation. In addition, when a claim requires selection of an element from a list of alternatives, the prior art teaches the element if one of the alternatives is taught by the prior art” and in MPEP 2111.04, Section ll that recites “The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition precedent are not met”).
Regarding claim 13, Niu discloses:
The method of claim 9, (see claim 9).
wherein at least one of: the least one UL signal belonging to the or each procedure in the PS1 and the least one UL signal belonging to the or each procedure in the PS2 is performed in a frequency range 2, FR2, (Niu, [0026] discloses Techniques for determining priority between body proximity sensing transmissions and other transmissions by a UE e.g., in FR2 are described; Niu, [0033] discloses For implementing such extension, it may be desirable to leverage Frequency Range 2 FR2 design to the extent possible; Niu, [0048] discloses It may be desired for a UE to apply more than one relative priority between BPS transmissions and UL transmissions that are P/SP configured signals. The relative priority that is to be applied to a particular collision may be based, for example, on the type of P/SP configured signal that is scheduled for transmission in the UL gap slot. In one such example, a rule to prioritize transmission of the P/SP configured signal by puncturing the UL gap configuration e.g., as described above with reference to FIG. 3A is applied e.g., by a UE 102/104/106 when the P/SP configured signal is a PUCCH-BFR; a rule to prioritize transmission of the P/SP configured signal by deferring the UL gap slot e.g., as described above with reference to FIG. 3B is applied when the P/SP configured signal is a HARQ-ACK for DL SPS transmission; and a rule to prioritize the BPS transmission e.g., as described above with reference to FIG. 3C is applied for other P/SP configured signals. Other selections among the relative priorities as described above e.g., based on the type of P/SP configured signal that is scheduled for transmission in the UL gap slot may also be implemented. EXAMINER’S NOTE: The examiner notes that the claims are written in an alternative limitation format requiring and contingent on the selection of only one of various alternative options presented and as such the non-selected alternative options are crossed out (i.e. the limitations reciting “or in a frequency range from 24250 MHz to 71000 MHz, or in a frequency range FR2-1, or in a frequency range from 24250 MHz to 52600 MHz, or in a frequency range FR2-2, or a frequency range from 52600 MHz to 71000 MHz, or in millimeter wave band, or in a frequency range 3, FR3, or in a frequency range from 7125 MHz and 24250 MHz.”) and are not given patentable weight as being directed towards limitations that are not required to be performed as is indicated in MPEP 2143.03 that recites “Language that suggests or makes a feature or step optional but does not require that feature or step does not limit the scope of a claim under the broadest reasonable claim interpretation. In addition, when a claim requires selection of an element from a list of alternatives, the prior art teaches the element if one of the alternatives is taught by the prior art” and in MPEP 2111.04, Section ll that recites “The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition precedent are not met”).
Regarding claim 15, Niu discloses:
The method of claim 1, (see claim 1).
Niu discloses in one embodiment that a body proximity sensing BPS transmission is sent in the UL gap based on the relative priority to an uplink transmission but fails to explicitly recite in the same embodiment the uplink transmission being sent to a network node and therefore fails to disclose in the same embodiment, the limitations of “wherein the UL signal is transmitted, or is to be transmitted, from the radio device to a network node.”
In a different embodiment, Niu discloses:
wherein the UL signal is transmitted, or is to be transmitted, from the radio device to a network node (Niu, [0031] discloses A UE 102/104/106 may use a Physical Uplink Control Channel PUCCH to transmit uplink control information UCI to the access node 108, which may include, for example, hybrid-automatic repeat request HARQ acknowledgements, scheduling requests, or periodic and semi-persistent channel state information CSI reports; Niu, [0048] discloses It may be desired for a UE to apply more than one relative priority between BPS transmissions and UL transmissions that are P/SP configured signals. The relative priority that is to be applied to a particular collision may be based, for example, on the type of P/SP configured signal that is scheduled for transmission in the UL gap slot. In one such example, a rule to prioritize transmission of the P/SP configured signal by puncturing the UL gap configuration e.g., as described above with reference to FIG. 3A is applied e.g., by a UE 102/104/106 when the P/SP configured signal is a PUCCH-BFR; a rule to prioritize transmission of the P/SP configured signal by deferring the UL gap slot e.g., as described above with reference to FIG. 3B is applied when the P/SP configured signal is a HARQ-ACK for DL SPS transmission;).
Therefore, at the time before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Niu to incorporate the teachings of the different embodiments for the purpose of conforming to the intent of the invention to modify and combine the various different embodiment (Niu, [0143]-[0144]) to make the system more dynamic and adaptable by providing the system with various different alternatives in design and functionality, thereby allowing the system to handle a number of various different combination of specific design structure and scenarios and preventing the system from being limited to a single specific design structure and scenario and furthermore, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize based on the guidelines to rationales supporting a conclusion of obviousness seen on MPEP 2143, that the modification would involve use of a simple substitution of one known element and base device (i.e. performing a process of an embodiment of transmitting either a BPS transmission or an UL transmission in an UL gap based on a determination of relative priority as taught by Niu) with another known element and comparable device utilizing a known technique (i.e. performing a process of a similar embodiment of an embodiment of transmitting either a BPS transmission or an UL transmission in an UL gap based on a determination of relative priority with additional and/or alternative features and functionalities of the other embodiments as taught by Niu) to improve the similar devices in the same way and to obtain the predictable result of the system performing a process of an embodiment of an embodiment of transmitting either a BPS transmission or an UL transmission in an UL gap based on a determination of relative priority (i.e. as taught by Niu) and is dependent upon the specific intended use, design incentives, needs and requirements (i.e. such as due to teachings of a known standard, current technology, conservation of resources, personal preferences, economic considerations, etc.) of the user and the system as has been established in MPEP 2144.04.
Regarding claim 16, Niu discloses:
A method performed by a network node for configuring a radio device (Niu, [0120] discloses a method of operating a base station (i.e. reads on by a network node), the method comprising sending, to a UE (i.e. reads on a radio device), an uplink gap configuration that indicates a plurality of uplink gap slots; sending, to the UE, a command to activate the uplink gap configuration).
for an uplink transmit power management (UTPM) procedure, the method comprising or initiating: determining (Niu, [0120] discloses wherein sending the dynamic grant is based on a determination that a relative priority (i.e. reads on determining a timing relation) of performing a BPS transmission (i.e. reads on for a UTPM procedure) during the uplink gap slot (i.e. reads on a timing of at least one UL slot) and transmitting the signal in the uplink gap slot (i.e. reads on a timing of at least one UL signal) prioritizes transmitting the signal over performing the BPS transmission. Claim 3 recites “wherein the UTPM procedure comprises at least one of … a proximity detection or body proximity sensing (BPS) at the radio device”. EXAMINER’S NOTE: The examiner notes that the claims are written in an alternative limitation format requiring and contingent on the selection of only one of various alternative options presented and as such the non-selected alternative options are crossed out (i.e. the limitations reciting “or configuring the radio device to determine”) and are not given patentable weight as being directed towards limitations that are not required to be performed as is indicated in MPEP 2143.03 that recites “Language that suggests or makes a feature or step optional but does not require that feature or step does not limit the scope of a claim under the broadest reasonable claim interpretation. In addition, when a claim requires selection of an element from a list of alternatives, the prior art teaches the element if one of the alternatives is taught by the prior art” and in MPEP 2111.04, Section ll that recites “The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition precedent are not met”).
and selectively scheduling the radio device with the at least one UL signal during the at least one UL gap depending on the determined timing relation (Niu, [0120] discloses sending, to the UE (i.e. reads on the radio device), a dynamic grant that indicates a signal (i.e. reads on with the at least one UL signal) to be transmitted (i.e. reads on selectively scheduling) during an uplink gap slot (i.e. reads on during the at least one UL gap) among the plurality of uplink gap slots, wherein sending the dynamic grant is based on a determination that a relative priority (i.e. reads on depending on the determined timing relation) of performing a BPS transmission during the uplink gap slot and transmitting the signal in the uplink gap slot prioritizes transmitting the signal over performing the BPS transmission. EXAMINER’S NOTE: The examiner notes that the claims are written in an alternative limitation format requiring and contingent on the selection of only one of various alternative options presented and as such the non-selected alternative options are crossed out (i.e. the limitations reciting “or configuring the radio device to selectively use the at least one UL gap for the UTPM procedure depending on the determined timing relation.”) and are not given patentable weight as being directed towards limitations that are not required to be performed as is indicated in MPEP 2143.03 that recites “Language that suggests or makes a feature or step optional but does not require that feature or step does not limit the scope of a claim under the broadest reasonable claim interpretation. In addition, when a claim requires selection of an element from a list of alternatives, the prior art teaches the element if one of the alternatives is taught by the prior art” and in MPEP 2111.04, Section ll that recites “The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition precedent are not met”).
Niu discloses in one embodiment that a signal is sent in the UL gap based on the relative priority but fails to explicitly recite in the same embodiment the signal corresponding to a specific type of procedure and therefore fails to disclose in the same embodiment, the limitations of “at least one UL signal belonging to a procedure in a first set of procedures (PS1)”.
In a different embodiment, Niu discloses:
at least one UL signal belonging to a procedure in a first set of procedures (PS1) (Niu, [0108]-[0109] discloses cause the UE to determine that the second signal indicated by the second scheduling information is a BFR signal (i.e. reads on at least one UL signal belonging to a procedure in a PS1) to be transmitted on a PUCCH; and transmit the BFR signal during the second uplink gap slot based on a determination that the second relative priority prioritizes transmitting the BFR signal over performing the BPS transmission and discloses cause the UE to determine that the second signal indicated by the second scheduling information is a HARQ-ACK for a DL SPS transmission; and transmit the HARQ ACK during the second uplink gap slot based on a determination that the second relative priority prioritizes transmitting the HARQ ACK over performing the BPS transmission; Niu, [0042] discloses A P/SP configured signal may include UL symbols in any part of an UL slot, and a gNB 108 may provide a configuration for a P/SP configured signal by, for example, RRC messaging e.g., in one or more information elements IEs within one or more RRC messages. Examples of P/SP configured signals may include a scheduling request SR, a beam failure recovery BFR signal on the PUCCH PUCCH-BFR, a P/SP configured channel status indicator CSI signal on the PUCCH or PUSCH, a signal transmitted on a physical random access channel PRACH, a P/SP configured sounding reference signal SRS, a configured grant CG signal on the PUSCH CG-PUSCH, or a hybrid automatic repeat request acknowledgement HARQ-ACK for a downlink semi-persistent scheduled SPS transmission e.g., on the PDSCH. Claim 12 recites “… wherein the at least one UL signal belonging to the respective procedure in the PS1 comprises or is indicative of at least one of: … a beam failure recovery …”).
Therefore, at the time before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Niu to incorporate the teachings of the different embodiments for the purpose of conforming to the intent of the invention to modify and combine the various different embodiment (Niu, [0143]-[0144]) to make the system more dynamic and adaptable by providing the system with various different alternatives in design and functionality, thereby allowing the system to handle a number of various different combination of specific design structure and scenarios and preventing the system from being limited to a single specific design structure and scenario and furthermore, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize based on the guidelines to rationales supporting a conclusion of obviousness seen on MPEP 2143, that the modification would involve use of a simple substitution of one known element and base device (i.e. performing a process of an embodiment of transmitting either a BPS transmission or an UL transmission in an UL gap based on a determination of relative priority as taught by Niu) with another known element and comparable device utilizing a known technique (i.e. performing a process of a similar embodiment of an embodiment of transmitting either a BPS transmission or an UL transmission in an UL gap based on a determination of relative priority with additional and/or alternative features and functionalities of the other embodiments as taught by Niu) to improve the similar devices in the same way and to obtain the predictable result of the system performing a process of an embodiment of an embodiment of transmitting either a BPS transmission or an UL transmission in an UL gap based on a determination of relative priority (i.e. as taught by Niu) and is dependent upon the specific intended use, design incentives, needs and requirements (i.e. such as due to teachings of a known standard, current technology, conservation of resources, personal preferences, economic considerations, etc.) of the user and the system as has been established in MPEP 2144.04.
Regarding claim 17, Niu discloses:
The method of claim 16, (see claim 16).
wherein the radio device is scheduled with the at least one UL signal belonging to the procedure in the PS 1 in the at least one UL gap, if at least one of the following conditions is fulfilled: if the at least one UL signal belonging to the procedure in the PS1 overlaps in time with the at least one UL gap; if the at least one UL gap occurs during the procedure in the PS1; (Niu, [0048] discloses It may be desired for a UE to apply more than one relative priority between BPS transmissions and UL transmissions that are P/SP configured signals. The relative priority that is to be applied to a particular collision may be based, for example, on the type of P/SP configured signal that is scheduled for transmission in the UL gap slot. In one such example, a rule to prioritize transmission of the P/SP configured signal by puncturing the UL gap configuration e.g., as described above with reference to FIG. 3A is applied e.g., by a UE 102/104/106 when the P/SP configured signal is a PUCCH-BFR; a rule to prioritize transmission of the P/SP configured signal by deferring the UL gap slot e.g., as described above with reference to FIG. 3B is applied when the P/SP configured signal is a HARQ-ACK for DL SPS transmission; and a rule to prioritize the BPS transmission e.g., as described above with reference to FIG. 3C is applied for other P/SP configured signals. Other selections among the relative priorities as described above e.g., based on the type of P/SP configured signal that is scheduled for transmission in the UL gap slot may also be implemented; Niu, [0059]-[0060] discloses The operation flow/algorithmic structure 400 may include, at block 412, determining a relative priority of performing a BPS transmission during the first uplink gap slot and transmitting the signal in the first uplink gap slot and discloses structure 400 may include determining that the signal indicated by the first scheduling information is a channel quality indication CQI signal, and dropping the CQI signal and performing the BPS transmission during the first uplink gap slot based on a determination that the relative priority prioritizes performing the BPS transmission over transmitting the CQI signal. EXAMINER’S NOTE: The examiner notes that the claims are written in an alternative limitation format requiring and contingent on the selection of only one of various alternative options presented and as such the non-selected alternative options are crossed out (i.e. the limitations reciting “and if the at least one UL signal belonging to the procedure in the PS1 and the UL gap are close in time to each other or are closer in time to each other than a predefined threshold.” ) and are not given patentable weight as being directed towards limitations that are not required to be performed as is indicated in MPEP 2143.03 that recites “Language that suggests or makes a feature or step optional but does not require that feature or step does not limit the scope of a claim under the broadest reasonable claim interpretation. In addition, when a claim requires selection of an element from a list of alternatives, the prior art teaches the element if one of the alternatives is taught by the prior art” and in MPEP 2111.04, Section ll that recites “The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition precedent are not met”).
Regarding claim 24, Niu discloses:
A user equipment (UE) (Niu, Fig. 4 & [0056] discloses FIG. 4 illustrates an operation flow/algorithmic structure 400 in accordance with some embodiments. The operation flow/algorithmic structure 400 may be performed or implemented by a UE (i.e. reads on by a UE) such as, for example, UE 102, 104, 106, or 800; or components thereof, for example, baseband processor 804A).
for an uplink transmit power management (UTPM) procedure, procedure in a first set of procedures (PS1); (Niu, [0059]-[0060] discloses The operation flow/algorithmic structure 400 may include, at block 412, determining a relative priority (i.e. reads on determining a timing relation) of performing a BPS transmission (i.e. reads on for the UTPM procedure) during the first uplink gap slot (i.e. reads on between a timing of at least one UL gap) and transmitting the signal in the first uplink gap slot (i.e. reads on a timing of at least one UL signal belonging to a procedure in a PS1) and discloses structure 400 may include determining that the signal indicated by the first scheduling information is a channel quality indication CQI signal, and dropping the CQI signal and performing the BPS transmission during the first uplink gap slot based on a determination that the relative priority prioritizes performing the BPS transmission over transmitting the CQI signal; Niu, [0034] discloses Transmit power management may benefit from periodic monitoring of information from the surrounding environment e.g., body proximity sensing or BPS; Niu, Fig. 8 & [0079] discloses The UE 800 may include processors 804, RF interface circuitry 808, memory/storage 812, user interface 816, sensors 820, driver circuitry 822, power management integrated circuit PMIC 824, antenna structure 826, and battery 828. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it is inherent for the UE to include processors and an RF interface circuitry in order to be able to perform the disclosed functionalities. Claim 3 recites “wherein the UTPM procedure comprises at least one of … a proximity detection or body proximity sensing (BPS) at the radio device”; Claim 12 recites “… wherein the at least one UL signal belonging to the respective procedure in the PS1 comprises or is indicative of at least one of: … a CSI report and/or a CQI; …”).
and selectively use the at least one UL gap for the UTPM procedure depending on the determined timing relation (Niu, [0060] discloses structure 400 may include determining that the signal indicated by the first scheduling information is a channel quality indication CQI signal, and dropping the CQI signal and performing the BPS transmission (i.e. reads on for the UTPM procedure) during the first uplink gap slot (i.e. reads on selectively using the at least one UL gap) based on a determination that the relative priority (i.e. reads on depending on the determined timing relation) prioritizes performing the BPS transmission over transmitting the CQI signal).
Niu discloses in one embodiment that a body proximity sensing BPS transmission is sent in the UL gap based on the relative priority to an uplink transmission but fails to explicitly recite in the same embodiment the uplink transmission being sent to a network node and therefore fails to disclose in the same embodiment, the limitations of “the UE being configured to communicate with a base station or with a radio device functioning as a gateway,”.
In a different embodiment, Niu discloses:
the UE being configured to communicate with a base station (Niu, [0120] discloses a method of operating a base station (i.e. reads on a base station), the method comprising sending (i.e. reads on communicate), to a UE (i.e. reads on the UE), an uplink gap configuration that indicates a plurality of uplink gap slots; sending, to the UE, a command to activate the uplink gap configuration; Niu, [0031] discloses A UE 102/104/106 may use a Physical Uplink Control Channel PUCCH to transmit uplink control information UCI to the access node 108, which may include, for example, hybrid-automatic repeat request HARQ acknowledgements, scheduling requests, or periodic and semi-persistent channel state information CSI reports; Niu, [0048] discloses It may be desired for a UE to apply more than one relative priority between BPS transmissions and UL transmissions that are P/SP configured signals. The relative priority that is to be applied to a particular collision may be based, for example, on the type of P/SP configured signal that is scheduled for transmission in the UL gap slot. In one such example, a rule to prioritize transmission of the P/SP configured signal by puncturing the UL gap configuration e.g., as described above with reference to FIG. 3A is applied e.g., by a UE 102/104/106 when the P/SP configured signal is a PUCCH-BFR; a rule to prioritize transmission of the P/SP configured signal by deferring the UL gap slot e.g., as described above with reference to FIG. 3B is applied when the P/SP configured signal is a HARQ-ACK for DL SPS transmission. EXAMINER’S NOTE: The examiner notes that the claims are written in an alternative limitation format requiring and contingent on the selection of only one of various alternative options presented and as such the non-selected alternative options are crossed out (i.e. the limitations reciting “or with a radio device functioning as a gateway,”) and are not given patentable weight as being directed towards limitations that are not required to be performed as is indicated in MPEP 2143.03 that recites “Language that suggests or makes a feature or step optional but does not require that feature or step does not limit the scope of a claim under the broadest reasonable claim interpretation. In addition, when a claim requires selection of an element from a list of alternatives, the prior art teaches the element if one of the alternatives is taught by the prior art” and in MPEP 2111.04, Section ll that recites “The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition precedent are not met”).
Therefore, at the time before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Niu to incorporate the teachings of the different embodiments for the purpose of conforming to the intent of the invention to modify and combine the various different embodiment (Niu, [0143]-[0144]) to make the system more dynamic and adaptable by providing the system with various different alternatives in design and functionality, thereby allowing the system to handle a number of various different combination of specific design structure and scenarios and preventing the system from being limited to a single specific design structure and scenario and furthermore, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize based on the guidelines to rationales supporting a conclusion of obviousness seen on MPEP 2143, that the modification would involve use of a simple substitution of one known element and base device (i.e. performing a process of an embodiment of transmitting either a BPS transmission or an UL transmission in an UL gap based on a determination of relative priority as taught by Niu) with another known element and comparable device utilizing a known technique (i.e. performing a process of a similar embodiment of an embodiment of transmitting either a BPS transmission or an UL transmission in an UL gap based on a determination of relative priority with additional and/or alternative features and functionalities of the other embodiments as taught by Niu) to improve the similar devices in the same way and to obtain the predictable result of the system performing a process of an embodiment of an embodiment of transmitting either a BPS transmission or an UL transmission in an UL gap based on a determination of relative priority (i.e. as taught by Niu) and is dependent upon the specific intended use, design incentives, needs and requirements (i.e. such as due to teachings of a known standard, current technology, conservation of resources, personal preferences, economic considerations, etc.) of the user and the system as has been established in MPEP 2144.04.
Regarding claim 30, Niu discloses:
A base station for configuring a radio device (Niu, [0120] discloses a method of operating a base station (i.e. reads on by a base station), the method comprising sending, to a UE (i.e. reads on a radio device), an uplink gap configuration that indicates a plurality of uplink gap slots; sending, to the UE, a command to activate the uplink gap configuration).
for an uplink transmit power management (UTPM) procedure, (Niu, [0120] discloses wherein sending the dynamic grant is based on a determination that a relative priority of performing a BPS transmission (i.e. reads on for a UTPM procedure) during the uplink gap slot and transmitting the signal in the uplink gap slot prioritizes transmitting the signal over performing the BPS transmission. Claim 3 recites “wherein the UTPM procedure comprises at least one of … a proximity detection or body proximity sensing (BPS) at the radio device”.
the base station being configured to communicate with a user equipment (UE), the base station comprising a radio interface, and processing circuitry, (Niu, [0120] discloses a method of operating a base station (i.e. reads on the base station), the method comprising sending, to a UE (i.e. reads on communicate with a UE), an uplink gap configuration that indicates a plurality of uplink gap slots; sending, to the UE, a command to activate the uplink gap configuration; Niu, Fig. 9 & [0097] discloses The access node 900 may include processors 904, RF interface circuitry 908, core network CN interface circuitry 912, memory/storage circuitry 916, and antenna structure 926. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it is inherent for the base station to include an RF interface circuity and a processor in order to be able to perform the disclosed functionalities).
wherein the base station is configured to: determine, (Niu, [0120] discloses wherein sending the dynamic grant is based on a determination that a relative priority (i.e. reads on determining a timing relation) of performing a BPS transmission (i.e. reads on for a UTPM procedure) during the uplink gap slot (i.e. reads on a timing of at least one UL slot) and transmitting the signal in the uplink gap slot (i.e. reads on a timing of at least one UL signal) prioritizes transmitting the signal over performing the BPS transmission. Claim 3 recites “wherein the UTPM procedure comprises at least one of … a proximity detection or body proximity sensing (BPS) at the radio device”. EXAMINER’S NOTE: The examiner notes that the claims are written in an alternative limitation format requiring and contingent on the selection of only one of various alternative options presented and as such the non-selected alternative options are crossed out (i.e. the limitations reciting “or configuring the radio device to determine”) and are not given patentable weight as being directed towards limitations that are not required to be performed as is indicated in MPEP 2143.03 that recites “Language that suggests or makes a feature or step optional but does not require that feature or step does not limit the scope of a claim under the broadest reasonable claim interpretation. In addition, when a claim requires selection of an element from a list of alternatives, the prior art teaches the element if one of the alternatives is taught by the prior art” and in MPEP 2111.04, Section ll that recites “The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition precedent are not met”).
and selectively schedule the radio device with the at least one UL signal during the at least one UL gap depending on the determined timing relation (Niu, [0120] discloses sending, to the UE (i.e. reads on the radio device), a dynamic grant that indicates a signal (i.e. reads on with the at least one UL signal) to be transmitted (i.e. reads on selectively scheduling) during an uplink gap slot (i.e. reads on during the at least one UL gap) among the plurality of uplink gap slots, wherein sending the dynamic grant is based on a determination that a relative priority (i.e. reads on depending on the determined timing relation) of performing a BPS transmission during the uplink gap slot and transmitting the signal in the uplink gap slot prioritizes transmitting the signal over performing the BPS transmission. EXAMINER’S NOTE: The examiner notes that the claims are written in an alternative limitation format requiring and contingent on the selection of only one of various alternative options presented and as such the non-selected alternative options are crossed out (i.e. the limitations reciting “or configuring the radio device to selectively use the at least one UL gap for the UTPM procedure depending on the determined timing relation.”) and are not given patentable weight as being directed towards limitations that are not required to be performed as is indicated in MPEP 2143.03 that recites “Language that suggests or makes a feature or step optional but does not require that feature or step does not limit the scope of a claim under the broadest reasonable claim interpretation. In addition, when a claim requires selection of an element from a list of alternatives, the prior art teaches the element if one of the alternatives is taught by the prior art” and in MPEP 2111.04, Section ll that recites “The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition precedent are not met”).
Niu discloses in one embodiment that a signal is sent in the UL gap based on the relative priority but fails to explicitly recite in the same embodiment the signal corresponding to a specific type of procedure and therefore fails to disclose in the same embodiment, the limitations of “at least one UL signal belonging to a procedure in a first set of procedures (PS1)”.
In a different embodiment, Niu discloses:
at least one UL signal belonging to a procedure in a first set of procedures (PS1) (Niu, [0108]-[0109] discloses cause the UE to determine that the second signal indicated by the second scheduling information is a BFR signal (i.e. reads on at least one UL signal belonging to a procedure in a PS1) to be transmitted on a PUCCH; and transmit the BFR signal during the second uplink gap slot based on a determination that the second relative priority prioritizes transmitting the BFR signal over performing the BPS transmission and discloses cause the UE to determine that the second signal indicated by the second scheduling information is a HARQ-ACK for a DL SPS transmission; and transmit the HARQ ACK during the second uplink gap slot based on a determination that the second relative priority prioritizes transmitting the HARQ ACK over performing the BPS transmission; Niu, [0042] discloses A P/SP configured signal may include UL symbols in any part of an UL slot, and a gNB 108 may provide a configuration for a P/SP configured signal by, for example, RRC messaging e.g., in one or more information elements IEs within one or more RRC messages. Examples of P/SP configured signals may include a scheduling request SR, a beam failure recovery BFR signal on the PUCCH PUCCH-BFR, a P/SP configured channel status indicator CSI signal on the PUCCH or PUSCH, a signal transmitted on a physical random access channel PRACH, a P/SP configured sounding reference signal SRS, a configured grant CG signal on the PUSCH CG-PUSCH, or a hybrid automatic repeat request acknowledgement HARQ-ACK for a downlink semi-persistent scheduled SPS transmission e.g., on the PDSCH. Claim 12 recites “… wherein the at least one UL signal belonging to the respective procedure in the PS1 comprises or is indicative of at least one of: … a beam failure recovery …”).
Therefore, at the time before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Niu to incorporate the teachings of the different embodiments for the purpose of conforming to the intent of the invention to modify and combine the various different embodiment (Niu, [0143]-[0144]) to make the system more dynamic and adaptable by providing the system with various different alternatives in design and functionality, thereby allowing the system to handle a number of various different combination of specific design structure and scenarios and preventing the system from being limited to a single specific design structure and scenario and furthermore, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize based on the guidelines to rationales supporting a conclusion of obviousness seen on MPEP 2143, that the modification would involve use of a simple substitution of one known element and base device (i.e. performing a process of an embodiment of transmitting either a BPS transmission or an UL transmission in an UL gap based on a determination of relative priority as taught by Niu) with another known element and comparable device utilizing a known technique (i.e. performing a process of a similar embodiment of an embodiment of transmitting either a BPS transmission or an UL transmission in an UL gap based on a determination of relative priority with additional and/or alternative features and functionalities of the other embodiments as taught by Niu) to improve the similar devices in the same way and to obtain the predictable result of the system performing a process of an embodiment of an embodiment of transmitting either a BPS transmission or an UL transmission in an UL gap based on a determination of relative priority (i.e. as taught by Niu) and is dependent upon the specific intended use, design incentives, needs and requirements (i.e. such as due to teachings of a known standard, current technology, conservation of resources, personal preferences, economic considerations, etc.) of the user and the system as has been established in MPEP 2144.04.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over NIU et al. (US Patent Publication 2024/0032022 herein after referenced as Niu) in view of PARK et al. (US Patent Publication 2023/0217496 herein after referenced as Park).
Regarding claim 2, Niu discloses:
The method of claim 1, (see claim 1).
wherein the radio device is configured with (Niu, [0060] discloses structure 400 may include determining that the signal indicated by the first scheduling information is a channel quality indication CQI signal, and dropping the CQI signal and performing the BPS transmission during the first uplink gap slot based on a determination that the relative priority prioritizes performing the BPS transmission over transmitting the CQI signal; Niu, [0120] discloses a method of operating a base station, the method comprising sending, to a UE, an uplink gap configuration that indicates a plurality of uplink gap slots; Niu, [0040] discloses A collision may arise if a BPS transmission is scheduled to occur in the same UL slot as another transmission by the UE e.g., an UL transmission. FIGS. 3A, 3B, and 3C show examples of such collisions for the example UL gap configuration shown in FIG. 2. Relative priorities between BPS transmissions and UL transmissions may be established e.g., in one or more 3GPP Technical Specifications to indicate which of the colliding transmissions should proceed and which should be dropped. Such relative priorities may be embodied, for example, in one or more priority rules).
Niu discloses a mobile device is configured with an uplink gap configuration comprising a plurality of uplink gap slots for performing body proximity sensing transmissions but fails to explicitly recite that said uplink gap configuration is an uplink gap pattern and therefore fails to disclose “the radio device is configured with at least one UL gap pattern (ULGP) comprising the at least one UL gap for performing the UTPM procedure”.
In a related field of endeavor, Park discloses:
the radio device is configured with at least one UL gap pattern (ULGP) comprising the at least one UL gap for performing the UTPM procedure (Park, [0068] discloses the UE 104 may include an uplink gap configuration module 198 configured to obtain, from a base station, an uplink gap pattern ULGP configuration indicating a first ULGP associated with a first time window, wherein the first ULGP is indicative of a distribution of one or more uplink slots activated as uplink gaps within the first time window; Park, [0087] discloses The UE may perform uplink gap processes once the uplink gap is configured and activated at the UE. The uplink gap processes may include BPS sensing and any other suitable self-calibration and/or self-monitoring process during the uplink gap slot; Park, [0108] discloses when uplink resources for a ransom access procedure overlap with an uplink gap slot, then the UE may temporarily deactivate one or more uplink gap slots e.g., reconfigure the uplink gap slot to operate as an uplink slot for communication so that the UE can be scheduled to transmit uplink RACH signaling over the slot; Park, [0033] discloses During an uplink slot that has been configured as an uplink gap, the UE may perform self-calibration and second monitoring processes, during which the UE may not transmit uplink signaling to the base station. In one example, during an uplink gap, the UE may perform proximity detection to determine if there is a person nearby. Such proximity detection may provide the UE with information that controls a transmission power of the UE e.g., a lower transmission power may be applied if a person is close to the UE, relative to a transmission power when a person is not close to the UE. In another example, the UE may transmit a low power signal e.g., a signal that will not be received by the base station that the UE will receive and use to perform self-calibration. Here, the UE may determine whether the power of the received signal a power that the UE expected. Based on this information, the UE may calibrate RF components and transmit/receive logic e.g., power amplified PA, transceiver, etc.).
Therefore, at the time before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Niu to incorporate the teachings of Park for the purpose of providing the system with a means to utilize alternative uplink gap configurations when configuring a UE to perform body proximity sensing transmissions (Park, [0068] & [0087]) and for the purpose of making the system more dynamic and adaptable by providing the system with added functionalities and various different alternatives in design, thereby allowing the system to handle a number of various different combination of specific design structure and scenarios (Niu, [0143]-[0144]) and thereby, preventing the system from being limited to a single specific design structure and scenario and furthermore, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize based on the guidelines to rationales supporting a conclusion of obviousness seen on MPEP 2143, that the modification would involve use of a simple substitution of one known element and base device (i.e. performing a process of a base station transmitting uplink gap configuration to a mobile device for performing body proximity sensing transmissions as taught by Niu) with another known element and comparable device utilizing a known technique (i.e. performing a process of a base station transmitting uplink gap configuration to a mobile device for performing body proximity sensing transmissions, wherein the uplink gap configuration is an uplink gap pattern configuration as taught by Park) to improve the similar devices in the same way and to obtain the predictable result of the system performing a process of a base station transmitting uplink gap configuration to a mobile device for performing body proximity sensing transmissions (i.e. as taught by both Niu & Park) and is dependent upon the specific intended use, design incentives, needs and requirements (i.e. such as due to teachings of a known standard, current technology, conservation of resources, personal preferences, economic considerations, etc.) of the user and the system as has been established in MPEP 2144.04.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over NIU et al. (US Patent Publication 2024/0032022 herein after referenced as Niu) in view of RIMINI (US Patent Publication 2020/0336222 herein after referenced as Rimini).
Regarding claim 14, Niu discloses:
The method of claim 9, (see claim 9).
Niu discloses performing body proximity sensing BPS but fails to explicitly recite that the BPS utilizes a radio detection and ranging signal or a radar signal and therefore fails to disclose “wherein a signal belonging to the UTPM procedure or each procedure in the PS3 is a radio detection and ranging signal or radar signal and/or wherein the UTPM procedure or each procedure in the PS3 uses in the at least one UL gap a frequency range outside of at least one of: the least one UL signal belonging to the or each procedure in the PS 1 and the least one UL signal belonging to the or each procedure in the PS2”.
In a related field of endeavor, Rimini discloses:
wherein a signal belonging to the UTPM procedure or radar signal (Rimini, [0040] discloses the MPE proximity sensor may use RADAR SONAR, ultrasonic object detection, infrared sensors, capacitive sensors, cameras, rangefinders, a light sensor, a camera, a LIDAR receiver, or a motion sensor and other range detection or movement detection devices. In step 410, the mobile device measures an indication of operation of a maximum permissible exposure MPE proximity sensor; Rimini, [0014] discloses To prevent humans and other living creatures from being exposed to transmissions that exceed regulatory power limits, a mobile device, such as a 5G mobile device, may utilize an MPE proximity sensor to detect nearby living objects, enabling the mobile device to reduce power and/or switch to other protocols, such as 4G, when the device detects that a person or other living object is nearby. The ability to detect living persons and other living objects enhances device safety and regulatory compliance. In addition, the ability to detect when living objects are in proximity to the device enables the device to utilize higher power when not in proximity to living objects. Multiple types of sensors may be utilized for body proximity detection; for example, acoustic-based SONAR, Electro-magnetic-based EM-based RADAR. EXAMINER’S NOTE: The examiner notes that the claims are written in an alternative limitation format requiring and contingent on the selection of only one of various alternative options presented and as such the non-selected alternative options are crossed out (i.e. the limitations reciting “or each procedure in the PS3 is a radar signal” and “and/or wherein the UTPM procedure or each procedure in the PS3 uses in the at least one UL gap a frequency range outside of at least one of: the least one UL signal belonging to the or each procedure in the PS 1 and the least one UL signal belonging to the or each procedure in the PS2.”) and are not given patentable weight as being directed towards limitations that are not required to be performed as is indicated in MPEP 2143.03 that recites “Language that suggests or makes a feature or step optional but does not require that feature or step does not limit the scope of a claim under the broadest reasonable claim interpretation. In addition, when a claim requires selection of an element from a list of alternatives, the prior art teaches the element if one of the alternatives is taught by the prior art” and in MPEP 2111.04, Section ll that recites “The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition precedent are not met”).
Therefore, at the time before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Niu to incorporate the teachings of Rimini for the purpose of providing the system with a means to utilize alternative body proximity sensing methodologies (Rimini, [0040]) and for the purpose of making the system more dynamic and adaptable by providing the system with added functionalities and various different alternatives in design, thereby allowing the system to handle a number of various different combination of specific design structure and scenarios (Niu, [0143]-[0144]) and thereby, preventing the system from being limited to a single specific design structure and scenario and furthermore, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize based on the guidelines to rationales supporting a conclusion of obviousness seen on MPEP 2143, that the modification would involve use of a simple substitution of one known element and base device (i.e. performing a process of a mobile device for performing a body proximity sensing procedure as taught by Niu) with another known element and comparable device utilizing a known technique (i.e. performing a process of a mobile device for performing a body proximity sensing procedure, wherein the body proximity sensing procedure utilizes radar or other range detection devices as taught by Rimini) to improve the similar devices in the same way and to obtain the predictable result of the system performing a process of a mobile device for performing a body proximity sensing procedure (i.e. as taught by both Niu & Rimini) and is dependent upon the specific intended use, design incentives, needs and requirements (i.e. such as due to teachings of a known standard, current technology, conservation of resources, personal preferences, economic considerations, etc.) of the user and the system as has been established in MPEP 2144.04.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL Y MAPA whose telephone number is (571)270-5540. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Thursday: 10 AM - 8 PM 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, Anthony Addy can be reached at (571) 272 - 7795. 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.
/MICHAEL Y MAPA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2645
Prosecution Insights