DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 4, 18, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li (US 2010/0321219 A1) in view of Kutz (US 2022/0368483 A1).
As to claim 1, Li discloses an apparatus for wireless communication at a user equipment (UE) (see transmitter/receiver in paragraph [0008]), comprising: at least one memory (inherently included in order to store the flowchart of figure 1); and at least one processor (see paragraph [0004]) coupled to the at least one memory and, based at least in part on information stored in the at least one memory, the at least one processor, individually or in any combination, is configured to cause the UE to: measure a peak-to-average power ratio (PAPR) of an input signal (see paragraph [0006]); and process the input signal based on a gain state (GS) for the input signal, wherein the GS is determined based on the PAPR and a received signal strength indicator (RSSI) measured for the input signal (see paragraph [0006]). Li fails to disclose that the PAPR includes a ratio of a peak power above a percentile to an average power of the input signal. Kutz discloses that PAPR includes a ratio of a peak power above a percentile to an average power of an input signal (see paragraphs [0083], [0130]). Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the above teaching of Kutz to Li, in order to yield predictable results such as outlier exclusion, and performance tracking.
As to claim 4, Li discloses that the input signal includes one or more of: a downlink signal (see paragraph [0008]); a first combination of the downlink signal and an uplink signal, or a second combination of the downlink signal, the uplink signal, and a jammer signal.
As to claim 18, it is rejected for similar reasons with respect to independent claim 1 as set forth above.
As to claim 20, it is rejected for similar reasons with respect to independent claim 1 as set forth above.
Claims 2-3, 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li (US 2010/0321219 A1) in view of Kutz (US 2022/0368483 A1) as applied to claims 1, 18 above and further in view of Liu (US 2023/0032794 A1).
As to claims 2, 19, Li discloses a receiver (see paragraph [0008]) coupled to the at least one processor (see paragraph [0004]), wherein the at least one processor, individually or in any combination, is further configured to cause the UE to communicate the input signal via the receiver. Li fails to disclose a transceiver instead of a receiver. The examiner, however, takes Official Notice that such a transceiver is known in the art. Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Li, such that a transceiver is utilized, in order to yield predictable results such as providing two-way communications to the users.
Li further fails to disclose that a gain state switch point is based on the PAPR measured for the input signal. Liu discloses a gain state switch point is based on PAPR measured for input signal. See paragraphs [0071], [0105]. In this instance, the claimed “a gain state switch point” reads on a power threshold.
As to claim 3, the combination of Li and Liu disclose that the gain state switch point includes a power threshold associated with a change of the GS for the input signal. See Liu, paragraphs [0071], [0105].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-17 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
As to claims 5-17, the prior art of record fail to disclose that the GS includes a gain on an analog-to-digital converter (ADC) on the UE, and wherein the at least one processor, individually or in any combination, is further configured to cause the UE: determine, based on the PAPR and the RSSI measured for the input signal, a power headroom to a saturating power of the ADC; and determine, based on the power headroom, the GS.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Chen (US 2008/0159421 A1); Parrucci (US 2020/0186399 A1) disclose that gain state (GS) is determined based on a peak-to-average power ratio (PAPR).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NGUYEN THANH VO whose telephone number is (571)272-7901. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8-5.
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, Jeanette J Parker can be reached at (571) 270-3647. 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.
/NGUYEN T VO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2646
Prosecution Insights