NON-FINAL REJECTION
This Office action is responsive to the application filed August 16, 2024.
The instant 18/807,679 application is a reissue application of U.S. Patent 11,419,058 to Pipponen et al. “the ‘058 Patent”), which issued August 16, 2022 from U.S. Patent Application Ser. No. 16/756,201, filed November 6, 2018 as a 371 Application of PCT/FI2018/050809, filed November 6, 2018. The ‘058 Patent has an earliest possible U.S. filing date of November 16, 2017 based on provisional application 62/587,220.
Claims 1-13 were originally pending in this application. By way of a preliminary amendment filed with the application, claims 1-13 are amended and claims 14-20 are added. Thus claims 1-20 are pending and are rejected below.
This action is Non-Final.
Reissue
The Examiner has determined that there are no other continuations, reissues, reexaminations, inter partes reviews, or other AIA trials or appeals currently pending with respect to the ‘058 Patent. A litigation search has determined there to be no pending litigation as to the ‘058 Patent.
Applicant is reminded of the continuing obligation under 37 CFR 1.178(b) to timely apprise the Office of any prior or concurrent proceeding in which the ‘058 Patent is or was involved. These proceedings would include interferences, reissues, reexaminations, and litigation. Applicant is further reminded of the continuing obligation under 37 CFR 1.56, to timely apprise the Office of any information which is material to patentability of the claims under consideration in this reissue application. These obligations rest with each individual associated with the filing and prosecution of this application for reissue. See also MPEP §§ 1404, 1442.01 and 1442.04.
Because the instant ‘058 Patent is not deemed to contain claims having an effective date prior to March 16, 2013, the America Invents Act First Inventor to File (“AIA -FITF”) provisions apply, rather than the pre-AIA provisions. See 35 U.S.C. § 100 (note) and 35 U.S.C. § 100 (pre-AIA ). In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 is incorrect, any correction of any statutory basis for a 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.
Reissue Amendment
The amendment of August 16, 2024 is objected to for the following:
The amendment adds new claims 10-35 but does not underline them in their entirety, as per 37 CFR 1.173(d)(2). Further, matter is added to claim 13 (the word “determining”) without underlining. A proper amendment meeting Rule 173 is required in response to this Office action. See also MPEP § 1453.
Reissue Declaration
The declaration of August 16, 2024 is objected to for the following:
The declaration does not contain a specific error statement pointing out that which causes the original patent to be defective. The statement that the applicant believes they claimed less than they had the right to claim is not a proper error statement. Further, the removal of surrender-related subject matter as noted below is not an error upon which a reissue may be based. A proper declaration is required in response to this Office action. See also MPEP § 1414.
Consent of Assignee
This application is objected to under 37 CFR 1.172(a) as lacking the written consent of all assignees owning an undivided interest in the patent. The consent of the assignee must be in compliance with 37 CFR 1.172. See MPEP § 1410.01. Here, the consent of assignee filed August 16, 2024 is signed by a person without a title.
A proper assent of the assignee in compliance with 37 CFR 1.172 and 3.73 is required in reply to this Office action.
Claim Rejections - § 251
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 251 as being based upon a defective reissue declaration. See 37 CFR 1.175.
The nature of the defect(s) in the declaration is set forth in the discussion above in this Office action.
Claims 1-13, 16-18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 251 as being an impermissible recapture of broadened claimed subject matter surrendered in the application for the patent upon which the present reissue is based. In re McDonald, 43 F.4th 1340, 1345, 2022 USPQ2d 745 (Fed. Cir. 2022); Greenliant Systems, Inc. et al v. Xicor LLC, 692 F.3d 1261, 103 USPQ2d 1951 (Fed. Cir. 2012); In re Youman, 679 F.3d 1335, 102 USPQ2d 1862 (Fed. Cir. 2012); In re Shahram Mostafazadeh and Joseph O. Smith, 643 F.3d 1353, 98 USPQ2d 1639 (Fed. Cir. 2011); North American Container, Inc. v. Plastipak Packaging, Inc., 415 F.3d 1335, 75 USPQ2d 1545 (Fed. Cir. 2005); Pannu v. Storz Instruments Inc., 258 F.3d 1366, 59 USPQ2d 1597 (Fed. Cir. 2001); Hester Industries, Inc. v. Stein, Inc., 142 F.3d 1472, 46 USPQ2d 1641 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Clement, 131 F.3d 1464, 45 USPQ2d 1161 (Fed. Cir. 1997); Ball Corp. v. United States, 729 F.2d 1429, 1436, 221 USPQ 289, 295 (Fed. Cir. 1984). The reissue application contains claim(s) that are broader than the issued patent claims. The record of the application for the patent family shows that the broadening aspect (in the reissue) relates to claimed subject matter that applicant previously surrendered during the prosecution of the application. Accordingly, the narrow scope of the claims in the patent was not an error within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. 251, and the broader scope of claim subject matter surrendered in the application for the patent cannot be recaptured by the filing of the present reissue application.
It is noted that the following is the three step test for determining recapture in reissue applications (see: MPEP § 1412.02 II.):
“(1) first, we determine whether, and in what respect, the reissue claims are broader in scope than the original patent claims;
(2) next, we determine whether the broader aspects of the reissue claims relate to subject matter surrendered in the original prosecution; and
(3) finally, we determine whether the reissue claims were materially narrowed in other respects, so that the claims may not have been enlarged, and hence avoid the recapture rule.”
(Step 1: MPEP § 1412.02 II. A.) In the instant case and by way of the instant amendment, Patent Owner seeks to present broadened independent claims 1, 7, and 13 by removing subject matter in issued independent claims 1, 7, and 13, specifically as to determining a modulation rate for uplink transmission, wherein the controlling comprises determining a maximum power reduction value based on the distance and modulation rate, determining a maximum transmission power based on it, and controlling based on signals from the BS a transmission power within a power range up to the maximum transmission power. Thus the newly presented claims have been broadened.
(Step 2: MPEP 1412.02 § II. B.) The record of the prior 16/756,201 application prosecution indicates that, responsive to a November 23, 2021 rejection of the claims that issued as claims 1, 7, and 13 over prior art references, Patent Owner filed an amendment March 3, 2022 wherein such limitations were added to independent claim 1:
PNG
media_image1.png
513
566
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Similar amendments were made to the claims which issued as claims 7 and 13. This subject matter was taken from dependent claims which were indicated by the examiner as comprising allowable subject matter. Patent Owner argued that this added matter rendered the independent claims allowable, and this amendment led directly to the issuance of the ‘058 Patent.
If an original patent claim limitation now being omitted or broadened in the present reissue application was originally relied upon by applicant in the original application to make the claims allowable over the art, the omitted limitation relates to subject matter previously surrendered by applicant. The reliance by applicant to define the original patent claims over the art can be by presentation of new/amended claims to define over the art, or an argument/statement by application that a limitation of the claim(s) defines over the art. MPEP § 1412.02 II. B. 2.
Therefore, the limitations above are surrendered subject matter and are clearly in the area of the surrendered subject matter. See also MPEP § 1412.02 II. B. 1. B.
(Step 3: MPEP § 1412.02 II. C) It is noted that the limitations are all removed from the amended independent claims in their entirety in the manner noted above. Therefore impermissible recapture exists.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-4, 7-10, 13, 16-18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over United States Patent Application Publication 2016/0345298 A1 to Frank (hereinafter “Frank”) in view of United States Patent Application Publication 2013/0182663 A1 to Ji et al. (hereinafter “Ji’).
As to claim 1, Frank discloses:
A method comprising:
determining, by a user device within a wireless network, a base station channel bandwidth;
Frank discloses a power control method comprising a user device determining a base station channel bandwidth. Frank at ¶¶3, 30, and 35.
receiving, by the user device, a resource block allocation including one or more resource blocks in a user device channel bandwidth that are allocated to the user device for uplink transmission,
Frank discloses the UE receiving a RB allocation in a user device bandwidth for UE uplink transmission. Frank at ¶¶26-27, disclosing that the base station allocates to the mobile terminal a contiguous allocation of resource blocks or non-contiguous allocation of resource blocks. See also Id. at ¶30 describing the allocation as part of the overall bandwidth.
wherein the user device channel bandwidth is within the base station channel bandwidth and is less than the base station channel bandwidth;
Frank discloses that the UE bandwidth is within the BS channel bandwidth and is less. Frank at ¶¶30 and 70-72, noting that the overall bandwidth includes two sets of resource blocks separated by punctured resource blocks, in one example.
Although Frank discloses “... contiguous A-MPR can apply when a left gap is less than X and a right gap is less than Y. The values of X and Y can be fixed in the specification or can be configured by the eNB subject to a maximum value in the specification. If X and Y are configured, these values can be signaled or otherwise provided to the UE. For example, the maximum value of X and Y can be specified in 36.101. X and Y can also be specified per CA combination, per bandwidth combination, and per CA_NS_Ox signaled” (Frank at ¶67), Frank does not expressly disclose determining, by the user device, a distance of the resource block allocation from at least one edge of the base station channel bandwidth, and controlling, by the user device based on the distance, a transmission power of the user device for uplink transmission via the resource block allocation.
To that end, Ji discloses an analogous invention and is similarly concerned with maximum power reduction in a wireless communication system, particular to uplink communications Ji at ¶¶3 and 9. Ji discloses determining, by the user device, a distance of a resource block allocation from at least one edge of the base station channel bandwidth. Ji at ¶¶9 and 46-51, which corresponds to the mobile device determining the resource block index, or end of the resource block and the length of resource blocks, which are used to identify a range or region in either the entire bandwidth or part of the bandwidth; s break point is calculated based on a distance from an adjacent channel and a channel bandwidth. Ji further discloses controlling, by the user device based on the distance, a transmission power of the user device for uplink transmission via the resource block allocation. Ji at ¶¶9, 11, 46-51, and 68, stating “[b]ased on the ending RB index and the length of the contiguous RB allocation, a power relaxation allowance is identified, in block 802, in a table of power relaxation allowances, wherein power relaxation allowances correspond to a plurality of regions defined based on a transmission channel bandwidth and a distance from an adjacent band, and wherein the identified power relaxation allowance is located in one of the plurality of regions associated with the ending RB index and the length of the contiguous RB allocation. In block 803, the mobile device adjusts the transmission power at the mobile device according to the indication.” A distance is one of a plurality of parameters that assist in determining an uplink transmission power from the mobile terminal.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Frank in view of Ji to determine a transmission power based on a distance of a resource allocation for the reasons of reducing interference in uplink transmissions as suggested by Ji. Ji at ¶7. Further, one of ordinary skill in the art would have understood such to have been an example of combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. MPEP § 2143 I. A., citing KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
Further as to claim 2:
the controlling comprises:
controlling, by the user device based on the distance, a maximum transmission power of the user device for uplink transmission via the resource block allocation.
Ji teaches the user device controlling based on the distance a maximum transmission power for the uplink. Ji at ¶¶9, 11, 46-51, and 68, noting “[b]ased on the ending RB index and the length of the contiguous RB allocation, a power relaxation allowance is identified, in block 802, in a table of power relaxation allowances, wherein power relaxation allowances correspond to a plurality of regions defined based on a transmission channel bandwidth and a distance from an adjacent band, and wherein the identified power relaxation allowance Is located in one of the plurality of regions associated with the ending RB index and the length of the contiguous RB allocation. In block 803, the mobile device adjusts the transmission power at the mobile device according to the indication.” A distance is one of a plurality of parameters that assist in determining an uplink transmission power from the mobile terminal.).
Further as to claim 3:
the controlling comprises:
determining, by the user device based on the distance, a maximum power reduction value
Ji further teaches the UE determining a max power reduction value based on the distance. Ji at ¶¶9, 11, 46-51, and 68, which corresponds to MPR value look-up based at least, in part, on a distance value.
determining, by the user device based on the maximum power reduction value, a maximum transmission power and
controlling, by the user device based on signals received from a base station, a transmission power of the user device for uplink transmission via the resource block allocation within a power range up to the maximum transmission power.
Ji discloses determining a maximum transmission power based thereon and controlling the transmission power in the uplink thereby within a power range up to the maximum. Ji at ¶¶9, 11, 46-51, and 68, stating “[b]ased on the ending RB index and the length of the contiguous FB allocation, a power relaxation allowance is identified, in block 802, in a table of power relaxation allowances, wherein power relaxation allowances correspond to a plurality of regions defined based on a transmission channel bandwidth and a distance from an adjacent band, and wherein the identified power relaxation allowance is located in one of the plurality of regions associated with the ending RB index and the length of the contiguous FB allocation. In block 803, the mobile device adjusts the transmission power at the mobile device according to the indication.” A distance is one of a plurality of parameters that assist in determining an uplink transmission power from the mobile terminal.);
In ¶47, Ji further details that MPR values may be grouped based on ranges of RB indexes and RB lengths.
As to claim 4:
The method of claim 1, wherein the controlling comprises performing the following for at least one modulation rate used for transmission by the user device:
selecting, by the user device based on the distance, a maximum power reduction value as either:
1) a first maximum power reduction value if the distance of the resource block allocation from at least one edge of the base station channel bandwidth is greater than or equal to a threshold, or 2) a second maximum power reduction value if the distance of the resource block allocation from at least one edge of the base station channel bandwidth is less than the threshold;
determining a maximum transmission power based on the selected maximum power reduction value; and
controlling, by the user device, the transmission power of the user device for uplink transmission within a power range that is less than or equal to the maximum transmission power.
Frank and Ji both disclose determining MPR for a modulation rate. Frank at ¶57, Ji at claim 15. Further, Frank discloses determining a maximum power based on one of two MPRs and controlling the UE to determine transmission power up to the maximum. Frank at FIG 5 steps 550 and 520-535 and at ¶¶52-54.
Further, in the combined invention Ji discloses that MPR is selected based on distance as noted above, and Ji further that in the calculation noted above a first MPR may be selected if an allocation is above a certain distance level and a second MPR may be selected if an allocation is not. Ji at ¶54 and FIG 4B, noting bandwidth allocation 401 which is a given distance from edge 851 (to RB_end_B), and if it is below that distance a different MPR is used than when it is above that distance. As Ji states that the higher MPR is when the allocation extends beyond this limit, it reads as implying that a lower MPR is for when the distance is greater than or equal to it.
As to claim 7, Frank discloses:
An apparatus implemented at a user device, comprising at least one processor and at least one memory including computer instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to:
determine a base station channel bandwidth;
Frank discloses a power control method comprising a user device determining a base station channel bandwidth. Frank at ¶¶3, 30, and 35. Frank further discloses the apparatus comprising a memory and processor in at least Figure 3 and ¶13.
receive a resource block allocation including one or more resource blocks in a user device channel bandwidth that are allocated to the user device for uplink transmission,
Frank discloses the UE receiving a RB allocation in a user device bandwidth for UE uplink transmission. Frank at ¶¶26-27, disclosing that the base station allocates to the mobile terminal a contiguous allocation of resource blocks or non-contiguous allocation of resource blocks. See also Id. at ¶30 describing the allocation as part of the overall bandwidth.
wherein the user device channel bandwidth is within the base station channel bandwidth and is less than the base station channel bandwidth;
Frank discloses that the UE bandwidth is within the BS channel bandwidth and is less. Frank at ¶¶30 and 70-72, noting that the overall bandwidth includes two sets of resource blocks separated by punctured resource blocks, in one example.
Although Frank discloses “... contiguous A-MPR can apply when a left gap is less than X and a right gap is less than Y. The values of X and Y can be fixed in the specification or can be configured by the eNB subject to a maximum value in the specification. If X and Y are configured, these values can be signaled or otherwise provided to the UE. For example, the maximum value of X and Y can be specified in 36.101. X and Y can also be specified per CA combination, per bandwidth combination, and per CA_NS_Ox signaled” (Frank at ¶67), Frank does not expressly disclose determining, by the user device, a distance of the resource block allocation from at least one edge of the base station channel bandwidth, and controlling, by the user device based on the distance, a transmission power of the user device for uplink transmission via the resource block allocation.
To that end, Ji discloses an analogous invention and is similarly concerned with maximum power reduction in a wireless communication system, particular to uplink communications Ji at ¶¶3 and 9. Ji discloses determining, by the user device, a distance of a resource block allocation from at least one edge of the base station channel bandwidth. Ji at ¶¶9 and 46-51, which corresponds to the mobile device determining the resource block index, or end of the resource block and the length of resource blocks, which are used to identify a range or region in either the entire bandwidth or part of the bandwidth; s break point is calculated based on a distance from an adjacent channel and a channel bandwidth. Ji further discloses controlling, by the user device based on the distance, a transmission power of the user device for uplink transmission via the resource block allocation. Ji at ¶¶9, 11, 46-51, and 68, stating “[b]ased on the ending RB index and the length of the contiguous RB allocation, a power relaxation allowance is identified, in block 802, in a table of power relaxation allowances, wherein power relaxation allowances correspond to a plurality of regions defined based on a transmission channel bandwidth and a distance from an adjacent band, and wherein the identified power relaxation allowance is located in one of the plurality of regions associated with the ending RB index and the length of the contiguous RB allocation. In block 803, the mobile device adjusts the transmission power at the mobile device according to the indication.” A distance is one of a plurality of parameters that assist in determining an uplink transmission power from the mobile terminal.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Frank in view of Ji to determine a transmission power based on a distance of a resource allocation for the reasons of reducing interference in uplink transmissions as suggested by Ji. Ji at ¶7. Further, one of ordinary skill in the art would have understood such to have been an example of combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. MPEP § 2143 I. A., citing KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
Further as to claim 8:
wherein causing the apparatus to control comprises causing the apparatus to:
control, based on the distance, a maximum transmission power of the user device for uplink transmission via the resource block allocation.
Ji teaches the user device controlling based on the distance a maximum transmission power for the uplink. Ji at ¶¶9, 11, 46-51, and 68, noting “[b]ased on the ending RB index and the length of the contiguous RB allocation, a power relaxation allowance is identified, in block 802, in a table of power relaxation allowances, wherein power relaxation allowances correspond to a plurality of regions defined based on a transmission channel bandwidth and a distance from an adjacent band, and wherein the identified power relaxation allowance Is located in one of the plurality of regions associated with the ending RB index and the length of the contiguous RB allocation. In block 803, the mobile device adjusts the transmission power at the mobile device according to the indication.” A distance is one of a plurality of parameters that assist in determining an uplink transmission power from the mobile terminal.).
Further as to claim 9:
wherein causing the apparatus to control comprises causing the apparatus to:
determine, based on the distance, a maximum power reduction value;
Ji further teaches the UE determining a max power reduction value based on the distance. Ji at ¶¶9, 11, 46-51, and 68, which corresponds to MPR value look-up based at least, in part, on a distance value.
determine, based on the maximum power reduction value, a maximum transmission power; and
control, based on signals received from a base station, a transmission power of the user device for uplink transmission via the resource block allocation within a power range up to the maximum transmission power.
Ji discloses determining a maximum transmission power based thereon and controlling the transmission power in the uplink thereby within a power range up to the maximum. Ji at ¶¶9, 11, 46-51, and 68, stating “[b]ased on the ending RB index and the length of the contiguous FB allocation, a power relaxation allowance is identified, in block 802, in a table of power relaxation allowances, wherein power relaxation allowances correspond to a plurality of regions defined based on a transmission channel bandwidth and a distance from an adjacent band, and wherein the identified power relaxation allowance is located in one of the plurality of regions associated with the ending RB index and the length of the contiguous FB allocation. In block 803, the mobile device adjusts the transmission power at the mobile device according to the indication.” A distance is one of a plurality of parameters that assist in determining an uplink transmission power from the mobile terminal.);
In ¶47, Ji further details that MPR values may be grouped based on ranges of RB indexes and RB lengths.
Further as to claim 10:
The apparatus of claim 7, wherein causing the apparatus to control comprises causing the apparatus to perform the following for at least one modulation rate used for uplink transmission:
select, based on the distance, a maximum power reduction value as either:
1) a first maximum power reduction value if the distance of the resource block allocation from at least one edge of the base station channel bandwidth is greater than or equal to a threshold, or
2) a second maximum power reduction value if the distance of the resource block allocation from at least one edge of the base station channel bandwidth is less than the threshold;
determine a maximum transmission power based on the selected maximum power reduction value; and
control the transmission power of the user device for uplink transmission within a power range that is less than or equal to the maximum transmission power.
Frank and Ji both disclose determining MPR for a modulation rate. Frank at ¶57, Ji at claim 15. Further, Frank discloses determining a maximum power based on one of two MPRs and controlling the UE to determine transmission power up to the maximum. Frank at FIG 5 steps 550 and 520-535 and at ¶¶52-54.
Further, in the combined invention Ji discloses that MPR is selected based on distance as noted above, and Ji further that in the calculation noted above a first MPR may be selected if an allocation is above a certain distance level and a second MPR may be selected if an allocation is not. Ji at ¶54 and FIG 4B, noting bandwidth allocation 401 which is a given distance from edge 851 (to RB_end_B), and if it is below that distance a different MPR is used than when it is above that distance. As Ji states that the higher MPR is when the allocation extends beyond this limit, it reads as implying that a lower MPR is for when the distance is greater than or equal to it.
Further as to claim 16:
wherein the apparatus is the user device or is comprised in the user device.
As noted above in the rejection of claim 7, Frank discloses the apparatus is the user device.
As to claim 13, Frank discloses:
A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium comprising program instructions that, when executed by an apparatus, cause the apparatus to perform at least the following:
determining a base station channel bandwidth;
Frank discloses a power control method comprising a user device determining a base station channel bandwidth. Frank at ¶¶3, 30, and 35. Frank further discloses the apparatus comprising a memory and processor in at least Figure 3 and ¶13, as well as the memory storing computer instructions for performing the method in ¶28.
receiving a resource block allocation including one or more resource blocks in a user device channel bandwidth that are allocated to the apparatus for uplink transmission,
Frank discloses the UE receiving a RB allocation in a user device bandwidth for UE uplink transmission. Frank at ¶¶26-27, disclosing that the base station allocates to the mobile terminal a contiguous allocation of resource blocks or non-contiguous allocation of resource blocks. See also Id. at ¶30 describing the allocation as part of the overall bandwidth.
wherein the user device channel bandwidth is within the base station channel bandwidth and is less than the base station channel bandwidth;
Frank discloses that the UE bandwidth is within the BS channel bandwidth and is less. Frank at ¶¶30 and 70-72, noting that the overall bandwidth includes two sets of resource blocks separated by punctured resource blocks, in one example.
Although Frank discloses “... contiguous A-MPR can apply when a left gap is less than X and a right gap is less than Y. The values of X and Y can be fixed in the specification or can be configured by the eNB subject to a maximum value in the specification. If X and Y are configured, these values can be signaled or otherwise provided to the UE. For example, the maximum value of X and Y can be specified in 36.101. X and Y can also be specified per CA combination, per bandwidth combination, and per CA_NS_Ox signaled” (Frank at ¶67), Frank does not expressly disclose determining, by the user device, a distance of the resource block allocation from at least one edge of the base station channel bandwidth, and controlling, by the user device based on the distance, a transmission power of the user device for uplink transmission via the resource block allocation.
To that end, Ji discloses an analogous invention and is similarly concerned with maximum power reduction in a wireless communication system, particular to uplink communications Ji at ¶¶3 and 9. Ji discloses determining, by the user device, a distance of a resource block allocation from at least one edge of the base station channel bandwidth. Ji at ¶¶9 and 46-51, which corresponds to the mobile device determining the resource block index, or end of the resource block and the length of resource blocks, which are used to identify a range or region in either the entire bandwidth or part of the bandwidth; s break point is calculated based on a distance from an adjacent channel and a channel bandwidth. Ji further discloses controlling, by the user device based on the distance, a transmission power of the user device for uplink transmission via the resource block allocation. Ji at ¶¶9, 11, 46-51, and 68, stating “[b]ased on the ending RB index and the length of the contiguous RB allocation, a power relaxation allowance is identified, in block 802, in a table of power relaxation allowances, wherein power relaxation allowances correspond to a plurality of regions defined based on a transmission channel bandwidth and a distance from an adjacent band, and wherein the identified power relaxation allowance is located in one of the plurality of regions associated with the ending RB index and the length of the contiguous RB allocation. In block 803, the mobile device adjusts the transmission power at the mobile device according to the indication.” A distance is one of a plurality of parameters that assist in determining an uplink transmission power from the mobile terminal.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Frank in view of Ji to determine a transmission power based on a distance of a resource allocation for the reasons of reducing interference in uplink transmissions as suggested by Ji. Ji at ¶7. Further, one of ordinary skill in the art would have understood such to have been an example of combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. MPEP § 2143 I. A., citing KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
Further as to claim 17:
The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 13, wherein the controlling comprises:
controlling, based on the distance, a maximum transmission power of the user device for uplink transmission via the resource block allocation.
Ji teaches the user device controlling based on the distance a maximum transmission power for the uplink. Ji at ¶¶9, 11, 46-51, and 68, noting “[b]ased on the ending RB index and the length of the contiguous RB allocation, a power relaxation allowance is identified, in block 802, in a table of power relaxation allowances, wherein power relaxation allowances correspond to a plurality of regions defined based on a transmission channel bandwidth and a distance from an adjacent band, and wherein the identified power relaxation allowance Is located in one of the plurality of regions associated with the ending RB index and the length of the contiguous RB allocation. In block 803, the mobile device adjusts the transmission power at the mobile device according to the indication.” A distance is one of a plurality of parameters that assist in determining an uplink transmission power from the mobile terminal.).
Further as to claim 18:
wherein the controlling comprises:
determining, based on the distance, a maximum power reduction value;
Ji further teaches the UE determining a max power reduction value based on the distance. Ji at ¶¶9, 11, 46-51, and 68, which corresponds to MPR value look-up based at least, in part, on a distance value.
determining, based on the maximum power reduction value, a maximum transmission power; and
controllling, based on signals received from a base station, a transmission power of the user device for uplink transmission via the resource block allocation within a power range up to the maximum transmission power.
Ji discloses determining a maximum transmission power based thereon and controlling the transmission power in the uplink thereby within a power range up to the maximum. Ji at ¶¶9, 11, 46-51, and 68, stating “[b]ased on the ending RB index and the length of the contiguous FB allocation, a power relaxation allowance is identified, in block 802, in a table of power relaxation allowances, wherein power relaxation allowances correspond to a plurality of regions defined based on a transmission channel bandwidth and a distance from an adjacent band, and wherein the identified power relaxation allowance is located in one of the plurality of regions associated with the ending RB index and the length of the contiguous FB allocation. In block 803, the mobile device adjusts the transmission power at the mobile device according to the indication.” A distance is one of a plurality of parameters that assist in determining an uplink transmission power from the mobile terminal.);
In ¶47, Ji further details that MPR values may be grouped based on ranges of RB indexes and RB lengths.
Further as to claim 20:
The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 13, wherein the controlling comprises performing the following for at least one modulation rate used for uplink transmission: selecting, based on the distance, a maximum power reduction value as either:
1) a first maximum power reduction value if the distance of the resource block allocation from at least one edge of the base station channel bandwidth is greater than or equal to a threshold, or
2) a second maximum power reduction value if the distance of the resource block allocation from at least one edge of the base station channel bandwidth is less than the threshold;
determining a maximum transmission power based on the selected maximum power reduction value; and
controlling the transmission power of the apparatus for uplink transmission within a power range that is less than or equal to the maximum transmission power.
Frank and Ji both disclose determining MPR for a modulation rate. Frank at ¶57, Ji at claim 15. Further, Frank discloses determining a maximum power based on one of two MPRs and controlling the UE to determine transmission power up to the maximum. Frank at FIG 5 steps 550 and 520-535 and at ¶¶52-54.
Further, in the combined invention Ji discloses that MPR is selected based on distance as noted above, and Ji further that in the calculation noted above a first MPR may be selected if an allocation is above a certain distance level and a second MPR may be selected if an allocation is not. Ji at ¶54 and FIG 4B, noting bandwidth allocation 401 which is a given distance from edge 851 (to RB_end_B), and if it is below that distance a different MPR is used than when it is above that distance. As Ji states that the higher MPR is when the allocation extends beyond this limit, it reads as implying that a lower MPR is for when the distance is greater than or equal to it.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Frank in view of Ji as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Taiwanese Patent Document TW 200948121A1 to Athalye et al. (“Athalye”), with a publication date of November 16, 2009.
As to claim 14:
The method of claim 1, further comprising:
determining, by the user device, a modulation rate for uplink transmission via the resource block allocation;
wherein the controlling comprises:
determining, by the user device based on the distance and the modulation rate, a maximum power reduction value;
determining, by the user device based on the maximum power reduction value, a maximum transmission power; and
controlling, by the user device based on signals received from a base station, a transmission power of the user device for uplink transmission via the resource block allocation within a power range up to the maximum transmission power.
Frank in view of Ji discloses the invention of claim 1 above. Further, Frank and Ji both disclose determining a modulation rate via an MCS which is related by their process to the MPR, which the UE would be made aware of for uplink transmissions. Frank at ¶¶50 and 57, Ji at claim 15. Lastly, Frank further discloses that transmission power is controlled via the RB allocation within a range up to a maximum transmission power determined by the MPR based on communications with the BS. Frank at ¶¶48-49.
However, Frank in view of Ji does not specify that the controlling includes the user device determining MPR based on the distance and modulation rate.
Athalye discloses an analogous invention, namely a method of controlling uplink power at a UE based on the distance of the UE’s assigned bandwidth to the edge of a frequency band. Athalye at Abstract and Description (“The power amplifier 224 at 220 may apply a larger power backoff when distributing one or more of the band edges than when the allocation is closer to the center of the band.”). Athalye further discloses determining a modulation rate for the allocation of UE bandwidth, determining, based on the distance and the modulation rate, a power backoff (MPR), and using the power backoff to determine a maximum power wherein the UE controls its uplink power based on the maximum power. Athalye at Description (“For example, lookup Table 412 and/or 422 may map an MPR to the assignment based on a plurality of RBs spanned by an assignment, a width of the assignment in frequency, a modulation order associated with the assignment, and/or other suitable factors In an instance. The 'additional or other' lookup table 412 and/or 422 may map a spectrum allocation to an MPR value based on the spectral position within the frequency band associated with the system”), as well as claim 3 and FIG 4. Note that lookup table 412 is part of the UE. Id.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Frank in view of Ji in such a manner as Athalye to determine a transmission power based on a distance of a resource allocation and the modulation rate as Athalye states “In order to minimize the hybrid transmission at a terminal, an efficient and adaptable power margin management technique needs to be implemented at the terminal”. Athalye at TECHNICAL FIELD OF THE INVENTION. Further, one of ordinary skill in the art would have understood such to have been an example of combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. MPEP § 2143 I. A., citing KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Frank in view of Ji as applied to claim 7 above and further in view of Athalye.
As to claim 15:
The apparatus of claim 7, wherein the apparatus is further caused to:
determine, a modulation rate for uplink transmission via the resource block allocation;
wherein causing the apparatus to control comprises causing the apparatus to:
determine, based on the distance and the modulation rate, a maximum power reduction value;
determine, based on the maximum power reduction value, a maximum transmission power; and
control, based on signals received from a base station, a transmission power of the user device for uplink transmission via the resource block allocation within a power range up to the maximum transmission power.
Frank in view of Ji discloses the invention of claim 7 above. Further, Frank and Ji both disclose determining a modulation rate via an MCS which is related by their process to the MPR, which the UE would be made aware of for uplink transmissions. Frank at ¶¶50 and 57, Ji at claim 15. Lastly, Frank further discloses that transmission power is controlled via the RB allocation within a range up to a maximum transmission power determined by the MPR based on communications with the BS. Frank at ¶¶48-49.
However, Frank in view of Ji does not specify that the controlling includes the user device determining MPR based on the distance and modulation rate.
Athalye discloses an analogous invention, namely a method of controlling uplink power at a UE based on the distance of the UE’s assigned bandwidth to the edge of a frequency band. Athalye at Abstract and Description (“The power amplifier 224 at 220 may apply a larger power backoff when distributing one or more of the band edges than when the allocation is closer to the center of the band.”). Athalye further discloses determining a modulation rate for the allocation of UE bandwidth, determining, based on the distance and the modulation rate, a power backoff (MPR), and using the power backoff to determine a maximum power wherein the UE controls its uplink power based on the maximum power. Athalye at Description (“For example, lookup Table 412 and/or 422 may map an MPR to the assignment based on a plurality of RBs spanned by an assignment, a width of the assignment in frequency, a modulation order associated with the assignment, and/or other suitable factors In an instance. The 'additional or other' lookup table 412 and/or 422 may map a spectrum allocation to an MPR value based on the spectral position within the frequency band associated with the system”), as well as claim 3 and FIG 4. Note that lookup table 412 is part of the UE. Id.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Frank in view of Ji in such a manner as Athalye to determine a transmission power based on a distance of a resource allocation and the modulation rate as Athalye states “In order to minimize the hybrid transmission at a terminal, an efficient and adaptable power margin management technique needs to be implemented at the terminal”. Athalye at TECHNICAL FIELD OF THE INVENTION. Further, one of ordinary skill in the art would have understood such to have been an example of combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. MPEP § 2143 I. A., citing KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Frank in view of Ji as applied to claim 13 above and further in view of Taiwanese Patent Document TW 200948121A1 to Athalye et al. (“Athalye”), with a publication date of November 16, 2009.
As to claim 19:
The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 13, further comprising:
determining a modulation rate for uplink transmission via the resource block allocation;
wherein the controlling comprises:
determining, based on the distance and the modulation rate, a maximum power reduction value;
determining, based on the maximum power reduction value, a maximum transmission power; and
controlling, based on signals received from a base station, a transmission power of the apparatus for uplink transmission via the resource block allocation within a power range up to the maximum transmission power.
Frank in view of Ji discloses the invention of claim 13 above. Further, Frank and Ji both disclose determining a modulation rate via an MCS which is related by their process to the MPR, which the UE would be made aware of for uplink transmissions. Frank at ¶¶50 and 57, Ji at claim 15. Lastly, Frank further discloses that transmission power is controlled via the RB allocation within a range up to a maximum transmission power determined by the MPR based on communications with the BS. Frank at ¶¶48-49.
However, Frank in view of Ji does not specify that the controlling includes the user device determining MPR based on the distance and modulation rate.
Athalye discloses an analogous invention, namely a method of controlling uplink power at a UE based on the distance of the UE’s assigned bandwidth to the edge of a frequency band. Athalye at Abstract and Description (“The power amplifier 224 at 220 may apply a larger power backoff when distributing one or more of the band edges than when the allocation is closer to the center of the band.”). Athalye further discloses determining a modulation rate for the allocation of UE bandwidth, determining, based on the distance and the modulation rate, a power backoff (MPR), and using the power backoff to determine a maximum power wherein the UE controls its uplink power based on the maximum power. Athalye at Description (“For example, lookup Table 412 and/or 422 may map an MPR to the assignment based on a plurality of RBs spanned by an assignment, a width of the assignment in frequency, a modulation order associated with the assignment, and/or other suitable factors In an instance. The 'additional or other' lookup table 412 and/or 422 may map a spectrum allocation to an MPR value based on the spectral position within the frequency band associated with the system”), as well as claim 3 and FIG 4. Note that lookup table 412 is part of the UE. Id.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Frank in view of Ji in such a manner as Athalye to determine a transmission power based on a distance of a resource allocation and the modulation rate as Athalye states “In order to minimize the hybrid transmission at a terminal, an efficient and adaptable power margin management technique needs to be implemented at the terminal”. Athalye at TECHNICAL FIELD OF THE INVENTION. Further, one of ordinary skill in the art would have understood such to have been an example of combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. MPEP § 2143 I. A., citing KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to Charles Craver whose telephone number is (571) 272-7849. The Examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 8:30-5:30 PT Pacific Time.
If attempts to reach the Examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner’s supervisor, Andrew J. Fischer can be reached on 571-272-6779. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
Signed,
/CHARLES R CRAVER/Reexamination Specialist, Art Unit 3992