Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 9/16/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Argument: Applicant argued (REM 9/16/2026, page 9, 2nd last paragraph):
“At a minimum, the Office Action has not pointed to portions of W0862 that disclose, teach, or suggest "determining a margin in dependence on a value of the estimate of SINR for the radio transmission," as recited in Claim 1. …..Claim 1 recites "determining a margin" which is "in dependence on a value of the estimate of SINR for the radio transmission." The Office Action has not identified a portion of W0862 where the LA margin is determined "in dependence on a value of the estimate of SINR for the radio transmission,"
Response: Examiner respectfully disagrees. Examiner quoted [0033] – [0035] in CTNF (6/17/2026, page 4, 2nd paragraph). WO682 further expands on this in Fig. 2. Fig. 2, block 202 discloses receiving signal and interference. WO682 ([0050]) discloses:
“Initially, a signal transmitted from another network entity and interference are received in a step 202. The signal could comprise, e.g. user data or reference signals. Alternatively, the signal could comprise estimates related to the quality of a radio link Then, one or more estimates of parameters related to the quality of the radio link, such as e.g. SINR, or separately, received signal strength S and interference I, are obtained in a step 204.”.
Hence, at this stage the estimate of SINR is obtained.
Next, in Fig. 2, block 210, the link margin is obtained. WO682 [0052] discloses “From the one or more derived error distributions, an estimated link adaptation margin is derived in a step 210”. The intermediate steps in blocks 206, 208 are based on SINR (e.g. see [0052], 1st step where the error distribution is based on actual vs estimate).
Hence from the above, the link margin obtained in WO682, Fig. 2, block 210 is dependent on the estimated SINR, as required by claim 1.
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 - 3, 5 - 6, 9, 11 - 16, 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by WO2011096862A1 (hereafter WO862; which has been provided in the International Search Report).
Regarding claim 1, WO862 discloses a method, performed by a network node (Fig.1, network node 102; [0004] discloses “The interference 110 experienced in a network node 102, e.g. a base station, can be estimated by measuring, in the network node 102 …..”), for selecting a transport format for a radio transmission ([0033] discloses selecting a modulation and coding scheme (MCS) based on the SINR; wherein the transport format is the MCS), the method comprising:
obtaining an estimate of expected Signal Interference to Noise Ratio, SINR, for the radio transmission ([0033]);
determining a margin in dependence on a value of the estimate of SINR for the radio transmission ([0033]; [0034] discloses “Given a probability distribution, e.g., of a SINR estimation error distribution, an IA margin is selected to achieve a predetermined radio link quality target…”; [0035; Fig. 2, block 210 dependent on prior blocks, including blocks 202, 204; [0050] discloses:
“Initially, a signal transmitted from another network entity and interference are received in a step 202. The signal could comprise, e.g. user data or reference signals. Alternatively, the signal could comprise estimates related to the quality of a radio link Then, one or more estimates of parameters related to the quality of the radio link, such as e.g. SINR, or separately, received signal strength S and interference I, are obtained in a step 204.”.
Hence, at this stage the estimate of SINR is obtained.
Next, in Fig. 2, block 210, the link margin is obtained. WO682 [0052] discloses “From the one or more derived error distributions, an estimated link adaptation margin is derived in a step 210”. The intermediate steps in blocks 206, 208 are based on SINR (e.g. see [0052], 1st step where the error distribution is based on actual vs estimate);
and selecting a transport format for the radio transmission based on the estimate of SINR for the radio transmission and the margin ([0033]; [0038], last bullet).
Regarding claim 2, WO862 discloses the margin is a Link Adaptation Margin, LAM ([0033], 3rd line).
Regarding claim 3, WO862 discloses the margin is determined in dependence on a magnitude of the estimate of SINR for the radio transmission ([0034] discloses “Given a probabili1ydistribution, e.g., of a SINR estimation error distribution, an IA margin is selected to achieve a predetermined radio link quali1y target, …”).
Regarding claim 5, WO862 discloses the margin is selected from a plurality of margin values in dependence of the value of the estimate of SINR ([0052], line 5+ discloses “From the one or more derived error distributions, an estimated link adaptation margin is derived in a step 210. One way 1D derive the estimated link adaptation margin is to derive it from the CDFs of the estimation error distributions at a certain quality target percentile,…”; hence from the above it is inherent that the plurality of margin values can be obtained from the error distribution).
Claim 6 is similarly analyzed as claim 5. Two margin values would be a subset of the multiple margin values in claim 5.
Regarding claim 9, WO862 discloses the margin is determined based on calculations of SINR estimation error in respect of previous transmissions (Fig. 5 shows SINR estimation errors; [0046], last 4 lines).
Regarding claim 11, WO862 discloses the margin is determined in dependence on the value of the estimate of SINR ([0034], 4th line – 8th line discloses “Given a probabili1ydistribution, e.g., of a SINR ….”) and based on at least one of:
a service type of traffic carried by the radio transmission;
a service requirement, such as one or more of: a reliability requirement, a latency requirement, a spectral efficiency requirement and a BLER requirement ([0034], 6th line discloses BLER);
environment conditions;
allocation size of the radio transmission;
whether the radio transmission is a re-transmission;
and an outcome of a previous transmission over the same communications channel.
Regarding claim 12, WO862 discloses the radio transmission is an uplink radio transmission or a downlink radio transmission ([0037] discloses “The procedure of estimating a link adaptation margin can be applied for transmissions both in the uplink (UI) and the downlink (DI), i.e. in both network nodes and mobile terminals…”).
Regarding claim 13, WO862 discloses obtaining the estimate of SINR for the radio communication comprises at least one of:
estimating SINR based on reference signal measurements ([0050], line 3+ discloses “Initially, a signal ransmitied from another network entity and interference are received in a step 202. The signal could comprise, e.g. user data or reference signals …Then, one or more estimates of parameters related to the quality of the radio link, such as e.g. SINR, or separately, received signal S and interference I are obtained in a step 204.”);
determining the estimate of SINR from one or more Channel State Information reports received from a user equipment;
receiving the estimate of SINR;
based on the outcome of one or more previous transmissions.
Regarding claim 14, WO862 discloses the transport format is a transport block format ([0006], lines 2 discloses BLER, hence transport block inherent; claim 2 discloses BLER).
Regarding claim 15, WO862 discloses the transport format is at least one of a modulation and coding scheme; a precoder and a number of layers for the transmission ([0033] discloses MCS).
Regarding claim 16, WO862 discloses scheduling the radio transmission according to the selected transport format ([0048], line 7 discloses “…simultaneous transmission is scheduled or not,….”; [0033] discloses MCS selected).
Claim 19 is similarly analyzed as claim 1, with claim 19 reciting operations performed by a user equipment. WO862 discloses the method could be performed by any network entity ([0050], Fig. 2; [0031] discloses “The -term "network entity'' is used as referring to both network nodes and mobile terminals”; [0037] discloses “The procedure of estimating a link adaptation margin can be applied for transmissions both in the uplink (UI) and the downlink (DI), i.e. in both network nodes and mobile terminals…”). Hence, the same could be performed by a UE.
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.
Claims 4, 7 - 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO2011096862A1 (hereafter WO862; which has been provided in the International Search Report).
Regarding claim 4, WO862 does not explicitly disclose the margin is selected according to a rule such that a smaller margin is selected for a lower estimate of SINR than for a higher estimate of SINR.
However, this is obvious to try by one of ordinary skill in the art (Rationales for Obviousness (MPEP 2143, Rationale E) based on one of ordinary skill in the art knowing that a lower SINR has a larger probability of error (since more noise in the estimate) and a higher SINR has a lower probability of error (less noise in the estimate). Based on this, the margin for lower SINR could be chosen lower and for higher SINR, the margin could be chosen higher.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to use two margins based on high or low SINR because this would provide optimum margin values for each scenario.
Regarding claim 7, WO862 does not explicitly disclose selecting the margin comprises selecting a first of the at least two margin values when the estimate of SINR exceeds a threshold and selecting a second of the at least two margin values when the estimate of SINR is lower than the threshold.
However, WO862 discloses “Given a probability distribution, e.g., of a SINR estimation error distribution, an IA margin is selected to achieve a predetermined radio link quality target, …” ([0037], line 2+).
Hence, the margin values can be selected based on SINR and error distribution and one of ordinary skill in the art can select different margins based on different SINR values defined by thresholds (low and high).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to use two margins based on high or low SINR because this would provide optimum margin values for each scenario.
Regarding claim 8, WO862 discloses at least one of the margin values is a value interpolated or extrapolated from at least two other of the plurality of margin values ([0052], line 5+ discloses “From the one or more derived error distributions, an estimated link adaptation margin is derived in a step 210. One way 1D derive the estimated link adaptation margin is to derive it from the CDFs of the estimation error distributions at a certain quality target percentile,…”; hence from the above it is inherent that the plurality of margin values can be obtained from the error distribution).
Interpolation or extrapolation between the two is obvious to try or an obvious variation (Rationales for Obviousness (MPEP 2143, Rationales E & F)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to use interpolation or extrapolation of the margin values because this would provide values in between or outside the obtained range, as is well known in the art
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO2011096862A1 (hereafter WO862; which has been provided in the International Search Report) in view of Ruijter (US 20210242894 A1).
Regarding claim 10, WO862 discloses the margin is selected from a plurality of margin values in dependence of the value of the estimate of SINR ([0034], lines 4 - 9).
WO862 does not disclose at least one of the plurality of margin values is determined based on calculations of SINR estimation error in respect of previous radio transmissions.
In the same field of endeavor, however, Ruijter discloses at least one of the plurality of margin values is determined based on calculations of SINR estimation error in respect of previous radio transmissions ([0118] discloses “The selection may be based on previous transmissions. As examples, the technique described in the IEEE 802.15.4-2020 standard is called link margin (obtained from a previous transmission) information element (IE). As examples, Packet Success Rate, RSSI, etc., may be used, as desired.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to use the link margin from the previous transmission, as disclosed by Ruijter, in the system of WO862 because this would avoid the need for obtaining it again, thereby reducing the “pre-data transmission” time.
Claims 17 – 18, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO2011096862A1 (hereafter WO862; which has been provided in the International Search Report) in view of Gaal et al. (US 20210377088 A1).
Regarding claim 17, WO862 discloses a network node (Fig.1, network node 102; [0004] discloses “The interference 110 experienced in a network node 102, e.g. a base station, can be estimated by measuring, in the network node 102 …..”) comprising:
processing circuitry configured to (Fig. 3, processor 312; [0022]; [0055] discloses “…adapted to enable the performance of the above described procedure in a network entity 301, will be described with reference to figure 3….”):
obtain an estimate of expected Signal Interference to Noise Ratio, SINR, for a radio transmission ([0033]);
determine a margin in dependence on a value of the estimate of SINR ([0033]; [0034] discloses “Given a probability distribution, e.g., of a SINR estimation error distribution, an IA margin is selected to achieve a predetermined radio link quality target…”; [0035]);
and select a transport format for the radio transmission based on the estimate of SINR for the radio transmission and the margin ([0033] discloses selecting a modulation and coding scheme (MCS) based on the SINR; wherein the transport format is the MCS; [0038], last bullet).
WO862 does not disclose power suppl y circuitry configured to supply power to the processing circuitry.
In the same field of endeavor, however, Gaal discloses power supply circuitry configured to supply power to the processing circuitry (Fig. 29, power supply 2918; [0169], especially last sentence discloses “In other aspects, the cellular baseband processor 2904 may be a component of the base station 310 or the entire base station 310 “).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to use the power supply, as disclosed by Gaal, in the system of WO862 because this would provide power needed for operating components in the network node/base station.
Regarding claim 18, WO862 discloses the margin is a Link Adaptation Margin, LAM ([0033], 3rd line).
Claim 20 is similarly analyzed as claim 17, with claim 20 reciting operations performed by a user equipment. WO862 discloses the method could be performed by any network entity ([0050], Fig. 2; [0031] discloses “The -term "network entity'' is used as referring to both network nodes and mobile terminals”; [0037] discloses “The procedure of estimating a link adaptation margin can be applied for transmissions both in the uplink (UI) and the downlink (DI), i.e. in both network nodes and mobile terminals…”). Hence, the same could be performed by a UE. Further, Gaal discloses power supply for UE ([0169] discloses “…in another configuration, the apparatus 2902 may be the entire UE (e.g., see 350 of FIG. 3) and include the additional modules of the apparatus 2902”).
Other Prior Art Cited
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to the applicant’s disclosure.
The following patents/publications are cited to further show the state of the art with respect to selecting transmission formats and link margin determination:
Pelletier et al. (US 9345039 B2) discloses Device-to-device (D2D) Link Adaptation.
Furuskar et al. (US 8681721 B2) discloses Method for Link Adaptation with A Signal Quality Margin Based On The Bandwidth.
Chuang et al. (US 7502340 B1) discloses Method and System for Integrated Link Adaptation and Power Control to Improve Error and Throughput Performance in Wireless Packet Networks.
Leung et al. (US 20090010242 A1) discloses System and Method for Estimating Interference in A Packet-based Wireless Network.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADOLF DSOUZA whose telephone number is (571)272-1043. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9 AM - 5 PM.
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, Chieh M Fan can be reached at 571-272-3042. 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.
/ADOLF DSOUZA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2632
Prosecution Insights