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
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-3, 5-7, 9-11 , 13-15 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung et al. (US 20200314765, hereinafter “Jung”), and further in view of Bergstrom et al. (US 20210092690, hereinafter “Bergstrom”).
Regarding claim 1, Jung discloses,
A user equipment (UE) (UE 100; Fig. 7) for wireless communication, comprising:
at least one memory and at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory (The apparatus may comprise: at least one processor; and at least one computer memory operably connectable to the at least one processor and storing instructions, [0018]) and configured to cause the UE to:
detect a condition to adjust a power class reduction (The wireless device (e.g., UE) 100 compares the measured uplink duty cycle with the max uplink duty cycle. If the measured uplink duty cycle is greater than the max uplink duty cycle and if the wireless device (e.g., UE) 100 does not receive a signal including a value for the P-MPR, the wireless device itself (e.g., UE) 100 calculates the value for the P-MPR Fig. 8 and [0187]-[0194]); and
adjust the power class reduction based on a measured duty cycle and a maximum duty cycle (the wireless device (e.g., UE) 100 allocates a transmit power for transmitting the uplink signal via the PUSCH. And, the wireless device (e.g., UE) 100 reduces the allocated transmit power by the calculated value for the P-MPR. The wireless device (e.g., UE) 100 transmits an uplink signal via a PUSCH at the transmit power which is reduced by the calculated value for the P-MPR [0187]-[0194]).
However, Jung does not disclose, the power class reduction for the single carrier transmission.
In the same field of endeavor, Bergstrom discloses, the power class reduction (the processing circuit 12 is adapted to execute step S10 such that the set of power classes is a set comprising a default power class, e.g., 26 dBm, [0075]-[0082]) for the single carrier transmission ( the wireless device 10 uses only a single carrier and may herein be referred to as the original power class or default power class….The term a carrier used herein may refer to the number of carriers configured at the wireless device 10 for performing an operation, which requires the wireless device 10 to apply its transmit power e.g. transmit signals with the power on the configured carrier, [0056]-[0062]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Jung by specifically providing the power class reduction for the single carrier transmission, as taught by Bergstrom for the purpose of increasing flexibility in setting different power classes in different communication scenarios while minimizing signalling overhead for capability signalling for the wireless device [0010].
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Jung and Bergstrom discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 1), further Jung discloses,
wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to adjust the power class reduction based at least in part on a ratio of the measured duty cycle and the maximum duty cycle (calculate P-MPR from its reported maxUplinkDutyCycle as another feasible solutions considering implementation aspects.
PMPR.sub.Calculated= max(10*log10 (UplinkDutyCycle.sub.estimated/maxUplinkDutyCycle), 0) [dB] ….. The wireless device (e.g., UE) 100 transmits an uplink signal via a PUSCH at the transmit power which is reduced by the calculated value for the P-MPR [0182]-[0194].).
In addition Bergstrom discloses, the power class reduction (the processing circuit 12 is adapted to execute step S10 such that the set of power classes is a set comprising a default power class, e.g., 26 dBm, [0075]-[0082]) for the single carrier transmission ( the wireless device 10 uses only a single carrier and may herein be referred to as the original power class or default power class….The term a carrier used herein may refer to the number of carriers configured at the wireless device 10 for performing an operation, which requires the wireless device 10 to apply its transmit power e.g. transmit signals with the power on the configured carrier, [0056]-[0062]).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Jung and Bergstrom discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 1), further Jung discloses,
wherein based at least in part on adjustment of the power class reduction (the wireless device (e.g., UE) 100 allocates a transmit power for transmitting the uplink signal via the PUSCH. And, the wireless device (e.g., UE) 100 reduces the allocated transmit power by the calculated value for the P-MPR. The wireless device (e.g., UE) 100 transmits an uplink signal via a PUSCH at the transmit power which is reduced by the calculated value for the P-MPR [0187]-[0194]).
In addition Bergstrom discloses, the power class reduction (the processing circuit 12 is adapted to execute step S10 such that the set of power classes is a set comprising a default power class, e.g., 26 dBm, [0075]-[0082]) for the single carrier transmission ( the wireless device 10 uses only a single carrier and may herein be referred to as the original power class or default power class….The term a carrier used herein may refer to the number of carriers configured at the wireless device 10 for performing an operation, which requires the wireless device 10 to apply its transmit power e.g. transmit signals with the power on the configured carrier, [0056]-[0062]) and the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to adjust an upper bound of a transmitter power (adapting the wireless device 10 maximum power, e.g. configuring the max power of the wireless device 10, adapting the wireless device 10 antenna configuration, e.g. maximum UL transmit antennas, adapting the CA configuration, e.g. increasing or reducing the number of carriers, adapting the MC or DC configuration, [0119]; [0144]).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Jung and Bergstrom discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 1), further Jung discloses,
wherein to adjust the power class reduction, the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to reduce the power class reduction for single carrier transmission based at least in part on the measured duty cycle and the maximum duty cycle (maxUplinkDutyCycle is a reported value via the UE capability information and UplinkDutyCycle.sub.estimated means an estimated current uplink duty cycle within certain estimation window. In both gNB and UE side, this value can be easily estimated by counting UL grant for scheduling [0184]; [0190]-[0194]).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Jung and Bergstrom discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 1), further Jung discloses,
wherein the measured duty cycle comprises a percentage of symbols transmitted by the UE over an evaluation period (The uplink duty cycle represents a percentage of uplink symbols transmitted within a first time period [0010]; The wireless device (e.g., UE) 100 measures an uplink duty cycle, which is expressed as UplinkDutyCycle.sub.estimated. Here, UplinkDutyCycle.sub.estimated means the estimated current uplink duty cycle within certain estimation window. The UplinkDutyCycle.sub.estimated may be estimated by using the allocated uplink resources based on the uplink scheduling [0190]).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Jung and Bergstrom discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 1), further Jung discloses,
wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to determine a value for the maximum duty cycle based at least in part on a power class of the UE ( This 20% default value of maxUplinkDutyCycle is derived as same approach when the default value of maxUplinkDutyCycle at FR1 is decided. In other words, 50% default value was decided with P-MPR 0 dB for power class 2 UE at FR1 since network consider the default values without any P-MPR report from UE side, [0167]-[0174]).
Regarding claim 9, Jung discloses,
A user equipment (UE) (UE 100; Fig. 7) for wireless communication, comprising:
at least one memory and at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory (The apparatus may comprise: at least one processor; and at least one computer memory operably connectable to the at least one processor and storing instructions, [0018]) and configured to cause the UE to:
detect a condition to adjust a power class reduction (The wireless device (e.g., UE) 100 compares the measured uplink duty cycle with the max uplink duty cycle. If the measured uplink duty cycle is greater than the max uplink duty cycle and if the wireless device (e.g., UE) 100 does not receive a signal including a value for the P-MPR, the wireless device itself (e.g., UE) 100 calculates the value for the P-MPR Fig. 8 and [0187]-[0194]); and
adjust the power class reduction based on a measured duty cycle and a defined maximum duty cycle (the wireless device (e.g., UE) 100 allocates a transmit power for transmitting the uplink signal via the PUSCH. And, the wireless device (e.g., UE) 100 reduces the allocated transmit power by the calculated value for the P-MPR. The wireless device (e.g., UE) 100 transmits an uplink signal via a PUSCH at the transmit power which is reduced by the calculated value for the P-MPR [0187]-[0194]; also see table 35, where it lists maxuplinkdutycycle).
However, Jung does not disclose, the power class reduction for the single carrier transmission.
In the same field of endeavor, Bergstrom discloses, the power class reduction (the processing circuit 12 is adapted to execute step S10 such that the set of power classes is a set comprising a default power class, e.g., 26 dBm, [0075]-[0082]) for the single carrier transmission ( the wireless device 10 uses only a single carrier and may herein be referred to as the original power class or default power class….The term a carrier used herein may refer to the number of carriers configured at the wireless device 10 for performing an operation, which requires the wireless device 10 to apply its transmit power e.g. transmit signals with the power on the configured carrier, [0056]-[0062]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Jung by specifically providing the power class reduction for the single carrier transmission, as taught by Bergstrom for the purpose of increasing flexibility in setting different power classes in different communication scenarios while minimizing signalling overhead for capability signalling for the wireless device [0010].
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Jung and Bergstrom discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 9), further Jung discloses,
wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to adjust the power class reduction based at least in part on a ratio of the measured duty cycle and the defined maximum duty cycle (calculate P-MPR from its reported maxUplinkDutyCycle as another feasible solutions considering implementation aspects. PMPR.sub.Calculated= max(10*log10 (UplinkDutyCycle.sub.estimated/maxUplinkDutyCycle), 0) [dB] ….. The wireless device (e.g., UE) 100 transmits an uplink signal via a PUSCH at the transmit power which is reduced by the calculated value for the P-MPR [0182]-[0194].).
In addition Bergstrom discloses, the power class reduction (the processing circuit 12 is adapted to execute step S10 such that the set of power classes is a set comprising a default power class, e.g., 26 dBm, [0075]-[0082]) for the single carrier transmission ( the wireless device 10 uses only a single carrier and may herein be referred to as the original power class or default power class….The term a carrier used herein may refer to the number of carriers configured at the wireless device 10 for performing an operation, which requires the wireless device 10 to apply its transmit power e.g. transmit signals with the power on the configured carrier, [0056]-[0062]).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Jung and Bergstrom discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 9), further Jung discloses,
wherein based at least in part on adjustment of the power class reduction (the wireless device (e.g., UE) 100 allocates a transmit power for transmitting the uplink signal via the PUSCH. And, the wireless device (e.g., UE) 100 reduces the allocated transmit power by the calculated value for the P-MPR. The wireless device (e.g., UE) 100 transmits an uplink signal via a PUSCH at the transmit power which is reduced by the calculated value for the P-MPR [0187]-[0194]).
In addition Bergstrom discloses, the power class reduction (the processing circuit 12 is adapted to execute step S10 such that the set of power classes is a set comprising a default power class, e.g., 26 dBm, [0075]-[0082]) for the single carrier transmission ( the wireless device 10 uses only a single carrier and may herein be referred to as the original power class or default power class….The term a carrier used herein may refer to the number of carriers configured at the wireless device 10 for performing an operation, which requires the wireless device 10 to apply its transmit power e.g. transmit signals with the power on the configured carrier, [0056]-[0062]) and the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to adjust an upper bound of a transmitter power (adapting the wireless device 10 maximum power, e.g. configuring the max power of the wireless device 10, adapting the wireless device 10 antenna configuration, e.g. maximum UL transmit antennas, adapting the CA configuration, e.g. increasing or reducing the number of carriers, adapting the MC or DC configuration, [0119]; [0144]).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Jung and Bergstrom discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 9), further Jung discloses,
wherein to adjust the power class reduction, the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to reduce the power class reduction for single carrier transmission based at least in part on the measured duty cycle and the defined maximum power class duty cycle (maxUplinkDutyCycle is a reported value via the UE capability information and UplinkDutyCycle.sub.estimated means an estimated current uplink duty cycle within certain estimation window. In both gNB and UE side, this value can be easily estimated by counting UL grant for scheduling [0184]; [0190]-[0194]).
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Jung and Bergstrom discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 9), further Jung discloses,
wherein the measured duty cycle comprises a percentage of symbols transmitted by the UE over an evaluation period (The uplink duty cycle represents a percentage of uplink symbols transmitted within a first time period [0010]; The wireless device (e.g., UE) 100 measures an uplink duty cycle, which is expressed as UplinkDutyCycle.sub.estimated. Here, UplinkDutyCycle.sub.estimated means the estimated current uplink duty cycle within certain estimation window. The UplinkDutyCycle.sub.estimated may be estimated by using the allocated uplink resources based on the uplink scheduling [0190]).
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Jung and Bergstrom discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 9), further Jung discloses,
wherein the defined maximum power class duty cycle comprises a defined maximum power class duty cycle defined based on one or more of a UE type or a UE power class ( This 20% default value of maxUplinkDutyCycle is derived as same approach when the default value of maxUplinkDutyCycle at FR1 is decided. In other words, 50% default value was decided with P-MPR 0 dB for power class 2 UE at FR1 since network consider the default values without any P-MPR report from UE side, [0167]-[0174]; also see table 35, where it lists maxuplinkdutycycle).
Regarding claim 21, Jung discloses,
A processor (UE 100; Fig. 7) for wireless communication, comprising:
at least one controller coupled with at least one memory and (The apparatus may comprise: at least one processor; and at least one computer memory operably connectable to the at least one processor and storing instructions, [0018]) configured to cause the processor to:
detect a condition to adjust a power class reduction (The wireless device (e.g., UE) 100 compares the measured uplink duty cycle with the max uplink duty cycle. If the measured uplink duty cycle is greater than the max uplink duty cycle and if the wireless device (e.g., UE) 100 does not receive a signal including a value for the P-MPR, the wireless device itself (e.g., UE) 100 calculates the value for the P-MPR Fig. 8 and [0187]-[0194]); and
adjust the power class reduction based on a measured duty cycle and a maximum duty cycle (the wireless device (e.g., UE) 100 allocates a transmit power for transmitting the uplink signal via the PUSCH. And, the wireless device (e.g., UE) 100 reduces the allocated transmit power by the calculated value for the P-MPR. The wireless device (e.g., UE) 100 transmits an uplink signal via a PUSCH at the transmit power which is reduced by the calculated value for the P-MPR [0187]-[0194]).
However, Jung does not disclose, the power class reduction for the single carrier transmission.
In the same field of endeavor, Bergstrom discloses, the power class reduction (the processing circuit 12 is adapted to execute step S10 such that the set of power classes is a set comprising a default power class, e.g., 26 dBm, [0075]-[0082]) for the single carrier transmission ( the wireless device 10 uses only a single carrier and may herein be referred to as the original power class or default power class….The term a carrier used herein may refer to the number of carriers configured at the wireless device 10 for performing an operation, which requires the wireless device 10 to apply its transmit power e.g. transmit signals with the power on the configured carrier, [0056]-[0062]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Jung by specifically providing the power class reduction for the single carrier transmission, as taught by Bergstrom for the purpose of increasing flexibility in setting different power classes in different communication scenarios while minimizing signalling overhead for capability signalling for the wireless device [0010].
Claims 4 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung, in view of Bergstrom and further in view of Yu et al. (US 20140321304, hereinafter “Yu”).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Jung and Bergstrom discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 1), including the feature wherein based at least in part on adjustment of the power class reduction for single carrier transmission (see the rejection in claim 1). However, the combination of Jung and Bergstrom does not explicitly disclose, the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to adjust a lower bound of a transmitter power. In the same field of endeavor, Yu discloses, the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to adjust a lower bound of a transmitter power (see the equations 2-5 and [0035]-[0043]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Jung and Bergstrom by specifically providing the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to adjust a lower bound of a transmitter power, as taught by Yu for the purpose of improving UL transmission efficiency (for both spectral efficiency and power consumption) via UE maximum transmit power configuration [0005].
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Jung and Bergstrom discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 9), including the feature wherein based at least in part on adjustment of the power class reduction for single carrier transmission (see the rejection in claim 1). However, the combination of Jung and Bergstrom does not explicitly disclose, the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to adjust a lower bound of a transmitter power. In the same field of endeavor, Yu discloses, the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to adjust a lower bound of a transmitter power (see the equations 2-5 and [0035]-[0043]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Jung and Bergstrom by specifically providing the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to adjust a lower bound of a transmitter power, as taught by Yu for the purpose of improving UL transmission efficiency (for both spectral efficiency and power consumption) via UE maximum transmit power configuration [0005].
Claims 8 and 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung, in view of Bergstrom and further in view of Popp et al. (US 20230345446, hereinafter “Popp”).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Jung and Bergstrom discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 1), further Jung discloses, however, the combination of Jung and Bergstrom does not disclose, wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE (The apparatus may comprise: at least one processor; and at least one computer memory operably connectable to the at least one processor and storing instructions, [0018]) to: determine that an adjusted power class correspond to a power class for which maximum power reduction (MPR) or additional maximum power reduction (A-MPR) is defined (The wireless device (e.g., UE) 100 compares the measured uplink duty cycle with the max uplink duty cycle. If the measured uplink duty cycle is greater than the max uplink duty cycle and if the wireless device (e.g., UE) 100 does not receive a signal including a value for the P-MPR, the wireless device itself (e.g., UE) 100 calculates the value for the P-MPR Fig. 8 and [0187]-[0194]). However, the combination of Jung and Bergstrom does not discloses, determine that an adjusted power class does not correspond to a power class for which maximum power reduction (MPR) or additional maximum power reduction (A-MPR) is defined; and utilize an MPR or A-MPR for a next higher power class for which MPR or A-MPR is defined for single carrier transmission by the UE.
In the same field of endeavor, Popp discloses, determine that an adjusted power class does not correspond to a power class for which maximum power reduction (MPR) or additional maximum power reduction (A-MPR) is defined and utilizing an MPR or A-MPR for a next higher power class for which MPR or A-MPR is defined for single carrier transmission by the UE (The modified MPR field may be particularly applicable, as MPR may change between power classes. For example, the user equipment 10 may set a modifiedMPR-Behavior bit or value associated with transmission diversity to a predefined value (e.g., a high value or ‘1’) to indicate to the network 102 that the user equipment 10 may or will use single transmission in the case of applying a lower power class [0045]-[0046]; [0055]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Jung and Bergstrom by specifically providing determine that an adjusted power class does not correspond to a power class for which maximum power reduction (MPR) or additional maximum power reduction (A-MPR) is defined; and utilize an MPR or A-MPR for a next higher power class for which MPR or A-MPR is defined for single carrier transmission by the UE, as taught by Popp for the purpose of efficiently managing transmission power for wireless communication [0002].
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Jung and Bergstrom discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 9), further Jung discloses, however, the combination of Jung and Bergstrom does not disclose, wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE (The apparatus may comprise: at least one processor; and at least one computer memory operably connectable to the at least one processor and storing instructions, [0018]) to: determine that an adjusted power class correspond to a power class for which maximum power reduction (MPR) or additional maximum power reduction (A-MPR) is defined (The wireless device (e.g., UE) 100 compares the measured uplink duty cycle with the max uplink duty cycle. If the measured uplink duty cycle is greater than the max uplink duty cycle and if the wireless device (e.g., UE) 100 does not receive a signal including a value for the P-MPR, the wireless device itself (e.g., UE) 100 calculates the value for the P-MPR Fig. 8 and [0187]-[0194]). However, the combination of Jung and Bergstrom does not discloses, determine that an adjusted power class does not correspond to a power class for which maximum power reduction (MPR) or additional maximum power reduction (A-MPR) is defined; and utilize an MPR or A-MPR for a next higher power class for which MPR or A-MPR is defined for single carrier transmission by the UE.
In the same field of endeavor, Popp discloses, determine that an adjusted power class does not correspond to a power class for which maximum power reduction (MPR) or additional maximum power reduction (A-MPR) is defined and utilizing an MPR or A-MPR for a next higher power class for which MPR or A-MPR is defined for single carrier transmission by the UE (The modified MPR field may be particularly applicable, as MPR may change between power classes. For example, the user equipment 10 may set a modifiedMPR-Behavior bit or value associated with transmission diversity to a predefined value (e.g., a high value or ‘1’) to indicate to the network 102 that the user equipment 10 may or will use single transmission in the case of applying a lower power class [0045]-[0046]; [0055]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Jung and Bergstrom by specifically providing determine that an adjusted power class does not correspond to a power class for which maximum power reduction (MPR) or additional maximum power reduction (A-MPR) is defined; and utilize an MPR or A-MPR for a next higher power class for which MPR or A-MPR is defined for single carrier transmission by the UE, as taught by Popp for the purpose of efficiently managing transmission power for wireless communication [0002].
Regarding claim 17, Jung discloses,
A user equipment (UE) (UE 100; Fig. 7) for wireless communication, comprising:
at least one memory and at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory (The apparatus may comprise: at least one processor; and at least one computer memory operably connectable to the at least one processor and storing instructions, [0018]) and configured to cause the UE to:
detect a condition to adjust a power class reduction (The wireless device (e.g., UE) 100 compares the measured uplink duty cycle with the max uplink duty cycle. If the measured uplink duty cycle is greater than the max uplink duty cycle and if the wireless device (e.g., UE) 100 does not receive a signal including a value for the P-MPR, the wireless device itself (e.g., UE) 100 calculates the value for the P-MPR Fig. 8 and [0187]-[0194]); and
adjust the power class reduction based on a measured duty cycle and a maximum duty cycle (the wireless device (e.g., UE) 100 allocates a transmit power for transmitting the uplink signal via the PUSCH. And, the wireless device (e.g., UE) 100 reduces the allocated transmit power by the calculated value for the P-MPR. The wireless device (e.g., UE) 100 transmits an uplink signal via a PUSCH at the transmit power which is reduced by the calculated value for the P-MPR [0187]-[0194]) or a measured duty cycle and a defined maximum duty cycle (the wireless device (e.g., UE) 100 allocates a transmit power for transmitting the uplink signal via the PUSCH. And, the wireless device (e.g., UE) 100 reduces the allocated transmit power by the calculated value for the P-MPR. The wireless device (e.g., UE) 100 transmits an uplink signal via a PUSCH at the transmit power which is reduced by the calculated value for the P-MPR [0187]-[0194]; also see table 35, where it lists maxuplinkdutycycle).
However, Jung does not disclose, the power class reduction for the single carrier transmission.
In the same field of endeavor, Bergstrom discloses, the power class reduction (the processing circuit 12 is adapted to execute step S10 such that the set of power classes is a set comprising a default power class, e.g., 26 dBm, [0075]-[0082]) for the single carrier transmission ( the wireless device 10 uses only a single carrier and may herein be referred to as the original power class or default power class….The term a carrier used herein may refer to the number of carriers configured at the wireless device 10 for performing an operation, which requires the wireless device 10 to apply its transmit power e.g. transmit signals with the power on the configured carrier, [0056]-[0062]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Jung by specifically providing the power class reduction for the single carrier transmission, as taught by Bergstrom for the purpose of increasing flexibility in setting different power classes in different communication scenarios while minimizing signalling overhead for capability signalling for the wireless device [0010].
Further, the combination of Jung and Bergstrom does not discloses, determine that an adjusted power class does not correspond to a power class for which maximum power reduction (MPR) or additional maximum power reduction (A-MPR) is defined; and utilize an MPR or A-MPR for a next higher power class for which MPR or A-MPR is defined for single carrier transmission by the UE.
In the same field of endeavor, Popp discloses, determine that an adjusted power class does not correspond to a power class for which maximum power reduction (MPR) or additional maximum power reduction (A-MPR) is defined and utilizing an MPR or A-MPR for a next higher power class for which MPR or A-MPR is defined for single carrier transmission by the UE (The modified MPR field may be particularly applicable, as MPR may change between power classes. For example, the user equipment 10 may set a modifiedMPR-Behavior bit or value associated with transmission diversity to a predefined value (e.g., a high value or ‘1’) to indicate to the network 102 that the user equipment 10 may or will use single transmission in the case of applying a lower power class [0045]-[0046]; [0055]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Jung and Bergstrom by specifically providing determine that an adjusted power class does not correspond to a power class for which maximum power reduction (MPR) or additional maximum power reduction (A-MPR) is defined; and utilize an MPR or A-MPR for a next higher power class for which MPR or A-MPR is defined for single carrier transmission by the UE, as taught by Popp for the purpose of efficiently managing transmission power for wireless communication [0002].
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Jung and Bergstrom discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 17), further Jung discloses,
wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to adjust the power class reduction based at least in part on a ratio of the measured duty cycle and the maximum duty cycle or a ratio of the measured duty cycle and the defined maximum power class duty cycle (calculate P-MPR from its reported maxUplinkDutyCycle as another feasible solutions considering implementation aspects.
PMPR.sub.Calculated= max(10*log10 (UplinkDutyCycle.sub.estimated/maxUplinkDutyCycle), 0) [dB] ….. The wireless device (e.g., UE) 100 transmits an uplink signal via a PUSCH at the transmit power which is reduced by the calculated value for the P-MPR [0182]-[0194].).
In addition Bergstrom discloses, the power class reduction (the processing circuit 12 is adapted to execute step S10 such that the set of power classes is a set comprising a default power class, e.g., 26 dBm, [0075]-[0082]) for the single carrier transmission ( the wireless device 10 uses only a single carrier and may herein be referred to as the original power class or default power class….The term a carrier used herein may refer to the number of carriers configured at the wireless device 10 for performing an operation, which requires the wireless device 10 to apply its transmit power e.g. transmit signals with the power on the configured carrier, [0056]-[0062]).
Regarding claim 19, the combination of Jung and Bergstrom discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 17), further Jung discloses,
wherein based at least in part on adjustment of the power class reduction (the wireless device (e.g., UE) 100 allocates a transmit power for transmitting the uplink signal via the PUSCH. And, the wireless device (e.g., UE) 100 reduces the allocated transmit power by the calculated value for the P-MPR. The wireless device (e.g., UE) 100 transmits an uplink signal via a PUSCH at the transmit power which is reduced by the calculated value for the P-MPR [0187]-[0194]).
In addition Bergstrom discloses, the power class reduction (the processing circuit 12 is adapted to execute step S10 such that the set of power classes is a set comprising a default power class, e.g., 26 dBm, [0075]-[0082]) for the single carrier transmission ( the wireless device 10 uses only a single carrier and may herein be referred to as the original power class or default power class….The term a carrier used herein may refer to the number of carriers configured at the wireless device 10 for performing an operation, which requires the wireless device 10 to apply its transmit power e.g. transmit signals with the power on the configured carrier, [0056]-[0062]) and the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to adjust an upper bound of a transmitter power or a lower bound on the transmitter power (adapting the wireless device 10 maximum power, e.g. configuring the max power of the wireless device 10, adapting the wireless device 10 antenna configuration, e.g. maximum UL transmit antennas, adapting the CA configuration, e.g. increasing or reducing the number of carriers, adapting the MC or DC configuration, [0119]; [0144]).
Prior Art of the Record:
The prior art made of record not relied upon and considered pertinent to
Applicant’s disclosure:
US 20240179634: Various techniques are provided for a method including receiving, at a network device from a user equipment (UE), an indication of a UE capability to support a per-band maximum power for a radio band combination (BC) used by the UE, determining whether the UE supports per-band maximum power for the radio BC based on the indication of the UE capability, and in response to determining the UE supports per-band maximum power for the radio BC.
US 11716696: Provided is a power control technique for a user equipment that supports high transmission power. An aspect of the invention relates to user equipment that supports a first power class in a certain frequency band, the user equipment including a transceiver that transmits radio signals to and receives radio signals from a base station; and a transmission power controller that controls transmission power to the base station.
US 20220377680: Various aspects of the present disclosure generally relate to wireless communication. In some aspects, a user equipment (UE) may determine a maximum permissible exposure (MPE) condition for one or more transmit beams of the UE; and transmit, to a base station based at least in part on the MPE condition, information indicating one or more duty cycle values for the one or more transmit beams. Numerous other aspects are provided.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GOLAM SOROWAR whose telephone number is (571)270-3761. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 8:30AM-5PM.
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, Charles Appiah can be reached at (571) 272-7904. 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.
/GOLAM SOROWAR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2641
Prosecution Insights