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 Objections
Claims 4 and 16 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 4 - Lines 3 and 7 – “date” should be -- data --.
Regarding claim 16 – Lines 3 and 6 - “date” should be -- data --.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 1-4, 6-16, and 18-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Noro (US 2014/0086053 A1).
Regarding claim 1 - Noro discloses establishing, via a transceiver of a user equipment (UE), a wireless connection with a network, refer to Figure 1 and paragraph [0050] - The network I/F 111 is controlled by the CPU 101 and functions as an interface for communication conducted using global positioning system (GPS), 3rd generation (3G), or wireless local area network (WLAN) technology, for example.
determining, via a central processing unit (CPU) of the UE, a CPU frequency upper bound, refer to paragraph [0033] - For this reason, when a portable terminal device is communicating, the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU may be increased so as to avoid a situation in which the processing capability of the CPU is a bottleneck to communication, also, refer to paragraph [0072] -When the instruction to control the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU is issued by the CPU load measuring unit 125, the determining unit 126 determines, based on the change state of the amount of traffic or the amount of traffic per unit time, whether the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU 101 is to be increased, decreased, or maintained intact.
increasing, via the CPU, a frequency of the CPU, until a first parameter of the wireless connection remains the same value for a predetermined duration, wherein the frequency of the CPU is limited to be lower than the CPU frequency upper bound, refer to paragraph [0035] - Therefore, in portable terminal devices according to embodiments described below, the operating frequency of a CPU is caused to vary, and the operating frequency of the CPU is decided based on the result of determining whether the amount of traffic (first parameter) of a wireless link changes after the operating frequency is varied, also, refer to paragraph [0072] - When the instruction to control the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU is issued by the CPU load measuring unit 125, the determining unit 126 determines, based on the change state of the amount of traffic or the amount of traffic per unit time, whether the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU 101 is to be increased, decreased, or maintained intact, also, refer to Figures 3 and 4, and paragraph [0079] - Then, after the completion of the "search mode" the controller 127 provides an instruction to start a "stabilization waiting mode", which is a subroutine (step S103). The "stabilization waiting mode" is a mode in which stabilization of the amount of traffic of the communication module 123 is waited for. That is, the "search mode" is carried out when the amount of traffic of the communication module 123 is stable, that is, in a stable period (refer to FIG. 4). Details of the "stabilization waiting mode" will be described later, also, Figure 6 and paragraph [0092] - As described above, in this embodiment, after the completion of the "search mode", the "stabilization waiting mode" is carried out until the amount of traffic of the communication module 123 has stabilized. Accordingly, the "search mode" for optimizing the setting of the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU 101 starts after the amount of traffic of the communication module 123 has stabilized.
decreasing, via the CPU, the frequency of the CPU until a second parameter of the wireless connection changes, in response to a determination that the first parameter of the wireless connection remains the same value for the predetermined duration, refer to Figure 3 and paragraph [0080] - However, if it is determined that the CPU load is not larger than the threshold ("No" in step S101), it is presumed that far from the processing capability of the CPU 101 being a bottleneck for communication, there is room for to decrease the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU 101. The controller 127 therefore instructs the CPU operating frequency control module 121 to decrease the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU 101. Based on the instruction from the controller 127, the CPU operating frequency control module 121 decreases the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU 101 by one rank (step S104). The CPU operating frequency upper limit control module performs the CPU operating frequency upper limit control processing at regular intervals.
Regarding claim 2 – Noro discloses claim 1. Noro discloses determining, via the CPU, a maximum throughput according to a maximum available bandwidth of the wireless connection, wherein the maximum throughput is the maximum throughput that the wireless connection is able to achieve, refer to Figure 6 and paragraph [0095] - As illustrated in FIG. 6, after the start of the "search mode", the controller 127 first instructs the CPU operating frequency control module 121 to increase the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU 101. Based on the instruction from the controller 127, the CPU operating frequency control module 121 increases the setting of the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU 101 by one rank (step S301), also, paragraph [0097] - Here, if it is determined that the amount of traffic has increased ("increase" in step S302), it is presumed that the processing capability of the CPU 101 has become a bottleneck for communication. The controller 127 therefore instructs the CPU operating frequency control module 121 to increase the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU 101. Based on the instruction from the controller 127, the CPU operating frequency control module 121 further increases the setting of the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU 101 by one rank (step S301).
determining, via the CPU, the CPU frequency upper bound according to the maximum throughput of the wireless connection, wherein the CPU frequency upper bound is the lowest frequency required to achieve the maximum throughput, refer to paragraph [0099] - Also, if it is determined that the amount of traffic has not changed ("no change" in step S302), it is presumed that the processing capability of the CPU 101 has become no longer a bottleneck for communication because of the increase in the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU 101. The controller 127 therefore instructs the CPU operating frequency control module 121 to decrease the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU 101. Based on the instruction from the controller 127, the CPU operating frequency control module 121 changes the setting of the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU 101 to the immediately previous upper limit (step S303). That is, the immediately previous upper limit of the operating frequency is presumed to be the optimum value, and the setting of the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU 101 is returned to the immediately previous upper limit.
Regarding claim 3 – Noro discloses claim 1. Noro discloses receiving, via the transceiver, an indication information that indicates a maximum throughput of the wireless connection from the network, refer to Figure 6 and paragraph [0096] - Then, the determining unit 126 determines based on the amount of traffic acquired by the data traffic measuring unit 124 whether the amount of traffic of the communication module 123 has increased, has decreased, or has not changed relative to the amount of traffic of the previous measurement (step S302). That is, it is determined how the amount of traffic changes when the setting of the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU 101 is increased by one rank.
determining, via the CPU, the CPU frequency upper bound according to the maximum throughput of the wireless connection, wherein the CPU frequency upper bound is the lowest frequency required to achieve the maximum throughput, refer to paragraph [0099] - Also, if it is determined that the amount of traffic has not changed ("no change" in step S302), it is presumed that the processing capability of the CPU 101 has become no longer a bottleneck for communication because of the increase in the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU 101. The controller 127 therefore instructs the CPU operating frequency control module 121 to decrease the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU 101. Based on the instruction from the controller 127, the CPU operating frequency control module 121 changes the setting of the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU 101 to the immediately previous upper limit (step S303). That is, the immediately previous upper limit of the operating frequency is presumed to be the optimum value, and the setting of the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU 101 is returned to the immediately previous upper limit.
Regarding claim 4 – Noro discloses claim 1. Noro discloses determining, via the CPU, the CPU frequency upper bound is the maximum frequency of the CPU, when an amount of date required to be transmitted through the UE is smaller than a maximum achievable throughput of the UE, refer to [0099] - Also, if it is determined that the amount of traffic has not changed ("no change" in step S302), it is presumed that the processing capability of the CPU 101 has become no longer a bottleneck for communication because of the increase in the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU 101. The controller 127 therefore instructs the CPU operating frequency control module 121 to decrease the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU 101. Based on the instruction from the controller 127, the CPU operating frequency control module 121 changes the setting of the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU 101 to the immediately previous upper limit (step S303). That is, the immediately previous upper limit of the operating frequency is presumed to be the optimum value, and the setting of the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU 101 is returned to the immediately previous upper limit.
determining, via the CPU, the CPU frequency upper bound is a value smaller than the maximum frequency of the CPU, when the amount of date required to be transmitted through the UE is larger than the maximum achievable throughput of the UE, refer to paragraph [0154] - Besides, after the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU 101 is increased to the maximum, the setting of the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU 101 is sequentially decreased by one rank until the CPU load is larger than the threshold. Therefore, even if increasing the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU 101 causes a situation where the CPU 101 exhibits an excessive processing capability, the processing capability of the CPU 101 may be controlled to a minimum necessity by performing the "increase mode" according to this embodiment, also, refer to Figures 13 and 14, paragraph [0149] - As illustrated in FIG. 13, after the start of the "increase mode", the controller 127 first instructs the CPU operating frequency control module 121 to increase the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU 101. Based on the instruction from the controller 127, the CPU operating frequency control module 121 increases the setting of the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU 101 to a maximum (step S801). As the maximum, the physical upper limit that is set for each CPU 101, or a thermal upper limit that is set in consideration of heat generation of the CPU 101, for example, may be used.
wherein the maximum achievable throughput of the UE is the throughput achieved using the CPU working at the maximum frequency of the CPU before an over-temperature protection mechanism is triggered, refer to Figures 13 and 14, paragraph [0149] - As illustrated in FIG. 13, after the start of the "increase mode", the controller 127 first instructs the CPU operating frequency control module 121 to increase the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU 101. Based on the instruction from the controller 127, the CPU operating frequency control module 121 increases the setting of the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU 101 to a maximum (step S801). As the maximum, the physical upper limit that is set for each CPU 101, or a thermal upper limit that is set in consideration of heat generation of the CPU 101, for example, may be used.
Regarding claim 6 – Noro discloses claim 1. Noro discloses determining, via the CPU, whether the first parameter of the wireless connection remains the same value for the predetermined duration, refer to [0099] - Also, if it is determined that the amount of traffic has not changed ("no change" in step S302), it is presumed that the processing capability of the CPU 101 has become no longer a bottleneck for communication because of the increase in the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU 101. The controller 127 therefore instructs the CPU operating frequency control module 121 to decrease the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU 101. Based on the instruction from the controller 127, the CPU operating frequency control module 121 changes the setting of the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU 101 to the immediately previous upper limit (step S303). That is, the immediately previous upper limit of the operating frequency is presumed to be the optimum value, and the setting of the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU 101 is returned to the immediately previous upper limit.
increasing, via the CPU, the frequency of the CPU by a first value, and determining again whether the first parameter of the wireless connection remains the same value for the predetermined duration, in response to a determination that the first parameter of the wireless connection doesn't remain the same value for the predetermined duration, refer to Figures 13 and 14, paragraph [0149] - As illustrated in FIG. 13, after the start of the "increase mode", the controller 127 first instructs the CPU operating frequency control module 121 to increase the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU 101. Based on the instruction from the controller 127, the CPU operating frequency control module 121 increases the setting of the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU 101 to a maximum (step S801). As the maximum, the physical upper limit that is set for each CPU 101, or a thermal upper limit that is set in consideration of heat generation of the CPU 101, for example, may be used.
wherein the operation of decreasing the frequency of the CPU until the second parameter of the wireless connection changes comprises:
determining, via the CPU, whether the second parameter of the wireless connection changes, refer to paragraph [0079] - Then, after the completion of the "search mode" the controller 127 provides an instruction to start a "stabilization waiting mode", which is a subroutine (step S103). The "stabilization waiting mode" is a mode in which stabilization of the amount of traffic of the communication module 123 is waited for. That is, the "search mode" is carried out when the amount of traffic of the communication module 123 is stable, that is, in a stable period (refer to FIG. 4). Details of the "stabilization waiting mode" will be described later.
decreasing, via the CPU, the frequency of the CPU by a second value and determining whether the second parameter of the wireless connection changes again, in response to a determination that the second parameter of the wireless connection doesn't change, refer to Figure 3 and paragraph [0080] - However, if it is determined that the CPU load is not larger than the threshold ("No" in step S101), it is presumed that far from the processing capability of the CPU 101 being a bottleneck for communication, there is room for to decrease the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU 101. The controller 127 therefore instructs the CPU operating frequency control module 121 to decrease the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU 101. Based on the instruction from the controller 127, the CPU operating frequency control module 121 decreases the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU 101 by one rank (step S104). The CPU operating frequency upper limit control module performs the CPU operating frequency upper limit control processing at regular intervals.
increasing, via the CPU, the frequency of the CPU by the second value, in response to a determination that the second parameter of the wireless connection changes, refer to Figures 13 and 14, paragraph [0149] - As illustrated in FIG. 13, after the start of the "increase mode", the controller 127 first instructs the CPU operating frequency control module 121 to increase the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU 101. Based on the instruction from the controller 127, the CPU operating frequency control module 121 increases the setting of the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU 101 to a maximum (step S801). As the maximum, the physical upper limit that is set for each CPU 101, or a thermal upper limit that is set in consideration of heat generation of the CPU 101, for example, may be used.
Regarding claim 7 – Noro discloses claim 6. Noro discloses wherein the first value is higher than the second value, refer to Figures 11 and 14 and paragraph [0133] - As illustrated in FIG. 10, after the start of the "increase mode", the controller 127 first instructs the CPU operating frequency control module 121 to increase the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU 101. Based on the instruction from the controller 127, the CPU operating frequency control module 121 increases the setting of the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU 101 by one rank (step S601). Then, the determining unit 126 determines, based on an amount of traffic acquired by the data traffic measuring unit 124, whether the amount of traffic of the communication module 123 has increased, has decreased, or has not changed relative to the amount of traffic of the previous measurement (step S602), also, paragraph [0143] - However, if it is determined that the amount of traffic has not increased ("not increase" in step S702), that is, if it is determined that the amount of traffic has decreased or the amount of traffic has not changed, it is presumed that the processing capability of the CPU 101 is not a bottleneck for communication. The controller 127 therefore instructs the CPU operating frequency control module 121 to decrease the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU 101. Based on the instruction from the controller 127, the CPU operating frequency control module 121 changes the setting of the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU 101 to the immediately previous upper limit (step S703). That is, the upper limit of the operating frequency set immediately before the current upper limit is presumed to be the optimum value, and the setting of the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU 101 is returned to the immediately previous upper limit.
Regarding claim 8 - determining, via the CPU, which core(s) of the CPU will be boosted, based on hardware configurations of the cores, refer to paragraph [0003] - Portable terminal devices have recently become capable of causing a plurality of application programs to be executed simultaneously. The use case of "doing one thing while doing another thing", such as music playback by a music reproduction application running in the background while checking a weather report by a weather application running in the foreground, is becoming more common. Accordingly, the power consumption of portable terminal devices is increasing. It is thus becoming an important issue to reduce power consumption, also, refer to Figure 1 and paragraph [0034] - However, when the portable terminal device is communicating, the communication throughput sometimes does not sufficiently increase even if the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU is increased. For example, when the CPU is executing another application (another CPU in callouts 109 to 112) that is irrelevant to communication or when the communication throughput is suppressed due to circumstances of a server at the other end of communication or circumstances of the basic network, even if the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU is increased, the throughput of communication does not increase, and conversely, the power consumption of the portable terminal device may increase.
wherein the operation of increasing the frequency of the CPU until the parameter of the wireless connection remains the same value for the predetermined duration comprises:
increasing, via the CPU, the frequency of the core(s) that is determined to be boosted, paragraph [0149] - As illustrated in FIG. 13, after the start of the "increase mode", the controller 127 first instructs the CPU operating frequency control module 121 to increase the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU 101. Based on the instruction from the controller 127, the CPU operating frequency control module 121 increases the setting of the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU 101 to a maximum (step S801). As the maximum, the physical upper limit that is set for each CPU 101, or a thermal upper limit that is set in consideration of heat generation of the CPU 101, for example, may be used.
Regarding claim 9 – Noro discloses claim 1. Noro discloses determining, via the CPU, to separate tasks into multiple workers/tasklets and dispatch the workers/tasklets to different cores, when a throughput of the wireless connection is higher than a first threshold, refer to paragraph [0003] - Portable terminal devices have recently become capable of causing a plurality of application programs to be executed simultaneously. The use case of "doing one thing while doing another thing", such as music playback by a music reproduction application running in the background while checking a weather report by a weather application running in the foreground, is becoming more common. Accordingly, the power consumption of portable terminal devices is increasing. It is thus becoming an important issue to reduce power consumption, also, refer to Figure 1 and paragraph [0034] - However, when the portable terminal device is communicating, the communication throughput sometimes does not sufficiently increase even if the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU is increased. For example, when the CPU is executing another application (another CPU in callouts 109 to 112) that is irrelevant to communication or when the communication throughput is suppressed due to circumstances of a server at the other end of communication or circumstances of the basic network, even if the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU is increased, the throughput of communication does not increase, and conversely, the power consumption of the portable terminal device may increase.
determining, via the CPU, to combine the tasks and use one of the cores to process the combined tasks, when the throughput is lower than a second threshold, refer to paragraph [0069] - The CPU load measuring unit 125 regularly acquires the CPU load from the scheduler 122, for example, at intervals of 10 to 1000 msec. Additionally, the CPU load measuring unit 125 determines whether the CPU load acquired from the scheduler 122 exceeds a threshold that is stored in advance. If the CPU load exceeds the threshold, the CPU load measuring unit 125 issues an instruction to control the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU to the determining unit 126, also, refer to Figure 3 and paragraph [0080] - However, if it is determined that the CPU load is not larger than the threshold ("No" in step S101), it is presumed that far from the processing capability of the CPU 101 being a bottleneck for communication, there is room for to decrease the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU 101. The controller 127 therefore instructs the CPU operating frequency control module 121 to decrease the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU 101. Based on the instruction from the controller 127, the CPU operating frequency control module 121 decreases the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU 101 by one rank (step S104). The CPU operating frequency upper limit control module performs the CPU operating frequency upper limit control processing at regular intervals.
Regarding claim 10 – Noro discloses claim 1. Noro discloses determining, via the CPU, which core(s) of the CPU will be used to process a task, refer to paragraph [0003] - Portable terminal devices have recently become capable of causing a plurality of application programs to be executed simultaneously. The use case of "doing one thing while doing another thing", such as music playback by a music reproduction application running in the background while checking a weather report by a weather application running in the foreground, is becoming more common. Accordingly, the power consumption of portable terminal devices is increasing. It is thus becoming an important issue to reduce power consumption, also, refer to Figure 1 and paragraph [0034] - However, when the portable terminal device is communicating, the communication throughput sometimes does not sufficiently increase even if the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU is increased. For example, when the CPU is executing another application (another CPU in callouts 109 to 112) that is irrelevant to communication or when the communication throughput is suppressed due to circumstances of a server at the other end of communication or circumstances of the basic network, even if the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU is increased, the throughput of communication does not increase, and conversely, the power consumption of the portable terminal device may increase.
determining, via the CPU, to use the core with the lowest process capability to process the task, when the throughput is lower than a threshold, paragraph [0149] - As illustrated in FIG. 13, after the start of the "increase mode", the controller 127 first instructs the CPU operating frequency control module 121 to increase the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU 101. Based on the instruction from the controller 127, the CPU operating frequency control module 121 increases the setting of the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU 101 to a maximum (step S801). As the maximum, the physical upper limit that is set for each CPU 101, or a thermal upper limit that is set in consideration of heat generation of the CPU 101, for example, may be used.
Regarding claim 11 – Noro discloses claim 1. Noro discloses determining, via the CPU, a new CPU frequency upper bound, in response to an amount that the throughput of the wireless connection changes being greater than a threshold, paragraph [0149] - As illustrated in FIG. 13, after the start of the "increase mode", the controller 127 first instructs the CPU operating frequency control module 121 to increase the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU 101. Based on the instruction from the controller 127, the CPU operating frequency control module 121 increases the setting of the upper limit of the operating frequency of the CPU 101 to a maximum (step S801). As the maximum, the physical upper limit that is set for each CPU 101, or a thermal upper limit that is set in consideration of heat generation of the CPU 101, for example, may be used.
Regarding claim 12 – Noro discloses claim 1. Noro discloses wherein the first parameter and the second parameter of the wireless connection is: amount of upper level packets, received signal strength indication (RSSI), the throughput, or packet error rate (PER), refer to paragraph [0067] - The data traffic measuring unit 124 regularly acquires the cumulative traffic of a wireless link managed by the communication module 123, for example, at intervals of 10 to 1000 msec, and calculates the amount of traffic per unit time (bits per second--bps) of the communication module 123. Additionally, based on the amount of traffic per unit time, the data traffic measuring unit 124 determines a change state of the amount of traffic of the communication module 123, that is, whether the amount of traffic tends to increase, tends to decrease, or is stable. Then, the data communication measuring unit 124 notifies the determining unit 126 of the change state of the amount of traffic or the amount of traffic per unit time, also, refer to Figure 5 and paragraph [0085] - As illustrated in FIG. 5, after the start of the "stabilization waiting mode", the data traffic measuring unit 124 first acquires the amount of traffic of the communication module 123 (step S201). The number of bits per unit time (bps), for example, may be used as the amount of traffic although the amount of traffic is not limited to this.
Regarding claim 13 – Please refer to claim 1 for the rejection of claim 13.
Regarding claim 14 - Please refer to claim 2 for the rejection of claim 14.
Regarding claim 15 - Please refer to claim 3 for the rejection of claim 15.
Regarding claim 16 - Please refer to claim 4 for the rejection of claim 16.
Regarding claim 18 – Please refer to claim 6 for the rejection of claim 18.
Regarding claim 19 - Please refer to claim 7 for the rejection of claim 19.
Regarding claim 20 - Please refer to claim 8 for the rejection of claim 20.
Regarding claim 21 - Please refer to claim 11 for the rejection of claim 21.
Regarding claim 22 - Please refer to claim 12 for the rejection of claim 22.
Regarding claim 23 - Please refer to claim 9 for the rejection of claim 23.
Regarding claim 24 - Please refer to claim 10 for the rejection of claim 24.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5 and 17 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Reasons for Allowance
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Applicants have claimed uniquely distinct features in the application, which are not found in the prior art, either singularly or in combination. The independent claims identify the following uniquely distinct features:
I. The primary reason for the allowance of the claims are the inclusion of the limitation in the claims which are not found in the prior art references. The following claim elements “determining, via the CPU, the CPU frequency upper bound is a first CPU frequency upper bound, when a sensing result of the sensor indicates that a human is located within a predetermined distance of the UE” together with the other elements are the reasons for allowance.
1. Regarding claim 5 – The method as claimed in claim 1, wherein the UE comprises a sensor for sensing human close to the UE, wherein the method further comprises: determining, via the CPU, the CPU frequency upper bound is a first CPU frequency upper bound, when a sensing result of the sensor indicates that a human is located within a predetermined distance of the UE, and determining, via the CPU, the CPU frequency upper bound is a second CPU frequency upper bound, when the sensing result of the sensor indicates that no human is located within the predetermined distance of the UE, wherein the first CPU frequency upper bound is lower than the second CPU frequency upper bound.
2. Regarding claim 17 – The UE as claimed in claim 13, wherein the UE further comprises a sensor for sensing human close to the UE, wherein the CPU is further configured to: determine the CPU frequency upper bound is a first CPU frequency upper bound, when a sensing result of the sensor indicates that a human is located within a predetermined distance of the UE, and determine the CPU frequency upper bound is a second CPU frequency upper bound, when the sensing result of the sensor indicates that no human is located within the predetermined distance of the UE, wherein the first CPU frequency upper bound is lower than the second CPU frequency upper bound.
The closest prior art, either singularly or in combination, fail to anticipate or render the above limitations obvious.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
1. Zeng (US 2018/0365066 A1) discloses method and apparatus for allocating computing resources of processor, and terminal.
2. Gan et al. (US 2023/0109874 A1) communication method and apparatus.
3. Ke et al. (US 2021/0144579 A1) discloses apparatus and method for managing connections in wireless communication system.
4. Kim et al. (US 2024/0163948 A1) discloses wireless communication method using multi-link, and wireless communication terminal using same.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to John Pezzlo whose telephone number is (571) 272-3090. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Friday from 8:30 AM to 5:00 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ayman A. Abaza, can be reached at telephone number (571) 270-0422. 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 Patent Center and the Private Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center or Private PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center and Private PAIR to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form .
John Pezzlo
9 July 2026
/John Pezzlo/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2465B
Prosecution Insights