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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 6, 7, 8, 13, 14, 15, 16, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over NGAI et al. (US 20120270519) in view of CHANDE et al. (US 20220053562).
Regarding claims 1, 15, NGAI et al. (US 20120270519) teaches an electronic device comprising:
at least one wireless communication module comprising communication circuitry configured to transmit and/or receive a wireless signal (fig. 3, par. 75, access terminal 106);
at least one processor, comprising processing circuitry, operatively connected to the wireless communication module (fig. 3, par. 75, access terminal 106); and
memory storing instructions, wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor individually and/or collectively (fig. 3, par. 75, access terminal 106), cause the electric device to:
determine whether a specific absorption rate (SAR) back-off limit value for transmission power of the electronic device exists (par. 72, 73, 74, 75, 114, In many existing devices, the maximum transmission power limit is set at a fixed value which accounts for the access terminal 106 operating modes…dynamically adjusting a transmission power characteristic depending on the operating mode of the device);
set a parameter related to the transmission power, based on the SAR back-off limit value (par. 79, A LUT, indexed by the DSI, may be provided for each combination of the communication characteristics just described, where each LUT may specify the transmission power limits to be used corresponding to each DSI.);
perform communication based on the transmission power (par. 72, 73, 74, 75, 114, 80, 88, transmission power).
However, NGAI does not teach
set a spatial reuse parameter related to the transmission power; and
perform communication based on the spatial reuse parameter.
But, CHANDE et al. (US 20220053562) in a similar or same field of endeavor teaches set a spatial reuse parameter related to the transmission power (par. 61, 67, 70, 74, 75, 86, The CCA threshold may be adjusted based on at least one of a transmit power, a transmit equivalent isotropic radiated power (EIRP), or a transmit power spectral density (PSD)); and
perform communication based on the spatial reuse parameter (par. 61, 91, At 872, UE 802 may communicate at least one of uplink data or downlink data, e.g., data 876, based on the adjusted CCA threshold corresponding to the at least one bandwidth).
Thus, it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effectively filing date of the claimed invention to implement the system or method as taught by CHANDE in the system of NGAI to determine the transmission power.
The motivation would have been to use powers and channels that are not collision and interference and improve the transmission.
Regarding claims 2, 16, CHANDE et al. (US 20220053562) teaches the electronic device of claim 1, wherein the spatial reuse parameter is a clear channel assessment (CCA) threshold value (par. 61, 67, 70, 74, 75, 86, The CCA threshold may be adjusted based on at least one of a transmit power, a transmit equivalent isotropic radiated power (EIRP), or a transmit power spectral density (PSD)).
Regarding claims 6, 20, NGAI et al. (US 20120270519) teaches the electronic device of claim 1, wherein the SAR back-off limit value is a transmission power limit value of the electronic device (par. 110, limit the use of the DSI to perform back-offs from power limits according to an operating mode to avoid invoking power transmission back-offs during minimum performance tests).
Regarding claim 7, MEYUHAS (US 20220201625) teaches an electronic device comprising:
at least one wireless communication module comprising communication circuitry configured to transmit and/or receive a wireless signal (par. 50, 83, 87, device);
at least one processor, comprising processing circuitry, operatively connected to the wireless communication module (par. 50, 83, 87, device); and
a memory storing instructions, wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor individually and/or collectively (par. 50, 83, 87, device), cause the electric device to:
calculate an energy budget allocated to a time window, based on a time average specific absorption rate (TAS) back-off algorithm (par. 50, 83, 87, determining whether to enforce a transmission back-off based on the projected time back-off and a transmission energy budget based on one or more time-averaging specific absorption rate (TAS) parameters for regulating a radiation exposure to a user of the device 806);
minimum Contention Window (CWmin) may be used since it provides the factor of added BO as determined by a clear channel assessment (CCA) check. The CCA, for example, may determine that the communication channel is busy by detecting energy levels that exceed a threshold (par. 55);
set a parameter related to transmission power of the electronic device, based on the energy budget (par. 50, 79, 81, 83, 87, the projTBO will not allow transmissions for a certain time, and therefore impact the energy usage of the TAS transmission energy budget, determining the projTBO may enable the elimination or reduction of currently requested BOs while still complying with a transmission energy budget. In other words, using the projTBO, the device may adjust or ignore the requested BOs.); and
perform communication during the time window, based on the parameter (par. 50, 79, 81, 83, 87, determining whether to adjust a power level of a transmitter based on the comparison).
However, MEYUHAS does not teach
set a spatial reuse parameter related to transmission power; and
perform communication based on the spatial reuse parameter.
But, CHANDE et al. (US 20220053562) in a similar or same field of endeavor teaches set a spatial reuse parameter related to transmission power (par. 61, 67, 70, 74, 75, 86, the COT may be shared with the UE so that the UE may also transmit uplink (UL) traffic to the BS during the BS's COT…The CCA threshold may be adjusted based on at least one of a transmit power, a transmit equivalent isotropic radiated power (EIRP), or a transmit power spectral density (PSD)); and
perform communication during the time window, based on the spatial reuse parameter (par. 61, 75, 91, the COT may be shared with the UE so that the UE may also transmit uplink (UL) traffic to the BS during the BS's COT…At 872, UE 802 may communicate at least one of uplink data or downlink data, e.g., data 876, based on the adjusted CCA threshold corresponding to the at least one bandwidth).
Thus, it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effectively filing date of the claimed invention to implement the system or method as taught by CHANDE in the system of NGAI to determine the transmission power.
The motivation would have been to use powers and channels that are not collision and interference and improve the transmission.
Regarding claim 8, CHANDE et al. (US 20220053562) teaches the electronic device of claim 7, wherein the spatial reuse parameter is a clear channel assessment (CCA) threshold value (par. 61, 67, 70, 74, 75, 86, The CCA threshold may be adjusted based on at least one of a transmit power, a transmit equivalent isotropic radiated power (EIRP), or a transmit power spectral density (PSD)).
Regarding claim 13, MEYUHAS (US 20220201625) teaches the electronic device of claim 7, wherein the TAS back-off algorithm is an algorithm that limits average transmission power during an averaging window to a value less than or equal to a determined value (par. 50, 83, 87, devices may be configured to limit their Tx power over certain time periods by implementing TAS mechanisms…determining whether to enforce a transmission back-off based on the projected time back-off and a transmission energy budget based on one or more time-averaging specific absorption rate (TAS) parameters for regulating a radiation exposure to a user of the device 806).
Regarding claim 14, CHANDE et al. (US 20220053562) teaches the electronic device of claim 8, wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor individually and/or collectively, cause the electronic device to further: determine whether a communication channel is occupied based on the CCA threshold value (par. 61, 67, 70, 74, 75, 86, CCA busy decision 480 may be a true or false answer depending on whether measured metric Q 460 is greater than or equal to threshold X(P) …The CCA threshold may be adjusted based on at least one of a transmit power, a transmit equivalent isotropic radiated power (EIRP), or a transmit power spectral density (PSD)); and perform communication using transmission power corresponding to the CCA threshold, based on the determination result (par. 61, 67, 70, 74, 75, 86, The CCA threshold may be adjusted based on at least one of a transmit power, a transmit equivalent isotropic radiated power (EIRP), or a transmit power spectral density (PSD)).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-5, 9-12, 17-19 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
TIIROLA et al. (US 20240244539) teaches absorbed power/energy (e.g., Specific Absorption Rate, SAR) or (potentially estimated) equivalent isotropic radiated power/energy power, which may take spatial directivity into account (e.g., Effective isotropic radiated power, EIRP) (par. 126).
Marinier et al. (US 20200145079) teaches rhe UE 602 may re-select the uplink beam of the active beam processed as a result of the MPR cause by SAR. As shown in the exemplary embodiment 600 illustrated in FIG. 6, the UE 602 may reselect beam B1 (604) to replace beam B2 (606) for the active beam process due to the proximity of beam B2 (606) to a human body 608. The UE 602 may take into consideration the reduced maximum EIRP and MRP in the open loop selection of the uplink beam (par. 256, 257); to use beam processes for mobility, to select beams using open-loop and closed-loop selection procedures, for simultaneous beam process power allocation, for beam process maximum power back-off (MPR) e.g. caused by SAR, for beam re-selection due to MPR, and for beam re-selection and re-pairing due to UE rotation and dynamic blockage (par. 8); A UE 602 with multiple simultaneous active beam processes may upon detection of rotation and blockage initiate uplink beam re-selection and re-pairing on a per-beam-process basis. The UE 602 may apply orthogonal uplink resource configuration for the uplink fall-back and re-pairing transmission either in frequency or time domain. In another solution, the UE 602 may have two spatially isolated simultaneous beam process, and in this case the UE 602 may use same frequency and time resource for the beam process transmissions (par. 264).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THINH D TRAN whose telephone number is (571)270-3934. The examiner can normally be reached mon-fri 9-6.
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, FARUK HAMZA can be reached at 5712727969. 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.
/THINH D TRAN/for /Thinh Tran/, Patent Examiner of Art Unit 2466 09/19/2026
Prosecution Insights