DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . In virtue of the Application filed on 12/23/2024 claims 1-30 are pending in the present application, claims 1, 10, 19, 28 are written in independent form. The present Application claims priority to Provisional Application 63/163,653 with a filing date of 03/19/2021 and is a CONTINUATION of US Application No. 17/654,184 (now US Patent 12,177,794).
Claim Interpretation
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
Double Patenting
The claims of this application is patentably from the claims of Application No. 17/654,184 (now US Pat. No. 12,177794). The Examiner has reviewed the case and has determined that the claims are highly related but set forth distinct inventions.
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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, 5-10, 14-19, 24-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Application Publication US-20200022097 to Wang et al. (hereinafter d1) in view of over US Patent Application Publication US-20210219240 to Lee et al. (hereinafter d2) in view of over US Patent Application Publication US-20180077655 to Zhou et al. (hereinafter d3).
Regarding claim 1, as to the limitation “A method performed by a wireless communication apparatus, comprising:” d1 discloses techniques in the field of wireless communication (see d1 para. 0002) with application to power control (see d1 para. 0002) embodied as methods (see d1 Fig. 15) which is implemented by a wireless communication device (see d1 Fig. 9 element 905) which comprises components including at least a processor (i.e. processing system) (see d1 Fig. 9 element 940) and an interface (i.e. a first interface) (see d1 Fig. 9 element 915);
As to the limitation “obtaining a first transmit power associated with transmitting a first uplink signal associated with a first radio access technology (RAT)” d1 discloses power control in dual connectivity devices communicating in at least two RATs (see d1 para. 0005); including power sharing between the communication split between the RATs, wherein the power sharing includes at least reducing a maximum transmit power limit (see d1 para. 0006) of an uplink signal associated with one of the RATs (see d1 para. 0007); d1 also discloses determining maximum transmit power limit for communication over both RATs (see d1 para. 0008);
As to the limitation “allocating a second transmit power to a second uplink signal associated with a second RAT” d1 discloses allocating transmit power for communication over a second RAT based on the amount of power allocated to communication over the first RAT and the maximum transmit power limit (see d1 para. 0020-0022)
As to the limitation “transmitting the first uplink signal; and transmitting the second uplink signal” d1 discloses communication over a first RAT and the second RAT using the allocated power (see d1 para. 0016-0017);
D1 does not appear to explicitly disclose “wherein power usage associated with the first RAT is prioritized over the second RAT, and wherein a total transmit power of the first uplink signal and the second uplink signal is within a tolerance level of a maximum transmit power limit”.
Attention is directed to d2, d2 discloses teaching in a similar field of endeavor of wireless communication (see d2 para. 0002) transmitting, to a first network entity, the first uplink signal associated with the first RAT based on the first transmit power; and transmitting, to a second network entity, the second uplink signal associated with the second RAT based on the second transmit power (see d2 para. 0010-0011).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the system and/or method of d1 regarding wireless communication to incorporate the details of transmitting, to a first network entity, the first uplink signal associated with the first RAT based on the first transmit power; and “transmitting, to a second network entity, the second uplink signal associated with the second RAT based on the second transmit power as disclosed by d2. One of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date would be motivated to combine the teaching of d1 and d2 according to the teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation to modify the reference or to combine reference teachings to more efficiently manage transmission power (see d2 para. 0011). The combination of the teaching of d1 and d2 would result in a reasonable expectation of success as both techniques are in the same field and work as cooperative techniques. Furthermore, it is noted that the prior art includes each element claimed (as mapped above), although not necessarily in a single reference. Wherein the only difference between the claimed invention and the prior art being the lack of actual combination of the elements in a single prior art reference. The Examiner notes that many of the limitations mapped to the teaching of d1 may also be mapped to disclosure in d2. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods, and that in combination, wherein each element performs the same function as it does separately in d1 and d2. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable to achieve at least the result of increased efficiency in managing transmission power (see d2 para. 0011); and the combination would yield a predictable result (without a change in function thereof) with no undue experimentation. It is also noted that many of the noted sections of d2 are equally applicable to meet many of the limitations set forth above as met by d1, therefore the teaching of d2 may be applied to any other limitation of the claims rejected under this section when d1 in view of d2 is considered as a whole and not individually.
As to the limitation “wherein power usage associated with the first RAT is prioritized over the second RAT, and wherein a total transmit power of the first uplink signal and the second uplink signal is within a tolerance level of a maximum transmit power limit” d3 discloses reducing a max Tx power limit of a first signal including use of priorities for power usage (see d3 para. 0124-0126, Fig. 4) which is applied to the teaching of d1 in view of d2 regarding changing of max Tx power limits based on RAT. Wherein, a total transmit power of the first uplink signal and the second uplink signal is within a tolerance level of the maximum transmit power. d1 in view of d2 in view of d3 discloses consideration that a combined transmit power exceeds or may have a potential of exceeding a total power limit (see d1 para. 0007, 0054), wherein the consideration of having the potential of exceeding a total power limit encompasses the idea of a tolerance.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the system and/or method of d1 regarding wireless communication to incorporate the details of reducing a maximum transmit power limit of a first uplink signal associated with a first radio access technology (RAT) to obtain a first transmit power, wherein the first RAT has priority on power usage over a second RAT as disclosed by d3. One of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date would be motivated to combine the teaching of d1 and d2 with d3 according to the teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation to modify the reference or to combine reference teachings to improve communication quality (see d3 para. 0006). The combination of the teaching of d1 and d2 with d3 would result in a reasonable expectation of success as both techniques are in the same field and work as cooperative techniques. Furthermore, it is noted that the prior art includes each element claimed (as mapped above), although not necessarily in a single reference. Wherein the only difference between the claimed invention and the prior art being the lack of actual combination of the elements in a single prior art reference. The Examiner notes that many of the limitations mapped to the teaching of d1 and/or d1 may also be mapped to disclosure in d3. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods, and that in combination, wherein each element performs the same function as it does separately in d1 and d2. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable to achieve at least the result of improved communication quality (see d3 para. 0006); and the combination would yield a predictable result (without a change in function thereof) with no undue experimentation. It is also noted that many of the noted sections of d3 are equally applicable to meet many of the limitations set forth above as met by d1 and/or d2, therefore the teaching of d3 may be applied to any other limitation of the claims rejected under this section when d1 in view of d2 in view of d3 is considered as a whole and not individually.
Regarding claim 5, as to the limitation “The method of claim 1, wherein the second uplink signal overlaps in time with the first uplink signal” d1 in view of d2 in view of d3 discloses overlapping signals in time (see d1 para. 0017, 0118).
Regarding claim 6, as to the limitation “The method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving a radio resource control (RRC) configuration that indicates the maximum transmit power limit” d1 in view of d2 in view of d3 discloses use of RRC configuration (see d1 para. 0079) which is employed by one of ordinary skill in the art to indicate the max transmit power limit (see d1 para. 0007-0008).
Regarding claim 7, as to the limitation “The method of claim 1, wherein the second transmit power is less than or equal to the first transmit power” d1 in view of d2 in view of d3 disclose reducing a max Tx power limit of a first signal including use of priorities for power usage (see d3 para. 0124-0126, Fig. 4) which is applied to the teaching of d1 in view of d2 regarding changing of max Tx power limits based on RAT. Wherein, a total transmit power of the first uplink signal and the second uplink signal is within a tolerance level of the maximum transmit power.
Regarding claim 8, as to the limitation “The method of claim 1, wherein the first transmit power is obtained in association with the wireless communication apparatus being located at a cell edge” d1 in view of d2 in view of d3 disclose location near a cell edge (see d2 para. 0082, 0087, 0102).
Regarding claim 9, as to the limitation “The method of claim 1, wherein the first RAT is Long Term Evolution (LTE) RAT and the second RAT is New Radio (NR) RAT” d1 in view of d2 in view of d3 disclose RATs including at least LTE and NR (see d1 para. 0006, 0031-0032).
Regarding claim 10, as to the limitation “A user equipment (UE), comprising: a processing system that includes one or more processors and one or more code-storing memories coupling with the one or more processors, the processing system configured to cause the UE to:” d1 discloses techniques in the field of wireless communication (see d1 para. 0002) with application to power control (see d1 para. 0002) embodied as methods (see d1 Fig. 15) which is implemented by a wireless communication device (see d1 Fig. 9 element 905) which comprises components including at least a processor (i.e. processing system) (see d1 Fig. 9 element 940) and an interface (i.e. a first interface) (see d1 Fig. 9 element 915);
As to the limitation “obtain a first transmit power associated with a transmission of a first uplink signal associated with a first radio access technology (RAT)” d1 discloses power control in dual connectivity devices communicating in at least two RATs (see d1 para. 0005); including power sharing between the communication split between the RATs, wherein the power sharing includes at least reducing a maximum transmit power limit (see d1 para. 0006) of an uplink signal associated with one of the RATs (see d1 para. 0007); d1 also discloses determining maximum transmit power limit for communication over both RATs (see d1 para. 0008);
As to the limitation “allocate a second transmit power to a second uplink signal associated with a second RAT” d1 discloses allocating transmit power for communication over a second RAT based on the amount of power allocated to communication over the first RAT and the maximum transmit power limit (see d1 para. 0020-0022)
As to the limitation “output the first uplink signal; and output the second uplink signal” d1 discloses communication over a first RAT and the second RAT using the allocated power (see d1 para. 0016-0017);
D1 does not appear to explicitly disclose “wherein power usage associated with the first RAT is prioritized over the second RAT, and wherein a total transmit power of the first uplink signal and the second uplink signal is within a tolerance level of a maximum transmit power limit”.
Attention is directed to d2, d2 discloses teaching in a similar field of endeavor of wireless communication (see d2 para. 0002) transmitting, to a first network entity, the first uplink signal associated with the first RAT based on the first transmit power; and transmitting, to a second network entity, the second uplink signal associated with the second RAT based on the second transmit power (see d2 para. 0010-0011).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the system and/or method of d1 regarding wireless communication to incorporate the details of transmitting, to a first network entity, the first uplink signal associated with the first RAT based on the first transmit power; and “transmitting, to a second network entity, the second uplink signal associated with the second RAT based on the second transmit power as disclosed by d2. One of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date would be motivated to combine the teaching of d1 and d2 according to the teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation to modify the reference or to combine reference teachings to more efficiently manage transmission power (see d2 para. 0011). The combination of the teaching of d1 and d2 would result in a reasonable expectation of success as both techniques are in the same field and work as cooperative techniques. Furthermore, it is noted that the prior art includes each element claimed (as mapped above), although not necessarily in a single reference. Wherein the only difference between the claimed invention and the prior art being the lack of actual combination of the elements in a single prior art reference. The Examiner notes that many of the limitations mapped to the teaching of d1 may also be mapped to disclosure in d2. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods, and that in combination, wherein each element performs the same function as it does separately in d1 and d2. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable to achieve at least the result of increased efficiency in managing transmission power (see d2 para. 0011); and the combination would yield a predictable result (without a change in function thereof) with no undue experimentation. It is also noted that many of the noted sections of d2 are equally applicable to meet many of the limitations set forth above as met by d1, therefore the teaching of d2 may be applied to any other limitation of the claims rejected under this section when d1 in view of d2 is considered as a whole and not individually.
As to the limitation “wherein power usage associated with the first RAT is prioritized over the second RAT, and wherein a total transmit power of the first uplink signal and the second uplink signal is within a tolerance level of a maximum transmit power limit” d3 discloses reducing a max Tx power limit of a first signal including use of priorities for power usage (see d3 para. 0124-0126, Fig. 4) which is applied to the teaching of d1 in view of d2 regarding changing of max Tx power limits based on RAT. Wherein, a total transmit power of the first uplink signal and the second uplink signal is within a tolerance level of the maximum transmit power. d1 in view of d2 in view of d3 discloses consideration that a combined transmit power exceeds or may have a potential of exceeding a total power limit (see d1 para. 0007, 0054), wherein the consideration of having the potential of exceeding a total power limit encompasses the idea of a tolerance.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the system and/or method of d1 regarding wireless communication to incorporate the details of reducing a maximum transmit power limit of a first uplink signal associated with a first radio access technology (RAT) to obtain a first transmit power, wherein the first RAT has priority on power usage over a second RAT as disclosed by d3. One of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date would be motivated to combine the teaching of d1 and d2 with d3 according to the teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation to modify the reference or to combine reference teachings to improve communication quality (see d3 para. 0006). The combination of the teaching of d1 and d2 with d3 would result in a reasonable expectation of success as both techniques are in the same field and work as cooperative techniques. Furthermore, it is noted that the prior art includes each element claimed (as mapped above), although not necessarily in a single reference. Wherein the only difference between the claimed invention and the prior art being the lack of actual combination of the elements in a single prior art reference. The Examiner notes that many of the limitations mapped to the teaching of d1 and/or d1 may also be mapped to disclosure in d3. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods, and that in combination, wherein each element performs the same function as it does separately in d1 and d2. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable to achieve at least the result of improved communication quality (see d3 para. 0006); and the combination would yield a predictable result (without a change in function thereof) with no undue experimentation. It is also noted that many of the noted sections of d3 are equally applicable to meet many of the limitations set forth above as met by d1 and/or d2, therefore the teaching of d3 may be applied to any other limitation of the claims rejected under this section when d1 in view of d2 in view of d3 is considered as a whole and not individually.
Regarding claim 14, as to the limitation “The UE of claim 10, wherein the second uplink signal overlaps in time with the first uplink signal” d1 in view of d2 in view of d3 discloses overlapping signals in time (see d1 para. 0017, 0118).
Regarding claim 15, as to the limitation “The UE of claim 10, wherein the first interface is further configured to: obtain a radio resource control (RRC) configuration that indicates the maximum transmit power limit” d1 in view of d2 in view of d3 discloses use of RRC configuration (see d1 para. 0079) which is employed by one of ordinary skill in the art to indicate the max transmit power limit (see d1 para. 0007-0008).
Regarding claim 16, as to the limitation “The UE of claim 10, wherein the second transmit power is less than or equal to the first transmit power” d1 in view of d2 in view of d3 disclose reducing a max Tx power limit of a first signal including use of priorities for power usage (see d3 para. 0124-0126, Fig. 4) which is applied to the teaching of d1 in view of d2 regarding changing of max Tx power limits based on RAT. Wherein, a total transmit power of the first uplink signal and the second uplink signal is within a tolerance level of the maximum transmit power.
Regarding claim 17, as to the limitation “The UE of claim 10, wherein the first transmit power is obtained in association with the wireless communication apparatus being located at a cell edge” d1 in view of d2 in view of d3 disclose location near a cell edge (see d2 para. 0082, 0087, 0102).
Regarding claim 18, as to the limitation “The UE of claim 10, wherein the first RAT is Long Term Evolution (LTE) RAT and the second RAT is New Radio (NR) RAT” d1 in view of d2 in view of d3 disclose RATs including at least LTE and NR (see d1 para. 0006, 0031-0032).
Regarding claim 19, as to the limitation “A method performed by a wireless communication apparatus comprising:” d1 discloses techniques in the field of wireless communication (see d1 para. 0002) with application to power control (see d1 para. 0002) embodied as methods (see d1 Fig. 15) which is implemented by a wireless communication device (see d1 Fig. 9 element 905) which comprises components including at least a processor (i.e. processing system) (see d1 Fig. 9 element 940) and an interface (i.e. a first interface) (see d1 Fig. 9 element 915);
As to the limitation “obtaining a first transmit power associated with a transmission of a first uplink signal associated with a first radio access technology (RAT)” d1 discloses power control in dual connectivity devices communicating in at least two RATs (see d1 para. 0005); including power sharing between the communication split between the RATs, wherein the power sharing includes at least reducing a maximum transmit power limit (see d1 para. 0006) of an uplink signal associated with one of the RATs (see d1 para. 0007); d1 also discloses determining maximum transmit power limit for communication over both RATs (see d1 para. 0008);
As to the limitation “allocating a second transmit power to a second uplink signal associated with a second RAT” d1 discloses allocating transmit power for communication over a second RAT based on the amount of power allocated to communication over the first RAT and the maximum transmit power limit (see d1 para. 0020-0022)
As to the limitation “transmitting the second uplink signal” d1 discloses communication over a first RAT and the second RAT using the allocated power (see d1 para. 0016-0017);
As to the limitation “wherein the second uplink signal overlaps in time with the first uplink signal” d1 discloses overlapping signals in time (see d1 para. 0017, 0118);
As to the limitation “The method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving a radio resource control (RRC) configuration that indicates the maximum transmit power limit” d1 discloses use of RRC configuration (see d1 para. 0079) which is employed by one of ordinary skill in the art to indicate the max transmit power limit (see d1 para. 0007-0008).
D1 does not appear to explicitly disclose “wherein power usage associated with the first RAT is prioritized over the second RAT, and wherein a total transmit power of the first uplink signal and the second uplink signal is within a tolerance level of the maximum transmit power limit; transmitting the first uplink signal”.
Attention is directed to d2, d2 discloses teaching in a similar field of endeavor of wireless communication (see d2 para. 0002) transmitting, to a first network entity, the first uplink signal associated with the first RAT based on the first transmit power; and transmitting, to a second network entity, the second uplink signal associated with the second RAT based on the second transmit power (see d2 para. 0010-0011).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the system and/or method of d1 regarding wireless communication to incorporate the details of transmitting, to a first network entity, the first uplink signal associated with the first RAT based on the first transmit power; and “transmitting, to a second network entity, the second uplink signal associated with the second RAT based on the second transmit power as disclosed by d2. One of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date would be motivated to combine the teaching of d1 and d2 according to the teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation to modify the reference or to combine reference teachings to more efficiently manage transmission power (see d2 para. 0011). The combination of the teaching of d1 and d2 would result in a reasonable expectation of success as both techniques are in the same field and work as cooperative techniques. Furthermore, it is noted that the prior art includes each element claimed (as mapped above), although not necessarily in a single reference. Wherein the only difference between the claimed invention and the prior art being the lack of actual combination of the elements in a single prior art reference. The Examiner notes that many of the limitations mapped to the teaching of d1 may also be mapped to disclosure in d2. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods, and that in combination, wherein each element performs the same function as it does separately in d1 and d2. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable to achieve at least the result of increased efficiency in managing transmission power (see d2 para. 0011); and the combination would yield a predictable result (without a change in function thereof) with no undue experimentation. It is also noted that many of the noted sections of d2 are equally applicable to meet many of the limitations set forth above as met by d1, therefore the teaching of d2 may be applied to any other limitation of the claims rejected under this section when d1 in view of d2 is considered as a whole and not individually.
As to the limitation “wherein power usage associated with the first RAT is prioritized over the second RAT, and wherein a total transmit power of the first uplink signal and the second uplink signal is within a tolerance level of a maximum transmit power limit” d3 discloses reducing a max Tx power limit of a first signal including use of priorities for power usage (see d3 para. 0124-0126, Fig. 4) which is applied to the teaching of d1 in view of d2 regarding changing of max Tx power limits based on RAT. Wherein, a total transmit power of the first uplink signal and the second uplink signal is within a tolerance level of the maximum transmit power. d1 in view of d2 in view of d3 discloses consideration that a combined transmit power exceeds or may have a potential of exceeding a total power limit (see d1 para. 0007, 0054), wherein the consideration of having the potential of exceeding a total power limit encompasses the idea of a tolerance.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the system and/or method of d1 regarding wireless communication to incorporate the details of reducing a maximum transmit power limit of a first uplink signal associated with a first radio access technology (RAT) to obtain a first transmit power, wherein the first RAT has priority on power usage over a second RAT as disclosed by d3. One of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date would be motivated to combine the teaching of d1 and d2 with d3 according to the teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation to modify the reference or to combine reference teachings to improve communication quality (see d3 para. 0006). The combination of the teaching of d1 and d2 with d3 would result in a reasonable expectation of success as both techniques are in the same field and work as cooperative techniques. Furthermore, it is noted that the prior art includes each element claimed (as mapped above), although not necessarily in a single reference. Wherein the only difference between the claimed invention and the prior art being the lack of actual combination of the elements in a single prior art reference. The Examiner notes that many of the limitations mapped to the teaching of d1 and/or d1 may also be mapped to disclosure in d3. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods, and that in combination, wherein each element performs the same function as it does separately in d1 and d2. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable to achieve at least the result of improved communication quality (see d3 para. 0006); and the combination would yield a predictable result (without a change in function thereof) with no undue experimentation. It is also noted that many of the noted sections of d3 are equally applicable to meet many of the limitations set forth above as met by d1 and/or d2, therefore the teaching of d3 may be applied to any other limitation of the claims rejected under this section when d1 in view of d2 in view of d3 is considered as a whole and not individually.
Regarding claim 24, as to the limitation “the method of claim 19, wherein the first transmit power is obtained in association with a pathloss associated with first RAT satisfying a threshold” d1 in view of d2 in view of d3 disclose path loss as a condition (see d2 para. 0082).
Regarding claim 25, as to the limitation “The method of claim 19, wherein the second transmit power is less than or equal to the first transmit power” d1 in view of d2 in view of d3 disclose reducing a max Tx power limit of a first signal including use of priorities for power usage (see d3 para. 0124-0126, Fig. 4) which is applied to the teaching of d1 in view of d2 regarding changing of max Tx power limits based on RAT. Wherein, a total transmit power of the first uplink signal and the second uplink signal is within a tolerance level of the maximum transmit power.
Regarding claim 26, as to the limitation “The method of claim 19, wherein the first transmit power is obtained in association with the wireless communication apparatus being located at a cell edge” d1 in view of d2 in view of d3 disclose location near a cell edge (see d2 para. 0082, 0087, 0102).
Regarding claim 27, as to the limitation “The method of claim 19, wherein the first RAT is Long Term Evolution (LTE) RAT and the second RAT is New Radio (NR) RAT” d1 in view of d2 in view of d3 disclose RATs including at least LTE and NR (see d1 para. 0006, 0031-0032).
Regarding claim 28, as to the limitation “A user equipment (UE), comprising: a processing system that includes one or more processors and one or more code-storing memories coupling with the one or more processors, the processing system configured to cause the UE to:” d1 discloses techniques in the field of wireless communication (see d1 para. 0002) with application to power control (see d1 para. 0002) embodied as methods (see d1 Fig. 15) which is implemented by a wireless communication device (see d1 Fig. 9 element 905) which comprises components including at least a processor (i.e. processing system) (see d1 Fig. 9 element 940) and an interface (i.e. a first interface) (see d1 Fig. 9 element 915);
As to the limitation “obtain a first transmit power associated with transmitting a first uplink signal associated with a first radio access technology (RAT);” d1 discloses power control in dual connectivity devices communicating in at least two RATs (see d1 para. 0005); including power sharing between the communication split between the RATs, wherein the power sharing includes at least reducing a maximum transmit power limit (see d1 para. 0006) of an uplink signal associated with one of the RATs (see d1 para. 0007); d1 also discloses determining maximum transmit power limit for communication over both RATs (see d1 para. 0008);
As to the limitation “allocate a second transmit power to a second uplink signal associated with a second RAT” d1 discloses allocating transmit power for communication over a second RAT based on the amount of power allocated to communication over the first RAT and the maximum transmit power limit (see d1 para. 0020-0022)
As to the limitation “transmit the first uplink signal; and transmit the second uplink signal” d1 discloses communication over a first RAT and the second RAT using the allocated power (see d1 para. 0016-0017);
As to the limitation “wherein the second uplink signal overlaps in time with the first uplink signal” d1 discloses overlapping signals in time (see d1 para. 0017, 0118);
As to the limitation “The method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving a radio resource control (RRC) configuration that indicates the maximum transmit power limit” d1 in discloses use of RRC configuration (see d1 para. 0079) which is employed by one of ordinary skill in the art to indicate the max transmit power limit (see d1 para. 0007-0008).
D1 does not appear to explicitly disclose “wherein power usage associated with the first RAT is prioritized over the second RAT, and wherein a total transmit power of the first uplink signal and the second uplink signal is within a tolerance level of a maximum transmit power limit”.
Attention is directed to d2, d2 discloses teaching in a similar field of endeavor of wireless communication (see d2 para. 0002) transmitting, to a first network entity, the first uplink signal associated with the first RAT based on the first transmit power; and transmitting, to a second network entity, the second uplink signal associated with the second RAT based on the second transmit power (see d2 para. 0010-0011).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the system and/or method of d1 regarding wireless communication to incorporate the details of transmitting, to a first network entity, the first uplink signal associated with the first RAT based on the first transmit power; and “transmitting, to a second network entity, the second uplink signal associated with the second RAT based on the second transmit power as disclosed by d2. One of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date would be motivated to combine the teaching of d1 and d2 according to the teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation to modify the reference or to combine reference teachings to more efficiently manage transmission power (see d2 para. 0011). The combination of the teaching of d1 and d2 would result in a reasonable expectation of success as both techniques are in the same field and work as cooperative techniques. Furthermore, it is noted that the prior art includes each element claimed (as mapped above), although not necessarily in a single reference. Wherein the only difference between the claimed invention and the prior art being the lack of actual combination of the elements in a single prior art reference. The Examiner notes that many of the limitations mapped to the teaching of d1 may also be mapped to disclosure in d2. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods, and that in combination, wherein each element performs the same function as it does separately in d1 and d2. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable to achieve at least the result of increased efficiency in managing transmission power (see d2 para. 0011); and the combination would yield a predictable result (without a change in function thereof) with no undue experimentation. It is also noted that many of the noted sections of d2 are equally applicable to meet many of the limitations set forth above as met by d1, therefore the teaching of d2 may be applied to any other limitation of the claims rejected under this section when d1 in view of d2 is considered as a whole and not individually.
As to the limitation “wherein power usage associated with the first RAT is prioritized over the second RAT, and wherein a total transmit power of the first uplink signal and the second uplink signal is within a tolerance level of a maximum transmit power limit” d3 discloses reducing a max Tx power limit of a first signal including use of priorities for power usage (see d3 para. 0124-0126, Fig. 4) which is applied to the teaching of d1 in view of d2 regarding changing of max Tx power limits based on RAT. Wherein, a total transmit power of the first uplink signal and the second uplink signal is within a tolerance level of the maximum transmit power. d1 in view of d2 in view of d3 discloses consideration that a combined transmit power exceeds or may have a potential of exceeding a total power limit (see d1 para. 0007, 0054), wherein the consideration of having the potential of exceeding a total power limit encompasses the idea of a tolerance.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the system and/or method of d1 regarding wireless communication to incorporate the details of reducing a maximum transmit power limit of a first uplink signal associated with a first radio access technology (RAT) to obtain a first transmit power, wherein the first RAT has priority on power usage over a second RAT as disclosed by d3. One of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date would be motivated to combine the teaching of d1 and d2 with d3 according to the teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation to modify the reference or to combine reference teachings to improve communication quality (see d3 para. 0006). The combination of the teaching of d1 and d2 with d3 would result in a reasonable expectation of success as both techniques are in the same field and work as cooperative techniques. Furthermore, it is noted that the prior art includes each element claimed (as mapped above), although not necessarily in a single reference. Wherein the only difference between the claimed invention and the prior art being the lack of actual combination of the elements in a single prior art reference. The Examiner notes that many of the limitations mapped to the teaching of d1 and/or d1 may also be mapped to disclosure in d3. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods, and that in combination, wherein each element performs the same function as it does separately in d1 and d2. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable to achieve at least the result of improved communication quality (see d3 para. 0006); and the combination would yield a predictable result (without a change in function thereof) with no undue experimentation. It is also noted that many of the noted sections of d3 are equally applicable to meet many of the limitations set forth above as met by d1 and/or d2, therefore the teaching of d3 may be applied to any other limitation of the claims rejected under this section when d1 in view of d2 in view of d3 is considered as a whole and not individually.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 2-4, 11-13, 20-23, 29-30 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.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHAN SCOTT TAYLOR whose telephone number is (571)270-3189. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon. - Thurs. 9:00-4:00.
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, JINSONG HU can be reached on 5712723965. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/NATHAN S TAYLOR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2643
Prosecution Insights