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 § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-6, 8-13, 16 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 20220022223 A1 (Yang et al., hereinafter Yang).
Regarding claim 1, Yang discloses a method for device protocol transition (par. [0008], “first quantity of transmission layers and the second quantity of transmission layers, or (2) a number of single-port”, transitioning from a number of transmission layers to a different number of transmission layers reads on change in protocol), the method comprising:
receiving signal quality information associated with a device (par. [0043], “the signal quality may be…” reads on at least one of the BS or the UE receives a signal with certain quality);
based on the signal quality information, determining that a number of communication layers is to be reduced for the device (par. [0043], “the signal quality may be excellent… the number of layers may be reduced…”); and
causing the device to transition from a first protocol, having a higher number of communication layers than a second protocol, to the second protocol (par. [0043], “… the number of layers may be reduced…”).
Regarding claim 9, Yang discloses a system (par. [0042]) comprising:
one or more processors (par. [0042]); and
one or more computer storage hardware devices storing computer-usable instructions that, when used by the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform operations (par. [0042], “…instructions stored on a computer readable medium…”) comprising:
receiving signal quality information associated with a device (par. [0043], “the signal quality may be…” reads on at least one of the BS or the UE receives a signal with certain quality);
based on the signal quality information, determining that a number of communication layers is to be adjusted for the device(par. [0043], “the signal quality may be excellent… the number of layers may be reduced…”); and
causing the device to transition from a first protocol, having a lower number of communication layers than a second protocol, to the second protocol (par. [0043], “… the number of layers may be reduced…”).
Regarding claim 16, Yang discloses one or more computer-readable media having computer-executable instructions embodied thereon that, when executed, perform a method (par. [0042]) comprising:
receiving signal quality information associated with a device indicating a reduced signal quality for the device (par. [0043], “the signal quality may be…” reads on at least one of the BS or the UE receives a signal with certain quality);
based on the signal quality information indicating the reduced signal quality for the device, determining that a number of communication layers is to be reduced for the device (par. [0043], “the signal quality may be excellent… the number of layers may be reduced…”); and
based on determining that the number of communication layers is to be reduced for the device, causing the device to transition from a first protocol, having a higher number of communication layers than a second protocol, to the second protocol(par. [0043], “… the number of layers may be reduced…”).
Regarding claims 2 and 10, Yang discloses all the limitations of claims 1 and 9, respectively. Yang further discloses based on the signal quality information, determining a transmission power for the device; and causing the device to adjust from a first transmission power to the determined transmission power (par. [0043], “…entering a power-saving mode”).
Regarding claim 3, Yang discloses all the limitations of claim 1. Yang further discloses wherein the first protocol and the second protocol are uplink protocols (par. [0051], “number of spatial layers, multiple-input-multiple output (MIMO) layers, or transmission layers, which may also be referred to as a transmission rank. A multi-port UL reference signal resource…” ).
Regarding claim 4, Yang discloses all the limitations of claim 1. Yang further discloses causing the device to use two ports to transmit the same communication data over a single layer based on the device transitioning to the second protocol (par. [0051], “The number of ports may correspond to a number of spatial layers… reduce the number of layers (e.g., number of SRS resources) it transmits on from 4 to 2 or 1…”).
Regarding claims 5 and 11, Yang discloses all the limitations of claims 1 and 9, respectively. Yang further discloses wherein the first protocol is a multiple layer Multiple-Input, Multiple-Output (MIMO) uplink protocol (par. [0051], “The number of ports may correspond to a number of spatial layers, multiple-input-multiple output (MIMO) layers,…”).
Regarding claim 6, Yang discloses all the limitations of claim 1. Yang further discloses determining that the device is within a first radio frequency coverage footprint (par. [0043], [0059], “when the UE is near the BS”, reads on being within the coverage footprint of the BS); and based on determining that the device is within the first radio frequency coverage footprint and prior to causing the device to transition from the first protocol, causing the device to utilize the first protocol (pars. [0043]-[0044], where while in the coverage of the BS and based on the quality information, the UE transitions to utilizing a reduced number of layers for UL transmission).
Regarding claims 8 and 20, Yang discloses all the limitations of claims 1 and 9, respectively. Yang further discloses causing the device to utilize one less transmission port upon the transition to the second protocol (par. [0051], “The number of ports may correspond to a number of spatial layers… reduce the number of layers (e.g., number of SRS resources) it transmits on from 4 to 2 or 1…”).
Regarding claim 12, Yang discloses all the limitations of claim 9. Yang further discloses causing the device to utilize one additional transmission port upon the transition to the second protocol (par. [0051], “after a period of time, increase the number of layers (e.g., number of SRS ports) to 4 again”).
Regarding claim 13, Yang discloses all the limitations of claim 9. Yang further discloses prior to causing the device to transition from the first protocol, causing the device to utilize the first protocol based on the device being located within a particular radio frequency coverage footprint (pars. [0043]-[0044], [0059]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 7, 14-15 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang in view of US 20210136693 A1 (Zhang et al., hereinafter Zhang).
Regarding claims 7, 14-15 and 18, Yang (and Zhang) discloses all the limitations of claims 6, 13, 14 and 16, respectively.
It is assumed that the BS knows when a device moves to a different region away from a nearby region from the BS; however, Yang does not explicitly disclose determining that the device is within a second radio frequency coverage footprint; and based on determining that the device is within the second radio frequency coverage footprint, causing the device to transition to the second protocol.
In related art concerning power saving in New Radio multicast, Zhang discloses determining that the device is within a second radio frequency coverage footprint; and based on determining that the device is within the second radio frequency coverage footprint, causing the device to transition to the second protocol (Fig. 2 and pars. [0126]-[0128], “base station 105-a may configure the transmission to the multicast group of UEs 115-a, 115-b, and 115-c, to a low transmission rate (e.g., a low number of MIMO layers”, where different bandwidths are utilized for devices located at different distances or coverage areas; therefore, the number of layers will be different based on the quality of the signals, the bandwidth or power signal strength. Where device 115-a and 115-c can be the same device moving between different regions within a global coverage area of the BS).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use Zhang’s teachings about determining that the device is within a second radio frequency coverage footprint; and based on determining that the device is within the second radio frequency coverage footprint, causing the device to transition to the second protocol with the uplink rank adaptation for MIMO communication disclosed by Yang because one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that in order to save resources, a network would dynamically change the protocol (number of layers, etc.) based on the region/distances of the devices.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang in view of US 20230107064 A1 (Bergljung et al., hereinafter Bergljung).
Regarding claim 17, Yang discloses all the limitations of claim 16.
Yang does not disclose wherein the second protocol has a greater transmit power per layer value than the first protocol.
In related art concerning extended power class for uplink MIMO communications, Bergljung disclose wherein the second protocol has a greater transmit power per layer value than the first protocol (pars. [0030], [0193], [0207]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use Bergljung’s teachings wherein the second protocol has a greater transmit power per layer value than the first protocol with the uplink rank adaptation for MIMO communication disclosed by Yang because one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that in order to save resources, utilizing a higher power level for the second protocol that uses less layers, would compensate for the lack of additional ports while saving power.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20220078887 A1 relates to multiple-layer wireless station implementation and method.
US 20220337360 A1 relates techniques for modifying component carrier or layer configuration in multi-subscription wireless communications.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Angelica Perez whose telephone number is 571-272-7885. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.
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, Yuwen (Kevin) Pan can be reached at (571) 272-7855. The fax phone numbers for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned are 571-273-8300 for regular communications and for After Final communications.
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 the PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through the 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). Information regarding Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system can be found at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or proceeding should be directed to the TC 2600's customer service number is 703-306-0377.
/Angelica M. Perez/
Patent Examiner AU 2649
Prosecution Insights