DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is sent in response to Applicant’s Communication received 01/17/2025 for application number 19/031,248. The Office hereby acknowledges receipt of the following and placed of record in file: Specification, Claims, Drawings, Abstract, Oath/Declaration, and IDS.
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
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 2, lines 1-2 recite, “…wherein the plurality of performance characteristics comprise an uplink transmission performance characteristics…” (emphasis added), and should instead read, “wherein the plurality of performance characteristics comprise uplink transmission performance characteristics…”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
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.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation is:
“a wireless communication device configured to: identify a thermal condition of the user equipment; determine… one or more performance characteristics in which to throttle…; and modify the one or more performance characteristics…” in Claim 10.
Because this claim limitation is being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it is being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
A review of the Specification as filed does not appear to indicate a structure for the “wireless communication device” of Claim 10.
If applicant does not intend to have this limitation interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation recites sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
The written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function of “a wireless communication device configured to: identify a thermal condition of the user equipment; determine… one or more performance characteristics in which to throttle…; and modify the one or more performance characteristics…” of Claim 10.
Claims 5, 10, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding Claim 5, lines 1-2 recite, “…wherein determining the one or more performance characteristics comprises determining two or more performance characteristics…” (emphasis added). However, it is unclear how the quantity of one or more performance characteristics can comprise two or more, as determining two or more performance characteristics would imply that determining one or more would not be sufficient. For the purposes of examination, the examiner construes “the one or more performance characteristics” as referenced in Claims 1, 5, and 7-9 to be “the performance characteristics” (emphasis added).
Regarding Claim 14, lines 1-2 recite, “…wherein determining the one or more performance characteristics comprises determining two or more performance characteristics…” (emphasis added). However, it is unclear how the quantity of one or more performance characteristics can comprise two or more, as determining two or more performance characteristics would imply that determining one or more would not be sufficient. For the purposes of examination, the examiner construes “the one or more performance characteristics” as referenced in Claims 10, 14, and 16-18 to be “the performance characteristics” (emphasis added).
Regarding Claim 10, claim limitation “a wireless communication device configured to: identify a thermal condition of the user equipment; determine… one or more performance characteristics in which to throttle…; and modify the one or more performance characteristics…” invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. The Specification does not appear to provide a definition containing any structure associated with the limitations at issue. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
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)(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.
(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 1-5, 10-14, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by KOTHIWALE et al., US 2021/0168838 A1.
Regarding Claim 1, KOTHIWALE discloses:
A method, comprising (Fig. 1 illustrates a method 100 of throttling data transmissions in a user equipment (UE) applied by components in Fig. 6):
identifying, by a wireless communication device, a thermal condition of a device ([0076] discloses the controller 630 which may transmit and receive signals via the wireless communication unit 610 (i.e. a wireless communication device and its wireless communication interface) and may control overall operations of the UE 600; [0077] discloses the controller 630 may monitor the current temperature of the UE 600 and may determine whether the current temperature is greater than a threshold temperature);
determining, by the wireless communication device from a plurality of performance characteristics, one or more performance characteristics in which to throttle performance of the wireless communication device, according to an application executing on the device ([0077] discloses the controller 630 (i.e. the wireless communication device) may be configured to identify (i.e. determine) a set of data transmissions from the plurality of data transmissions based on a corresponding socket priority of the plurality of data transmissions (i.e. one or more performance characteristic), when the current temperature is determined to be greater than the threshold temperature (i.e. in which to throttle performance of the wireless communication device); where each data transmission in the set of data transmissions may have a low socket priority; [0039] discloses the socket priority of the at least one uplink (UL) data transmission and the socket priority of the at least one downlink (DL) data transmission may be determined based on a priority of an application associated with each of the at least one UL data transmission and the at least one DL data transmission and may be determined at an application layer of the UE (i.e. performance characteristics according to an application executing on the device)); and
modifying, by the wireless communication device, the one or more performance characteristics, to reduce the thermal condition of the device to within a thermal condition range ([0077] discloses the controller 630 (i.e. the wireless communication device) may be configured to throttle (i.e. modify) the identified set of data transmissions (i.e. the one or more performance characteristics) for a time duration for which the monitored current temperature is determined to be greater than the threshold temperature; [0040] discloses as long as the current temperature remains greater than the threshold temperature, the identified set of data transmissions may be throttled (i.e. continuing to modify the one or more performance characteristics until thermal condition is reduced to a thermal condition range, the range being anything below the threshold temperature)).
Regarding Claim 2, KOTHIWALE discloses the method of Claim 1. KOTHIWALE further discloses:
wherein the plurality of performance characteristics comprise uplink transmission performance characteristics ([0037] discloses identifying a set of data transmissions to throttle based on socket priority; [0039] discloses the socket priority of the at least on UL data transmission may be determined based on a priority of an application associated with the at least on UL data transmission; [0043] discloses buffering the UL data transmissions having low socket priority results in reducing the resource consumption at the UE, which in turn lowers the temperature of the resources),
maximum transmission power, or
downlink transmission performance characteristics ([0037] discloses identifying a set of data transmissions to throttle based on socket priority; [0039] discloses the socket priority of the at least one DL data transmission may be determined based on a priority of an application associated with the at least one DL data transmission; [0044] discloses reducing the transmission window size for DL data transmissions with low socket priorities causing a reduced number of data packets received at the UE, resulting in lowering the resource consumption at the UE and ultimately lowering the temperature).
Regarding Claim 3, KOTHIWALE discloses the method of Claim 2. KOTHIWALE further discloses:
wherein the uplink transmission performance characteristics comprise at least one of a buffer status report configuration,
a number of carriers in an uplink carrier aggregation,
an uplink packet ranking ([0037] discloses identifying a set of data transmissions from the plurality of data transmissions to throttle based on the socket priority (i.e. performance characteristic of data transmissions) of each of the data transmissions in the plurality of data transmissions; the socket priority may be one of “high” and “low” (i.e. the socket priorities dictate which data packets are transmitted first, therefore the data packets are ranked); [0038] discloses all transmissions may be UL data transmissions, and the data transmission with corresponding low socket priorities are placed in the set of data transmissions to throttle (i.e. the socket priorities are the performance characteristics considered under the uplink data transmissions)), or
a modulation scheme.
Regarding Claim 4, KOTHIWALE discloses the method of Claim 2. KOTHIWALE further discloses:
wherein the downlink transmission performance characteristics comprise at least one of a number of carriers in downlink carrier aggregation,
a downlink packet ranking ([0037] discloses identifying a set of data transmissions from the plurality of data transmissions to throttle based on the socket priority (i.e. performance characteristic of data transmissions) of each of the data transmissions in the plurality of data transmissions; the socket priority may be one of “high” and “low” (i.e. the socket priorities dictate which data packets are transmitted first, therefore the data packets are ranked); [0038] discloses all transmissions may be DL data transmissions, and the data transmission with corresponding low socket priorities are placed in the set of data transmissions to throttle (i.e. the socket priorities are the performance characteristics considered under downlink data transmissions)),
a modulation scheme, or
a number of supported bandwidth parts.
Regarding Claim 5, KOTHIWALE discloses the method of Claim 1. KOTHIWALE further discloses:
wherein determining the one or more performance characteristics comprises determining two or more performance characteristics in which to throttle performance of the wireless communication device ([0037] discloses identifying a set of data transmissions based on corresponding socket priority of the plurality of data transmissions to throttle; [0039] discloses the plurality of data transmissions comprise at least one UL data transmission and at least one DL data transmission (i.e. determining two or more performance characteristics); a socket priority of the at least one UL data transmission may be compared with the at least one DL data transmission).
Regarding Claim 10, KOTHIWALE discloses:
A user equipment (Fig. 6 is a diagram illustrating the configuration of a UE 600 (i.e. a user equipment)), comprising:
a wireless communication device (controller 630 and communication 610; [0076] discloses the controller may transmit and receive signals via the wireless communication unit 610 (i.e. the wireless communication device and its wireless interface),
The remainder of Claim 10 recites limitations similar to those of Claim 1 and is rejected accordingly.
Regarding Claims 11-14, KOTHIWALE discloses the user equipment of Claim 10. Claims 11, 12, 13, and 14 recite limitations similar to Claims 2, 3, 4, and 5, respectively, and are rejected accordingly.
Regarding Claim 20, KOTHIWALE discloses:
A non-transitory computer readable medium storing instructions that, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to (Fig. 6 illustrates a storage unit 620 (i.e. a non-transitory computer readable medium); [0075] discloses the storage unit 620 may store data, such as basic program, an application program, and configuration information for operating the user equipment (UE) 600 (i.e. storing instructions); [0076] discloses the controller 630 may include at least one processor and may control overall operations of the UE 600),
The remainder of Claim 20 recites limitations similar to those of Claim 1 and is rejected accordingly.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 6-8 and 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KOTHIWALE, in view of EHSAN et al., US 2013/0039173 A1.
Regarding Claim 6, KOTHIWALE discloses the method of Claim 1. KOTHIWALE further discloses:
wherein the wireless communication device comprises a communication device of the device ([0071] discloses the UE 600 includes a communication unit 610 (e.g., a communicator or a communication interface), a storage unit 620, and a controller 630; [0076] discloses the controller 630 (i.e. the wireless communication device) may transmit and receive signals via the wireless communication unit 610 (i.e. the wireless communication interface of the wireless communication device) and may perform the functions of a protocol stack required by a particular communication standard).
While KOTHIWALE discloses the method is executed by the wireless communication device as presented in Claim 1, KOTHIWALE does not explicitly disclose the method is executed at a physical layer of the device by the wireless communication device.
However, EHSAN teaches the method is executed at a physical layer of the device ([0188] teaches the centralized flow-control manager (CFM) 330 in the processor 304 (i.e. the wireless communication device) can control the transmit power of the transceiver 314 (i.e. the wireless communication device ; [0201] teaches the CFM 330 receives signals that the temperature monitor 332 has transitioned to a transmit back-off state, and provides a DOWN command to one or more radio components (e.g., LTE Layer 1 components) and begins a step timer; In response to the DOWN command, the one or more radio components may reduce a maximum transit power limit by a configurable back-off value (i.e. the wireless communication device throttling at the physical layer by controlling the transmit power of the components at Layer 1, known as the physical layer)).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of KOTHIWALE and EHSAN before him before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate reduction in transmit power for Layer 1 components as taught by EHSAN into the method disclosed by KOTHIWALE to carefully monitor device temperatures to ensure that situations do not arise where the device is damaged or a user of the wireless device experiences uncomfortable high touch temperatures (EHSAN [0026]).
Regarding Claim 7, KOTHIWALE and EHSAN disclose the method of Claim 6. KOTHIWALE further discloses:
receiving, by the wireless communication device, from the application, one or more services of the application ([0076] discloses the controller 630 (i.e. the wireless communication device) may transmit and receive signals via the wireless communication unit 610; [0090] discloses a communication session for sending a plurality of data packets to a network may be initiated by a social media application (i.e. the controller is receiving one or more services from an application, as the application initiated the communication session for sending data packets) installed and running on the UE, where multiple such sessions may be initiated on the network by one or more applications on the UE),
wherein the wireless communication device determines the one or more performance characteristics based on the one or more services of the application ([0091] discloses after the communication session is initiated by the application, the data packets are assigned priorities according to a predetermined priority policy based on the service requirements of a service rendered by the application; [0087] discloses the controller 630 may be configured to assign the priorities based on the predetermined priority policy (i.e. the wireless communication device is determining the priorities of for data packets in a plurality of data packets based on the service given by the application)).
Regarding Claim 8, KOTHIWALE discloses the method of Claim 1.
KOTHIWALE does not explicitly disclose modifying, by the wireless communication device, the one or more performance characteristics according to a stepwise function.
However, EHSAN teaches modifying, by the wireless communication device, the one or more performance characteristics according to a stepwise function ([0188] teaches the wireless device 302 has a processor 304 (i.e. the wireless communication device) that includes a centralized flow-control manager (CFM) 330 that is configured to reduce an uplink channel transmit power (i.e. modify the one or more performance characteristics); [0203] teaches a maximum transmit power limit (MTPL) is reduced by a back-off value (e.g. P_backoff) and may be reduced with that value for a duration of time; [0204] teaches the back-off value may be adjusted in a stepwise fashion (i.e. the modification to the performance characteristics is being done according to a stepwise function)).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of KOTHIWALE and EHSAN before him before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate modifying performance according to a stepwise function as taught by EHSAN into the method disclosed by KOTHIWALE to mitigate overload issues while supporting high data rates (EHSAN [0009]).
Regarding Claims 15-17, KOTHIWALE and EHSAN disclose the user equipment of Claim 10. Claims 15, 16, and 17, recite limitations similar to the corresponding Claims 6, 7, and 8, respectively, and are rejected accordingly.
Claims 9 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KOTHIWALE, in view of EHSAN, and further in view of MA et al., US 2006/0183493 A1.
Regarding Claim 9, KOTHIWALE and EHSAN disclose the method of Claim 8. KOTHIWALE further discloses:
reducing, by the wireless communication device, the one or more performance characteristics ([0037] discloses identifying a set of data transmissions to throttle based on socket priority; [0043] discloses buffering the UL data transmissions having low socket priority (i.e. buffering is causing a reduction in the amount of UL data transmissions that can be released)),
determining, by the wireless communication device, a change in the thermal condition of the device ([0077] discloses the controller 630 may be configured to throttle the identified set of data transmissions for a time duration for which the monitored current temperature is determined to be greater than the threshold temperature (i.e. the wireless communication device can determine the change in thermal condition of the device during modification of the performance characteristics)); and
selectively increasing or decreasing, by the wireless communication device, the one or more performance characteristics, based on the change in the thermal condition of the device ([0078] discloses the controller 630 may be configured to release the plurality of data packets for UL transmission (i.e. releasing the buffering data packets increases the amount of UL data transmissions), upon determining the monitored temperature to be lower than the threshold temperature (i.e. releasing the buffering data packets for UL transmission was based on the change in the thermal condition of the device).
EHSAN further teaches reducing, by the wireless communication device, the one or more performance characteristics according to a first step of a first step size ([0198] teaches the CFM 330 inside the processor 304 is configured to implement a transmit power back-off technique that reduces a transmit power for all uplink channels (i.e. reducing the one or more performance characteristics) by applying a back-off value (i.e. according to a first step of a first step size) to a maximum transmit power limit (MTPL)).
The combination of KOTHIWALE and EHSAN do not explicitly disclose selectively increasing or decreasing the one or more performance characteristics according to a sub-step of a second step-size, based on the change in the condition of the device.
However, MA teaches selectively increasing or decreasing the one or more performance characteristics according to a sub-step of a second step-size, based on the change in the condition of the device (Fig. 2 illustrates a Signal-to-Interference Noise Ratio (SINR) target known as SINRtarget that a received SINR (SINRreceived) is compared against shown in S20; blocks S31, S32, and S33 show that if the SINRreceived is not equal to the SINRtarget (i.e. the condition that is causing the throttling of the performance characteristics of the device), the transmission power (i.e. the one or more performance characteristics) will either be increased or decreased (i.e. the performance characteristic will be selectively increased or decreased); [0023] teaches an adaptive power control (PC) step size that is utilized when increasing or decreasing the transmission power; [0024] teaches utilizing a previous PC cycle attribute (i.e. command to increase (+) or decrease (-) the transmission power after comparing the SINRreceived and SINRtarget) with the current PC cycle attribute and checking for a continuous or discontinuous increase or decrease in the attributes (i.e. if the previous PC cycle attribute and the current PC cycle attribute are (++) or (--) it is continuous, conversely (+-) or (-+) would show as discontinuous); [0043] teaches if the PC attributes in the previous and current PC cycle increase or decrease discontinuously (i.e. (+-) or (-+)), then the PC step size in the current PC cycle is cut down based on the previous step size (i.e. the current step size is lessened and is now a sub-step of the previous step size, therefore the transmission power would then be selectively increased or decreased using the lowered current step size for the current iteration based on the new comparison result between the SINRreceived and SINRtarget)).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of KOTHIWALE, EHSAN, and MA before him before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate adaptive changes in the step size for reducing transmission power as taught by MA into the method disclosed by KOTHIWALE and EHSAN to reach a desired condition quicker and smoother, and can ensure that wireless communication holds better communication quality (MA [0016]).
Regarding Claim 18, KOTHIWALE and EHSAN disclose the user equipment of Claim 17. The remainder of Claim 18 recites limitations similar to those of Claim 9 and is rejected accordingly.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KOTHIWALE, in view of GHELICHI et al., US 2022/0408436 A1.
Regarding Claim 19, KOTHIWALE discloses the user equipment of Claim 10.
While KOTHIWALE discloses wherein the wireless communication device is configured to identify the thermal condition of the user equipment ([0077] discloses the controller 630 (i.e. the wireless communication device) may be configured to monitor a current temperature of the UE 600 (i.e. identify the thermal condition of the user equipment), during a plurality of data transmissions occurring at the UE 600), KOTHIWALE does not explicitly disclose the condition identifying the thermal condition of the user equipment, based on signaling corresponding to one or more sensor measurements of a temperature of an external surface of the user equipment.
However, GHELICHI teaches identifying the thermal condition of the user equipment, based on signaling corresponding to one or more sensor measurements of a temperature of an external surface of the user equipment ([0060] teaches user equipment 500 including a temperature sensor 506, which may be configured to measure a case temperature, screen temperature, or other physical interface of user equipment 500 that is likely to come into contact with a user’s skin, and thus may be referred to as a “touch” temperature (i.e. the sensor measures the temperature of the external surface of the user equipment); [0061] teaches a thermal mitigation component 198 may monitor temperatures of various aspects of user equipment 500 (e.g., temperature sensors 504A-504D and 506) (i.e. the thermal mitigation component is able to monitor the temperature by utilizing the sensors, therefore the sensors would be sending the measured temperatures data signals to the thermal mitigation component)).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of KOTHIWALE and GHELICHI before him before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the method of identifying external surface temperature of a device through a sensor as taught by GHELICHI into the user equipment disclosed by KOTHIWALE to monitor operating temperatures to change operational characteristics to reduce thermal load (GHELICHI [0020]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Laurenz Advincula whose telephone number is (571)272-9211. The examiner can normally be reached T-F 8:30 AM - 5:30 PM EST.
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, Andrew J. Jung can be reached at 571-270-3779. 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.
/L.A./Examiner, Art Unit 2175
/ANDREW J JUNG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2175
Prosecution Insights