Ex Parte Liu

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Jun 15, 2016

13125301 (P.T.A.B. Jun. 15, 2016)

UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE
13/125,301 04/20/2011
48116 7590 06/17/2016
FAY SHARPE/LUCENT
1228 Euclid Avenue, 5th Floor
The Halle Building
FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
Hao Liu
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office
Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
www .uspto.gov
ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.
LUTZ 201250US01 3869
EXAMINER
NGUYEN, TUX
Cleveland, OH 44115-1843 ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
2649
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
06/17/2016 ELECTRONIC
Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the
following e-mail address( es):
docketing@faysharpe.com
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Ex parte HAO LIU
Appeal2015-001652
Application 13/125,301
Technology Center 2600
Before LINZY T. McCARTNEY, JOYCE CRAIG, and
MATTHEW J. McNEILL, Administrative Patent Judges.
McCARTNEY, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
Appellant appeals under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from a rejection of claims
1 and 11. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b ).
We AFFIRM.
Appeal2015-001652
Application 13/125,301
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
The present patent application "relates to transmit power control in [a]
mobile station." Spec. 1:6-7. Claim 1 illustrates the claimed subject matter:
1. A method, of controlling the transmit power of a mobile
station, in said mobile station in wireless communication
network, comprising:
controlling the transmit power of said mobile station
according to interference over thermal of the neighboring cells
or sectors of the cell or sector in which said mobile station is
located, transmission loss compensation, and quality of signal
received from the mobile station by the base station which serves
said mobile station.
REJECTION
Claims 1 and 11 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as
anticipated by Xiao et al. (US 2008/0188260 Al; Aug. 7, 2008) ("Xiao").
ANALYSIS
Based on Appellant's arguments, we select claim 1 as representative
of the appealed rejection and decide the appeal with respect to claim 1. See
App. Br. 8-12; 37 C.F.R. § 41.37(c)(l)(iv).
Claim 1 recites in relevant part a mobile station "controlling the
transmit power of said mobile station according to [ 1] interference over
thermal of the neighboring cells or sectors of the cell or sector in which said
mobile station is located, [2] transmission loss compensation, and [3] quality
of signal received from the mobile station by the base station which serves
said mobile station." App. Br. 14 (bracketed material added). Appellant
contends the cited portions of Xiao refer to either downlink path loss or
2
Appeal2015-001652
Application 13/125,301
downlink transmission loss and fail to disclose the recited "transmission loss
compensation" and "quality of signal received" factors. Id. at 10-12
(discussing Xiao i-fi-127, 3 8--40, 57). Appellant also argues the Examiner's
rejection improperly conflates the "transmission loss compensation" and
"quality of signal" factors. Id. at 10-11.
We find Appellant's arguments unpersuasive. In the Answer, the
Examiner clarified that the Examiner did not treat "transmission loss
compensation" and "quality of signal received" as a single factor. Ans. 3.
The Examiner found paragraph 40 of Xiao teaches the "transmission loss
compensation" factor and paragraphs 41, 46, and 57 of Xiao teach the
"quality of signal received" factor. Id. With respect to "transmission loss
compensation," paragraph 40 of Xiao discloses that a "Node B can correct
418 errors using the reported downlink path loss and send 420 the corrected
power control commands to the user equipment [also referred to as "UE"]."
Xiao i1 40 (italics added). Although Appellant asserts that downlink
transmission loss "fails to disclose compensation of transmission loss as
claimed," see App. Br. 12, Appellant has not supported this assertion with
persuasive evidence or reasoning. Simply asserting the cited art fails to
teach or suggest this limitation is insufficient to establish the Examiner
erred. Cf 3 7 C.F .R. § 41.3 7 ("A statement which merely points out what a
claim recites will not be considered an argument for separate patentability of
the claim."); In re Lovin, 652 F.3d 1349, 1357 (Fed. Cir. 2011) ("[W]e hold
that the Board reasonably interpreted Rule 41.37 to require more substantive
arguments in an appeal brief than a mere recitation of the claim elements and
a naked assertion that the corresponding elements were not found in the
prior art.").
3
Appeal2015-001652
Application 13/125,301
As for the "quality of the signal received," paragraph 41 of Xiao
discloses that the "errors" referenced in paragraph 40 include "non-
accumulated compensation where Node B has more information of the
channel (due to uplink sounding or the Channel Quality Information (CQI)
feedback channel) than the UE." Xiao i-f 41 (emphasis added). Appellant
argues this disclosure concerns Node B correcting errors using the Channel
Quality Information feedback channel, not "a mobile device controlling its
transmit power." Reply Br. 9. But as noted above, paragraph 40 of Xiao
discloses "Node B can correct 418 errors using the reported downlink path
loss and send 420 the corrected power control commands to the user
equipment." Xiao i-f 40 (emphasis added). Xiao further explains that "Node-
B sends power control commands ... to the UEs or broadcasts updates of
the power control parameters to the UEs if the power control is implemented
in UEs." Id. i-f73 (emphasis added). Thus, while Node B may correct errors,
Xiao discloses that the user equipment (the claimed "mobile stations")
implement the corrected power control commands. That is, Xiao discloses
that each mobile station "control[ s] the transmit power of said mobile
station" as required by claim 1. Indeed, Appellant appears to admit as much
in the Reply Brief. See Reply Br. 8 (arguing that Xiao "does not disclose the
UE controlling its transmit power according to anything other than 'a power
control scheme and the updated power control parameters"' (emphasis
added)).
Paragraphs 47 and 57 of Xiao provide additional support for the
Examiner's findings. Paragraph 57 discloses that "UE transmit power
control can be pathloss based. This means a UE can estimate the received
power of the downlink (DL) ... and ... can then estimate pathloss ...
4
Appeal2015-001652
Application 13/125,301
referred to here as L." Id. il 57 (emphasis added). Paragraph 47 discloses
that "'L' is determined based on a downlink channel quality measured by the
UE and/or an uplink channel quality measured by Node B." Id. i-f 47
(emphasis added). Appellant's argument that pathloss is different from the
recited "quality of signal received," Reply Br. 10, does not address the fact
that these paragraphs disclose that a UE's transmit power is controlled
according to both pathloss and quality of the channel received from the
mobile station by the base station.
In any event, Appellant acknowledges the Examiner also found Xiao' s
paragraph 27 discloses the limitations recited in claim 1. See App. Br. 11.
Xiao's paragraph 27 teaches that "each Node B ... measures (404) one or
more system performance metrics associated with a corresponding air
interface 120--122. For example, the Node B may measure one or more of
an interference over thermal-noise ratio (IoT) ... [and] a cell-edge
peiformance metric." Xiao i-f 27 (emphases added). The following
paragraph teaches that "cell-edge performance relates to an opportunity to
transmit that is given to UEs ... and the quality of their signal as received at
the serving Node B." Id. i-f 28 (emphasis added). Xiao also teaches that
"[b ]ased on the system performance metric measurements received ... and
further based on the system performance metric measured by the Node B ...
each Node B ... determines 410 an adaptive power control parameter that is
used 412 to update an uplink transmit power level for each of the one or
more UEs .... " Id. i-f 31 (emphasis added). Xiao teaches the next step
involves "a Node B sending updated power control parameters to [the] user
equipment it serves." Id. i-f 3 7. See also id. Fig. 5. This disclosure supports
the Examiner's finding that Xiao discloses controlling the transmit power of
5
Appeal2015-001652
Application 13/125,301
said mobile station according to the recited "interference over thermal" and
"quality of signal received" factors, in addition to the "transmission loss
compensation" factor discussed above.
Finally, Appellant asserts that in the Answer the Examiner found
paragraph 3 8 of Xiao discloses "the base station sending power control
commands to a UE based on Interference over [T]hermal." Reply Br. 8.
Appellant contends this paragraph "does not disclose the UE controlling its
transmit power according to anything other than 'a power control scheme
and the updated power control parameters' or 'the MCS level assigned."'
Id.
Even if we were to agree with Appellant's interpretation of paragraph
3 8, as discussed above, other portions of Xiao disclose this limitation. See,
e.g., Xiao i-f 27, 28, 37; Fig. 5. Accordingly, we find this argument
unpersuasive.
For the above reasons, we sustain the Examiner's rejection of claims 1
and 11.
DECISION
For the above reasons, we affirm the rejection of claims 1 and 11.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a)(l)(iv).
AFFIRMED
6