Ex Parte Hawaka et al

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Mar 28, 2017

13912285 (P.T.A.B. Mar. 28, 2017)

United States Patent and Trademark Office
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
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.
13/912,285 06/07/2013 Shigekazu Hawaka JP920120021USNP(710.231) 6196
58127 7590 03/28/2017
FERENCE & ASSOCIATES LLC
409 BROAD STREET
PITTSBURGH, PA 15143
EXAMINER
NGUYEN, TU X
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
2649
MAIL DATE DELIVERY MODE
03/28/2017 PAPER
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.
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Ex parte SHIGEKAZU HAWAKA, MASAKI OIE,
and MASAHIDE TAMURA
Appeal 2017-002017
Application 13/912,285
Technology Center 2600
Before JEFFREY S. SMITH, JEREMY J. CURCURI, and
DAVID J. CUTITTAII, Administrative Patent Judges.
SMITH, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
Appeal 2017-002017
Application 13/912,285
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
This is an appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from the Final Rejection of
claims 1, 2, and 4—19, which are all the claims pending in the application.
We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
We affirm.
1. An information handling device, comprising:
one or more processors;
one or more antennas;
one or more proximity sensors disposed near the one or
more antennas;
a communication element; and
a memory device that stores instructions executed by the
one or more processors, the instructions being executable by the
one or more processors to:
recognize a geographic location within which the
information handling device is operating through wireless
communication received via the communication element;
said wireless communication including a code associated
with the geographic location;
set a specific absorption rate (SAR) limit for the
information handling device based on the code associated with
the geographic location;
determine, using the one or more proximity sensors, a
relative proximity of a human body; and
responsive to the determination, modulate, based on the
SAR limit, a dynamic power reduction of transmission power
through the antenna.
Illustrative Claim
Prior Art
Naganuma
Kazmi
Ali
US 2009/0253459 A1 Oct. 8, 2009
US 2012/0231784 A1 Sept. 13, 2012
US 2013/0122827 A1 May 16, 2013
2
Appeal 2017-002017
Application 13/912,285
Examiner’s Rejections
Claims 1,2, and 4—19 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
unpatentable over Kazmi, Naganuma, and Ali.
ANALYSIS
We adopt the findings of fact made by the Examiner in the Final
Action and Examiner’s Answer as our own. We concur with the conclusions
reached by the Examiner for the reasons given in the Examiner’s Answer.
We highlight the following for emphasis.
Claim 1 recites “set a specific absorption rate (SAR) limit for the
information handling device based on the code associated with the
geographic location.” Appellants contend the combination of Kazmi,
Naganuma, and Ali does not teach setting the SAR limit based on the code
associated with the geographic location. App. Br. 11—12. In particular,
Appellants contend Naganuma does not teach setting the SAR limit for the
device based on the code, because a transmission power setting is not the
same as an SAR limit. App. Br. 12; Reply Br. 14, 16. Appellants’
contention against Naganuma alone does not persuasively rebut the
combined teachings of Kazmi and Naganuma. See Final Act. 3.
Kazmi relates to SAR requirements for radio transmission control.
Kazmi 11. Kazmi teaches the value for a device’s SAR parameter can be
configured based on the detected location of the device. Id. 24, 60-61.
For example, after detecting the location of the device, the SAR value can be
selected from a mapping table linking predetermined SAR values and
associated locations where they should be used. Id. 161. After selecting the
SAR value mapped to the detected location, the device implements the
3
Appeal 2017-002017
Application 13/912,285
selected SAR value and takes necessary action, i.e., reduces its maximum
power. Id. Naganuma teaches using a look-up table, in which each
country’s identification code is related to a transmission level value
specified by the radio law of each country, to provide transmission power
control that satisfies the radio law of each country. Naganuma H 52, 57.
We find that detecting a location of a device, mapping the location to
an associated SAR value, then implementing the mapped SAR value, as
taught by Kazmi teaches “set a specific absorption rate (SAR) limit for the
information handling device based on the code associated with the
geographic location” within the meaning of claim 1. We find Naganuma’s
teachings are cumulative to those of Kazmi, namely, that one of ordinary
skill in the art would understand the geographic location stored in Kazmi’s
mapping table would be represented by a “code associated with the
geographic location” within the meaning of claim 1.
Appellants do not provide persuasive evidence or argument to
distinguish “set a specific absorption rate (SAR) limit for the information
handling device based on the code associated with the geographic location”
as recited in claim 1 from using a mapping table to link the detected location
of the device to an associated SAR value, then implementing the associated
SAR value and taking necessary action such as reducing maximum power as
taught by the combination of Kazmi and Naganuma.
We sustain the rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. § 103. Appellants
do not provide arguments for separate patentability of claims 2 and 4—19,
which fall with claim 1.
4
Appeal 2017-002017
Application 13/912,285
DECISION
The rejection of claims 1, 2, and 4—19 is affirmed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a). See 37 C.F.R.
§ 41.50(f).
AFFIRMED
5