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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 03/31/26, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-6, 8--21 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Agrawal (Pub No 20220312260) further in view of Vegesna (Pub No 20210297351), Rao (Pub No 20090075668), newly cited Saloni (Pub No 20220038212) and newly cited Bao (Pub No 20140086222).
Regarding claim 1,
Applicant argues that the prior art does not teach the amended limitation.
The Examiner relies in Agrawal (Pub No 20220312260) further in view of Vegesna (Pub No 20210297351), Rao (Pub No 20090075668), newly cited Saloni (Pub No 20220038212) and newly cited Bao (Pub No 20140086222)
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, 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 before the effective filing date of the invention to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1, 7-11, 18, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Agrawal (Pub No 20220312260) further in view of Vegesna (Pub No 20210297351), Rao (Pub No 20090075668), Saloni (Pub No 20220038212) and Bao (Pub No 20140086222)
Regarding claim 1 and 18,
Agrawal teaches A method comprising:
A receiving device; and the transmitting device communicatively coupled to the receiving device via a communication link, wherein the transmitting device is configured to: (see para [0005])
determining, by the transmitting device, whether a count of unacknowledged frames corresponding to a receiving device is smaller than a threshold value; (interpreted as At a first time t1 the local buffer 911 of the hub includes less than the threshold number of packets, and therefore, the controller 960 does not transmit a request for acknowledgement to the base station, see para [0049])
transmitting, by the transmitting device, a first packet to the receiving device wherein the transmitting device configures the first packet to instruct the receiver is not required to send block acknowledgement immediately upon receipt of the first packet by the receiver; ( see transmission of packet – 9 in fig 9)
determining, by the transmitting device after transmitting the first packet, whether the count of the unacknowledged frames is smaller than the threshold value; (interpreted as At a second time t2 the threshold number of packets within the local buffer 911 exceeds the threshold. For at least some embodiments a request for acknowledgment would be transmitted, see para [0049].
transmitting, by the transmitting device, a second packet requesting immediate block acknowledgement for the unacknowledged frames in response to determining that the count of the unacknowledged frames is greater than or equal to the threshold value; and (interpreted as If the number of transmission packets stored in the local buffer does exceed the threshold, then a step 1140 includes the transmitting modem sending (transmitting) a request for acknowledgement of reception of the transmission packets to a receiving device (base station), see para [0054])
receiving, by the transmitting device, a block acknowledgement for the unacknowledged frames in response to receipt of the second packet by the receiving device. (interpreted as For an embodiment, the receiving device replies with an acknowledgement (ACK) indicating whether a packet(s) have been successfully received. For an embodiment, once the controller 260 of the modem 210 receives an ACK that indicates that a packet was successfully received, the controller 260 of the modem 210 purges the successfully received packet(s) from the local buffer 220, see para [0033])
Agrawal does not teach a machine-readable storage medium storing executable instructions; and a processing resource coupled to the machine-readable storage medium;
transmitting, by the transmitting device, a first packet to the receiving device in response to determining that the count of the unacknowledged frames is smaller than the threshold value;
determining, by the transmitting device, whether the oldest unacknowledged frame has not reached an acknowledgement timeout;
(a) the oldest unacknowledged frame has not reached the acknowledgement timeout;
Vegesna teaches a machine-readable storage medium storing executable instructions; and a processing resource coupled to the machine-readable storage medium; (para [0118]) (see para [0115])
transmitting, by the transmitting device, a first packet to the receiving device in response to determining that the count of the unacknowledged frames is smaller than the threshold value (interpreted as if the un-granted queue build-up is small and below a certain threshold, the queue may be allowed to send unsolicited packets without waiting for an explicit request/grant message exchange, see para [0205])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the system taught by Agrawal with the with the transmitting due to a threshold as taught by Vegesna since it would have been a simple substitution providing expected results of transmitting with a threshold in the buffer to limit.
However, Agrawal in view of Vegesna does not teach determining, by the transmitting device, whether the oldest unacknowledged frame has not reached an acknowledgement timeout;
(a) the oldest unacknowledged frame has not reached the acknowledgement timeout;
Rao Teaches determining, by the transmitting device, whether the oldest unacknowledged frame has not reached an acknowledgement timeout; (a) the oldest unacknowledged frame has not reached the acknowledgement timeout; (interpreted as The mobile unit sets (107) the latency indicator bit to "0" if the packet waiting time measurement does not exceed the predetermined threshold in step 103. [0030] The mobile unit transmits (109) the MAC packet to base station, see para [0029-0030])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the system taught by Agrawal in view of Vegesna with timeout conditions taught by Rao with the motivation being for having another condition for transmitting packets such as an expiry timer so that packets are not waiting forever.
Howeve,r Agrawal in view of Vegesna and Rao do not teach establishing a clock acknowledgement session between a transmitting device and a receiving device; the aggregated packet with an aggregated mac protocol data unit packet;
Saloni teaches establishing a clock acknowledgement session between a transmitting device and a receiving device; the aggregated packet with an aggregated mac protocol data unit packet; (interpreted as before the frames can be aggregated by the originator, a block acknowledgement session is required to be established between the originator and the responder… multiple aggregated frames (such as Aggregated MPDUs or Aggregated MSDUs) can be acknowledged together using a single BA frame, see para [0012])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the system taught by Agrawal in view of Vegesna and Rao with session setup taught by Saloni with the motivation being to setup the communications between devices.
However, Agrawal in view of Vegesna, Rao and Saloni do not teach instructing the receiver that it is not required to send the block ack immediately.
Bao teaches instructing the receiver that it is not required to send the block ack immediately. (interpreted as For example, one field of the agreed data frame is the delayed acknowledgement indication bit. The waiting interval of frame acknowledgement which used the delayed-ACK is decided by the delivering end. It can delivery when it has free resource. If it analyzes the delayed-ACK indication from data frame during analyzing data frame, it will return the acknowledgement frame when it has free resource, see para [0084])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the data unit taught by Agrawal in view of Vegesna, Rao, and Saloni with the with the bits as taught by Bao with the motivation being to use bits in packets to indicate various configurations of the packet transmissions.
Regarding claim 5 and 21,
Agrawal teaches The method of claim 1, however does not teach further comprising configuring a plurality of frames in the first packet with a delayed block acknowledgement by setting predefined control quality of service bits in frame headers of the plurality of frames.
Bao teaches further comprising configuring a plurality of frames in the first packet with a delayed block acknowledgement by setting predefined control quality of service bits in frame headers of the plurality of frames. (interpreted as For example, one field of the agreed data frame is the delayed acknowledgement indication bit. The waiting interval of frame acknowledgement which used the delayed-ACK is decided by the delivering end. It can delivery when it has free resource. If it analyzes the delayed-ACK indication from data frame during analyzing data frame, it will return the acknowledgement frame when it has free resource, see para [0084])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the data unit taught by Agrawal with the with the bits as taught by Bao with the motivation being to use bits in packets to indicate various configurations of the packet transmissions.
Regarding claim 7,
Agrawal teaches The method of claim 1, further comprising determining, by the transmitting device, whether the oldest unacknowledged frame has not reached an acknowledgement timeout, wherein the transmitting device transmits the first packet to the receiving device in response to determining that the oldest unacknowledged frame has not reached the acknowledgement timeout and the count of the unacknowledged frames is smaller than the threshold value. (interpreted as If the number of transmission packets stored in the local buffer does exceed the threshold, then a step 1140 includes the transmitting modem sending (transmitting) a request for acknowledgement of reception of the transmission packets to a receiving device (base station), see para [0054]. Also see fig. 9)
Regarding claim 8 and 20,
Agrawal teaches The method of claim 7, wherein the transmitting device transmits the second packet in response to determining that the oldest unacknowledged frame has reached the acknowledgement timeout or the count of the unacknowledged frames is greater than or equal to the threshold value. (interpreted as For an embodiment, the threshold level is dynamically determined by the receiving device (base station) based upon its network congestion. For example, if the base station determines that 60% of random-access slots are in use and 50% of transmit blocks are available, the base station can decrease the threshold, resulting in a QoS increase for all/a set of hubs and base station usage to increase to 80%. If usage goes past 90% and the base station starts to saturate, then the base station may increase the threshold, see para [0036])
Regarding claim 9,
Agrawal teaches The method of claim 1, wherein the threshold value is determined based on a size of the block acknowledgement. (interpreted as For an embodiment, the threshold level is dynamically determined by the receiving device (base station) based upon its network congestion. For example, if the base station determines that 60% of random-access slots are in use and 50% of transmit blocks are available, the base station can decrease the threshold, resulting in a QoS increase for all/a set of hubs and base station usage to increase to 80%. If usage goes past 90% and the base station starts to saturate, then the base station may increase the threshold, see para [0036])
Regarding claim 10,
Agrawal teaches The method of claim 1, wherein the threshold value is 75% of a size of the block acknowledgement. (interpreted as For an embodiment, the threshold level is dynamically determined by the receiving device (base station) based upon its network congestion. For example, if the base station determines that 60% of random-access slots are in use and 50% of transmit blocks are available, the base station can decrease the threshold, resulting in a QoS increase for all/a set of hubs and base station usage to increase to 80%, see para [0036])
Regarding claim 11,
Agrawal teaches The method of claim 1, however does not teach wherein the transmitting device is an access point.
Vegesna teaches wherein the transmitting device is an access point. (interpreted as Although not shown, data center 10 may also include, for example, one or more non-edge switches, routers, hubs, gateways, security devices such as firewalls, intrusion detection, and/or intrusion prevention devices, servers, computer terminals, laptops, printers, databases, wireless mobile devices such as cellular phones or personal digital assistants, wireless access points, bridges, cable modems, application accelerators, or other network devices, see para [0043])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the system taught by Agrawal with the with the access point as taught by Vegesna with the motivation being to use other known in the art devices as the transmitter.
Regarding claim 19,
Agrawal teaches The system of claim 18, however does not teach wherein the transmitting device is an access point and the receiving device is a client device, and wherein the communication link is a wireless communication link supporting IEEE 802.11 standard.
Bao teaches wherein the transmitting device is an access point and the receiving device is a client device, and wherein the communication link is a wireless communication link supporting IEEE 802.11 standard (interpreted as The 802.11-based WiFi technique is currently the most widely used wireless network transmission technology. It is principally applied to wireless local area network environment, application scenarios with room predominate, may also be applied to an outdoor environment. 802.11 system evolves into 802.11a and 802.11g based on OFDM technology form initial 802.11b CDMA-based transmission mechanism. Although, in the latest IEEE 802.11n-2009 standard, enabling 802.11n physical peak rate attainable 600 Mbps by introducing multi-antenna (MIMO) technology, see para [0008] It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the system taught by Agrawal with the IEEE standard as taught by Bao since it is known in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the standards for communicating packets so that the receiver and transmitter and process packets.
Regarding claim 21,
Agrawal teaches the system of claim 18, however does not teach wherein a plurality of frames in the first AMPDU packet are configured with a delayed block acknowledgement by setting predefined control Quality of Service bits in frame headers of the plurality of frames
Bao teaches wherein a plurality of frames in the first AMPDU packet are configured with a delayed block acknowledgement by setting predefined control Quality of Service bits in frame headers of the plurality of frames (interpreted as both sides of receiving and dispatching can appoint one field of data frame as the delayed acknowledgement indicating bit. When delivering data frame, it informs the opposite end return the frame acknowledgement by setting delayed acknowledgement indicating bit. Preferably, it can set delayed acknowledgement indicating bit in the data frame header. When delivering the acknowledgement request, it can indicate the opposite end return the frame acknowledgement by setting data frame header, see para [0133])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the data unit taught by Agrawal with the with the bits as taught by Bao with the motivation being to use bits in packets to indicate various configurations of the packet transmissions.
Claim(s) 2-3, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Agrawal (Pub No 20220312260) further in view of Vegesna (Pub No 20210297351), Rao (Pub No 20090075668), Saloni (Pub No 20220038212),Bao (Pub No 20140086222), and Kneckt (Pub No 20230232218)
Regarding claim 2,
Agrawal in view of Vegesna, Rao, Saloni and Bao teaches The method of claim 1, however does not teach wherein the first packet and the second packet are Aggregated MAC Protocol Data Units (AMPDUs) each comprising a plurality of frames.
Kneckt teaches wherein the first packet and the second packet each comprising a plurality of frames (interpreted as When the aggregated MAC protocol data unit (A-MPDU) subframe is received, the receiver can transmit block acknowledgement (BA) based on OTA values within header 315 before decrypting payload 340, see para [0042])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the data unit taught by Agrawal with the with the AMPDU as taught by Kneckt with the motivation being to perform the communications using other known data units.
Regarding claim 3,
Agrawal in view of Vegesna, Rao, Saloni and Bao teaches The method of claim 2, however does not teach further comprising selecting the plurality of frames from a frame queue corresponding to a traffic identifier (TID).
Kneckt teaches teach further comprising selecting the plurality of frames from a frame queue corresponding to a traffic identifier (TID). (interpreted as In some embodiments, the processor can be further configured to set a bit of one or more static MAC header bits in the payload of the A-MPDU subframe to corresponding actual values associated with a field in the header, where the field can include a traffic ID (TID) field or an aggregated MAC service data unit (A-MSDU) present field, see para [0007]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the data unit taught by Agrawal with the with the traffic ID as taught by Kneckt with the motivation being to use identifiers for identifying the different types of traffic.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Agrawal (Pub No 20220312260) further in view of Vegesna (Pub No 20210297351), Rao (Pub No 20090075668), Saloni (Pub No 20220038212),Bao (Pub No 20140086222), Kneckt (Pub No 20230232218) and Sun (Pub No 20220345973)
Regarding claim 4,
Agrawal in view of Vegesna, Rao, Saloni and Bao teaches The method of claim 3, however does not teach wherein the TID corresponds to a latency tolerant traffic.
Sun teaches wherein the TID corresponds to a latency tolerant traffic. (interpreted as (a) The latency sensitive traffic and latency tolerant traffic are using different TIDs, see para [0085])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the data unit taught by Agrawal with the with the traffic ID latency as taught by Sun with the motivation being to use identifiers for routing the different types of traffic.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Agrawal (Pub No 20220312260) further in view of Vegesna (Pub No 20210297351), Rao (Pub No 20090075668), Saloni (Pub No 20220038212),Bao (Pub No 20140086222), and Searle (Pub No 20140280884)
Regarding claim 6,
Agrawal in view of Vegesna, Rao, Saloni and Bao teaches The method of claim 1, however does not teach further comprising configuring a plurality of frames in the second packet with the immediate block acknowledgement by setting predefined control bits in frame headers of the plurality of frames.
Searle teaches further comprising configuring a plurality of frames in the second packet with the immediate block acknowledgement by setting predefined control bits in frame headers of the plurality of frames. (interpreted as for example by setting an acknowledgement request flag in the overlay network packet header of a packet. An indication of N (the number of packets that this request is for) may also be included in the overlay network packet header. Note that N may be, but is not necessarily, a fixed number. The receiving VMM 312 may collect metrics for the received packets and, upon receiving a request for acknowledgement, see para [0041])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the data unit taught by Agrawal with the with the bit/flag latency as taught by Searle since it is known in the art of communications to indicate intent of transmissions.
Claim(s) 12, 14-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Agrawal (Pub No 20220312260) further in view of Vegesna (Pub No 20210297351), Rao (Pub No 20090075668), Saloni (Pub No 20220038212), Bao (Pub No 20140086222), and Grayson (Pub No 20190124543)
Regarding claim 12,
Agrawal teaches A transmitting device, comprising:
Determining whether a count of unacknowledged frames corresponding to a receiving device is smaller than a threshold value; (interpreted as At a first time t1 the local buffer 911 of the hub includes less than the threshold number of packets, and therefore, the controller 960 does not transmit a request for acknowledgement to the base station, see para [0049])
Transmit a first packet to the receiving device wherein the transmitting device configures the first packet such that the receiver is not required to send block acknowledgement immediately upon receipt of the first packet by the receiver; ( see transmission of packet – 9 in fig 9)
Determine, after the transmission of the first packet, whether the count of the unacknowledged frames is smaller than the threshold value; (interpreted as At a second time t2 the threshold number of packets within the local buffer 911 exceeds the threshold. For at least some embodiments a request for acknowledgment would be transmitted, see para [0049].
Transmit a second packet requesting an immediate block acknowledgement for the unacknowledged frames in response to determining that the count of the unacknowledged frames is greater than or equal to the threshold value; and (interpreted as If the number of transmission packets stored in the local buffer does exceed the threshold, then a step 1140 includes the transmitting modem sending (transmitting) a request for acknowledgement of reception of the transmission packets to a receiving device (base station), see para [0054])
Receiving a block acknowledgement for the unacknowledged frames in response to receipt of the second packet by the receiving device. (interpreted as For an embodiment, the receiving device replies with an acknowledgement (ACK) indicating whether a packet(s) have been successfully received. For an embodiment, once the controller 260 of the modem 210 receives an ACK that indicates that a packet was successfully received, the controller 260 of the modem 210 purges the successfully received packet(s) from the local buffer 220, see para [0033])
However Agrawal does not teach a machine-readable storage medium storing executable instructions; and
a processing resource coupled to the machine-readable storage medium, wherein the processing resource executes one or more of the instructions to:
transmit a first packet to the receiving device in response to determining that the count of the unacknowledged frames is smaller than the threshold value;
wherein the threshold value is set to a predetermined percentage of a size of a block acknowledgement frame;
Vegesna teaches a machine-readable storage medium storing executable instructions; and a processing resource coupled to the machine-readable storage medium; (para [0118]) (see para [0115])
transmitting, by the transmitting device, a first packet to the receiving device in response to determining that the count of the unacknowledged frames is smaller than the threshold value (interpreted as if the un-granted queue build-up is small and below a certain threshold, the queue may be allowed to send unsolicited packets without waiting for an explicit request/grant message exchange, see para [0205])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the system taught by Agrawal with the with the transmitting due to a threshold as taught by Vegesna since it would have been a simple substitution providing expected results of transmitting with a threshold in the buffer to limit.
However Agrawal in view of Vegesna does not teach determining, by the transmitting device, whether the oldest unacknowledged frame has not reached an acknowledgement timeout;
(a) the oldest unacknowledged frame has not reached the acknowledgement timeout;
Rao Teaches determining, by the transmitting device, whether the oldest unacknowledged frame has not reached an acknowledgement timeout; (a) the oldest unacknowledged frame has not reached the acknowledgement timeout; (interpreted as The mobile unit sets (107) the latency indicator bit to "0" if the packet waiting time measurement does not exceed the predetermined threshold in step 103. [0030] The mobile unit transmits (109) the MAC packet to base station, see para [0029-0030])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the system taught by Agrawal in view of Vegesna with timeout conditions taught by Rao with the motivation being for having another condition for transmitting packets such as an expiry timer so that packets are not waiting forever.
However Agrawal in view of Vegesna and Rao do not teach establishing a clock acknowledgement session between a transmitting device and a receiving device; the aggregated packet with an aggregated mac protocol data unit packet;
Saloni teaches establishing a clock acknowledgement session between a transmitting device and a receiving device; the aggregated packet with an aggregated mac protocol data unit packet; (interpreted as before the frames can be aggregated by the originator, a block acknowledgement session is required to be established between the originator and the responder… multiple aggregated frames (such as Aggregated MPDUs or Aggregated MSDUs) can be acknowledged together using a single BA frame, see para [0012])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the system taught by Agrawal in view of Vegesna and Rao with session setup taught by Saloni with the motivation being to setup the communications between devices.
However Agrawal in view of Vegesna, Rao, and Saloni do not teach instructing the receiver that it is not required to send the block ack immediately.
Bao teaches instructing the receiver that it is not required to send the block ack immediately. (interpreted as For example, one field of the agreed data frame is the delayed acknowledgement indication bit. The waiting interval of frame acknowledgement which used the delayed-ACK is decided by the delivering end. It can delivery when it has free resource. If it analyzes the delayed-ACK indication from data frame during analyzing data frame, it will return the acknowledgement frame when it has free resource, see para [0084])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the data unit taught by Agrawal with the with the bits as taught by Bao with the motivation being to use bits in packets to indicate various configurations of the packet transmissions.
However they do not teach wherein the threshold value is set to a predetermined percentage of a size of a block acknowledgement frame;
Grayson Teaches wherein the threshold value is set to a predetermined percentage of a size of a block acknowledgement frame; (interpreted as method 500 includes determining whether a number/percentage of dropped frames indicated by the block acknowledgement is greater/less than the threshold number/percentage of dropped frames, see para [0060])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the threshold using a count taught by Agrawal with threshold using count or percentage as taught by Grayson since it would have been a simple substitution to use percentage rather than a count for a threshold to achieve the same results.
Regarding claim 14,
Agrawal teaches The transmitting device of claim 12, further comprising a counter that maintains the count of the unacknowledged frames corresponding to the receiving device. (interpreted as controller of a modem requesting acknowledgment 430 of reception of packets based on a local buffer 310 of the modem having greater than a threshold number of packets, see para [0042])
Regarding claim 15,
Agrawal teaches The transmitting device of claim 12, wherein the threshold value is a value in a range from 50% to 100% of a size of the block acknowledgement. (interpreted as For an embodiment, the threshold level is dynamically determined by the receiving device (base station) based upon its network congestion. For example, if the base station determines that 60% of random-access slots are in use and 50% of transmit blocks are available, the base station can decrease the threshold, resulting in a QoS increase for all/a set of hubs and base station usage to increase to 80%. If usage goes past 90% and the base station starts to saturate, then the base station may increase the threshold, see para [0036]. Wherein it would have been obvious to try any number of percentages)
Regarding claim 16,
Agrawal teaches The transmitting device of claim 12, wherein transmitting the second packet requesting the immediate block acknowledgement after the count of the unacknowledged frames becomes equal to greater than the threshold value avoids frequent transmissions of block acknowledgements from the receiving device thereby resulting in airtime savings. (interpreted as If the number of transmission packets stored in the local buffer does exceed the threshold, then a step 1140 includes the transmitting modem sending (transmitting) a request for acknowledgement of reception of the transmission packets to a receiving device (base station), see para [0054])
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Agrawal (Pub No 20220312260) further in view of Vegesna (Pub No 20210297351), Rao (Pub No 20090075668), Saloni (Pub No 20220038212), Bao (Pub No 20140086222), Grayson (Pub No 20190124543), and Kneckt (Pub No 20230232218)
Regarding claim 13,
Agrawal in view of Vesna, Rao, and Saloni teaches The method of claim 2, however does not teach further comprising selecting the plurality of frames from a frame queue corresponding to a traffic identifier (TID).
Kneckt teaches teach further comprising selecting the plurality of frames from a frame queue corresponding to a traffic identifier (TID). (interpreted as In some embodiments, the processor can be further configured to set a bit of one or more static MAC header bits in the payload of the A-MPDU subframe to corresponding actual values associated with a field in the header, where the field can include a traffic ID (TID) field or an aggregated MAC service data unit (A-MSDU) present field, see para [0007]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the data unit taught by Agrawal in view of Vesna, Rao, Saloni and Bao with the with the traffic ID as taught by Kneckt since it is known in the art of communications to use identifiers for routing the different types of traffic.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 17 is 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.
Regarding claim 17,
The prior art of record do not teach The transmitting device of claim 12, wherein transmitting the second packet requesting the immediate block acknowledgement after the count of the unacknowledged frames becomes equal to greater than the threshold value avoids frequent transmissions of block acknowledgements from the receiving device thereby resulting in airtime reduction from 6% to 7% for a frame size of 1500 bytes or from 14% to 16% for a frame size of 500 bytes in comparison to transmitting immediate block acknowledgements for each packet individually.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BAO G NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-7732. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10pm - 6:30pm.
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, Huy Vu can be reached on 571-272-3155. 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.
/BAO G NGUYEN/Examiner, Art Unit 2461
/HUY D VU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2461
Prosecution Insights