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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
2. A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 01/09/2025 has been entered.
Claims 1, 10-13, 21-24 are pending. Claims 22-24 are new claims. Claims 2-9, 14-20 are cancelled.
Response to Arguments
3. Applicant’s arguments filed on 01/09/2026 with respect to claims 1, 10-13, 21 have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to new combinations of references including new prior arts being used in the current rejection. The new grounds of rejection are necessitated by amendment.
Claim Objections
4. Claims 1, 10 and 11 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 1, 10, 11 recites in lines 12, 14, 15 respectively, the limitation “CW”.
The acronym “CW” should be fully titled so one skilled in the art can quickly understand the meaning of the applicant's invention.
Appropriate correction is required
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. 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.
Claim(s) 1, 10, 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Damnjanovic; Jelena et al. (US 20170099120 A1 ) hereinafter Damnj and further in view of Adachi et al. (US 20120014335 A1) hereinafter Adachi and further in view of Jiang et al. (CN 102244568 A) hereinafter Jiang e.g., translated copy attached
As to claim 1. Damnj teaches a method for data frame transmission, comprising: determining that transmission of a data frame is switched from a first link to a second link([0098] Network access controller NAC perform an inter-beam handover (IBH) to hand off communications with the UT from the source beam to the target beam. )
; and in response to determining that the transmission of the data frame is switched from the first link to the second link, performing retransmission counting of the data frame on the second link. ([0148] Fig. 14, if the network controller 1000 receives reverse link RL data from the user terminal via the source beam (1410) after communications with the user terminal have already switched over to the target beam (as tested at 1420), the network controller 1000 may simply proceed by resetting the retransmission counter for the HARQ process associated with the received RL data (1460) and transmit the RL grant message to the user terminal via the target beam (1470). )
wherein performing the retransmission counting of the data frame on the second link comprises: performing the retransmission counting of the data frame on the second link ([0148] Fig. 14, if the network controller 1000 receives reverse link RL data from the user terminal via the source beam (1410) after communications with the user terminal have already switched over to the target beam (as tested at 1420), the network controller 1000 may simply proceed by resetting the retransmission counter for the HARQ process associated with the received RL data (1460) and transmit the RL grant message to the user terminal via the target beam (1470) )
Damanj does not teach by taking a retransmission count value of the data frame corresponding to the first link as an initial value of a retransmission count value of the data frame corresponding to the second link;
and continuing to use a transmission identifier and a sequence number of the data frame corresponding to the first link as a transmission identifier and a sequence number of the data frame corresponding to the second link.
Adachi teaches by taking a retransmission count value of the data frame corresponding to the first link as an initial value of a retransmission count value of the data frame corresponding to the second link ([0166] when the frames having sequence numbers starting from 11 in the first channel/mode are sequentially retransmitted through the second channel/mode. For example, when the frame having sequence number 11 is reassigned with sequence number 0 in the second channel/mode,)
and continuing to use a transmission identifier and a sequence number of the data frame corresponding to the first link as a transmission identifier and a sequence number of the data frame corresponding to the second link. . ([0166] when the frames having sequence numbers starting from 11 in the first channel/mode are sequentially retransmitted through the second channel/mode. For example, when the frame having sequence number 11 is reassigned with sequence number 0 in the second channel/mode,)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine teachings of Adachi with the teachings of Damanj because Adachi teaches that changing transmission channel from one to another would enable wireless terminal on the receiving side to receive frames in sequence when the frames are transmitted through a plurality of channels, while ensuring a flexible transmitter configuration. (Adachi [0005])
The combination of Damnj, Adachi does not teach determining a retransmission count value of the data frame corresponding to the first link, wherein the retransmission count value indicates a number of times data frame has been retransmitted
in response to determining that a CW window for performing the retransmission counting of the data frame on the first link has a maximum value,
Jiang teaches determining a retransmission count value of the data frame corresponding to the first link, wherein the retransmission count value indicates a number of times data frame has been retransmitted;([0022] when data frames transmitting party transmits a data frame at the MAC layer retransmission times reaches the maximum number of times defined by the protocol, in first path)
in response to determining that a CW window for performing the retransmission counting of the data frame on the first link has a maximum value, ([0047][0048] if the sender is in the congestion state, adjusting the contention window of the sender; when the sender of the data frame after the one data frame of the MAC layer retransmission times reaches the maximum number of times defined by the protocol, it still cannot be successfully transmitted, the data frame is returned to the routing layer; if the data frame of the TTL count greater than 0, which indicates that the data frame survival time in the network is still valid, the routing layer is the data frame to find another path reaching the destination node)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine teachings of Jiang with the teachings of Damanj and Adachi because Jiang teaches that determining contention window for retransmission would improve channel utilization ratio, eliminating deadlock hazard. ([Jiang [0021]
Claims 10 and 11 is/are interpreted and rejected for the same reasons as set forth in claim 1.
Claim(s) 12, 21, 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Damnj, Adachi, Jiang and further in view of McNew et al. (US 20110182171 A1) hereinafter Ahn
As to claim 12 The combination of Damnj, Adachi and Jiang specifically Damnj teaches retransmission count value of the data frame corresponding to the second link ([0148] Fig. 14, if the network controller 1000 receives reverse link RL data from the user terminal via the source beam (1410) after communications with the user terminal have already switched over to the target beam (as tested at 1420), the network controller 1000 may simply proceed by resetting the retransmission counter for the HARQ process associated with the received RL data (1460) and transmit the RL grant message to the user terminal via the target beam (1470) )
combination of Damnj, Adachi and Jiang does not teach wherein performing the retransmission counting of the data frame comprises: initializing a contention window, and increasing [[a]] the [ ] in response to retransmission of the data frame until the contention window reaches a maximum value.
McNew teaches wherein performing the retransmission counting of the data frame comprises: initializing a contention window, and increasing [[a]] the [ ] in response to retransmission of the data frame until the contention window reaches a maximum value
([0030]-[0034] FIG. 5 the device checks whether the packet has already been retransmitted the maximum allowed times If not, another attempt is made to retransmit the packet, start contention window, If CW has reached its maximum size, the device checks whether the packet has already been retransmitted the maximum allowed times, contention widow value is increased, )
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine teachings of McNew with the teachings of Damnj Adachi and Jiang because Ahn teaches that a larger CWinit reduces the likelihood of collision. (McNew [0034])
Claims 21, 23 is/are interpreted and rejected for the same reasons as set forth in claim 12.
Claim(s) 13, 22, 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Damnj, Adachi, Jiang and further in view of Kim et al. (US 20170325266 A1) hereinafter Kim
As to claim 13. The combination of Damnj, Adachi and Jiang does not teach in response to successful transmission of the data frame, initializing the retransmission count value to zero.
Kim teaches in response to successful transmission of the data frame, initializing the retransmission count value to zero.([0075] If the transmission of the downlink frame by the AP is successful, the CW may be reset (or changed or decremented) to CWmin. Additionally, in case the transmission of the downlink frame is successful, the number of retransmission counts may be reset to 0.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine teachings of Kim with the teachings of Damnj Adachi and Jiang because Kim teaches that resetting number of retransmission counts to 0 transmission of the downlink frame is successful, that would AP to allow to reset the CW changed or decremented to CWmin. (Kim [0075])
Claims 22, 24 is/are interpreted and rejected for the same reasons as set forth in claim 13.
Conclusion
6. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Chang; Wei-Hsuan et al. [US 20120213104 A1] APPARATUS FOR ADJUSTING POWER AND METHOD THEREOF
Shinohara; Chiaki et al. [US 20110170491 A1] Communication device and communication method
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ATIQUE AHMED whose telephone number is (571)272-6244. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30 - 7:30 PM M-F Eastern.
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, Un Cho can be reached on 5712727919. 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.
/ATIQUE AHMED/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2413