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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
Acknowledgment is made of the information disclosure statements filed on 16 September 2021,
U.S. patents and Foreign Patents have been considered.
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 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.
Claim [1-19] are rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Leif (US 7095719 B1) in view of Chou (US 9813189 A1) further in view of Polo (US 20140086125 A1).
Regard claim 1 and 14, Leif teaches sending at least one first packet to a first receiving device by using a wireless communication connection, [Col 2 Row 38-43] The present invention is related to a method or an apparatus for dynamically selecting a packet type based on the quality estimates of the channel. From these channel quality estimates, specific properties of the packet may be selected including whether a coding scheme should be used, the packet length, and the modulation used. The packet type selection is then performed in a dynamic fashion based on updates or changes to the channel conditions, wherein the at least one first packet is generated by using a first packet assembly manner; [ Col 2 Row 46-53] In one aspect, the invention is related to a method for improving a network connection in a wireless network. The method comprises the steps of determining at least one quality measure for a channel of the network connection, estimating a quality condition for the channel based on the at least one quality measure, and selecting a packet type to be transmitted over the channel based on the quality condition and sending the at least one second packet to the first receiving device by using the wireless communication connection, [Col 7 Row 64- Col 8 Row 1-2] From the foregoing, it should be clear that an optimal packet type may be selected based on information about the channel conditions. Following is a description of an algorithm that can be used to switch the packet type based on information about changes in the channel conditions, in accordance with the present invention.
Leif does not teach determining, based on a receiving status of at least one piece of feedback information sent by the first receiving device, to generate at least one second packet by using the first packet assembly manner or a second packet assembly manner wherein the at least one piece of feedback information is an acknowledgment or a negative acknowledgment fed back by the first receiving device after receiving the at least one first packet, the first packet assembly manner comprises non-channel-coding and the second packet assembly manner comprises: Channel coding at one of multiple channel-coding levels, each of the multiple channel-coding levels corresponding to a respective channel coded packet assembly manner, or the first packet assembly manner comprises channel coding of a second channel coding level, wherein the first coding level is lower than the second channel coding level.
However, Chou does teach determining, based on a receiving status of at least one piece of feedback information sent by the first receiving device [Col 7 Row 27-32] However, the transmitter detects that the link quality is not good. For example, the transmitter receives NACK or does not receive ACK from the receiver. In step 313, the transmitter decides to switch to a lower symbol rate, e.g., 125 k for the next data packet to generate at least one second packet by using the first packet assembly manner or a second packet assembly manner, [Col 7 Row 30-35] In step 313, the transmitter decides to switch to a lower symbol rate, e.g., 125 k for the next data packet. In step 314, the transmitter transmits a data packet with an RI field. The packet comprises a first FEC block and a second FEC block. The first FEC block comprises the RI field, while the second FEC block comprises the PDU wherein the at least one piece of feedback information is an acknowledgment or a negative acknowledgment fed back by the first receiving device after receiving the at least one first packet; [Col 6 Row 26-36] With the RI field, fast rate adaption can be achieved for long-range BLE. No handshaking or synchronization is required for data rate change. The transmitter can change the data rate on each individual channel unilaterally. Fast adaptation is feasible because the transmitter can make the decision directly based on channel quality, whether ACK is received or not, receiver status, or receiver recommendation, etc. Transmitter can simply use a trial and error approach. For example, transmitter can start with a high data rate to save power and speed up the data transfer and if no ACK, it immediately switches to low rate the first packet assembly manner comprises non-channel-coding [Col 9 Row 55-64] For Bluetooth Long Range 250a mode (LR-250a), the physical data rate is 250 Kbps with no FEC coding and 1:4 pattern mapping. For Bluetooth Long Range 250b mode (LR-250b), the physical data rate is 250 Kbps with 1/2 FEC K=4 coding rate and 1:2 pattern mapping. For Bluetooth Long Range 500a mode (LR-500a), the physical data rate is 500 Kbps with no FEC coding and 1:2 pattern mapping and the second packet assembly manner comprises: Channel coding at one of multiple channel-coding levels, [Col 9 Row 59 - Col 10 Row 2] the physical data rate is 125 Kbps with 1/2 FEC K=4 coding rate and 1:4 pattern mapping. For Bluetooth Long Range 250a mode (LR-250a), the physical data rate is 250 Kbps with no FEC coding and 1:4 pattern mapping. For Bluetooth Long Range 250b mode (LR-250b), the physical data rate is 250 Kbps with 1/2 FEC K=4 coding rate and 1:2 pattern mapping. For Bluetooth Long Range 500a mode (LR-500a), the physical data rate is 500 Kbps with no FEC coding and 1:2 pattern mapping. For Bluetooth Long Range 500b mode (LR-500b), the physical data rate is 500 Kbps with 1/2 FEC K=4 coding rate and 1:1 pattern mapping each of the multiple channel-coding levels corresponding to a respective channel coded packet assembly manner, [Col 10 Row 2-6] A transmitter thus can use different MCS options to support variable data rates by adapting to channel conditions, and then uses the novel rate indication field to indicate the data rate to a receiver dynamically or the first packet assembly manner comprises channel coding of a second channel coding level, wherein the first coding level is lower than the second channel coding level, wherein, when it is determined to generate the at least one second packet by using the second packet assembly manner, (Col 7 Row 30-39) In step 313, the transmitter decides to switch to a lower symbol rate, e.g., 125 k for the next data packet. In step 314, the transmitter transmits a data packet with an RI field. The packet comprises a first FEC block and a second FEC block. The first FEC block comprises the RI field, while the second FEC block comprises the PDU. The RI field indicates that the second FEC block is encoded with a lower symbol rate of 125 k. In step 315, the receiver retrieves the RI field from the data packet and decodes the PDU based on the indicated symbol rate of 125 k and the at least one second packet comprises a second data packet and a second control packet, (Col 15 Row 62- Col 6 Row 1) Data packet 110 comprises preamble, an access address field, a rate indication (RI) field 120, a first TERM1 field, a payload data Unit (PDU), CRC, and a second TERM2 field. The first three fields (access address, RI, and TERM1) form a first FEC block 1, while the next three fields (PDU, CRC, and TERM2) form a second FEC block 2 the method further comprises: generating the second data packet by using the second packet assembly manner, and generating the second control packet by using the first packet assembly manner. [Col 8 Row 36-42] Note that the RI field in FEC block 1 is also convolutional FEC encoded, with a fixed low rate of 125 k. Therefore, RI is protected even at lower SNR. On the other hand, the PDU in FEC block 2 is FEC encoded with an adaptive rate indicated by RI. The transmitter is able to quickly decide an appropriate rate that is adaptive to the link quality.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teachings of Leif and Chou before him or her, to modify the method of Leif to include the assembly manner as taught by Chou.
The motivation to do so would be improved network throughput. (27 by Chou).
Leif and Chou do not teach the second data packet is transmitted on a data link and the second control packet is transmitted on a control link, the data link and the control link are different logical links on a same physical link, the second data packet and the second control packet are separate packets independently assembled under different packet assembly manners.
However, Polo does teach the second data packet is transmitted on a data link [0065] The L2CAP layer has a protocol control channel that is carried over a default asynchronous connection-oriented link (ACL) logical transport. Application data submitted to the L2CAP channel may be carried on any logical link that supports the L2CAP channel, and the second control packet is transmitted on a control link, [0064] The LL control channel for the baseband and physical layers is carried over logical links in addition to user data. Devices that are active in a piconet have a default asynchronous connection-oriented logical transport that is used to transport the LL control channel signaling, the data link and the control link are different logical links on a same physical link, [0064] The physical link may be used as a transport for one or more logical links that support unicast synchronous, asynchronous and isochronous traffic, and broadcast traffic. Traffic on the logical links may be multiplexed onto the physical link by occupying slots assigned by a scheduling function in a resource manager of the multi-mode BLE controller 511, the second data packet and the second control packet are separate packets independently assembled under different packet assembly manners. [0084] As shown in FIG. 8, the BLE packet 601 is employed as a data channel packet, in which the PDU 606 includes a header 801, a payload 802 and optionally a message integrity check (MIC) 803. The header 801 may be a 16-bit header, while the payload 802 may be a variable size payload. In some aspects, the payload 802 may be as per the length field in the header 801. The header 801 may be structured to include multiple fields for the enhanced rate physical layer BLE activities. In this regard, the header 801 includes logical link identifier (LLID) field 804, next expected sequence number (NESN) field 805, sequence number (SN) field 806, more data (MD) field 807, reserved-for-future-use (RFU) field 808 and length field 809.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teachings of Leif, Polo and Chou before him or her, to modify the method of Leif and Chou to include the data packet configuration as taught by Polo.
The motivation to do so would be improved network efficiency. (0016 by Polo).
Regarding claim 2 and 15, Leif, Chou and Polo teach the limitations of the patent limitations.
Leif does teach wherein the receiving status comprises a received signal strength indicator indicating strength of the at least one piece of feedback information. [Col 3 Row 40-46] The channel quality estimates may be determined using channel information obtained from either the receiver 24, the transmitter 20, or both. In particular, the invention makes use of easily obtained parameters such as the transmitter side power, the RSSI value, the number of retransmissions, and in the case of an error correcting code, how many errors have been corrected.
Regarding claim 3, Leif, Chou and Polo teach the limitations of the patent limitations.
Leif does teach wherein the determining, based on a receiving status of at least one piece of feedback information sent by the first receiving device, to generate at least one second packet by using the first packet assembly manner or a second packet assembly manner comprises:[Col 8 Row 7-13] In one exemplary embodiment, if coded DMx packets are used, one can combine the information from the Q.sub.CRC and Q.sub.FEC values available at the receiver side to determine whether any errors have been corrected in those packets that were accepted as correct. For instance, equation (8) can be used for both Q.sub.CRC and Q.sub.FEC with M.sub.FEC=1 if no errors have been corrected, and M.sub.FEC=0 otherwise. If Q.sub.CRC.apprxeq.Q.sub.FEC, then for almost all packets that were accepted, no errors were corrected, determining, based on the received signal strength indicator of the at least one piece of feedback information within one or more preset time periods and the first packet assembly manner, whether to switch to the second packet assembly manner;[Col 8 Row 24-30] In another exemplary embodiment, by using the Q.sub.RSSI and Q.sub.CRC values which are found at the receiver side, it is possible to deduce the case where the received signal strength is good (e.g., above a predefined level), yet the throughput is still low. In that case, interference may be considered to be the limiting factor and, hence, error coding would have little effect on the throughput, upon determining not to switch to the second packet assembly manner, generating the at least one second packet by using the first packet assembly manner;[Col 9 Row 26-31] Similarly, if Q.sub.CRC is less than a predefined quality threshold T4, indicating that the number of packets confirmed as correct is too low, a switch from DM5 to shorter DM3 packets may be made to improve the Q.sub.CRC value. The remainder of the diagram should be self-explanatory and, therefore, will not be described further, upon determining to switch to the second packet assembly manner, generating the at least one second packet by using the second packet assembly manner. [Col 8 Row 64 - Col 9 Row 6] In general, it is the transmitter side that controls which packet type is to be transmitted, but the receiver side may make requests based on receiver side estimates of channel conditions. However, the transmitter side may choose to ignore the inputs from the receiver side if the transmitter side determines the requests to be unreliable or incorrect. For example, if the receiver side requests uncoded packets in spite of the fact that V.sub.PA is at the maximum value and Q.sub.ARQ is small, the transmitter side can decide to switch to coded packets anyway.
Regarding claim 4, Leif, Chou and Polo teach the limitations of the patent limitations.
Leif does teach when the received signal strength indicator of the at least one piece of feedback information within the one or more preset time periods is less than a first threshold, and the first packet assembly manner belongs to a first type, determining to switch to a packet assembly manner that belongs to a second type;[Col 9 Row 22-30] the number of packets confirmed as correct are sufficiently high, then coded packets may no longer be necessary and a switch from coded DM5 packets to uncoded DH5 packets may be made. Similarly, if Q.sub.CRC is less than a predefined quality threshold T4, indicating that the number of packets confirmed as correct is too low, a switch from DM5 to shorter DM3 packets may be made to improve the Q.sub.CRC value. The remainder of the diagram should be self-explanatory and, therefore, will not be described further, or when the received signal strength indicator of the at least one piece of feedback information within the one or more preset time periods is greater than a fourth threshold, and the first packet assembly manner belongs to a second type, determining to switch to a packet assembly manner that belongs to a first type,[ Col 9 Row 18-25] As can be seen from the diagram, a change from one packet type to another may be made if certain channel conditions exist. For example, if Q.sub.CRC and Q.sub.FEC are greater than the predefined quality thresholds T1 and T2 respectively, indicating that the number of packets corrected by the FEC code and, hence, the number of packets confirmed as correct are sufficiently high, then coded packets may no longer be necessary and a switch from coded DM5 packets to uncoded DH5 packets may be made. wherein the packet assembly manner that belongs to the first type comprises non-channel coding, and the packet assembly manner that belongs to the second type comprises channel coding at any channel coding level;[ Col 6 Row 14-21] To determine which packet type is the best for a certain channel condition, the data rate and throughput for the different packet types can be found for different channel conditions. This information is typically obtained by simulation, but it can also be obtained by direct measurements if a test system is available. For convenient reference, the data rate and throughput for the different packet types of the Bluetooth.TM. wireless system has been tabulated in TABLE 1 and TABLE 2 below, or the packet assembly manner that belongs to the first type comprises channel coding at a first channel coding level, and the packet assembly manner that belongs to the second type comprises channel coding at a second channel coding level, wherein the first channel coding level is lower than the second channel coding level. [Col 7 Row 64 - Col 8 Row 2] From the foregoing, it should be clear that an optimal packet type may be selected based on information about the channel conditions. Following is a description of an algorithm that can be used to switch the packet type based on information about changes in the channel conditions, in accordance with the present invention.
Regarding claim 5, Leif, Chou and Polo teach the limitations of the patent limitations.
Leif does teach wherein the receiving status comprises a packet loss rate or a receiving correctness rate of the at least one piece of feedback information [Col 2 Row 40-44] From these channel quality estimates, specific properties of the packet may be selected including whether a coding scheme should be used, the packet length, and the modulation used. The packet type selection is then performed in a dynamic fashion based on updates or changes to the channel conditions.
Regarding claim 6, Leif, Chou and Polo teach the limitations of the patent limitations.
Leif teaches determining, based on the packet loss rate or the receiving correctness rate of the at least one piece of feedback information within a plurality of preset time periods and the first packet assembly manner, whether to switch to the second packet assembly manner;[ Col 4 Row 50-54] In order to emphasize that it is not necessary to use the same function with every quality measure, each function f used herein has a subscript appended thereto corresponding to the particular quality measure being updated. For example, the function f in equation (1) has the RSSI subscript appended thereto corresponding to the received signal strength quality measure Q.sub.RSSI, and upon determining not to switch to the second packet assembly manner, generate the at least one second packet by using the first packet assembly manner;[ Col 5 Row 13-18] The Q.sub.ARQ value for the (k+1)th packet can be updated using the M.sub.ARQ value for the (k+1)th packet and the previous Q.sub.ARQ value, as shown below. The M.sub.ARQ value can either reflect whether the last transmitted packet was accepted at the other side, that is M.sub.ARQ=0 or 1, or it can be the number of times a certain packet has been updated, upon determining to switch to the second packet assembly manner, generating the at least one second packet by using the second packet assembly manner.[ Col 5 Row 22-30] The Q.sub.TSYNC value for the (k+1)th packet may be updated using the M.sub.TSYNC value for the (k+1)th packet and the previous Q.sub.TSYNC value, as shown below. The M.sub.TSYNC value reflects the quality of the time synchronization. In general, time synchronization may be obtained by correlating the received signal with a known "synchronization word."
Regarding claim 7, Leif, Chou and Polo teach the limitations of the patent limitations.
Leif does teach when the packet loss rate within each preset time period is greater than a second threshold, and the first packet assembly manner belongs to a first type, determining to switch to a packet assembly manner that belongs to a second type;[ Col 4 Row 58-60] The Q.sub.PA value for the (k+1)th packet can be updated using the V.sub.PA value for the (k+1)th packet and the previous Q.sub.PA value as follows, or when the packet loss rate within each preset time period is less than a fifth threshold, and the first packet assembly manner belongs to a second type, determining to switch to a packet assembly manner that belongs to a first type,[Col 5 Row 3-8] The Q.sub.FEC value for the (k+1)th packet can be updated using the M.sub.FEC value for the (k+1)th packet and the previous Q.sub.FEC value, as shown below. In general, M.sub.FEC is a momentary quality measure indicating the number of errors per packet per codeword (it is possible for one packet to have several codewords). wherein the packet assembly manner that belongs to the first type comprises non-channel coding, and the packet assembly manner that belongs to the second type comprises channel coding at any channel coding level;[Col 5 Row 49-52] The function f which is used to update the above quality measures, as explained above, can be a number of different functions. Using the Q.sub.CRC quality measure or the packet assembly manner that belongs to the first type comprises channel coding at a first channel coding level, and the packet assembly manner that belongs to the second type comprises channel coding at a second channel coding level, wherein the first channel coding level is lower than the second channel coding level.[ Col 5 Row 54-59] Auto Regressive:Q.sub.CRC(k+1)=.lamda.Q.sub.CRC(k)+(1.lamda.)M.sub.CRC(k+1) (8) where .lamda. represents a "forgetting factor," 0.ltoreq..lamda..ltoreq.1.
Regarding claim 8, Leif, Chou and Polo teach the limitations of the patent limitations.
Leif does teach when the receiving correctness rate in each preset time period is less than a third threshold, and the first packet assembly manner belongs to a first type, determining to switch to a packet assembly manner that belongs to a second type;[ Col 4 Row 58-62] The Q.sub.PA value for the (k+1)th packet can be updated using the V.sub.PA value for the (k+1)th packet and the previous Q.sub.PA value, or when the receiving correctness rate in each preset time period is greater than a sixth threshold, and the first packet assembly manner belongs to a second type, determining to switch to a packet assembly manner that belongs to a first type, [Col 5 Row 3-7] The Q.sub.FEC value for the (k+1)th packet can be updated using the M.sub.FEC value for the (k+1)th packet and the previous Q.sub.FEC value, as shown below. In general, M.sub.FEC is a momentary quality measure indicating the number of errors per packet per codeword (it is possible for one packet to have several codewords), wherein the packet assembly manner that belongs to the first type comprises non-channel coding, and the packet assembly manner that belongs to the second type comprises channel coding;[ Col 5 Row 49-56] The function f which is used to update the above quality measures, as explained above, can be a number of different functions. Using the Q.sub.CRC quality measure as an example, or the packet assembly manner that belongs to the first type comprises channel coding at a first channel coding level, and the packet assembly manner that belongs to the second type comprises channel coding at a second channel coding level, wherein the first channel coding level is lower than the second channel coding level.[ Col 5 Row 54-60] Auto Regressive: Q.sub.CRC(k+1)=.lamda.Q.sub.CRC(k)+(1-.lamda.)M.sub.CRC(k+1) (8) where .lamda. represents a "forgetting factor," 0.ltoreq..lamda..ltoreq.1.
Regarding claim 9, Leif, Chou and Polo teach the limitations of the patent limitations.
Leif does teach upon determining to generate the at least one second packet by using the second packet assembly manner, adjusting a communication periodicity of a second receiving device, wherein the second receiving device is a receiving device synchronized with the first receiving device,[ Col 10 Row 9-15] It should be noted that the radio unit 22 and the radio unit 26 are similar in function and, therefore, only the radio unit 22 will be described here. In the exemplary embodiment, the radio unit 22 includes at least a channel quality processor 50, a channel condition processor 52, a packet type selector 54, a receiver unit 56, and a transmitter unit 58, the communication periodicity is a time interval between two adjacent third packets sent to the second receiving device, and the adjacent third packet and the second packet have same packet content;[ Col 10 Row 23-31] Based on the updates of the channel quality measures, the channel condition processor 52 analyzes one or more of these quality measures in order to make an estimate of the current channel condition, e.g., whether the channel is noise or interference limited. Thereafter, the packet type selector 54 selects the type of packet to be used that will minimize the effects of the noise and/or interference on the network connection. If the optimum packet type is already selected, then the packet type selector 54 may simply retain that packet type, and sending at least one of the adjacent third packet to the second receiving device through the wireless communication connection based on the adjusted communication periodicity of the second receiving device.[ Col 10 Row 33-39] The receiver unit 56 receives packets transmitted over the network and forwards them to the channel quality processor 50. From the packets received by the receiver unit 56, certain receiver side quality measures may be determined such as the Q.sub.CRC, Q.sub.RSSI, and Q.sub.FEC values. Finally, the transmitter unit 58 transmits information across the network using the packet type selected by the packet type selector 54.
Regarding claim 10, Leif, Chou and Polo teach the limitations of the patent limitations.
Leif does teach when the packet assembly manner of the first receiving device is switched from a packet assembly manner that belongs to the first type to a packet assembly manner that belongs to the second type, increasing the communication periodicity of the second receiving device;[ Col 10 Row 8-15] Referring now to FIG. 5, a functional block diagram of an exemplary radio unit 22 is shown. It should be noted that the radio unit 22 and the radio unit 26 are similar in function and, therefore, only the radio unit 22 will be described here. In the exemplary embodiment, the radio unit 22 includes at least a channel quality processor 50, a channel condition processor 52, a packet type selector 54, a receiver unit 56, and a transmitter unit 58, or when the packet assembly manner of the first receiving device is switched from a packet assembly manner that belongs to the second type to a packet assembly manner that belongs to the first type, decreasing the communication periodicity of the second receiving device,[ Col 10 Row 20-26] The channel quality processor 50 obtains and updates the channel quality measures in the manner described previously and at predefined intervals as specified in the radio unit 22. Based on the updates of the channel quality measures, the channel condition processor 52 analyzes one or more of these quality measures in order to make an estimate of the current channel condition, e.g., whether the channel is noise or interference limited, wherein the packet assembly manner that belongs to the first type comprises non-channel coding, and the packet assembly manner that belongs to the second type comprises channel coding;[ Col 5 Row 49-53] The function f which is used to update the above quality measures, as explained above, can be a number of different functions. Using the Q.sub.CRC quality measure, or the packet assembly manner that belongs to the first type comprises channel coding at the first channel coding level, and the packet assembly manner that belongs to the second type comprises channel coding at the second channel coding level, wherein the first channel coding level is lower than the second channel coding level. [Col 5 Row 54-60] Auto Regressive: Q.sub.CRC(k+1)=.lamda.Q.sub.CRC(k)+(1-.lamda.)M.sub.CRC(k+1) (8) where .lamda. represents a "forgetting factor," 0.ltoreq..lamda..ltoreq.1.
Regarding claim 11, Leif, Chou and Polo teach the limitations of the patent limitations.
Leif does teach determining, based on a packet assembly manner of the second receiving device, whether to adjust the communication periodicity of the second receiving device;[ Col 10 Row 8-15] Referring now to FIG. 5, a functional block diagram of an exemplary radio unit 22 is shown. It should be noted that the radio unit 22 and the radio unit 26 are similar in function and, therefore, only the radio unit 22 will be described here. In the exemplary embodiment, the radio unit 22 includes at least a channel quality processor 50, a channel condition processor 52, a packet type selector 54, a receiver unit 56, and a transmitter unit 58, and when the packet assembly manner of the second receiving device is a packet assembly manner that belongs to the second type, skipping adjusting the communication periodicity of the second receiving device; [Col 10 Row 20-26] The channel quality processor 50 obtains and updates the channel quality measures in the manner described previously and at predefined intervals as specified in the radio unit 22. Based on the updates of the channel quality measures, the channel condition processor 52 analyzes one or more of these quality measures in order to make an estimate of the current channel condition, e.g., whether the channel is noise or interference limited, or when the packet assembly manner of the second receiving device is a packet assembly manner that belongs to the first type, perform the step of adjusting the communication periodicity of the second receiving device.[ Col 10 Row 35-39] From the packets received by the receiver unit 56, certain receiver side quality measures may be determined such as the Q.sub.CRC, Q.sub.RSSI, and Q.sub.FEC values. Finally, the transmitter unit 58 transmits information across the network using the packet type selected by the packet type selector 54.
Regarding claim 12 Leif, Chou and Polo teach the limitations of the patent limitations.
Leif does teach generating the second control packet by using the second packet assembly manner, and generating the second data packet by using the first packet assembly manner;[ Col 4 Row 58-61] The Q.sub.PA value for the (k+1)th packet can be updated using the V.sub.PA value for the (k+1)th packet and the previous Q.sub.PA value as follows: Q.sub.PA(k+1)=f.sub.PA(Q.sub.PA(k),V.sub.PA(k+1)) or generating the second data packet by using the second packet assembly manner, and generating the second control packet by using the first packet assembly manner.[ Col 5 Row 5-10] In general, M.sub.FEC is a momentary quality measure indicating the number of errors per packet per codeword (it is possible for one packet to have several codewords). The M.sub.FEC value is the number of errors that have been corrected by the FEC code.
Regarding claim 13, Leif, Chou and Polo teach the limitations of the patent limitations.
Leif does teach determining, based on a transmission requirement of a data link and a transmission requirement of a control link respectively, to generate the second data packet and the second control packet by using the second packet assembly manner or the first packet assembly manner,[ Col 5 Row 12-18 ] The Q.sub.ARQ value for the (k+1)th packet can be updated using the M.sub.ARQ value for the (k+1)th packet and the previous Q.sub.ARQ value, as shown below. The M.sub.ARQ value can either reflect whether the last transmitted packet was accepted at the other side, that is M.sub.ARQ=0 or 1, or it can be the number of times a certain packet has been updated, wherein the transmission requirement comprises at least one of a real-time transmission requirement or a transmission reliability requirement.[ Col 5 Row 22-28] The Q.sub.TSYNC value for the (k+1)th packet may be updated using the M.sub.TSYNC value for the (k+1)th packet and the previous Q.sub.TSYNC value, as shown below. The M.sub.TSYNC value reflects the quality of the time synchronization. In general, time synchronization may be obtained by correlating the received signal with a known "synchronization word."
Regarding claim 17, Leif, Chou and Polo teach the limitations of the patent limitations.
Leif does teach determining, based on the received signal strength indicator of the at least one piece of feedback information within one or more preset time periods and the first packet assembly manner, whether to switch to the second packet assembly manner; [Col 8 Row 25-28] by using the Q.sub.RSSI and Q.sub.CRC values which are found at the receiver side, it is possible to deduce the case where the received signal strength is good (e.g., above a predefined level), yet the throughput is still low upon determining not to switch to the second packet assembly manner, generating the at least one second packet by using the first packet assembly manner; [Col 10 Row 27-32] the packet type selector 54 selects the type of packet to be used that will minimize the effects of the noise and/or interference on the network connection. If the optimum packet type is already selected, then the packet type selector 54 may simply retain that packet type and upon determining to switch to the second packet assembly manner, generating the at least one second packet by using the second packet assembly manner; [Col 9 Row 20-25] if Q.sub.CRC and Q.sub.FEC are greater than the predefined quality thresholds T1 and T2 respectively, indicating that the number of packets corrected by the FEC code and, hence, the number of packets confirmed as correct are sufficiently high, then coded packets may no longer be necessary and a switch from coded DM5 packets to uncoded DH5 packets may be made
Regarding claim 16, Leif, Chou and Polo teach the limitations of the patent limitations.
Leif does teach wherein the receiving status comprises a received signal strength indicator indicating strength of the at least one piece of feedback information; [Col 4 Row 1-3] Q.sub.RSSI represents a quality measure based on the RSSI value mentioned previously. This quality measure may be determined at the receiver side.
Regarding claim 18 Leif and Chou teach the limitations of the patent limitations.
Leif does teach when the received signal strength indicator of the at least one piece of feedback information within the one or more preset time periods is less than a first threshold, and the first packet assembly manner belongs to a first type, determining to switch to a packet assembly manner that belongs to a second type; [Col 8 Row 28-35] Q.sub.RSSI is low, however, then noise may be considered to be the limiting factor. In that case, error coding may be used to increase the throughput if this is not already the case, or the output power of the transmitter side may be increased (unless it is already transmitting at the maximum power) or when the received signal strength indicator of the at least one piece of feedback information within the one or more preset time periods is greater than a fourth threshold, and the first packet assembly manner belongs to a second type, determining to switch to a packet assembly manner that belongs to a first type, [Col 8 Row 24-28] by using the Q.sub.RSSI and Q.sub.CRC values which are found at the receiver side, it is possible to deduce the case where the received signal strength is good (e.g., above a predefined level), yet the throughput is still low. In that case, interference may be considered to be the limiting factor and, hence, error coding would have little effect on the throughput wherein the packet assembly manner that belongs to the first type comprises non-channel coding, and the packet assembly manner that belongs to the second type comprises channel coding at any channel coding level; [Col 7 Row 27-31] DMx and DHx represent coded and uncoded packet types, respectively, with `x` representing the packet length. For example, DH3 is an uncoded packet having three times the length of a DH1 packet or the packet assembly manner that belongs to the first type comprises channel coding at a first channel coding level, and the packet assembly manner that belongs to the second type comprises channel coding at a second channel coding level, wherein the first channel coding level is lower than the second channel coding level [Col 8 Row 50-55] more robust packets from a noise standpoint should be used. For example, more robust signal modulation may be used, such as reducing the number of signal points in the constellation if phase shift keying (PSK) is used, or DMx packets with an error correcting code (of lower rate) should be used.
Regarding claim 18, Leif, Chou and Polo teach the limitations of the patent limitations.
Leif does teach wherein the receiving status comprises a packet loss rate or a receiving correctness rate of the at least one piece of feedback information [Col 4 Row 8-10] Q.sub.CRC represents a quality measure indicating the fraction of packets that have been declared as correctly received by an error detection scheme using
Regarding claim 19, Leif, Chou and Polo teach the limitations of the patent limitations.
Leif does teach wherein the channel coding at one or more channel coding levels comprises channel coding at a first channel coding level and/or channel coding at a second channel coding level, the first packet assembly manner is the channel coding at the first channel coding level, and the second packet assembly manner is the channel coding at the second channel coding level. [Col 4 Row 8-10] Q.sub.CRC represents a quality measure indicating the fraction of packets that have been declared as correctly received by an error detection scheme using.
Response to Argument
Applicant’s arguments filed on 06/16/2026 have been fully considered but are moot in view of the new rejection stated above.
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 SHEHAB A ALAWDI whose telephone number is (571)270-3203. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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, [ Hamza, Faruk ] can be reached at [ (571) 272-7969 ]. 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.
/SHEHAB A ALAWDI/Examiner, Art Unit 2466
/JAY P PATEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2466
Prosecution Insights