DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
This Action is in response to the amendment dated 2/20/2026, for which the amendment and corresponding arguments filed on the same date have been entered. Claims 1-27, 29-32, 38, 39, 50, 51 are currently pending in this application, with claims 1, 10, 22, 29, 38 and 50 being independent. Claims 1, 10, 22, 29, 38 and 50 have been amended, no claims have been added, and no claims have been cancelled. This Action is made FINAL.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been considered, but are moot, because the new ground of rejection was caused by the amendment and does not rely on any reference applied in the aforementioned rejection for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 2, 4-6, 10, 11, 13-15, 20-27, 29, 30, 32, 38, 39, 50 and 51 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kneckt, et al (US PG Publication 2021/0075551), hereafter Kneckt, in view of Ma (US PG Publication 2012/0110418).
The equivalent citations from US Provisional Application# 62/896,456, to which US PG Publication 2021/0075551 has priority, are shown below.
Citation Used Equivalent Citation from US Provisional Application
[0005] [0003]
[0006] [0003]
[0027] [0024]
[0032] [0029]
[0034] [0031]
[0038] [0035]
[0039] [0036]
[0043] [0040]
[0044] [0041]
[0046] [0043]
[0047] [0044]
Note: In the Kneckt rejection below, TSTA 301 is the transmitter, and rSTA 303 is the receiver, and the second data streams are the messages mapped to the codewords.
Regarding claim 1, Kneckt teaches
a method of a transmitter node for conveying a message selected from a collection of messages to a receiver node, the method comprising:
mapping the message to a current codeword
([0027] The communications between the TSTA 301 and rSTA 303 may include a second data stream 309
[0038] The iSTA 301 may identify which codewords (initially transmitted within codewords 1-22 – see [0034]) were not acknowledged in the block acknowledgement 307. The TSTA 301 may then map the unacknowledged frames that are larger than the minimum size requirement to codewords that carried the frames and retransmit the mapped codewords. Using the example above, based on the block acknowledgement 307, the iSTA 301 may determine that codewords CW 10-20 should be retransmitted to the rSTA 303
[0039] The second data stream 309 may include retransmitted codewords, e.g., codewords CWs 10-20. Alternatively, the second data stream may include information related to the one or more codewords to be retransmitted, such as encoding information
(TSTA 301 maps a data stream message 309 to retransmitted (current) codewords 10-20 based on these codewords having previously been transmitted as codewords 1-22 but not having been received by the receiver rSTA 303)); and
transmitting the current codeword to convey the message to the receiver node
([0038] The iSTA 301 may determine that codewords CW 10-20 should be retransmitted to the rSTA 303
[0039] The second data stream 309 may include retransmitted codewords, e.g., codewords CWs 10-20
(TSTA 301 then transmits the current codewords 10-20 to the receiver rSTA 303, along with the data stream message 309)).
Knecht does not teach
wherein the mapping is a function of at least the candidate message and a previous codeword and/or a counter value.
In the same field of endeavor, Ma teaches
wherein the mapping is a function of at least the candidate message and a previous codeword and/or a counter value
([0019] When the first applicable codeword is read from the block, the controller may also decode the first applicable codeword back into the first message via the first mapping rule
[0020] When the first message becomes obsolete, the user may then desire to write a second message to the block. A second mapping rule may be adapted to map the second message to a second set of one or more codewords. The controller may identify, from the second set of codewords, a second applicable codeword that satisfies the constraint. When the second applicable codeword is read from the block, the controller may also decode the second applicable codeword back into the second message via the second mapping rule
(The controller decodes, via mapping, a second/current codeword to a message, the mapping performed via (as a function of) the message and a first/previous codeword becoming obsolete)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention of Kneckt, which includes codeword transmission, to include Ma’s teaching of codeword mapping, based on a message, for the benefit of determining whether the identified codewords contain an applicable codeword that satisfies a constraint (see [0019]).
Regarding claim 2, Kneckt, in view of Ma, teaches the method of claim 1.
Knecht further teaches
wherein the mapping for a specific message results in different current codewords for at least some differing previous codewords and/or for at least some differing counter values
([0037] In some embodiments, a value of the field added to the block acknowledgement 307 may be set to 0 to indicate that all of the codewords, e.g., codewords CW 0-22, were incorrectly received (associated with respective codewords CW 1-22 – see [0032])
[0038] The TSTA 301 may then map the unacknowledged frames that are larger than the minimum size requirement to codewords that carried the frames and retransmit the mapped codewords. Using the example above, based on the block acknowledgement 307, the iSTA 301 may determine that codewords CW 10-20 should be retransmitted to the rSTA 303
(The mapping of codewords not received includes determining, for example every codeword 1-22, or codewords 10-20)).
Regarding claim 4, Kneckt, in view of Ma, teaches the method of claim 1.
Knecht further teaches
further comprising:
determining whether or not a size of the collection of messages exceeds a collection size threshold, wherein the steps of mapping the message to a current codeword and transmitting the current codeword are responsive to the size of the collection of messages not exceeding the collection size threshold
([0046] The TSTA 301 may analyze the data stream 305 and the block acknowledgement 307 to determine the codewords to be retransmitted in the second data stream 309. The iSTA 301 may determine that six codewords, e.g., codewords CW 1-6, are to be retransmitted based in part on the block acknowledgement 307. The iSTA 301 may truncate the codewords to be retransmitted by canceling the retransmission of, for example, a first two of the codewords, e.g., codewords CW 1-2
(The transmitter truncates the data stream message 309 to the receiver rSTA 303 to meet six codeword transmission (threshold of 6 codewords))).
Regarding claim 5, Kneckt, in view of Ma, teaches the method of claim 1.
Knecht further teaches
further comprising acquiring indication of one or more mapping parameters
([0047] Alternatively, the preamble of the second data stream 309 may include a symbol that includes having a first retransmitted codeword field and a last retransmitted codeword field
(The mapped data stream message 309 includes first retransmitted codeword field)).
Regarding claim 6, Kneckt, in view of Ma, teaches the method of claim 5.
Knecht further teaches
wherein the one or more mapping parameters comprise one or more of:
a shared secret;
a collection of allowed codewords;
a codeword length;
an initial codeword
([0047] Alternatively, the preamble of the second data stream 309 may include a symbol that includes having a first retransmitted codeword field and a last retransmitted codeword field
(The mapped data stream message 309 includes first retransmitted codeword)); and
an initial counter value.
Regarding claim 10, Kneckt teaches
a method of a receiver node for detecting a message selected from a collection of messages by a transmitter node,
the method comprising:
mapping a candidate message from the collection of messages to a candidate codeword
([0027] The communications between the TSTA 301 and rSTA 303 may include a second data stream 309
[0038] The iSTA 301 may identify which codewords (initially transmitted within codewords 1-22 – see [0034]) were not acknowledged in the block acknowledgement 307. The TSTA 301 may then map the unacknowledged frames that are larger than the minimum size requirement to codewords that carried the frames and retransmit the mapped codewords. Using the example above, based on the block acknowledgement 307, the iSTA 301 may determine that codewords CW 10-20 should be retransmitted to the rSTA 303
[0039] The second data stream 309 may include retransmitted codewords, e.g., codewords CWs 10-20. Alternatively, the second data stream may include information related to the one or more codewords to be retransmitted, such as encoding information
[0045] The second data stream 309 may include a retransmission field in the preamble 905 to indicate whether the MPDU contains no HARQ retransmitted codewords (“0”), all of the codewords to be retransmitted (“1”), or a shortened set of the codewords to be retransmitted (“2”)
(TSTA 301 maps a data stream message 309 from different types of data stream messages (without or with a preamble, etc) to retransmitted (current) codewords 10-20 based on these codewords having previously been transmitted as codewords 1-22 but not having been received by the receiver rSTA 303));
receiving a current codeword from the transmitter node
([0038] The iSTA 301 may determine that codewords CW 10-20 should be retransmitted to the rSTA 303
[0039] The second data stream 309 may include retransmitted codewords, e.g., codewords CWs 10-20
(TSTA 301 then transmits the current codewords 10-20 to the receiver rSTA 303, along with the data stream message 309)); and
detecting the candidate message when the current codeword coincides with the candidate codeword
([0038] The iSTA 301 may determine that codewords CW 10-20 should be retransmitted to the rSTA 303
[0039] The second data stream 309 may include retransmitted codewords, e.g., codewords CWs 10-20
(Data stream message 309 received by receiver rSTA 303, when current retransmitted codewords 10-20 same as previous codewords 10-20)).
Knecht does not teach
wherein the mapping is a function of at least the candidate message and a previous codeword and/or a counter value.
In the same field of endeavor, Ma teaches
wherein the mapping is a function of at least the candidate message and a previous codeword and/or a counter value
([0019] When the first applicable codeword is read from the block, the controller may also decode the first applicable codeword back into the first message via the first mapping rule
[0020] When the first message becomes obsolete, the user may then desire to write a second message to the block. A second mapping rule may be adapted to map the second message to a second set of one or more codewords. The controller may identify, from the second set of codewords, a second applicable codeword that satisfies the constraint. When the second applicable codeword is read from the block, the controller may also decode the second applicable codeword back into the second message via the second mapping rule
(The controller decodes, via mapping, a second/current codeword to a message, the mapping performed via (as a function of) the message and a first/previous codeword becoming obsolete)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention of Kneckt, which includes codeword transmission, to include Ma’s teaching of codeword mapping, based on a message, for the benefit of determining whether the identified codewords contain an applicable codeword that satisfies a constraint (see [0019]).
Regarding claim 11, Kneckt, in view of Ma, teaches the method of claim 10.
Knecht further teaches
wherein the mapping for a specific candidate message results in different candidate codewords for at least some differing previous codewords and/or for at least some differing counter values
([0037] In some embodiments, a value of the field added to the block acknowledgement 307 may be set to 0 to indicate that all of the codewords, e.g., codewords CW 0-22, were incorrectly received (associated with respective codewords CW 1-22 – see [0032])
[0038] The TSTA 301 may then map the unacknowledged frames that are larger than the minimum size requirement to codewords that carried the frames and retransmit the mapped codewords. Using the example above, based on the block acknowledgement 307, the iSTA 301 may determine that codewords CW 10-20 should be retransmitted to the rSTA 303
(The mapping of codewords not received includes determining, for example every codeword 1-22, or codewords 10-20)).
Regarding claim 13, Kneckt, in view of Ma, teaches the method of claim 10.
Knecht further teaches
further comprising:
determining whether or not a size of the collection of messages exceeds a collection size threshold, wherein the steps of mapping the candidate message to a candidate codeword, receiving the current codeword, and detecting the candidate message are responsive to the size of the collection of messages not exceeding the collection size threshold
([0046] The TSTA 301 may analyze the data stream 305 and the block acknowledgement 307 to determine the codewords to be retransmitted in the second data stream 309. The iSTA 301 may determine that six codewords, e.g., codewords CW 1-6, are to be retransmitted based in part on the block acknowledgement 307. The iSTA 301 may truncate the codewords to be retransmitted by canceling the retransmission of, for example, a first two of the codewords, e.g., codewords CW 1-2
(The transmitter truncates the data stream message 309 to the receiver rSTA 303 to meet six codeword transmission (threshold of 6 codewords))).
Regarding claim 14, Kneckt, in view of Ma, teaches the method of claim 10.
Knecht further teaches
further comprising acquiring indication of one or more mapping parameters
([0047] Alternatively, the preamble of the second data stream 309 may include a symbol that includes having a first retransmitted codeword field and a last retransmitted codeword field
(The mapped data stream message 309 includes first retransmitted codeword field)).
Regarding claim 15, Kneckt, in view of Ma, teaches the method of claim 14.
Knecht further teaches
wherein the one or more mapping parameters comprise one or more of:
a shared secret;
a collection of allowed codewords;
a codeword length;
an initial codeword
([0047] Alternatively, the preamble of the second data stream 309 may include a symbol that includes having a first retransmitted codeword field and a last retransmitted codeword field
(The mapped data stream message 309 includes first retransmitted codeword)); and
an initial counter value.
Regarding claim 20, Kneckt, in view of Ma, teaches the method of claim 10.
Knecht further teaches
wherein mapping a candidate message from the collection of messages to a candidate codeword comprises mapping each candidate message from the collection of messages to a respective candidate codeword
([0043] The retransmitted codewords CW 10-20 may be retransmitted in the same transmission order as in the data stream 305, such that the rSTA 303 is aware of the sequence of the retransmitted codewords. In this way, the rSTA 303 may more efficiently replace the failed codewords stored in the memory 250. The iSTA 301 may include a header in the preamble 905 that maps the retransmitted codewords to the failed codewords
[0044] The iSTA 301 may also be configured to include a transmission order field in the preamble of the second data stream 309. The transmission order field may indicate that the MPDUs are aggregated in an increasing sequence order
(The codewords are mapped, in order for the receiver rSTA 303 to determine, from the data stream 309, each codeword in a sequential order)), and
detecting the candidate message comprises selecting the respective candidate codeword that coincides with the current codeword
([0043] After determining which codewords are to be retransmitted, the iSTA 301 may transmit the second data stream 309 to the rSTA 303. The retransmitted codewords CW 10-20 may be retransmitted in the same transmission order as in the data stream 305, such that the rSTA 303 is aware of the sequence of the retransmitted codewords. In this way, the rSTA 303 may more efficiently replace the failed codewords stored in the memory 250
[0044] The iSTA 301 may also be configured to include a transmission order field in the preamble of the second data stream 309. The transmission order field may indicate that the MPDUs are aggregated in an increasing sequence order
(The receiver rSTA 303 determines each codeword in the sequential order from the data stream 309)).
Regarding claim 21, Kneckt, in view of Ma, teaches the method of claim 10.
Knecht further teaches
further comprising, when the current codeword does not coincide with the candidate codeword:
mapping the candidate message from the collection of messages to an alternative candidate codeword based on an assumed lost codeword and/or based on a counter value for an assumed lost codeword
([0046] In some embodiments, the subset of codewords to be retransmitted may be based on eliminating one or more codewords to be retransmitted. To achieve this, the TSTA 301 may analyze the data stream 305 and the block acknowledgement 307 to determine the codewords to be retransmitted in the second data stream 309. The iSTA 301 may truncate the codewords to be retransmitted by canceling the retransmission of, for example, a first two of the codewords, e.g., codewords CW 1-2. It should be understood by those of ordinary skill in the arts that more or less than the first two codewords may be canceled from the retransmission. In some instances, the codewords CW 1-2 may be retransmitted codewords that have failed multiple transmissions, where the number of failed transmissions is greater than a predetermined threshold
(Alternatively, a subset of codewords may be included in the retransmission by eliminating one or more codewords to be retransmitted, when certain codewords (for example, codewords 1-2) have not been received a threshold number of times)); and
detecting the candidate message when the current codeword coincides with the alternative candidate codeword
([0047] In some embodiments, the preamble of the second data stream 309 may include a first parameter indicating how many of the first codewords have been canceled and a second parameter indicating whether the last codeword has been canceled. Using the example shown in FIG. 10, the first parameter may indicate that the first two codewords CW 1-2 have been canceled and the second parameter may indicate that the last codeword CW 6 has been canceled. As a result, the iSTA 301 may retransmit codewords CW 3-5, as shown in FIG. 10. In this way, the rSTA 303 may be notified about which codewords are being retransmitted and which codewords have been canceled from the retransmission
(Data stream message 309 notifies the receiver rSTA 303 about codewords 3-5 being retransmitted and codewords 1-2 (the eliminated codewords) being canceled from the retransmission)).
Regarding claim 22, Kneckt teaches
a method of a provisioning node for controlling conveyance of a message selected from a collection of messages from a transmitter node to a receiver node, the method comprising:
providing, to the transmitter node and to the receiver node, information for mapping a message from the collection of messages to a current codeword
([0027] The communications between the TSTA 301 and rSTA 303 may include a second data stream 309
[0038] The iSTA 301 may identify which codewords (initially transmitted within codewords 1-22 – see [0034]) were not acknowledged in the block acknowledgement 307. The TSTA 301 may then map the unacknowledged frames that are larger than the minimum size requirement to codewords that carried the frames and retransmit the mapped codewords. Using the example above, based on the block acknowledgement 307, the iSTA 301 may determine that codewords CW 10-20 should be retransmitted to the rSTA 303
[0039] The second data stream 309 may include retransmitted codewords, e.g., codewords CWs 10-20. Alternatively, the second data stream may include information related to the one or more codewords to be retransmitted, such as encoding information
(TSTA 301 maps a data stream message 309 to retransmitted (current) codewords 10-20 based on these codewords having previously been transmitted as codewords 1-22 but not having been received by the receiver rSTA 303)).
Knecht does not teach
wherein the mapping is a function of at least the message and a previous codeword and/or a counter value.
In the same field of endeavor, Ma teaches
wherein the mapping is a function of at least the message and a previous codeword and/or a counter value
([0019] When the first applicable codeword is read from the block, the controller may also decode the first applicable codeword back into the first message via the first mapping rule
[0020] When the first message becomes obsolete, the user may then desire to write a second message to the block. A second mapping rule may be adapted to map the second message to a second set of one or more codewords. The controller may identify, from the second set of codewords, a second applicable codeword that satisfies the constraint. When the second applicable codeword is read from the block, the controller may also decode the second applicable codeword back into the second message via the second mapping rule
(The controller decodes, via mapping, a second/current codeword to a message, the mapping performed via (as a function of) the message and a first/previous codeword becoming obsolete)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention of Kneckt, which includes codeword transmission, to include Ma’s teaching of codeword mapping, based on a message, for the benefit of determining whether the identified codewords contain an applicable codeword that satisfies a constraint (see [0019]).
Regarding claim 23, Kneckt, in view of Ma, teaches the method of claim 22.
Knecht further teaches
wherein the mapping for a specific message results in different current codewords for at least some differing previous codewords and/or for at least some differing counter values
([0037] In some embodiments, a value of the field added to the block acknowledgement 307 may be set to 0 to indicate that all of the codewords, e.g., codewords CW 0-22, were incorrectly received (associated with respective codewords CW 1-22 – see [0032])
[0038] The TSTA 301 may then map the unacknowledged frames that are larger than the minimum size requirement to codewords that carried the frames and retransmit the mapped codewords. Using the example above, based on the block acknowledgement 307, the iSTA 301 may determine that codewords CW 10-20 should be retransmitted to the rSTA 303
(The mapping of codewords not received includes determining, for example every codeword 1-22, or codewords 10-20)).
Regarding claim 24, Kneckt, in view of Ma, teaches the method of claim 22.
Knecht further teaches
further comprising:
determining whether or not a size of the collection of messages exceeds a collection size threshold, wherein the step of providing is responsive to the size of the collection of messages not exceeding the collection size threshold
([0046] The TSTA 301 may analyze the data stream 305 and the block acknowledgement 307 to determine the codewords to be retransmitted in the second data stream 309. The iSTA 301 may determine that six codewords, e.g., codewords CW 1-6, are to be retransmitted based in part on the block acknowledgement 307. The iSTA 301 may truncate the codewords to be retransmitted by canceling the retransmission of, for example, a first two of the codewords, e.g., codewords CW 1-2
(The transmitter truncates the data stream message 309 to the receiver rSTA 303 to meet six codeword transmission (threshold of 6 codewords))).
Regarding claim 25, Kneckt, in view of Ma, teaches the method of claim 22.
Knecht further teaches
wherein the information for mapping comprises indication of one or more mapping parameters
([0047] Alternatively, the preamble of the second data stream 309 may include a symbol that includes having a first retransmitted codeword field and a last retransmitted codeword field
(The mapped data stream message 309 includes first retransmitted codeword field)).
Regarding claim 26, Kneckt, in view of Ma, teaches the method of claim 25.
Knecht further teaches
wherein the one or more mapping parameters comprise one or more of:
a shared secret;
a collection of allowed codewords;
a codeword length;
an initial codeword
([0047] Alternatively, the preamble of the second data stream 309 may include a symbol that includes having a first retransmitted codeword field and a last retransmitted codeword field
(The mapped data stream message 309 includes first retransmitted codeword)); and
an initial counter value.
Regarding claim 27, Kneckt, in view of Ma, teaches the method of claim 1.
Knecht further teaches
wherein the codewords are codewords of a block code
([0038] The iSTA 301 may determine that codewords CW 10-20 should be retransmitted to the rSTA 303
(block of codewords 10-20)).
Regarding claim 29, Kneckt teaches
an apparatus for a transmitter node, the apparatus being for conveyance - from the transmitter node to a receiver node - of a message selected from a collection of messages,
the apparatus comprising controlling circuitry configured to cause
([0005] Transmitting device includes processor
[0038] The iSTA 301 may configured to execute retransmission protocols, the TSTA 301 aware of the codewords that need to be retransmitted):
mapping of the message to a current codeword
([0027] The communications between the TSTA 301 and rSTA 303 may include a second data stream 309
[0038] The iSTA 301 may identify which codewords (initially transmitted within codewords 1-22 – see [0034]) were not acknowledged in the block acknowledgement 307. The TSTA 301 may then map the unacknowledged frames that are larger than the minimum size requirement to codewords that carried the frames and retransmit the mapped codewords. Using the example above, based on the block acknowledgement 307, the iSTA 301 may determine that codewords CW 10-20 should be retransmitted to the rSTA 303
[0039] The second data stream 309 may include retransmitted codewords, e.g., codewords CWs 10-20. Alternatively, the second data stream may include information related to the one or more codewords to be retransmitted, such as encoding information
(TSTA 301 maps a data stream message 309 to retransmitted (current) codewords 10-20 based on these codewords having previously been transmitted as codewords 1-22 but not having been received by the receiver rSTA 303)); and
transmission of the current codeword to convey the message to the receiver node
([0038] The iSTA 301 may determine that codewords CW 10-20 should be retransmitted to the rSTA 303
[0039] The second data stream 309 may include retransmitted codewords, e.g., codewords CWs 10-20
(TSTA 301 then transmits the current codewords 10-20 to the receiver rSTA 303, along with the data stream message 309)).
Knecht does not teach
wherein the mapping is a function of at least the message and a previous codeword and/or a counter value.
In the same field of endeavor, Ma teaches
wherein the mapping is a function of at least the message and a previous codeword and/or a counter value
([0019] When the first applicable codeword is read from the block, the controller may also decode the first applicable codeword back into the first message via the first mapping rule
[0020] When the first message becomes obsolete, the user may then desire to write a second message to the block. A second mapping rule may be adapted to map the second message to a second set of one or more codewords. The controller may identify, from the second set of codewords, a second applicable codeword that satisfies the constraint. When the second applicable codeword is read from the block, the controller may also decode the second applicable codeword back into the second message via the second mapping rule
(The controller decodes, via mapping, a second/current codeword to a message, the mapping performed via (as a function of) the message and a first/previous codeword becoming obsolete)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention of Kneckt, which includes codeword transmission, to include Ma’s teaching of codeword mapping, based on a message, for the benefit of determining whether the identified codewords contain an applicable codeword that satisfies a constraint (see [0019]).
Regarding claim 30, Kneckt, in view of Ma, teaches the apparatus of claim 29.
Knecht further teaches
wherein the mapping of a specific message results in different current codewords for at least some differing previous codewords and/or for at least some differing counter values
([0037] In some embodiments, a value of the field added to the block acknowledgement 307 may be set to 0 to indicate that all of the codewords, e.g., codewords CW 0-22, were incorrectly received (associated with respective codewords CW 1-22 – see [0032])
[0038] The TSTA 301 may then map the unacknowledged frames that are larger than the minimum size requirement to codewords that carried the frames and retransmit the mapped codewords. Using the example above, based on the block acknowledgement 307, the iSTA 301 may determine that codewords CW 10-20 should be retransmitted to the rSTA 303
(The mapping of codewords not received includes determining, for example every codeword 1-22, or codewords 10-20)).
Regarding claim 32, Kneckt, in view of Ma, teaches the apparatus of claim 29.
Knecht further teaches
wherein the controlling circuitry is further configured to cause:
determination of whether or not a size of the collection of messages exceeds a collection size threshold, wherein mapping of the message to a current codeword and transmission of the current codeword are responsive to the size of the collection of messages not exceeding the collection size threshold
([0046] The TSTA 301 may analyze the data stream 305 and the block acknowledgement 307 to determine the codewords to be retransmitted in the second data stream 309. The iSTA 301 may determine that six codewords, e.g., codewords CW 1-6, are to be retransmitted based in part on the block acknowledgement 307. The iSTA 301 may truncate the codewords to be retransmitted by canceling the retransmission of, for example, a first two of the codewords, e.g., codewords CW 1-2
(The transmitter truncates the data stream message 309 to the receiver rSTA 303 to meet six codeword transmission (threshold of 6 codewords))).
Regarding claim 38, Kneckt teaches
an apparatus for a receiver node, the apparatus being for detection of a message selected from a collection of messages by a transmitter node,
the apparatus comprising controlling circuitry configured to cause
([0006] Receiving device includes processor
[0038] The rSTA 303 may configured to execute retransmission protocols, the rSTA 303 aware of the codewords that need to be retransmitted):
mapping of a candidate message from the collection of messages to a candidate codeword
([0027] The communications between the TSTA 301 and rSTA 303 may include a second data stream 309
[0038] The iSTA 301 may identify which codewords (initially transmitted within codewords 1-22 – see [0034]) were not acknowledged in the block acknowledgement 307. The TSTA 301 may then map the unacknowledged frames that are larger than the minimum size requirement to codewords that carried the frames and retransmit the mapped codewords. Using the example above, based on the block acknowledgement 307, the iSTA 301 may determine that codewords CW 10-20 should be retransmitted to the rSTA 303
[0039] The second data stream 309 may include retransmitted codewords, e.g., codewords CWs 10-20. Alternatively, the second data stream may include information related to the one or more codewords to be retransmitted, such as encoding information
[0045] The second data stream 309 may include a retransmission field in the preamble 905 to indicate whether the MPDU contains no HARQ retransmitted codewords (“0”), all of the codewords to be retransmitted (“1”), or a shortened set of the codewords to be retransmitted (“2”)
(TSTA 301 maps a data stream message 309 from different types of data stream messages (without or with a preamble, etc) to retransmitted (current) codewords 10-20 based on these codewords having previously been transmitted as codewords 1-22 but not having been received by the receiver rSTA 303)));
reception of a current codeword from the transmitter node
([0038] The iSTA 301 may determine that codewords CW 10-20 should be retransmitted to the rSTA 303
[0039] The second data stream 309 may include retransmitted codewords, e.g., codewords CWs 10-20
(TSTA 301 then transmits the current codewords 10-20 to the receiver rSTA 303, along with the data stream message 309)); and
detection of the candidate message responsive to the current codeword coinciding with the candidate codeword
([0038] The iSTA 301 may determine that codewords CW 10-20 should be retransmitted to the rSTA 303
[0039] The second data stream 309 may include retransmitted codewords, e.g., codewords CWs 10-20
(Data stream message 309 received by receiver rSTA 303, when current retransmitted codewords 10-20 same as previous codewords 10-20)).
Knecht does not teach
wherein the mapping is a function of at least the candidate message and a previous codeword and/or a counter value.
In the same field of endeavor, Ma teaches
wherein the mapping is a function of at least the candidate message and a previous codeword and/or a counter value
([0019] When the first applicable codeword is read from the block, the controller may also decode the first applicable codeword back into the first message via the first mapping rule
[0020] When the first message becomes obsolete, the user may then desire to write a second message to the block. A second mapping rule may be adapted to map the second message to a second set of one or more codewords. The controller may identify, from the second set of codewords, a second applicable codeword that satisfies the constraint. When the second applicable codeword is read from the block, the controller may also decode the second applicable codeword back into the second message via the second mapping rule
(The controller decodes, via mapping, a second/current codeword to a message, the mapping performed via (as a function of) the message and a first/previous codeword becoming obsolete)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention of Kneckt, which includes codeword transmission, to include Ma’s teaching of codeword mapping, based on a message, for the benefit of determining whether the identified codewords contain an applicable codeword that satisfies a constraint (see [0019]).
Regarding claim 39, Kneckt, in view of Ma, teaches the apparatus of claim 38.
Knecht further teaches
wherein the mapping of a specific candidate message results in different candidate codewords for at least some differing previous codewords and/or for at least some differing counter values
([0037] In some embodiments, a value of the field added to the block acknowledgement 307 may be set to 0 to indicate that all of the codewords, e.g., codewords CW 0-22, were incorrectly received (associated with respective codewords CW 1-22 – see [0032])
[0038] The TSTA 301 may then map the unacknowledged frames that are larger than the minimum size requirement to codewords that carried the frames and retransmit the mapped codewords. Using the example above, based on the block acknowledgement 307, the iSTA 301 may determine that codewords CW 10-20 should be retransmitted to the rSTA 303
(The mapping of codewords not received includes determining, for example every codeword 1-22, or codewords 10-20)).
Regarding claim 50, Kneckt teaches
an apparatus for a provisioning node, the apparatus being for control of conveyance of a message selected from a collection of messages from a transmitter node to a receiver node,
the apparatus comprising controlling circuitry configured to cause
([0038] The iSTA 301 and the rSTA 303 may both be configured to execute retransmission protocols based on the minimum size requirement, the TSTA 301 and rSTA 303 may be synchronized with one another such that the iSTA 301 and rSTA 303 are both aware of the codewords that need to be retransmitted):
provision, to the transmitter node and to the receiver node, of information for mapping a message from the collection of messages to a current codeword
([0027] The communications between the TSTA 301 and rSTA 303 may include a second data stream 309
[0038] The iSTA 301 may identify which codewords (initially transmitted within codewords 1-22 – see [0034]) were not acknowledged in the block acknowledgement 307. The TSTA 301 may then map the unacknowledged frames that are larger than the minimum size requirement to codewords that carried the frames and retransmit the mapped codewords. Using the example above, based on the block acknowledgement 307, the iSTA 301 may determine that codewords CW 10-20 should be retransmitted to the rSTA 303
[0039] The second data stream 309 may include retransmitted codewords, e.g., codewords CWs 10-20. Alternatively, the second data stream may include information related to the one or more codewords to be retransmitted, such as encoding information
(TSTA 301 maps a data stream message 309 to retransmitted (current) codewords 10-20 based on these codewords having previously been transmitted as codewords 1-22 but not having been received by the receiver rSTA 303)).
Knecht does not teach
wherein the mapping is a function of at least the message and a previous codeword and/or a counter value.
In the same field of endeavor, Ma teaches
wherein the mapping is a function of at least the message and a previous codeword and/or a counter value
([0019] When the first applicable codeword is read from the block, the controller may also decode the first applicable codeword back into the first message via the first mapping rule
[0020] When the first message becomes obsolete, the user may then desire to write a second message to the block. A second mapping rule may be adapted to map the second message to a second set of one or more codewords. The controller may identify, from the second set of codewords, a second applicable codeword that satisfies the constraint. When the second applicable codeword is read from the block, the controller may also decode the second applicable codeword back into the second message via the second mapping rule
(The controller decodes, via mapping, a second/current codeword to a message, the mapping performed via (as a function of) the message and a first/previous codeword becoming obsolete)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention of Kneckt, which includes codeword transmission, to include Ma’s teaching of codeword mapping, based on a message, for the benefit of determining whether the identified codewords contain an applicable codeword that satisfies a constraint (see [0019]).
Regarding claim 51, Kneckt, in view of Ma, teaches the apparatus of claim 50.
Knecht further teaches
wherein mapping of a specific message results in different current codewords for at least some differing previous codewords and/or for at least some differing counter values
([0037] In some embodiments, a value of the field added to the block acknowledgement 307 may be set to 0 to indicate that all of the codewords, e.g., codewords CW 0-22, were incorrectly received (associated with respective codewords CW 1-22 – see [0032])
[0038] The TSTA 301 may then map the unacknowledged frames that are larger than the minimum size requirement to codewords that carried the frames and retransmit the mapped codewords. Using the example above, based on the block acknowledgement 307, the iSTA 301 may determine that codewords CW 10-20 should be retransmitted to the rSTA 303
(The mapping of codewords not received includes determining, for example every codeword 1-22, or codewords 10-20)).
Claims 3, 12 and 31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kneckt, in view of Ma, and further in view of Xi, et al (US PG Publication 2019/0140784), hereafter Xi.
Regarding claim 3, Kneckt, in view of Ma, teaches the method of claim 1.
Kneckt, in view of Ma, does not teach
further comprising updating the counter before the mapping step by:
adding a fixed update value to the counter; or
adding a variable update value to the counter, wherein the variable update value is based on the message and/or a current counter value; or
adding an update value to a first counter when the message is a first message, and adding the update value to a second counter when the message is a second message.
In the same field of endeavor, Xi teaches
further comprising updating the counter before the mapping step by:
adding a fixed update value to the counter
([0094] In operation 435, the transmitter sets a counter value, layer 1, to 1
[0096] The transmitter stores the generated parity codewords, and, then, increments the counter value, layer l, in operation 450 (See Fig. 4 – counter = I + 1)
[0097] In operation 455, the FEC codewords and/or parity codewords are transmitted by the transmitter to the receiver after executing rate matching, modulation and other physical process. The other physical process may include the resource mapping.
[0098] There are several options to map FEC codewords and parity codewords to different resource blocks (RBs) or physical resource block (PRB)
(Step 450 incrementation of counter by 1 for each incrementation before Step 455 mapping)); or
adding a variable update value to the counter, wherein the variable update value is based on the message and/or a current counter value; or
adding an update value to a first counter when the message is a first message, and adding the update value to a second counter when the message is a second message.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention of Kneckt, in view of Ma, which includes codeword transmission, to include Xi’s teaching of codeword transmission, using a counter, for the benefit of meeting different requirements such as higher data rate, higher spectrum efficiency, low power and higher energy efficiency, lower latency and higher reliability (see [0023]).
Regarding claim 12, Kneckt teaches the method of claim 10.
Kneckt, in view of Ma, does not teach
further comprising updating the counter before the mapping step by:
adding a fixed update value to the counter; or
adding a variable update value to the counter, wherein the variable update value is based on the candidate message and/or a current counter value; or
adding an update value to a first counter when the candidate message is a first message, and adding the update value to a second counter when the candidate message is a second message.
In the same field of endeavor, Xi teaches
further comprising updating the counter before the mapping step by:
adding a fixed update value to the counter
([0094] In operation 435, the transmitter sets a counter value, layer 1, to 1
[0096] The transmitter stores the generated parity codewords, and, then, increments the counter value, layer l, in operation 450 (See Fig. 4 – counter = I + 1)
[0097] In operation 455, the FEC codewords and/or parity codewords are transmitted by the transmitter to the receiver after executing rate matching, modulation and other physical process. The other physical process may include the resource mapping.
[0098] There are several options to map FEC codewords and parity codewords to different resource blocks (RBs) or physical resource block (PRB)
(Step 450 incrementation of counter by 1 for each incrementation before Step 455 mapping)); or
adding a variable update value to the counter, wherein the variable update value is based on the candidate message and/or a current counter value; or
adding an update value to a first counter when the candidate message is a first message, and adding the update value to a second counter when the candidate message is a second message.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention of Kneckt, in view of Ma, which includes codeword transmission, to include Xi’s teaching of codeword transmission, using a counter, for the benefit of meeting different requirements such as higher data rate, higher spectrum efficiency, low power and higher energy efficiency, lower latency and higher reliability (see [0023]).
Regarding claim 31, Kneckt teaches the apparatus of claim 29.
Kneckt, in view of Ma, does not teach
wherein the controlling circuitry is further configured to cause updating of the counter before the mapping by:
addition of a fixed update value to the counter; or
addition of a variable update value to the counter, wherein the variable update value is based on the message and/or a current counter value; or
addition of an update value to a first counter when the message is a first message, and addition of the update value to a second counter when the message is a second message.
In the same field of endeavor, Xi teaches
wherein the controlling circuitry is further configured to cause updating of the counter before the mapping by:
addition of a fixed update value to the counter
([0094] In operation 435, the transmitter sets a counter value, layer 1, to 1
[0096] The transmitter stores the generated parity codewords, and, then, increments the counter value, layer l, in operation 450 (See Fig. 4 – counter = I + 1)
[0097] In operation 455, the FEC codewords and/or parity codewords are transmitted by the transmitter to the receiver after executing rate matching, modulation and other physical process. The other physical process may include the resource mapping.
[0098] There are several options to map FEC codewords and parity codewords to different resource blocks (RBs) or physical resource block (PRB)
(Step 450 incrementation of counter by 1 for each incrementation before Step 455 mapping)); or
addition of a variable update value to the counter, wherein the variable update value is based on the message and/or a current counter value; or
addition of an update value to a first counter when the message is a first message, and addition of the update value to a second counter when the message is a second message.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention of Kneckt, in view of Ma, which includes codeword transmission, to include Xi’s teaching of codeword transmission, using a counter, for the benefit of meeting different requirements such as higher data rate, higher spectrum efficiency, low power and higher energy efficiency, lower latency and higher reliability (see [0023]).
Claims 7, 8, 16 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kneckt, in view of Ma, and further in view of Hilpisch, et al (US PG Publication 2009/0180651), hereafter Hilpisch.
Regarding claim 7, Kneckt, in view of Ma, teaches the method of claim 1.
Kneckt, in view of Ma, does not teach
wherein the transmitter node is configured to convey messages using a default communication protocol,
in which physical layer packets comprise at least one of:
an address field, a header field and a data field, and wherein transmitting the current codeword comprises transmitting a physical layer packet comprising the current codeword.
In the same field of endeavor, Hilpisch teaches
wherein the transmitter node is configured to convey messages using a default communication protocol
([0078] The transmission protocol is functionally equivalent to the physical layer
[0084] A transmission code is used to improve the transmission characteristics of information to be transferred across the link. The transmission code ensures that sufficient transitions are present in a bit stream to make clock recovery possible at the receiver. Various protocol embodiments use the Manchester transmission code standard as the default method of encoding data bits on the wireless channel. The Manchester transmission code transforms a data bit 0 into a 01 Manchester bit sequence and a data bit 1 to a 10 Manchester bit sequence
(Transmission protocol used by receiver to receive messages (bit stream/sequence), the transmission protocol being a default transmission standard)),
in which physical layer packets comprise at least one of:
an address field, a header field and a data field
([0078] The transmission protocol is functionally equivalent to the physical layer
Table 15 Packets include Codewords with header
Table 46 audio packet will contain 72 codeword bytes (using 3 bit/sample compression). Options: 00000110b)
(The transmission protocol being functionally equivalent to the physical layer, the transmission including packets that include codewords with header and codeword bytes (data fields)),
and
wherein transmitting the current codeword comprises transmitting a physical layer packet comprising the current codeword
([0078] The transmission protocol is functionally equivalent to the physical layer
Table 46 audio packet will contain 72 codeword bytes (using 3 bit/sample compression). Options: 00000110b)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention of Kneckt, in view of Ma, which includes codeword transmission, to include Hilpisch’s teaching of codeword transmission, using default transmission protocol, for the benefit of providing improved communication systems and methods for transmitting and receiving short range data (see [0004]).
Regarding claim 8, Kneckt, in view of Ma, and further in view of Hilpisch, teaches the method of claim 7.
Hilpisch further teaches
further comprising one or more of:
inserting the current codeword in the address field of the physical layer packet;
leaving the data field of the physical layer packet empty;
inserting a first part of the current codeword in the address field of the physical layer packet and a second part of the current codeword in the data field of the physical layer packet;
inserting the current codeword in the data field of the physical layer packet
(Table 46 audio packet will contain 72 codeword bytes (using 3 bit/sample compression). Options: 00000110b);
indicating codeword transmission by using a dedicated content of the address field of the physical layer packet;
indicating codeword transmission by using an advertising packet type field of the header field of the physical layer packet; and
indicating codeword transmission by using a tag value in the initial part of the data field of the physical layer packet.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention of Kneckt, in view of Ma, and further in view of Hilpisch, which includes codeword transmission, to include Hilpisch’s teaching of codeword transmission, using default transmission protocol, for the benefit of providing improved communication systems and methods for transmitting and receiving short range data (see [0004]).
Regarding claim 16, Kneckt, in view of Ma, teaches the method of claim 10.
Kneckt, in view of Ma, does not teach
wherein the receiver node is configured to detect messages using a default communication protocol,
in which physical layer packets comprise at least one of:
an address field, a header field and a data field, and wherein receiving the current codeword comprises receiving a physical layer packet comprising the current codeword.
In the same field of endeavor, Hilpisch teaches
wherein the receiver node is configured to detect messages using a default communication protocol
([0078] The transmission protocol is functionally equivalent to the physical layer
[0084] A transmission code is used to improve the transmission characteristics of information to be transferred across the link. The transmission code ensures that sufficient transitions are present in a bit stream to make clock recovery possible at the receiver. Various protocol embodiments use the Manchester transmission code standard as the default method of encoding data bits on the wireless channel. The Manchester transmission code transforms a data bit 0 into a 01 Manchester bit sequence and a data bit 1 to a 10 Manchester bit sequence
(Transmission protocol used by receiver to receive messages (bit stream/sequence), the transmission protocol being a default transmission standard)),
in which physical layer packets comprise at least one of:
an address field, a header field and a data field
([0078] The transmission protocol is functionally equivalent to the physical layer
Table 15 Packets include Codewords with header
Table 46 audio packet will contain 72 codeword bytes (using 3 bit/sample compression). Options: 00000110b)
(The transmission protocol being functionally equivalent to the physical layer, the transmission including packets that include codewords with header and codeword bytes (data fields)), and
wherein receiving the current codeword comprises receiving a physical layer packet comprising the current codeword
([0078] The transmission protocol is functionally equivalent to the physical layer
Table 46 audio packet will contain 72 codeword bytes (using 3 bit/sample compression). Options: 00000110b)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention of Kneckt, which includes codeword transmission, to include Hilpisch’s teaching of codeword transmission, using default transmission protocol, for the benefit of providing improved communication systems and methods for transmitting and receiving short range data (see [0004]).
Regarding claim 17, Kneckt, in view of Ma, and further in view of Hilpisch, teaches the method of claim 16.
Hilpisch further teaches
further comprising one or more of:
extracting the current codeword from the address field of the physical layer packet;
ignoring the data field of the physical layer packet;
extracting a first part of the current codeword from the address field of the physical layer packet and a second part of the current codeword from the data field of the physical layer packet;
extracting the current codeword from the data field of the physical layer packet
(Table 46 audio packet will contain 72 codeword bytes (using 3 bit/sample compression). Options: 00000110b);
determining codeword transmission by detecting a dedicated content of the address field of the physical layer packet;
determining codeword transmission by detecting an advertising packet type field of the header field of the physical layer packet; and
determining codeword transmission by detecting a tag value in the initial part of the data field of the physical layer packet.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention of Kneckt, in view of Ma, and further in view of Hilpisch, which includes codeword transmission, to include Hilpisch’s teaching of codeword transmission, using default transmission protocol, for the benefit of providing improved communication systems and methods for transmitting and receiving short range data (see [0004]).
Claims 9 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kneckt, in view of Ma, and further in view of Hilpisch, and further in view of Dotan-Cohen, et al (US PG Publication 2016/0284199), hereafter Dotan-Cohen.
Regarding claim 9, Kneckt, in view of Ma, and further in view of Hilpisch, teaches the method of claim 7.
Kneckt, in view of Ma, and further in view of Hilpisch, does not teach
wherein the default communication protocol is a Bluetooth protocol and/or a Bluetooth mesh protocol.
In the same field of endeavor, Dotan-Cohen teaches
wherein the default communication protocol is a Bluetooth protocol and/or a Bluetooth mesh protocol
([0034] Table 222 illustrates one example implementation where the second electronic device 204 saves a key ‘WT7@30Q’ in association with a device descriptor (“Jake”) signifying a pairing with the electronic device 202. This same key is also stored in table 220 of the first electronic device 202 in association with the confirmed pairing to the second electronic device 204
[0035] The various proximity triggers stored in association with the pairing requests may be set by default parameters of the proximity-based reminder program. In table 220, example proximity triggers include “BlueTooth,”
(The electronic devices use a default Bluetooth setting to communicate during pairing that includes using pairing keys (codewords))).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention of Kneckt, in view of Ma, and further in view of Hilpisch, which includes codeword transmission, to include Dotan-Cohen’s teaching of codeword transmission, using default transmission protocol, for the benefit of providing the user with a reminder to facilitate execution of a task (see [0013]).
Regarding claim 18, Kneckt, in view of Ma, and further in view of Hilpisch, teaches the method of claim 16.
Kneckt, in view of Ma, and further in view of Hilpisch, does not teach
wherein the default communication protocol is a Bluetooth protocol and/or a Bluetooth mesh protocol.
In the same field of endeavor, Dotan-Cohen teaches
wherein the default communication protocol is a Bluetooth protocol and/or a Bluetooth mesh protocol
([0034] Table 222 illustrates one example implementation where the second electronic device 204 saves a key ‘WT7@30Q’ in association with a device descriptor (“Jake”) signifying a pairing with the electronic device 202. This same key is also stored in table 220 of the first electronic device 202 in association with the confirmed pairing to the second electronic device 204
[0035] The various proximity triggers stored in association with the pairing requests may be set by default parameters of the proximity-based reminder program. In table 220, example proximity triggers include “BlueTooth,”
(The electronic devices use a default Bluetooth setting to communicate during pairing that includes using pairing keys (codewords))).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention of Kneckt, in view of Ma, and further in view of Hilpisch, which includes codeword transmission, to include Dotan-Cohen’s teaching of codeword transmission, using default transmission protocol, for the benefit of providing the user with a reminder to facilitate execution of a task (see [0013]).
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kneckt, in view of Ma, and further in view of Hilpisch, and further in view of Hussein, et al (US PG Publication 2024/0373454), hereafter Hussein.
Regarding claim 19, Kneckt, in view of Ma, and further in view of Hilpisch, teaches the method of claim 16.
Kneckt, in view of Ma, and further in view of Hilpisch, does not teach
further comprising:
relaying the detected message by transmission in accordance with the default communication protocol.
In the same field of endeavor, Hussein teaches
further comprising:
relaying the detected message by transmission in accordance with the default communication protocol
([0063] Embodiments provide for natural concepts that allow transmission of critical messages from one vehicle to another vehicle, from the base station (BS)/a roadside unit (RSU) to a vehicle and/or vice versa
[0100] All the V2X relay-capable UEs start with a relay-enabled mode as a default mode
[0102] c) once the V2X switches to an idle mode or network reconnected/in-space connected mode, it may return back to the default status in which the relay is activated, i.e., the state 164.sub.1; [0103] d) this message overrides the activation to deactivation once the network wants to override. The overriding message for relaying capability for critical messages (SI2) may target individual devices, groups of devices and/or a global network control).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention of Kneckt, in view of Ma, and further in view of Hilpisch, which includes codeword transmission, to include Hussein’s teaching of codeword transmission, using default transmission protocol, for the benefit of enhancing wireless communication by allowing for a high reliability of wireless communication that may be obtained by assigning more resources than requested to a communicating apparatus and/or by introducing a prioritization for message forwarding (see [0016]).
Conclusion
Citation of Pertinent Prior Art not Applied
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Luo, et al (US Patent No. 7,934,137), hereafter Luo, teaches mapping messages to codewords.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Examiner Frank Donado whose telephone number is (571) 270-5361. The examiner can normally be reached Mondays through Fridays between 8 am and 4 pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone 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 Patent Examiner (SPE) Charles Appiah can be reached at 571-272-7904. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov.
Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/FRANK E DONADO/Examiner, Art Unit 2641
/CHARLES N APPIAH/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2641
Prosecution Insights